Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.

DLM
Lv 7

Question on a theory on our Solar System's evolution?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q4UmVelA4RU

You can skip to time index 7:41 for the part I am curious about.

1). Wouldn't this cause greater eccentricities of the planets affected, than what we observe today?

2). If accurate, could this period be responsible for Uranus' peculiar obliquity?

3 Answers

Relevance
  • ?
    Lv 7
    1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    1) Planets moving in distance from the Sun would occur over very long periods of time: many millions of years, and thus millions of orbits during a substantial move in radius. At any one time, the orbits are approximately circular --- if they were not, the interaction strength would go up dramatically, possibly leading to a catastrophic event. (If that had happened, we might not be here.) In fact, the interactions tend to circularize the orbits, even as their radius is changing, although this is not guaranteed.

    2) Maybe, but very early in the formation of the Solar System there was an even more chaotic period, where planetoids where still colliding with each other and dropping into the Sun and being ejected. It's more likely that Uranus' obliquity dates from that time, a couple billion years before the late heavy bombardment.

  • 4 years ago

    you do no longer ought to take any of it on faith in case you do no longer pick to. in case you probably did the study and understood the tips, you will not ought to easily assume that what scientists let us know is genuine. something of the planets in our photograph voltaic device are no longer suited for carbon based life types. the shortcoming of water on my own is sufficient to circumvent comparable life from evolving. Mars may be the only one close sufficient in composition to have the skill to maintain life, yet on account that's to some distance removed from the sunlight, that's no longer able to stay heat sufficient. basically because of the fact Richard Dawkins is mythical does no longer propose that he's the final authority on evolution. i'm specific in case you probably did the study, you will discover different (much less conceited) scientists proclaiming the veracity of evolution.

  • 1 decade ago

    i just heard man come to know about supernova well which happens in Nebula star system. so we need practical visible about the evolution changes happening and problem is it takes billion of years ,so guessing is such a difficult one.

    better we can listen to what science says about duties of stars .

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.