Friday 1 November 2024
Friday 21 August 2009
PLANET EROSION
The Planet Erosion
In nature it is very hard to find as a natural process, which still does not have clear explication in the actual science. For this we do not have easy labour. In this little article we want to formulate as a concept, which is in connection with rocky planets of our solar system.
In the later 100-150 years the observation of our world have become accurate with the improvement of astronomical and geological tools, in this way helped the development to get closest to interpretation those process which are present in reality. In this way was borne lot of discovering, that continuing to the present. Like this was borne the Planetary Science (Planetology) before 50 years. This science was evolved in part from Earth science in other part from astronomy and in our day it is reaching their evolution extremity. If we take in consideration that the planetary science’s ground, in its focus we can find study of all planets (rocky planets, gas giants, asteroids, comets, etc.). Moreover recently the researches have been extended to the extra solar planets of neighbour stars. At present we know at a rough estimate 27O extra solar planets. Reaching to the actual stage of this science in many people the next question may arise, that the concept of the planet erosion (understanding here: gradual breaking, cutting up of rocky planets’ surface gradual and in this condition if the gravity decrease approximate to zero, and the dislocated fragment leave the surface…) why was not formulated till now in the planet doctrine?
We know well the true that the planetary science is developed very dynamically and for this in the short time grows into the serious science inside, phenomena like the presented exist after all in the nature, but their meaning did not was writing down till now. May occur the next situation, they have not been discovered or the nowadays dominated current concepts have not given possibility to its formulation because their basis may be false. Mainly the last situation is probable: the current concepts may impede the discovering of new phenomenon and the possibilities of introducing their describing notions.
The enormous hardness is well meaning of planets formation’s interpretation, because their forming is being explicated with such of phenomena which contain is not enough cleared. This phenomenon is the gravitation. Vainly on this space theories with serious significance (Newton’s “Principia”, Einstein’s “Theory of General Relativities”, La Sage works… etc.) were prepared, they did not manage to define “real reason” of the gravitation yet punctually, till now. According to the before mentioned generally accepted views the gravitation is constant in space and in time, but the reality indicates that it changes steadily although (Decreasing of gravitational constant theory, Paul Dirac, Jordan Pascual; Theory of Gravito vortex Ioan Popescu ) With the taking account of these theories assumption or other same theories unmentioned, in the following we may accept that the gravitation is variable in case of rocky planets (Mercury, Venus, increase; Moon, Mars, Earth (?) decrease) and growing presumably in case the gas giants planets. From this and from the assumption that the gas giants planets’ systems are shoving different shape of orbiting and relation with their moons likewise two, relatively “apparent” contrary formation idea can be associated (see it later). As soon as we see it the situation is complicated, because of this we are obliged to make some new short statement differing from the accepted views relevantly onto the planets arising. For this we have to refer onto the inside structure of the planets and onto the gravitation which can be observed on their surface. Hopefully these statements are not opposed with the real processes which can be observed in nature, but other hand they can be in contradiction with views accepted currently. At near the new summary explanation every time are connected in short the current theories’ statements of basis.
1. To elaborate this concept of planet erosion we consider trends resulting from two formation mechanisms: the planets was ejected from Sun (Sun eruption supernova like) (1); enormous of the volatile material was cooling and suffered adiabatically shrink (2).
The theory of planets ejecting from Sun already can be found in the scientific literature like a rejected-, or a new but not tested theory yet till now. This possibility first was mentioned by the author of this article in 1997 when wanted to explain how the Earth’s like life has possibilities to appear on Mars (Was life on Mars? SZOKIMONDÓ 12., 1997). I have found similar concept in James Maxlow work. (MAXLOW J. 2001. Quantification of an Archaean to Recent Earth Expansion Process Using Global Geological and Geophysical Data Sets. Unpublished PhD thesis, Curtin University of Technology, Perth, Western Australia), where he given good explication to this possibilities of planets apparition:
In this paper, accepting of this theory was made only in the case of the rocky planets: these planets separated out - ejected as incandescent plasmolike from the Sun, or similar material at regular, periodic intervals, similar to solar flare activity on the present our stars’ surface. So we can say that first was formed Mars, after it Earth-Moon binary planets, the following planet was Venus, and finally was appeared Mercury, accordingly between rocky planets the Mars is the oldest, while Mercury is the youngest.
Here we have to make the next observation that the Earth’s like planets had separated from the Sun earlier than the mentioned planets however, and how the surface gravity decreasing near to null and the surface was fragmented by the tectonics process (Observation III), the planet erosion had started: the like divided up surface of planets hade begun to live the surface of planets (From among of cca. 30000 fragments – preexisted chunk of crust and mantle, rubbles which can be found in the Inner Asteroid Belt according to the knowledge until now at least exists a dwarf planet Ceres, but may be more, example: 2Pallas, 3Juno, 4Vesta etc.). From Ceres we can suppose rather resolutely probable that it is a remained inside of preexisted rocky planet. That is why divided up planets’ pieces can be found resending from Mars (from Inner Asteroid Belt) entirely until the border of the exterior solar system. We may stumble upon their big part in the substance of the giant planets, so we may presuppose that these big celestial bodies did not arise similarly to the earth like planets already. The theory accepted in our days deals with them taking shape already well. True, the real physical process the consequence of which the development of the gas giant planets is missing from its basic contains. As a supplement because of it we can mention that the low temperature played important role at the beginning of these planets with gas type.
