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.

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

"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.

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

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

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

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.

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

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”

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