<h1>Possible, but very hard to form</h1>
<p>Considering the fact that the universe is infinite, anything can be possible, be it a galaxy-wide wormhole, a bromine planet, or a Type II- no, we're getting off-topic.</p>
<p>Anyways the point is, that it is possible, however the probability is very slim. Very slim indeed. It has the same probability as, let's say, your glass of kombucha collapsing into a black hole.</p>
<p><a href="https://i.sstatic.net/R9Gx4.jpg" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/R9Gx4.jpg" alt="enter image description here" /></a></p>
<p>Bromine has a much heavier nucleus than iron. Iron-56 has an extremely high binding energy, which gives it a notorious reputation for consuming more energy than is actually produced, during fusion. Anything after iron cannot be produced in a star. Heavier elements like uranium, gold, platinum and of course - bromine, are formed in supernovae, when free neutrons bombard any Iron-56 nuclei that escaped the collapsing core, turning it into heavy elements.</p>
<p>Sulphur, carbon and phosphorus, on the other hand, have a much lower atomic no. than iron-56. So basically they are as abundant as dirt in the universe. So no problem with getting sulphur planets, carbon planets etc.</p>
<p>Big problem - bromine is extremely reactive. So, even if by coincidence, you managed to get a bunch of bromine concentrated in space for planet-formation, that bromine is going to be gone very soon, either locked up in compounds, or present deep in underground reservoirs.</p>
<p>No bromine lakes for you :(</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-04-18T12:42:39.487Z
That diagram neglects s-process synthesis. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S-process
PM 2Ring
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-04-18T13:07:51.753Z
And certainly everything that humans have synthesized in our puny accelerators has already been created in various ways in the universe. And more...
Jon Custer
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-04-18T22:06:57.183Z
On the one hand, Bromine is super reactive.  On the other, if the rocky part is non-reactive, and there's no other atmosphere other than a little evaporated Bromine, it's possible.  The "catch" is that a planet of reasonable size would be expected to have *some* sort of atmosphere, and the vapor pressure of Bromine is quite low, so it couldn't "chase away" other gases from the atmosphere.  So, yeah, it would be extremely unlikely to have Bromine lakes, unless maybe there was some sort of event that "blew away" the atmosphere before the bromine arrived.  I can't imagine how that could happen.
Jeffiekins
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-04-19T03:28:37.600Z
Oxygen is *also* extremely reactive, and yet we've somehow managed to get an entire planetary atmosphere of it...
Mark
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-04-19T06:29:52.260Z
That is because, free oxygen was made by lifeforms, whereas there is no known biological synthesis reaction that involves the liberation of bromine.
Arcturus
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-04-19T08:31:31.687Z
@ArktourosUltorMaximus7600 In fairness your sample size is 1. In the one tree of life that you know of, bromine based pathways were not formed.
Aron
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-04-19T09:34:46.603Z
@RadovanGarabík Seems you need a revision in Chemistry. Bromine has an atomic mass of about nearly 80 U, and it has 35 protons and 34 neutrons. Iron on the other hand, has an atomic mass of about 55 U with only 26 protons and 30 neutrons. Most common isotope of Bromine is Br-79, which has nearly 40% MORE NUCLEONS than Iron's most common Isotope, Fe-56
Arcturus
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-04-19T09:38:09.720Z
@ArktourosUltorMaximus7600 you are right... I looked at the proton number instead of the atomic. I blame it on not enough sleep last night :-)
Radovan Garabík
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-04-22T09:33:02.813Z
@PM2Ring The s-process is responsible for the production of the elements that are dispersed in "dying low-mass stars" for $Z\geq 38$ and in "exploding massive stars" for $29 \leq Z \leq 37$.
ProfRob
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-04-22T09:39:04.570Z
The downvote is for promulgating the myth that heavy elements (a) cannot be made inside stars during their evolution and (b) claiming that the heavier elements are made in supernovae, even when you have a diagram that tells you that isn't so (though bromine might be).
ProfRob
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-04-23T05:50:36.667Z
The universe is infinite? How could you  know that, moreover I thought the universe was expanding, how does an infinite space become bigger? F
Hisham
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-04-23T10:25:01.083Z
@Maalik Imagine a ruler, or a measuring tape, that goes to infinity. The ruler is marked at each space, let's say 1cm. Now lets say,  that for each 1cm of the measuring tape, there is a 50% increase. The scale has clearly expanded. Although the length is still infinite, the spacing between the markers have increased. The universe is infinite and expanding.
Arcturus
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-04-23T14:27:33.967Z
@ArktourosUltorMaximus7600  this analogy is probably wrong, but even if its correct: how do you know the universe is infinite?
Hisham
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-04-18T11:30:14.477Z
2023-04-21T02:09:30.130Z
2023-04-21T02:09:30.130Z
Arcturus
<p>Is it possible to have a terrestrial, rocky, earth-sized planet (by earth-sized I mean approximately the same mass and volume as earth) which has vast quantities of bromine on its surface, in the form of bromine liquid and vapour? I’ve never heard of these “bromine worlds” being considered possible as exoplanets; but I have heard of sulphur planets, carbon planets and phosphorous planets being considered possible exoplanet categories, and wondered whether a bromine World is possible as well.</p>
<p>So, could a bromine planet exist? What would it look like? And what conditions would be necessary for such a world to form?</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-04-19T02:17:24.333Z
Bromine become solid in ultracold temperature, so you won't find any bromine lakes or vapors in this planet. However, bromine is detected in Venusian atmosphere: https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/544413. You can take this as a comparison model and check of this bromine planet is possible. Again I have ignored the binding energy of bromine, but if I were to consider, this planet would have collapsed into a black hole be now.
Nilay Ghosh
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-04-21T03:58:21.450Z
@Nilay Why would a planetary mass collapse into a black hole?
PM 2Ring
CC BY-SA 4.0
2023-04-27T16:36:35.723Z
@PM2Ring that would need to be a pretty big planet.
Deko Revinio
<exoplanet><hypothetical>
Is a bromine planet possible?
user98816
# Is a bromine planet possible?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2023-04-18)

