When the music of the spheres hurts the ear
Let's remember the history. Less than 100 years after the invention of the telescope, it seemed to scientists that they generally understood the structure of the solar system. No one dared to talk about any primogeniture of Mother Earth. In the center, as Aristarchus of Samos and Copernicus discovered, a solar bonfire burns, and a round dance of planets around it. All of them are located in one plane, approximately coinciding with the plane of the solar equator, they all move and rotate in one direction in circular or elliptical orbits, obeying the laws of Kepler and Newton.
Therefore, the astronomers of the 18th century were absolutely sure that our luminary always reigned in the heavens. It was this that gave birth to its planetary retinue. They argued only about which cosmogonic mechanism was preferable. Some, following Swedenborg, Kant and Laplace, adhered to the nebular hypothesis of the joint formation and condensation of the Sun and planets from the same initial gas-dust cloud. Others preferred Buffon's catastrophic hypothesis about the active intervention in the process of the birth of planets by an outside force center - for example, a wandering star. Then the planets are clots of the Sun that splashed out when rammed by its heavenly wanderer.
Now the supporters of both classical cosmogonic hypotheses seem to be at a complete dead end. They are completely unable to explain a number of strange facts, most of which have been discovered relatively recently.
Indeed, let's look at the solar system from the outside. From the side, its model with planetary balls and orbital hoops looks like a gigantic, extremely thin disk. If we imagine the Sun as a soccer ball with a diameter of 30 centimeters, then the Earth in the form of a grain of 2-3 millimeters in size will be located at a distance of 30 meters from it. Jupiter is 5 times farther from the Sun, Saturn is 10 times, Uranus is 20 times, Neptune is 30 times, Pluto is 40 times, that is, more than a kilometer from the ball.
If the Sun suddenly falls under space and emerges somewhere in the region of Jupiter or Saturn, then the "end of the world" will not come. All in all, the orbits of the planets will be redistributed, and there will be enough free space in the system.
Now let's look at the disk from above. First of all, the difference between the four dense inner dwarfs (Mercury, Venus, Earth and Mars) and the four outer "loose" giants (Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune) is striking. The inner planets seem to be made of "earthly" material, while the outer ones, far apart from each other, are made of "solar" material. The analogy between the outer planets and our star can be traced very far - both in size, and in chemical composition, and in density. Giants are generally similar to independent suns, because they are surrounded by their own planetary systems. Twelve moons revolve around Jupiter, ten moons dance around ringed Saturn, at least five are assigned to Uranus, at least two to Neptune. Some of the giant satellites, in turn, are similar to dwarfs. The conclusion involuntarily suggests itself:several family members can or could generate mini-planets. No Sun Monopoly!
As they say, the family is not a white freak. Some celestial bodies, it turns out, move backwards, against the usual course of rotation of the system. Jupiter's four moons, one Saturn's moon and Neptune's largest companion circle in the opposite direction of the rotation of these giants. We have already spoken about Venus …
But the most difficult puzzle was asked by Uranus. It rotates around the axis, as if lying on its side, and also reversed. Therefore, the orbits of its satellites, rotating backward, are almost perpendicular to the common plane of all other stars. The small disk of the Uranium system seems to be twisted in the opposite direction and is inserted upright into the large disk of the solar system.
The giants are spinning rapidly - their day is half the time of the earth. The sun is clumsy - turnover for a whole month! It will spin as fast as Jupiter if it contracts to its size! Why the Earth and Mars rotate rapidly is completely incomprehensible. There is no regularity in the orientation of the rotation axes of the planets. On Earth, the equator of which is inclined to the general plane of the system at an angle of about 24 degrees, the pole arrow points to the North Star; on Mars, Saturn and Neptune - in the same region of the sky. But the axes of rotation of Jupiter and Venus are almost perpendicular to the disk of the solar system, their equators lie in the plane of their orbits. The equator of the Sun, like the equator of Mercury, is tilted to this disk at an angle of more than seven degrees.
Now think: rotating luminaries are, in fact, gyroscopes, huge tops. And the axis of rotation of the top is extremely stable in its direction, it is not so easy to tilt it. What force was able to force Uranus to lie on its side, what lever can turn the planets and the Sun itself?