In case of Jupiter and other jovian planets may suppose that the volatile matter originated from rocky planets and Sun was transported by sollar wind, and was acumulated together cca. 3-4 AU(1 AU= Earth Sun distance) distance from our star. This mixture of gas after grandiose cooling reached his neighborhood of the absolute zero degree and was shrunk adiabatically. (the theory of adiabatically accretion; the theory of adiabatically shrinking). This manner shrinking volatile matter was gotten strange aggregate, namely something similar with Bose-Einstein condensates arose. (This condensate comes into existence if a gas with one atomic stage is cooled near the absolute zero degree. The hot motion of the particles ceases. The condensate starts to behave as one single superatom…) The laboratory experiments prove that the like a matter aggregate with a condition like this have entire disposal of magnetic characteristic, too. In this manner already conceivable the possible gathering, developing of the gas giant planets of the solar system. Likewise everyone from us also may deduce the formation of the Sun. In chronological order first the Neptune, then Uranus, and following the Saturn the Jupiter came into existence. It would be necessary to mention that how the moons of these planets was formed. If the before presented view is sketched correctly in this article, these celestial body formation also can be explained without fail, certainly. The planets real movement is made on a similar spiral orbit near to ellipse or circle (at these theirs inertial motions of the planets receive a big role the initial impulse, and entranced quantity of mass, the solar wind, cosmic radiation, electromagnetic field, and the gravitation). For this they recede away from the Sun continuously in very little scale. It was showed with very accurate measurements that the distances of the Earth Moon annually growing with 3-4 cm. Because of this, in its sense of this article, the common formation of the Earth and the Moon can be rendered with high probability. The primordial incandescent Earth-Moon material were separated as a result of instability between the angular momentum and the cohesion force (electromagnetic-gravitational natured), forming binary planets. Here as evidence may list the approximate similar substance combination of the two celestial bodies, the tidal locking orbit of the Moon around the Earth, the maximum of the tide phenomenon is at the time of new moon and the time of full moon. (with a interpretation of real cause of gravity can explain this last sentence)
--According to the current accepted theories, accretion theories (modern nebular theories) the terrestrial and the gaseous planets with their satellites, the asteroids from inner asteroid and Kuiper belts and the rest of our solar system was formed at the same date. After built up of the proto Sun around it was formed a primary proto planetary disk, which is itself byproduct of the formation of the parent star from a dense, rotating interstellar cloud. In this proto planetary disc was happened the gradual accretion of planets, moons (in the inner side the terrestrial planets in the outside the gas giant planets), and smaller objects from cold cosmic dust grains, gaseous material by gravitational interaction. The present observation are demonstrating proto planetary disks existence around several young stars in our galaxy. The first observed (1984) disk is found around the star Beta Pictoris, about it the Hubble Space Telescope obtained the first images from the Orion nebula in 1992 (“Planet Formation-Problems and Future by Maria Dimitrova SENS’2006). (Photo 1.)
Photo 1. Sun and planet formation onto base of Accretion Theory
(Photo origins: www.astro.psu.edu/users/kluhman/a5/lec11.html)
Like this the existence of asteroids located roughly between the orbits of the planets Mars and Jupiter (the main belt’s asteroids) is explained with not perfect accretion, or with blowing up of terrestrial planet (Van Flanderm). The Earth-Moon system formed as a result of a giant collision. A celestial body with the Mars greatness (labeled “Theia”) impacted with the proto-Earth, blasting sufficient material around Earth to form the Moon through accretion, resulted the today’s arrangement in this manner. Actually, in the our solar system the planets are moving along a ellipse with the Sun at one focus, their approximate distances are remaining constant. Opposite to this, Moon diverges from Earth (3-4 cm/years) is explained by means of the pushing effect of the tide’s force. (additional about this theory lot of, full explained description can be found in any actual scientific work.)
2. Accepting this article’s proposes, may be supposed that, the cores of terrestrial planets are build up from a substance which has similar stage with Sun’s material as a result of their formation. The same physical processes take place in the core like this, than in the Sun. This core is divisible onto two parts on the basis of physical (geophysical, astrophysical) measurements: onto an outer core that presumably is like an electronegative plasmoid substance, and onto an inner core which is similar to the electropositive atomic nucleus. The density of the interior of the core exceeds the currently accepted by good one, is bigger than 160 g/cm3. With the presented state of terrestrial planets’ core is explicable the planets (Earth) gravitational field which can be experienced on their surfaces. To the mentioned reasons the Earth tides’ effect can be leaded onto the next effect: the change of the situation of the inner core related to the rest of planet body as well as the establishment of the situation of the inner core related to the planet surface and this position compared to the its orbit. When the planet surface is near perpendicular to its orbit, exists possibility to the maxim of tide (in front and at the rear)
(Photo 2)
Photo 2. Ceres
(photo origins: www.kolumbus.fi/.../Challenge/Asteroids.html)
The much bigger density (supper dense stage) of the inner core may be in service as real evidence to the explication of expanding (growing) Earth’s process, too… (in near future exist possibilities to find better explication to the real cause of planets’ gravity field. With this, perhaps better meaning of gravities process does not opposite to the actual declared. With this new contain can explain all present observed phenomena… can explain the gravity fluctuation in time of earthquakes, this high frequently variation has not observed directly, yet.)… If the inner core moving (rotation) differed from the rest of planet body then electromagnetic field is joinable to rest of the planet surface (dynamo effect). For example in the case of the Earth, the inner core turns faster than the full body, crust-mantle, like this resulting strong electromagnetic field… The geochemistry laws which some well warking foundations were well laid by Goldschmith, the laws of geochemical differentiations – they seem to be well justified by the direct obsevation – can be accepted with next restriction, their admissiblity can be limited just only onto crust-mantle of the terrestrial planets.
