The sun is pregnant!

Originally posted by ThePeopleParty
Hi

Im not big on all this stuff, but i have a question. If mars was once in earths spot and so was the otheer planets, does this mean they where all habitable at some point?

Yes on habitable. NASA people would make fun of this statement, but some of them know it to be true.

So mars and the rest would of been "earth like"?

Not necessarily Earth like, all planets have their own unique characteristics, the inhabitants too.

Originally posted by davespanners
reply to post by sleeper

 

I just saw this post if the Recent Posts page and now I am really confused!

Did you make up this theory yourself?

Yes

Or is it something that other people have discussed?

If so they haven't discussed it with me.

I only ask because I once randomly met a girl in Trafalgar Square during a protest march, we got talking and she told me more or less what stated in the first post, that the sun was "pregnant" and was going to give birth to a planet.
At the time I thought it was a really random thing to say and the conversation just tailed off.

This would have been around 2002 so she couldn't have got it from your post

Maybe she had ET info too.

reply to post by sleeper


Well that is very strange then

I seem to remember that she was a Greek girl studying art at university (I think it might have been at Central St Martins) She also told me I had a big chin

I guess you both reached this conclusion independently, or maybe she was an alien, she was certainly strange enough.

Originally posted by sleeper
And may produce another planet or two in the not so distant future

Like a hairball that has formed in the interior of the sun, planets get spit out every now and then.

As the planets age they move ever so slowly to the outskirts of the solar system and become debris, some of this debris collides with other debris and ricochets back into the interior of the solar system as comets, asteroids and moons.

All the planets were birthed by the sun, the youngest being Mercury, the oldest Neptune, Pluto and the other bodies in the Kuiper Belt and Oort Cloud are where remnants of the early solar system and dead planets reside.

The planets are gradually pushed away from the sun over the span of millions and billions of years and as their orbits enlarge and the sun’s gravitational pull on them decreases they bloat up like gas giants---and then deflate and congeal as they enter the frigid zone at the periphery of the solar system.

Mercury, will move into Venus’ orbit, Venus into earth’s orbit, earth into Mars’ orbit, and so on

The planets are held in orbit by the pull of the sun’s gravitation and the push of the Solar wind. It’s a delicate balance that slowly moves the planets from the interior to the outskirts as if riding on a large invisible conveyor belt.


Galaxies work in a similar way, producing stars at the center and kicking them out to the outskirts like popcorn in a kettle, where they cool off in clusters or individually and then slowly make their way back to the center of the galaxy


My two cents on how planetary systems evolve---

Thank you for a very out of the box thought provoking theory! It makes a great deal of sense for some odd reason.

Keep up the good work! SF

Originally posted by sleeper
Besides a few basics no one really knows much about what the sun can or can’t do. Ejecting a small amount of mass the size of Mercury is so infinitesimal for something as large as the sun that it doesn’t equal a human sloughing off a single dust mite from his skin---and therefore could easily pass under any gravitational or magnetic nuance---in my opinion

Well, it's fairly simple to calculate how valid your opinion is here Sleeper.

If we take a ratio of the mass of the Sun [1.98892 × 10^30 kg] to the mass of Mercury [3.30 x 10^23 kg] and compare it to the ratio of the mass of a man [say 70 kg] to the mass of a dust mite [5.29801325 × 10^-8 kg] we get...

6,027,030.3 vs. 1,321,250,000 which means that your statement that the sun ejecting a mass equal to Mercury is "infinitesimal" compared to a human sloughing a dust mite is not just incorrect, but it is incorrect by a factor of 219.2 without considering the additional "infinitesimal" factor, whatever that is which would also be factored in.

That's a pretty big difference.

reply to post by TheFlash


You sound like someone from 100 years ago trying to explain how an iphone can't possibly work because it defies all the laws they knew then.

Originally posted by your_evidence
nice theory, very entertaining and humorous. But doesn't comply with certain laws of physics.

Your right and wrong, laws of physics only describe what we have seen, and how it is relative to us. Besides, we dont even truly understand our own planet, how can we be sure we know anything about space and other celestial bodies? Truth is, all we can do for now is speculate.

Originally posted by redseal
pregnant? well who it the universe is the father?? Explain this to me, how will it evolve another planet??

Fathers may not be needed. There is a thread posted very recently that is about new animals. One of such animals is a lizard that repopulates through cloning, males are unnecessary. Leiolepis ngovantrii is the scientific name. if your interested

Originally posted by Johnmike
This makes no sense at all. How does whatever the sun spits out get propelled into orbit?

Why exactly do they move farther and farther away from the sun?

There are plenty of theory's that incorporate a expanding universe. Im sure you've heard of The Big Bang, for example. If the universe may be expanding, why not the solar system?

Originally posted by Long Lance
oh really?

these articles are from 2003, no matter what kind of theory you proposed, the concept is the same and this thread is therefore not original. how hard can a search for 'planet birthing' be?

credit where it's due, pls. add some unverifiable spin and call it enlightened, funny isn't it? NOT.

