Profile cover photo
Profile photo
David Carlson
327 followers -
Orthodoxy means not thinking.
Orthodoxy means not thinking.

327 followers
About
David's posts

Post has attachment
AQUEOUS DIFFERENTIATION OF KUIPER BELT OBJECTS (KBOs):

Abstract:
This section suggests an alternative extraterrestrial origin for metamorphic gneiss, along with its associated mantling rock of quartzite, carbonate rock and schist. Authigenic gneissic sediments are suggested to have been precipitated in the cores of Kuiper belt objects (KBOs) undergoing 'aqueous differentiation', with aqueous differentiation caused by orbital perturbation.

Our suggested former binary brown-dwarf Companion to the Sun perturbed binary KBOs to spiral in and merge during the Archean Eon, catastrophically forming authigenic sedimentary cores with a typically tonalite–trondhjemite–granodiorite (TTG) composition, characteristic of Archean cratons.

The tidal inflection point (associated with the former Sun-Companion solar system barycenter) is suggested to have initiated orbital perturbation of KBOs. The tidal inflection point spiraled out from the Sun at an exponential rate, passing through the cubewanos of the Kuiper belt from 4.1 to 3.9 Ga, causing the late heavy bombardment of the inner solar system. The growing Sun-Companion eccentricity around the solar system barycenter, which caused the tidal inflection point to spiral out from the Sun, was driven by the spiral in of the binary brown-dwarf components of binary-Companion.

Solitary KBOs, which did not undergo catastrophic binary spiral-in merger, may have experienced smaller, repeated instances of aqueous differentiation, forming multiple gneiss domes in KBO cores, compared to catastrophic binary spiral-in merger which formed TTG cores.

Finally, perturbation by binary-Companion came to an end when the binary brown-dwarf components ultimately merged at 542 Ma in an asymmetrical merger explosion that gave the Companion escape velocity from the Sun.

Neptune became the nemesis of the Kuiper belt in the new Phanerozoic Eon, with the loss of the perturbing and stabilizing influence of the Companion at 542 Ma, with Neptune causing orbital perturbation of KBOs in newly-unstable orbits. Neptune also caused smaller instances of aqueous differentiation, such as forming the Eocene gneiss domes which are scattered through the Middle East from Greece to Nepal. Neptune is responsible for injecting KBOs into the inner solar system in the Phanerozoic Eon, likely by the intermediate pathway of the minor-planet centaurs.

Sedimentary KBO cores lithify into TTG cores and gneiss domes, with subsequent metamorphism occurring as saltwater oceans freeze solid. The expansion of water ice in solidifying KBO oceans builds the tremendous pressure which causes high-pressure metamorphism in extraterrestrial metamorphic rock.

Perturbation of KBOs into the inner solar system by Neptune cause extinction event impacts on Earth, with highly-compressible KBO ices generally clamping the Earth-impact shock-wave pressure below the melting point of silicates, masking the impact origin of the continental tectonic plates.
.......................

Ptygmatic Folds in gneiss migmatite from Helsinki Finland
–used with permission of Sameli Kujala
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sameli/2040126969/

Post has attachment
DARK MATTER AND SPIRAL GALAXY FORMATION

Abstract:

Hydro-gravitational-dynamics (HGD) cosmology suggests that hierarchical clustering began at 10^12 s after the Big Bang, at matter radiation equality, and proceeded from the top down at the Schwarz viscous scale, progressively fragmenting the plasma realm into smaller clumps, beginning at the supercluster-scale and progressing to the cluster-scale and finally the galaxy-scale prior to the epoch of recombination. At recombination, Jeans instability fragmented proto-galaxies into million solar mass proto-globular-clusters. (Gibson 2006)

Baryonic dark matter (DM) cosmology suggests baryonic DM reservoirs in the form of self-gravitating planetary-mass globules of gas in hydrostatic equilibrium, which are a few astronomical units across. These baryonic DM globules are designated 'paleons' by Manly Astrophysics for their presumed old age. The evidence for paleons comes from scintillation of pulsars and quasars by foreground plasma, which can be modeled as spherical paleons with ionized outer shells that are ionized by plowing through interstellar gas at 230 km/s in their rotation around the Milky Way.

Paleons are suggested here to have to have been ejected from Population III protostars during coronal-mass-ejection chain reactions, which progressed around the equator at the rate of a magnetic reconnection shockwave, ejecting equatorial material which magnetically condensed into self-gravitating paleons. A similar process is suggested to occur today in the form of self-gravitating, planetary-mass cometary-knot (CK) ejection from late-stage asymptotic giant branch (AGB) stars.

