ForumGarden

Star Formation

Gravity alone cannot form stars because of the insufficiency of it strength.

The coulomb forces are the major players in the star formation and the Universe.

During the star formation, the gravity starts the initial condensation from the surrounding gasses, particles and objects they may contain.

As the condensation starts to increase, the central temperatures start to increase. They reach a point where outer electrons are released from some of the heavier elements contained in the gaseous cloud. These electrons skip to the outer gases to form negative ions while in the central portion of these clouds, it starts to accumulate a positive charge. This coulomb component causes a tremendous increase in the condensation of the gaseous cloud.

This coulomb buildup continues until there is sufficient heat buildup to initiate nuclear fusion. Thus, a new star is created. The size of the star will depend on the availability of the quantity of gaseous cloud content to supply this formation.

If this is a gigantic gaseous cloud . There can be enough to form a galaxy with individual star formations. A passing galaxy can supply the gravitational momentum for a spiral galaxy to form

Mike CT

Any comments?

Erm not really, its like you said the initial and accelerating action of gravity, followed by nuclear processes that instigate star formation.

I suppose that you do not accept the validty of black holes, as you do not believe in general relativity. I read a fasconating acrticle in the Scientific American about galaxy formation and structure (spiral and ecilptic) have you heard about the very promoising work being conducted on gravity waves, very interesting.

the part i'm always confused with is the very begining phase.

gravity gives the kick start, but according to general reletivity and newtons laws of gravitational attraction there would need to be a mass there to begin with.

most stars form in nebule but the stars don't just start forming as there must first be a certain density to the matter in the cloud. hence i would infer that star formation first begins with the collisions of particles or the contents of the nebule.

these particles are already travelling fast as a consequence of supernove or or lesser nova so the particle smash into each other and stick to start creating the mass. i guess they would stick because of the strong nuclear force keeping together when 2 protons come into contact under the high velocity.

then comes gravity.

just a thought.

I have realized that the more posts I do, the worse my spelling becomes. Alfred, I think that the key point to remember about gravity and star formation is that gravity is always attractive, so their only needs to be a slight increase in the local concnetration of a gas for gravity to work its magic and start drawing larger and larger amounts of interstellar gas together, it takes some time, but since cosmological time scales are so huge, thats not a problem in the long run (no pun intended).

Galbally quote

I suppose that you do not accept the validty of black holes, as you do not believe in general relativity. I read a fasconating acrticle in the Scientific American about galaxy formation and structure (spiral and ecilptic) have you heard about the very promoising work being conducted on gravity waves, very interesting.

reply

You are right. I do not accept the validity of BH's.

I believe that the 'serparated charges (electrons and positive ions) play a very big part in these mysterious structures. The 'dark matter' problem is simply coulomb enhanced gravity The BH's can be neutron star complexes (positively charged) that are surrounded by negatively charged gases.

Coulomb forces are many times greater than gravity. You know the ratio of these forces, I am sure.

Gravity waves would be a miniscule contributer to the various actions and structures in the universe.

I may check up on that SA article.

Alfred quote

hence i would infer that star formation first begins with the collisions of particles or the contents of the nebule.

these particles are already travelling fast as a consequence of supernove or or lesser nova so the particle smash into each other and stick to start creating the mass. i guess they would stick because of the strong nuclear force keeping together when 2 protons come into contact under the high velocity.

reply

The colliders have not accomplished this feat yet. All they do is shatter particles to fragments of the original.partcles.

Your solution above is working backwards where the fusion forms before it is surrounded by an outer shell of gases.

Mike CT

hmm thats another point i confuse myself on.

ponder this more i shall...however Galbally's explanation seems to fit.

ponder this more i shall...

Alfred, you havn't been taking lessons from Yoda have you?

Anyway, I take it from your posts that you are still at school and are only starting out on a scientific career, well I'm glad that there are still people idealistsic enough to want to slog for a career that is not well respected, understood, or paid. But don't let me put you off, its a great thing to do, if you do get into a scientific discipline you won't regret it. Just take nothing at face value, don't let your own pet ideas cloud your judgement (i.e. Mike), and listen to the older guys who have been there before. I hope that doesn't sound condescending or anything, I don't mean it to be, I really hope that you retain your interest in science. Actually being a Scientist in Aus would be great, its a fascinating continent, one of the oldest pieces of land on earth, its got the southern skies, and great weather for astronomy. Unfortunatly Ireland sucks, unless your a biologist.

actually i did have yoda in mind while i typed that.

yes i'm still in school, well i've got 8 weeks of school holidays infront of me now, and next year i've chosen to do mainly maths and science. Physics, Chemistry, calculus and another maths subject.

so guess you could say i've just started walking down the scientific path.

Alfred

The physical sciences are more interesting and simpler to understand than the biological sciences.

I also avoid the biological sciences because they are life forms which I do not care to invade their environments or perform any sacrifices for research.

Mike CT