| Home. | Universe Galaxies And Stars Archives. | 
Universe Galaxies Stars logo.
     | Universe | Big Bang | Galaxies | Stars | Solar System | Planets | Hubble Telescope | NASA | Search Engine |

Planets and stars.

Ten Years Since The Revolution at Amazon.

SAS Black Ops at Amazon.
Amazon Kindle EBook Reader: Click For More Information.

construction of Planets.
construction of star's central core.

We'll continue from our last chapter, and discuss how to build planets, where we showed how an exploding star can literally shower an entire, newly formed Solar System in iron core matter. But before we do so, we have to immerse ourselves a touch more deeply into the very make-up of planetary evolution, and decipher what that term actually means. Just so we know exactly what we discuss.

Planetary evolution, basically shows us the construction of a planet or Planets from a star's central iron core, surrounding gas particles and constant fluctuations of its internal temperature, as it continuously regulates its atomic reaction of localised conditions.

Theoretically, from the star's perspective, to construct Planets shouldn't be that difficult: It simply becomes a process where natural propagation takes over from a consistent disparity of heat.

We suggested, as newly formed Galaxies mature with age, and constantly collapse back on themselves, spacial matter is dragged into the nebula. Thus allowing a condensing of gas based vapour material to form. Gradually an ubiquity starts to apply surrounding pressure; and continues until its atomic process can take no more. At that exact moment, the core implodes, detonates and showers a regionalised Solar System in particle matter. Most of which would-be made of iron, the rest gas, small rocks, dust - and debris. And a searing heat from the star is produced in conjunction with other stars. For as they instinctively pull against each other, atoms are condensed and fission is produced. And once the initial chain reaction takes place, a very hot, early Solar System is born.

We allowed this action to come about because of cause and effect, and now it has the ability to establish planets, comets, life and a stable condition of nuclear reaction to continue a life cycle and develop, not just planetary motion, but also the fabric of life that will inevitably crawl across its surface, mature and grow in to intellectual species, that will one day, no doubt discuss how the process began in the first place!

Yet we should remember at this juncture, all of this will be controlled by gravity. And most of that gravity will be implemented by the temperature of the star as it constantly recycles the debris it initially showered the Solar System with in the first place.

If we momentarily imagine a newly exploded star pulling heavily down on the very fabric of space in a tight hot vortex, spiraling ever downwards, a vortex which produces a duel action from a reciprocal star deep out in space, we see the vortex try to drag all Solar System matter back in to the localised area, but simultaneous, is forbidden from doing so, because of an abnormally high temperature which permeates the Solar System itself.

Heat pushes it away, leaving it no option other than to spin continuosusly in an eliptical movement. What we might term a pushing and pulling motion of equal forces, or balanced forces to be more precise.

At this period in its history, it has but one logical option open to it, to rotate. As our Solar System filled with gas and debris is only left with that individual option, to rotate, it gradually picks-up speed. As this happens each particle or individual piece of matter begins to produce its own gravitational influence on each other particle.

We have now managed to produce, what we could call, a primary solar system with an inbuilt ability to create the very essence of life we are looking for.

No getting lucky. No being in the right place at the right time.

What we have done is we have constructed an evolutionary star, with an evolutionary planetary structure encompassed. But what we need now, is a meticulous and methodical application so the cooking process can continue unabated and bring an embryonic Solar System foward to fruition.

With a hot, fused vortex desperately trying to reclaim its particle mass, and the heat simply refusing to capitulate, one of the two has to give way.

We can assume it will not be the gravitational influence of the star itself, therefore it has to be the heat. For our new star it is simply a waiting game. It can hold its gravitational ability as long as is needed, and still remain a strident force even when heat is reduced to such an extent, the Solar System itself gradually beings to lose momentum.

As heat permeating the Solar System reduces itself, particle matter starts to operate to a principle of equivalence: All objects in a vacuum fall with an equal ratio.

A slow decent back towards the core of the star, is then under way.

The star will, by this time, probably have switched from bright yellow, possibly even a strong white, with them early temperatures, toward a sallow blue. A brand new Solar System laden with sulphur and carbon, offset with oxygen and Hydrogen is by this time starting to capitulate. Very hot temperatures relinquish their hold - and all solid matter recedes back to its point of origin.

