The disks of gas and dust that supposedly form planets don’t seem to have the goods

ScienceMag.org ^ | Sept 28, 2018 | Adam Mann

[ETL]

Astronomers have a problem on their hands: How can you make planets if you don’t have enough of the building blocks?

Stars are born from colossal clouds of gas and dust and, in their earliest stages, are surrounded by a thin disk of material. Dust grains within this halo collide, sometimes sticking together. The clumps build up into planetary cores, which are big enough to gravitationally attract additional dust and gas, eventually forming planets.

But many details about this process remain unknown, such as just how quickly planets arise from the disk, and how efficient they are in capturing material. The disks, surrounded by an obscuring haze of gas and dust, are difficult to observe. But radio telescopes can penetrate the haze and investigate young stars. The brightness of radio waves emitted by dust in the disk can be used to give a reasonable estimate of its overall mass.

The Atacama Large Millimeter Array (ALMA), a radio observatory in the Atacama Desert in Chile, has made it far easier to study protoplanetary disks. In the new study, astronomers led by Carlo Manara of the European Southern Observatory in Munich, Germany, used ALMA to compare the masses of protoplanetary disks around young stars between 1 million and 3 million years old to the masses of confirmed exoplanets and exoplanetary systems around older stars of equivalent size. The disk masses were often much less than the total exoplanet mass—sometimes 10 or 100 times lower, the team will report in an upcoming paper in Astronomy & Astrophysics.

Although such findings have been reported before for a few star systems, the study is the first to point out the mismatch over several hundred different systems. “I think what this work does is really set this as a fact”

[Kickass Conservative]

We will never know as much as we don’t know.

God has seen to that.

It’s called Life.

[Verginius Rufus]

I guess this proves it. It is impossible for planets to exist.

[Big Red Badger]

As in, Tower of!
Duh

[SunkenCiv]

Duh, you can't spell, I must have been too subtle for ya.

[Big Red Badger]

I got a smartphone,
I don’t need no spellcheck.

How do ya spell,Duh?

[Big Red Badger]

So type slower and use
Smaller words,
Thanks

[trebb]

...the study is the first to point out the mismatch over several hundred different systems. “I think what this work does is really set this as a fact”

How scientific is a study of a few hundred vs. billions and billions and concludes the results can be set as fact? Is this guy an out-of-work climate "scientist"?

[ETL]

I guess this proves it. It is impossible for planets to exist.

And if planets don't exist, neither do we!!

[SunkenCiv]

Death Spiral: Why Theorists Can’t Make Solar Systems
SPACE.com | Tue March 28, 2006 | Ker Than
Posted on 3/29/2006 1:21:37 PM by SunkenCiv
https://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/1605529/posts

[central_va]

I thought new stars, as they formed, threw off heavier elements and made plasma like eddy currents which then became planets. This why planets have hot cores. I guess that was the old theory.

[SunkenCiv]

Astronomy: Planets in chaos. Standard ideas of Planet formation are being demolished
NATURE | 07/02/2014 | Ann Finkbeiner
Posted on 7/8/2014 5:09:26 PM by SeekAndFind
https://www.freerepublic.com/focus/chat/3177604/posts