THE INFINITE UNIVERSE (Part 7, Chapter 7-1)
© Eit Gaastra
CONTENTS of this website (bottom of this webpage)

Part 7 (chapters 7-1 and 7-2) presents dark matter objects as components in star formation and solar system formation.

Dark matter and star formation
What will happen in a universe that is infinite in time and space? All kind of old blackened stars (6-1) (or other dark matter, 4-1, 7-1) will be thrown out of galaxies and will be in intergalactic space for enormous long times. Until they get attracted, for instance, to the nucleus of an old (shrunk) galaxy and start to move to that galaxy until they finally fly into that galaxy. Meanwhile the galaxy has attracted gas (mostly hydrogen) from intergalactic space (3-2) and the dark matter objects (i.e. old blackened stars; or: dark matter pieces from clashed stars or from supernovae) assemble hydrogen until they light up as a star.
When the star is luminous it fuses elements into higher elements until it blackens again, after which it can cool down until it attracts new gas again. Attracting gas means it is not only attracting hydrogen and helium but also higher elements (4-4). The star may also fuse other elements than hydrogen or helium in its heavy element nucleus (6-2, 7-1).
Thus stars may slowly build up a big heavy element core. Examples of stars with big heavy element cores may be bright blue stars which may show excess redshift because of their heavy element cores (6-2).
Perhaps that also small stars (or brown dwarfs that later become stars when they get the chance to attract more hydrogen) can originate from dark matter (pieces/objects). Dark matter pieces which may have been produced by clashing dark matter objects (7-2) or by supernovae (5-2), X-ray bursters (5-2) or radio loud activity (5-2) and may be (or become, by merging) large enough to assemble hydrogen (4-4).

[June 2004: Such a way of looking at star formation leads to a very simple way of understanding the magnitudes of star and planet masses ranging from small planets, larger planets, brown dwarfs, red dwarfs, M-type stars, L-type stars, etc. to the biggest stars. Recently some of the world´s biggest telescopes directly measured the mass, for the first time, of one of the smallest stars ever seen in the universe. Barely the size of the planet Jupiter, the dwarf star weighs in at just 8.5 percent of the mass of our Sun. It was the first ever mass measurement of an L-type dwarf star. This stellar class was discovered in 1997 and was added to the spectral classification that had remained unchanged for half a century. Big bang astronomers consider the discovery as a major step towards the understanding of the types of objects that occupy the gap between Sun-like stars and planets192.
There is no gap when the formation of stars is understood by dark matter objects of all kind of magnitudes getting their chances to assemble gas, opposed to the big bang way of understanding planet/star formation, i.e. large clouds of gas and dust contracting. End June 2004]

[May 3 2005: Also between brown dwarfs and the largest planets there may be no gap. A European/American team of astronomers report the imaging discovery of a lightweight companion to AB Pictoris, a young star located about 150 light years from Earth. The estimated mass of the companion is between 13 and 14 times the mass of Jupiter, which places the companion right on the border line between massive planets and the lowest mass brown dwarfs326. End May 3 2005]
[May 18 2007: Recently astronomers announced that they have found the most massive transiting extrasolar planet that is about 1.18 times the size of Jupiter and contains about 8.2 times Jupiter's mass. (Transiting planet = planet crossing directly in front of the star as viewed from Earth.) The planet is as dense as the Earth, though the astronomers think that the planet is mostly made of hydrogen453.
I guess there will be a pretty big nucleus of elements heavier than helium inside the new found planet.
An intriguing feature of the planet is its highly eccentric (e=0.5) orbit. There is no other planet known with such an eccentric, close-in orbit. In addition, all other known transiting planets have circular orbits. The astronomers think that the most likely explanation is the presence of a second, outer world whose gravity pulls on the planet and perturbs its orbit. Although existing data cannot confirm a second planet, they cannot rule it out either453.
When you have solar system formation by planets swinging themselves around stars (7-1) planets with higher eccentricities may come to existence and then one does not need the presence of a second, outer world to have such a high eccentricity.
Recently another group of astronomers announced that they have found the hottest planet so far (2040 °C). Discovered in 2005, HD 149026b is a bit smaller than Saturn, making it the smallest extrasolar planet with a measured size. However, it is more massive than Saturn, and is suspected of having a core 70-90 times the mass of the entire Earth. It has more heavy elements (material other than hydrogen and helium) than exist in our whole solar system, outside the Sun. The planet is so hot that it is off the temperature scale that big bang astronomers expect for planets, they don't understand what's going on455.
I think things can be explained easier when you leave the big bang paradigm of star and planet formation out of clouds of gas and look at star and planet formation by thinking of heavy metal objects assembling gas. End May 18 2007]

[January 30 2008: Astronomers have found a brown dwarf 25 times as massive as Jupiter at 170 light-years from Earth. An object, known as 2M1207B, orbiting the brown dwarf, should be a physical impossibility because of its hotter-than-expected temperature, dim luminosity, young age and location, the astronomers say. The researchers propose that the object orbiting the brown dwarf is small, about the size of Saturn. They think that the brown dwarf might be the outcome of a collision between a Saturn-sized gas giant and a planet about three times the size of Earth. The two smacked into each other and fused, forming one larger world still boiling from the heat generated in the titanic collision475.
Both objects may have come to existence by old remains of (crashed) stars. Later they may have come to orbit each other. 2M1207B may still be hot because of (smaller) old dark matter objects melting together. End January 30 2008]

[December 2004: Recently astronomers observed another object that may show that there is no gap. NASA's Spitzer Space Telescope has found a warm glow coming from a star-like object. The object defies all models of (big bang) star formation; it is fainter than would be expected for a young star. The astronomers theorize that the mystery object is one of three possibilities: the youngest “failed star,” or brown dwarf ever detected; a newborn star caught in a very early stage of development; or something else entirely. They think that the object might represent a different way of forming stars or brown dwarfs. The objects is so dim that previous studies would have missed them261.
The existence of such objects is just what you expect with the above described star formation model within an infinite universe. End December 2004] [March 20 2006: This needs a bit more explanation of course. On this website star formation is considered to take place with certain objects (like planets in our solar system or small stars that have cooled down) assembling gas until the object starts glowing by gravitational forces or lights up as a star that fuses elements. With such a way of looking at star formation all kind of objects (objects that are small or big, with low or high density) can assemble gas that can be around in all kinds of concentrations. Thus all kind of planets (with gas mantles), brown dwarfs and stars can come to existence. End March 20 2006]

[March 20 2006: So far it has been a problem for astronomers to measure the size of brown dwarfs, but recently researchers discovered a pair of brown dwarfs in mutual orbit. The discovery enabled the scientists to weigh and measure the radius of brown dwarfs for the first time, it is the first direct measurement of the radii and masses of brown dwarfs. The bigger of the two brown dwarfs turned out to be 50 times the size of Jupiter, the smaller turned out to be about 30 times the size of Jupiter. In most respects, the new observations conform to established theoretical (big bang) models for brown dwarfs, but, surprisingly, the less massive of the two dwarfs is hotter than its heftier companion.
An explanation, the big bang astronomers say, is that the paired brown dwarfs did not form together in the same coalescing mass of gas and dust, but formed at different times and places, and somehow became companions locked in mutual orbit408. That is along my line of thinking: within an infinite universe all kind of objects develop in all kind of masses, travel through space for long times and often meet another object with which they become gravitationally linked. This way a lot of binaries may have been formed instead of being formed from one gas cloud with no dark matter objects in it to assemble and concentrate gas at certain places, thus forming stars and brown dwarfs as big bang astronomers think.
But the two brown dwarfs may have been formed from one gas cloud as well, i.e. when they originate from different dark matter objects. Jupiter has an iron core, while the two brown dwarfs are hydrogen to their very centers, the researchers say. I wonder if that is true. I think that brown dwarfs may have iron cores too. The iron cores may have been the dark matter objects that assembled gas, thus originating the two brown dwarfs. (Perhaps it is also possible that another element or other elements (heavier than helium) are concentrated at the cores of the brown dwarfs, i.e. dark matter objects originating brown dwarfs(/stars) may consist of different kind of elements than iron.) End March 20 2006]

[March 23 2005: Big bang astronomers have found that the small star OGLE-TR-122b weighs one-eleventh of the mass of the Sun. Although the star is 96 times as massive as Jupiter, it is only 16% larger than Jupiter. This result shows the existence of stars that look strikingly like planets, even from close by, the astronomers say. As all stars, OGLE-TR-122b produces indeed energy in its interior by means of nuclear reactions. However, because of its low mass, this internal energy production is very small. Striking is the fact that exoplanets which are orbiting very close to their host star, the so-called “hot Jupiters”, have radii which may be larger than the newly found star. The radius of exoplanet HD209458b, for example, is about 30% larger than that of Jupiter. It is thus substantially larger than OGLE-TR-122b293.
Also this shows that there may be no gap (7-1). One may expect that the interior of such a small star will have a lot of heavy elements. Understanding stars by assuming that there may be heavy element cores within stars may bring a lot of progress. End March 23 2005]

