Nebula hypothesis
From CreationWiki, the encyclopedia of creation science
The nebula hypothesis is the most generally accepted evolutionary model for formation of the solar system. The process starts with a rotating cloud of gas that contracts and flattens to form a disk of dust and gas around a forming star at its center. Planets grow from the dust and gas in the disk and are left behind when disk clears.
Contents |
Solar System Formation
The Nebula Hypothesis should always result in the same basic pattern, with the heated inner disk forming terrestrial planets and the cold outer disk forms gas giants.
The Sun and Planets
One of the big problems for this model is that the sun rotates too slow. The sun contains 99.9% of mass of the solar system but the planets contain 98% angular momentum. This translates into the planets have 50 times the sun's angular momentum while the sun would have needed to have 700 times the planets' combined angular momentum. So according to the nebula hypothesis model, the sun should spin faster, in fact much faster. Evolutionists understand the problem so they propose that it has slowed over time, but this fails to consider the true scope of the problem.
Just to get the sun even with the planets it would have to be rotating 50 times faster than it actually is. To satisfy the conservation of angular momentum, it would have started rotating 700 times faster than that. That means that the sun's initial rotation rate was 35,000 times it present rate. Now the sun is presently rotating at one revolution per 25.38 Earth days[1]. A rotation rate that is 35,000 faster than present conditions produces an initial period of revolution of 1 minute and 2.65 seconds.
According to the CRC Hand Book of Chemistry and Physics, the sun's equatorial rotational velocity is 2.0578 km/s, this means that the initial equatorial rotational velocity would be 72,023 km/s or nearly a quarter the speed of light. Another problem is that the sun's surface escape velocity is 617.23 km/s which is 116.7 times smaller than the initial equatorial rotational velocity of 72,023 km/s. The result is that the sun would literally fly apart. That is assuming it formed to begin with.
Extra Solar Planets
Over one hundred extra solar planets have been detected to date all of which are large, with the smallest about the size of Saturn. The largest are many times the size of Jupiter while some are larger still, enough to be classified as brown dwarfs. They are usually detected by indirect means, like their effect on their parent star.
Recently one was confirmed orbiting the star HD 209458 as was observed by the effect on the star's light during transit. Astronomers also detected spectral evidence of sodium in the planet's atmosphere. A larger one has actually been photographed near Gliese 229 and likewise is classified as a brown dwarf. One possible planet called SOri70 is located 36,000 times farther from its star than Jupiter is from our Sun.
Many of these planets are extremely close to their sun, sometimes surprisingly close. One planet orbits around HD 209458 at 4 million miles. Upsilon Andromedae has three gas giants, all of which are to close to their sun for gas giants to form under the nebula hypothesis. These planets are so close to their stars that they defy evolutionary models of planet formation. The star would sweep up too much mass and the temperatures is too high. Evolutionists have invented a number of mechanisms to cause planets to migrate closer to their star, but they all require assuming unrealistic gas and dust densities.
Another interesting observation is that seen with the Hubble telescope. It found a giant gaseous object orbiting two burned out stars. Many astronomers believed this to be the oldest planet found yet and they dated it around 12.7 billion years. However, this creates a problem for the Big Bang and it’s theories of planet formation because during this time in cosmic evolution, 12.7 billion years ago assuming the Big Bang is true, there wasn’t enough heavy elements at that time. [2]
Supporting evidence
- HubbleSite - NewsCenter - 1995 - 45 - Image c
- Panoramic Hubble Picture Surveys Star Birth, Proto-Planetary Systems in the Great Orion Nebula
- From: NASA and STScI
- HubbleSite - NewsCenter - 1995 - 45 - Image b
- Hubble Picture Surveys Star Birth, Proto-Planetary Systems in the Great Orion Nebula
- From: NASA and STScI
These are the so-called protoplanetary disks from the Orion Nebula. The glow in center of the disks probably is a stars. It needs to be noted that there is no evidence of planet formation in these images
HD141569
- HubbleSite - NewsCenter - 2003 - 02 - Image a
- Hubble Reveals Complex Circumstellar Disk
- From: NASA and STScI
Here is another alleged protoplanetary disk. In this case however the gas structure suggests that it is not being blown from star, except possibly the star's pole. Once again it needs to be noted that there is no evidence of planet formation in this image. The brighter rings in the image would be consistent with the destruction of a planet in that location.
Spectrographic Evidence of Discs Around Stars
- Image ssc2004-08c
- NASA/JPL-Caltech
While this does not show the motion of the material around a star, it does suggest the presence of a disk of material around stars, even when such disks can not be seen optically. Some times this data seems to suggest dust and gas while other times debris such as asteroids. Once again it needs to be noted that there is no evidence of planet formation in this data.
Forming or destroying planets?
Does this dust and debris represent forming planets or destroyed planets?
Massive Coronal Mass Ejections called Superflares have observed that are 10 million times more powerful than any Coronal Mass Ejections from the sun. A superflare that is powerful and concentrated enough these could theoretically destroy planets.
Other forms of stellar out gassing could theoretically destroy planets as well.
Planets with above average amounts of radioactive nuclei could have large amounts of nuclear fission, if powerful enough this could cause their demise; particularly with large amounts of relatively short lived nuclei.
If the planets also had above average amounts of radioactive nuclei, this too could contribute to their demise. The dust and other debris from such planets would remain in orbit around the star forming a disk. Some of the mater ejected from the star would be brought in to orbit by planetary material. The speed and location of ejected marital would be a major factor. This would also explain so called protostars, since if any of these stars ejected too much material, their nuclear fusion reactions would shut down.
Conclusion
In no case is there any evidence of planet formation. Stars shoot out gas all the time and they can pass through nebulae, so none of the observations can be legitimately considered evidence for the Nebula Hypothesis. As shown above there is no real evidence supporting the hypothesis, but plenty of evidence against it.
Related References
- In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood - 43. Strange Planets:
- REVELATIONS IN THE SOLAR SYSTEM--Part 1
- Laplace: The nebular hypothesis
- The existence and origin of extrasolar planets
 Browse |
