Fine tuning Intelligent Design

Astronomers: Earth formed within 5 million years

Spread the love

Illustration of protoplanetary disk (stock image). | Credit: (c) Peter Jurik / stock.adobe.com
protoplanetary disk/ © Peter Jurik, Adobe Stock

Much faster than previously thought:

The precursor of our planet, the proto-Earth, formed within a time span of approximately five million years, shows a new study from the Centre for Star and Planet Formation (StarPlan) at the Globe Institute at the University of Copenhagen.

On an astronomical scale, this is extremely fast, the researchers explain.

If you compare the solar system’s estimated 4.6 billion years of existence with a 24-hour period, the new results indicate that the proto-Earth formed in what corresponds to about a minute and a half.

Thus, the results from StarPlan break with the traditional theory that the proto-Earth formed by random collisions between larger and larger planetary bodies throughout several tens of millions of years — equivalent to about 5-15 minutes out of the above-mentioned fictional 24 hours of formation.

Instead, the new results support a more recent, alternative theory about the formation of planets through the accretion of cosmic dust.

University of Copenhagen, “Earth formed much faster than previously thought, new study shows” at ScienceDaily

Paper. (open access)

Nothing seems to happen slower than previously thought. And the random collisions aren’t even in this version.

8 Replies to “Astronomers: Earth formed within 5 million years

  1. 1
    Truthfreedom says:

    And the random collisions aren’t even in this version.

    ‘Random’ is the token word of the intellectually lazy.

  2. 2
    bornagain77 says:

    As to this comment from the article in the OP:

    Instead, the new results support a more recent, alternative theory about the formation of planets through the accretion of cosmic dust.

    In the following article by Hugh Ross, it is found that not only must the right chemicals be present on earth for the earth to be able to host life, but the chemicals must also be present on the earth in ‘specific abundances’.

    Elemental Evidence of Earth’s Divine Design – Hugh Ross PhD. – April 2010
    Table: Earth’s Anomalous Abundances – Page 8
    The twenty-five elements listed below must exist on Earth in specific abundances for advanced life and/or support of civilization to be possible. For each listed element the number indicates how much more or less abundant it is, by mass, in Earth’s crust, relative to magnesium’s abundance, as compared to its average abundance in the rest of the Milky Way Galaxy, also relative to the element magnesium. Asterisks denote “vital poisons,” essential elements that if too abundant would be toxic to advanced life, but if too scarce would fail to provide the quantities of nutrients essential for advanced life. The water measure compares the amount of water in and on Earth relative to the minimum amount the best planet formation models would predict for a planet the mass of Earth orbiting a star identical to the Sun at the same distance from the Sun.

    carbon* 1,200 times less
    nitrogen* 2,400 times less
    fluorine* 50 times more
    sodium* 20 times more
    aluminum 40 times more
    phosphorus* 4 times more
    sulfur* 60 times less
    potassium* 90 times more
    calcium 20 times more
    titanium 65 times more
    vanadium* 9 times more
    chromium* 5 times less
    nickel* 20 times less
    cobalt* 5 times less
    selenium* 30 times less
    yttrium 50 times more
    zirconium 130 times more
    niobium 170 times more
    molybdenum* 5 times more
    tin* 3 times more
    iodine* 3 times more
    gold 5 times less
    lead 170 times more
    uranium 16,000 times more
    thorium 23,000 times more
    water 250 times less
    https://www.reasons.org/explore/publications/nrtb-e-zine/read/nrtb-e-zine/2010/03/01/elemental-evidence-of-earth-s-divine-design

    We simply have no evidence “that extrasolar terrestrial planets will consistently manifest Earth-like chemical compositions”

    Compositions of Extrasolar Planets – July 2010
    Excerpt: ,,,the presumption that extrasolar terrestrial planets will consistently manifest Earth-like chemical compositions is incorrect. Instead, the simulations revealed “a wide variety of resulting planetary compositions.”,,, The team concluded that terrestrial planets in these systems would have “compositions and mineralogies unlike any body observed within our solar system.”4
    https://tnrtb.wordpress.com/2010/07/12/compositions-of-extrasolar-planets/

    Earth’s composition might be unusual for a planet with life – 2015
    Excerpt: Is Earth the odd planet out? Many of our galaxy’s habitable planets probably have a chemical composition that is quite different from Earth’s.
    Vardan Adibekyan of the Institute of Astrophysics and Space Sciences, Portugal, and colleagues looked at stars with a similar mass and radius to the sun that are known to have planets in their habitable zones, where water stays liquid. They found that these stars tended to have less iron and other metals than stars that host only inhospitable worlds.
    Planets are built from the same basic material as their stars. “Most of the properties of planets of different types strongly depend on their host stars’ chemistry,” says Adibekyan. This suggests that planets in the habitable zone are typically lower in certain metals than Earth is.
    https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn28170-earths-composition-might-be-unusual-for-a-planet-with-life/

    Moreover, the solar system itself must be set up in such a way so as to enable life. Thus far, out of all the solar systems studied thus far, only our solar system is found to have the correct orbital features to enable life to be possible.