--According to the theory accepted currently the core of the terrestrial planets consists of two parts generally, based on geophysical and astrophysical measurements. This situation was resulted after the main part of planets was accreted as a result of the gravitation and warmed up, started getting cool slowly then, finished with the first geochemical differentiation. As result of this process were formed liquid (outer) and solid (inner) cores made from iron (Mercury), iron-nickel (Venus, Earth), iron with 13-17% sulfur (Mars), metallic iron alloyed with a small amount of sulfur and nickel (Moon). The accepted density of core is 16-19 g/cm3 in case of Earth and lesser in case of the rest terrestrial planets. So the present theory refers the geochemical differentiation to the all substance of terrestrial planets…The gravity field is not associated to the concrete substantial stage of this planet’s interior, simply is considered like effect of the full substance of planet expounding from a theoretical-virtual point (center of gravity) which positioned in the center of the planet. The tidal effects are originated from the gravity effect exerted by the Sun and the surroundings planets, moons (zodiac astrology). This theory explains the electromagnetic field by means of the dynamo effect. The inner core turning with different speed (faster) than the rest: outer liquid core, crust-mantle…
3. The actual geologic observation give opportunity to conclude that the gravitation of the Earth decreases continuously in time since its formation (from the others, Popescu’s Theory of gravitovortex) this causing our planet expansion (Samuel Warren Carey, ”The Expanding Earth” 448 pp., Elsevier, Amsterdam 1976), and this drove to the continents fragmentation (Alfred Wegener’s Theory). Ensues on a manner like this the inner core’s gradual consuming (is similar to the radioactive decay presented well in case of Earth by J. Marvin Herndon) is causing its gradual shrinking, which yields irradiance a very big amount of heat. In time of these processes lot of atoms are creating which well known by the chemical science causing the planet’s mantle grows bigger and with this the its surface’s crust fragmentation. The intense increase of the Earth volume, its “expanding”, ensues in a time with the shrinking of the inner core! So generalizing the before made mentions in case of the terrestrial planets we may relate the following:
The gravitation decreases continuously in time in the case of the terrestrial planets while their volume is growing, finally is driving to the surface crust (mantle superior) fragmentation, and getting away from the mean body, if the surface gravity down zeros. Such of phenomenon like this is standing in the background of the quantity decrease of the terrestrial planets’ inner core, which one to the radioactive decay comparable. On a manner such may establish, that the gravitation of the terrestrial planets depends on the extension of their core (its contained substance), the thickness of their crust-mantle has also a role important with its compression exerted to the core. The state and quantity of different material which can be found in the crust and mantle has effect onto the surface gravity field (the main reason of the gravitational anomalies). Processes taking place in the inside of the terrestrial planets, on the surface of their core (”D” zone: Core-mantle Boundary) probable are observable on to surface of the Sun. So we may deduct the next conclusion that the different rays originating from the Sun are like ones, with the irradiance processes mentioned early due to which the inner core of planets decreasing continuously. Presumably while the fusion reaction may happens on the surface of the Sun, meanwhile under this in the inside may be well supposed a contrary process, the disintegration. This considered double phenomenon likewise onto the terrestrial planets level may confirm their inside heat origin. In this manner the inner heat of the Earth (rocky planets) may be explained well, too. (3. figure)
Photo 3. Sun’s surface
(Photo origins: www.sciencelearn.org.nz/.../surface_of_the_sun)
In the theory of Global Tectonics theory (GT) the reason of the big convectional heat currents was not able to be explained yet punctually, which are yielding the shift of the continents to each other compared, yearly cca. 3-8 cm. So now exist the energy which is necessary to the shift of the continental plates compared to each other in case of GT, and possibility of explication Earth expansion in case of EET. In this manner is explainable the origins of heat that are causing approximate 1 Celsius degree (thermal gradient) grows when approaching to the inside of Earth, after every 16-30 m, without any doubt. Here may be supposed that thermal gradient (TG) of rocky planets are showing the next relation: TG Mercury> TG Venus> TG Earth> TG Mars> TG Moon…
(The GT was accepted by me at the time of writing this article yet, but existing many of my doubts with its today existing form, because is also stiffish. Opposite to the GT the expansion-growing theory is clearer. The expansion-growing theory’s interpretation can be well correlated with the phenomena observed in the nature, and without any rigidity is presenting the real dynamics of planet.)
--Similar explications in the current theory accepted we can not find.
The following descriptions are also staying at the hypothetical attribute in a measure like the before explained personal images in three point about the inner solar system, parallel with the current accepted view. They are enough for try to give basics meaning of the planet erosion concept. So did not been disputed vainly the borders of gravitational effect, because with the showed new meaning is related with planet erosion.
This connection receives significance when the gravitation decreases very much already in the life of the rocky planet. In such a way could be said that with a cosmic like intensity will begin destroying of the terrestrial planet’s surface if the surface gravity is reaching approximate null. The planet erosion of terrestrial planet has a time interval more extensive, than the erosion process well known on the surface of the actual Earth. The degradation of the surface, when atmosphere and surface fragments leaving surface of the planet, starts up with the ceasing of the intensity of the surface gravity – the common erosion transforming into the planet erosion occurs. How was seen before, this process is separable into two phases.
To the make more visible these two phases of planet erosion, for example was taken the present surface condition of the Moon (considered like a planet) and the Mars. The first phase of the planet erosion effect is observable already in both cases. This phase reached advanced state in the case of the Moon – or ends slowly - already, since it lost nearby all air. The Moon had abounding atmosphere and water onto the surface in the earlier developmental phase certainly. Furthermore may be possible, that on there was life similarly to the Earth, only this was less developed, insomuch as smaller celestial body being the processes that are yet present in the case of the Earth happened more quickly.
