Binary Solar System

[AbnormallyHonest]

So the Solar System has a few mysteries contained in its creation that seem to defy modern physics. The potential that our Solar System may in fact be the remains of a stellar merger may help to resolve many of the inconsistencies as opposed to the majority of observation throughout the galaxy.

If the system had originally began as a binary, the gas giants that would’ve formed may have been accelerated into an increasing orbit as the resonant tug from the orbiting suns transferred their momentum.

At that point, if one of the suns had inflated into a red giant, fusing helium into carbon and oxygen, and then collapsing into a white dwarf, leaving an inner planetary nebula composed of rocky elements... with an abundance of carbon, oxygen, as well as metals. The asteroid belt just inside the outer giants might just have been the rocky debris left after the swelling of one of our stars.

As the rocky planets began the accretion process, the decaying orbit of the two stars, combined with the shepherding of the outer gas giants, would have diluted the eccentricity of the orbits. Eventually, the two stars would merge into a single star, with a dense white dwarf as a core with a very disguising, and atypically inflated hydrogen fusing shell. This merger could also be the catalyst that could have caused a tidally locked Venus into a retrograde rotation as the oscillating resonant lock merged into a singular angular momentum.

This could also explain why it always appears that the Sun’s rotation is accelerated around the equator. A smaller, denser object with a higher angular momentum could produce such a peculiar disparity in the apparent rotation. Also, when the surface of the Sun exposes some of the layers beneath, we observe a darker cooler region of the surface which does not recover until the surface can overtake the area once again. As a white dwarf’s surface temperature is actually cooler than that of a main sequence star, it would seem only natural that the core below the surface would show a cooler region and the temperature might actually increase as you move further away from it. This could also explain why the Corona is actually much hotter than the surface of the Sun, as it is farther away from the “cooling” effect by the white dwarf possibly contained within.

Statistically, about 57% or more of the stars in our local vicinity are binary systems and at least eight of them that we know of contain a white dwarf. Beginning as a binary may be more likely, although the inclusion of a white dwarf may be less likely, but it does answer some questions as to the origins of the rocky inner planets.

What would the result be of a merger between a low mass white dwarf and a hydrogen fusing star with a combined mass equivalent to one solar mass?

Edited May 22, 2017 by AbnormallyHonest

[swansont]

Why would a star with less than a solar mass go red giant after such a short time?

A white dwarf that is absorbed by another star would probably have a very violent reaction, since you have a core that is denser than what's necessary to fuse Helium. You'd be dumping a load of Hydrogen onto that.

 

So the Solar System has a few mysteries contained in its creation that seem to defy modern physics. The potential that our Solar System may in fact be the remains of a stellar merger may help to resolve many of the inconsistencies as opposed to the majority of observation throughout the galaxy.

These unnamed mysteries and inconsistencies are no excuse to just make up a narrative that contradicts what we do seem to have a handle on.

[Silvestru]

AbnormallyHonest, you express yourself very eloquently and clear and I enjoy reading your science fiction but the ideas within are often like a script for an episode of ancient aliens.

[AbnormallyHonest]

Why would a star with less than a solar mass go red giant after such a short time?

 

A white dwarf that is absorbed by another star would probably have a very violent reaction, since you have a core that is denser than what's necessary to fuse Helium. You'd be dumping a load of Hydrogen onto that.

 

 

These unnamed mysteries and inconsistencies are no excuse to just make up a narrative that contradicts what we do seem to have a handle on.

 

Well, it could've been the larger of the two stars, and I am suggesting that they may have existed longer than the ~4 billion years that we age our Solar System at. That date could just be from the accretion of the inner planets pre-merger. The scarring on Mars and it's sudden loss of geothermal activity so soon to creation of the system could've been a result post merger. Who knows, it might have been moon to one of the other planets before it got kicked out. The hemispheric bulge on the planet would suggest that it is, in fact, a rogue moon.

 

Does not a white dwarf lose its fusing ability, sometimes shortly after it collapses? Also, is it not contained within a shell of fusing hydrogen? A merger into another star would just be adding volume to that shell.

 

I know of no complete and working model of the creation of our Solar System that can imitate our layout that can run from beginning to end, without an intervention of some fluke occurrence in more than one point in its construction. I'm not sure if I agree that a series of one in a billion flukes to do that or just the most probable type of system that we see in our local stellar neighborhood is a better "handle" on anything. Perhaps, we have the wrong handle?

AbnormallyHonest, you express yourself very eloquently and clear and I enjoy reading your science fiction but the ideas within are often like a script for an episode of ancient aliens.

