[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: JJ Swaim has started an interesting discussion we can all speculate about

In my view of the solar system formation, all planets did not formed at
once but Jupiter is first since it is at just the right distance to be the
big accretion area from the sun of our size.
This has been kind of verified by observation recently of infant forming
solar system in the neighborhood some 20 million light years away.  Some
astronomers think that Jupiter could be the incomplete formation of a
second star. As you know some system are binary stars with one  revolving
about the other.  Who know for sure? At this stage in mans evolution to the
stars it is unknowable. Like all things we try to explain after the fact,
their are always multiple explanations but usually a popular or more
accepted explanation seems to have an answer to all the questions thus far
made. That is all that science can provide ultimately. We may know some day
if we can observe the formation of other solar systems at various stages of
developement in the universe. 

Victor
----------
> From: JJSwaim 
> To: meteorite-list@meteoritecentral.com
> Subject: Re: An uncomplicated question
> Date: Thursday, January 22, 1987 6:49 PM
> 
> If we assume all of the known planets came into being 'all at once',
> you are probably correct.  I rather picture the formation of the solar
> system as having had at first 2 or 3 planets before the rest completed
> coalescence.  Therefore, can we rule out the notion that the planet that
> became the asteroid belt (with a little help from its friends) is not in
> fact older than Jupiter therefore eliminating any such influence? jj
> 
> Apologies.  I sent this to Frank Spera and not the list.
>