On other hand Mars has atmosphere yet, but already thinned, because its gravitation is twice of the Moon cca. In case of Mars we can also say, it had much thicker atmosphere than nowadays. Can be related in connection with the previous state of Mars it had atmosphere much thicker than in our days, water occurred on his surface in a big quantity, and there may have been Earth like life. But this life may have attained a level with smaller development since Mars smaller planet also went faster throughout on the developmental stage of the Earth. The martian life if exists, have got into an additional phase like than Earth, because its surface was cooled and atmosphere was changed, at the present built up only from CO2 approximate. This life, which adapted to the atmosphere, perhaps was total or nearly destroyed by numerous meteorites which was coming from a preexisted rocky planet surface, smaller then Mars bigger than Moon – behind of the main process causing this fragments broken away from the main planet body was stood the second phase of planet erosion (fig. 7).On the basis like this can be projected ahead, like that what will happen to the Moon and Mars, in the not too far away future planetologycally scale (in the next 20-100 million years in case of the Moon, after 150 million years in case of the Mars).
While Mars loses his atmosphere gradually (until the finishing of the first phase), the second phase of the planet erosion ensues in the case of the Moon till then. The Moon loses its crust, upper mantle gradually on the time of the second phase, indeed the particular part of its mantle surface until a stable surface (let us be satisfied with this much), while he does not turn into a dwarf planet similarly to Ceres.
From the surface of the Moon in the course of the process, first unconsolidated rocks (sediments) will diverge in an order growing according to their size (dust, sand, ballast). Then the less cemented rocks will come next. After ran out of the dust, sand and gravel will continue with the erosion of the grit stones, conglomerates, depending from these rocks gathering. Lastly the pieces with bigger mass will detach, that sizes can be found in the main asteroid, like asteroid Ida.( Photo. 4.)
Photo 4. The Asteroid 243 Ida and its Moon Dactyl
(Photo origins: www.jpl.nasa.gov/.../img-3-ida-dactyl.cfm)
In all cases the surface’s inertial motion, the cosmic radiation, the solar wind and the deficiency of the considerable gravitation (if the core substance with a solar state is found yet) helps their divergence… The diverged rocky bodies with bigger mass will accomplish synchronous orbital motion around remained terrestrial planet (our case: Moon). The synchronous orbit is an orbit in which an orbiting body, usually a satellite, has a period equal to the average rotational period of the body being orbited, usually a planet, and in the same direction of rotation as that body. From the before made affirmation, so in no wise cannot be said that the synchronous orbital motion caused by tide effect as the current science accepts. Here more likeable mentioning of inertial motion effect, which indicates a safe common origin bygone (figure 5.)
Photo 5. Space Telescope image of Pluto, Charon and the two new moons, Nix & Hydra
(Photo origins: www.stsci.edu/~inr/thisweek1/thisweek092.html)
Before was presented shortly second main part of planet erosion, consequently with it we was able to explain the main asteroid belt formation. There just the same was found a terrestrial body Ceres, too. This is enumerated between three dwarf planets of our solar system. It has approximate spheroid shape, for this may be supposed about Ceres that it is remained part of preexisted rocky planet interior.
With opposite to text which containing the short description of planet erosion process, the current theory the asteroids between Mars and Jupiter is explained with not successful accretion, when this fragment did not be enough to form planets. This theory has some important problems. It is too rigid, the celestials bodies are localized onto fix orbit in the time and space of our solar system. Not taken in consideration that these fragments have not clear, real physical (electric-magnetic, gravitational) field, for this they form differ from spheroid. That is way they are different from the planets. So origin of asteroids from inner asteroids belt has very weak explanation in the actual accepted theory.
Exists another well known concept, the exploded planet theory (Tom Van Flandern: “The Exploded Planet Hypothesis 2000” www.metaresearch.org). (Before arisen the idea of planet erosion the author of this article also thought something similar about formation of asteroid of inner asteroids belt, but had problem which stand behind the process explosion) Here the main problems is caused by not well explication of process which stand behind the explosion, rest also is a too rigid concept, because its author did no be able to escape from influence of current theory. However in the all description of the exploded planet theory can be found very useful information which is not against to the planet erosion, like the part: “Explosion Signatures in the Main Asteroid Belt”…,
Arriving to the finish part of this presentation the moment is preferable to mention an Article. It was also written by the recent work’s author and appeared in this newspaper too. The title of which was:”Was there a life on Mars? In that writing the terrestrial planets formation from Sun was not emphasized so much. Only there the formation of planets acted in that manner, like an only possibilities for the Earth’s like life’s development onto the Mars. There was made a very important statement, which correction is preferable at this time:
”With the new interpretation of the gravitation, changing gravitational constant theory may be supposed that Mars and its two satellites was formed before 1000-2000 million years of Earth-Moon same creating. The material of the Mars and its two moons separated out from the Sun simultaneously, and they got into three then. Their movement was left bearing the initial momentum of their formation, which was remained until ere now. So these moons, Phobos and Deimos are not, orbits around the Mars only because of the gravitational interaction, the remained initial momentum play important role, too. The Earth and the Moon exemplify a similar case.”
On base of the present knowledge the origin of the Mars’ moons, Phobos (Photo 6.) and Deimos (Photo 7.) may not be unambiguously to reflect. May be, that this satellites are remained part after planet erosion of terrestrial Moon which was orbited around the Mars (it seems this is not so probable by now on the other hand).
Photo 6. Phobos
(Photo origins: zuserver2.star.ucl.ac.uk/~idh/apod/ap080414.html)
Photo 7. Deimos
(Photo origins: zuserver2.star.ucl.ac.uk/~idh/apod/ap090316.html)
The other opportunity already more probable: Phobos and Deimos originated from a bigger preexisted rocky planet, from the same one the inside of which Ceres was presumably The Phobos and Deismos detached from the respective planet much early already, from the same one the inside of which Ceres was presumably. They detached from the respective planet much early already, as a result of planet erosion and they were got to the actual orbit around the Mars by its gravity and orbit effect (cosmic radiation, solar wind also plays a important role here). Their fate can be projected ahead, because they will strike inevitably into Mars. (8. figure, 9. figure)”
Photo 8.The Surface of Mars
(Photo origins:www.astro.sunysb.edu/fwalter/AST101/ms2.html)
Photo 9.The Surface of Mars(Photo origins: news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/01/0701)
In nature it is very hard to find as a natural process, which still does not have clear explication in the actual science. For this we do not have easy labour. In this little article we want to formulate as a concept, which is in connection with rocky planets of our solar system.