 

Thank you very much, I do appreciate that. I guess I won't write that post on the Earth being round then. Thanks for the advice. I'm not suggesting that this post should assume that level of insight, although at one point a round Earth, a heliocentric solar system, or another galaxy were all considered science fiction, although I do not remember a mention of a engineered intervention. Although, I might say, that celestial engineering almost seems more probable than any of the "natural" intervention used to explain our Solar System... and then to suggest a series of them with regard to each one as only an isolated occurrence. My mind finds it difficult to accept.

Edited May 22, 2017 by AbnormallyHonest

[swansont]

 

Does not a white dwarf lose its fusing ability, sometimes shortly after it collapses? Also, is it not contained within a shell of fusing hydrogen? A merger into another star would just be adding volume to that shell.

 

 

 

It stops fusing because it runs out of viable fuel.

[Strange]

I know of no complete and working model of the creation of our Solar System that can imitate our layout that can run from beginning to end, without an intervention of some fluke occurrence in more than one point in its construction.

 

 

And do you have such a model?

 

 

I'm not suggesting that this post should assume that level of insight, although at one point a round Earth, a heliocentric solar system, or another galaxy were all considered science fiction

 

This is the Galileo Gambit, a well known fallacy.

 

(I don't think the Earth being flat has ever been a mainstream idea, for obvious reasons.)

[AbnormallyHonest]

A white dwarf that is absorbed by another star would probably have a very violent reaction, since you have a core that is denser than what's necessary to fuse Helium. You'd be dumping a load of Hydrogen onto that.

 

 

 

 

It stops fusing because it runs out of viable fuel.

 

Exactly.

 

 

1. And do you have such a model?

 

 

2. This is the Galileo Gambit, a well known fallacy.

 

(I don't think the Earth being flat has ever been a mainstream idea, for obvious reasons.)

 

1. I believe the one I just described could do just that, without much else than just our understanding of classical mechanics and a little adjustment. At least it can explain the basic organization with one simple (and statistically probable) scenario that doesn't require an intervention that is purely speculative just to reconcile one basic inconsistency at a time. (e.g. Mars' scarring, Mars' hemispheric bulge, Mars' geothermic inactivity at almost the inception of its existence, Venus' retrograde rotation, the outer gas giants, the inner rocky bodies, the abundance of heavier elements in the inner system, the asteroid belt, the uniquely equidistant orbits of all the planets, the increasing temperature of the Sun's atmosphere, the cooler interior... just to name a few) It seems a lot simpler, ergo, a lot more logical, that the scenario I just described above could explain all of these mysteries in one fell swoop, than accounting for each on individually through any number of rogue whatever or cataclysmic collisions. I would also argue, that the scenario I just described above, has a lot more supporting evidence in observation than just the assumption that any other occurrence is possible by imagination alone, and without any support in reality.

 

2. I'm actually a member of a "The Earth is Flat" group on Facebook. I assure you, it has never left the mainstream.

[Mordred]

I wouldn't consider a facebook group an authority in Physics. Let alone a judgement of what is mainstream.

[Manticore]

2. I'm actually a member of a "The Earth is Flat" group on Facebook. I assure you, it has never left the mainstream.

It's never left the mainstream because it was never in the mainstream.

[Silvestru]

2. I'm actually a member of a "The Earth is Flat" group on Facebook. I assure you, it has never left the mainstream.

 

I am really not surprised. You know you can buy a 2 part flight around the world so you can disprove this "mainstream theory" right?

And why don't you go to the edge of the earth and send me a picture? really...Big foot is harder to disprove than this "theory".

[Strange]

2. I'm actually a member of a "The Earth is Flat" group on Facebook.

 

 

Well that explains a lot.

[swansont]

Exactly.

 

 

And if it started to merge with another star, it would all of the sudden have a bunch of fuel. Like letting oxygen into a room above the flash point.

[AbnormallyHonest]

I wouldn't consider a facebook group an authority in Physics. Let alone a judgement of what is mainstream.

 

Would you consider the digital social venue of facebook as mainstream? How would you define it's mainstream-ness, as a product of the number of people that use it, or because of content that perpetuates its use?

It's never left the mainstream because it was never in the mainstream.

 

So, you're saying that Columbus actually had a long list of investors for his "Round the World" venture, or do you think that prior to him, the conventional wisdom may have been of a different logic? It's not that he was the one who first discovered the New World, or first thought of the Earth as being round, but he was the one who had enough influence, or at least enough fame, to bring the idea from ridicule to acceptance.

 

 

I am really not surprised. You know you can buy a 2 part flight around the world so you can disprove this "mainstream theory" right?

And why don't you go to the edge of the earth and send me a picture? really...Big foot is harder to disprove than this "theory".