    (Our) Rare Solar System Gets Rarer – Hugh Ross – November 5, 2018
    Excerpt: Astronomers have detected and measured the mass and/or orbital features of 3,869 planets in 2,887 planetary systems beyond the solar system.1 This ranks as a staggering rate of discovery, given that the first confirmed detection of a planet orbiting another hydrogen-fusion-burning star was as recent as 1995.2 What do the characteristics of these systems reveal about potential habitability for advanced life?,,,
    How many of the known multiple-planet systems exhibit these life-essential features? The answer for the 638 known multi-planet exoplanetary systems is zero.13 How about the known exoplanetary systems where only one planet has been discovered? Of these 2,249 systems, they either lack a cold Jupiter closer than 14 times Earth’s distance from the Sun or the planet they contain possesses characteristics that would rule out the possible existence of another planet in the system capable of sustaining advanced life.
    The presumption back in 1995 was that astronomers would find many exoplanetary systems where the probability of advanced life possibly existing in that system would be greater than zero. More than twenty-three years later, with a database of 2,888 planetary systems and 3,877 planets, only one planetary system and only one planet possess the characteristics that the possible existence of advanced life needs. It requires little effort to discern the identity of that single planetary system and single planet.
    https://www.reasons.org/explore/blogs/todays-new-reason-to-believe/read/todays-new-reason-to-believe/2018/11/05/rare-solar-system-gets-rarer

    A solar system having, and maintaining, the correct orbital features for life is far harder than was presupposed:

    “Research now establishes that every planet in our solar system must possess exactly the masses and orbits that they do for advanced life to be possible on Earth. No other known planetary system comes anywhere close to having the features to make advanced life possible. We live not only on a miraculously “rare” Earth but also a miraculously “rare” planetary system. For details and documentation, see my latest blog post.”
    – Hugh Ross – June 2017
    https://www.reasons.org/explore/blogs/todays-new-reason-to-believe/read/todays-new-reason-to-believe/2017/06/12/rare-planetary-system

    “You might also think that these disparate bodies are scattered across the solar system without rhyme or reason. But move any piece of the solar system today, or try to add anything more, and the whole construction would be thrown fatally out of kilter. So how exactly did this delicate architecture come to be?”
    R. Webb – Unknown solar system 1: How was the solar system built? – New Scientist – 2009

    Is the Solar System Stable? By Scott Tremaine – 2011
    Excerpt: So what are the results? Most of the calculations agree that eight billion years from now, just before the Sun swallows the inner planets and incinerates the outer ones, all of the planets will still be in orbits very similar to their present ones. In this limited sense, the solar system is stable. However, a closer look at the orbit histories reveals that the story is more nuanced. After a few tens of millions of years, calculations using slightly different parameters (e.g., different planetary masses or initial positions within the small ranges allowed by current observations) or different numerical algorithms begin to diverge at an alarming rate. More precisely, the growth of small differences changes from linear to exponential:,,,
    As an example, shifting your pencil from one side of your desk to the other today could change the gravitational forces on Jupiter enough to shift its position from one side of the Sun to the other a billion years from now. The unpredictability of the solar system over very long times is of course ironic since this was the prototypical system that inspired Laplacian determinism.
    Fortunately, most of this unpredictability is in the orbital phases of the planets, not the shapes and sizes of their orbits, so the chaotic nature of the solar system does not normally lead to collisions between planets. However, the presence of chaos implies that we can only study the long-term fate of the solar system in a statistical sense, by launching in our computers an armada of solar systems with slightly different parameters at the present time—typically, each planet is shifted by a random amount of about a millimeter—and following their evolution. When this is done, it turns out that in about 1 percent of these systems, Mercury’s orbit becomes sufficiently eccentric so that it collides with Venus before the death of the Sun. Thus, the answer to the question of the stability of the solar system—more precisely, will all the planets survive until the death of the Sun—is neither “yes” nor “no” but “yes, with 99 percent probability.”
    https://www.ias.edu/about/publications/ias-letter/articles/2011-summer/solar-system-tremaine

    Of related note. Anomalies in the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation now strongly indicate that the earth and solar system have a far more significant position in the universe than was presupposed under the Copernican principle,

    Cosmic Microwave Background Proves Intelligent Design (disproves Copernican principle) (clip of “The Principle”) – video
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=htV8WTyo4rw

    In other words, the “tiny temperature variations” in the CMBR, to the largest scale structures in the universe itself, reveal teleology, (i.e. a goal directed purpose, a plan, a reason), that specifically included the earth from the start. ,,, The earth, and our solar system, from what our best science can now tell us, is not some random cosmic fluke as atheists had presupposed.
    November 2019
    https://uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/rob-sheldon-on-whether-quantas-universe-is-closed-or-flat/#comment-687216

    Job 38:4-5
    “Where were you when I laid the earth’s foundation?
    Tell me, if you understand.
    Who marked off its dimensions? Surely you know!
    Who stretched a measuring line across it?

