If you saw/heard an ad for a science talk to the general public on "Nuclear Processes in the Cosmos" ...

Question

What would you expect to hear about in that talk?

Answer 1

i would expect to hear about in that talk that the world as we know is going 2 change b/c if we started going into the cosmos for nuclear processes, that would mean that it's obviously going 2 b used 2 destroy people and homes, and so i think that no one would b left, and that our world would end up like the city of ember.  

Answer 2

things that happen naturally in the cosmos similar to nuclear fission created by man?

Answer 3

Ummm...fusion? Is this a trick one teacher ? :)

Maybe a little more detail would help?

*The properties of the various elements starting with hydrogen to iron (at least). Are heavier ones produced by fusion? (question for you, sorry)

  * Relationships between gravity, pressure and temperature.

  * Oh Jeeze! energy levels in atoms

I give up but really just EVERYTHING from physics to the macro level of the observable universe. Because nuclear processes is how it all works. Oh yeah, we'd need some Big Bang to create the time and space for the processes to occur. That's the trouble with this "learning" stuff....it never ends;)

EDIT: "It's not a trick question."  

I am genuinely interested to find out what people expect."

Well, That's good (smile) I was trying for an inclusive , knowledgable answer, which is foolish because why would YOU need the knowledge;)

So, now I'll try my real answer, maybe it's something you already do and not too many people seem to care but... I've "expected" just about every "talk" (tv show, whatever) about  nuclear processes in the cosmos to give at least a nod to Einstien and Bohr...possibly Newton. It's hard to discuss anything without mentioning the names.

I also, initally, expected to hear brief reference to the woman whose discovery made it possible to understand how their great contributions could be applied to the universe. A discovery that is the basis of almost everything we've learned in astro physics since the early '20's, which is practically everything. None of it would "work" at all..... Newtons Laws wouldn't match what we observe. E=MC squared just wouldn't mean a thing until we knew it was Hydrogen, would it?

Maybe you being a female Prof you already stress her importance, I don't know BUT I do know I attended a talk by an astro physicist from Stonybrook U a few years ago who didn't know who she was. Yet everyone knows the wives and sisters who "helped" their astronomer men and the "Curies" (plural)!  As I said, I seem to be the only one who cares but she's my heroine, you see.

I didn't mean to come off agressive to you if it sounds that way, I'm just really passionate about this.