Jump to content

The sun is giving birth to planets


jamiestem
 Share

Recommended Posts

So in essence there is no argument or evidence of which contradict your belief that can ever change your mind?

That's not what he said. That would be the normal crackpot who refuse to change their mind. You should quote the first sentence too if you want to be fair to jamiestem.

 

As far as I understand, he just doesn't like the current theory of the Big Bang, or the theory of the solar system... and I don't blame him.

 

He abandoned his own theory in its current form, but he questions the one put forward by popular science. And there is absolutely nothing wrong with that!

 

There are very weird things that are required to explain the observations we make sometimes - especially in astronomy. And it's alright to challenge that.

 

jamie, there exists a good explanation why the solar system is all in a plane. Perhaps we should make a new thread for that? It wouldn't be the same topic anymore.

Edited by CaptainPanic
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So in essence there is no argument or evidence of which contradict your belief that can ever change your mind?

 

I think so far every comment that has been thrown my way has altered my thought on this a little bit. Every comment but yours. Good contribution. If you could pull your head out of your black hole and read the whole 3 pages, I think you'd find that my opinion has changed quite a bit. For a person who has no experience whatsoever in the realm of science, I think I'm trying my best here to describe what I'm envisioning. What basis do you have to argue? Do you really think we understand the universe? Look at the history of science, science is based in questioning, so why wouldn't I question what is said to be true? Galileo did that and thankfully the Catholic Church locked him up for the last 10 years of his life. What a good bunch of people though, they apologized in 1995 and finally admitted they were wrong about everything revovling around the earth. I think there are many questions left to ask and many answers left to correct. One of the biggest "answers" I have a problem with is the Big Bang Theory. I just can't picture these beautiful spherical objects all being formed from one explosion. I think the planets are a timeline. We are nothing special, our particular brand of life is nothing impressive to the Sun. Fire is life to the sun. Rock is life to the sun. Gas is life to the sun. We are so self centered that we can't see the sun as a living being. The planets are it's children. We were once a little ball like Mercury, then as our inner magma/plasma leaked out, we became Venus. Then the outer plates began seperating revealing vast amounts of condensation that had gathered under the plates in the form of oceans. We are on our way to becoming Mars. Maybe Mars had a greenhouse gas problem too? Maybe we aren't causing it all ourselves? Maybe it's a natural process. Then Mars orbits farther away from the sun andundergoes a process that turns it into a gas giant like Jupiter. Saturn was once as big as Jupiter and as it shrunk down form the gases freezing and escaping, it left rings showing how big the planet once was. Then freezing more and shrinking, becoming more and more dense until it reaches the edge of the top and begins to wobble off like Pluto is. Meanwhile the Sun is in it's own orbit, an orbit so large we can't see it or understand it very easily.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I tried to come up with reasons to support this hypothesis and this is what I came up with:

 

1) what if such "births" corresponded to gravitational shifts caused when critical amounts of certain elements are formed within the sun and their position relative to other layers "avalanches" inward, somewhat like supernova but on a less radical scale?

 

2) If the sun ejected planet-sized balls of matter like this once in while, perhaps it would result in a gravity shift in the solar system that would allow the existing planets to re-orient their orbits at further distances. The process could go something like this: sun stretches causing its gravity field to warp and shift the orbits of the planets at which point the stretched out part breaks away from the rest of the sun and the two gravity wells re-spherize at a distance from each other with the new planetoid redistributing the solar gravitation it brought with it in splitting off.

 

3) Why would the planets have different compositions? Maybe because the sun is stratified and heterogeneous inside, like marble, and if it would eject a planet-sized ball of matter, that ball would reflect the composition of the part of the sun's interior it was ejected from.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2) If the sun ejected planet-sized balls of matter like this once in while, perhaps it would result in a gravity shift in the solar system that would allow the existing planets to re-orient their orbits at further distances. The process could go something like this: sun stretches causing its gravity field to warp and shift the orbits of the planets at which point the stretched out part breaks away from the rest of the sun and the two gravity wells re-spherize at a distance from each other with the new planetoid redistributing the solar gravitation it brought with it in splitting off.

