|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#131
|
|||
|
|||
Addressing the formation of the solar system
Ramon F Herrera wrote:
On Apr 7, 1:20 am, BURT wrote: How do accretion discs form in a flat plane around a star? How does the gravitational order bring matter together in the solar plane. How then does this matter proceed to become planets? There were trillions of lumps of matter. How did they come together for the order of the solar system we now see? Nobody can do it. And never will. Mitch Raemsch Just because we can't explain it completely now, doesn't mean that we will be ignorant forever (well, perhaps you will, but that's by choice). -RFH "Any sufficiently advanced technology or science at a given point in time is indistinguishable from magic" With BURT, the answer always precedes the question. This is the guy with two imaginary Nobel prizes. The rest of his answers are of a similarly imaginary nature. |
#132
|
|||
|
|||
Addressing the formation of the solar system
On Apr 14, 11:32*am, Jack Sprat wrote:
Ramon F Herrera wrote: On Apr 7, 1:20 am, BURT wrote: How do accretion discs form in a flat plane around a star? How does the gravitational order bring matter together in the solar plane. How then does this matter proceed to become planets? There were trillions of lumps of matter. How did they come together for the order of the solar system we now see? Nobody can do it. And never will. Mitch Raemsch Just because we can't explain it completely now, doesn't mean that we will be ignorant forever (well, perhaps you will, but that's by choice). -RFH "Any sufficiently advanced technology or science at a given point in time is indistinguishable from magic" With BURT, the answer always precedes the question. This is the guy with two imaginary Nobel prizes. The rest of his answers are of a similarly imaginary nature. The flat disk is something that a pair of merging black holes might create. ~ BG |
#133
|
|||
|
|||
Addressing the formation of the solar system
"Mark Earnest" wrote in message ica... "BURT" wrote in message ... How do accretion discs form in a flat plane around a star? How does the gravitational order bring matter together in the solar plane. How then does this matter proceed to become planets? There were trillions of lumps of matter. How did they come together for the order of the solar system we now see? Nobody can do it. And never will. Mitch Raemsch Gas does not come together. It dissipates. There is no way the solar system could have formed, except by supernatural accomplishment. Gravity makes things coalesce rather than dissipate. As I understand it, it is suggested that shockwaves from supernovae impact on interstellar gas and dust clouds causing local density anisotropies that act as nucleii for gravitational collapse. None of this requires a supernatural intervention - and I would be most disappointed if the God that I believe in had to go around intervening every time a solar system is created. Mine is clever enough to let the laws of nature manage all the physical stuff that the universe needs. |
#134
|
|||
|
|||
Addressing the formation of the solar system
On Apr 16, 8:03*am, "OG" wrote:
"Mark Earnest" wrote in message ica... "BURT" wrote in message .... How do accretion discs form in a flat plane around a star? How does the gravitational order bring matter together in the solar plane. How then does this matter proceed to become planets? There were trillions of lumps of matter. How did they come together for the order of the solar system we now see? Nobody can do it. And never will. Mitch Raemsch Gas does not come together. It dissipates. There is no way the solar system could have formed, except by supernatural accomplishment. Gravity makes things coalesce rather than dissipate. As I understand it, it is suggested that shockwaves from supernovae impact on interstellar gas and dust clouds causing local density anisotropies that act as nucleii for gravitational collapse. None of this requires a supernatural intervention - and I would be most disappointed if the God that I believe in had to go around intervening every time a solar system is created. Mine is clever enough to let the laws of nature manage all the physical stuff that the universe needs. Perhaps our pagan god of LHC will prove how simple it is to create a spinning disk of hydrogen and helium, with a pair or more of black holes at the center. ~ BG |
#135
|
|||
|
|||
Addressing the formation of the solar system
On Apr 16, 12:25*pm, BradGuth wrote:
On Apr 16, 8:03*am, "OG" wrote: "Mark Earnest" wrote in message ica... "BURT" wrote in message .... How do accretion discs form in a flat plane around a star? How does the gravitational order bring matter together in the solar plane. How then does this matter proceed to become planets? There were trillions of lumps of matter. How did they come together for the order of the solar system we now see? Nobody can do it. And never will. Mitch Raemsch Gas does not come together. It dissipates. There is no way the solar system could have formed, except by supernatural accomplishment. Gravity makes things coalesce rather than dissipate. As I understand it, it is suggested that shockwaves from supernovae impact on interstellar gas and dust clouds causing local density anisotropies that act as nucleii for gravitational collapse. None of this requires a supernatural intervention - and I would be most disappointed if the God that I believe in had to go around intervening every time a solar system is created. Mine is clever enough to let the laws of nature manage all the physical stuff that the universe needs. Perhaps our pagan god of LHC will prove how simple it is to create a spinning disk of hydrogen and helium, with a pair or more of black holes at the center. *~ BG The Formation of the Solar System Box 666 Old Dime Box, Texas 66666 |