In the later 100-150 years the observation of our world have become accurate with the improvement of astronomical and geological tools, in this way helped the development to get closest to interpretation those process which are present in reality. In this way was borne lot of discovering, that continuing to the present. Like this was borne the Planetary Science (Planetology) before 50 years. This science was evolved in part from Earth science in other part from astronomy and in our day it is reaching their evolution extremity. If we take in consideration that the planetary science’s ground, in its focus we can find study of all planets (rocky planets, gas giants, asteroids, comets, etc.). Moreover recently the researches have been extended to the extra solar planets of neighbour stars. At present we know at a rough estimate 27O extra solar planets. Reaching to the actual stage of this science in many people the next question may arise, that the concept of the planet erosion (understanding here: gradual breaking, cutting up of rocky planets’ surface gradual and in this condition if the gravity decrease approximate to zero, and the dislocated fragment leave the surface…) why was not formulated till now in the planet doctrine?
We know well the true that the planetary science is developed very dynamically and for this in the short time grows into the serious science inside, phenomena like the presented exist after all in the nature, but their meaning did not was writing down till now. May occur the next situation, they have not been discovered or the nowadays dominated current concepts have not given possibility to its formulation because their basis may be false. Mainly the last situation is probable: the current concepts may impede the discovering of new phenomenon and the possibilities of introducing their describing notions.
The enormous hardness is well meaning of planets formation’s interpretation, because their forming is being explicated with such of phenomena which contain is not enough cleared. This phenomenon is the gravitation. Vainly on this space theories with serious significance (Newton’s “Principia”, Einstein’s “Theory of General Relativities”, La Sage works… etc.) were prepared, they did not manage to define “real reason” of the gravitation yet punctually, till now. According to the before mentioned generally accepted views the gravitation is constant in space and in time, but the reality indicates that it changes steadily although (Decreasing of gravitational constant theory, Paul Dirac, Jordan Pascual; Theory of Gravito vortex Ioan Popescu ) With the taking account of these theories assumption or other same theories unmentioned, in the following we may accept that the gravitation is variable in case of rocky planets (Mercury, Venus, increase; Moon, Mars, Earth (?) decrease) and growing presumably in case the gas giants planets. From this and from the assumption that the gas giants planets’ systems are shoving different shape of orbiting and relation with their moons likewise two, relatively “apparent” contrary formation idea can be associated (see it later). As soon as we see it the situation is complicated, because of this we are obliged to make some new short statement differing from the accepted views relevantly onto the planets arising. For this we have to refer onto the inside structure of the planets and onto the gravitation which can be observed on their surface. Hopefully these statements are not opposed with the real processes which can be observed in nature, but other hand they can be in contradiction with views accepted currently. At near the new summary explanation every time are connected in short the current theories’ statements of basis.
1. To elaborate this concept of planet erosion we consider trends resulting from two formation mechanisms: the planets was ejected from Sun (Sun eruption supernova like) (1); enormous of the volatile material was cooling and suffered adiabatically shrink (2).
The theory of planets ejecting from Sun already can be found in the scientific literature like a rejected-, or a new but not tested theory yet till now. This possibility first was mentioned by the author of this article in 1997 when wanted to explain how the Earth’s like life has possibilities to appear on Mars (Was life on Mars? SZOKIMONDÓ 12., 1997). I have found similar concept in James Maxlow work. (MAXLOW J. 2001. Quantification of an Archaean to Recent Earth Expansion Process Using Global Geological and Geophysical Data Sets. Unpublished PhD thesis, Curtin University of Technology, Perth, Western Australia), where he given good explication to this possibilities of planets apparition:
In this paper, accepting of this theory was made only in the case of the rocky planets: these planets separated out - ejected as incandescent plasmolike from the Sun, or similar material at regular, periodic intervals, similar to solar flare activity on the present our stars’ surface. So we can say that first was formed Mars, after it Earth-Moon binary planets, the following planet was Venus, and finally was appeared Mercury, accordingly between rocky planets the Mars is the oldest, while Mercury is the youngest.
Here we have to make the next observation that the Earth’s like planets had separated from the Sun earlier than the mentioned planets however, and how the surface gravity decreasing near to null and the surface was fragmented by the tectonics process (Observation III), the planet erosion had started: the like divided up surface of planets hade begun to live the surface of planets (From among of cca. 30000 fragments – preexisted chunk of crust and mantle, rubbles which can be found in the Inner Asteroid Belt according to the knowledge until now at least exists a dwarf planet Ceres, but may be more, example: 2Pallas, 3Juno, 4Vesta etc.). From Ceres we can suppose rather resolutely probable that it is a remained inside of preexisted rocky planet. That is why divided up planets’ pieces can be found resending from Mars (from Inner Asteroid Belt) entirely until the border of the exterior solar system. We may stumble upon their big part in the substance of the giant planets, so we may presuppose that these big celestial bodies did not arise similarly to the earth like planets already. The theory accepted in our days deals with them taking shape already well. True, the real physical process the consequence of which the development of the gas giant planets is missing from its basic contains. As a supplement because of it we can mention that the low temperature played important role at the beginning of these planets with gas type.
