Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

New theory on origin of the asteroid belt
Phys.org ^ | September 14, 2017 | by Bob Yirka

Posted on 09/14/2017 11:41:53 AM PDT by BenLurkin

Abstract

The asteroid belt contains less than a thousandth of Earth's mass and is radially segregated, with S-types dominating the inner belt and C-types the outer belt. It is generally assumed that the belt formed with far more mass and was later strongly depleted.

We show that the present-day asteroid belt is consistent with having formed empty, without any planetesimals between Mars and Jupiter's present-day orbits. This is consistent with models in which drifting dust is concentrated into an isolated annulus of terrestrial planetesimals. Gravitational scattering during terrestrial planet formation causes radial spreading, transporting planetesimals from inside 1 to 1.5 astronomical units out to the belt.

Several times the total current mass in S-types is implanted, with a preference for the inner main belt. C-types are implanted from the outside, as the giant planets' gas accretion destabilizes nearby planetesimals and injects a fraction into the asteroid belt, preferentially in the outer main belt.

These implantation mechanisms are simple by-products of terrestrial and giant planet formation. The asteroid belt may thus represent a repository for planetary leftovers that accreted across the solar system but not in the belt itself.

(Excerpt) Read more at phys.org ...


TOPICS: Astronomy; Science
KEYWORDS: asteroidbelt; asteroids; astronomy; bobyirka; catastrophism; ceres; science; vesta
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-49 last
To: Oatka

Lol the best part is the “north wind”.... in space!


41 posted on 09/15/2017 7:34:17 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: ETL

“You are right, until a quantum entity such as an electron or proton is observed it exists only within a probability wave.”

Well, that’s one interpretation. The math works well to view the waves as “probability waves” but it doesn’t make much sense empirically. It makes more sense if the waves are just actual waves, and the “probability” is simply something inherent to the nature of matter being in a wave state.


42 posted on 09/15/2017 7:42:09 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: reasonisfaith

Einstein got it backwards. Matter doesn’t distort space, matter IS a distortion in space. Energy is equivalent to matter so it is also a distortion in space, just at a much lower amplitude.


43 posted on 09/15/2017 7:45:25 AM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: ETL

We’re getting a little closer to agreement, possibly. Having a general idea about what something is might seem very different depending on level of expertise, and whether the concept of origin is included.

Underlying all discussions of origin—in the biggest picture of all big pictures—is the question of first premise. That is, the first premise of naturalism vs the opposing view.

The naturalist can do little more than admit to being completely in the dark when asked to give an account of nature’s origin.


44 posted on 09/15/2017 7:49:48 AM PDT by reasonisfaith ("...because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved." (2 Thessalonians))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman

Sounds like I can learn from you.

How can we know it’s more accurate to state “matter is a distortion in space” than “matter distorts space”?


45 posted on 09/15/2017 8:05:15 AM PDT by reasonisfaith ("...because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved." (2 Thessalonians))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: reasonisfaith

“How can we know it’s more accurate to state “matter is a distortion in space” than “matter distorts space”?”

Both statements are basically equivalent when it comes to describing a certain set of observations (gravity bending light, or relativistic effects near massive objects, for example), but saying “matter distorts space”, while explaining those observations, leaves us with more questions, such as “how does matter distort space?”, which is a question that isn’t easily answered.

If instead we look at matter as the actual distortion in space instead of something causing the distortion, it leads to different questions, ones that we can actually answer. For example, we would instead ask “why is space distorted such that it appears to us as matter?” and that question can be easily answered... space is distorted because it is a wave medium and the manner in which it is distorted is governed by the same wave mechanics that govern all wave mediums.


46 posted on 09/15/2017 12:40:51 PM PDT by Boogieman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Boogieman

I was hoping for more than fanciful speculation.

The problem here is that those interpreting scientific literature and scientists themselves—and in fact many across academia—often believe the falsehood that man’s language can create or reinvent reality when its capacities are limited to describing discovered reality.


47 posted on 09/15/2017 4:55:56 PM PDT by reasonisfaith ("...because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved." (2 Thessalonians))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: blueunicorn6

Annulus = fancy word for a donut.


48 posted on 09/16/2017 10:33:08 PM PDT by Professional Engineer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: 75thOVI; Abathar; agrace; aimhigh; Alice in Wonderland; AndrewC; aragorn; aristotleman; ...
Note: this topic is from 9/14/2017. Thanks BenLurkin.



49 posted on 04/26/2018 6:56:46 AM PDT by SunkenCiv (www.tapatalk.com/groups/godsgravesglyphs/, forum.darwincentral.org, www.gopbriefingroom.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-49 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson