Scientist Observes Planet Being Formed

The woefully ignorant lot tend to think that scientists or even those who accept the theory of evolution that matter like planets come from nothing. That sort of intellectual dishonesty not only drives people deeper into delusional mindsets, but also create a false atmosphere of thought.

Smart people know better.

A Hawaiian scientist recently came across a planet being created from dust and gas from the atmosphere it surrounds itself. The more we delve into the beauties of the universe, the more fascinating it becomes. Put away the archaic thoughts and continue to read the article below.

----------------------------------------------------------------
Hawaii astronomer captures image of forming planet

HONOLULU (AP) — Astronomers have captured the first direct image of a planet being born.

Adam Kraus, of the University of Hawaii's Institute for Astronomy, said the planet is being formed out of dust and gas circling a 2-milion-year-old star about 450 light years from Earth.

The planet itself, based on scientific models of how planets form, is estimated to have started taking shape about 50,000 to 100,000 years ago.
Called LkCa 15 b, it's the youngest planet ever observed. The previous record holder was about five times older.

Kraus and his colleague, Michael Ireland from Macquarie University and the Australian Astronomical Observatory, used Keck telescopes on Mauna Kea to find the planet.

"We're catching this object at the perfect time. We see this young star, it has a disc around it that planets are probably forming out of and we see something right in the middle of a gap in the disc," Kraus said in a telephone interview.

Kraus presented the discovery Wednesday at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center in Maryland. Kraus and Ireland's research paper on the discovery is due to appear in The Astrophysical Journal.

Observing planets while they're forming can help scientists answer questions like whether planets form early in the life of a star or later, and whether they form relatively close to stars or farther away.

Planets can change orbits after forming, so it's difficult to answer such questions by studying older planets.
"These very basic questions of when and where are best answered when you can actually see the planet forming, as the process is happening right now," Kraus said.

Other planets may also be forming around the same star. Kraus said he'll continue to observe the star and hopefully will see other planets if there are in fact more.

Scientists hadn't been able to see such young planets before because the bright light of the stars they're orbiting outshines them.
Kraus and Ireland used two techniques to overcome this obstacle.
One method, which is also used by other astronomers, was to change the shape of their mirror to remove light distortions created by the Earth's atmosphere.

The other, unique method they used was to put masks over most of the telescope mirror. The combination of these two techniques allowed the astronomers to obtain high-resolution images that let them see the faint planet next to the bright star.

The astronomers found the planet while surveying 150 young dusty stars. This led to a more concentrated study of a dozen stars.
The star LkCa 15 — the planet is named after its star — was the team's second target. They immediately knew they were seeing something new, so they gathered more data on the star a year later.
---------------------------------------------------------------

 

I follow an astrophysicist on FB and he'd posted about this earlier. He posts all kinds of space related wonderful geekery. His name is Adam Frank, if you're on FB and interested

 

I don't have a Facebook account and have no intentions on joining.

 

Its all about Dr Miatu Kaku Physics of the impossible baby

 

Now you have to prove God didn't set this in motion BBW. Take your time I'll wait lol.

 

I think the proof's in the pudding. Actually, there would have to be proof that there is a god first and foremost. So, the burden of proof lies within the likes of you.

 

I have a geek crush on Michio Kaku. I know he's still an 11 dimension string theorist, and that's probably not the right theory, but he's got a way of explaining things to the average person which is bang on. Plus he's sort of sexy in a geeky kind of way.

 

The creation of a planet?
no one said there has to be a belief in a personal God but why not a grand creator.

 

He guess lectured at my school and he was amazing. I've seen him and Chopra debate and its entertaining as hell to watch.
The man is truly a genius

 

There's no grand creation or scheme when it comes to the planets or stars being formed. Read the article as to what caused it. Do it carefully without selective reading. There's no predestined place. Everything simply happens. Not everything requires a reason, especially in the macroscopic sense. Only people adamant on thinking otherwise have a lot of intellectual dishonesty on their end. The possibility of a higher being is less and less likely especially since we've been uncovering more of the mysteries of universe.

The limitations of the brain comes mainly from that person who's unwilling to look beyond that little box of thought and observe what's been shown and calculate everything from there. The article here is the reality and more proof showing that the concept of god is less needed as to how things are set in motion.

 

Read it twice and all the article described was the how not the why.
This is why I dislike atheists and hardcore Christians alike. Both insufferable douchebags who swear they have it all figured it out. Well enjoy wonderless and cold world buddy. You've got it all figured out so there's no need conversing on the topic.

 

You assume that it requires a "why?" That's the major problem there first and foremost, Andrae. Why would a newly formed planet require a reason to be in existence? That's utterly silly. You simply cannot accept that maybe it just happened? Or you think it serves a purpose? The fact of the matter is that the planet is there and as life and time, it's objectively not there for anyone or anything. It's just something formed through material.

And secondly, for you to make that quip that my thought process is cold and wonderless is very disingenuous and downright immature on your part. There was no need for that. You can beauty in the process of science, but I guess your mind hasn't received the memo on the beauty of science. It's a lot more interesting to see it all work in motion as oppose to speculating a supernatural idea. If you're that clingy on that, then more power to you. As for me, I relish fantastic findings of the world.

 

I can believe a planet could be formed by gas and dust and its formation just "happens." But I can not believe, for one second, that a baby could just "happen." If I ever have any doubts about God's existence, all I have to do is stare into the eyes of a newborn baby, and I believe there is a Master Creator. Just my $.02.

 

Any discipline void of spirit and only responds to and studies mechanistic functionality by definition lacks the ability to recognize beauty. Just saying.

 

Those are two irrelevant examples from one another. The "birth" of a new planet is on a macroscopic level where as the birth of a baby is through a reproductive process. Sure, both are excellent examples of science, but two different scenarios.

As for the newborn baby, that's purely a personal thought, not an objectively factual one. But if you're talking a Master Creator(s), just observe the mom and dad with their sperm, egg, and genetic codes to create the little bundle of joy.

 

You know what BBW after reading posts like this I totally get why you think the way you do fam. Geesh.

 

Only a fool would make that assertion to boost his or her own ego. Just saying. I've heard this a lot from a lot of religious people around my part of the woods and quite frankly, I see nothing but contradiction there.

 

And where did the first mom and dad come from? Oh, wait. They just "formed" out of dust and gas, right?

 

Pffffft.

 

Is that sarcasm or you really don't know?