While it is true that in the world of science we must always be open to what theories we take for certain to suffer some other missteps, there is a type of assertions that costs us much more than the rest establish as final. I refer to those that explain how were the origins of certain forms of the universe. We have never stopped asking ourselves “how was the origin of man?”, “How was the origin of life?”, “And of the Earth?”, “And of the universe?” … About the origin From the man there seems to be a clear consensus and, apart from the occasional appearance of some ancient great-great-grand father fossilized that confuses us a bit, there seems to be no doubt about how it happened. The origin of life seems to contain one of those points in which, as happens with the origin of the universe, we have a blurred interrogation just in the initial moment that keeps scientists pulling their hair. For some of these questions, we have already obtained quite firm answers, while others still elude us some subtle detail. It is not surprising that, from the scientific community itself, these types of issues are constantly being questioned, since we have not been able to witness any of these events directly. Or if?
Origin of the Solar system
There is a type of origin of which if we have been able to be witnesses, true that not of ours, but of similar ones. I refer to the origin of the Solar System, and although it has also gone through multiple hypotheses, today we have already formulated the one that seems to be on the right track.
The nebular theory was proposed in 1644 by Descartes and perfected independently by both Pierre-Simon Laplace and Immanuel Kant. This theory proposes that the Solar System was formed from a huge protosolar nebula in rotation, which evolved in such a way that most of the mass condensed in the center giving rise to the formation of the Sun, and from the small lumps that were around and that were colliding and grouping progressively, the planets were formed.
When Isaac Newton thought about the Solar System and how all the planets rotated in practically the same plane and direction of the elliptical, he felt quite confused. For him, the natural state of the orbits should have been more disordered, like that of the comets that traversed the solar system with all kinds of directions and senses. Newton ended up attributing this so perfect order, with which the planets aligned and turned, to a divine placement. But that the planets ended up orbiting all in the same plane, direction and sense were due to the flattening provoked by the rotation of the cloud when contracting by the force of gravity.
Currently, many stars have been observed accompanied by these protoplanetary discs, which helps to confirm this theory quite directly. A type of stars that are usually observed accompanied by these discs is called T Tauri stars. Young stars approximately twice as less massive than our Sun, which has not yet entered into what is called the main sequence. Another type of young stars, with masses between 2 and 8 times that of the Sun, which also, although more difficult to detect, are usually surrounded by this type of disc, are the stars Herbig Ae / Be. And they are not the only ones. Other different types such as the star Beta Pictoris, located in the Pictor constellation only 60 light years away from us, it also has a protoplanetary disk.
The study of these stars offers us the possibility of, indirectly, traveling to the past and witnessing the processes that took some 5,000 million years ago, to a totally chaotic cloud, to form our ordered and precise star system.