In case of Jupiter and other jovian planets may suppose that the volatile matter originated from rocky planets and Sun was transported by sollar wind, and was acumulated together cca. 3-4 AU(1 AU= Earth Sun distance) distance from our star. This mixture of gas after grandiose cooling reached his neighborhood of the absolute zero degree and was shrunk adiabatically. (the theory of adiabatically accretion; the theory of adiabatically shrinking). This manner shrinking volatile matter was gotten strange aggregate, namely something similar with Bose-Einstein condensates arose. (This condensate comes into existence if a gas with one atomic stage is cooled near the absolute zero degree. The hot motion of the particles ceases. The condensate starts to behave as one single superatom…) The laboratory experiments prove that the like a matter aggregate with a condition like this have entire disposal of magnetic characteristic, too. In this manner already conceivable the possible gathering, developing of the gas giant planets of the solar system. Likewise everyone from us also may deduce the formation of the Sun. In chronological order first the Neptune, then Uranus, and following the Saturn the Jupiter came into existence. It would be necessary to mention that how the moons of these planets was formed. If the before presented view is sketched correctly in this article, these celestial body formation also can be explained without fail, certainly. The planets real movement is made on a similar spiral orbit near to ellipse or circle (at these theirs inertial motions of the planets receive a big role the initial impulse, and entranced quantity of mass, the solar wind, cosmic radiation, electromagnetic field, and the gravitation). For this they recede away from the Sun continuously in very little scale. It was showed with very accurate measurements that the distances of the Earth Moon annually growing with 3-4 cm. Because of this, in its sense of this article, the common formation of the Earth and the Moon can be rendered with high probability. The primordial incandescent Earth-Moon material were separated as a result of instability between the angular momentum and the cohesion force (electromagnetic-gravitational natured), forming binary planets. Here as evidence may list the approximate similar substance combination of the two celestial bodies, the tidal locking orbit of the Moon around the Earth, the maximum of the tide phenomenon is at the time of new moon and the time of full moon. (with a interpretation of real cause of gravity can explain this last sentence)
--According to the current accepted theories, accretion theories (modern nebular theories) the terrestrial and the gaseous planets with their satellites, the asteroids from inner asteroid and Kuiper belts and the rest of our solar system was formed at the same date. After built up of the proto Sun around it was formed a primary proto planetary disk, which is itself byproduct of the formation of the parent star from a dense, rotating interstellar cloud. In this proto planetary disc was happened the gradual accretion of planets, moons (in the inner side the terrestrial planets in the outside the gas giant planets), and smaller objects from cold cosmic dust grains, gaseous material by gravitational interaction. The present observation are demonstrating proto planetary disks existence around several young stars in our galaxy. The first observed (1984) disk is found around the star Beta Pictoris, about it the Hubble Space Telescope obtained the first images from the Orion nebula in 1992 (“Planet Formation-Problems and Future by Maria Dimitrova SENS’2006). (Photo 1.)
Photo 1. Sun and planet formation onto base of Accretion Theory
(Photo origins: www.astro.psu.edu/users/kluhman/a5/lec11.html)
Like this the existence of asteroids located roughly between the orbits of the planets Mars and Jupiter (the main belt’s asteroids) is explained with not perfect accretion, or with blowing up of terrestrial planet (Van Flanderm). The Earth-Moon system formed as a result of a giant collision. A celestial body with the Mars greatness (labeled “Theia”) impacted with the proto-Earth, blasting sufficient material around Earth to form the Moon through accretion, resulted the today’s arrangement in this manner. Actually, in the our solar system the planets are moving along a ellipse with the Sun at one focus, their approximate distances are remaining constant. Opposite to this, Moon diverges from Earth (3-4 cm/years) is explained by means of the pushing effect of the tide’s force. (additional about this theory lot of, full explained description can be found in any actual scientific work.)
2. Accepting this article’s proposes, may be supposed that, the cores of terrestrial planets are build up from a substance which has similar stage with Sun’s material as a result of their formation. The same physical processes take place in the core like this, than in the Sun. This core is divisible onto two parts on the basis of physical (geophysical, astrophysical) measurements: onto an outer core that presumably is like an electronegative plasmoid substance, and onto an inner core which is similar to the electropositive atomic nucleus. The density of the interior of the core exceeds the currently accepted by good one, is bigger than 160 g/cm3. With the presented state of terrestrial planets’ core is explicable the planets (Earth) gravitational field which can be experienced on their surfaces. To the mentioned reasons the Earth tides’ effect can be leaded onto the next effect: the change of the situation of the inner core related to the rest of planet body as well as the establishment of the situation of the inner core related to the planet surface and this position compared to the its orbit. When the planet surface is near perpendicular to its orbit, exists possibility to the maxim of tide (in front and at the rear)
(Photo 2)
Photo 2. Ceres
(photo origins: www.kolumbus.fi/.../Challenge/Asteroids.html)
The much bigger density (supper dense stage) of the inner core may be in service as real evidence to the explication of expanding (growing) Earth’s process, too… (in near future exist possibilities to find better explication to the real cause of planets’ gravity field. With this, perhaps better meaning of gravities process does not opposite to the actual declared. With this new contain can explain all present observed phenomena… can explain the gravity fluctuation in time of earthquakes, this high frequently variation has not observed directly, yet.)… If the inner core moving (rotation) differed from the rest of planet body then electromagnetic field is joinable to rest of the planet surface (dynamo effect). For example in the case of the Earth, the inner core turns faster than the full body, crust-mantle, like this resulting strong electromagnetic field… The geochemistry laws which some well warking foundations were well laid by Goldschmith, the laws of geochemical differentiations – they seem to be well justified by the direct obsevation – can be accepted with next restriction, their admissiblity can be limited just only onto crust-mantle of the terrestrial planets.
