I'm working on a tattoo for someone, that features Hydrogen, Iron, Carbon and Water.
His logic:
Hydrogen and Iron are the closest representations for the beginning and end of a star. Starstuff being responsible for life and planets and everything.
Where as carbon and water are the two largestest keys to life.
How accurate is this statement? Do you have any recommendations I could pass on? I really don't want to end up making a retarded tattoo but I've got a GED and I really don't know any better.
atomic matter really does start out as hydrogen, and the last phase of a (large) star's life does produce iron (heavier elements are produced pretty much only in supernovae). and indeed, everything heavier than hydrogen and helium was pretty much made in a star.
as for the keys to life, you might see it represented as CHNOPS (carbon, hydrogen, nitrogen, oxygen, phosphorus, sulfur), but at its most basic it can be reduced to the peculiar properties of carbon and water. water acts as a good solvent, allowing for a whole suite of chemical reactions in aqueous solution that don't otherwise happen. and carbon is unusual in that it "likes" to be in states with valence 4 and bonds readily to elements other than itself, allowing for the creation of complex macromolecules using carbon as its backbone. another happy property of both is that they are present in multiple forms at conditions close to those of a planet's surface. water's triple point (where vapor, liquid, and solid can coexist) is near STP, and carbon can be present in solid (CaCO3, carbohydrates), liquid (long-chain alkanes), and gaseous (short alkanes and CO2) phases under common conditions. this allows for better transport and circulation of carbon, which is conducive to life.
so yes, accurate to within artistic license.
Austin Mitchell
Hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe. It's the first and simplest element that forms stars, and Iron is supposedly the last before a star goes supernova.
Also, carbon and water are the most common elements of life. But H20 is a molecule, not an element, so that kind of ruins the elemental theme of it. Of the elements, oxygen is much more abundant than carbon.
Of course without DNA which includes other elements no life would be possible. But I'm guessing he wants to avoid larger organic molecules.
Lincoln Moore
A star need not necessarily end from supernova, it might become a white dwarf or black dwarf or some other such type of star.
Leo Davis
This was great, thank you.
I think the idea is that virtually everything other than gas is a byproduct of a star turd.
Well the problem with using more complex molecules and things is that he wants to use the simplified atomic structure of them. (Think Dr. Manhattans hydrogen symbol in watchmen)
That taken in mind, Hydrogen and Iron seem to make sense as far as star stuff. Do you guys have recommendations for the latter two atomic structures serving to represent life?
William Thomas
nickel-56 is actually the final fusion products of stars however it is radioactive and decays to cobalt, then to iron i guess it's a pretty legit tat
Leo Cruz
Is this an accurate equivalent for water?
Angel Myers
probably but I'd still like to call you a homo regardless
Jace James
Very simplified with regard to quantum mechanics. A representation of the electron position probablity density would be more accurate and would probably look cooler too
no it's not. even our sun creates elements up to bismuth. The only special thing about iron is that at this point fusion is no longer thermodynamically favorable. The reactions still happen though.
Evan Scott
He's looking to keep it as simple as possible. To tattoo anything in that picture (that I don't understand) would be beyond my skill and I'm sure beyond his budget.
Leo Carter
Excuse me, those are atomic orbitals, retard. You're looking for molecular orbitals.
Jeremiah Nelson
...
William Gonzalez
>molecular orbitals represent what atoms look like better than atomic orbitals do well spank my ass and call me shurley
Isaac Jenkins
...
Aaron Gomez
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpha_process >This sequence ends at ^56_28Ni because it is the most stable (i.e., it has the highest nuclear binding energy per nucleon). Of course other reactions still happen, it's just that Ni-56 is the "end" of the alpha process
Justin Fisher
OP said
>Hydrogen, Iron, Carbon and Water.
only the last one is a molecule
Aaron Hughes
OP here, I've returned.
Would Oxygen make more sense than water?
Wyatt Cox
what are you getting at? being at the end of a process doesn't mean anything. the final product is still at least as far as bismuth, but is currently unknown.
Jaxson Gutierrez
nah dude we just use oxygen cause it's a shortcut to energy producing. For instance there are organisms that don't use oxygen and still live just as lively, 'Anaerobic' organisms. Oxygen is toxic and our relationship with it is precarious: too much and you die, too little and you die... Water however is just such a perfect solvent it's almost as if the universe was made for life cause there's so much of it out there.
Ayden Edwards
carbon on its own is not exactly "useful" to life, but carbon in a sugar molecule would be. also amino acids would be good examples of how useful carbon (and nitrogen) are to life.
for something "essential" to life thats a bit more advanced and still looks cool, look at hemoglobin
>pic related
James Ross
Would it be safe to say Iron is more or less the beginning of the end?
So you agree with carbon and water?
Owen Thompson
Um, I donno you're the artist. To be quite honest everything involving life and sciences are just so amazing it's a shame to just limit it to two things. Like the gay demon here, that shit's fascinating.
Blake Hughes
ATP could be a good molecule to have tattooed.
It includes carbon, nitrogen, oxygen, a purine base, a sugar group, and phosphates.
ATP is what we use for energy (it is the product of aerobic metabolism) and is supremely essential for life.
Virtually all important metabolic/biological reactions run on ATP.
ATP pretty much sums up all the essential functional groups of life in one molecule.
Austin Williams
Oh good going asshole, this'll just make it that much easier for the aliens to conquer us.
Henry Cox
just read the wikipedia article about stellar nucleosynthesis What I am getting at, is that stars produce energy through fusion up until nickel-56 once that happens, you no longer get energy from fusion and the star starts to burn itself out and goes supernova (or whatever other stellar death pathway is appropriate) Yes you do make very small amounts of heavier elements before supernova, but it's in the supernova that you get the most heavier elements forming. what's significant about the process is that it's the life cycle of the star, once you hit nickel-56, the star is going to die, who cares if you've managed to make a small amount of bismuth as side products, thats not significant.
Christian Thomas
>is that stars produce energy through fusion up until nickel-56 that doesn't mean iron or nickel are the last elements a star produces. it also adds to the misconception that heavy elements must be formed in supernova. specially since the vast majority of stars aren't even big enough to go supernova, they'll die as black dwarfes >physics.stackexchange.com/questions/123422/what-is-the-percentage-of-stars-that-are-massive-enough-to-end-their-lives-in-a and they'll be producing heavy elements for quiet a while before they burn out. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S-process#The_s-process_in_stars >who cares if you've managed to make a small amount of bismuth as side products, thats not significant. in the grand scheme of things, it is. given there's millions of stars that will burn out for ever 1 that will supernova. It is statistical. a star can create iron very early in its lifetime and does. But yes, if the vast majority of what the star is creating is iron then it's in its last stages.
Brayden Lee
Anyone who wears science related anything usually is a tool who watched Carl Sagan that one time or a legit autist.
Gabriel Kelly
I don't really think anyone should be discouraged from having an interest in any science field.
The world doesn't need more retards.
Ayden Howard
>be dumb jobber looking for a tattoo >fail highschool chemistry >employ a tattoo artist to research your tattoo design for you before permanently inking yourself with it just draw a fucking knob-end OP they won't know any better
Alexander Morris
Yeah well it is Portland. That's kind of the turf.
Ethan Jenkins
here is some inspiration
Aaron Johnson
DELETE THIS
Ayden Clark
While we're on the subject of tattoos, how do you guys feel about pic related as a tattoo? I like its simplicity and I've been thinking about getting it somewhere inconspicuous.
Robert Brooks
geometric shapes like that, especially circles are p. difficult to do
