The sun is giving birth to planets

[jamiestem]

I am not a scientist, but I have a theory about a couple of different things when it comes to the origin of our universe. My ideas seems to be fairly original, yet simple. I believe that the Sun gave birth to all of the planets, one by one. That the sun spits out a large ball of plasma every 80 billion years or so resulting in a new planet. Each planet is an offspring of the sun on an outward journey away from it. A ball of molten plasma exploding out into space, spinning and slowly cooling until the outer crust forms. Basically the planets are a timeline of what happens to a ball of plasma shot out of the sun. Ball of plasma-cools-crusts over, spins from its source, expands and breaks apart, sweating oceans, exploding into a gas and then freezing as it reached the depths of space. Mercury is a baby and Pluto is an old man.

 

1. Mercury the newest planet, closest to the sun. Mercury has cooled on the outside but remains molten within, a planet to be. Gases and moisture trap within the cooling rock as it hurtles through frozen space at breakneck speed.

 

2. Venus which soon will be in the sweet spot rotation that Earth is in. Once there it will begin to expand and oceans will form as the Earth once expanded or spun apart from a sheer rock surface to what it is now. Venus is the next earth.

 

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

 

4. Mars- Once had life much like Earth but was disintegrated when Mercury was born, soon to be a gas giant once it explodes in 6 billion years

 

5. Jupiter- Hard to believe, but Jupiter was once the size of earth, still a heat source remains within, but mostly this gas giant consists of gas

 

6. Saturn- Much like Jupiter, just shrinking and freezing as it moves away from the sun

 

7. Neptune- Allt he gas condenses and freezes and we have these two ice giants

 

8. uranus

[Klaynos]

So why are the planets made of different % of stuff than the sun?

 

How would the mass get out against gravity?

 

How do you consolidate this with the evidence we have for planet formation disks observed around other planets?

 

Why are all of the planets, pretty much, orbiting in one plane?

 

Why are the orbits we observe not changing by the required amount for this to happen?

 

Also, have you been here before? If not, your idea has.

[insane_alien]

also, with your time scale, the universe has not been around long enough to spit out even two planets.

 

and the sun definitely hasn't been here anywaher near that time

[jamiestem]

All I am saying is it seems to me that the Sun shoots out a molten ball of mass, that mass then cools in space and becomes a planet slowly rotating away from the earth. I think I'm right. Of course they are all different, each meteor that hits a planet brings different elements to it. Plus the sun might not spit out all the same materials all the time. Just the sun pooping out a planet, all different, like kids of a mother:) Oh and I have no idea of the timeline of things, I guessed on the 60 billion, sorry, I'm not a scientist. This all makes sense to me, a big bang does not make sense to me. I'm a genius, I figured it out. Can't find any relative posts anywhere about this. The earth was once as small as mercury, it has expanded and grown, spinning until it is destroyed by the birth of a new planet by the sun. That event will kill us, Earth will then begin to look like MArs.

[Bignose]

course they are all different, each meteor that hits a planet brings different elements to it.

 

Think about the ratio of the mass of an average meteor to the mass of the average planet, and then re-think this.

 

-OR- to put it more clearly, the amount of different elements that a meteor could bring to a planet is almost infinitesimal.

 

Please try to answer all of Klaynos' questions. If you firmly believe in your idea, you should develop it enough so as to be able to answer all questions fully to the satisfaction of the questioners. This is how science works -- you get reviewed and asked questions by other people. If you don't answer questions, your idea gains no traction.

[michel123456]

At least it is testable.

It means, if i understand well, that planets change orbit abruptly. But not necessary. Your theory can stand without that.

 

It means that all planets have a different age.

 

And it means the Sun is throwing away matter in roughly the same direction in order to put the planets in the same orbital plane as Klaynos pointed.

[insane_alien]

so, first you admit you are not a scientist, then when we raise concerns about the idea, you just handwave them away effectively saying 'that doesn't matter, it just is'

 

yeah, thats not how it works.

[ewmon]

The idea of the sun giving birth to planets is interesting. About the mechanics of it, I can imagine the sun expelling material, but I don't see how/where the material acquires the tangential velocity for it to orbit the sun.

[Sisyphus]

I think I'm right.

 

Why?

[michel123456]

The idea of the sun giving birth to planets is interesting. About the mechanics of it, I can imagine the sun expelling material, but I don't see how/where the material acquires the tangential velocity for it to orbit the sun.

 

By the principle of Newton's cannon, point 3 where

3.If the speed is higher than the orbital velocity, but not high enough to leave Earth altogether (lower than the escape velocity) it will continue revolving around Earth along an elliptical orbit. (D)

 

Jamie, say something.

[Sisyphus]

By the principle of Newton's cannon, point 3 where

 

But note there that the origin point is already above the Earth's atmosphere. That ellipse of the orbit will intercept the origin point (the cannon on the mountaintop), as it must, unless some secondary force is applied to it while it's already in flight. There is no way to fire a cannonball from the Earth's surface such that it will neither escape Earth's gravity entirely nor intersect the surface again.