In alternative baryonic DM cosmology, the epoch of recombination occurred later than the recognized date of 378,000 years after the Big Bang, when the universe had expanded by a volume factor of about 6 to the canonical density of baryons calculated by ΛCDM cosmology. Baryonic DM cosmology suggests that recombination occurred around 378,000 yr * 6^(1/3) ~ 687,000 years after the Big Bang, at otherwise canonical conditions.


https://hillscloud.wordpress.com/dark-matter-and-spiral-galaxy-formation/

Post has shared content
Ah ha!

Finally, slim circumstantial evidence that self-gravitating objects smaller than a Jeans mass are ejected from a larger Jeans mass, i.e. ejected from a star, which weighs against the standard theory of cometary knot (CK) formation in planetary nebulae by Rayleigh Taylor instability of gas streaming away from the degenerate white-dwarf core.

Alternatively, CKs are ejected from the late stage of AGB stars (just prior to the planetary nebulae phase) by super-intense magnetic reconnection, as a kind of super-intense coronal mass ejection.
"Black holes don't just provide gravity, absorb incoming matter and prevent anything from escaping. They also gravitationally pull on and tear matter that passes nearby, including stars. In a surprising find, a new study out of Harvard shows that torn-apart stars aren't merely reduced into gas, but they form dense streams that re-condense into planets in just year-long timescales. Moving rapidly away from the central black hole, these 'cosmic spitballs' represent a brand new population of rogue planets, and are potentially the most catastrophic objects from space careening through our galaxy."

Imagine you’re a star passing too close to a black hole. What’s going to happen to you? Yes, you’ll be tidally disrupted and eventually torn apart. Some of the matter will be swallowed, some will wind up in an accretion disk, and some will be accelerated and ejected entirely. But quite surprisingly, the ejected matter doesn’t just come out in the form of hot gas, but it condenses into large numbers of rapidly-moving planets. This population should make up approximately one out of every 1000 rogue planets, but should be uniquely identifiable. The vast majority will move at incredible speeds of around 10,000 km/s, be approximately the mass of Jupiter but will be made out of shredded star material, rather than traditional planetary material. As the next generation of infrared telescopes come online, these ‘cosmic spitballs’ should be one of the most exciting novel discoveries of all.

Come get the whole story on cosmic spitballs, fresh from the AAS meeting!

Post has shared content
The title is purposely provoking, since no new planet has been discovered, only postulated.

An alternative explanation for the relative alignment of detached object semimajor axes (like Sedna and 2012 VP113) is 'fossil alignment', which I was flogging before the relative alignment of detached objects was even noticed.

Alternatively, fossil alignment of detached objects is due to a former binary brown-dwarf Companion to the Sun which spiraled in to merge at 542 Ma in an asymmetrical merger explosion that gave the newly-merged object escape velocity from the Sun.

As the binary components of binary-Companion spiraled in, the solar system barycenter between Companion and Sun moved out from the Sun at an exponential rate for 4 billion years. Associated with the barycenter was the 'tidal balance point', which perturbed Kuiper belt objects (KBOs).

Nominally, when the semimajor axis of a KBO was beyond the tidal balance point, the KBO aphelion was gravitationally attracted to the Companion, EXACTLY the same way as near-side lunar tides on Earth, but when the tidal balance point crossed the semimajor axis of KBOs, it caused apsidal precession perturbation, centrifugally slinging the aphelion 180° away from the Companion. This tidal balance point perturbation moved through the Plutinos at 4.22 Ga and through the main belt KBOs (cubewanos) at about 3.9 Ga, resulting in a double-pulse late heavy bombardment (discovered in Apollo samples), which can't be explained by Grand tact/Nice model.

And the slight retrograde rotation of Venus is predicted as well, if Venus had been in a synchronous orbit around the Sun (1 day = 1 year), prior to the loss of the centrifugal force of the solar system barycenter, which lowered all heliocentric orbits slightly, decreasing Venus' year while its day (rotation rate) was conserved, resulting in slight retrograde rotation. And the magnitude of the Venusian retrograde rotation to its year allows the former centrifugal force of binary-Companion to be calculated, making another prediction about its relative former mass-distance.

