Hi anise_prakash,<br /><br />I think the first two scenarios, "Nebula theory" and the "gravitational collapse of hydrogen" are essentially the same thing, and this theory is the one that is the most promising. I think part of the confusion may be because there are many different things called "nebulae." In general, a nebula is some diffuse region (as opposed to a compact ball of gas like a star) that is blocking the light from background stars, that is scattering the light from other stars or that is glowing. This is usually the result of some over-density of gas/dust or the presence of some particularly bright star near the gas that's heating it up. The cartoon picture for how stars form is that some overdense region of gas/dust collapses into a star while a disk forms around the star and the planets form in the disk. This collapsing cloud is called the nebula. The collapsing gas/dust is dense enough that it blocks out background stars and scatters light from foreground stars. So you should be able to see nebulae associated with stars that are forming. And in fact that seems to be the case. When you look at areas with the youngest stars they seem to be associated with giant molecular clouds (massive regions of dust/gas). The orion nebula is an example of this. The youngest stars also typically have disks whereas older stars do not, as expected from this theory. As others have mentioned, stars tend to form in groups and we suspect that the sun was no different - there is evidence that there was a large amount of unstable Al26 early in the history of the solar system - this stuff decays away incredibly rapidly and is only produced (so far as we know) in Supernovae, so it seems that there was perhaps a supernova that went off very close to the Sun early in the history of the solar system (and may in fact have induced the collapse of the gas/dust cloud that formed the sun).<br /><br />One of the facts that seems to point strongly toward the "nebula" hypothesis f <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>