[michel123456]

That's a problem, indeed.

[ewmon]

By the principle of Newton's cannon

Okay, so it would eject it tangentially. I was thinking more radially. So, how/why would the sun eject it tangentially?

[jamiestem]

This is awesome. Thank you. I've seen picture of a plane that the earth and all the planets sit on and rotate on? That's why they're all in line maybe. What I'm also saying is that the sun has weather that we don't completely understand yet. What if instead of a solar storm shooting out in gas form, a liquid molton ball of lava/plasma was shot out. Huge event. But as it moved away from the sun it cooled and spun into a perfect ball.

 

You could test it with a slow vortex in an anti gravity chamber and then ploomp, shoot lava balls into it and see how they react. Do they spin and form perfect balls rotating into the vortex over time?

 

The sun produces different materials all the time, it is the birthplace of all planets and life. All our planets are traced back to the sun. I'm saying multiple bangs rather than one big bang created this galaxy. Think of the sun as an entity, an organism that is actually having a phenomenom happen to it that creates these planets. The sun is alive. The planets are its children. The solar system is a timeline of a planets life.

 

and i meant revolving around the sun up in the 2nd post, not the earth.

 

Why?

 

Because why else would all the planets be perfectly round? Some explosion that makes perfectly round balls? Nope. Think about water and how it acts in zero gravity, it turns into a ball. Thats how the liquid of the sun reacts when it breaks through the magnetic barrier of the sun in a huge solar storm. once it hits space it takes on a droplet form. It cools, crusts, hardens, and moisture and pressure build inside as the crust grows and the inner molten lava shrinks in size.

[md65536]

[1] So why are the planets made of different % of stuff than the sun?

 

[2] How would the mass get out against gravity?

 

[3] How do you consolidate this with the evidence we have for planet formation disks observed around other planets?

 

[4] Why are all of the planets, pretty much, orbiting in one plane?

 

[5] Why are the orbits we observe not changing by the required amount for this to happen?

 

Also, have you been here before? If not, your idea has.

I disagree with the theory but I don't like to see an idea killed by open questions.

 

1. It could be that the "planet birthing" process occurs deep within the sun, involving a process that makes use of only some portion of the sun's matter. Some number of factors could influence the size and composition of each "child".

 

2. Births are explosive events (think Alien). Supernovae and solar winds already let stellar matter escape gravity... explosive births could too.

 

3. It could be possible that there are multiple means of planet formation.

 

4. The planet formation process might be directly related to the sun's rotation.

 

5. Change in planet orbits may occur in short periods due to some phenomena we haven't witnessed in our history. The births may be accompanied by a "belch" that pushes everything away from the sun.

 

 

All that said, there is no evidence that any of these answers or any of the original statements are true.

Meanwhile, other alternatives (planet formation disks) are evident, much more plausible, and have fewer unanswered questions.

I don't see any reason why someone would believe this theory. What problem does it solve or advantage does it have over other planet formation theories?

 

Can't find any relative posts anywhere about this. The earth was once as small as mercury, it has expanded and grown

I've seen a youtube video describing the theory that the Earth is expanding. The video argued that the continents fit together perfectly on a smaller sphere. It's an interesting idea, but it's not accepted and probably debunked and doesn't have the supporting evidence that tectonic plate theories have. But if you want to get on board with other crackpot theories, you might search for that.

 

Or on the other hand... you could skip youtube and instead check out some science books or even wikipedia... http://en.wikipedia....etary_formation.

 

Edit:

I remember at the time reading that Neal Adams is... well, let's say not reputable. When I googled this video google suggested search term "expanding earth debunked". I would suggest looking into that before getting too into this. Edited March 28, 2011 by md65536

[michel123456]

(...)What if instead of a solar storm shooting out in gas form, a liquid molton ball of lava/plasma was shot out. (...)

 

Look back at Sisyphus' s comment.

No matter the direction of the blast, radial, tangent or in-between, the plasma-ball will come back to the sun after one orbit at most. Or the plasma will not orbit at all in case it reaches escape velocity.

[Klaynos]

The purpose of my open questions was to get the OP to think about his idea a bit more. Handwavey "I think it was dun like this because that's what I think it was dun like" is not science, it's not even very easy to analyse in anything like a scientific way, but if you can get people to think things through themselves and present them with the evidence we have then maybe they'll come to the conclusion that their idea doesn't fit reality. And maybe they'll then go on to find something that does...

[CaptainPanic]

But note there that the origin point is already above the Earth's atmosphere. That ellipse of the orbit will intercept the origin point (the cannon on the mountaintop), as it must, unless some secondary force is applied to it while it's already in flight. There is no way to fire a cannonball from the Earth's surface such that it will neither escape Earth's gravity entirely nor intersect the surface again.

That's a problem, indeed.

There are the solar winds.