Finally, if one of the two former binary-Companions were a room-temperature Y-class brown dwarf or super Jupiter, then the lifeforms of the Cambrian Explosion may have evolved in room temperature water-vapor cloud belts (like those on Jupiter), with free oxygen created by endothermic chemical reactions in lightening strikes (like those on Jupiter).

Our former Companion gave the Kuiper belt a degree of orbital stability in Precambrian times, making Neptune the Nemesis of the Phanerozoic Eon by perturbing KBOs into the inner solar system. "Culler et al. [2000] studied 179 spherules from 1 g of soil collected by the Apollo 14 astronauts, and found evidence for a decline in the meteoroid flux to the Moon from 3000 million years ago (Ma) to 500 Ma, followed by a fourfold increase in the cratering rate over the last 400 Ma." (Levine et al., 2005)
THE MILLENNIAL ASTROPHYSICIST WHO FOUND A PLANET WITH MATH

Konstantin Batygin made the decision of which college to attend with the intention of keeping his band together. (When a guy at Costco recognized him from a rock show, he thought, “With this kind of momentum, we can’t quit!”) Day one at UC Santa Cruz, an unknown “drifter” told him, “You should do astrophysics — that shit is dope.” He did so. Today, his office has thug-life posters on the door and big-kid toy planes on the shelves. He wears a shark-tooth necklace, and he uses the word hashtag out loud. Oh, and this millennial just turned the astrophysics universe upside-down when he predicted the existence of a new planet in our solar system.

http://www.ozy.com/rising-stars/the-millennial-astrophysicist-who-found-a-planet-with-math/72534
Photo

Post has shared content
I'm particularly interested in this new plasmoid instability mechanism, because I suspect that magnetic reconnection in late-stage AGB stars may be responsible for ejecting planetary-mass-sized globules of stellar plasma, prior to their illumination as cometary knots in the subsequent planetary nebula phase.

When late stage AGB stars undergo expansion and contraction during third dredge up, I could imagine the magnetic field undergoing super reconnection events during the expansion phases, as the field lines becomes twisted due to the outer stellar layers lagging behind the core rotation undergoing spin up due to ongoing contraction. Then when the stored magnetic energy is catastrophically released during these suggested super reconnection events, I wouldn't be surprised if it launches discrete planetary-mass-sized chunks of plasma as a primary mechanism in sloughing off the outer layers of the dying star to reveal the naked white dwarf. And the exceedingly-luminous young white dwarf illuminates the planetary-mass globules as 'cometary knots' in the planetary nebula phase.
"Coming up with a model that physically reproduces what experiments and observations bear out is a tremendous advance. But the team has also uncovered some surprising lessons. There are four quantities that grow/change over time (like the number of plasmoids and how long they take to reach the critical, reconnection phase) and three quantities that they depend on (like the sizes of the initial imperfections). Unlike most physical laws, which are power laws (i.e., x is proportional to y to some power), these dependences aren't!"

The phenomenon of solar flares has been understood qualitatively but not quantitatively for a long time. The Sun's magnetic field confines its plasma into thin sheets of electric current, and when the field changes, the lines split and reconnect, causing the plasma to be expelled at tremendous rates. This same physics underlies solar flares, Earth's aurora, laboratory plasmas and possibly even gamma ray bursts! But when you do the calculations, the reconnection timescales and speeds are too slow to account for what we see. For the past few years, a new idea came about that had a hope of explaining things: the plasmoid instability idea. For the first time, a team of physicists has worked out both theoretically and experimentally how this works, and they've nailed it. Most excitingly, the results don't look like what a great many have expected for a long time!

Surprises are some of the best things one can hope for in physics; it's a chance to learn something new. Come and find out how it all works today!

Post has shared content
Still fiddling the data to justify pebble accretion as the domineering planet formation mechanism.

'"In the previous studies, astronomers have estimated the size based on radio emissions assuming hypothetical spherical dust particles," explains Kataoka. "In our study, we observed the scattered radio waves through polarization, which carries independent information from the thermal dust emission. Such a big difference in the estimated size of dust particles implies that the previous assumption might be wrong."'

'The team's idea to solve this inconsistency is to consider fluffy, complex-shaped dust particles, not simple spherical dust (note 2.). In the macroscopic view, such particles are indeed large, but in the microscopic view, each small part of a large dust particle scatters radio waves and produces unique polarization features. According to the present study, astronomers obtain these "microscopic" features through polarization observations. This idea might prompt astronomers to reconsider the previous interpretation of observational data.'

