• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Solar system formation shown impossible by meteor

dad

Undefeated!
Site Supporter
Jan 17, 2005
44,905
1,259
✟25,524.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
"
The original extraterrestrial rock that fell to Earth must have been at least several meters in diameter, but disintegrated into small fragments of which the Hypatia stone is one.

Weird matrix

Straight away, the Hypatia mineral matrix (represented by fruitcake dough), looks nothing like that of any known meteorites, the rocks that fall from space onto Earth every now and then.

"If it were possible to grind up the entire planet Earth to dust in a huge mortar and pestle, we would get dust with on average a similar chemical composition as chondritic meteorites," says Kramers. "In chondritic meteorites, we expect to see a small amount of carbon{C} and a good amount of silicon (Si). But Hypatia's matrix has a massive amount of carbon and an unusually small amount of silicon."

"Even more unusual, the matrix contains a high amount of very specific carbon compounds, called polyaromatic hydrocarbons, or PAH, a major component of interstellar dust, which existed even before our solar system was formed. Interstellar dust is also found in comets and meteorites that have not been heated up for a prolonged period in their history," adds Kramers.

In another twist, most (but not all) of the PAH in the Hypatia matrix has been transformed into diamonds smaller than one micrometer, which are thought to have been formed in the shock of impact with the Earth's atmosphere or surface. These diamonds made Hypatia resistant to weathering so that it is preserved for analysis from the time it arrived on Earth.

Weirder grains never found before

When researcher Georgy Belyanin analyzed the mineral grains in the inclusions in Hypatia, (represented by the nuts and cherries of a fruitcake), a number of most surprising chemical elements showed up.

"The aluminum occurs in pure metallic form, on its own, not in a chemical compound with other elements. As a comparison, gold occurs in nuggets, but aluminum never does. This occurrence is extremely rare on Earth and the rest of our solar system, as far as is known in science," says Belyanin.

"We also found silver iodine phosphide and moissanite (silicon carbide) grains, again in highly unexpected forms. The grains are the first documented to be found in situ (as is) without having to first dissolve the surrounding rock with acid," adds Belyanin. "There are also grains of a compound consisting of mainly nickel and phosphorus, with very little iron; a mineral composition never observed before on Earth or in meteorites," he adds.

Dr Marco Andreoli, a Research Fellow at the School of Geosciences at the University of the Witwatersrand, and a member of the Hypatia research team says, "When Hypatia was first found to be extraterrestrial, it was a sensation, but these latest results are opening up even bigger questions about its origins."

Unique minerals in our solar system

Taken together, the ancient unheated PAH carbon as well as the phosphides, the metallic aluminum, and the moissanite suggest that Hypatia is an assembly of unchanged pre-solar material. That means, matter that existed in space before our Sun, the Earth and the other planets in our solar system were formed.

Supporting the pre-solar concept is the weird composition of the nickel-phosphorus-iron grains found in the Hypatia inclusions. These three chemical elements are interesting because they belong to the subset of chemical elements heavier than carbon and nitrogen which form the bulk of all the rocky planets.

"In the grains within Hypatia the ratios of these three elements to each other are completely different from that calculated for the planet Earth or measured in known types of meteorites. As such these inclusions are unique within our solar system," adds Belyanin.

"We think the nickel-phosphorus-iron grains formed pre-solar, because they are inside the matrix, and are unlikely to have been modified by shock such as collision with the Earth's atmosphere or surface, and also because their composition is so alien to our solar system," he adds.

Generally, science says that our solar system's planets ultimately formed from a huge, ancient cloud of interstellar dust (the solar nebula) in space. The first part of that process would be much like dust bunnies coagulating in an unswept room. Science also holds that the solar nebula was homogenous, that is, the same kind of dust everywhere.

But Hypatia's chemistry tugs at this view. "For starters, there are no silicate minerals in Hypatia's matrix, in contrast to chondritic meteorites (and planets like the Earth, Mars and Venus), where silicates are dominant. Then there are the exotic mineral inclusions. If Hypatia itself is not presolar, both features indicate that the solar nebula wasn't the same kind of dust everywhere -- which starts tugging at the generally accepted view of the formation of our solar system," says Kramers."

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2018/01/180109112437.htm



Question the fables.
 

JackRT

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Oct 17, 2015
15,722
16,445
82
small town Ontario, Canada
✟767,445.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Unorthodox
Marital Status
Married
dad --- thank you for a most interesting article. While interesting in and of itself, it also points out the true power of science. New information that challenges old understandings is encouraged and even welcomed. This leads to new understandings that correspond more closely to reality. This is in complete contrast to theologians who deal in dogma and doctrine.
 
Upvote 0

Shemjaza

Regular Member
Site Supporter
Apr 17, 2006
6,469
4,008
47
✟1,116,864.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
AU-Greens
I'm failing to see how a mysterious meteor that formed separately and possibly earlier than the solar system is a problem for science?
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Bungle_Bear

Whoot!
Mar 6, 2011
9,084
3,513
✟262,040.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Married
I'm failing to see how a mysterious meteor that formed separately and possibly earlier than the solar system is a problem for science?
So does @dad, but it doesn't stop him posting these things. We should really be thanking him for posting an interesting article which, fundamentally, goes against his entire, weird different state past claim.
 
Upvote 0

dad

Undefeated!
Site Supporter
Jan 17, 2005
44,905
1,259
✟25,524.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
I'm failing to see how a mysterious meteor that formed separately and possibly earlier than the solar system is a problem for science?
If they claimed solar system formed a certain way, and it could not have done so...that is a problem.
 