#136
|
|||
|
|||
Addressing the formation of the solar system
On Apr 17, 4:56*am, Don Stockbauer wrote:
On Apr 16, 12:25*pm, BradGuth wrote: On Apr 16, 8:03*am, "OG" wrote: "Mark Earnest" wrote in message ica... "BURT" wrote in message ... How do accretion discs form in a flat plane around a star? How does the gravitational order bring matter together in the solar plane. How then does this matter proceed to become planets? There were trillions of lumps of matter. How did they come together for the order of the solar system we now see? Nobody can do it. And never will. Mitch Raemsch Gas does not come together. It dissipates. There is no way the solar system could have formed, except by supernatural accomplishment. Gravity makes things coalesce rather than dissipate. As I understand it, it is suggested that shockwaves from supernovae impact on interstellar gas and dust clouds causing local density anisotropies that act as nucleii for gravitational collapse. None of this requires a supernatural intervention - and I would be most disappointed if the God that I believe in had to go around intervening every time a solar system is created. Mine is clever enough to let the laws of nature manage all the physical stuff that the universe needs. Perhaps our pagan god of LHC will prove how simple it is to create a spinning disk of hydrogen and helium, with a pair or more of black holes at the center. *~ BG The Formation of the Solar System Box 666 Old Dime Box, Texas 66666 “A star is born when a dense patch gas and dust collapses inside a cosmic cloud” For a stellar packed galaxy or even the individual stellar and/or complex solar system disk of planets to start with, it needs at least two or more black holes merging and/or combining within a sufficient cosmic cloud of mostly hydrogen plus some helium and assorted other elements that just so happen to exist out of nowhere. Otherwise, if there’s nothing of any gravity seeds or nearby event(s) taking place, such as a supernova, then the natural cosmic collapsing process that’ll provide for the star plus an accretion disk is going to take a great deal of time, perhaps billions of years before any such star materializes, much less companions and/or worthy planets created out of whatever cosmic cloud remainders didn’t become any part of a given star. In other words, no one really knows this timeline within any objective certainty, of what a typical star and accretion disk formation of planets requires. Under the best of stellar creation/birthing conditions, it should take a cosmic molecular cloud proportion or volumetric area of at least a thousand fold the mass of whatever star(s) gets made, with otherwise tens of thousands in stellar mass most likely required. On average the molecular cloud density of 1e31e6 particles/cm3 is necessary in order to feed this initial process that’ll have to gravity suck that surrounding cosmic molecular medium down to 1 particle/cm3 or less, subsequently blowing away whatever remainders that didn’t become other companion stars, planets and moons. Good thing for us this suddenly rotating disk of a stellar creation process doesn't happen very often, however the original 12+ massive Sirius star/solar system as having emerged right next door, if not essentially on top of us, and supposedly having formulated as of not much further back than 300 million years ago, is certainly one very lucky cosmic period of nearby stellar creation for us, that which I find hard to believe this horrific event supposedly didn’t affect us. Perhaps this extremely recent creation of the Sirius star/solar system was downwind, so to speak, though I find this analogy as equally hard to fathom. Of course, I and most others still have no good idea as to where all of that vast volumetric expanse of mostly molecular hydrogen, helium and a composite of other elements came from to start with, much less of where the hell a pair of black holes or other significant sources of seed worthy gravity materialized from. ~ BG |
#137
|
|||
|
|||
Addressing the formation of the solar system
BradGuth wrote:
