Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The genealogy going back to Adam comes to about 6000 years. That is the time when the universe came into being (so it isn't 4.5 billion years old). And since Jupiter was created at the time, the age of universe is no different than the age of Jupiter.
Who mentioned that the universe is 4.5 billion years old?
Anyone else have any substance to add to this thread? PITTS?, NightBazzar? etc...
Hey 6 Foot........as far as I know...YES......(KEY WORD "FAILED") it is and IF it were MORE massive it in fact would probably have evolved into a main sequence star.....it also gives off more heat in the infrared wavelengths than it receives from the Sun.
Thanks for some intellect discussion man ..... i'm wondering if the sun formed first and took 98% of all the helium and hydrogen available in the solar system which kept jupiter from compacting a super mass to ''fire up'' so to speak although there's some smart brains on here who know better than i.
My understanding is that Jupiter would need to be both larger and denser for it's core to reach the critical mass of temperature and pressure necessary for thermonuclear ignition to begin the main sequence phase of a star.......however a newly discovered star is only approximately 20% larger than Jupiter but it is far more massive.
In general an "average" star needs to be about 75 Jupiter masses to achieve fusion ignition.
And a "typical" brown Dwarf about 15 Jupiter masses.
Remember the movie 2010....when our "creators" added enough mass to Jupiter to achieve thermonuclear ignition...and create a binary star system......it really is not far fetched and theoretically possible with sufficient advanced technology.
Last edited by PITTSTON2SARASOTA; 09-14-2011 at 05:04 PM..
Thanks as always PITTS and lots of good science links on your last two postings that i'll check out manana as i'm chilling out for the eve however i broke out Iron Maiden - ''666 Number of the Beast'' album as i'm in the mood for some satanic 80's metal in honor of the religious nut case trolling the science forums lately
It may be a failed brown dwarf, but it seems to have missed by quite a bit, considering the mass. We can probably blame Saturn, Uranus and Neptune for running away with Jupiter's lunch.
I would probably agree with that. Jupiter doesn't meet the mass requirements to be considered a brown dwarf, nor does it give off enough energy, though it does give off more energy than it receives from the sun.
Thanks for some intellect discussion man ..... i'm wondering if the sun formed first and took 98% of all the helium and hydrogen available in the solar system which kept jupiter from compacting a super mass to ''fire up'' so to speak although there's some smart brains on here who know better than i.
There is some interesting research going on with the outer planets right now. One line of research suggests that the outer planets were closer in early on in the formation of the solar system, and moved father out, which might have created the asteroid belt and caused serious problems for Mars. As to how Jupiter formed, it is hoped that the Juno mission will shine more light on the question.
Yeap i agree and so i'm now wondering if in other ''binary'' solar systems if one star forms first or do they both form at the same time? Also some binary systems have a main star (sun) and also a dwarf star (sun) and so i'm pondering if jupiter may have been the little ''sister'' to our sun rotating around each other if it had formed as one?
The interesting thing about Jupiter's moons is the great diversity of them. They are all so different, which leads one to speculate whether or not some of them were captured from elsewhere. It is theorized that Jupiter might have formed closer to the sun than where it currently orbits and moved out to where it is now, upsetting the balance in the inner solar system, and possiblly be responsible for the late bombardment that occurred in the inner solar system. If so, it could have picked up some hitch hikers along the way.
Your question makes me think whether a multiple star system is common or rare with sun-sized star in the middle, or if it requires a lot more of the building block and a more turbulent cloud system before the stars are born, so there is more mass involved, both in the center and around it. But then, it may also be true that multiple star systems are rare with a central star but the system itself involves a “revolving system” with two or more stars, each having a much greater influence on the other(s) than planets do.
The cloud that eventually gave rise to the solar system may have been short changed to begin with, to deliver conditions that would be conducive to development of two stars since our sun is quite small.
Actually, multiple star systems in our galaxy are the norm. Single star systems like ours are the exception.
Here is an article that discusses how multiple star systems might have formed:
As to how Jupiter formed, it is hoped that the Juno mission will shine more light on the question.
Thanks for pointing that out as i'll check out info about the Juno Mission .
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
.