[October 2004: In a binary system known as EF Eridanus big bang astronomers recently found a strange, inert body that is far too massive to be considered a super-planet where its composition does not match known brown dwarfs and it is far too low in mass to be a star. There's no category for such an object within big bang astronomy256. Again, there is no gap when the formation of stars is understood by dark matter objects of all kind of magnitudes getting their chances to assemble gas. End October 2004]

[June 2004: Recently it was observed that the majority of brown dwarfs are surrounded by dusty disks at an age of a million years or so, which is similar to young stars at the same age. Observations too showed that brown dwarfs also accrete material from surrounding disks the same way as stars do, although at a slower pace. In one intriguing case, astronomers have also found evidence of material spewing out from the poles of a brown dwarf. Such jets have been seen in young stars of the same age, but not until now in brown dwarfs. If confirmed, the presence of jets would further strengthen the case for remarkably similar infancies for brown dwarfs and Sun-like stars150. [July 2004: Recently astronomers found new evidence pointing towards similar ways of formation where it comes to brown dwarfs and Sun-like stars. Within big bang cosmology stars are supposed to form in huge interstellar clouds in which gravity causes clumps of gas and dust to collapse into “seeds”, which then steadily pull in more and more material until they grow to become stars. However, when this process is studied in detail by computer, many simulations fail to produce brown dwarfs. In one alternative that has been proposed recently, the seeds in an interstellar cloud pull on each other through their gravity, causing a slingshot effect and ejecting some of the seeds from the cloud before they have a chance to grow into stars. These small bodies then could be brown dwarfs, according to that hypothesis. But also this alternative is under strain because of the observation of one pair of brown dwarfs orbiting each other at a remarkably wide separation223. End July 2004]
This can be seen as a confirmation of the above mentioned way of star and brown dwarf formation, which are described here as essentially the same. Whether a dark matter object will turn into a star or a brown dwarf when it is fuelled by hydrogen, depends on the magnitude of the dark matter object, the amount of hydrogen available and the competition by other dark matter objects. This is similar to the formation of galaxies out of large concentrations of dark matter objects fuelled by hydrogen, i.e. universal engines and g-galaxies fuelled by hydrogen (4-1). End June 2004]

[May 2004: When hydrogen surrounds and moves to dark matter objects then we won't be able to see this, unless such a system lies before a nearby star. Big stars will attract hydrogen too, but when the hydrogen comes too near it will be blown away by radiation pressure.
There are unusual nebulae that appear to be the subject of strong heating. In three nebulae, astronomers have succeeded in identifying the sources of energetic radiation of the unusual nebulae: some of the hottest, most massive stars ever seen, some of which are double112. Perhaps that the gas in the nebulae is attracted to the massive star as I think dark matter will attract in a much smaller way hydrogen/gas too, which allows the dark matter object to grow until it lights up as a star. Perhaps stars can attract hydrogen/gas until the hydrogen/gas is bounded to the star. The hydrogen/gas then may balance between attraction by gravitational forces from the star as well as radiation pressure by photons coming from the star. Perhaps this is a way red giants can come to existence (5-1). End May 2004]
[July 2004: Perhaps that red giants can come to existence by the merging of two or more stars (or stars plus dark matter objects or multiple dark matter objects merging within a gas cloud, 6-2). Big bang astronomers think that our Sun will expand into a red giant star in roughly five billion years218. They may be right, but perhaps there are other ways (too) to produce a red giant. Especially the thought of an inner core of a star suddenly becoming much hotter and therefore producing stronger radiation pressure (that makes the star expend into a red giant) after the star has been loosing mass for billions of years is something that makes me wonder whether the big bang red giant model is a correct model. Though, perhaps that gravitational shielding (3-2) may cause certain fusion processes to start up at a later stage. End July 2004]
[January 2005: New ultraviolet observations indicate a Milky Way star is spinning nearly 200 times faster than Earth's sun, the probable result of a merger between two sun-like stars whose binary orbit recently collapsed, according to a University of Colorado at Boulder astronomer Thomas Ayres. The yellow giant, known as FK Comae Berenices, or FK Com, is 10 times larger than the sun and is emitting spectacular amounts of X-rays, ultraviolet light and radio waves as it rotates furiously. Dubbed the "King of Spin" by the research team, FK Com is the namesake of a rare class of fast-rotating yellow giants noted for high levels of coronal magnetic activity. FK Com objects are oddballs because most giant stars rotate very slowly. That's why many theorists now believe binary mergers are the best way to explain the existence of these rare, ultra-fast rotators273. End January 2005]
[March 31 2005: The massive star Regulus has 5 times the diameter of our own Sun, and yet it completes a rotation in only 15.9 hours (our own Sun takes a month to rotate once). Regulus is shaped like an egg. According to big bang astronomers it spins at 86% of its breakup speed (which may be wrong when stars harbor heavy metal cores, or what I call dark matter objects).
Regulus too may be a binary merger. But perhaps there is also the possibility that Regulus has come to existence by a binary dark matter system that has attracted hydrogen/gas. Perhaps this way Regulus may harbor two dark matter cores that orbit each other very fast at a very short distance (rotation faster than 15.9 hours?). Gas that surrounds the two cores then may have started rotating too, which is what astronomers may have measured: gas orbiting in 15.9 hours. However, the two dark matter cores may have merged too (before or after the attraction of hydrogen/gas). Regulus may have come to existence by the merging of two stars too, which may have brought the same: two dark matter cores/objects within a gas bulb that orbit each other or two dark matter cores/objects that have merged.
Regulus becomes brighter at its poles than at its equator, a phenomenon previously only detected in binary stars. Researchers have found that the temperature at Regulus' poles is 15,100 degrees Celsius, while the equator's temperature is only 10,000 Celsius. The temperature variation causes the star to be about five times brighter at its poles than at its equator306.
Perhaps the that the temperature differences can be explained with nuclear fusion taking place in or on dark matter cores inside Regulus. With less gas between the poles and the dark matter cores it may be easily explained why Regulus is hotter at its poles. In the case Regulus harbors only one dark matter core then the same explanation may be used to explain why Regulus is hotter at its poles. End March 31 2005]

[July 2004: There are limits where it comes to the magnitudes of dark matter objects that are cool enough to assemble hydrogen. Dark matter objects may produce much radiation pressure as pulsars (6-1), white dwarfs (6-2), X-ray bursters (5-2) or may explode as Type Ia supernovae (5-2). One of the most enduring riddles of stellar physics is217: Why are there no stars that are more luminous than about a million Suns?
The answer may be that there are limits to (cool) dark matter objects (bringing stars by assembling hydrogen) having certain limits where it comes to magnitude. Though, perhaps that exceptions can be made when many smaller dark matter objects merge while assembling hydrogen. However, such merging then may rather produce a Type II supernovae (5-2) than originating a giant star. End July 2004]

[May 3 2005: The Milky Way - like all spiral galaxies - swings gracefully around a central core. Astronomers have known for some time that a “fairy ring” of blue-hot stars dance within a few light-years from the center, but such stars should display expansive low-temperature red giant envelopes according to big bang cosmology330.
With the on this website described star formation in an infinite universe, with star formation by hydrogen gas assembling on cold dark matter cores one expects blue-hot stars to develop in the center of the Milky Way. End May 3 2005]

Are we living on an old star?
Could our Earth once have been a star? For instance a white dwarf that became a black dwarf and floated through intergalactic space for, let's say, 1040 years? Losing gas, getting heated by heavy metals (heavier than iron) decay, losing mass by heat radiation?

[June 2004: If stars run out of gas to fuse and start cooling down we should see objects that are still glowing. Such objects may be white dwarfs (remnants of hotter stars), but also brown dwarfs (remnants of less hot stars; brown dwarfs may be cooled down white dwarfs too, though it remains to be seen what white dwarfs really are, 6-2). There are brown dwarfs that have been observed to be warm198.
So there may be two classes of brown dwarfs. The ones that are pieced together by (cold) dark matter assembling gas, which may be likely to be cold brown dwarfs, and the ones that descent from stars that have stopped fusing gas, which may be (still) warm brown dwarfs. End June 2004]

[June 2004: Perhaps that within Saturn and Jupiter (very) heavy metals decay, which may explain the (unexpected) large amount of X-radiation from Saturn and Jupiter. Saturn may have X-radiation coming from two sources, the large source very close to its center, the smaller source a little further from its center132. Perhaps that far in the past two large (one a little larger than the other, the larger one residing closest to Saturn's center) celestial objects merged, together with a lot of other smaller (dark) matter objects. The two large objects may contain certain amounts of (very) heavy metals (heavier than iron) that decay, which then may explain the X-radiation from Saturn (and Jupiter). Such mechanism may also explain mysterious hot X-ray producing brown dwarfs114. (Within big bang astronomy planets are thought to generate internal heat by radioactive decay8.)

