# How is it that all of the universe’s naturally occurring elements can all be found on earth? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [December 13, 2017, 4:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-is-it-that-all-of-the-universe-s-naturally-occurring-elements-can-all-be-found-on-earth/804366 "2017-12-13T04:39:39Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 8\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Lumpy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lumpy/32/446_2.png) [@Lumpy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lumpy)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2017, 2:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-is-it-that-all-of-the-universe-s-naturally-occurring-elements-can-all-be-found-on-earth/804366/41 "2017-12-14T02:50:55Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > I’m pretty sure there is no technetium to be found on earth Except for what we’ve synthesized (it’s a byproduct of uranium fission). In fact, since one of technetium’s isotopes is long lived by human standards we now have pieces of technetium metal- possibly the only ones that have ever existed in the cosmos, barring other technological species elsewhere. ---
**Author:** ![Napier](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/ce73a5/32.png) [@Napier](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Napier)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2017, 4:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-is-it-that-all-of-the-universe-s-naturally-occurring-elements-can-all-be-found-on-earth/804366/42 "2017-12-14T16:26:15Z")
> [@Chronos](#): > > Oh, and there is one way in which one might have stable trans-uranic “elements”. For purposes of chemistry, the details of the nucleus are mostly irrelevant: All that matters is its total positive charge, and that it’s much more massive than the electrons. And it is conceivable that you could have a nugget of quarks stuck together, or a microscopic black hole, or something, with a total charge equal to that of 93 or more protons, while still being stable. This would be completely unrelated to the “islands of stability” of nuclei made up of protons and neutrons. And such a charged particle, surrounded by the appropriate number of electrons, would behave almost identically, chemically speaking, to the “normal” element with the same charge on its nucleus. This is irresistibly intriguing! How conceivable is this? Does the conjecture have a name and is there some kind of framework around it, or are you just putting it out there spurred by the moment? I crave more! For one thing, a pet daydream of mine is wondering how dense a substance we humans could experience with our senses. As far as I know, an osmium iridium alloy would be the best we could do, unless we somehow could assemble a chunk of hassium without starting a nuclear war, or some similar harebrained scheme. Can you make me a chunk of Blackholium to play with? ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [December 14, 2017, 5:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-is-it-that-all-of-the-universe-s-naturally-occurring-elements-can-all-be-found-on-earth/804366/43 "2017-12-14T17:48:34Z")
I think I saw an essay by Asimov on it once, but I don’t know of a name for the general concept. But I can tell you that the word for a nugget of quarks all stuck together without being apportioned into protons and neutrons is a “quark nugget”: That might bring up some search results. Oh, and I should also say that the nucleus needs to be much smaller than the electron orbitals: You can’t use a polyatomic ion as a “nucleus”. But that’s not a problem for quark nuggets or micro-black-holes, which would both be even smaller than conventional nuclei. ---
**Author:** ![Lumpy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lumpy/32/446_2.png) [@Lumpy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lumpy)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2017, 3:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-is-it-that-all-of-the-universe-s-naturally-occurring-elements-can-all-be-found-on-earth/804366/44 "2017-12-15T03:06:25Z")
[Strange Matter](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strange_matter) ---
**Author:** ![gnoitall](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/bb73d2/32.png) [@gnoitall](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gnoitall)\ **Post date:** [December 15, 2017, 3:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-is-it-that-all-of-the-universe-s-naturally-occurring-elements-can-all-be-found-on-earth/804366/45 "2017-12-15T15:31:17Z")
As indirectly pointed out by other posters, there’s a hidden built-in begging-the-question in the OP’s question. “Naturally occurring elements” are the elements that are found in nature. Without specialist skills and equipment, “nature” is constrained to the Earth. (For instance, no one is going to perform a spectroscopic examination of starlight with naked eyes, so no one can perceive elemental composition of a location outside of Earth that way.) So, decoding, the question boils down to “How is it that all of the universe’s elements that occur on the Earth can be found on the Earth?” ---
**Author:** ![seal\_cleaner](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e274bd/32.png) [@seal\_cleaner](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/seal_cleaner)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2017, 12:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-is-it-that-all-of-the-universe-s-naturally-occurring-elements-can-all-be-found-on-earth/804366/46 "2017-12-17T00:33:41Z")
Not to be snarky, but the OP’s question is a \*perfect example \*of begging the question. ---
**Author:** ![Francis\_Vaughan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/francis_vaughan/32/3093_2.png) [@Francis\_Vaughan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Francis_Vaughan)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2017, 1:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-is-it-that-all-of-the-universe-s-naturally-occurring-elements-can-all-be-found-on-earth/804366/47 "2017-12-17T01:51:25Z")
I would have to disagree that the question is beggared. The notion of naturally occurring elements has long since been taken to be beyond just a mater of what is found or observed on Earth. Famously Helium was indeed first discovered by spectroscopic analysis of a star’s light, that star being our Sun. We would still regard Helium as a naturally occurring element even if we had never found any on Earth. But more importantly, we have a very well developed understanding of what the elements are, and what can and cannot be. Starting with the periodic table. Scientists spent a lot of time looking for even the most minute traces of elements based upon the predictions made here. Perhaps the OP’s question is more like - why is it that once the periodic table had been codified and understood was it possible to eventually find every element that it predicted should exist, here on the Earth? As indeed, that is how many rare elements were discovered - the prediction for their existence - and their chemical properties - was made, and this allowed scientists to have a pretty good idea about what they were looking for. Eventually all of the predicted elements were found - except for those that later understandings of radioactivity showed could not exist for long enough to still be found. (And then we _were_ able to create them knowing what to look for.) So, why do we find every predicted stable element on Earth? ---
**Author:** ![zimaane](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/a3d4f5/32.png) [@zimaane](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/zimaane)\ **Post date:** [December 18, 2017, 3:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-is-it-that-all-of-the-universe-s-naturally-occurring-elements-can-all-be-found-on-earth/804366/48 "2017-12-18T15:56:27Z")
Extension: Would we be able to find all of elements 1 - 92 on the Moon ? A 100 km asteroid ? How small can a rocky body be that has the whole natural periodic table? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-is-it-that-all-of-the-universe-s-naturally-occurring-elements-can-all-be-found-on-earth/804366.md?page=2)