 

I don't think the sun is the only thing that is stretching here.

 

Ok. So spitting out a planet and having it fall into an orbit seems unlikely, if not impossible. I still believe it could happen based on how little we know of things like that occuring. As I stated earlier, when the thought was first suggested of solar flares and coronal mass ejections in 1951, the science community lashed out at it, calling it "impossible". Not only was it possible, it happens all the time.

There are many things that were scoffed at that ended up being true... but that is not an argument. My new theory is that the planet is actually a perfect triangle, and we are an alien experiment whose purpose is to see how long the humans can be fooled into believing their planet is round. Why do I believe this? Because we don't know everything that happens in the universe and also because people laughed when someone first suggested the planet was round right? Everyone knew, back then, that the planet was flat... so why not?

 

This one big bang theory does not make sense at all, it's about as easy to love as the 2 party system. I believe we are all on the same plane with the other planets because our solar system is swirling around a larger solar system. The motion and momentum of hurtling through space have pushed us into one spinning plane, like a top. Pluto is falling out of spin like the edge of a top while the closer planets stay in this straight line of sorts like the top of a top. Imagine our solar system as a dna strand spiraling through a hurricane of other solar systems all swirling towards a black hole in the eye of the hurricane. We spiral through it all planets in line.

 

You keep mentioning the big bang... but that has very little to do with what we are talking about. We are talking about planet formation. You can read a little about it HERE. What is it that you don't like about the theory, and why is yours more believable? Or have you abandoned that idea yet? I can't really tell, you are like a politician... that may be your calling.

 

Also I think if a body with enough gravitational pull such as the white dwarf pictured in the video above came in contact with the sun, it would pull the plasma from the sun, spinning it and covering its surface, then as the planet grew slowly from the plasma, it would gain enough mass to orbit away from the sun rather than into it.

 

I like this one a little better than the first one, but really you are just throwing out ideas now... dna strands... hurricanes... white dwarfs... its like a mixture of art, poetry, and philosophy with a little bit of astronomy thrown in. There is no doubt or question that there are many many possibilities... but the fact is that the theory we have now appears to be the best one (regarding planet formation).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

he questions the one put forward by popular science. And there is absolutely nothing wrong with that!

 

Questioning is fine, but one needs something beyond personal incredulity. And in supporting an alternative theory, "anything can happen" is not evidence. Putting forth an hypothesis and asking "can this happen?" but also rejecting any hint of rigorous analysis with an entreaty to "think outside the box" is an inconsistent position.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3. Earth is expanding, spinning and twisting apart to reveal the oceans, when the next planet is born, we will all die, perhaps this is what the Mayans knew of? 2012 or sometime soon a new planet will be born. Will it be born out of the sun? Yes. Will that event destroy all mankind? Yes, I'm afraid so. What may loook like a star will be born out of the sun, cooling into a new planet

 

It really sounds like Discovery Channel speaker man. This paragraph you wrote made me laugh so, so, but SO much that I hope it is not so inappropriate to reveal it here.

 

Anyway, for what we discovered by now, this theory is very weak.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks guys for thinking of possibilites. And thanks for the links as well. I'm still not totally good on quoting everyone as you can tell from my previous posts. So I'm kinda mass responding here to the past few posts. I appreciate your patiencein listening to what I'm trying to get across.

 

I'm not saying anything is possible...I mean I don't really think all the images from space have been doctored and we could be a triangle shaped planet. I believe that scientists are fueled by their own thirst for knowledge and that is why I find so much comfort and faith within the realms of it. I feel that their hearts are in the right place, trying to find answers, and that smile on the face of a man or woman who has just discovered something for the first time, when they know they have the proof to back it up.......it's amazing!

 

Just to have anyone take me seriously on here at all kinda gives me that feeling. I started to share a few of my thoughts with some of my friends and I've been surprised at how large their eyes have gotten, on 3 occasions now I've had them come back at me the next day with their own thoughts and theories and questions. For guys playing poker at a bar, that's pretty awesome.

