It is said that the solar systam was formed from supernova and the whirling clouds generated by that supernova then clustered together to form our star and planets. It is also said that the Moon was formed from a collision of a large body with the Earth during the time the solar system was formed. I know there have been alternative theories on the creation of the Moon, that attempt to explain why the Moon always has the same side facing the Earth, and it was textbook to have alternative theories on how the Moon was formed since it was not proven. I could help but wonder if the model for solar formation has been proven or if that is the only model that has been passed down over the years. In other words, what scientist has proven the current model for solar formation? I don't think astronomers have made observations of other solar systems that are in a phase that we would say that is what our own solar system would have looked like when it was forming. I may be wrong, if so please provide a link. Most observations of stellar nuseries that I have seen consisted of giant nebula that are clusters of stars in gas. I don't think this situation is consistant with what we think of as solar formation in our own solar system, the Sol System. This lead me to an alternative theory of solar formation, asking the question how could our own solar system form from these stellar nuseries.
One popular theory on supernova suggest that stars will go supernova the moment they start to produce iron in the core. There is a sudden collaspe in the size of the star and then reaches a critical point to where it explodes. So then what happens to the iron? I think this is a good place to start because there is a lot of iron on Earth and inside of its molten core. I think most of the star that imploded onto the newly formed iron core would bounce off that core like a rubber ball hitting a sidewalk. This could be a hard detail to point out in the mathmatics of stars, because most of it is just a linear section from the core to the edge to simplify the equations. It would require a three dimensional description of the elasticity of the stars make up, which I have not done. So then my hypothesis is that the iron core of a star going supernova would then remain consintrated into a body that is the location of the star. A dead star could leave behind an iron core that is mostly in tact, that has not been thrown into the debree of the supernova. This could then mean that the Earth is the core of a dead star, or that the Earth is a dead star.
So then what if the Earth was the core of a dead star? The debree would be sent out in all direction, and then possibly create an orbiting body in the same way we believe that bodies are formed in the solar system. I think the moon could be a result of this debree. I think most of the star dust ended up collecting on the Moon, and a lot of the heavier elements where left back on Earth. Then since they where once a part of the same body, then the same side of the Moon could remain facing Earth. Then the Earth could get caught in orbit around our sun with the Moon sometime after its death as a star, along with other failed stars that are smaller, like the gas giants. So then the solar system could be seen to be formed from a steller nursery, because then the solar system would be mostly formed from dead stars getting caught into the orbits of other stars, and the large collections of gas forming the gas giants are most of the gas that consisted of that nusery that didn't form into a star. So then the number of stars would thin out, and then there wouldn't be as many stars like around our solar system compared to that of a steller nusery.
One popular theory on supernova suggest that stars will go supernova the moment they start to produce iron in the core. There is a sudden collaspe in the size of the star and then reaches a critical point to where it explodes. So then what happens to the iron? I think this is a good place to start because there is a lot of iron on Earth and inside of its molten core. I think most of the star that imploded onto the newly formed iron core would bounce off that core like a rubber ball hitting a sidewalk. This could be a hard detail to point out in the mathmatics of stars, because most of it is just a linear section from the core to the edge to simplify the equations. It would require a three dimensional description of the elasticity of the stars make up, which I have not done. So then my hypothesis is that the iron core of a star going supernova would then remain consintrated into a body that is the location of the star. A dead star could leave behind an iron core that is mostly in tact, that has not been thrown into the debree of the supernova. This could then mean that the Earth is the core of a dead star, or that the Earth is a dead star.
So then what if the Earth was the core of a dead star? The debree would be sent out in all direction, and then possibly create an orbiting body in the same way we believe that bodies are formed in the solar system. I think the moon could be a result of this debree. I think most of the star dust ended up collecting on the Moon, and a lot of the heavier elements where left back on Earth. Then since they where once a part of the same body, then the same side of the Moon could remain facing Earth. Then the Earth could get caught in orbit around our sun with the Moon sometime after its death as a star, along with other failed stars that are smaller, like the gas giants. So then the solar system could be seen to be formed from a steller nursery, because then the solar system would be mostly formed from dead stars getting caught into the orbits of other stars, and the large collections of gas forming the gas giants are most of the gas that consisted of that nusery that didn't form into a star. So then the number of stars would thin out, and then there wouldn't be as many stars like around our solar system compared to that of a steller nusery.