--According to the theory accepted currently the core of the terrestrial planets consists of two parts generally, based on geophysical and astrophysical measurements. This situation was resulted after the main part of planets was accreted as a result of the gravitation and warmed up, started getting cool slowly then, finished with the first geochemical differentiation. As result of this process were formed liquid (outer) and solid (inner) cores made from iron (Mercury), iron-nickel (Venus, Earth), iron with 13-17% sulfur (Mars), metallic iron alloyed with a small amount of sulfur and nickel (Moon). The accepted density of core is 16-19 g/cm3 in case of Earth and lesser in case of the rest terrestrial planets. So the present theory refers the geochemical differentiation to the all substance of terrestrial planets…The gravity field is not associated to the concrete substantial stage of this planet’s interior, simply is considered like effect of the full substance of planet expounding from a theoretical-virtual point (center of gravity) which positioned in the center of the planet. The tidal effects are originated from the gravity effect exerted by the Sun and the surroundings planets, moons (zodiac astrology). This theory explains the electromagnetic field by means of the dynamo effect. The inner core turning with different speed (faster) than the rest: outer liquid core, crust-mantle…
3. The actual geologic observation give opportunity to conclude that the gravitation of the Earth decreases continuously in time since its formation (from the others, Popescu’s Theory of gravitovortex) this causing our planet expansion (Samuel Warren Carey, ”The Expanding Earth” 448 pp., Elsevier, Amsterdam 1976), and this drove to the continents fragmentation (Alfred Wegener’s Theory). Ensues on a manner like this the inner core’s gradual consuming (is similar to the radioactive decay presented well in case of Earth by J. Marvin Herndon) is causing its gradual shrinking, which yields irradiance a very big amount of heat. In time of these processes lot of atoms are creating which well known by the chemical science causing the planet’s mantle grows bigger and with this the its surface’s crust fragmentation. The intense increase of the Earth volume, its “expanding”, ensues in a time with the shrinking of the inner core! So generalizing the before made mentions in case of the terrestrial planets we may relate the following:
The gravitation decreases continuously in time in the case of the terrestrial planets while their volume is growing, finally is driving to the surface crust (mantle superior) fragmentation, and getting away from the mean body, if the surface gravity down zeros. Such of phenomenon like this is standing in the background of the quantity decrease of the terrestrial planets’ inner core, which one to the radioactive decay comparable. On a manner such may establish, that the gravitation of the terrestrial planets depends on the extension of their core (its contained substance), the thickness of their crust-mantle has also a role important with its compression exerted to the core. The state and quantity of different material which can be found in the crust and mantle has effect onto the surface gravity field (the main reason of the gravitational anomalies). Processes taking place in the inside of the terrestrial planets, on the surface of their core (”D” zone: Core-mantle Boundary) probable are observable on to surface of the Sun. So we may deduct the next conclusion that the different rays originating from the Sun are like ones, with the irradiance processes mentioned early due to which the inner core of planets decreasing continuously. Presumably while the fusion reaction may happens on the surface of the Sun, meanwhile under this in the inside may be well supposed a contrary process, the disintegration. This considered double phenomenon likewise onto the terrestrial planets level may confirm their inside heat origin. In this manner the inner heat of the Earth (rocky planets) may be explained well, too. (3. figure)
Photo 3. Sun’s surface
(Photo origins: www.sciencelearn.org.nz/.../surface_of_the_sun)
In the theory of Global Tectonics theory (GT) the reason of the big convectional heat currents was not able to be explained yet punctually, which are yielding the shift of the continents to each other compared, yearly cca. 3-8 cm. So now exist the energy which is necessary to the shift of the continental plates compared to each other in case of GT, and possibility of explication Earth expansion in case of EET. In this manner is explainable the origins of heat that are causing approximate 1 Celsius degree (thermal gradient) grows when approaching to the inside of Earth, after every 16-30 m, without any doubt. Here may be supposed that thermal gradient (TG) of rocky planets are showing the next relation: TG Mercury> TG Venus> TG Earth> TG Mars> TG Moon…
(The GT was accepted by me at the time of writing this article yet, but existing many of my doubts with its today existing form, because is also stiffish. Opposite to the GT the expansion-growing theory is clearer. The expansion-growing theory’s interpretation can be well correlated with the phenomena observed in the nature, and without any rigidity is presenting the real dynamics of planet.)
--Similar explications in the current theory accepted we can not find.
The following descriptions are also staying at the hypothetical attribute in a measure like the before explained personal images in three point about the inner solar system, parallel with the current accepted view. They are enough for try to give basics meaning of the planet erosion concept. So did not been disputed vainly the borders of gravitational effect, because with the showed new meaning is related with planet erosion.
This connection receives significance when the gravitation decreases very much already in the life of the rocky planet. In such a way could be said that with a cosmic like intensity will begin destroying of the terrestrial planet’s surface if the surface gravity is reaching approximate null. The planet erosion of terrestrial planet has a time interval more extensive, than the erosion process well known on the surface of the actual Earth. The degradation of the surface, when atmosphere and surface fragments leaving surface of the planet, starts up with the ceasing of the intensity of the surface gravity – the common erosion transforming into the planet erosion occurs. How was seen before, this process is separable into two phases.
To the make more visible these two phases of planet erosion, for example was taken the present surface condition of the Moon (considered like a planet) and the Mars. The first phase of the planet erosion effect is observable already in both cases. This phase reached advanced state in the case of the Moon – or ends slowly - already, since it lost nearby all air. The Moon had abounding atmosphere and water onto the surface in the earlier developmental phase certainly. Furthermore may be possible, that on there was life similarly to the Earth, only this was less developed, insomuch as smaller celestial body being the processes that are yet present in the case of the Earth happened more quickly.
On other hand Mars has atmosphere yet, but already thinned, because its gravitation is twice of the Moon cca. In case of Mars we can also say, it had much thicker atmosphere than nowadays. Can be related in connection with the previous state of Mars it had atmosphere much thicker than in our days, water occurred on his surface in a big quantity, and there may have been Earth like life. But this life may have attained a level with smaller development since Mars smaller planet also went faster throughout on the developmental stage of the Earth. The martian life if exists, have got into an additional phase like than Earth, because its surface was cooled and atmosphere was changed, at the present built up only from CO2 approximate. This life, which adapted to the atmosphere, perhaps was total or nearly destroyed by numerous meteorites which was coming from a preexisted rocky planet surface, smaller then Mars bigger than Moon – behind of the main process causing this fragments broken away from the main planet body was stood the second phase of planet erosion (fig. 7).On the basis like this can be projected ahead, like that what will happen to the Moon and Mars, in the not too far away future planetologycally scale (in the next 20-100 million years in case of the Moon, after 150 million years in case of the Mars).
