theory on planet formation. you may not have heard this one.

So I was just sitting and thinking about some of the old information about inner solar orbit planetary formation and thought of something that I have never read or discussed before. Previous theories include the possibility that inner planets were formed by the collection of debris over time. This doesn't seem to explain the core heat of planets like earth and Venus and previously mars. Now I'm not claiming to be the first but I have never seen this theory presented by any credible sources, well any sources for that matter. If you've seen it before please link it and the thread can be closed.

This theory is for the formation of planets closest to the sun and may explain as far out as the inner asteroid belt. I call it.........

The Solar Splash/"droplets" planetary formation.

So its actually fairly simple to understand. A week or so ago I read a thread on this site about a solar phenomena rarely observed where relatively cool portions of the sun were splashed by inner heat expansion of some kind. Some of these "droplets" were said to surpass the earth in size. So, is it possible that events such as this but more powerful could create a mass that is ejected from the solar atmosphere and eventually caught by the suns gravity. Some may not even be caught but are later caught by other planets and become moons.

This theory can possibly explain why some inner planets have heated cores. It can also plausibly explain why the earth and moon have very similar compositions. Also, mars could have cooled more rapidly due to its higher distance from the sun. Yes I have read and seen simulations of the collision theory that explains the moons formation. It's still just a theory, though it is highly accepted my mainstream scientists. Here's another possible evidence to this theory. When these droplets make it to a certain distance around that of the asteroid belt and are captured, then the gravitational forces of the sun and Jupiter compete and ultimately rip the planet/solar droplets into pieces, leaving an asteroid belt in its wake. This theory plausibly explains inner planetary formation as well as the continued existence if the asteroid belt between mars and Jupiter.

I have read the accepted theories that explain that the inner planets were formed by the collection of asteroids over huge periods of time. This does not sit well with me as it doesn't explain the size differences in inner planets and gas giants. Also, I would think that if gas giants exist and the sun is basically an ignited gas giant then these strangely dense planets between the sun and Jupiter would not have formed unless they were of a gaseous density like the others, however, if the inner planets were formed after the suns ignition then this theory would explain their strangely higher density. some may think that these planets were formed because of the theory that relates to centrifuge where more dense objects sink towards the sun as solar system formation occurs, to me its not fully correct. Every system begins as a fairly dense gaseous cloud which begins to gravitationally combine into huge balls. The sun would also have to be one of these gas balls before ignition. So, where did these highly dense balls of iron and carbon come from, maybe another solar system, but more likely from the sun itself. I propose to you to think on this theory and ask yourself if the old theory really makes all that much sense. Now that we've seen that these planet sized splashed can occur this theory, in my mind, becomes fairly plausible.

Sometime ill get on a computer and link to that ats thread about the solar splash phenomena unless someone else links it.

I hate using my phone for communicating on forums like these but I don't have my own computer. Sometime ill asked my housemate to use hers or maybe catch a ride to the public library for some research and easier computer use. I hate having to try to edit paragraphs on this thing. The text prediction is awful, and it doesn't seem to recognize some quite common use words.

Hello DarkSarcasm

Were you aware of the Hopi migration of the planets? This has only been revealed by the Hopi since 2005 and they use their sand paintings as a symbolic replica of how our solar system "operates". Any take a look at this document. It is written by a member of the Hopi nation who has been charged with disseminating the information out over the net. It ties in elegantly with the droplet theory:

www.dancingawakethefifthworld.com...

reply to post by aaronez


Interesting link, I may have to read this book sometime. When I read planetary migration in the your text I instantly thought of another theory I have been thinking about as of late. Pertains to another ats thread about rogue planets. Could it be possible that planets can be gravitationally lost by its sun and drift through space until it is eventually caught by another star. Could this be what the hopi refer to when they point to the Cirrus star system as or original home (I think that that is the system). Could it be that ice ages are periods of time when earth is lost and traveling to its new home or destroyed on its journey. Notice the distance change in earth orbit, as time goes by the close distance could become closer and the farthest could become larger. As the earth makes its closest approach it is accelerated at higher and higher speeds until the sun basically throws it across the galaxy. I'm not sure how life would survive the trip though.

Ok, now I can already see morons saying, you're a fear-monger. No, I'm a theoretical astro-physicist when it comes to these hypotheses.

reply to post by DarkSarcasm


The migration model says that all the planets migrate inwards by one orbit periodically, with those who have cores, actually BIRTHING their cores before they migrate. The Earth is soon to literally birth her core at the Weddell Sea in Antarctica. The temperatures down there are starting to rise dramatically now. The ebook explains the model. The end result is that our current moon was previously the core of Venus. Venus currently has no magnetosphere as it has no core. In next migration Earth will birth it's core and move into the orbit of Venus - with the accompanying atmosphere because of its distance from the Sun. Venus and Mercury are to go INTO THE SUN. The Hopi teach that this is the destiny of all the planets in the Solar System as they migrate inwards by one orbit at each "purificaiton". Sounds crazy at first, but not so crazy once you start piecing solar observations together. Anyway read the ebook. It opened my eyes years ago...

Originally posted by aaronez
reply to post by DarkSarcasm

 

The migration model says that all the planets migrate inwards by one orbit periodically, with those who have cores, actually BIRTHING their cores before they migrate. The Earth is soon to literally birth her core at the Weddell Sea in Antarctica. The temperatures down there are starting to rise dramatically now. The ebook explains the model. The end result is that our current moon was previously the core of Venus. Venus currently has no magnetosphere as it has no core. In next migration Earth will birth it's core and move into the orbit of Venus - with the accompanying atmosphere because of its distance from the Sun. Venus and Mercury are to go INTO THE SUN. The Hopi teach that this is the destiny of all the planets in the Solar System as they migrate inwards by one orbit at each "purificaiton". Sounds crazy at first, but not so crazy once you start piecing solar observations together. Anyway read the ebook. It opened my eyes years ago...