 

Lately I've been thinking of the big bang theory a little more and the planet formations, I can see why an explosion could leave behind a straight line of debris. With the video recreations of this, it makes sense to me why everyone would think that, but I still say we're spinning fast like a top and that's why we are in line. Perhaps connected to the sun by a force we cannot see. There is a wobble? right? why?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks guys for thinking of possibilites. And thanks for the links as well. I'm still not totally good on quoting everyone as you can tell from my previous posts. So I'm kinda mass responding here to the past few posts. I appreciate your patiencein listening to what I'm trying to get across.

 

I'm not saying anything is possible...I mean I don't really think all the images from space have been doctored and we could be a triangle shaped planet. I believe that scientists are fueled by their own thirst for knowledge and that is why I find so much comfort and faith within the realms of it. I feel that their hearts are in the right place, trying to find answers, and that smile on the face of a man or woman who has just discovered something for the first time, when they know they have the proof to back it up.......it's amazing!

 

Just to have anyone take me seriously on here at all kinda gives me that feeling. I started to share a few of my thoughts with some of my friends and I've been surprised at how large their eyes have gotten, on 3 occasions now I've had them come back at me the next day with their own thoughts and theories and questions. For guys playing poker at a bar, that's pretty awesome.

 

Lately I've been thinking of the big bang theory a little more and the planet formations, I can see why an explosion could leave behind a straight line of debris. With the video recreations of this, it makes sense to me why everyone would think that, but I still say we're spinning fast like a top and that's why we are in line. Perhaps connected to the sun by a force we cannot see. There is a wobble? right? why?

 

It's great that you are so excited about talking about this stuff. But I think you are here merely to philosophize... rather than trying to discover the truth about things. That can be annoying to people who are trying to answer your questions in the hope that you want to learn something.

 

The term 'big bang' is misleading. It was more an expansion than an explosion. I am not sure what 'straight line of debris' you are talking about.

 

Which wobble are you talking about? There are lots of wobbles.

 

2) If the sun ejected planet-sized balls of matter like this once in while, perhaps it would result in a gravity shift in the solar system that would allow the existing planets to re-orient their orbits at further distances. The process could go something like this: sun stretches causing its gravity field to warp and shift the orbits of the planets at which point the stretched out part breaks away from the rest of the sun and the two gravity wells re-spherize at a distance from each other with the new planetoid redistributing the solar gravitation it brought with it in splitting off.

 

I said:

I don't think the sun is the only thing that is stretching here.

 

That is as specific as you can get?

 

It was a play on words.

 

OK... first problem... you have not given a cause for the first event. Everything plays out (though it still doesn't work) after 'sun stretches'... what caused the sun to stretch? Do you mean stretch like went from a sphere to a football shape and then a piece pinched off and it snapped back to a sphere? That is a dramatic effect... where is the cause?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK... first problem... you have not given a cause for the first event. Everything plays out (though it still doesn't work) after 'sun stretches'... what caused the sun to stretch? Do you mean stretch like went from a sphere to a football shape and then a piece pinched off and it snapped back to a sphere? That is a dramatic effect... where is the cause?

I said it was internal avalanching as conditions would shift in a way that caused layer-collapse or something like that. I think this is sort of like the cause of a supernova, though I don't know if it could occur on a less explosive scale. Another possibility could be that some material somehow "clumps up" inside the sun and "boils up" to an exceptionally high altitude within the sun. Then, as it collapses back downward, it could "roll" out on the waves of turbulence. I wouldn't know how to begin thinking about fluid dynamics inside the sun, but I would guess it is turbulent enough to eject something if that something could congeal enough to hold together as a "clump." I know it sounds like a stretch, but I'm just trying to figure out something that would work for the OP. Surely there must be something that could cause the sun to deform and pinch off from itself. Maybe the interior of the sun consists of numerous relatively cohesive balls/clouds of iron plasma rolling around like in a hot lava lamp.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Watch the video. Idea is something intersects with enough mass or something shoots off with enough mass to begin a rolling sort of snowballing fire effect until it breaks off. This obviously would be the end of us, but a planet would be born from the sun, a less dramtic supernova. I just want to say, I don't really know man this posting is so random and not like me. I have no background in any of this, it all just came to me. Keep that in mind.