RX J0806.3+1527 is observed to be a system of two white dwarfs revolving around each other at a distance of only 80,000 km. Each of the stars seems to be about as large as the Earth. The system has the shortest orbital period known for any binary stellar system (that is, in March 2002), 5 minutes. One star is trapped in the strong gravitational grip of the other somewhat heavier star. The orbital motion is very fast - over 1,000 km/sec, and the lighter star apparently always turns the same hemisphere towards its companion, just as the Moon in its orbit around Earth, they are gravitationally locked. Systems in which the orbital period is very short (less than 1 hour) are referred to as AM Canis Venaticorum (AM CVn) systems. According to big bang astronomers it is likely that such systems, after having reached a minimum orbital period of a few minutes, then begin to evolve towards longer orbital periods. Big bang astronomers think that this indicates that RX J0806.3+1527 is now at the very beginning of the “AM CVn phase”200.
Perhaps that such kind of systems later can become a system like the Earth and the Moon (the Moon too spirals away from the Earth, the distance between the Earth and the Moon is 5 times 80,000 km) or a dark matter binary system as described in 7-2 that can bring two planets like the Earth/Mars in a solar system.
But such a system too may cool down and collect gas, dust and dark matter object debris and then merge, thus bringing a planet like Saturn, which may have two merged dark matter objects at its center, as described above (the diameter of Saturn is 120,000 km, which is larger than the 80,000 km distance in the RX J0806.3+1527 system). End June 2004]

[May 2003: Small stars, who are very numerous, turn into red dwarfs. What happens with red dwarfs over extremely long times? Can they become Earth-like, i.e. can our Earth be a former star?
And: if our Earth has originated from a dust cloud, then how can we have something like a gold-vein? If our Earth is originated from gathered dust then one would expect all kind of elements, i.e. minerals, very well mixed, which is not the case. [January 5 2007: Probably this is mostly nonsense, because gold and many other minerals are concentrated on the Earth because of geological processes. Still, I wonder if all concentrations of minerals on Earth can be explained by geological processes, for instance what about uranium? I also wonder if there are concentrations of certain minerals on the Moon and, if indeed, whether or not such concentrations can be explained by geological processes on the Moon. End January 5 2007]
So far it is expected that heavy elements are only formed in supernovae, but perhaps they may also be formed in pulsars (6-1), white dwarfs (6-2), and perhaps also in our Sun or even smaller stars. Right now it is thought (by conventional science) that the Sun (and other stars) is well mixed and that the outer regions of the Sun is representative for the interior of the Sun. This is a paradigm that may be untenable.
Some specialists in this particular field, like professor Manuel41,244, are also convinced that the interior of the Sun is very unlike the composition of the outer layers of the Sun. Also Manuel thinks that the core of the Sun consists of heavy metals (iron according to Manuel).
[January 24 2006: Professor of Radiology Pierre-Marie Robitaille thinks there is a lot of evidence in favor of a condensed matter model of the Sun instead of the now used gaseous models of the Sun397. End January 24 2006]

Jovian planets have a core with heavy elements. Our Sun may have a much bigger core, perhaps that's the reason why it has been able to attract so much hydrogen.

A heavy element core in the Sun may mean that in the interior of the Sun other processes are going on. Those processes may account for not understood phenomena like sunspots, change in latitude of sunspots, sunspot cycles, coronal mass ejections and solar flares (6-1).

Hydrogen “burning” in the Sun may be going on in a shell around a nucleus of heavy elements and this nucleus may have different layers with different compositions. A Population I star may have a bigger nucleus than a Population II star and hence may burn more fiercely (4-4).
There may be different nuclear synthesis processes going on at the same time, for the gravitational pressure in the different layers of a star is getting higher when you go more to the center of a star. There may be a shell with burning hydrogen while in a shell (or shells) more towards the center another nuclear synthesis process (or processes) may be going on (perhaps with a pulsar quality, 6-1).

[August 2004: Though never observed so far, big bang astronomers made theoretical predictions that, if massive enough, some stars can extend their lives by the fusion of carbon into magnesium226. End August 2004]

Thus it may even be that there is no hydrogen burning in our Sun at all. Depending on the thickness of the outward hydrogen layer there may be or may not be hydrogen burning. Perhaps under a relative thin hydrogen layer helium processes into higher elements. Perhaps fusion of even higher elements causes the heat of the Sun.

If there are other processes going on, besides the burning of hydrogen and helium, in (small) stars, like the processing of heavier elements into more heavy elements, and if pulsars and white dwarfs have certain processes going on as mentioned in 6-1 and 6-2, then the dark matter objects that may result from all kinds of stars and white dwarfs and pulsars may have something like the mentioned “gold-veins” (7-1) as on our Earth (think for instance of “reaction-regions” of pulsars, 6-1). Therefore: perhaps we are living on an old star.
(Though perhaps it is also possible that “gold-veins” are the result of (big chunks from) supernovae explosions. Still, the “gold-vein” thought may become a problem for today's way of looking at Solar system formation and thus Earth formation.) End May 2003]

[March 23 2005: Big bang astronomers think that millimeter-sized spheres called chondrules may provide important clues to how the planets formed. Chondrules would compact into larger solid bodies290. But with such small particles compacting into larger spheres one would expect that the minerals/elements of planets are well mixed (the gold-vein problem, 7-1). Fact is that we find certain concentrations of minerals/elements at certain places at our Earth. I think one has to think about much larger objects as the progenitors of planets like our Earth. But perhaps that other planets are well mixed when it comes to the minerals/elements of the planet. Planet formation (i.e. not planets as our Earth) from a lot of small particles may be possible too (7-1). End March 23 2005]

[March 24 2005: Gravity, always an attractive candidate to explain how celestial matter pulls together, was no match for stellar winds, big bang scientists say. The dust needed help coming together fast, in kilometer-wide protoplanets, in the first few million years after a star was born, or the stellar wind would blow it all away.
Micron-wide dust particles encrusted with molecularly gluey ice enabled planets to bulk up like dirty snowballs quickly enough to overcome the scattering force of solar winds. That may be the answer, according to some big bang scientists, when it comes to understanding the formation of a planet like our Earth295.
Still, the above mentioned problem (7-1) is not solved: with such small particles compacting one would expect that the minerals/elements of the Earth are well mixed. End March 24 2005]

Of course our Earth has very little mass if one looks at our Earth as descending from an old star, but what happens over extremely long times if you think of periods of 1050 - 10500 years? For instance: if our Earth descends from a star that has been shining in another galaxy and escaped from that galaxy? Things change if you take a universe in mind that is endless in time and space.
But perhaps things are possible on shorter time scales too, it is something we just don't know yet. In the on this website described universe our Galaxy is very much older than 15 billion years, which will lead to different options, like white dwarfs escaping a galaxy, blackening and shrinking/degrading over enormous times and finally entering a new galaxy, with the possibility of becoming a planet by swinging around a star in the new galaxy (7-1).

[May 2003: Dark matter objects may come from intergalactic space. For instance: they may be extremely old pulsars/white dwarfs, 6-1. About 90% of all stars finally become white dwarfs, which may make white dwarfs good candidates as progenitors of planets as well as progenitors of new stars like Population I stars. End May 2003]

If our Earth is an extremely old star then that may explain the magnetic field of our Earth, being a remnant of the old stars magnetic field (7-1).