On Apr 17, 4:56 am, Don Stockbauer wrote: On Apr 16, 12:25 pm, BradGuth wrote: On Apr 16, 8:03 am, "OG" wrote: "Mark Earnest" wrote in message ica... "BURT" wrote in message ... How do accretion discs form in a flat plane around a star? How does the gravitational order bring matter together in the solar plane. How then does this matter proceed to become planets? There were trillions of lumps of matter. How did they come together for the order of the solar system we now see? Nobody can do it. And never will. Mitch Raemsch Gas does not come together. It dissipates. There is no way the solar system could have formed, except by supernatural accomplishment. Gravity makes things coalesce rather than dissipate. As I understand it, it is suggested that shockwaves from supernovae impact on interstellar gas and dust clouds causing local density anisotropies that act as nucleii for gravitational collapse. None of this requires a supernatural intervention - and I would be most disappointed if the God that I believe in had to go around intervening every time a solar system is created. Mine is clever enough to let the laws of nature manage all the physical stuff that the universe needs. Perhaps our pagan god of LHC will prove how simple it is to create a spinning disk of hydrogen and helium, with a pair or more of black holes at the center. ~ BG The Formation of the Solar System Box 666 Old Dime Box, Texas 66666 “A star is born when a dense patch gas and dust collapses inside a cosmic cloud” For a stellar packed galaxy or even the individual stellar and/or complex solar system disk of planets to start with, it needs at least two or more black holes merging and/or combining within a sufficient cosmic cloud of mostly hydrogen plus some helium and assorted other elements that just so happen to exist out of nowhere. Otherwise, if there’s nothing of any gravity seeds or nearby event(s) taking place, such as a supernova, then the natural cosmic collapsing process that’ll provide for the star plus an accretion disk is going to take a great deal of time, perhaps billions of years before any such star materializes, much less companions and/or worthy planets created out of whatever cosmic cloud remainders didn’t become any part of a given star. In other words, no one really knows this timeline within any objective certainty, of what a typical star and accretion disk formation of planets requires. So you accept that a relatively local supernova could initiate the collapse. Which makes a lot more sense than your insistence on a pair of black holes. |
#138
|
|||
|
|||
Addressing the formation of the solar system
On Apr 17, 10:06*am, OG wrote:
BradGuth wrote: On Apr 17, 4:56 am, Don Stockbauer wrote: On Apr 16, 12:25 pm, BradGuth wrote: On Apr 16, 8:03 am, "OG" wrote: "Mark Earnest" wrote in message ica... "BURT" wrote in message ... How do accretion discs form in a flat plane around a star? How does the gravitational order bring matter together in the solar plane. How then does this matter proceed to become planets? There were trillions of lumps of matter. How did they come together for the order of the solar system we now see? Nobody can do it. And never will. Mitch Raemsch Gas does not come together. It dissipates. There is no way the solar system could have formed, except by supernatural accomplishment. Gravity makes things coalesce rather than dissipate. As I understand it, it is suggested that shockwaves from supernovae impact on interstellar gas and dust clouds causing local density anisotropies that act as nucleii for gravitational collapse. None of this requires a supernatural intervention - and I would be most disappointed if the God that I believe in had to go around intervening every time a solar system is created. Mine is clever enough to let the laws of nature manage all the physical stuff that the universe needs. Perhaps our pagan god of LHC will prove how simple it is to create a spinning disk of hydrogen and helium, with a pair or more of black holes at the center. *~ BG The Formation of the Solar System Box 666 Old Dime Box, Texas 66666 “A star is born when a dense patch gas and dust collapses inside a cosmic cloud” For a stellar packed galaxy or even the individual stellar and/or complex solar system disk of planets to start with, it needs at least two or more black holes merging and/or combining within a sufficient cosmic cloud of mostly hydrogen plus some helium and assorted other elements that just so happen to exist out of nowhere. *Otherwise, if there’s nothing of any gravity seeds or nearby event(s) taking place, such as a supernova, then the natural cosmic collapsing process that’ll provide for the star plus an accretion disk is going to take a great deal of time, perhaps billions of years before any such star materializes, much less companions and/or worthy planets created out of whatever cosmic cloud remainders didn’t become any part of a given star. *In other words, no one really knows this timeline within any objective certainty, of what a typical star and accretion disk formation of planets requires. So you accept that a relatively local supernova could initiate the collapse. Which makes a lot more sense than your insistence on a pair of black holes. Of course, but if our messily little LHC can manage to produce black holes of protons or perhaps electrons, and should we manage to safely placed them into a sufficient molecular soup of hydrogen, helium and a few other elements should start to spin everything as those micro black holes merge into one. If we can accomplish this without causing a terrestrial nova, then perhaps far out in the vast cosmic realm of creating real stars, solar systems and galaxies should be a similar process, except trillions upon trillions fold bigger. btw, I'm hardly ever insisting. ~ BG |
