Does the math work out for there being enough time for the formation of the heavier elements and their distribution as seen in today's universe? Currently accepted scientific theory says that all elements heavier than hydrogen, helium, and a little lithium have been created in supernova explosions.
My questions, specifically, is has anyone done the math to see if the observed amounts and the distribution of, the heavier elements in the universe agrees with the 13.7 billion year age of the universe?
With the birth, life, and death of stars at the currently observed and accepted rates... does the math work out? Can you please refer me to a resource where I can review the material or get further clarification. (I freely admit that my maths aren't up to the task, but I'm hoping for a deeper understanding of the phenomenon.)
 A: Of course people have "done the math" on this. The chemical evolution of the Universe is a significant research area in astrophysics. There are tons of observations charting the evolution over time (by looking at different distances, we can measure things at different times), and tons of work on numerical models.
You could try this book for an entry point into the voluminous literature, if you're really interested. (It's about 15 years old, so there are probably more recent review articles, but your question of whether the timing can work out has been understood for far longer than that, so this book should be OK.)
Oh, and Edward's comment is quite right, although I think he should have said "iron" rather than "lead." Elements from beryllium to iron are mostly produced during "normal" stellar evolution, not supernovae; elements heavier than iron are produced in supernovae.
A: For the lighter elements the standard model nucleosynthesis works pretty good. But all is not quite perfect in the nucleosynthesis world, particularly with lithium. Google "lithium problem" to find lots of papers on this. For example: 
JCAP 0811:012 (2008), Richard H. Cyburt, Brian D. Fields, Keith A. Olive, A Bitter Pill: The Primordial Lithium Problem Worsens
http://arxiv.org/abs/0808.2818 

The lithium problem arises from the
  significant discrepancy between the
  primordial 7Li abundance as predicted
  by BBN theory and the WMAP baryon
  density, and the pre-Galactic lithium
  abundance inferred from observations
  of metal-poor (Population II) stars.
  This problem has loomed for the past
  decade, with a persistent discrepancy
  of a factor of 2--3 in 7Li/H. Recent
  developments have sharpened all
  aspects of the Li problem.

Here's a paper suggesting that there's problems even with 4He:
Int.J.Mod.Phys.E15:1-36 (2006), Gary Steigman, Primordial Nucleosynthesis: Successes And Challenges
Summary and Conclusions: 

Perhaps the $^4$He challenge to SBBN
  is a signal of new physics.

http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0511534
All this is good news for physicists; there jobs are safe.