 

 

 

 

Edited by jamiestem
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's not what he said. That would be the normal crackpot who refuse to change their mind. You should quote the first sentence too if you want to be fair to jamiestem.

 

As far as I understand, he just doesn't like the current theory of the Big Bang, or the theory of the solar system... and I don't blame him.

 

He abandoned his own theory in its current form, but he questions the one put forward by popular science. And there is absolutely nothing wrong with that!

 

There are very weird things that are required to explain the observations we make sometimes - especially in astronomy. And it's alright to challenge that.

I don't understand why it would be necessary to quote more than what's needed to make my point or how not quoting the first sentence is unfair to jamiestem. The post is right above mine and there is a link to the full post in my quote, but most of all what was said does not lessen but reinforce my argument.

 

This is what jamiestem said in post #50:

"Ok. So spitting out a planet and having it fall into an orbit seems unlikely, if not impossible. I still believe it could happen based on how little we know of things like that occuring."

 

You are free to your own opinion, but my interpretation of above text is that jamiestem did not fully abandon his theory and argued that we know to "little", AFAIK orbital mechanics is not some new unexplored science.

 

Whether he likes, understands or questions the current theory of formation and evolution of Solar Systems is besides and totally irrelevant to my argument. After 3 pages of arguments and he still "belives" - IMHO it is appropriate to ask IF it's possible and WHAT it would take to make him change his mind. It might very well behoove him to carefully think this question through too.

 

I don't mind if people put faith in their personal view of the Universe and understand that not everyone can take time to learn and understand all of science and every current theory and models. Certainly, I agree that there is nothing wrong with challenging current status or trying to learn more.

 

 

----------

 

 

I think so far every comment that has been thrown my way has altered my thought on this a little bit. Every comment but yours. Good contribution. If you could pull your head out of your black hole and read the whole 3 pages, I think you'd find that my opinion has changed quite a bit. For a person who has no experience whatsoever in the realm of science, I think I'm trying my best here to describe what I'm envisioning. What basis do you have to argue? Do you really think we understand the universe?

Attacking me instead of thinking through and answering my question does not improve on your credibility nor your knowledge and understanding of science.

 

A person with "no experience whatsoever in the realm of science" would profit more from asking questions and learning why his envisioned models are wrong, instead of stubbornly clinging to his faith and continue to argue about his idea after convincing evidence has been put forth against it, if he truly is interested in learning and discussing said phenomena.

 

I don't think we will ever fully understand the Universe and that our current knowledge have much more to add, with plenty of amazing and surprising discoveries to be made. But current knowledge of orbital mechanics put forth against your idea is well known and researched, it is NOT likely to change that much and any future change will be built upon whats already known and observed.

 

 

Look at the history of science, science is based in questioning, so why wouldn't I question what is said to be true? Galileo did that and thankfully the Catholic Church locked him up for the last 10 years of his life. What a good bunch of people though, they apologized in 1995 and finally admitted they were wrong about everything revovling around the earth.

You are NOT Galileo, implying that the mere unpopularity of some belief is in itself evidence of plausibility or that your personal ideas are being suppressed because of their revolutionary insights don't help your cause.

 

Without a thorough understanding of current consensus you are NOT able to judge its correctness or challenge its status.

 

 

I think there are many questions left to ask and many answers left to correct. One of the biggest "answers" I have a problem with is the Big Bang Theory. I just can't picture these beautiful spherical objects all being formed from one explosion.

The Big Bang theory doesn't involve the creation of our Solar System with the Sun and orbiting planets, according to the prevailing cosmological theory the Big Bang took place some 13.7 billion years ago and our Solar System formed much later, some 4.6 billion years ago. Big Bang is NOT about an explosion inside space, it deals with the grand scale evolution of the Universe as a whole, while the Nebular hypothesis deals with how stars and planets can form from local large clouds of matter. There is only one Big Bang, (that we know of), but billions of galaxies with billions of Solar Systems in different ages and stages of evolution.

 

I don't think it will lead to anything useful by trying to mix these very different and separate theories...