Off topic: I miss the days where people could talk about epiphanies or speculations without necessarily having a source. I too, have considered this thought process the OP brings to the table and it was not from that site or any website for that matter. Lets get back to talking to people for the sake of philosophical speculation, instead of trying to prove everyone a "impostor", cheater, fabricator, disinfo agent, ect.

ps: thank you for posting those links, they will indeed add some information.

Originally posted by Lexion
Snowman, the acronym is actually KISS, but I digress.

Does noone else see what Sleeper is doing ? This is another point farm.
I'm actually shocked the mods aren't on to this.

Sadly, I'm adding to his farming by trying to point out the obvious.

Lex

A point farm? im not familiar with this term. If it has anything to do with the numbers below his sn, i doubt this being his intentions. Why would he post an idea he wishes to talk about, in an attempt to get pseudo points? I dont know, maybe im too new to ATS, or maybe your too worried about points.

Originally posted by Smack
Lets be clear -- what Sleeper has put forward is not entirely his own theory. It shares many of the characteristics of a body of scholarly work, known as the Electric Universe theory or Plasma Cosmology.

There does exist a body of credible, peer reviewed work on Plasma Cosmology theory. I suggest some of you take the time to educate yourselves on the topic. ...or you could just assume you know better and place any debate outside the scope of the status quo into the 'skunk works' pile.

Whatever makes you feel more comfortable.



[edit on 11-3-2007 by Smack]

I havent had a chance to read up on this theory, but i have speculated on the possibility of it. Thanks, and i foresee reading in my future.

Originally posted by DarkSide


Why are the outermost planets gaseous and the innermost telluric? Are the telluric and gas planets from....hmmm...different fathers?

It could be possible that they are not necessarily gas only, We have never been to jupiter, and its entirely possible there is terrain underneath the gaseous surface. Someone here posted a link to a website that attempts to describe the earths surface below the atmosphere and photosphere, and the sun was once thought to be a ball of flame... We just dont have enough information on it to really come to a sound theory, as with almost all things in space.

/responses
Do we know everything about the moon, the closest thing to us? Do we know everything about the Earth? Id say no, scientists cant really be 100% percent sure on things like hurricane paths, volcano eruption predictions, tornado and when they will occur. We also have a area of unknown in the percentage of 90% ( Nat. Geo. ) of the ocean floor. Are we not still finding new species (that in all probability, were already there waiting to be discovered.) So until we know about ourselves and our home, is it safe to say we are talking out of our ass when it comes to galactic science?

reply to post by sleeper


Brilliant! Your originating post is undeniably fantastic.

I think I remember some ancient civilizations had thought of the sun as a portal..

If the sun has given birth like this, maybe it has been witnessed a few times in our history..

Originally posted by SinkingSun
I think I remember some ancient civilizations had thought of the sun as a portal..

If the sun has given birth like this, maybe it has been witnessed a few times in our history..

Maybe.... or maybe it correlates with the "we are from mars" speculation. who knows.

Interesting theory.

I dont buy the whole big bang theory myself.

All the UFOs sucking on our sun have had me concerned. What is your take on that?

Personally,I wouldnt be suprised at ALL if a planet popped out of the sun.Or a fleet of ufos.

The more BS Nasa tells us the more we know what to RULE OUT

The sun could be a portal of some sort since alot of history has people saying things/gods come out of the sun.
Im sure people had better things to imagine than making up stories about things coming out of the sun.THey would know that no one would believe it.

Originally posted by WeTIredABC
Interesting theory.

I dont buy the whole big bang theory myself.

All the UFOs sucking on our sun have had me concerned. What is your take on that?

Personally,I wouldnt be suprised at ALL if a planet popped out of the sun.Or a fleet of ufos.

The more BS Nasa tells us the more we know what to RULE OUT

The sun could be a portal of some sort since alot of history has people saying things/gods come out of the sun.
Im sure people had better things to imagine than making up stories about things coming out of the sun.THey would know that no one would believe it.

This is an old thread, started in March of 2007. Lots of stuff has come out of the sun since then. Everything in this solar system has come out of the sun but most in the industry would hate to have to admit that possibility because it would invalidate much if not all they have believed about mankind's place in the universe, astronomy and physics...and that would look bad on many a résumés.

Giant Planet size UFO's THE Sun Stargate & Sungods - Nassim Haramein Part 1 of 5

I don't remember which parts the info was in.

But basically he was saying, akin to some information being like electric universe theory, but he still includes black holes, though EU doesn't.

He says the sun, and earth/planets, contains a singularity within, that this allows travel, larger crafts would use the sun, but smaller crafts could travel through earth's stargate, of which volcano's would provide openings. Whereas some people would equate volcanos with inner earth hell zones, but maybe it depends on frequency realm/channel.

In any case, he said that the singularity was overflowing with energy, and this could be picked up by changes in the sun, ie perhaps the movement or rotation, don't quite recall exactly what he said.

That this would slough off, and I immediately thought of this thread, wondering if this mechanism was similar.

Someone asked him, what we could do to work with the sun's energies to be safe and he said, to not take it personally.

And then to really find out why we're here, as all souls came for a reason, to do that work that was needed, that we came for as time was short.

Is there a similarity in what he's saying?