I've thought a "birthing" of the core was possible for several months now. If you look at the actual shape of earth based on some gps satellite imaging it looks like earth is a slowly folding liquid blob floating through space. It almost looks as though a massive "bubble" could pop to the surface. It's size could be comparable to the "hole" formed in the Serbian area that burned for more than one million years. Earth will "POP" again though I have no timeframe of the event.

Also, in that link above I read the core heart and immediately thought of an image I saw on a Nat geo or History special I saw a while back where the earth core was presented and looked strangely similar to a heart to me. It even had what looked like red and blue veins running up and down. I've searched for this image on Google several times but to no avail. Could this core heart event been portrayed to the public unknowingly. The image literally poped up an screen, only there for a few seconds, I actually noticed it the second time I viewed the special.

As for the paragraph above it seems to not fit scientifically. I could see the iron core of earth being pulled out toward the sun but not away. This could be why mercury is basically a ball of iron. could be an ejected high mass core of Venus. Yes, planets do move closer to the sun but with unstable orbits I believe they can be lost if accelerated aggressively. The high density core ejection only makes since if the denser core moves closer toward the sun faster than the less dense mantle and crust.

Now, what might scientistcally force a core out of its planet and pull it away from the sun. Sorry I'm not gonna say it and add to the fear mongering on this site. This thread is not intended to make any such claims, I'm only presenting a plausible thought I had. Oh the answer most likely would be a passing black hole.

Could very well be true there is alot we don't understand about our planet and the solar system. I believe it is the Sumerians who have writings about the time before we had our moon. Might be wrong my dad has been talking to me about aliens and conspiracy theories since I can remember and when I was younger I used to not really pay attention but now I'm all into it. I love ATS and reading what other people think I truely believe if you want to learn anything worth learning you have to do it on your own because our school system are trying to dumb us down and teach us what they want us to know.

Originally posted by MRF227
Could very well be true there is alot we don't understand about our planet and the solar system. I believe it is the Sumerians who have writings about the time before we had our moon. Might be wrong my dad has been talking to me about aliens and conspiracy theories since I can remember and when I was younger I used to not really pay attention but now I'm all into it. I love ATS and reading what other people think I truely believe if you want to learn anything worth learning you have to do it on your own because our school system are trying to dumb us down and teach us what they want us to know.

Well, good for your dad. My parents never question much of anything. Maybe that's why I enjoy asking questions so much. Public education and regulated private American educations are extremely lacking in real information and overfilled with political mumbo jumbo that if thought about makes no real sense.

Something could def be up seems alot of government officials and super rich people are building some crazy underground bunkers. Could be a new fad for someone to make a ton of money on but non the less there is alot of building under ground going on. Maybe thats where you need to be if we do drift off into open space hoping to get picked up by another star. Being that deep down could be the only place with heat but who knows how long we could be a drift for?? I remember in an Ancient Aliens show where they had elaborate cave system don't remember where they were but they said it could have housed thousands of people.

Originally posted by DarkSarcasm
.... This doesn't seem to explain the core heat of planets like earth and Venus and previously mars. Now I'm not claiming to be the first but I have never seen this theory presented by any credible sources, well any sources for that matter. If you've seen it before please link it and the thread can be closed.

Will you accept a peer reviewed paper from Tokyo University Geophysical Institute outlining the process as "credible"?

The energetic impacts of the smaller planetesimals (as well as radioactive decay) will heat up the growing planet, causing it to at least partially melt. The interior of the planet begins to differentiate by mass, developing a denser core

Here's a reference on their graduate courses and PHD program...

Department of Earth and Planetary Science

Here's the abstract...

The Earth's core formation due to the Rayleigh-Taylor instability

References and further reading may be available for this article. To view references and further reading you must purchase this article.

Shigeru Ida, Yo#sugu Nakagawa and Kiyoshi Nakazawa

Geophysical Institute, Faculty of Science, University of Tokyo, Tokyo 113, Japan

Received 25 June 1986; revised 2 October 1986. Available online 26 October 2002.

Abstract
The recent theories of planetary formation lead to a gravitationally unstable structure of the proto-Earth in the accretion stage, which is composed of three layers: an innermost undifferentiated solid core, an intermediate metal-melt layer, and an outermost silicate-melt layer. Taking this configuration as an initial state, we investigate the Earth's core formation due to the Rayleigh-Taylor instability by using the quantitative results on the instability in a self-gravitating fluid sphere obtained from another paper (S. Ida, Y. Nakagawa, and K. Nakagawa, submitted). We find that the instability occurs through the translational mode on a time scale of about 10 hr if the thickness of the metal-melt layer 1 km. This leads to the conclusion that the Earth's core began to form through the translation of the innermost undifferentiated solid core as soon as the outer layer was melted and differentiated in the late accretion stage. In addition, we examine the rotational effects of the instability; the translation occurs most often along the rotational axis. But this preference is weak, since the rotational energy is small compared to the gravitational one.

Here's the Link...

The Earth's core formation due to the Rayleigh-Taylor instability

It is available through the Harvard University Library dataverse as well...

The earth's core formation due to the Rayleigh-Taylor instability/harvard.edu

Hope this helps.