 

 

I think the planets are a timeline. We are nothing special, our particular brand of life is nothing impressive to the Sun. Fire is life to the sun. Rock is life to the sun. Gas is life to the sun. We are so self centered that we can't see the sun as a living being. The planets are it's children. We were once a little ball like Mercury, then as our inner magma/plasma leaked out, we became Venus. Then the outer plates began seperating revealing vast amounts of condensation that had gathered under the plates in the form of oceans. We are on our way to becoming Mars. Maybe Mars had a greenhouse gas problem too? Maybe we aren't causing it all ourselves? Maybe it's a natural process. Then Mars orbits farther away from the sun andundergoes a process that turns it into a gas giant like Jupiter. Saturn was once as big as Jupiter and as it shrunk down form the gases freezing and escaping, it left rings showing how big the planet once was. Then freezing more and shrinking, becoming more and more dense until it reaches the edge of the top and begins to wobble off like Pluto is. Meanwhile the Sun is in it's own orbit, an orbit so large we can't see it or understand it very easily.

Very poetic Jabberwocky...

 

I suggest you start reading here -> Solar System and use all links diligently to learn more.

Edited by Spyman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spyman-

 

The planet formation is still a mystery.

 

The big bang theory describes the creation of the universe, which in turn describes the creation of our solar system, but you are right I was confusing the two.

 

The theory is that all the planets formed at once, but we have no proof of that.

 

I'm trying to say they didn't, I'm not going to abandon that theory just yet.

 

I also believe in my planet timeline.

 

I believe the planets are all in line because of the speed at which we are spinning, like blades on a fan, or that drum thing in Karate Kid part 2. A top spinning.

 

And spyman, you're being condescending, you're contribution really adds nothing to this thread. Captain Panic was right, you took my words out of context purposely to try to make me look foolish. We don't need that here. You don't want speculations messing up your perfect little idea of how things work? Then don't click on speculations.

 

Galileo was one of the greatest scientists of all time, I am a guy in a rock band with an idea, I know the difference. Implying that I think I'm Galileo is kind of childish too. I was merely giving my example of how science is based in questioning "known" things.

 

Spyman, let me ask you this.......

 

Is it possible I'm right?

 

Is it possible that the sun(in some way) could give birth to a planet that then begins orbiting around it?

 

Say no, I dare you..............

 

More things are possible than you could ever imagine. I believe in the possibilty that I have a good idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is it possible I'm right?

 

Is it possible that the sun(in some way) could give birth to a planet that then begins orbiting around it?

 

Say no, I dare you..............

 

More things are possible than you could ever imagine. I believe in the possibilty that I have a good idea.

No.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And spyman, you're being condescending, you're contribution really adds nothing to this thread. Captain Panic was right, you took my words out of context purposely to try to make me look foolish. We don't need that here. You don't want speculations messing up your perfect little idea of how things work? Then don't click on speculations.

 

 

!

Moderator Note

 

jamiestem, the personal attacks will stop NOW. spyman attacked your ideas, not you. The burden of proof is yours, and it is expected that others will try and find holes in what you post.

 

Note: Discussion of this issue should not take place in this thread; it will merely drive the discussion off-topic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Spyman-

 

The planet formation is still a mystery.

 

Not really a mystery, there are still gaps though.

 

Have a look at:

 

http://astronomyonline.org/Exoplanets/ExoplanetDynamics.asp

 

The big bang theory describes the creation of the universe, which in turn describes the creation of our solar system, but you are right I was confusing the two.

 

I'm glad you acknowledged this. BBT has little influence on our planet formation models.

 

The theory is that all the planets formed at once, but we have no proof of that.

 

From what we observe we believe that planets form in quite a short space of time. We do know the age of the earth, and of the sun.

 

I'm trying to say they didn't, I'm not going to abandon that theory just yet.

 

I also believe in my planet timeline.

 

Are you prepared to accept other theories have more evidence/are better at predicting what we observe than your idea and are therefore closer to reality? Will anything we say change your view?

 

From what you've said previously I'd assume yes, but you are showing a few signs that that might be a no.... A yes is what science would do...

 

I believe the planets are all in line because of the speed at which we are spinning, like blades on a fan, or that drum thing in Karate Kid part 2. A top spinning.

 

You'd need to show how that can be true, that would require maths. Things like the mass accretion theory explain why the planets are in a plane. To a great degree we can predict planet size, composition and spin as well.

 

And spyman, you're being condescending, you're contribution really adds nothing to this thread. Captain Panic was right, you took my words out of context purposely to try to make me look foolish. We don't need that here. You don't want speculations messing up your perfect little idea of how things work? Then don't click on speculations.

 

Galileo was one of the greatest scientists of all time, I am a guy in a rock band with an idea, I know the difference. Implying that I think I'm Galileo is kind of childish too. I was merely giving my example of how science is based in questioning "known" things.

 

What science does not do is decide that an idea is correct and that the observation is wrong. Your measurement is ALWAYS correct. It's working out whether you've measured the right thing that is difficult.

 

Spyman, let me ask you this.......

 

Is it possible I'm right?

 

Is it possible that the sun(in some way) could give birth to a planet that then begins orbiting around it?

 

Say no, I dare you..............

 

It is unlikely to a very very very high degree that you are correct. This is mostly due to how the planets would get into stable orbits, the time scales involved, and what we observe happening around other stars.

 

More things are possible than you could ever imagine.

 

This is true. Nature is always better than us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow. Someone's got home court advantage. Really ref? A foul? Gotta call em at both ends buddy. Doesn't matter how "high brow" the insult is, ya gotta call em at both ends ref.

 

 

 

Again. Once the intersecting object builds up enough mass from the plasma attaching to it and rolling, snowballing, it eventually builds up enough mass to orbit away from the sun rather than back into it. A rarity yes, but on a large time line, planets are a rarity. That is why it's possible. That is all I'm saying. I disagree with the theories of planet formation. I am open to change, my original idea was that the sun shot out a ball of plasma and then once that hit space, like water it would turn into a sphere, which is kind of what you guys are saying about it's own gravity pulling in on itself. I changed that theory in part because it seemed more likely that an intersecting body could do exactly what this one above in the video is doing. Snowballing and then exploding in the video, I say snowballing and then detaching, a supernova on a smaller scale.

 

Again, I am just saying it's possible. Tell me why that isn't possible. No one has done that yet.

 

I tried to come up with reasons to support this hypothesis and this is what I came up with:

 

1) what if such "births" corresponded to gravitational shifts caused when critical amounts of certain elements are formed within the sun and their position relative to other layers "avalanches" inward, somewhat like supernova but on a less radical scale?

 

2) If the sun ejected planet-sized balls of matter like this once in while, perhaps it would result in a gravity shift in the solar system that would allow the existing planets to re-orient their orbits at further distances. The process could go something like this: sun stretches causing its gravity field to warp and shift the orbits of the planets at which point the stretched out part breaks away from the rest of the sun and the two gravity wells re-spherize at a distance from each other with the new planetoid redistributing the solar gravitation it brought with it in splitting off.

 

3) Why would the planets have different compositions? Maybe because the sun is stratified and heterogeneous inside, like marble, and if it would eject a planet-sized ball of matter, that ball would reflect the composition of the part of the sun's interior it was ejected from.

 

I loved this idea as well, not my own, but at least the guy was trying to think outside the box. Understand that we can't possibly begin to contemplate all of the things that can happen in the sun. We don't even know all the things the Earth can do. Somewhere between solar flares and supernovas, lies my answer.

 

What happens between the GRANDIOSE supernova and the tiny solar flares?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Where does the intersecting object come from? Again you have the moving out issue which you can't just account for with made as that would put all the planets in one orbit. This doesn't explain the disks we observe disappearing around young stars. Planets are not rare. Observable planets are.

 

Supernova are a result of star death, go read about them. There is no reason to assume there has to be something between cme and them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The explanation I've read on the creation of the solar system is very vague:

 

The Solar System formed from the gravitational collapse of a giant molecular cloud 4.568 billion years ago.[102] This initial cloud was likely several light-years across and probably birthed several stars.[103]

 

As the region that would become the Solar System, known as the pre-solar nebula,[104] collapsed, conservation of angular momentum made it rotate faster. The centre, where most of the mass collected, became increasingly hotter than the surrounding disc.[103] As the contracting nebula rotated, it began to flatten into a spinning protoplanetary disc with a diameter of roughly 200 AU[103] and a hot, dense protostar at the centre.[105][106] At this point in its evolution, the Sun is believed to have been a T Tauri star. Studies of T Tauri stars show that they are often accompanied by discs of pre-planetary matter with masses of 0.001–0.1 solar masses, with the vast majority of the mass of the nebula in the star itself.[107] The planets formed by accretion from this disk.