Promotional video:
Desperate astrophysicists
Developing the nebular hypothesis, very authoritative foreign cosmogonists F. Hoyle, G. Alphen, J. Kuiper and many others are trying to trace how the solar system can be formed during the gravitational compression of a gas-dust cloud with the direct participation of magnetic, ionization, vortex and other factors.
In their opinion, the central condensation with its tentacles of magnetic field lines pulled the remaining matter into a thin disk, and various gases were frozen on the dust particles. Light elements such as hydrogen and helium were blown out by the solar wind into regions of distant orbits, and heavy ones, such as iron, were attracted to the magnetic poles and concentrated in the zone closest to the core of the Protosun. The disk under gravitational influence disintegrated into resonance rings, like that of Saturn; vortices formed in the rings; in the center of the vortices, the density of matter increased, from the frost of frozen gases, snowballs grew - the embryos of the planets. Some of the protoplanets, future giants, repeated this cosmogonic process (but on a smaller scale) and spawned their own satellite systems.
The authors of the hypothesis themselves did not flatter themselves about it, "For the Uranus system," they stressed, "no satisfactory explanation has been given." Why is there Uranus! No explanation is given for backward-moving satellites and planets; does not fit into the nebular scheme and the distribution of masses, densities and chemical elements in all five planetary systems.
What about the catastrophic hypothesis? Buffon in 1745 suggested that once a huge comet crashed into the Sun and knocked out the splashes of planets. 135 years later, the English astronomer A. Bickerton replaced the comet with a wandering star. Many wrote about the direct collision of stars as the reason for the formation of planets, until at the beginning of our century the English naturalists T. Chamberlain, F. Multon and J. Jeans proved that the release of matter from the Sun can occur just like that, without direct contact with a passing a star, due to tidal forces alone.
Then the apparatus of the nebular hypothesis comes into play. Planetesimals (grains of planets) gradually arise from the ejected matter. Then there is a process of condensation, and, from the point of view of the Buffon-Jeans hypothesis, some more catastrophes are needed for the formation of secondary "planetary systems" in giants. Note that not only are all the objections put forward against the Laplace-Hoyle hypothesis valid here, and a number of new significant objections do not appear.
More than once, such prominent scientists as B. Levin, F. Whipple, W. Macari and others pointed out the unlikely probability of the condensation of planets from gas and dust jets - they tend not to stick to each other, but to scatter. But cosmogonists ignore mathematical arguments and come up with more and more intricate combinations of diverse conditions under which the origin and growth of planets can supposedly occur.
Along the path of many suns
In view of the insurmountable difficulties of the nebular and catastrophic hypotheses, the idea arose of a fundamentally different, but at the same time, synthesizing approach. First, the American physicist R. Gann in 1932 created a model of the Protosun, which split into two parts during rapid rotation due to electromagnetic effects. But further Gann went on the beaten path. Like, jets of gases stretched between the two diverging stars. Of these, planetesimals condensed, etc. Gann's model was mathematically disproved within six months.
However, the idea of a double Protosun did not die. In 1935, G. Russell, and in 1937, R. Littleton independently developed the hypothesis of a collision with a solar companion of a certain heavenly wanderer, that is, a passing third star. The partner and the third star died or were thrown into the depths of space, and the Sun remained. The fragments of the collision turned into a huge protoplanet, a satellite of the Sun. Spinning rapidly, it split into Proto-Jupiter and Protosaturn. The bridge connecting both of these halves disintegrated into clots of the rest of the members of the solar system.
By the way, R. Littleton simultaneously succeeded in proving that the terrestrial planets cannot, due to their insignificant size, condense by themselves, for their formation requires an intermediate large parent body. Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars are clearly second generation planets. This assumption was quite worthy of detailed consideration. However, it was too associated with Littleton's original postulates, which, as the Indian scientist P. Bhatnagad proved in 1940, are mathematically unfounded.
After such crushing criticism, R. Littleton put forward the idea of a "triple star" consisting of the Sun and a close pair of stars. Absorbing interstellar matter, "getting better" and "growing", the members of the pair approached. And so they merged. A stormy period of instability followed, the merged mass disintegrated into two stars, and both left the triple system, and the Sun remained in splendid isolation, capturing the gas bridge between the separated bodies as a keepsake. The planets were formed from it.