Is it possible to have a terrestrial, rocky, earth-sized planet (by earth-sized I mean approximately the same mass and volume as earth) which has vast quantities of bromine on its surface, in the form of bromine liquid and vapour? I’ve never heard of these “bromine worlds” being considered possible as exoplanets; but I have heard of sulphur planets, carbon planets and phosphorous planets being considered possible exoplanet categories, and wondered whether a bromine World is possible as well.

So, could a bromine planet exist? What would it look like? And what conditions would be necessary for such a world to form?

**Tags:** exoplanet, hypothetical
> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Bromine become solid in ultracold temperature, so you won't find any bromine lakes or vapors in this planet. However, bromine is detected in Venusian atmosphere: https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/544413. You can take this as a comparison model and check of this bromine planet is possible. Again I have ignored the binding energy of bromine, but if I were to consider, this planet would have collapsed into a black hole be now.  
> **username_2**: @Nilay Why would a planetary mass collapse into a black hole?  
> **username_3**: @PM2Ring that would need to be a pretty big planet.  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_4 on 2023-04-18. Score: 4 | Accepted answer

# Possible, but very hard to form

Considering the fact that the universe is infinite, anything can be possible, be it a galaxy-wide wormhole, a bromine planet, or a Type II- no, we're getting off-topic.

Anyways the point is, that it is possible, however the probability is very slim. Very slim indeed. It has the same probability as, let's say, your glass of kombucha collapsing into a black hole.

[![enter image description here](https://i.sstatic.net/R9Gx4.jpg)](https://i.sstatic.net/R9Gx4.jpg)

Bromine has a much heavier nucleus than iron. Iron-56 has an extremely high binding energy, which gives it a notorious reputation for consuming more energy than is actually produced, during fusion. Anything after iron cannot be produced in a star. Heavier elements like uranium, gold, platinum and of course - bromine, are formed in supernovae, when free neutrons bombard any Iron-56 nuclei that escaped the collapsing core, turning it into heavy elements.

Sulphur, carbon and phosphorus, on the other hand, have a much lower atomic no. than iron-56. So basically they are as abundant as dirt in the universe. So no problem with getting sulphur planets, carbon planets etc.

Big problem - bromine is extremely reactive. So, even if by coincidence, you managed to get a bunch of bromine concentrated in space for planet-formation, that bromine is going to be gone very soon, either locked up in compounds, or present deep in underground reservoirs.

No bromine lakes for you :(

> **Comments:**
> **username_2**: That diagram neglects s-process synthesis. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S-process  
> **username_5**: And certainly everything that humans have synthesized in our puny accelerators has already been created in various ways in the universe. And more...  
> **username_6**: On the one hand, Bromine is super reactive.  On the other, if the rocky part is non-reactive, and there's no other atmosphere other than a little evaporated Bromine, it's possible.  The "catch" is that a planet of reasonable size would be expected to have *some* sort of atmosphere, and the vapor pressure of Bromine is quite low, so it couldn't "chase away" other gases from the atmosphere.  So, yeah, it would be extremely unlikely to have Bromine lakes, unless maybe there was some sort of event that "blew away" the atmosphere before the bromine arrived.  I can't imagine how that could happen.  
> **username_7**: Oxygen is *also* extremely reactive, and yet we've somehow managed to get an entire planetary atmosphere of it...  
> **username_4**: That is because, free oxygen was made by lifeforms, whereas there is no known biological synthesis reaction that involves the liberation of bromine.  
> **username_8**: @ArktourosUltorMaximus7600 In fairness your sample size is 1. In the one tree of life that you know of, bromine based pathways were not formed.  
> **username_4**: @RadovanGarabík Seems you need a revision in Chemistry. Bromine has an atomic mass of about nearly 80 U, and it has 35 protons and 34 neutrons. Iron on the other hand, has an atomic mass of about 55 U with only 26 protons and 30 neutrons. Most common isotope of Bromine is Br-79, which has nearly 40% MORE NUCLEONS than Iron's most common Isotope, Fe-56  
> **username_9**: @ArktourosUltorMaximus7600 you are right... I looked at the proton number instead of the atomic. I blame it on not enough sleep last night :-)  
> **username_10**: @PM2Ring The s-process is responsible for the production of the elements that are dispersed in "dying low-mass stars" for $Z\geq 38$ and in "exploding massive stars" for $29 \leq Z \leq 37$.  
> **username_10**: The downvote is for promulgating the myth that heavy elements (a) cannot be made inside stars during their evolution and (b) claiming that the heavier elements are made in supernovae, even when you have a diagram that tells you that isn't so (though bromine might be).  
> **username_11**: The universe is infinite? How could you  know that, moreover I thought the universe was expanding, how does an infinite space become bigger? F  
> **username_4**: @Maalik Imagine a ruler, or a measuring tape, that goes to infinity. The ruler is marked at each space, let's say 1cm. Now lets say,  that for each 1cm of the measuring tape, there is a 50% increase. The scale has clearly expanded. Although the length is still infinite, the spacing between the markers have increased. The universe is infinite and expanding.  
> **username_11**: @ArktourosUltorMaximus7600  this analogy is probably wrong, but even if its correct: how do you know the universe is infinite?  

---