 

I would speculate that the die hard "Flat Earth" cult would argue that because you aren't able to do it in a single flight, it diminishes the relevancy of your suggestion. (I agree that a flight more than half way around the globe would be illogical for travel purposes, but not for thought experiments.) Also, I would appreciate your ability to disprove this theory absolutely, or at best, provide some other circumstance that could describe any one of the anomalies described above which can be substantiated by an actual observation that humans have made in recorded history. I believe reasonable doubt would even be a difficult challenge. Which has more support in reality for it's existence, Bigfoot... or Bigfoot-like costumes?

 

 

Well that explains a lot.

 

Yes it does, my friend invited me to try and help him with the inception of some logic to some of the fanatics, but I guess that's assuming that their conclusions were based on some type of it.

 

 

And if it started to merge with another star, it would all of the sudden have a bunch of fuel. Like letting oxygen into a room above the flash point.

 

Well, white dwarfs have been known to sometimes be encased in a hydrogen fusing shell, with the dwarf essentially as the core. In this instance, wouldn't make sense that a merger with a hydrogen fusing star would only be adding fuel to the hydrogen fusing shell of the dwarf?

[swansont]

Well, white dwarfs have been known to sometimes be encased in a hydrogen fusing shell, with the dwarf essentially as the core. In this instance, wouldn't make sense that a merger with a hydrogen fusing star would only be adding fuel to the hydrogen fusing shell of the dwarf?

No, why would it? Those situations are not equivalent.

[AbnormallyHonest]

No, why would it? Those situations are not equivalent.

 

Well, there is a cooler, helium fusing portion of the star, which may have exhausted its fuel, encased in a shell of hotter, lighter fuel of a different type of fusion. So, in response to you inquiry of throwing fuel onto the fire, so to speak, I would tend to agree. Although, I fail to see why the addition of hydrogen to a star that has a cooler interior composed of denser matter of a different type which may or may not fuel a completely different type of reaction and a shell of the same type of matter, of a similar density, temperature, already producing the exact same type of fusion would be considered illogical. That would be like saying that there is no way to add fuel to an oil fire burning on a body of water, because the water and the fuel don't mix.

[Mordred]

the most reliable way to judge mainstream is what is taught in the textbooks. So no I wouldn't judge any social media as mainstream physics.

 

Its not based on a popularity contest but on what the evidence shows and the strongest model. Most robust to describe it.

 

We have far too many satellites in space to even consider the Earth as being flat.

 

A little study into how forces work with matter shows that the most energy efficient configuration is round.

 

Its extremely basic physics that you can literally test yourself at home.

 

If you like I'll post you the math later on. Granted you will have to believe in the 3 laws of inertia.

Edited May 25, 2017 by Mordred

[swansont]

 

Well, there is a cooler, helium fusing portion of the star, which may have exhausted its fuel, encased in a shell of hotter, lighter fuel of a different type of fusion. So, in response to you inquiry of throwing fuel onto the fire, so to speak, I would tend to agree. Although, I fail to see why the addition of hydrogen to a star that has a cooler interior composed of denser matter of a different type which may or may not fuel a completely different type of reaction and a shell of the same type of matter, of a similar density, temperature, already producing the exact same type of fusion would be considered illogical. That would be like saying that there is no way to add fuel to an oil fire burning on a body of water, because the water and the fuel don't mix.

 

 

Why is the helium-fusing part cooler?

[Airbrush]

I thought that a merger between a white dwarf and another star produces a type Ia supernova.

 

 

"There are several means by which a supernova of this type can form, but they share a common underlying mechanism. If a carbon-oxygen^{[nb 2]}white dwarf accreted enough matter to reach the Chandrasekhar limit of about 1.44 solar masses (M_☉)^[54] (for a non-rotating star), it would no longer be able to support the bulk of its mass through electron degeneracy pressure^[55][56] and would begin to collapse....Within a few seconds, a substantial fraction of the matter in the white dwarf undergoes nuclear fusion, releasing enough energy (1–7044200000000000000♠2×10⁴⁴J)^[58] to unbind the star in a supernova.^[59] An outwardly expanding shock wave is generated, with matter reaching velocities on the order of 5,000–20,000 km/s, or roughly 3% of the speed of light."

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supernova#Normal_Type_Ia

Edited May 25, 2017 by Airbrush

[AbnormallyHonest]

 

 

Why is the helium-fusing part cooler?

 

Really? It has to do with freeing the nuclei of the electrons which increases the density and actually reduces the actual kinetic energy and harbors it as potential instead. Basically, the energy that would have been expressed as heat, it is the pressure that prevent the nuclei from collapsing into a denser form of matter (neutrons). I believe this can also halt the fusion process under certain conditions. Oh, or it because it runs out of fuel.