Mathematicians immediately pointed out that in this model, as in any kind of nebular hypothesis, condensation of dense bodies from gas jets is unlikely. Astrophysicists lost heart for a while.
But here the frantic Fred Hoyle appeared on the scene. With characteristic boldness, Hoyle declared in 1944: why not allow an internally inevitable catastrophe with one of the members of the "double protosun"? After all, stars for the most part in the process of internal evolution must sooner or later explode, become new or supernovae.
Suppose the Sun's partner has once turned into a new star or a supernova. The force of its grandiose explosion, which illuminated the entire Milky Way, broke the gravitational ties of the members of the "star tandem". Almost all of the ejected matter was lost, but the Sun managed to hold on to a cloud of gas saturated with heavy elements that were synthesized during the explosion. True, it is unclear how it itself was able to survive this explosion. But Hoyle was not embarrassed by such "little things." The main thing is that the objections of cosmochemists have been overcome. And then you can use the thought of R. Littleton about the protoplanet, into which the supernova remnants have condensed.
The explosive model of Littleton-Hoyle and, in general, the idea of a "double protosun" is no worse than other cosmogonic hypotheses, especially since the overwhelming number of stars, as it turned out, are born and exist in pairs. It is clear: such a heavenly community is hardly accidental. Isn't there a pattern here that reveals the mystery of the origin of our solar family? Is there not a single algorithm by which space systems arise and develop?
Heavenly paired "holes"
It is generally accepted that the universe as a whole is expanding from a superdense state, galaxies are scattering from each other, matter is, as it were, scattered over outer space. Therefore, it is reasonable to seek, our outstanding astrophysicist V. Ambartsumyan advised, for very dense clumps of matter, when "melting" of which protogalaxies and protosuns are formed.
Such superdense clumps - quasars - have been found quite recently. Now we see them as they were billions of years ago, at the time of the birth of the solar system. From the most powerful, but very small in size, the quasar grows, like a tree from a grain, first a fiercely emitting radio galaxy, then the compact Seyfert galaxy and, finally, a normal star system such as our Milky Way or the Andromeda nebula.
Researchers have found that all celestial clusters have at least two centers, or poles, and incredibly huge masses of matter are rapidly pumped from one center to another, sometimes in several tens of hours. Quasars, radio galaxies and galaxies seem to "blink", and denser and more ancient space systems - they are also younger in age - pulsate continuously.
There is little to surprise today's theoretical physicists. They suspect there is a gravitational-magnetic swing at work here. Matter can, say, concentrate at two magnetic poles. The formed vapors interact especially effectively in a superdense state. Suppose, near each pole, the gravitational field, this gravitational Goliath, is so strong that the surrounding space is crowded and closed on itself. The famous gravitational collapse begins. Matter breaks through space and falls out of this region of space through a "hole", but where? This is where the magnetic David, for example, comes into play. The magnetic field also contracts and becomes so powerful that it decisively interferes with the course of the collapse and tightly connects the "holes" with each other. Gravitational lightning pierces the space between both "holes"under the space, a channel instantly bursts.
Having emerged in another "hole", the matter by inertia is torn from the mouth of the gravitational "ring" outward, but Goliath is on the alert. He again attracts everything around him; another collapse is approaching, another lightning. Over time, the oscillations of the "swing" fade, such catastrophes occur less and less, and paired "holes" of different sizes gradually diverge and stabilize.
The mechanism is universal, it seems to play the most important role in the formation of galaxies, stars and planets. Indeed, paraphrasing the famous words of Lomonosov, the stars have opened - the abysses are full.
How did the evolution of our Galaxy take place?
