Posted on 03/09/2018 9:43:05 AM PST by 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.
(Excerpt) Read more at space.com ...
Rectum? Damn near killed ‘em!
CC
The jokes are what I’m here for.
A few years ago, the San Francisco Comical, ran the following headline:
“Startling New Discovery, Rings Around Uranus”
It really caused a “stir” on Castro Street!
In the womb?
Dowsn’t Uranus from about the time urzygote trans into urembryoblast?
shortly after my folks had relations
The nebular hypothesis has been an embarrassment for about 200 years. The sun has over 99% of the solar systems mass, while the planets have about 99% of the angular momentum. If it did not receive the endorsement of an aged Laplace, it would have died back then.
So...how many movements does Uranus have?
I don’t know about forming, but desk chairs have a noticeable deforming influence...
So Laplace couldn’t transform this into a viable hypothesis? :)
Will someone who believes this tell me what the earth looked like when it was only 4000 miles in diameter. Supposedly the earth now has a number of layers.
What layers were there when the earth was only 4000 miles in diameter? Did all the supposed iron in the core come first or did it somehow arrive with all the other stuff and find its way to the core over time? Does anyone pretend to have any idea?
ML/NJ
He He... very nicely done.
no doubt many on Castro street have vowed to penetrate the mysteries of uranus
I’d theorize it began as a simple aperture in space-time, through which mass exited and began to accrete. This caused a depression in the fabric of space-time causing Uranus to pinch together.
The jokes write themselves on this one!!!
That’s a very tightly held secret.
I don’t know. Another question, how’d this happen?
URANUS IS PROBABLY FULL OF GIANT DIAMONDS
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.popsci.com/amp/uranus-neptune-diamond-rain
Very carefully...
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.