#139
|
|||
|
|||
Addressing the formation of the solar system
On Apr 6, 10:20*pm, BURT wrote:
How do accretion discs form in a flat plane around a star? How does the gravitational order bring matter together in the solar plane. How then does this matter proceed to become planets? There were trillions of lumps of matter. How did they come together for the order of the solar system we now see? Nobody can do it. And never will. Mitch Raemsch In addition to whatever cosmic lumps of matter/antimatter, originally packed within black and white/clear holes of matter/antimatter, on average there's trillions upon trillions upon trillions of new photons per second being continually created and radiated from within most every cubic light year, of course most of which are those of photons we can’t see. Go figure as to the amount of cosmic data that should be endlessly available per any given cubic light year/sec, or for that matter per given m3/sec. One cubic light year = 8.467e47 m3 Volume of our expanding universe = 2e33 x 8.467e47 = 16.934e80 m3 Atoms within our universe of 1.7e81 m3 at 0.1 atom/m3 = 1.7e80 atoms (or if you like to use 0.1 atom/cm3 = 1.7e86 atoms) Our relatively passive sun supposedly radiates 1~2e45 (all inclusive) photons/sec, plus whatever mystery gravitons. (update/correction) Supposedly we have 2e24 significant photon emitting stars within this mostly forever expanding universe of ours (many of them, perhaps more than half, are red dwarfs), and that’s suggesting roughly more than 1e-9 star per cubic light year, with more stars being created on the fly, so to speak, not to mention trillions upon trillions upon trillions of other physical interactions taking place throughout our universe that can’t but help generate photons of their own at any given time, plus there are unavoidably secondary/ recoil photons and thereby third, forth and so on generations of those kinds of pesky photons to contemplate, and yet the mass and energy of this universe remains essentially unchanged. For the moment, I’ll use a conservative 1e25 stars offering an average 1e45 photons/sec each. Universe photons/year = ?.?e?? x 31.536e6 = ?.??e?? photons/year Photons per universe/yr = (1e25 x 1e45) x 31.536e6 = 3.15e77 Per given billion years makes that tally worth 3.15e86 photons Per 100 billion years = 3.15e87 photons, and so forth. Don’t forget to multiply everything by a thousand fold if you happen to like the average cosmic density of 0.1 atom/cm3, instead of the average 0.1 atom/m3, because that would make it 3.15e90 photons per 100 billion years. In other words, it can be safely said there has been and stall always be far more photons than atoms, especially if you’d care to include those pesky interior plus FTL quantum tunneling photons coexisting within all forms of physical matter. The relatively recent and sudden creation of the absolutely vibrant and extremely active Sirius star/ solar system of 12+ solar mass evolving itself right next door, if not on top of us so to speak, would have been a darn good example of where such deductive observationology of photons would have been very cosmology insightful, especially informative from those photons we can’t see. ~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / “Guth Usenet” |
#140
|
|||
|
|||
Addressing the formation of the solar system
On Apr 22, 2:56*pm, BradGuth wrote:
On Apr 6, 10:20*pm, BURT wrote: How do accretion discs form in a flat plane around a star? How does the gravitational order bring matter together in the solar plane. How then does this matter proceed to become planets? There were trillions of lumps of matter. How did they come together for the order of the solar system we now see? Nobody can do it. And never will. Mitch Raemsch In addition to whatever cosmic lumps of matter/antimatter, originally packed within black and white/clear holes of matter/antimatter, *on average there's trillions upon trillions upon trillions of new photons per second being continually created and radiated from within most every cubic light year, of course most of which are those of photons we can’t see. *Go figure as to the amount of cosmic data that should be endlessly available per any given cubic light year/sec, or for that matter per given m3/sec. One cubic light year = 8.467e47 m3 Volume of our expanding universe = 2e33 x 8.467e47 = 16.934e80 m3 Atoms within our universe of 1.7e81 m3 at 0.1 atom/m3 = 1.7e80 atoms (or if you like to use 0.1 atom/cm3 = 1.7e86 atoms) Our relatively passive sun supposedly radiates 1~2e45 (all inclusive) photons/sec, plus whatever mystery gravitons. (update/correction) *Supposedly we have 2e24 significant photon emitting stars within this mostly forever expanding universe of ours (many of them, perhaps more than half, are red dwarfs), and that’s suggesting roughly more than 1e-9 star per cubic light year, with more stars being created on the fly, so to speak, not to mention trillions upon trillions upon trillions of other physical interactions taking place throughout our universe that can’t but help generate photons of their own at any given time, plus there are unavoidably