Text Box: Based on computer simulations Mark Krumholz from Princeton University, Christopher McKee from the University of California at Berkeley, and Richard Klein from Berkeley and Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory now claim [Nature 438, 332-334 (2005)] that the bottom-up theory is incorrect because the seeds cannot grow fast enough during the lifetimes of the clouds to reach typical star sizes. …
"Our result is that the bottom-up idea doesn't work," Krumholz told PhysicsWeb, "because seeds can't accrete quickly enough to grow to stellar masses within the lifetimes of the clouds out of which they are born. Instead, stars form by fragmentation, and the fragmentation process determines their masses." 
The results also explain, the team says, why observations suggest that objects as different as small brown dwarfs and massive stars have a common formation mechanism. In contrast, the accretion model involves different mechanisms for making objects with different masses. A universal formation process might also explain why the mass distribution of newly formed stars - the initial mass function - seems to be constant throughout our galaxy and other galaxies. 
"Many earlier simulations of star formation processes made a significant error because they modelled environments with properties that are very different from those observed," says Krumholz. "A lot of these simulations are now going to have to be reconsidered and probably re-done."
How do stars form? Belle Dumé, PhysicsWeb, 16 November 2005
Text Box: A decade ago, brown dwarfs were not more than a theoretical curiosity in astronomy textbooks. It was unclear whether such objects, with masses and temperatures between the giant planets and the coolest known dwarf stars, even existed. Today, the problem is how to tell all the different low-mass objects apart. ...
Like Jupiter and the Sun, brown dwarfs mainly consist of hydrogen and helium... Cloud formation on brown dwarfs is similar to that on giant planets and did not come as a surprise to planetary scientists... 
No direct observations have yet been made of objects with even lower mass and temperature than T8 dwarfs (effective temperature ~800K) to complete the bridge to Jupiter (~125K). But with the Spitzer Space Telescope in orbit ready to gather mid-infrared spectra, such ultralight brown dwarfs may finally come into view. 
Brown Dwarfs – Faint at Heart, Rich in Chemistry, Katharina Lodders (Washington University, St Louis, MO), Science 303, 323-324 (16 Jan 2004)
Text Box: Déjà vu!
Periodically and energetically spewed from the galactic core and into rarefying space, a large chunk in the nuclear ejectum splits further in succession to form – the star cluster.
Stars are thus born primarily by fragmentation – and not by agglomeration as popularly believed today. 
(Please see Section 9 of A Synopsis, link below, and Chapter 8 of the book for the full text).

And planets and moons are basically stars, or star fragments, that cooled off faster due to their small size, with stellar dwarfs posing as the intermediary fragments between stars and planets.  Nuclear fission would thus predominate the scene to varying degree in galactic matter depending on size and age of the body and its environment.

During the very early stages in the life of a star, violent activity would be the order of the day. In the young Sun, typically, these would have peaked with disturbing regularity in nova-like epochs and ejections – from which planets, too, could have well found their place in the Sun. Since hundreds of millions of years could lapse between such large outpourings, the planets we see around the Sun today tend only to answer why some are at contrastingly very different temperatures despite size similarities.

Getting down to Earth, we find mass extinctions to have plagued the land repeatedly since the dawn of time. These, however, were caused not primarily by collisions with comets or errant asteroids – but by the fierce internal volcanics of the planet itself at peak periods; the basic mechanism remaining the same for the stellar nova (see also The Pulsar, link below).
Text Box: Planet Earth
Text Box: Geophysicists in the Netherlands have drawn up plans for an underground antineutrino antenna that could prove if a naturally occurring nuclear reactor lies at the centre of the Earth. The controversial idea that the Earth's core contains a "georeactor" was first proposed in 1993 by Marvin Herndon, an independent geophysicist based in California... Such a reactor could also explain why more energy is emitted at the surface of the Earth than can be accounted for by conventional theories. ...
[Says Rob de Meijer at the Nuclear Physics Institute in Groningen:] "Antineutrinos could, for example, be emitted by uranium and thorium nuclei in the lower mantle or at the boundary between the solid and liquid inner core." ...
Herndon's georeactor idea is controversial... But if true, it could explain the mystery of why the Earth's magnetic field has suddenly reversed direction at various points in the planet's history. ...
Is the Earth fuelled by a nuclear reactor? Matin Durrani, Physics World, September 2004, p 6
Text Box: At the Earth's surface, the planetary magnetic field can vary on timescales that range over 18 orders of magnitude – from less than a millisecond to more than 100 million years. The most dramatic of these changes are magnetic-field reversals, in which the geomagnetic poles swap hemispheres. Several hundred such reversals have been documented from geological records. They seem to occur randomly in time, with the shortest interval between successive reversals being 20,000-30,000 years and the longest about 50 million years. It is 40 years since the reality of field reversals became widely accepted; by now one might expect that what happens to the magnetic field during a reversal; would be understood.
This is not so, even for the most recent reversal, which occurred about 790,000 years ago. ...
Time of reversal, Ronald T Merrill (Univ of Washington, Seattle), Nature 428, 608-609 (8 Apr 2004)
      Go back to Part 1 of 2
A Synopsis The Cosmos The Spin
ADDENDA The Cosmological Redshift The Neutrino
Two-Slit Tests The Galaxy Nuclear Reactions
NASA Tests Gravity The Sun
KamLAND Test Anti-Gravity The Pulsar
UCLA Test Relativity Superconductivity
Q and A Mass-Energy Fusion Energy
 Eugene Sittampalam
 16 June 2007