I thought that a merger between a white dwarf and another star produces a type Ia supernova.

 

 

"There are several means by which a supernova of this type can form, but they share a common underlying mechanism. If a carbon-oxygen^{[nb 2]}white dwarf accreted enough matter to reach the Chandrasekhar limit of about 1.44 solar masses (M_☉)^[54] (for a non-rotating star), it would no longer be able to support the bulk of its mass through electron degeneracy pressure^[55][56] and would begin to collapse....Within a few seconds, a substantial fraction of the matter in the white dwarf undergoes nuclear fusion, releasing enough energy (1–7044200000000000000♠2×10⁴⁴J)^[58] to unbind the star in a supernova.^[59] An outwardly expanding shock wave is generated, with matter reaching velocities on the order of 5,000–20,000 km/s, or roughly 3% of the speed of light."

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supernova#Normal_Type_Ia

 

This is also the base limit, which is not considerate of rotation. That would be like measuring the excitement of a merry-go-round while only at rest. Another thing to consider is that both the stars combined only have a grand total of exactly 1 solar mass. Also, another thought is that we've only really been able to look at one star up close, and if we have gotten it wrong about it's makeup or density, than that could change our entire understanding of star formation and life cycles as a whole. If you look at a list of stars in our local group, and only look at the stars between 1-2 solar masses, you'll find that except for the ones that are dwarf stars or non-hydrogen fusing stars, almost all are less dense than our star, but all of them more massive.

 

Also, it is theorized that the core of the Sun extends to about 20-25% of its entire diameter at an average of 5x the density of water... and the plasma layer that follows is 1/6000 the density of air at sea level? A smaller denser core made of something else would do a lot to soften that ratio between the density of matter of the same type.

 

Also, the core of the Sun progressively exerts an increasing gravitational force on the surface due to the fact that the lighter elements are less dense than the heavier elements they become. As the core shrinks, its density increases, displacing the distribution of mass as being closer to the mean gravitational center. This actually causes the sun to have an increase in it's luminosity of about ~1% per year. Sorry, don't mean to bore you with trivial facts, but it just seems logical to assume that there might a smaller denser core at the foundation of all these processes?

 

...or maybe I should just try to get a photo of Bigfoot?

[swansont]

Helium fusion temperature is six times higher than the sun's hydrogen-burning core temperature.

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triple-alpha_process

[AbnormallyHonest]

Helium fusion temperature is six times higher than the sun's hydrogen-burning core temperature.

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triple-alpha_process

 

Yes... so how does electron degenerate matter fuse? I always hate it when I order white wine and they bring red.

Edited May 25, 2017 by AbnormallyHonest

[imatfaal]

 

Yes... so how does electron degenerate matter fuse? I always hate it when I order white wine and they bring red.

 

 

The matter in a white dwarf which is under the chandrasekar limit (1.39 Solar Masses) is held apart by the electron degeneracy pressure - if it were actively fusing it would be held apart by the thermal pressure involved with such a high temperature; you reach this situation when there is not much left to fuse together (the sun has run out of fuel) AND there is not enough inward gravitational pressure to continue fusion.

 

Matter in a white dwarf star which is above the chandrasekar limit and is running out of fuel will also get to the point where the only thing against the gravitational pressure inwards is the electron degeneracy pressure outwards - but for these heavier stars the gravity "wins" and electron degeneracy pressure is overcome and other things can happen depending on its make up and any companion; most spectacularly Super Nova

[Sensei]

 

2. I'm actually a member of a "The Earth is Flat" group on Facebook. I assure you, it has never left the mainstream.

 

You're just member of group, or you truly believe in that Earth is flat.. ?

These are two different things. One can be member (like this forum) without actually believing in it..

[Strange]

One can be member (like this forum) without actually believing in it..

 

 

Yep. I don't believe in this forum.

[pavelcherepan]

 

 

So, you're saying that Columbus actually had a long list of investors for his "Round the World" venture, or do you think that prior to him, the conventional wisdom may have been of a different logic? It's not that he was the one who first discovered the New World, or first thought of the Earth as being round, but he was the one who had enough influence, or at least enough fame, to bring the idea from ridicule to acceptance.

 

"Round the world" and "western route to Orient" are very different things. Columbus wanted to do the latter. The reason why he didn't have enough financial support is because scholars of the time considered his estimate of travel distance as far too low, while the distance in his estimates was already on the very edge of what was possible to accomplish with naval vessels of the time. Also around the same time Spanish explorers managed to find the southern tip of Africa and now the eastern route to India was available.