secondary/ recoil photons and thereby third, forth and so on generations of those kinds of pesky photons to contemplate, and yet the mass and energy of this universe remains essentially unchanged. *For the moment, I’ll use a conservative 1e25 stars offering an average 1e45 photons/sec each. Universe photons/year = ?.?e?? x 31.536e6 = ?.??e?? photons/year Photons per universe/yr = (1e25 x 1e45) x 31.536e6 = 3.15e77 Per given billion years makes that tally worth 3.15e86 photons Per 100 billion years = 3.15e87 photons, and so forth. Don’t forget to multiply everything by a thousand fold if you happen to like the average cosmic density of 0.1 atom/cm3, instead of the average 0.1 atom/m3, because that would make it 3.15e90 photons per 100 billion years. In other words, it can be safely said there has been and stall always be far more photons than atoms, especially if you’d care to include those pesky interior plus FTL quantum tunneling photons coexisting within all forms of physical matter. *The relatively recent and sudden creation of the absolutely vibrant and extremely active Sirius star/ solar system of 12+ solar mass evolving itself right next door, if not on top of us so to speak, would have been a darn good example of where such deductive observationology of photons would have been very cosmology insightful, especially informative from those photons we can’t see. *~ Brad Guth Brad_Guth Brad.Guth BradGuth BG / “Guth Usenet” “A star is born when a dense patch of gas and dust collapses inside a cosmic cloud” For a stellar packed galaxy or even the individual stellar and/or complex solar system disk of planets to start with, it needs at least an nearby kicker or perhaps two or more black holes merging, and/or combining within a sufficient cosmic cloud of mostly hydrogen plus some helium and assorted other elements, that just so happen to exist out of nowhere. Otherwise, if there’s nothing of any gravity seeds or nearby event(s) taking place, such as a supernova, then the natural cosmic collapsing process that’ll provide for the primary star plus an accretion disk is going to take a great deal of time, perhaps billions of years before any such star materializes, much less companions and/ or worthy planets created out of whatever cosmic molecular cloud remainders didn’t become any part of a given star. In other words, no one here or anywhere else really knows this timeline within any objective certainty, of what a typical star and accretion disk formation of planets requires. Only a limited number of complex simulations of such has emerged, and few if any of those efforts are similar enough to call it other than subjective. Under the best of stellar creation/birthing conditions, such as whatever created the nearby Sirius star/solar system, it should have taken a cosmic molecular cloud proportion or volumetric area of at least a thousand fold the mass of whatever stars get made, with otherwise tens of thousands in stellar mass most likely required. On average the necessary molecular cloud density of 1e9 particles/cm3 is required in order to feed this initial process that’ll have to gravity suck that surrounding cosmic molecular medium down to vacuum of 1 particle/cm3 or less, and/or having subsequently solar wind blown away whatever remainders that didn’t become other companion stars, planets and moons. Good thing for us this suddenly rotating disk of a stellar creation process doesn't happen very often, however the original 12+ massive Sirius star/solar system as having emerged right next door, if not essentially on top of us, and supposedly having formulated as of not much further back than 300 million years ago, and from a complex molecular cloud of at least 12,000 solar masses was certainly one very lucky cosmic period of nearby stellar creation for us, that which I find extremely hard to fathom this horrific stellar birthing event supposedly didn’t affect us. Perhaps this extremely recent creation of the Sirius star/solar system was downwind, so to speak, though I find this analogy as equally hard to fathom. Of course, I and most others still have no good idea as to where all of that vast volumetric expanse of mostly molecular hydrogen, helium and a complex composite of other elements came from to start with, much less of where the hell a pair of black holes or white/clear antimatter holes of any other significant sources of gravity seed worthy substance materialized from in the first place. In other words, thus far no one knows with certainty as to the exact timeline of how a star is born, or even knowing the demise process of a main sequence stare is now entirely in question and at risk of being far more complex than anyone can thus far imagine. ~ BG |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Formation of a Solar System??? | G=EMC^2 Glazier | Misc | 36 | March 10th 07 06:01 AM |
Solar system formation. Momentum distribution? | Starboard | Amateur Astronomy | 3 | January 2nd 07 07:05 PM |
UCSD Discovery Suggests 'Protosun' Was Shining During Formation Of First Matter In Solar System | [email protected] | News | 0 | August 11th 05 08:31 PM |
The formation of the Solar System | G=EMC^2 Glazier | Misc | 2 | August 13th 04 02:32 PM |