When the data doesn't fit the domineering model, add secondary mechanisms (fluffy dust particles and planetary migration) to justify your original assumptions.
ALMA measures size of seeds of planets - Researchers using the Atacama Large Millimeter/submillimeter Array (ALMA), have for the first time, achieved a precise size measurement of small dust particles around a young star through radio-wave polarization. ALMA's high sensitivity for detecting polarized radio waves made possible this important step in tracing the formation of planets around young stars.

Post has shared content
Oh why oh why is the c-star so bright?

The brightest star is the smallest IRS3B-c star, at a distance of 183 AU from the similar-sized larger binary pair (IRS3B-a & IRS3B-b), which is telegraphing that the standard model is wrong, whereas the alternative flip-flop fragmentation ideology suggests that the peripheral star is the oldest and most evolved of the system, having originally formed at the core of the system.

So instead of IRS3B-c forming by disk instability around the older a & b stars, as the standard model dictates, IRS3B-a & IRS3B-b alternatively formed by disk instability around an older central core. Then hierarchy prevailed, causing the larger, younger similiar-sized binary pair to inertially hurl the former core into a stable circumbinary orbit as a satellite companion (c) star in a hierarchical configuration, making the c star older and hotter than its presumed progenitors.

Thus, the overly-bright c star is telegraphing that the standard model of companion star formation is EXACTLY backwards.
A Triple Star is Born
Image Credit: Bill Saxton, ALMA (ESO/NAOJ/NRAO), NRAO/AUI/NSF - Publication: John Tobin (Univ. Oklahoma/Leiden) et al.
http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap161202.html

A triple star system is forming, enshrouded within this dusty natal disk some 750 light-years away in the Perseus molecular cloud. Imaged at millimeter wavelengths by the Atacama Large Millimeter/submillimeter Array (ALMA) in Chile, the extreme close-up shows two protostars separated by a mere 61 AU (1 AU is the Earth-Sun distance) with a a third some 183 AU from the central protostar. The ALMA image also reveals a clear spiral structure indicating instability and fragmentation led to the multiple protostellar objects within the disk. Astronomers estimate that the system, cataloged as L1448 IRS3B, is less than 150,000 years old. Captured at an early phase, the starforming scenario is likely not at all uncommon, since almost half of all sun-like stars have at least one companion.
Photo

Post has shared content
The Protoplanetary Fallacy:

Core accretion as a planet formation mechanism is not settled science, so why is planet formation taught to general audiences as though it's the only game in town?

Why should gaps in protoplanetary disks necessarily imply causation, when they could just as well be reactionary clearing by preexisting gas-giant planets? I suggest it's because the scientific community starts with the unfounded assumption that (gas-giant) planets necessarily form from protoplanetary disks.

Even if planets do form from protoplanetary disks, this wouldn't necessarily imply pebble accretion. Thayne Currie (2005) suggests an alternative hybrid mechanism wherein comet-sized objects condense by gravitational instability (GI) and then the comet-sized objects gravitationally accrete into planets, hence 'hybrid'. He provides strong evidence for similar sized and similar colored cold-classical Kuiper belt objects having bifurcated during GI due to excess angular momentum [heavily paraphrasing]. This is not pseudoscience which should be categorically shut out.

And once again, why should gas giant planets NECESSARILY form from protoplanetary disks, when freefall collapse in prestellar dark cores form first hydrostatic cores (FHSCs), which are understood to be on the scale of one Jupiter mass and which are typically surrounded by a much-much more massive overlying envelope supported by angular momentum? I suggest that the much-much greater center-seeking overlying mass constitutes an unstable system, wherein the diminutive core is unable to stabilize the envelope against positive feedback between envelope inhomogeneities and the diminutive core, promoting runaway disk instability. And disk instability causes the envelope to clump and form a new larger core (catastrophically projecting center-seeking mass inward), while inertially spinning off the former jupiter-mass core to become a self-gravitating proto-gas-giant satellite, long before a well-behaved late-stage protoplanetary disk ever appears.
"These central regions first glow in infrared light, while the material surrounding the center “pancakes” into a disk shape. The disk rotates, and tiny densities imperfections form within it. In the densest regions, mass begins to clump together, creating the first protoplanets."

