How Did Uranus Form?

Space.com ^ | 03/08/18 | Nola Taylor Redd,

[Simon Green]

Although planets surround stars in the galaxy, how they form remains a subject of debate. Despite the wealth of worlds in our own solar system, scientists still aren't certain how planets are built. Currently, two theories are duking it out for the role of champion.

The first and most widely accepted, core accretion, works well with the formation of the terrestrial planets but has problems with giant planets such as Uranus. The second, the disk instability method, may account for the creation of giant planets.

"What separates the ice giants from the gas giants is their formation history: during core growth, the former never exceeded [critical mass] in a full gas disk," wrote researchers Renata Frelikh and Ruth Murray-Clay in a research paper. The core accretion model

Approximately 4.6 billion years ago, the solar system was a cloud of dust and gas known as a solar nebula. Gravity collapsed the material in on itself as it began to spin, forming the sun in the center of the nebula.

With the rise of the sun, the remaining material began to clump together. Small particles drew together, bound by the force of gravity, into larger particles. The solar wind swept away lighter elements, such as hydrogen and helium, from the closer regions, leaving only heavy, rocky materials to create terrestrial worlds. But farther away, the solar winds had less impact on lighter elements, allowing them to coalesce into gas giants such as Uranus. In this way, asteroids, comets, planets, and moons were created.

[Monkey Face]

I should have stopped at the article, before the jokes started. :o|

[SunkenCiv]

Just be glad this wasn’t about the Tallywhacker Galaxy!

[Monkey Face]

I know FR is filled with extremely brilliant people, but with articles like this, it seems they all revert to the worst days of their adolescence. I’m gobsmacked. NOT!

‘Face

[rdl6989]

You knew this would be a fun thread.