A Theory of the Origin and Development of the Solar System

Description

Foreword
1 Cosmogonical hypotheses
1. Nebular hypotheses
2. Hypotheses of capture
3. Other hypotheses
2 Expansion of celestial bodies
1. Cosmic precipitations
2. Classification of celestial bodies
3. Expansion of celestial bodies
4. Circulation of matter in the Universe
5. Condensation of diffuse matter
3 Deep differentiation of substance. Origin of continents and oceans
1. Depth differentiation of substance
2. The origin of shells of celestial bodies
3. Origin of continents and oceans
4 Deceleration of celestial bodies in gas-dust environment
1. Deceleration of celestial bodies
2. Interplanetary distances
3. Spiral branches of the Galaxy
5 Evolution of the solar system
1. The dynamics of masses and dimensions of celestial bodies
2. The change of density
3. Distances of planets to the Sun
4. Eccentricity
5. Inclination of orbital planes. Direction of circulation of celestial bodies
6. Rotation of celestial bodies. Slopes of equatorial planes of celestial bodies
6 Origin of the solar system
1. Origin of rings of giant planets
2. The origin of giant planets
3. Origin of Pluto and other ice planets
4. Origin of asteroids
5. Origin of satellites
6. The origin of terrestrial planets
7. Origin of comets
8. Origin of the Sun
Conclusion
Foreword
The recent century and a half was marked by the greatest achievements of scientific progress. In many fields of science, the idea of development of matter carves its way; this idea is connected, in particular, with the names of such great researchers as D.Mendeleyev — in chemistry, Ch.Darvin — in biology, K.Marx — in social sciences, A.Einstein — in physics. There is some progress in other branches of science as well, including cosmogony — the science on origin and evolution of celestial bodies and their systems, including the Solar System. However, the achievements of cosmogony cannot be compared with those in other fields of science. One can even say that chaos reigns in this field. Nearly each researcher (astronomer, celestial mechanician, physicist, mathematician, etc), having rejected all the previous cosmogonical hypotheses, creates its own one. The number of books on cosmogony is equal to the number of hypotheses.

Is it good or bad? Both good and bad. It is bad, because in cosmogony, in contrast to other fields of science, there is no an objective theory able to explain in a proper way one of the most important stages of development of matter — the phase of origin of our Earth and the whole Solar System, as well as their further development. Meanwhile, this theme is of great philosophical significance.

Many researchers try to resolve this important problem again and again. And this is good. It means that this problem will be resolved sooner or later. And the more is the number of hypotheses; the sooner will be the solution. At that, the merit for this will belong to the authors of different hypotheses, at least because scientists, having become familiar with erroneous hypotheses, can avoid these and similar errors in future.

The author calls attention of the readers to one more hypothesis of origin and development of the Solar System in the Universe being infinite and eternal. If this hypothesis has attracted at least several new researchers, the author would consider his task fulfilled.

The author