It takes a lot of work to make a solar system from the raw materials of an interstellar molecular cloud, but the Universe is up to the challenge. We had a theoretical picture that held for a long time, but thanks to the array of modern telescopes that humanity has constructed, we've finally been able to put that picture to the test. Would protostars form from gravitational collapse? Would they wind up with protoplanetary disks around them? Would those disks develop asymmetries and, later, gaps where young planets formed? And then, would the central star ignite and burn off the rest of the materials, where only the planetary survivors would persist?

We've now got the evidence for all of this, and the answer is a resounding, overwhelming yes! Come see for yourself.

Post has shared content
Alternatively, how about an even earlier(?) catastrophic stellar-evolution process that I imagine occurring in pre-stellar objects (prior to forming a protostar with its second hydrostatic core) processing excess angular momentum, when the diminutive stellar core is still on the scale of a gas-giant-sized planet?

I imagine that a diminutive gas-giant-planet-sized core surrounded by a much-more-massive envelope supported by angular momentum to be intrinsically unstable, promoting disk fragmentation which would cause the envelope to clump and initiate the formation of a larger younger core, while inertially displacing the older original core to a satellite status as a proto gas-giant planet. Essentially the collapsing cloud would turn itself inside out in a flip-flop process as a catastrophic mechanism for projecting mass inward, and this flip-flop process would create the observed 'strong luminosity bursts'.

And I imagine the observed gap between cold Jupiters and hot Jupiters in exoplanet systems as the result of a limited degree of stability connecting the core with its envelope during the brief formation of the first hydrostatic core. Thus pre-stellar objects with excess angular momentum might spin off cold Jupiters during the first collapse and might spin off hot Jupiters during the second collapse, with the spin-off process only occurring when the core was physically isolated from its surrounding envelope by freefall collapse, with the freefall gap allowing positive feedback between a diminutive core and its much-more-massive overlying envelope.
The birth of massive stars is accompanied by strong luminosity bursts!!!

Read more at:- https://medienportal.univie.ac.at/presse/aktuelle-pressemeldungen/detailansicht/artikel/the-birth-of-massive-stars-is-accompanied-by-strong-luminosity-bursts/

(Image credit: Institute for Astronomy and Astrophysics, Tübingen University)
Photo

Post has attachment
Chasing Arrows:

(HD 87646 turned inside out three times in succession during its prestellar collapse phase to form a giant planet and a brown dwarf in a close binary system)

What follows is an alternative, conceptual catastrophic ideology for gas giant planet and companion star formation.

When a collapsing prestellar object has excess angular momentum, it forms a diminutive core surrounded by a much larger doughnut-shaped envelope supported by angular momentum, but rather than slowly accreting gas from the envelope, as suggested by the standard model of star formation, this conceptual alternative idelology evokes a catastrophic mechanism. When the mass in the angular-momentum-supported envelope is much greater than its diminutive core the system is dynamically unstable, promoting disk instability in a catastrophic process which turns the system inside out, designated, 'flip-flop fragmentation' (FFF).

FFF disk instability causes the envelope to break its radial symmetry, causing it to gravitationally clump to form a more massive (younger) core, which inertially injects the former (older) core into a satellite orbit around the new core. This mechanism catastrophically projects mass inward, while conserving system angular momentum.

Imagine joining the ends of a Slinky together to form a doughnut-shaped envelope with a golf ball in the center to represent the core. Then catastrophic FFF can be represented by releasing the Slinky, causing the ends to snap together to form a new larger core, with the golf ball as a satellite.

In the HD 87646 system, the process apparently occurred three times in succession (spinning off 3 generations of former cores), before the final core attained sufficient stability to reach the protostar phase, where a protostar is defined as the formation of a 'second hydrostatic core' (SHSC). The first-generation FFF spun off the companion star (at 22 AU), the second-generation FFF spun off the 57 Mj brown dwarf (HD 87646с in a 673 day orbital period) and the third-generation FFF spun off the 12.4 Mj super Jupiter (HD 87646b in a 13.5 day orbital period).

This nominally makes companion stars, brown dwarfs and gas giant planets older than their supposed progenitor stars; however, since ejected cores themselves typically undergo one or more generations of FFF, the largest moon around the most distant gas giant planet in a (solitary star) system is likely to be the oldest object in the system, if only by a whisker.

if Occam's razor has any validity at all, the compelling simplicity of FFF beats core accretion (particularly in this turbulent system) hands down. Additionally, FFF is a primary predictive mechanism which doesn't require secondary ad hoc planetary migration mechanism to reverse the falsification of pebble accretion by the finding of hot Jupiters in low hot orbits.
Wait while more posts are being loaded