But as this procession gets started, a new set of laws enter the equation. As all matter slowly pursues a descent towards its ultimate destination, the star itself, we must assume a certain amount of matter arrives first. This will begin to fuse immediately with the star's rim. And once that happens, matter begins to burn, heat is restored and rotation once again commences, gravity is returned and all globular matter solidifies.

These early pieces of solid matter, probably iron based, become the very foundation of new planetary life. We can assume the more solid and dense they become, the higher the volume og gravitational influence they produce, the more they will attract other particles towards them.

We might like to think of a simple analogy to explain this event, so a complex theory becomes more ingrained on the mind and produces an easier recognition in future discussions.

Picture a solar system, slightly cone shaped, with a large hot vortex at its base. The rest of the Solar System rising upward, literally crammed with primordial gases, some larger fragments of rock and debris. Now let it spin in your mind, so the whole system rotates violently in one huge gas filled eddy. And you'll see, as those larger pieces of matter find their own value within the cone-shaped voticies, the chances are they will try to counter act this hot tempest. In other words they will try to envelope a system where they spin counter clockwise to the vortex itself. Therefore, if the vorticies moves itself clockwise, large forming material will move counter-clockwise to try and retain its position within the voxtex.

This should enable the newly clumping matter to collect gas. Imagine it like a machine at the fun fair, where a candyfloss is bought. A stick is run around a large steel bowl scooping hot melted sugar, which is then converted it into a large fluffy, pink cloud.

Imagine in the Solar System large early rock formation acting just like that stick, and all the Solar System gas building up around it. Eventually, what will remain, will be a couple of dozen different planets, all large gas giants, and all the excess gas removed to close proximity around them.

Our Solar System at this point would then begin, over millions of years, to find its own parity. And the volume of mass of the star would match that of those newly formed gas structured Planets themselves.

Once again we have encountered a principle of balanced forces, where the star, and its elementary Planets achieve weight distribution.

But we have to deduce, from this belief, that nothing can stand still forever. We could easily assume the Solar System is now out of control. The star can no longer control its freshly constructed embryonic planets, and they in turn, cannot determine the future of the star.

And so, the only single governing factor in the equation now, is temperature. It may seem an insignificant idea, that a principle of temperature fluctuation can determine the plight of an entire Solar System and everything that inhabits it. And although science would call our star a constant burning ball of gas, we have to endorse that wisdom of George Bernard Shaw again, and ask: If our star, and every other star in the universe is a stable, constant burning ball of gas, how do we encounter ice age phenomenon? It's inconceivable to believe, with such climatical patterns of weather, ice age periods and an observation of that which surrounds us this, is anything but stable. In fact we might deduce it highly unstable!

If we return to that early period, that aeonic outset, where a Solar System permitted a series of balanced forces to be established, we should assume it is motivated by two key criteria: Heat and gravity. These two basic products act as a counter balance to each other. If either is upset, the other must redetermine its location - and position to bring itself back in conjunction with its equal and opposite number.

If heat is lost, planetary motion will slow, the Planets will lose gravity and move in towards a lower orbit, so once again it can drive heat from that position and reintroduce a high enough velocity to balance itself back out.

However, if too much heat is induced from the central core of the star, Planets will move obviously in an alternative direction. They will find a higher, more distant location from the star, and turn at a lower ratio. This means balanced forces are always employed and always purvey a distribution of weight.

We might also apply the same analogy for the Galaxy and universe beyond, as we mentioned previously in an earlier chapter.

However, there is the quantum principle to consider: Small gravity. For although we have now shown how to introduce a star, by fusion, created basic Planets through heat and gravity, we have not yet shown how to bring the planet forward fully to fruition.

One of the difficulties here, is the initial blueprint we work from. It might sound illogicall to us as humans, because we like problems to be complicated. It is a natural human infliction, whether we like it or not, that the human race enjoys their problems complex. And the more difficult the conundrum that presents itsel, the greater the satisfaction we get from solving it.

But it should be remembered, the universe is not of homo-sapien structure, it is more homogenous in its structure. It likes things ordered, and run along the same lines, from the same original blueprint. Tur universe, as we previously mentioned likes things ordered, therefore problem solving for it becomes based on one design.

If we take this factor into account, we can deduce that a centre of large gravity is no different in its interpretation, than that of a centre of small gravity. They indeed become part and parcel of the same thing. Although we might deduce quantum physics as small gravity, to the universe, there is no logical reason why it should deduce it under any other assumption than that of large gravity. Both are controlled instinctively within their own remit, and both from the same perspective.

So size is not really important?

