The stardust is a given. As for sunlight, all the energy including somewhat arguably geothermal (using the suns gravity to help form the earth and I guess radioactive material being formed by other stars) comes from the sun and gets converted into chemical energy you eat so you’re stardust animated by sunlight (mainly).

  • TranquilTurbulence@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    8 hours ago

    So a coal plant is sort of running on solar power? Sure it took millions of years and a few extinction events to make that coal, but it’s technically renewable, right?

    If you could make the sun go boom in a supernova, nuclear power would be renewable too.

    • Zephyr@sh.itjust.worksOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      7 hours ago

      Yes it’s converted and stored solar energy and it is renewable if you wait long enough but not on any reasonable timescales for human society. The sun isn’t big enough to become a supernova but if it did I guess you could argue if you wait long enough the material would most likely form other stars a few times until the stellar era of the universe winds down which will happen with or without any beings extracting energy to perform work.

      • TranquilTurbulence@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        32 minutes ago

        Yeah, it seems that the sun just isn’t big enough for that sort of thing. As the universe is also expanding, the uranium we find in this system is probably locked in here until the heat death of the universe.

        If you could expect the elemental cycle to continue forever, you could argue that the elements of nuclear waste would eventually end up in a star which would recycle them into new uranium. The expanding universe makes that highly unlikely, so even in extremely long time scales, nuclear power isn’t really renewable at all.

        If the big crunch hypothesis turns out to be true, there would be an infinite cycle of new universes, and that would make every element renewable in extremely long time scales. However, the ultimate fate of the universe isn’t particularly clear at the moment, so who knows really. For the time being, I’ll just assume that the heat death is the most likely outcome.

        • Zephyr@sh.itjust.worksOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          22 minutes ago

          Yes in the long term there’s no such thing as renewable energy since entropy always increases. It’s a misnomer that only has meaning in small human timescales.

          Yeah if the big crunch is accurate and the universe is eternally expanding and contracting then all energy is renewable. Although this is way way outside the scope most normally have in mind when speaking about renewable energy.

  • MangoCats@feddit.it
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    9 hours ago

    The Sun contains approximately 99.86% of all mass in the solar system… everything else is 0.14% orbiting it. Of that 0.14%, the Earth is only a 0.22% fraction.

    The Sun loses 130 billion metric tons (130 trillion kilograms) of matter to the solar wind every single day, that’s 260 times the mass of all currently living human beings every single day.

  • BlackLaZoR@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    11 hours ago

    Also we’re chemical compounds, eating chemical compounds to produce more chemical compounds fighting off other chamical compounds to prevent them from converting our chemical compounds into their chemical compounds.

    This is the meaning of life BTW

    • MangoCats@feddit.it
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      9 hours ago

      Your contribution to increasing entropy is so incredibly insignificant… you could spend your entire life constructing and detonating hydrogen bombs and not contribute as much increased entropy to the galaxy as a single nano second of what the stars are doing.

  • HubertManne@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    19 hours ago

    yeah it depends on the level. we are earthdust and eat earthstuff to stay alive. Go one out and its sun. go another and its maybe black holes or at the very least the big bang which could be one more iteration. maybe membrane at that point and vibrating strings and such.

    • Zephyr@sh.itjust.worksOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      17 hours ago

      True, sometimes as a joke when I’m meeting someone for the first time I’ll say “omg it’s been so live since I’ve seen you, like nearly 13.8 billion years since we met last”.

      • MangoCats@feddit.it
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 hours ago

        Joke’s on you, you probably have drunk an incredible number of water molecules of that person’s recycled urine, particularly if they live anywhere nearby.

  • Ilixtze@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    1 day ago

    I am what i eat and i eat enchiladas de mole con queso blanco y cebolla.

  • Boomer Humor Doomergod@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    1 day ago

    I don’t know how much but I’m sure at least some geothermal energy is due to tidal forces on the earth.

    Which would make some of it technically lunar power.

    • A_A@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 day ago

      Only when a moon orbits around a planet faster than the planet spin on its axis, then only will this moon transfers its orbital energy to the planet.
      Our planet, by the means of tidal forces, transfers a small part of its rotating energy to the moon’s orbital energy.
      … in this process most of the rotation energy lost by the Earth is converted to heat.

      • Aniki@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 day ago

        so … you’re saying that earth will eventually slow down the spinning until its angular velocity equals that of the rotation of moon around earth?

        • teslekova@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 day ago

          That is accurate. However, there is also an effect from the Sun. I think the Sun will do it first, but I have not checked.

    • Zephyr@sh.itjust.worksOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      How did the moon get there? Would it be there if there was no sun? It’s a shit argument I know but the moon and its mass is in some form due to the existence of the sun.

      • MangoCats@feddit.it
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        9 hours ago

        “Lunar power” arguably came from the initial condensation of matter spinning into the sun - it’s the stuff that didn’t get sucked into the fusion reaction. Now - where did that kinetic energy come from? Likely supernovae nearby not too long ago…

        • MangoCats@feddit.it
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 hours ago

          And neither are powered by the fusion of Sol - they got their energy when the solar system formed out of the ejecta from previous stellar explosions - probably not much “big bang” direct contribution to rotations in the local frame.

  • Aniki@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    yeah and what’s crazy to think about is that we’re probably at a point where it took 4 billion years to go from bacteria to humans but it will probably take less than a few million years to settle most of the milky way.

  • DougPiranha42@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 day ago

    True statement. About equally true and useful as: you’re made out of shit and you eat shit to stay alive.