If we assume that the sun can indeed shoot out crazy amounts of mass at high enough velocities to reach orbits where the planets are, then we can also assume that the mad amount of mass will be followed by a mad amount of radiation at nearly the speed of light, which will provide the necessary force to keep something in an orbit, rather than an elipse which crosses the surface of the sun. We can also come up with some electric forces that have a similar effect.

 

But so far I haven't seen anything that would indicate that the planets were formed this way... and other theories about the formation of the solar system seem to explain our reality quite well.

[Klaynos]

There are the solar winds.

If we assume that the sun can indeed shoot out crazy amounts of mass at high enough velocities to reach orbits where the planets are, then we can also assume that the mad amount of mass will be followed by a mad amount of radiation at nearly the speed of light, which will provide the necessary force to keep something in an orbit, rather than an elipse which crosses the surface of the sun. We can also come up with some electric forces that have a similar effect.

 

But so far I haven't seen anything that would indicate that the planets were formed this way... and other theories about the formation of the solar system seem to explain our reality quite well.

 

That amount of radiation would be detectable from other stars I'd have thought. We don't observe this.

[CaptainPanic]

That amount of radiation would be detectable from other stars I'd have thought. We don't observe this.

Good point! I completely agree. That's why I ended my previous post with the remark that there are no signs or observations that suggest that the sun (or any other star) is giving birth to planets.

[Klaynos]

Good point! I completely agree. That's why I ended my previous post with the remark that there are no signs or observations that suggest that the sun (or any other star) is giving birth to planets.

 

Sorry, missed that bit.

[jamiestem]

Well that helps. Is it the constant rotation that's made all the planets perfectly round? Like stones in an ocean? It seems like we'd have some planets that weren't round if that was the case. I still say ploomp- the sun gives birth to a planet again soon. The formation of the planets as described to me, happening in one large event that created the whole thing is obviously wrong. That could not have happened. Randomness happens. All perfectly round balls rotating around the sun on the same plane does not happen. I still see no reason why the sun can't shoot out a ball of molten plasma in a huge event and then just as every other planet in our solar system it begins rotating away from the sun, burned and molded by gravity into a perfect circle. I would think we could mistake this event for a supernova in far off solar systems. Not recognizing the growth of the sun, not giving it the potential it deserves, the life it deserves, life breeds life. The sun is birthing. I believe the earth was once a barren wasteland, much like mercury, then becomes volcanicly active like Venus, then expanded like earth, then died like Mars did when Mercury was born, then explodes and expands like Jupiter, then begins to shrink and freeze like Saturn, with outer rings that were once the planets true size, and continues shrinking and freezing as it rotates away from the sun and becomes an ice giant, little actual mass because it has all exploded, all just frozen gas around a chunk of what remains of the mass.

[CaptainPanic]

Well that helps. Is it the constant rotation that's made all the planets perfectly round? Like stones in an ocean? It seems like we'd have some planets that weren't round if that was the case. I still say ploomp- the sun gives birth to a planet again soon. The formation of the planets as described to me, happening in one large event that created the whole thing is obviously wrong. That could not have happened. Randomness happens. All perfectly round balls rotating around the sun on the same plane does not happen. I still see no reason why the sun can't shoot out a ball of molten plasma in a huge event and then just as every other planet in our solar system it begins rotating away from the sun, burned and molded by gravity into a perfect circle. I would think we could mistake this event for a supernova in far off solar systems. Not recognizing the growth of the sun, not giving it the potential it deserves, the life it deserves, life breeds life. The sun is birthing. I believe the earth was once a barren wasteland, much like mercury, then becomes volcanicly active like Venus, then expanded like earth, then died like Mars did when Mercury was born, then explodes and expands like Jupiter, then begins to shrink and freeze like Saturn, with outer rings that were once the planets true size, and continues shrinking and freezing as it rotates away from the sun and becomes an ice giant, little actual mass because it has all exploded, all just frozen gas around a chunk of what remains of the mass.

Planets are round because of gravity. Everything (all material of a planet) wants to be as close to the center of the planet as possible. That is the case in a sphere.

 

Small rocks have such low gravity that they can have nearly any shape. There are many planetoids (small planets) that aren't perfectly round. But at a certain size, all planets are spheres.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definition_of_planet#Hydrostatic_equilibrium

[jamiestem]

Look back at Sisyphus' s comment.

No matter the direction of the blast, radial, tangent or in-between, the plasma-ball will come back to the sun after one orbit at most. Or the plasma will not orbit at all in case it reaches escape velocity.

 

If it was slowed by the pull of the sun on its outward trajectory, couldn't it just fall into an outward orbit? Has this ever happend? Has plasma shot out of the sun and past us and out of our solar system before? No. That never happened. Only gas. Solar flares. When the sun spits a fireball, then we can talk about where its gonna go. Why wouldn't it orbit? Thanks for thinking about this with me.

 

Are atoms round for the same reason?

[mississippichem]

Are atoms round for the same reason?

 

Who said atoms are round?