In the early stages of the development of the universe, space resembled a swirling water surface. Gravitational shafts not only distorted, but also cracked open space, as if cutting through "wormholes" (J. Wheeler's term) under it, with access to neighboring and remote areas. It can be assumed that such "holes" connect our space, our world with some other space, the coexisting world. From "holes", or "holes", as from the vents of volcanoes, huge masses of matter can pour out, but whole stellar systems risk "falling through" into these wells. In the first case, we have a "white hole" in front of us, in the second - a "black" one. "Holes", apparently, are born in pairs, otherwise all conservation laws in the universe would be violated. When it was compressed, the "holes" of each pair interacted intensely with each other, which, in particular,manifested itself in a quasi-periodic explosive transfer of matter between them (quasar stage). As the universe expands and the "holes" diverge, this interaction weakens (the stage of the radio galaxy). Finally, there remains a compact galaxy that is actively functioning (Seyfert's galaxy). Spinning and gushing, the nucleus of a compact galaxy, hundreds of millions of years later, gives birth to an ordinary spiral galaxy like our Milky Way.
Many scientists believe that the "holes" have survived to this day.
It is quite possible that the famous Tunguska meteorite is just a wandering "microhole" that accidentally collided with the Earth. But, as a rule, "holes", or, more precisely, potential "holes", whose mouths do not reach the surface of our space-time, must be enclosed in the cores of celestial bodies. A sufficiently powerful gravitational shaft is capable of exposing the mouth of the "wormholes", the substance splashes out from under space into these cores. Stars and planets increase in both mass and size. Moreover, one of the members of each pair of stars and planets, connected to each other through "holes", swells much more than the other. For example, in a binary star system, matter begins to flow from a larger component to a smaller one. At the same time, the celestial pair, as in the quasar, diverges.
The body, which at first was more massive, becomes smaller at the end of the process, so the fate of the couple is very dramatic, with a change in roles. This is evidenced by the equations of the evolution of close binary stars. Roles can change multiple times.
It is possible that similar cycles have occurred in the solar system, and more than once. So, in 1972, Japanese astronomers, and after them and experts from other countries, proved that the last grandiose explosion of the nucleus of our Galaxy occurred relatively recently, in the memory of mankind - about a million years ago. Undoubtedly, the gravitational shaft from such a powerful explosion thoroughly "shook up" the solar system, as it had been "shaken" more than once by other equally powerful explosions. Is it not about this formidable and truly universal event that information has come down to us in the form of ancient legends and myths? And has not happened as a result of a short-term "opening" of "holes" another dramatic change of roles among the members of the solar group of luminaries?
It is difficult to grasp this fact - "holes" can turn out to be centers of "crystallization" of cosmic formations. After all, then, as follows from the theoretical positions of J. Wheeler, J. Penrose and other scientists, we will have to admit that cosmic bodies are quite likely instantly connected to each other under space. And the overflow of matter can take place not only in the usual order, from the surface of the first body; on the surface of the second in a certain period of time, but also with lightning speed, from "hole" to "hole", from center to center.
The first speculative models of the Sun with a hole in the center have already appeared. Three years ago, to imagine not just a "hollow Sun", but with a "well" inside, going into the abyss, was the height of fantasy. And now astrophysicists are calmly calculating the model and wondering if it will help explain the sensational results of recent experiments with solar neutrinos, which our star emits a dozen or two times less than expected in the usual model of the Sun - a solid red-hot gas ball. The structure of celestial bodies, it turns out, can be much more interesting.
And inside the Earth there can be found a "well" in the "abyss", a "hole" associated with this or that "hole" -mate.
Now these holes are still closed, but articles appear in scientific journals in which it is proved that a gravitational wave of ordinary power can open them and thereby shake the solar system to the ground, causing all kinds of astronomical and geological catastrophes. And gravitational waves arise, scatter and wrinkle space-time during the spontaneous (spontaneous), like in radioactive nuclei, decay of metastable "holes" hidden, for example, in the centers of our and neighboring galaxies. As for double stars, they are a particular consequence of the universal gravitational-magnetic mechanism of the unification and separation of matter through "holes".
But since every star may be born with a twin, where did the Sun's twin go?
Metamorphoses of the solar system
Undoubtedly, in the early stages of the universe, when the world was incredibly close, gravitational waves and shafts walked around the solar system. The members of the system probably interacted with each other in a complex manner and exchanged matter both under space and in the usual way.