[August 2004: The binary system Gamma Cephei, about 45 light-years away in the constellation Cepheus, may be an example of a system with a small star that later may become a planet. The primary star is 1.59 times as massive as the Sun. A planet orbits the primary star at about 2 Astronomical Units (A.U.), a little further than Mars's distance from the Sun, and is 1.76 times as massive as Jupiter. A second, relatively small star orbits the primary star at only 25 to 30 A.U. from the primary star -- about Uranus' distance from the Sun231. The second, relatively small star may become a planet in the future. End August 2004]

[March 23 2005: An international team of astronomers have accurately determined the radius and mass of the smallest core-burning star known until now. The observations were performed in March 2004 with the FLAMES multi-fibre spectrograph on the 8.2-m VLT Kueyen telescope at the ESO Paranal Observatory (Chile). The astronomers found that the dip seen in the light curve of the star known as OGLE-TR-122 is caused by a very small stellar companion, eclipsing this solar-like star once every 7.3 days. This companion is 96 times heavier than planet Jupiter but only 16% larger. It is the first time that direct observations demonstrate that stars less massive than 1/10th of the solar mass are of nearly the same size as giant planets293.
Perhaps that such a small star can become a future planet. End March 23 2005]

[May 2003: Two possible ways of dark matter object/planet formation
Next to dark matter objects (free floating in interstellar and intergalactic space) and planets (dark matter objects tied to stars) descending from old stars, dark matter objects may originate as assemblages of collected dust/asteroids/meteoroids. Perhaps it is possible somehow to distinguish between those two planet-origins. One thing, as mentioned above, may be: perhaps there are planets or moons that have chemical composites that are very equal everywhere on and in the planet or moon (i.e. no “gold-veins”, 7-1, or other conspicuous high concentrations of certain elements), which then may be a sign of originating from (assembled) dust and small dark matter pieces. End May 2003]
Dark matter and magnetic fields
Dark matter objects (4-1) may play an important part in star formation. Dark matter objects may attract hydrogen (and dust), which thus can concentrate itself around the dark matter object. Dark matter objects often may have a certain rotation (7-2), which then will show up again in the rotation of stars.
Right now there are problems understanding what causes the burst of star formation8, dark matter being in or entering into a cloud of hydrogen (or hydrogen flowing to dark matter) may be the answer.
Rotating dark matter may attract a certain amount of gas, dust and other dark matter and so there may have been a rotation momentum from the very beginning. The infalling gas, dust and other dark matter, with its own peculiar velocities, may have caused a certain spin as well. Thus the original dark matter object and new mass that has fallen onto the dark matter object may be two different rotation layers, this may explain the magnetic fields of stars (also: planets that orbit stars may effect the outer layer of a star as well).

[August 2004: With dark matter objects having their own peculiar rotation and gas and dust having certain momentum all kind of rotation rates become possible for stars. Right now big bang cosmology has problems explaining why some small stars have slow rotation where the majority of small stars have fast rotation238. End August 2004]

[June 2004: A fast-spinning hot star, Achernar (Alpha Eridani), the brightest in the southern constellation Eridanus, is much flatter than expected - its equatorial radius is more than 50% larger than the polar one. Big bang astronomers have problems explaining the flatness of the star188.
Perhaps that when the inside of the star is allowed to have a very big core of heavy elements, i.e. when the star originated by gas accreting on a large dark matter object, theoretical solutions are possible. But also: perhaps that the star originated by two large dark matter objects orbiting each other at a very close distance (7-2). Perhaps then that the dark matter objects within the core have not collided yet into one big core and that this can bring the unusual flatness of the star. End June 2004]

[May 2003: Perhaps a dark matter object does not necessarily have to be rotating. Perhaps thus there may be stars formed with YSOs and without YSOs (7-1). A lot of hydrogen falling on a not or slow rotating dark matter object may form an YSO where fast rotating stars may bring the hydrogen into rotation which may cause that the hydrogen slowly approaches the dark matter object and hence no YSO is formed.
Thus stars descending from YSOs may rotate (predominantly) because of the momentum of the infalling gas where stars not descending from YSOs may rotate (predominantly) because of the momentum of the rotating dark matter. And: perhaps that sometimes the momentum by the infalling hydrogen counteracts the original rotation of a dark matter object, which may originate stars that hardly rotate or don't rotate at all. End May 2003]

Brown dwarfs and Jupiter-like planets may originate in a similar way as here described for stars, thus explaining the magnetic fields of Jovian planets. The magnetic field of the Earth and other terrestrial planets change, which then may be due to different mass-layers from the old star, gradually changing relative to each other. Though magnetic fields of planets may be due too to the Sun's gravitational forces (3-2) working upon the outer layers of the rotating planets.
[May 2003: See also the ideas of professor Ghosh3 about inertial induction. End May 2003]
Star formation
Right now the star formation model is far from understood, there is lack of a physical understanding of how gas turns into stars.

[May 2003: As mentioned in 6-2: white dwarfs that have cooled down enough will start assembling gas again until they light up. This will be the same for every big enough object that is not so hot that radiation pressure keeps hydrogen from falling on the object. This makes one look in a completely different way at star formation.

Big stars thus can easily be explained, even if they are positioned in space regions with conspicuously high metal concentrations. Some current theories of star formation and certain indirect observations appear to indicate that very heavy stars, with masses more than 20-30 MSun, could not possibly form in metal-rich regions67.

This would be because the strong radiation from nascent stars in such environments would rapidly disperse the remains of the natal cloud and thereby halt any further growth beyond a certain limit. Deprived of “food”, those young stellar objects would be unable to grow beyond a certain, limited class67.
[June 2004: Also less big stars within less metal-rich environments have problems within big bang astronomy with their own luminosity disrupting accretion-disks that are supposed to make the star grow136.
Two possible scenarios for the formation of massive stars are currently proposed by big bang astronomers, by accretion of large amounts of circumstellar material or by collision (coalescence) of protostars of intermediate masses. The new observations favour accretion, i.e. the same process that is active during the formation of stars of smaller masses. The accretion process then must somehow overcome the outward radiation pressure that builds up, following the ignition of the first nuclear processes (e.g., deuterium/hydrogen burning) in the star's interior, once the temperature has risen above the critical value near 10 million degrees187.
Gas accreting on large dark matter objects (or multiple dark matter objects orbiting each other) may solve the accretion problem. End June 2004]

[September 7 2005: Big bang astronomers have studied a young protostar 15 times more massive than the Sun, located more than 2,000 light-years away in the constellation Cepheus. They discovered a flattened disk of material orbiting the protostar. The disk contains 1 to 8 times as much gas as the Sun and extends outward for more than 30 billion miles - eight times farther than Pluto's orbit. The existence of this disk provides clear evidence of gravitational collapse, they say. They think that a disk formed when a spinning gas cloud contracted, growing denser and more compact. The angular momentum of the spinning material would have forced it into a disk shape. The team detected both molecular gas and dust in the flattened structure surrounding the massive protostar. Data also showed a velocity shift due to rotation, supporting the interpretation that the structure is a gravitationally bound disk. Combined with radio observations showing a bipolar jet of ionized gas, a type of outflow often observed in association with low-mass protostars, these results support theoretical big bang models of high-mass star formation via disk accretion rather than big bang models of several low-mass protostars merging. “Merging low-mass protostars wouldn't form a circumstellar disk and a bipolar jet,” the researchers say. “Even if they had circumstellar disks and outflows before the merger, those features would be destroyed during the merger.”354.
Perhaps there is also a possibility that two dark matter objects with gas or two small stars (or a dark matter object with (or without) gas and a small star) have clashed. One object may have come to orbit the protostar while moving inward while the other object may have come to orbit the star closer to the star with a faster velocity and hence moving outward (see also 7-2). Still, massive stars rather may be formed by big dark matter objects attracting much gas as described above. End September 7 2005]

Recently a team of French, Swiss, and Spanish astronomers, using the ESO Very Large Telescope (VLT) directly observed the presence of Wolf-Rayet stars (born with masses of 60-90 MSun or more) within metal-rich regions in some galaxies in the Virgo cluster67.
With current conventional astronomy and current ways of looking at star formation this gives severe problems, but with (very) heavy dark matter objects attracting huge amounts of gas massive stars can easily be formed in metal-rich regions.

Thus the difference between Population I and II stars may caused by: Population I stars originate from gas clouds with higher metal/dust content (conventional view) as well as that Population I stars originate from heavier dark matter objects. In fact, (many of) the dark matter objects from which Population I stars originate may be old blackened Population II stars (4-4, 6-2).