Not really. To the universe, it has no observational content to it. In other words, it simply cannot discriminate. It applies the same basic laws to large bodies as it will to small bodies. Therefore, if we perceive large bodies of matter planets having to either move closer, or father awey from the star, due to temperature control, we should also assume that when laying the foundations of the planet itself, it will welcome, for planetary matter, the same design.

As all particles in motion apply automatic, to an individual weight, which should be governed by temperature, then as our newly acquired Planets move in closer, or distance themselves father away, particles around them gases must follow the same philosophy.

And as a new planet might be heavily enveloped in structural gases of different compounds, we have to establish what will cause a dilution, and turn it from a primordial soup, into the solidified structre we see around us today.

If we assume carbon is a heavy gas, and oxygen much lighter, we can imagine, like on a hot summer's day how this advancement begins. If the star begins to run cold, all gases around the embryo planet will settle. Gases will fall to the lowest possible point. But as more matter fuses with the star itself, and heat is reintroduced to the solar system, lighter particles, such as oxygen, will naturally rise much faster than heavier particles such as carbon. What we are saying is, just like city smog, gas dilution takes place, as atmoic weight separates the individual gases.

We have all witnessed how smoggy days produce low lying carbon, and oxygen has moved to a higher, more acceptable level. If we believe this is the case, then it can go some way to demonstrate how the planet itself will gradually construct a shell around itself. A slow, and progressional advancement toward a carboniferous substructure, that is based entirely of gas dilution.

If this process of particle refinement is continued over hundreds of millions of years, we might understand the futility of believing we were in the right place at the right time. With a more methodical approach, we begin to witness an evolutionary journey pf planetary motion commence.

We said those early Planets would be gas giants, and probably the first ones would never have advanced through their long life cycle at aIl. They would have merely been fodder for the huge firey furnace will call, our sun. It would have only been the more distant Planets that would have had a long enough duration to undertake such an epic, precarious journey and muture into the structured worlds we observe in our Solar System today.

We might even consider ourselves fortunate at that point. Or we might even believe, that not just are we fortunate, both those around every other star in the universe, or at least those within that mature central belt we spoke of are fortunate.

We now begin to display a set of circumstances, where life by accident becomes anything other than a clumsy mistake. From our theory we have given birth to a whole new set of original circumstances, where the universe has developed from what science considers an accident, to a pantheon of precise movements. We built ourselves a paradigm based on George Bernad Shaw's wisdom, rather than convenient soundbites.

But if size to our universe is unimportant, and it does allow galaxies, stars and Planets to be formulated from the same simple design, how many other life forms, what we call extra-terrestrials might inhabit that extensive ether we term simply, space?

If we're right in our rearrangement of stars, and I see no reason why we shouldn't be, by turning them into a vorticies, where life is established through an evolutionary process, then it might not be so outrageous to suggest every star houses life around it. And that thought alone could literally blow the mind. With hundreds of millions of stars dotted about the entire universe, life could be so abundant, that those spacecraft individual's claim to see, might not just be visitors from one world, but from a multitude of different worlds, possibly even from within our own solar system.

You mean other life from within our solar system?

That's exactly what I mean. We must remember, that when we start to manufacture Planets based on an evolutionary process, there simply cannot be any room for complacency. We mustn't be deluded into thinking along existing scientific lines, just because others do. We have established a theory for ourselves, not based on contrived ideology or long established notions that science refuses to challenge, but based entirely around highly original - and unique concepts.

We constructed our theory, more from a principle of dilettantism. We watched it literally build from nothing, and sought to advance the very boundaries of reason, with a rational acceptance that appeared, first strange, and then brash. We followed wisdom that made perfect sense. So we must not shrink from those original ideas by cowering to sciences narrow-minded stance. We mustn't back away at the point of greatness, but must convince a sceptical world with reasonable argument as to what we believe.

We proposed a hypothesis, which showed a Solar System gradually being built, a Solar System that used the foundation blocks of life. We demonstrated how temperature enabled us to slowly put together a planet through atomic engineering, and suggested how this process, an evolutionary one, not accidental.

But if that really is the case, then we must also accept the logic that might accompany such a theory, for if we are right about planetary evolution, then the example we seek should be obvious.

We should be able to see a Solar System production line of planets, strung-out across the solar system. So why don't we?

I think I might have unearthed the answer to this intriguing problem.