As for the "growth" or "crystallization" of celestial bodies from scattered matter, sometimes this process also means a lot, for example, during the formation of cold red giants in the Galaxy of our time. It is doubtful, however, whether planets are formed in this case? However, the authoritative astronomer S. van den Berg recently emphasized that the hypothesis of the formation of stars from scattered matter does not yet have strong evidence in its favor. For space as a whole, the process of "melting", which once in the past determined the development of space objects, obviously predominates.
In 1967, West German scientists R. Kippenhan and A. Weigert calculated the behavior of two stars of approximately solar mass, revolving around a common center of gravity at a distance of approximately the radius of the present earth's orbit. The result is a very curious picture. At first, the system is unstable. The larger star is doomed, it begins to "melt". Although there is no collapse, the matter from it under the combined influence of tidal and electromagnetic forces still flows into the smaller star. At the same time, the distance between the partners of the star dance increases.
In the end, the process of the outflow of matter may stop, but the double star will no longer resemble itself. Its second member will become much heavier than the first, which has melted to about the size of Jupiter. By the way, according to the estimates of the Indian scientist S. Kumar, in the past Jupiter was 50 times more massive and played an important role in the formation of the solar system.
"So that's who the Sun's partner was - Jupiter!" - the impatient reader will hasten to conclude. In fact, everything is much more complicated and confusing. There are tons of options. Much depends on the initial masses and other parameters of the "stellar tandem", their chemical composition, the distance between them. The formation of the final system almost certainly proceeds quantized, in leaps, with interruptions and explosions. Moreover, the English scientist F. Hartwick showed in 1972 that in close binary systems, even supernova explosions are inevitable, if only the mass of one of the members does not exceed the solar mass. At some stage in the evolution of such a "light" star, a comparatively small addition of mass (for example, overflowing from another member of the system) is sufficient for its core to be strongly compressed, heated, and it flared up. Thus, at a new theoretical level, we return to the explosive model of the "double protosun" by Fred Hoyle.
Accordingly, the metamorphoses of the solar system can be very diverse, including those about which ancient myths tell. One of the possible sequences of events in the solar system may look in full accordance with the ancient Greek cosmogonic concepts. First, from the “hole” - Proto-Earth (Gaia), Uranus, the Sun, the Moon, Saturn (Chronos) and some other celestial bodies were born. Then there was a transfer of matter from Uranus to Saturn (in myth this event is interpreted as the overthrow of his father Uranus by Chronos). From the interaction of Proto-Earth with Saturn, this new ruler of the heavens, Jupiter (Zeus) was born, who managed to repeat the operation with his "father", Saturn, pumped out the substance from him, as if overthrown him from the heavenly throne. As a result, Jupiter became the most powerful member of the system. In the following epochs, Venus, Mars, Pluto and Mercury were born due to various processes, Typhon disintegrated, and other space objects appeared. The last events in the solar system, associated with the birth of Venus from the head of Zeus-Jupiter, just tried to reconstruct in detail the American scientist I. Velikovsky in the books "Colliding Worlds" (1950), "Troubled Ages" (1952), " The Upside Down Earth "(1955). But one can understand the drama of a system only by understanding the beginning of it. And in the beginning there was the Earth, on which we live and from which all other members of the solar family were born, including the SunVelikovsky in the books “Worlds Colliding” (1950), “Troubled Ages” (1952), “Upside Down Earth” (1955). But one can understand the drama of a system only by understanding the beginning of it. And in the beginning there was the Earth, on which we live and from which all other members of the solar family were born, including the SunVelikovsky in the books “Worlds Colliding” (1950), “Troubled Ages” (1952), “Upside Down Earth” (1955). But one can understand the drama of a system only by understanding the beginning of it. And in the beginning there was the Earth, on which we live and from which all other members of the solar family were born, including the Sun
Thus, we can conclude that now, thanks to the successes of relativistic astrophysics, the cosmogony of the solar system has moved away from the primitive hypotheses of the 18th - 19th centuries and is building more and more "dramatic" models with many characters. And since in the course of the grandiose "revolution and astronomy" the usual heliocentric picture of the universe is collapsing before our eyes and at a higher spiral of knowledge a return to the ancient geocentric system may occur, we should trust the ancient evidence more and think about the question: which of the members the solar system is "guilty" of its creation, from which of them can we expect its upcoming transformations?
V. SKURLATOV, Candidate of Historical Sciences
1980