Wolf-Rayet (WR) stars are among the most luminous stars in the galaxy. Perhaps such stars originate from huge dark matter objects that get fuelled by a cloud with much hydrogen/helium. Many WR stars are in binary systems. Dark matter objects (or two groups of multiple dark matter objects orbiting each other), especially old (huge) dark matter objects, too often may be in binary systems (4-3, 7-2), which may explain why many WR stars are in binary systems.
WR stars are helium-rich and hydrogen-deficient. Some white dwarfs will loose helium (6-2), others may gain (that) helium and thus may become WR stars.
But, of course, WR stars may also descend from massive stars like red supergiants, as suggested by big bang scientists68. End May 2003]

[March 24 2005: Big bang astronomers have been uncertain about how large a star can get before it cannot hold itself together and blows apart. They don't know enough about the details of the star-formation process to estimate a star's upper mass. Consequently, theories have predicted stars can be anywhere between 100 to 1,000 times more massive than the sun.
A team of big bang astronomers may have taken an important step toward establishing an upper limit to the masses of stars. Using NASA's Hubble Space Telescope, they made the first direct measurement within our Milky Way Galaxy, and concluded stars cannot get any larger than about 150 times the mass of our sun296.
When indeed stars cannot get any larger than about 150 times the mass of our sun then one may wonder why the prediction by big bang theories went up to 1000 times the mass of our sun (within big bang theories only possible with an extremely small percentage of heavy elements in the protostar gas cloud). Perhaps that the answer is: the star formation process needs dark matter objects to assemble hydrogen. With a (big) heavy element core, i.e. big dark matter object, assembling (much) hydrogen for the production of a giant star the protostar sooner will have gas producing nuclear reactions than a pure hydrogen cloud falling together all by itself by gravity. End March 24 2005]

[June 2004: Giant stars may also originate when a very concentrated group of multiple dark matter objects gets fuelled by gas in such a way that the fuelled dark matter objects can't be distinguished from each other anymore (5-1). End June 2004]

[October 27 2005: A mysterious group of massive stars orbit less than a light-year from the Milky Way's central “black hole” (which rather may be an assemblage of very many dark matter objects packed in a very small volume of space, 5-1). The stars are known as Sagittarius A* ( Sgr A*)376. Sagittarius A* may be a very old shrunken galaxy (4-1). If Sgr A* indeed is a very old shrunken galaxy it may contain a large number of dark matter objects (old darkened stars) that merged while attracting hydrogen. This may have caused massive stars to come to existence. End October 27 2005]

With an infinite universe there will always be metals everywhere, which may be the reason why there are no Population III stars. But also: an hydrogen stream/cloud originating from a hydrogen production system as described with radio loud activity in 5-2 may always be contaminated with elements heavier than hydrogen and helium (“metals”), because radio loud activity may not/never pour out 100% HII and electrons.
Though, recently a star in our Milky Way named HE 0107-5240, with about 0.8 solar mass, was found to have a metal content of 1/200,000 the metal content of the Sun197. This can be seen as evidence that radio loud AGN activity can bring quite pure HII, with little heavy metal content (though, there may be other ways of hydrogen production too, 5-2, 3-2). The discovery of the low metal star clearly demonstrates that stars with masses slightly less than the Sun can form from very metal-poor gas (according to big bang cosmology, I see such stars as formed with the aid of dark matter objects). This is unexpected for big bang cosmologists, as their most current theoretical calculations indicate that it is very difficult to form low-mass stars shortly after the big bang, because metals are needed to efficiently cool gas clouds as they contract into stars. But now HE 0107-5240 “reveals that Nature has found a way to achieve the necessary cooling” they say197. I see it as evidence for the necessity of dark matter objects to trigger star formation.

Dark matter objects may be around in all kind of magnitudes, because all kind of former stars have blackened with all kind of heavy element cores (i.e. dark matter objects descending from stars, 7-1). And: dark matter objects that descend from dust/smaller dark matter pieces (produced by supernovae, or produced by clashing dark matter objects, 4-1), probably will have all kind of magnitudes too, depending on the amount of material that assembles into one dark matter object.
With dark matter objects having al kind of magnitudes (and all kind of rotation rates, 6-2) stars that descend from those dark matter objects will also have all kind of magnitudes (and rotation rates).

[June 2004: I think that gas assembling around dark matter objects, thus causing star formation, is going on in star clusters and their associated nebula all through the (spiral arms of the) Milky Way, for instance the nebulosity known as NGC 7129, which is located at a distance of 3300 light-years in the constellation Cepheus139. End June 2004]

[May 2003: Strong concentrations of dark matter may have pulsar (6-1) qualities or novae qualities (5-2). Thus it may be that the cores of stars may have certain pulsar/novae qualities too, which may explain certain variable star types, like ZZ Ceti Stars, RR Lyrae stars, RS Canum Venaticorum stars, Cepheids or Dwarf Cepheids.
Though, also the (original) rotation of the dark matter object may be very important (6-2). Strong rotation means strong centrifugal forces. Slow rotation means weak centrifugal forces and hence pulsating activity may arise easier. And: the way new mass falls in may make a difference (7-1).
[June 2004: Recently a star flared (lightning up McNeil's Nebula). Its outburst may not be the first time the star has flared, an inspection of archival photographic plates revealed that a similar event took place in 1966, when the star flared and faded again into its enshrouding gas120. Perhaps that pulsating qualities by dark matter can explain such flares. End June 2004]

Massive dark matter objects assembling relatively little hydrogen (because the region has relatively little hydrogen) may originate relatively small stars that shine very bright: subdwarf O and B stars. The origin of those stars is still not clear in current astronomy.

Bipolar outflows of YSOs are not understood either. But with a dark matter object in the core of an YSO the problem may be easily solved: massive streams of gas (streams that have, at least partly, adjusted themselves to the rotation of the dark matter object, thus falling on the dark matter object with streams in a form like the spiral arms of our Galaxy) fall on the rotating dark matter object, streams that can't be completely hold by the dark matter object, and thus part of the gas flows out of the YSO along the rotation axis of the dark matter object. [June 2004: A similar mechanism, i.e. material flowing out along the rotation axis, is found with the radio loud process (5-2), matter poured out by galaxies (5-2) and matter poured out of Seyfert 2s (5-1). Matter gets poured out at the poles because the poles are relatively “thin” or “weak” due to rotation. End June 2004]

Right now it is thought that dust around YSOs is pushed outward from the star8. But the dust just may come later than the hydrogen ( 4-3).

Perhaps that multiple nuclear fusion processes can go on in stars in different layers when stars have layered structures. Perhaps that in the deepest inner parts of very big stars even fusion to elements higher than iron can occur (a cooling process, 6-1). End May 2003]
[May 28 2005: Big bang astronomers say that stars that start off their lives with ten or more times the Sun's mass are capable of “burning” hydrogen into helium, helium into carbon, and so on up to the final nuclear ash, iron334. End May 28 2005]

[May 2004: Peering into a giant molecular cloud in the Milky Way galaxy - known as W49 - astronomers from the European Southern Observatory (ESO) have discovered a whole new population of very massive newborn stars. Altogether, the ESO astronomers were able to identify more than one hundred heavy-weight stars inside W49A, with masses greater than 15 to 20 times the mass of our Sun. Among these, about thirty are located within a W49 region called W49A and about ten in each of three other clusters within W49. The presence of such a large number of very massive stars spread over the entire W49 region suggests that star formation in the various regions of W49A must have happened rather simultaneously from different seeds and not, as some theories within big bang cosmology propose, by a “domino-typefood” chain effect where stellar winds of fast particles and the emitted radiation of newly formed massive stars trigger another burst of star formation in the immediate neighbourhood85.
The presence of such a large number of very massive stars spread over the entire W49 region can be seen as a confirmation of the here described way of star formation with dark matter objects collecting gas. End May 2004]

[June 2004: Of course, it remains to be seen whether or not it is (totally) impossible for a cloud of gas and dust to contract and become a star without the aid of a dark matter object triggering the contraction of the gas/dust cloud. Different ways of star formation may coexist as well as different ways of galaxy formation (5-3) and solar system formation (7-2) may coexist. End June 2004]
[May 11 2006:Space is littered with giant clouds of gas. Occasionally, regions within these clouds collapse to form stars. One of the major questions for big bang astronomers is why some clouds produce high- and low-mass stars, whilst others form only low-mass stars418. Perhaps clouds can collapse into stars without the aid of dark matter objects and hence become low-mass stars, whilst where there are dark matter objects a collapsing cloud of gas can produce high-mass stars (triggered by dark matter objects) and low-mass stars (produced by collapsing clouds, without the aid of dark matter objects). On the other hand: there may be a lot of minor dark matter objects that may produce only low-mass stars, whilst other groups of dark matter objects in a particular region of space consist of minor dark matter objects producing low-mass stars and major dark matter objects producing high-mass stars. End May 11 2006]

[March 24 2005: Observations have marked the first clear detection of X-rays from a precursor to a star, called a Class 0 protostar, far earlier in a star's evolution than most (big bang) experts in this field thought possible. The big bang researchers who did the observations say that the surprise detection of X-rays from such a cold object reveals that matter is falling toward the protostar core 10 times faster than expected from gravity alone294.
When a dark matter object assembles the gas then: 1. the X-rays may come from the dark matter object (7-1). 2. if matter falls in very fast indeed (explaining the X-rays) then the speed of the matter may be explained by strong gravitational attraction because of the (massive) dark matter object (with heavy elements). End March 24 2005]