Some years ago now, I was consulting a good friend of mine, who had been investigating chronological variations in certain types of tree stumps dug-up on Irish peat bogs, when he said their growth cycle had been massively stunted around the 6th century. We finally traced the period back to 542ad, from the journals of Greek monks. First, I thought nothing of it, until he mentioned that during an analysis they found a heavy sulphurous compound trace. Again, I thought it perplexing, but not out of the ordinary; and then, to reiterate, I remembered some years back reading an old philosophy journal. It was by the Greek monk, Evagrious, and although I couldn't remember the exact text, I recalled the basic: How he said:

"The Sun appears to have lost its wanton might, and appears of a bluish colour. We marvel to feel its power wasted into feebleness."

That short passage sent my mind into overdrive. I had the rough text, but no definitive date! I spoke with another friend, and he suggested it approximated to the 580s, possibly 542ad. Yet more important than that, my investigation led still further, for if some event had turned the Sun a bluish colour, only one logical answer sprang directly to mind: It needed to be an entity with a heavy sulphurous content, the same as which had shown on the test-results from those old tree stumps.

I had two contributory factors, a whole lot of circumstantial evidence and a very frightened imagination. And suddenly, I understood, if those two events were interlinked, there was only one possible route to produce such an effect: A heavenly body moving through the solar system.

But which one?

I continued to search around the period (542ad) and became more alarmed the more I read. In the middle-east crops failed, there was famine and pestilence across the western world - and in China, a dynasty that had been stable for nearly one hundred and fifty years suddenly collapsed into anarchy.

What the world witnessed during those dire days, was nothing short of a calamity. An outside factor had pushed our Earth to the verge of extinction. The planet may have been no more than a cat's whisker from an infinite disaster that it could never recover from. And still to this day, investigations surrounding those events are discouraged by government.

But undissuaded by goverment, I looked towards our Solar System for an answer, hoping beyond hope it might surrender one of its most cherished secrets, and allow me the privilege of a brief insight into what biblical event nearly brought humanity to its knees.

And there it was, Venus, magnificent and bold, her thick blanketed heavy atmosphere laden with poisonous sulphur; and I knew there was no other option but to recognise this angelic, sometimes beautiful planet as the cause: But at that point, I faced an even bigger obstacle.

I was asking myself how this distant planet could produce such an effect on our own, fragile world? As the solar-vortex, star, theory gradually gained momentum, it became obvious to me our planetary Solar System was out of line! The Planets within it were in the wrong position. Something, I assumed had altered their confighuration.

For it to be put right, our Planets needed to shuffle their current orbit slightly, for presently we see our Planets lined-up like thus: The Sun, Mercury, Venus, The Earth, Mars, The asteroid belt, and then the outer, superior planets: Jupiter, Saturn, uranus, Neptune and the highly strange and erratic orbit of Pluto.

However, if the solar-vortex theory was to work, and a steady application had been introduced to construct Planets with a slow, methodical and regulated control of Solar System temperatures, then from a geological aspect, they required a slight realignment: Venus, was in the wrong place!

I took a much more candid view, and decided, with a slight alteration we could place in a different, visionary structure. It was only then I rearranged the planetary matrix so they then ran like thus: The Sun, Mercury, Mars, The Earth, The asteroid belt, Jupiter, Saturn, uranus, Neptune and Pluto.

You might ask yourself, where has Venus gone?

With a detailed observation under way, and closer inspection of Venus, I decided there was only one logical location to place Venus, back as an outer Jovian moon; possibly a large sister Moon to Ganamede. Some people, science, academia, the world as a whole, might think that crazy, that we could relocate an entire planet to a higher, satellite orbit. And at the time, not least of all me.

I was so hostile to the initial idea, I refused to entertain it for nearly six months. I had the cursory idea down on paper, yet refused point-blank to investigate further. But inevitably I gave in. My new theory became too tempting to just leave to vegetate. I had this enigma of how, or more importantly why Venus would have relocated its position in our solar system, if indeed it did, and so I ran the idea past a close colleague.

He just looked at me totally expressionless, and said much to my amazement, the idea not as outrageous as I thought. I was astonished by his reaction; I had expected him to brand me mad - and have nothing further to do with me.

But then he pointed out one very interesting detail, a detail I had overlooked. He said the pitting across Venus' surface, what we call cratering, showed it had probably not been there that long anyway. The thing with Venus is, all the surface craters show an ubiquity in their chronology. That suggests that they all formed around about the same time, and therefore, the planet had not become as susceptible as other planets, such as the Earth and mars, to meteorite impactions.

And that could only have happened if Venus had recently relocated, or indeed had been shielded at other periods in its history; which is even more unlikely.

I asked my friend, how long he thought Venus had been there, and he said, from a chronological evaluation, about two thousand years: "But that's off the record!" I assured him it would be, but posed a more, in-depth time frame. I asked him how he would feel about fourteen hundred years, rathe than two thousand? He shrugged his shoulders, and said it was possible.

At last, I thought, I was not going mad, but had accidentally stumbled across what could be a crucial factor. The movement of a large body of matter, Venus, moved through our solar system, in between two other planets: The Earth and Mars, and used the Earth and Mars' own gravitational fields to hook each other inside out.

You mean the Earth and Mars literally exchanged orbits with each other? That is exactly what I mean.

But the big question which arose then, was did Venus fall, or was it pushed? With our planetary structure realigned, so that Mars would run ahead of earth, I had a very sobering thought to consider. For had Mars ran ahead of us initially, it should theoretically be at a much more advanced stage than we are, in our evolutionary cycle today. In other words, Mars would be way ahead of us on evolutionary terms; and that thought alone sent a shiver through my veins.

If Mars had been constructed before us, it should, if the solar evolutionary theory is right, hold the same natural life components as ourselves.

Once we extracted a hit-or-miss principle from life, and the evolution of solar systems, we extracted any inconsistencies from the equation: The theory meant all solar systems has to reflect a perfect production line, and generate planetary production in a consistemt and methodical way.

But if that is so, where had all the life on Mars vanished too?

It seemed absurd that Mars could have gone ahead of us. And so, I began to construct a model in my mind and see if the anomoly could be resolved. This is how it works.

Let us for one moment imagine Mars did run ahead of Earth, on evolutionary terms, that life leapt-up from a primordial soup around Mars, and progressed with a structured system of advanced intelligence over hundreds of millions of years, before species on Earth were even in their infancy. Yet as we suggested earlier, due to gas dilution, their atmosphere purified itself as the Sun constantly heated up, and then cooled down. And as the newly discovered solar-vortex continuously heated up, then cooled down, particles were constantly processed.

Each time our star cooled, gas settled, each time it heated up - as more matter fused with the star, Mars would lose more atmosphere, just as the Earth and every other planet in our solar system, and every other Solar System will. And then slowly, over an extended epoch a Martian environment is refined; its atmosphere becomes so weak it cannot sustain life at all. Martian life begins to wither and die, then vegitation slowly perishes, seas begin to boil and harmful ulta-violet rays from the Sun create endemic cancer amongst the Martian population.

So what might an advanced Martian civilisation do: Give up? Call it a day? I doubt it.

An instinctive desire for survival is so paramount in any species, their fight for life would continue unabated. We would do the same. But what would they do with a dying, almost barren planet?

They may have but one option, look to an alternative world, as they would be incapable of rejuvenating their own atmosphere. But where would they go? What planet would they choose?

There might have been only one option open to them as they scoured the Solar System with desperate eyes: Our Earth!

However, one small, but complex problem would stand between them, and their ambitions project. A high carbonaceous atmosphere, that would leave Martian life susceptible to a respiratory system, that had previously adapted itself to suit a Martian environment over hundreds of millions of years. The Earth's gases would contain a too high carbon content for them to breath. As an example, to help us comprehend this delicate problem, we could say, the equivalent scenario down here, would be you sitting in your car with a hosepipe up the exhaust, and placed in through the window. And you, like them, would die.

Martian life must have faced the same prospect as they endeavoured to move here; yet there was one plausible avenue of approach open to them if they could hone and adapt their theory and technology to satisfy the equation.

If they were to take a large thermonuclear weapon, and place it carefully behind a Jovian moon, what we now call the planet Venus, and detonate it as Venus reaches an orbital position suitable to knock it from its orbit, then Venus would leave its natural orbit and be catapulted through space on a trajectory between both the Earth and Mars.

Below is a list of chapters for the Metaphysics Anthology. The book itself is designed as abit of fun! One man thinking out loud. You should not see it as science, merely enjoy the imagination of the human mind in full swing.

  Go To Print Article  

Universe - Galaxies and Stars: Links and Contacts

the web this site
 | GNU License | Contact | Copyright | WebMaster | Terms | Disclaimer | Top Of Page. |