While Mars loses his atmosphere gradually (until the finishing of the first phase), the second phase of the planet erosion ensues in the case of the Moon till then. The Moon loses its crust, upper mantle gradually on the time of the second phase, indeed the particular part of its mantle surface until a stable surface (let us be satisfied with this much), while he does not turn into a dwarf planet similarly to Ceres.
From the surface of the Moon in the course of the process, first unconsolidated rocks (sediments) will diverge in an order growing according to their size (dust, sand, ballast). Then the less cemented rocks will come next. After ran out of the dust, sand and gravel will continue with the erosion of the grit stones, conglomerates, depending from these rocks gathering. Lastly the pieces with bigger mass will detach, that sizes can be found in the main asteroid, like asteroid Ida.( Photo. 4.)
Photo 4. The Asteroid 243 Ida and its Moon Dactyl
(Photo origins: www.jpl.nasa.gov/.../img-3-ida-dactyl.cfm)
In all cases the surface’s inertial motion, the cosmic radiation, the solar wind and the deficiency of the considerable gravitation (if the core substance with a solar state is found yet) helps their divergence… The diverged rocky bodies with bigger mass will accomplish synchronous orbital motion around remained terrestrial planet (our case: Moon). The synchronous orbit is an orbit in which an orbiting body, usually a satellite, has a period equal to the average rotational period of the body being orbited, usually a planet, and in the same direction of rotation as that body. From the before made affirmation, so in no wise cannot be said that the synchronous orbital motion caused by tide effect as the current science accepts. Here more likeable mentioning of inertial motion effect, which indicates a safe common origin bygone (figure 5.)
Photo 5. Space Telescope image of Pluto, Charon and the two new moons, Nix & Hydra
(Photo origins: www.stsci.edu/~inr/thisweek1/thisweek092.html)
Before was presented shortly second main part of planet erosion, consequently with it we was able to explain the main asteroid belt formation. There just the same was found a terrestrial body Ceres, too. This is enumerated between three dwarf planets of our solar system. It has approximate spheroid shape, for this may be supposed about Ceres that it is remained part of preexisted rocky planet interior.
With opposite to text which containing the short description of planet erosion process, the current theory the asteroids between Mars and Jupiter is explained with not successful accretion, when this fragment did not be enough to form planets. This theory has some important problems. It is too rigid, the celestials bodies are localized onto fix orbit in the time and space of our solar system. Not taken in consideration that these fragments have not clear, real physical (electric-magnetic, gravitational) field, for this they form differ from spheroid. That is way they are different from the planets. So origin of asteroids from inner asteroids belt has very weak explanation in the actual accepted theory.
Exists another well known concept, the exploded planet theory (Tom Van Flandern: “The Exploded Planet Hypothesis 2000” www.metaresearch.org). (Before arisen the idea of planet erosion the author of this article also thought something similar about formation of asteroid of inner asteroids belt, but had problem which stand behind the process explosion) Here the main problems is caused by not well explication of process which stand behind the explosion, rest also is a too rigid concept, because its author did no be able to escape from influence of current theory. However in the all description of the exploded planet theory can be found very useful information which is not against to the planet erosion, like the part: “Explosion Signatures in the Main Asteroid Belt”…,
Arriving to the finish part of this presentation the moment is preferable to mention an Article. It was also written by the recent work’s author and appeared in this newspaper too. The title of which was:”Was there a life on Mars? In that writing the terrestrial planets formation from Sun was not emphasized so much. Only there the formation of planets acted in that manner, like an only possibilities for the Earth’s like life’s development onto the Mars. There was made a very important statement, which correction is preferable at this time:
”With the new interpretation of the gravitation, changing gravitational constant theory may be supposed that Mars and its two satellites was formed before 1000-2000 million years of Earth-Moon same creating. The material of the Mars and its two moons separated out from the Sun simultaneously, and they got into three then. Their movement was left bearing the initial momentum of their formation, which was remained until ere now. So these moons, Phobos and Deimos are not, orbits around the Mars only because of the gravitational interaction, the remained initial momentum play important role, too. The Earth and the Moon exemplify a similar case.”
On base of the present knowledge the origin of the Mars’ moons, Phobos (Photo 6.) and Deimos (Photo 7.) may not be unambiguously to reflect. May be, that this satellites are remained part after planet erosion of terrestrial Moon which was orbited around the Mars (it seems this is not so probable by now on the other hand).
Photo 6. Phobos
(Photo origins: zuserver2.star.ucl.ac.uk/~idh/apod/ap080414.html)
Photo 7. Deimos
(Photo origins: zuserver2.star.ucl.ac.uk/~idh/apod/ap090316.html)
The other opportunity already more probable: Phobos and Deimos originated from a bigger preexisted rocky planet, from the same one the inside of which Ceres was presumably The Phobos and Deismos detached from the respective planet much early already, from the same one the inside of which Ceres was presumably. They detached from the respective planet much early already, as a result of planet erosion and they were got to the actual orbit around the Mars by its gravity and orbit effect (cosmic radiation, solar wind also plays a important role here). Their fate can be projected ahead, because they will strike inevitably into Mars. (8. figure, 9. figure)”
Photo 8.The Surface of Mars
(Photo origins:www.astro.sunysb.edu/fwalter/AST101/ms2.html)
Photo 9.The Surface of Mars(Photo origins: news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/01/0701)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