Solar system formation
The planets in our Solar System may have been old dark matter objects floating through space, attracted by the nucleus of our Galaxy and thus getting some velocity but also having its own peculiar velocity (i.e. when coming from outside the Galaxy).
Planets may originate and come from outside our Galaxy (outboard dark matter objects, 4-1, 4-3, 6-1), originating from old stars or dust/smaller dark matter pieces, or they may originate from old stars or dust/small dark matter pieces in the spiral arms of our Galaxy (inboard dark matter objects). [July 2004: The old dark matter objects may also be old darkened Population I stars that come out of the dark matter halo (4-4) of our Milky Way. End July 2004]
Whether the planets were formed outside or inside the spiral arms: (certain) dark matter objects may orbit the nuclear bulge of our Galaxy a little faster or slower than stars, which may be important for solar system formation.
Our Population I Sun may have originated from a hydrogen cloud and an old massive dark matter object, both moving around the nuclear bulge of our Galaxy. The hydrogen may have moved faster (4-3) and then have adjusted its speed to the dark matter object which thus may have speeded up. Also: the object/star then may be attracted stronger to the nuclear bulge because the density of the dark matter object has become lower (by assembling hydrogen) (see 3-2). Thus most small dark matter objects (that may become planets) may have a lower velocity than stars.
But it may also be possible that dark matter objects orbit the Galactic nucleus faster than the stars, for the massive dark matter objects (with higher densities) that originate stars may have lower velocities than smaller objects (with lower densities) that can end up as planets.
When dark matter objects have different velocities than stars then dark matter objects may swing themselves in orbits around stars, thus becoming planets and forming solar systems. A “cloud” of dark matter objects may have passed our Sun (or vice versa) and hence part of the dark matter objects may have been “caught” by our Sun and therefore our Solar System may have come to existence (thus perhaps in a relatively short time). The motion of the Sun among the nearby stars -the solar motion- is 20 km/s toward the constellation of Hercules. This is in the order of magnitude of planets orbiting the Sun. Thus velocity differences between stars and dark matter objects may be in the order of the velocities of our planets around the Sun.

[January 21 2006: An international team of astronomers have discovered a new large object in the Kuiper Belt; a region of the Solar System beyond the orbit of Neptune. Currently 58 astronomical units from the Sun, the new object never approaches closer than 50 AU, because its orbit is close to circular. Because this new object's orbit is close to circular the big bang astronomers have difficulty explaining its orbit. Complicating the problem, the object's orbit also has an extreme tilt, being inclined (tilted) at 47 degrees to the rest of the Solar System386.
Perhaps the (dark matter) object came into our solar system because it drifted trough interstellar space as a “lonely cowboy” until gravity of our sun made it swing into our solar system. End January 21 2006]

[November 13 2006: Astronomers have detected a new faint companion to the star HD 3651, already known to host a planet. This new companion, a brown dwarf, is the faintest known companion of an exoplanet host star imaged directly so far. HD 3651 is a star slightly less massive than the Sun, located 36 light-years away. For several years, it has been known to harbour a planet less massive than Saturn, sitting closer to its parent star than Mercury is from the Sun: the planet accomplishes a full orbit in 62 days. The newly found companion, HD 3651B, is 16 times further away from HD 3651 than Neptune is from the Sun. The planet is very close, while the newly found brown dwarf companion revolves around the star 1500 times farther away than the planet. According to big bang astronomers this system is the first imaged example that planets and brown dwarfs can form around the same star439.
Perhaps it is more logical to think that the brown dwarf companion has swung itself around the star and thus was not formed the way big bang astronomers think exoplanets form around stars, i.e. by coming into existence from disks of dust circling around stars. End November 13 2006]

[November 13 2006: It is difficult for big bang theorists to make anything larger than Mercury or Mars in the habitable zone of a red dwarf. The discovery that planets around red dwarfs can weigh between 5 and 15 times Earth was therefore surprising for big bang astronomers. So big bang theorists now believe that such “super-Earths” form during a cosmic “snowstorm”. Only this snowstorm envelops the whole planet and lasts millions of years440.
Relatively large planets around red dwarfs are very easily explained by the in this chapter suggested way of planet formation around stars: sole objects from interstellar space swinging themselves around stars. End November 13 2006]

[November 2004: The Sun and most stars near it follow an orderly, almost circular orbit around the centre of our galaxy, the Milky Way. Using data from ESA's Hipparcos satellite, a team of European astronomers has now discovered several groups of “rebel” stars that move in peculiar directions, mostly towards the galactic centre or away from it, running like the spokes of a wheel. These rebels account for about 20% of the stars within 1000 light-years of the Sun, itself located about 25 000 light-years away from the centre of the Milky Way. The data show that rebels in the same group have little to do with each other. They have different ages so, according to big bang scientists, they cannot have formed at the same time nor in the same place. Instead, they must have been forced together258.
Thus, with (all kind of?) objects moving in different directions it may be likely that quite some dark matter objects can swing themselves around stars during the lifetime of galaxies. End November 2004]

[May 2004: NASA's Chandra X-ray Observatory has confirmed that close encounters between stars form X-ray emitting, double-star systems in dense globular star clusters. They found that the number of X-ray binaries is closely correlated with the rate of encounters between stars in the clusters. Their conclusion is that the binaries are formed as a consequence of these encounters86. The stars in a globular cluster are often only about a tenth of a light year apart. For comparison, the nearest star to the Sun, Proxima Centauri, is 4.2 light years away. With so many stars moving so close together, interactions between stars occur frequently in globular clusters. The stars, while rarely colliding, do get close enough to form binary star systems or cause binary stars to exchange partners in intricate dances86.
When dark matter objects are numerous in our spiral galaxy then there is quite a chance for dark matter objects to have close encounters with stars, which may explain solar system formation. A shrunken and relatively old spiral galaxy like our Milky Way then is likely to have more solar systems than relatively young elliptical galaxies. [June 11 2005: Though, if ellipticals descend from very old darkened, shrunken and collided (clusters of) galaxies then perhaps there still can be many (small) dark matter objects in ellipticals? End June 11 2005]

Observations by NASA's Uhuru X-ray satellite in the 1970's showed that globular clusters seemed to contain a disproportionately large number of X-ray binary sources compared to the Galaxy as a whole. Normally only one in a billion stars is a member of an X-ray binary system containing a neutron star, whereas in globular clusters, the fraction is more like one in a million. The present research confirms earlier suggestions that the chance of forming an X-ray binary system is dramatically increased by the congestion in a globular cluster86.
A shrunken and relatively old spiral galaxy like our Milky Way then is likely to have more binary stars than a relatively young elliptical galaxy. End May 2004]

The terrestrial planets in our Solar System may have come into our Solar System without a gas coat or they may have been stripped of their gas coat by the Sun when they came into the Solar System with a gas coat (gas then would go away from the Sun because of radiation pressure).
[June 2004: Recently it was discovered that the well-known extrasolar planet HD 209458b, provisionally nicknamed Osiris, has gas evaporating at an immense rate, i.e. atmospheric “blow off” is occurring. The planet's outer atmosphere is extended and heated so much by the nearby star that it starts to escape the planet's gravity. Hydrogen, carbon and oxygen boil off in the planet's upper atmosphere under the searing heat of the star146. End June 2004]
[December 2003: There is another possibility. The terrestrial planets may have had a gas coat when they entered the Solar System, but this gas coat may have been pulled of by the Sun before the Sun started to fuse hydrogen into helium, i.e. before radiation pressure by photons coming from the Sun came to the front. Thus the Sun may have “stripped” the terrestrial planets by gravity and then gas from the terrestrial planets would have gone to the Sun. End December 2003]
[January 2004: There is another possibility. All planets may have been without a gas coat within the (preliminary) Solar System. The moment this preliminary system got “fuelled” by hydrogen (thus bringing our blackened “Sun” back to a new (Population I) star stage) the Jovian planets may have gotten their own gas coat. End January 2004]
Dark matter objects coming into our Solar System without a gas coat may seem strange, for then it would be such a coincidence that all terrestrial planets are close to the Sun. But there may be (another) reason why we find terrestrial planets close to our Sun, but no Jovian planets and why we find Jovian planets but no terrestrial planets beyond a certain distance from the Sun: 3-2.

