Isotopes Say New Origin Stories for Some Planets

Solar wind samples reveal that Earth, the moon and Mars have different isotopic ratios than the sun, indicating some additional additional wrinkles in the planetary origin scenario. Karen Hopkin reports

Illustration of a Bohr atom model spinning around the words Science Quickly with various science and medicine related icons around the text

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

If you’ve ever wondered where the Earth came from, the answer, it seems, is blowin’ in the wind—the solar wind. Or so say scientists who, after examining solar wind samples collected by the Genesis spacecraft, conclude that the inner planets of our solar system formed a little differently than we’d thought. The work appears in the journal Science. [Bernard Marty et al., "A 15N-Poor Isotopic Composition for the Solar System as Shown by Genesis Solar Wind Samples"]

Our solar system arose from a large, rotating cloud of interstellar debris called the solar nebula. The sun came first and the planets followed not long after.

But the new study shows that the ratio of oxygen and nitrogen isotopes found in the solar wind is different from the ratio here on earth, or on the moon or Mars. We’ve got more of the heavier versions of these atoms than our Sun does.

Now we just have to figure out why. Scientists say the excess heavy nitrogen could have come from a comet. And the heavier oxygen from a natural process that left more of the light isotope in the part of the nebula that made the sun. So we are made of star stuff. But when it comes to our elemental composition, we’re not a carbon copy.

—Karen Hopkin


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


[The above text is an exact transcript of this podcast.]

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe