Stephen Hawkings Lost Singularity
A theory on the conception of planet Earth.
What if Planet Earth was actually born a star from the inner depths of our Galaxy; The Milky Way. Perhaps not as a normal bright powerful star, but as a star that didn’t quite make it? What if during the Compression State something went wrong? What if the chain-reaction cycle was missing a component or maybe it had too much of one particular element? Maybe it was made in the outer rims of a dust cloud, or was conceived as a twin star that tagged the gravitational pull of our existing Sun?
The Sun
Stars are formed from huge gas and dust clouds. These clouds are known as Nebulae. The pressure within these clouds causes the formation of stars. Just like the pressure from gravity and compressed weight causes organic matter to make coal and then on to make diamonds. When a new Star moves away from the Nebulae it turns on like a light bulb. The life of a star begins.
Nebulae
(Emission nebula NGC 604 lies in a spiral arm of galaxy M33, 2.7 million light-years away in the constellation Triangulum, birth place of stars)
Evidence from the Hubble Telescope shows that planets are made from a trail of dust left by the initial path of a new star. These planets then orbit the new star and create a solar system. Immanuel Kant a German philosopher predicted this over 200years ago.
Hubble Telescope
‘Bodes Law’ explains that a Star will explode many times within the early stages of its cycle. These explosions make the Planets, which go on to form the solar system. Planets are seen as the Suns debris that never made it back after the initial explosions.
If the Earth was born as a star with a possible deformity, could it have been caught up in the gravitational pull from the existing Sun in our solar system? If it did, then many possibilities could arise from many different scenarios.
The Rebirth
Lets say Planet Earth did start off as a star but was near the end of it life cycle, or maybe due to its size possibly used up much of its fuel very quickly? What if the tiny Sun now known as Earth was absorbing vast amounts of star dust from the early stages of the existing Suns life cycle. This could have caused the twin star, Earth, to become denser and form the molten Lava we know of today?
Furthermore when a star comes to the end of its cycle it has burned most of its hydrogen energy source. When the star burns its helium supplies the elements within the star become heavier. Metals and other variations of materials are formed.
All this new material absorbed from the existing Sun’s early path, could have halted or seriously slowed down the Suns, (Planet Earth’s) normal star cycle.
Our existing Suns new material combined with Planet Earth’s elements don’t show the true age of Earth. Maybe the Earth is older and was caught up in the gravitational pull of our existing Sun at a later date? The Sun and Planet Earth have been worked out to be around 4.5 billion years old. Measuring this on planet Earth however is very difficult. Many variables such as the weathering, tectonic plate movement, asteroid and volcano activity make the actual calculations hard to calculate.
What about the essence of life it’s self? Everything is made up of stardust. When a star dies it blows out the unique building blocks for everything known. This could also explain why Earth is lush with living organic organisms. All the building blocks of nearly everything possible is here already in the exhausted creation of all scientific possibilities.
Life
The moon could also be another clue as to how Planet Earth became full of water. What if the moon was originally an ice giant? If the moon did collide with Earth what could have happened? If the Earth was a dying, deformed or a reformed star due to all the dust from our existing star. The heat would have melted millions of tones of space ice from the moon. This reaction would have caused an instant melt down. Water would have rained down for the rest of the Suns (Earths) life span cooling the planets crust. With a cooled surface and a creation of a living, inhabitable star; could this be the missing link for a conclusive possibility?
The Moon
Is the moon the remains of an ice giant?
Many questions are still to be answered. One thing is for sure, what is Stephen’s lost singularity?
Related articles:
Liked it
12 Responses to “Stephen Hawkings Lost Singularity”
On April 21, 2009 at 9:28 am
Interesting stuff, but who knows? Like 10 years ago they thought the universe was contracting but it’s not.
On April 21, 2009 at 1:46 pm
Very Interesting article David. I just read somewhere that Hawkins is sick?
On April 21, 2009 at 8:37 pm
Do you mean Stephen Hawking and ‘Stephen Hawking’s Lost Singularity’? (Title reads ‘Hawkins’ now.)
On April 22, 2009 at 9:17 am
Great read. Thanks.
On April 23, 2009 at 2:45 am
cool
On April 23, 2009 at 4:15 am
Very cool indeed. Thanks for sharing.
On April 23, 2009 at 9:40 am
Very interesting indeed.
On April 24, 2009 at 4:46 am
Nice theory, really like it.
On May 3, 2009 at 1:18 am
this is useful.
great post
On May 11, 2009 at 11:15 am
I’ve always admired the sincerity in your works.
On May 23, 2009 at 9:14 am
Some good food for thought I liked it.
On October 25, 2009 at 3:01 pm
whoaaaaaaa …me encanto ese video … de todos los soles , estrellas , planetas .. muy muy interesate ,,, porque nos dio la idea de q nosotros no somos nada comparandonos con esas estrellas …. i liked it … it is good for gils that are lost in this topic …
Post Comment