[June 2004: Of the first 100 stars found to harbor planets, more than 30 stars host a Jupiter-sized world in an orbit smaller than Mercury's, whizzing around its star in a matter of days (as opposed to our solar system where Jupiter takes 12 years to orbit the Sun). Although Jupiter-sized worlds have been found orbiting incredibly close to their parent stars, such giant planets could not have formed in their current locations where it concerns big bang solar system formation out of a protoplanetary disk. The oven-like heat of the nearby star and dearth of raw materials would have prevented any large planet from coalescing. Explaining how such planets got there is a puzzle for big bang astronomy157.
It is easily explained with the way of solar system formation described on this webpage. End June 2004]
[September 3 2007: An international team of astronomers have found the largest known exoplanet. The exoplanet is about 70 percent bigger than Jupiter, but less massive, making it a planet of extremely low density. Its mean density is only about 0.2 grams per cubic centimeter. Because of the planet's relatively weak pull on its upper atmosphere, some of the atmosphere probably escapes in a comet-like tail. The exoplanet is called TrES-4 and it orbits its host star in three and a half days. Being only about 4.5 million miles from its home star, the planet is also very hot, about 1,600 Kelvin. TrES-4 is a theoretical problem for big bang astronomers. It is larger relative to its mass than current big bang models of superheated giant planets can presently explain465.
Of course a planet like TrES-4 can not be formed so close to its host star. It is therefore likely that the planet was formed away from its host star and was captured later by gravity by the star. The problem then is how could a gas cloud contract by gravity and form TrES-4? Simply by the mechanism suggested on this website: a sole dark matter object assembling gas in interstellar space. End September 3 2007]

[June 13 2005: Scientists studying data from NASA's Galileo spacecraft have found that Jupiter's moon Amalthea is a pile of icy rubble less dense than water. Scientists expected moons closer to the planet to be rocky and not icy. The finding shakes up long-held theories of how moons form around giant planets. Current big bang models imply that temperatures were high at Amalthea's current position when Jupiter's moons formed, but this is inconsistent with Amalthea being icy. The findings suggest that Amalthea formed in a colder environment. One possibility is that it formed later than the major moons. Another is that the moon formed farther from Jupiter, either beyond the orbit of Jupiter's moon Europa or in the solar nebula at or beyond Jupiter's position. It would have then been transported or captured in its current orbit around Jupiter. Either of these explanations challenges big bang models of moon formation around giant planets335.
There is no problem with Amalthea being icy with planets and moons flying into a solar system as described on this webpage. End June 13 2005]

[May 2004: A comparison of 754 nearby stars like our Sun - some with planets and some without - has shown that the more iron and other metals there are in a star, the greater the chance it has a companion planet. Data showed that stars like the Sun, whose metal content is considered typical of stars in our neighborhood, have a 5 to 10 percent chance of having planets. Stars with three times more metal than the Sun have a 20 percent chance of harboring planets, while those with 1/3 the metal content of the Sun have about a 3 percent chance of having planets. The 29 most metal-poor stars in the sample, all with less than 1/3 the Sun's metal abundance, had no planets90.
When Population I stars are older stars than Population II stars as argued in 4-4 then it is no surprise that stars with higher metal content have a greater chance to have a companion planet. The older the star the more time it had to find a companion planet, but also: environments where Population I stars originate are likely to have more dark matter objects that can have close encounters with stars and thus become planets of those stars. And: Population I stars have more mass, thus attracting more dark matter objects.
When somewhere many dark matter objects are around that can swing themselves around stars then a lot of dust (due to clashing of dark matter objects) can be expected to be around too, such dust then can fall to stars thus enriching those stars with heavy elements. [June 2004: And also enriching those stars with disks containing dust (7-2). Therefore it may be no surprise that stars with a higher heavy metal content have dust disks rather than stars with a lower heavy metal content171. End June 2004] End May 2004]

[May 2004: Some astronomers have argued that globular clusters cannot contain planets because globular clusters are deficient in heavier elements, a conclusion that was supported in 1999 when NASA's Hubble Space Telescope failed to find close-orbiting Jupiter-type planets around the stars of the globular cluster 47 Tucanae. However, recently the Hubble Space Telescope precisely measured the mass of a planet orbiting a peculiar pair of burned-out stars, a white dwarf and a pulsar, in the crowded core of the globular star cluster M4, located 7,200 light-years away99.
According to big bang astronomers the Hubble measurement offers evidence that (big bang) planet formation processes are quite robust and efficient at making use of a small amount of heavier elements99. I think the observation is rather be seen as a confirmation of the here presented way of solar system formation in an infinite universe. A globular cluster in an infinite universe can have dark matter objects that can swing themselves around an odd couple like a pulsar plus a white dwarf. End May 2004]

[May 2004: Big bang astronomers expected planetary systems (solar systems) to be quite alike because within big bang astronomy those systems are supposed to originate from similar clouds of gas and dust. The extrasolar planetary systems now known to exist have very different properties, planetary systems are much more diverse than ever imagined by big bang astronomy100.
Dark matter objects within an infinite universe model can be very different and so with the here described way of solar system formation one can expect to find solar systems that differ very much from each other. End May 2004]

[June 2004: There may be multiple ways of solar system formation (7-2). End June 2004]

[January 2005: Solar systems may flatten because dark matter objects that once flew into the solar system may have adjusted their plane of orbiting more and more to the rotation of the Sun. Thus all planets in our solar system more or less may have ended up in the same plane orbiting the Sun, i.e. perpendicular to the rotation axis of the Sun. The planets still may have a bit of the plane in which they originally started orbiting the Sun, which may explain why all planets in our solar system orbit in slightly different planes around the Sun. The older the solar system the more the planets then may be likely orbit in the same plane (4-4). End January 2005]
[June 11 2005: Gas clouds, stars and dark matter objects travel in a disk around the center of the Milky Way, so it is normal that stars have their rotation axis perpendicular to this disk and that dark matter objects swirl towards stars in a disk parallel to the disk of the Milky Way. End June 11 2005]

[September 2004: Big bang planetary formation models are far from being able to account for all the amazing diversity observed amongst the extrasolar planets that have been discovered in recent years252. A European team of astronomers recently discovered the lightest known planet orbiting a star other than the sun. The new exoplanet orbits the bright star mu Arae, which is about 50 light years away from the Earth. The exoplanet has a mass of only 14 times the mass of the Earth and completes a full revolution around mu Area in 9.5 days. Big bang astronomers have trouble explaining this observation because of the limiting way they look at planet formation: material in a disk surrounding a star accreting into a planet252. Dark matter objects swinging themselves around stars opens up very many new ways of understanding the diversity observed amongst the extrasolar planets. End September 2004]

[November 13 2006: Big bang researchers have discovered a hole in a disk of gas and dust encircling a star which is about the size of the orbit of Saturn. For big bang astronomers it is difficult to explain the existence of such a big hole. They think that the disk of gas is pushed away from the star by intense solar radiation443.
With planets swinging themselves around stars one can think of another explanation. Large chunks of rocks and/or dark matter objects/sole planets may swirl towards the star, bringing gravitationally attached gas and dust with them. Therefore the gas may slowly circle towards the star instead of being pushed away from the star. End November 13 2006]

[December 2004: Recent planet observations revealed the possibility of a planet on the order of only 100,000 to half a million years old, which is causing problems for the big bang way of looking at solar system formation262.
Looking at solar system formation with dark matter objects swinging themselves around stars is likely to solve these problems easily. End December 2004]

[March 27 2006: The current big bang picture of how planetary systems form is as follows: i) dust grains coagulate to form planetesimals of up to 1 km in diameter; ii) the runaway growth of planetesimals leads to the formation of ~100 to 1000 km-sized planetary embryos; iii) these embryos grow in an "oligarchic" manner, where a few large bodies dominate the formation process, and accrete the surrounding and much smaller planetesimals. These "oligarchs" form terrestrial planets near the central star and planetary cores of ten terrestrial masses in the giant planet region beyond 3 astronomical units (AU). However, these theories fail to describe the formation of gas giant planets in a satisfactory way. Gravitational interaction between the gaseous protoplanetary disc and the massive planetary cores causes them to move rapidly inward over about 100,000 years in what we call the "migration" of the planet in the disc. The prediction of this rapid inward migration of giant protoplanets is a major problem, since this timescale is much shorter than the time needed for gas to accrete onto the forming giant planet. Theories predict that the giant protoplanets will merge into the central star before planets have time to form. This makes it very difficult for big bang astronomers to understand how they can form at all411.
Looking at solar system formation with dark matter objects swinging themselves around stars solves these problems. End March 27 2006]
[February 1 2008: With big bang solar system formation astronomers expect the (old primal) dust from the more outer regions of the solar system to be different than the (more altered by accretion) dust from the more inner regions of our solar system. When they tried to measure this it turned out that there was no difference, much to their surprise480. With planets swinging themselves around stars you expect no dust-difference because their is no old gas cloud and therefore no old dust disc from which the planets and comets and asteroids developed from by accretion. End February 1 2008]

[February 27 2005: There are more problems with the big bang models for planet formation284.
A problem I have not read about or heard of so far is the following. If all planets and moons of our Solar System originated from the same cloud of gas and dust then the planets and moons of Solar System should resemble each other very much where it comes to their chemical compounds, but this is obviously not the case. End February 27 2005]

Kepler's three laws
The rotation of the Sun around its axis, the orbiting directions of the planets around the Sun, the rotation of the planets around their axis (with exceptions by Venus and Uranus, 7-2), the direction of our Moon orbiting the Earth and the rotation of our Moon around its axis: it is all in the same direction of rotation.
This may be because our Solar System has formed itself out of a rotating cloud, as suggested by conventional science, but with the above mentioned swing around idea it may also be a necessity for a solar system to become stable and enduring.
Planets orbiting the Sun in the other direction will soon be attracted to the other planets and thus planets will either flow out of the Solar System, fall on the Sun or clash with another planet (7-2). Also: the speeds of the planets will have certain magnitudes or else they would have either escaped the Solar System or fallen on the Sun.

