Astronomers Have No Idea How Planets Form | Space News

According to a paper in the journal Nature, astronomers are now looking for a whole new theory to explain how planets form. The standard model of planet formation says that planets and stars form gravitationally in a contracting disk of gas and dust called the core accretion theory. Since astronomers believe that this model explains our solar system, they expected that exo-planet systems would play by the same rules. However, they have now observed countless baffling systems that cannot be explained by conventional reasoning. Wal Thornhill explains the Electric Universe thoughts on planetary formation.

[randyatkins]

The Thunderbolts Guys can explain the whole gambit of cosmology with the Electric Universe Model, practically leaving standard cosmologists in the cosmic dust.  The Electric Universe model really explains it all. Indeed it's the only new Idea about space that make any sense.

[veritas.sounds]

I get so giddy when I see a new TBP video come out!

[yolandosoquite]

The increased in Technology and Precision instruments are all favoring the Electric universe paradigm..nothing for gravity oriented ones..Magnetometers for detecting magnetic fields(that made earth habitable, EISA, swarm )..no gravitometers!

[mojomanhand]

The more I go over these videos things become very clear. What I was taught about the formation of the solar system seems very simple, but looking at the planets... It does not make any sense. 
The way the formation of the solar system is explained in the video is so clear to me. It is not simple in any sense like what was taught, but it is becoming very clear now. Thank You. The truth is out there!

[LordSzabonight]

It would great to see an episode where the project explains what it cannot explain. This would help all of us to input.

[angrypotato]

really enjoy the last parts of this intelligent presentation.

[bigmamaful]

thank you for such great information ~~~

[barrycooper]

It is surprising. Accretion does seem 2 have some sort of working yet not the only action. In no gravity particles do join together but we have been seriously misled

[Mavrilon]

How does the electric Universe theory explain stars going super nova ?

[fretlord]

Just a suggestion, but you might want to look at the sky on a clear night, while remaining completely still, like you're taking a time-laps with your eye. You can actually see some of this stuff depicted in the ancient symbols.

[ElveeKaye]

I just watched a video about how the stars supposedly formed from collisions of matter, which then accumulated via gravity to form stars. But how do you get from a ball of particles pulled together through gravity, to what is basically a giant machine that burns hydrogen for fuel? It doesn't make any sense to me. The EU model, however, works.

By the way, have you seen the article about the newly-discovered bacteria that eat electrons? They form long chains that channel the electrons like microscopic wires. It seems that the cosmos is electrical at all scales!

[carrick]

Think of the solar spiral opening as a watch spring might unwind. Most models tend to keep the planets revolving in fixed orbits. All planets are spiraling away from their primaries with ever increasing radii. The bodies of the planets also expand as they move further away from their primaries.

[skingk]

Astronomers remind me of someone watching automobiles drive by, and then start expounding on the internal combustion engines.

[ritsukasa]

starting at about 3:55 he mentions some very dinamyc elements. Trying to show that earth, venus and mars are too different. The only more permanent difference is actually the size of mars.

[MisterBrimm]

This stuff rings true and blows my mind. 

[artembluntzki]

Are there any books about the electric universe that somebody can recommend me?

[JohnGadway]

Send this link to any physicist or scientist you know, retired or graduate student, and ask for an honest comment.

[cafu]

Very informative! Lots I did not know!
C.(DK).

[CharlesGarvang]

I would like to see the math behind this. All the things he talks about fits fine in the theory we have at the moment. He just neglects to inform of the countless ways for planets and stars being thrown out of solarsystems due to the chaos of the formation of the solarsystem. Or the "weird" orbits that also fits fine in the gravitational theory. We see alot of "hot jupiter" exo planets because these are the biggest and dim the light of its host star the most. But it does not take much for a planet to get out of orbit and start a collision course with its host star. This process can be stopped again at some point. But it still fits fine into the model we have today

[cbrucesbiz]

A new thought is that there may not be all the planets about the start as determined. It is possible the red shift method used is a measurement of something different. Also planets my be formed within proto stars or gas giants and the spots may be the scars seen on the surfaces. This rough report by me of the thunderbolts channels comments is from 2017.