Upvote 0

SkyWriting

The Librarian
Site Supporter
Jan 10, 2010
37,281
8,501
Milwaukee
✟411,038.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
But Hypatia's chemistry tugs at this view. "For starters, there are no silicate minerals in Hypatia's matrix, in contrast to chondritic meteorites (and planets like the Earth, Mars and Venus), where silicates are dominant. Then there are the exotic mineral inclusions. If Hypatia itself is not presolar, both features indicate that the solar nebula wasn't the same kind of dust everywhere -- which starts tugging at the generally accepted view of the formation of our solar system," says Kramers."

I checked scripture, and couldn't find any similar ratios of silicates to be expected in chondritic meteorites there either. So this really is strange rock. It goes to show that not only do we imagine that God is mysterious, but He is more mysterious than we can imagine.
 
Upvote 0

dad

Undefeated!
Site Supporter
Jan 17, 2005
44,905
1,259
✟25,524.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
I checked scripture, and couldn't find any similar ratios of silicates to be expected in chondritic meteorites there either. So this really is strange rock. It goes to show that not only do we imagine that God is mysterious, but He is more mysterious than we can imagine.
Right, and also that the creation fables of science don't fit evidence.
 
Upvote 0

SkyWriting

The Librarian
Site Supporter
Jan 10, 2010
37,281
8,501
Milwaukee
✟411,038.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Right, and also that the creation fables of science don't fit evidence.
They always change and adapt to fit the evidence.
That is
what science does.

What they don't do is admit they were dead wong before
or that they are likely to be wrong now.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

AirPo

with a Touch of Grey
Oct 31, 2003
26,363
7,214
61
✟176,857.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Married
So does @dad, but it doesn't stop him posting these things. We should really be thanking him for posting an interesting article which, fundamentally, goes against his entire, weird different state past claim.
Give it time.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: kiwimac
Upvote 0

SkyWriting

The Librarian
Site Supporter
Jan 10, 2010
37,281
8,501
Milwaukee
✟411,038.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Upvote 0

Speedwell

Well-Known Member
May 11, 2016
23,928
17,626
82
St Charles, IL
✟347,280.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
Upvote 0

SkyWriting

The Librarian
Site Supporter
Jan 10, 2010
37,281
8,501
Milwaukee
✟411,038.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Was it silicate rock? My understanding is that there are springs there pent up behind limestone incrustations which can be opened by striking them.

That's not likely. And if it was likely, it would hardly be worth writing about in scripture other than a tourist note. So it was either a miracle, or a pointless geography notation.
 
Upvote 0

Shemjaza

Regular Member
Site Supporter
Apr 17, 2006
6,469
4,008
47
✟1,116,864.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
AU-Greens
If they claimed solar system formed a certain way, and it could not have done so...that is a problem.
But they don't, that's the point.

No one ever claimed that every scrap of rock in the solar system formed in the same way or at the same time. Stuff being both much older than the solar system and traveling through interstellar space is very old news indeed.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: kiwimac
Upvote 0

dad

Undefeated!
Site Supporter
Jan 17, 2005
44,905
1,259
✟25,524.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
They always change and adapt to fit the evidence.
That is
what science does.

What they don't do is admit they were dead wong before
or that they are likely to be wrong now.
Chameleon science.
 
Upvote 0

dad

Undefeated!
Site Supporter
Jan 17, 2005
44,905
1,259
✟25,524.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
But they don't, that's the point.

No one ever claimed that every scrap of rock in the solar system formed in the same way or at the same time. Stuff being both much older than the solar system and traveling through interstellar space is very old news indeed.

Yet I see this in the article

"Generally, science says that our solar system's planets ultimately formed from a huge, ancient cloud of interstellar dust (the solar nebula) in space. The first part of that process would be much like dust bunnies coagulating in an unswept room. Science also holds that the solar nebula was homogenous, that is, the same kind of dust everywhere.

But Hypatia's chemistry tugs at this view. "For starters, there are no silicate minerals in Hypatia's matrix, in contrast to chondritic meteorites (and planets like the Earth, Mars and Venus), where silicates are dominant. Then there are the exotic mineral inclusions. If Hypatia itself is not presolar, both features indicate that the solar nebula wasn't the same kind of dust everywhere -- which starts tugging at the generally accepted view of the formation of our solar system," says Kramers."

Admit the tug.
 
Upvote 0

Shemjaza

Regular Member
Site Supporter
Apr 17, 2006
6,469
4,008
47
✟1,116,864.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
AU-Greens
Yet I see this in the article

"Generally, science says that our solar system's planets ultimately formed from a huge, ancient cloud of interstellar dust (the solar nebula) in space. The first part of that process would be much like dust bunnies coagulating in an unswept room. Science also holds that the solar nebula was homogenous, that is, the same kind of dust everywhere.

But Hypatia's chemistry tugs at this view. "For starters, there are no silicate minerals in Hypatia's matrix, in contrast to chondritic meteorites (and planets like the Earth, Mars and Venus), where silicates are dominant. Then there are the exotic mineral inclusions. If Hypatia itself is not presolar, both features indicate that the solar nebula wasn't the same kind of dust everywhere -- which starts tugging at the generally accepted view of the formation of our solar system," says Kramers."

Admit the tug.
If Hypatia itself is not presolar,

It's right there in your quote. One explantation is that the asteroid isn't part of the same stuff as the rest of the solar system.

Another explanation is that the current ideas about solar system formation while mostly consistent with evidence might need a more complicated and nuanced explanation.

No one ever claims that science is perfect, just that it's practical and the most reliable source of detailed explanations we have.

Given that the other option in this case appears to be: "Some nonsense that Dad just made up, that isn't consistent with evidence, scientific theory or even traditional creationist theology." I find your hand waving and doubt amusing and ridiculous.
 
Upvote 0