So: there may be a correlation between the speed of a planet that enters a solar system and the shortest distance between the line of its incoming direction and the star. This correlation may bring Kepler's three laws. (This may mean that the incoming speed of a planet and the direction of its speed and the distance between the line of the planet's incoming direction and the star may have to be of specific magnitudes for the planet in order to start orbiting the star. Too fast and the planet leaves the solar system, too slow and the planet falls into the star. The mass and the density of the dark matter object will play a role too, 3-2.)
Also: the moment an incoming planet starts orbiting the Sun (or starts deviating from its original line of direction), speed and direction of the incoming planet are accelerated and therefore our planets may orbit in ellipses.

[May 3 2005: Instead of the nice circular orbits our nine planets enjoy, most of the more than 160 extrasolar planets detected in the last decade have eccentric orbits: so elongated that many come in very close to the central star and then go out much further away328. Such elongated eccentric orbits are easily explained with planets coming into a solar system from outside the solar system, e.g. not coming into existence from a protoplanetary disc as now is thought by big bang astronomers. End May 3 2005]

[May 2003: Incoming planets also explain the precession of planets in our Solar System.
[June 11 2005: Dark matter objects that fly into solar systems will have a certain speed, direction and mass when they are going to stay, or else they fly out of the solar system or fall on the star. This means that there is a relation between the strength of the gravity of the star and the speed of the planet, the mass of the planet and the distance of the planet to the star. Right now the theory of relativity calculates the recession of the planets with the strength of the gravity of the Sun. With the here mentioned dark matter objects flying into the Sun one will come to calculate with the strength of the gravity of the Sun too. So I guess a model can be found that explains the precession of the planets with dark matter objects flying into solar systems. End June 11 2005]
Newtonian gravity is corrected by Assis2, Ghosh3 and various authors in Pushing Gravity5, thus predicting the precession of Mercury correctly too. End May 2003]
Rotation of stars and planets
If the rotation of the Sun makes the planets orbit the Sun faster then the planets in their turn slow down the Sun's rotation rate. (This may cause tension in the Sun which may cause the coronal mass ejections and/or solar flares.) Perhaps the rotation rate of our Sun is slowed down too by strong gravitational forces from the core of our Milky Way, like the rotation rate of the planets of our Solar System may be slowed down by gravitational forces of our Sun. Thus perhaps old stars rotate less fast then young stars (I don't mention “old” Population II stars versus “young” Population I stars here, 4-4).

Perhaps stars too can originate from a binary (or triple) dark matter systems (with 2 or 3 dark matter objects very close to each other) sucking up hydrogen, after which the binary (or triple) system merges into one system that has a strong rotation rate and forms the core of a new star.

If the rotation of the stars is slowed down by gravitational forces from the core of our Milky Way then one may expect stars in our Milky Way to rotate less fast (on average) around their axes when they are closer to the core of the Milky Way.
And if so then the rotation of the inner core of our Milky Way is slowed down by its attachment (by gravity) to mass in (the rest of the) nuclear bulge, the spiral arms and the halo (except, perhaps, at moments when by the core attracted mass falls into the core, 4-3). If the core of our Milky Way sucks in mass from the halo then (of course) the core of our Milky Way has a gravitational influence on stars and hence perhaps as well on the rotation of stars, and vice versa: the stars will have a certain influence on the core.
[May 2003: See also the books by Ghosh3 and Assis2, in which gravitational inertial forces play a substantial part. End May 2003]
The Earth and the Moon
Our Moon may have come into our Solar System together with our Earth. Perhaps our Moon is much older than 5 billion years. Perhaps our Moon is an old star too, but then very much older than our Earth.

Craters on the Moon evolve and disappear slowly as material slides down their walls and as the walls themselves slump; meteorite bombardment produces new craters8, which fill, obliterate, and degrade the older craters. The lifetime against such erosion has been estimated at several million years for craters 1 cm in diameter, and longer than the age of the Moon for large craters (tens of kilometers in diameter)8. A much older Moon would explain the erosion of the large craters on the Moon.

The average difference between the bottom of the oceans (our lowlands) and the higher parts, the mountains, of our Earth is in the same magnitude as the lower and higher parts of the Moon if you divide that magnitude of the Moon by REarth / RMoon. The same goes for the diameters of the Earth's oceans and the Moon's maria.

Also: the cooled down lava of the Earth's oceans has turned into basaltic lava and the maria of the Moon have basaltic lava too. And: the highlands of the Moon are less cratered than the marias, which may mean that the Moon once had oceans? Could it be possible that our Moon once had the size of our planet? Extremely long ago? Is the well-mixed layer of loose soil and rocks on the Moon what our soil is now?

If the Moon once was hotter and rotating stronger then it's magnetic field was probably stronger, which may explain Apollo astronauts' measurements that have showed magnetic fields on the Moon to be of low strength while some lunar surface rock samples were magnetized much more than you would expect from such a weak magnetic field8.

The Jupiter system
Spherical large moons circling the Earth, Jupiter, Saturn and Neptune may have been circling around the planets before the planets came into the Solar System.

[February 2005: Big bang astronomers have learned that planets may also circle celestial bodies almost as small as planets. The Spitzer Space Telescope has spotted a dusty disc of planet-building material around an extraordinarily low-mass brown dwarf that is only 15 times the mass of Jupiter. Previously, the smallest brown dwarf known to host a planet-forming disc was 25 to 30 times more massive than Jupiter. There may be a host of miniature solar systems in which planets orbit brown dwarfs, the researchers say. They think that longer searches with Spitzer could reveal discs around brown dwarfs below 10 Jupiter masses279.
The Jupiter system, i.e. Jupiter with all its moons, may have been a former “miniature solar system” that was captured by our Sun (perhaps together with the Saturn system, 7-2). End February 2005]

Perhaps that a system like Jupiter and its (larger) moons once was a solar system itself. And: perhaps that our Solar System once only had the terrestrial planets orbiting the Sun; terrestrial planets which were much further away from the Sun than they are now and which were Jovian-type planets with a gas coat.
Perhaps our (once Population II?) Sun stopped shining, blackened, and finally sucked up that much hydrogen that it ignited again, meanwhile the (now) terrestrial planets having approached the Sun closer (and thus their gas coats were stripped of by the Sun) and meanwhile new Jovian planets having entered the new Solar System.

Perhaps gravity causes shrinking of the Sun (by triggering fusion) as well as shrinking of the orbits of planets (by inertial forces, 3-2, 7-1) in a fine tuned equilibrium and hence perhaps solar systems may be very enduring.

[May 2004: Perhaps that another way of looking at the Jupiter system is better. Dark matter objects from interstellar space first start circling around the Sun and at a certain moment they are captured by a planet. Then certain ways of thinking by big bang astronomers can be used to explain, for instance, the 60 moons of Jupiter and the 30 moons of Saturn, and why some of those moons have prograde orbits - revolving in the same direction as the planet - while the vast majority have retrograde orbits108.

The moons of Jupiter and Saturn can be divided into two groups - regular and irregular. Regular moons have a roughly circular orbit around their planet and big bang astronomers believe them to have been formed there during the early history of the (big bang way of looking at) Solar System formation. Irregular moons have an orbit that is highly elliptical, orbiting the planet at a distance of many millions of miles. These are believed to have originally encircled the Sun and to have been subsequently captured by the planet they now orbit108.
Perhaps that regular moons have been captured by Jupiter and Saturn before Jupiter and Saturn came into the Solar System where irregular moons were captured (“stolen” from the Sun) by Jupiter and Saturn after the planets had entered the Solar System. End May 2004]

Part 1 The expansion redshift paradigm
Part 2 The relativity paradigm
Part 3 The quantum mechanics and Newtonian gravity paradigms
Part 4 The big bang paradigm
Part 5 The black hole paradigm
Part 6 The neutron star and degenerate gas paradigms
Part 7 The star formation and solar system formation paradigms