 

Are they saying that we are kind of like a twister spinning off a tornado, our little twister of a solar system was born still rotating from the initial power of the tornado?

 

 

 

 

I can picture that.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[/url]

 

 

 

 

 

 

Check this out. Maybe Pyramids were built as protective bulidings to keep some humans alive through some sort of solar explosion? Aliens could have built them and given ancient culture these doomsday dates in hopes that people would hide inside the pyramids. I mean, why not? Apparently the pyramids were impossible to build. Apparently Mayans understanding of the solar system almost seems impossible without some sort of outside source. Why else would thy have built the pyramids?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wow. Someone's got home court advantage. Really ref? A foul? Gotta call em at both ends buddy. Doesn't matter how "high brow" the insult is, ya gotta call em at both ends ref.

!

Moderator Note

jamiestem, please remember that you are not being insulted. Your ideas are being critiqued, nothing more. This is a crucial step in the scientific method. If it were easy, it wouldn't be the most effective tool for understanding the physical world that has ever existed. As was mentioned before, it's not personal though it may feel that way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The explanation I've read on the creation of the solar system is very vague:

 

The Solar System formed from the gravitational collapse of a giant molecular cloud 4.568 billion years ago.[102] This initial cloud was likely several light-years across and probably birthed several stars.[103]

 

As the region that would become the Solar System, known as the pre-solar nebula,[104] collapsed, conservation of angular momentum made it rotate faster. The centre, where most of the mass collected, became increasingly hotter than the surrounding disc.[103] As the contracting nebula rotated, it began to flatten into a spinning protoplanetary disc with a diameter of roughly 200 AU[103] and a hot, dense protostar at the centre.[105][106] At this point in its evolution, the Sun is believed to have been a T Tauri star. Studies of T Tauri stars show that they are often accompanied by discs of pre-planetary matter with masses of 0.001–0.1 solar masses, with the vast majority of the mass of the nebula in the star itself.[107] The planets formed by accretion from this disk.

 

Are they saying that we are kind of like a twister spinning off a tornado, our little twister of a solar system was born still rotating from the initial power of the tornado?

 

 

 

 

I can picture that.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[/url]

 

 

 

 

 

 

Check this out. Maybe Pyramids were built as protective bulidings to keep some humans alive through some sort of solar explosion? Aliens could have built them and given ancient culture these doomsday dates in hopes that people would hide inside the pyramids. I mean, why not? Apparently the pyramids were impossible to build. Apparently Mayans understanding of the solar system almost seems impossible without some sort of outside source. Why else would thy have built the pyramids?

 

If you would like something that is not vague I can recommend some undergraduate astrophysics texts, but they will expect a good maths and physics founding expecting at least second year level understanding of the basics. There is a lot of stuff to know, you can't just expect to understand it after a little bit of reading. People spend their lives trying to understand it. If you want to, you can and we will try to help but it will be hard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And spyman, you're being condescending, you're contribution really adds nothing to this thread.

I am sorry if you feel insulted jamiestem, it was not my intention to make you feel bad.

 

But nevertheless, it is crucial that you are abel to change your mind, if you want to learn.

(Pointing out this importance is my only claim of contribution here in this thread.)

 

Others are already doing a very good job in patiently explaining to you how you are wrong and I am not interested in trying to force feed you with knowledge or evidence against your will, so I wish you luck in your endeavour and won't disturb your speculation further.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It IS crucial to be able to change one's mind.

 

Mine changes all the time.

 

As evidenced by this thread.

 

Yours does not.

 

As evidenced by this thread.

 

It's easy to stand in the corner with the cops and blame all the robbers, but it's never that black and white.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.