    In fact, as far as General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics themselves are concerned, (which happen to be our two most powerful theories in science), the Copernican Principle itself is now overturned as to being a correct assumption in science:

    November 2019 – despite the fact that virtually everyone, including the vast majority of Christians, hold that the Copernican Principle is unquestionably true, the fact of the matter is that the Copernican Principle is now empirically shown, (via quantum mechanics and general relativity, etc..), to be a false assumption.
    https://uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/so-then-maybe-we-are-privileged-observers/#comment-688855

    Thus, we have VERY GOOD reasons to believe that the earth and solar system, and therefore humans themselves, are not nearly as insignificant in this universe as atheists have presupposed:

    Genesis 1:1-3
    In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

  3. 3
    Seversky says:

    Bornagain77 @ 2

    In the following article by Hugh Ross, it is found that not only must the right chemicals be present on earth for the earth to be able to host life, but the chemicals must also be present on the earth in ‘specific abundances’.

    If it happened once it can happen again,

    We simply have no evidence “that extrasolar terrestrial planets will consistently manifest Earth-like chemical compositions”

    Did anyone claim that they would?

    Moreover, the solar system itself must be set up in such a way so as to enable life. Thus far, out of all the solar systems studied thus far, only our solar system is found to have the correct orbital features to enable life to be possible.

    Life as we know it. We don’t know if this is the only configuration that makes life possible. There may be others. We’ll just have to wait and see.

    Of related note. Anomalies in the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation now strongly indicate that the earth and solar system have a far more significant position in the universe than was presupposed under the Copernican principle,

    No they don’t. It’s a curious alignment. Anything beyond that is speculation.

    The earth, and our solar system, from what our best science can now tell us, is not some random cosmic fluke as atheists had presupposed.

    The CMBR anomalies don’t imply design any more than the solar system configuration. That’s a leap of faith.

    In fact, as far as General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics themselves are concerned, (which happen to be our two most powerful theories in science), the Copernican Principle itself is now overturned as to being a correct assumption in science:

    In your dreams.

    Thus, we have VERY GOOD reasons to believe that the earth and solar system, and therefore humans themselves, are not nearly as insignificant in this universe as atheists have presupposed:

    You can believe that if it makes you feel better but how are we supposed to assess our “significance” – whatever that might mean – in this universe?

    Genesis 1:1-3
    In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

    Humility is the foundation of all the other virtues hence, in the soul in which this virtue does not exist there cannot be any other virtue except in mere appearance.

    Saint Augustine

  4. 4
    jawa says:

    Too bad nobody thought of installing webcams to watch the earth formation as it happened

    🙂

  5. 5
    bornagain77 says:

    Seversky at 3, short snide comments deriding empirically established facts is NOT a scientific refutation, It is merely you expressing your personal displeasure with the current state of empirically established facts.

    “If it disagrees with experiment, it’s wrong. In that simple statement is the key to science. It doesn’t make any difference how beautiful your guess is, it doesn’t matter how smart you are who made the guess, or what his name is… If it disagrees with experiment, it’s wrong. That’s all there is to it.”
    – Richard Feynman – a brilliant Nobel Prize winning scientist,

  6. 6
    ET says:

    seversky:

    If it happened once it can happen again,

    Except it never happened and never will

    We don’t know if this is the only configuration that makes life possible.

    Imagination is neither evidence nor science. Astrobiologists agree that any life will be carbon based.

    That’s a leap of faith.

    That is all you and yours have, seversky- huge leaps of faith.

  7. 7
    Truthfreedom says:

    @4 Seversky

    The CMBR anomalies don’t imply design any more than the solar system configuration. That’s a leap of faith.

    Neither do they imply “absence” of design. Tie.

    You can believe that if it makes you feel better but how are we supposed to assess our “significance” – whatever that might mean – in this universe?

    Neither can we assess our “in”significance then. Tie.

    Hawking was wrong then.

    ” The human race is chemical scum on a moderate-sized planet, orbiting around a very average star in the outer suburb of one among a hundred billion galaxies. We are so
    insignificant that I can’t believe the whole universe exists for our benefit”.
    Stephen Hawking.

    __________

    Humility is the foundation of all the other virtues hence, in the soul in which this virtue does not exist there cannot be any other virtue except in mere appearance. Saint Augustine.

    Are you humble enough to accept the fact that your neurons are the ones doing the thinking and that after the event, they inform their own creation, a “self” they named “Seversky”?

  8. 8
    Pearlman says:

    5 million based on current deep-time dependent consensus, calibrates to about 1 day, after considering all the science and applies the highest probability galactic and stellar formation model..
    reference ‘distant starlight and ‘the age, formation and structure of the universe’ volume II of the YeC Moshe Emes series for Torah and science alignment, that once studied, fairly considered and disseminated, should replace the current LCDM standard, here is how they compare on several issues. http://www.academia.edu/360138.....cal_models

Leave a Reply