Our Sun is estimated at 4.6 billion years old. Since our solar system is made up of "left overs" from the formation of the Sun, it's safe to say that our solar system is less than 4.6 billion years old.
It appears you haven't grasped the concept of several generations of star formation!
https://mobile.arc.nasa.gov/public/iexplore/missions/pages/yss/november.html
Yes, I was referring to its position within the nebula. Once fusion begins it tends to disperse remaining matter and begin its own journey away from there. Depending on the circumstance that might be the end of the nebula or it might just go back to rebuilding itself slowly over time. If many stars are forming then chances are good, you're seeing the end of it.
I now see what you mean, Cal. 😎
I read that, due to gravitational interactions, the newly formed stars may be thrown out in different directions and at different speeds, eventually being dispersed around the plane of the galaxy - a process which occurs over several hundreds of millions of years!
By extension, our Sun will have moved away from the location of the nebula in which it was born.
I read that, due to gravitational interactions, the newly formed stars may be thrown out in different directions and at different speeds, eventually being dispersed around the plane of the galaxy - a process which occurs over several hundreds of millions of years!
By extension, our Sun will have moved away from the location of the nebula in which it was born.
We are faced with two possibilities:
1. The gaseous materials came from near the beginning of the universe. In which case it does not make sense that it would take that long to form the solar system. The solar system is about 5 billions year old. The universe is about 15 billion years old. It does not make sense that it would take 10 billion years to form the solar system. That would be too long.
2. The gaseous materials came from a dying star either first or second or third generation. But if that is the case then whichever star that exploded that form the solar system has to be close by. But we clearly do not see anything close by.
3. Obviously there is a third possibility which I don't know yet.
1. The gaseous materials came from near the beginning of the universe. In which case it does not make sense that it would take that long to form the solar system. The solar system is about 5 billions year old. The universe is about 15 billion years old. It does not make sense that it would take 10 billion years to form the solar system. That would be too long.
2. The gaseous materials came from a dying star either first or second or third generation. But if that is the case then whichever star that exploded that form the solar system has to be close by. But we clearly do not see anything close by.
3. Obviously there is a third possibility which I don't know yet.
Open star clusters consist of young stars which were born together in the same nebula, and which are still moving within the nebula.
A good example is The Pleiades star cluster whose brightest stars, The Seven Sisters, are visible to the naked eye.
Through a telescope, it can be seen that the cluster is still surrounded by its veil of nebulosity.
A good example is The Pleiades star cluster whose brightest stars, The Seven Sisters, are visible to the naked eye.
Through a telescope, it can be seen that the cluster is still surrounded by its veil of nebulosity.
Attachments
Yes I believe that whether a nebula rebuilds temporarily or begins its demise is determined by the number of stars or planets are being formed at any given time. Too many stars and the nebula disappears rather quickly. ie: No matter? No stars!
I don't think you're quite grasping it.
Many, many stars continue to add particulate to a nebula, that we used to think of as empty space. The junk comes from all directions. When the conditions are right, they get together and have a party. During that party, someone gets up and sings. They have a nice voice. Suddenly a star is born.
Although there are very large planets that explode and create their own nebula, that's only one type. Some nebula don't come from supernovae and don't create stars, they create planets and sometime small chucks of interstellar 'junk' There's nothing that conclusively identifies that our planets all came from the Sun. It's an insignificant star in the big picture. Our sun may very well have captured a wayward planet or planets that were large enough to wander away from their nebula and not be grasped by another gravitational field.
New member of family moving out when it gets older seems natural.
Where did you get that idea from?
How do you see something that's gone?
Things don't just disappear like magic. An exploding star will leave behind its core material.
Not always. Our star is medium sized and if it exploded would most likely leave no trace behind .. core included. The material is blasted out into interstellar space and it's moving pretty fast.
I think we've pretty much nailed it, andy2.
We've shown your hypothesis in post #1 to be incorrect.
1. No single exploding star was responsible for the formation of our solar system.
2. Cosmic inflation was not responsible for our solar system moving away from its point of formation.
Happy? 👍
We've shown your hypothesis in post #1 to be incorrect.
1. No single exploding star was responsible for the formation of our solar system.
2. Cosmic inflation was not responsible for our solar system moving away from its point of formation.
Happy? 👍
Like the vast majority of stars in our Milky Way galaxy, the sun will eventually collapse into a white dwarf, an exotic object about 200,000 times denser than Earth.
Yes, the corpse of the Sun will be a sphere of carbon and oxygen, known as a white dwarf.
It will have just over half of the present mass of the Sun.
https://medium.com/amazing-science/the-fate-of-the-sun-dd8c857d22d8
It will have just over half of the present mass of the Sun.
https://medium.com/amazing-science/the-fate-of-the-sun-dd8c857d22d8
