How To 

How Does a Star Form?



Look up at the night sky, and you’ll see a twinkling display of thousands of stars. There are billions more that we can’t see, but they’re there nevertheless. Some of those points of light are entire galaxies with billions of stars themselves. How did all of those dots get there? What causes stars to form with such ease that they become commonplace? Here’s the process of star formation.



1. They’re born from clouds of gas and dust.
Galaxies are filled with gas and dust, some of which is concentrated in specific areas. We call these stellar nurseries because they’re the birthplaces of stars. When a cloud of dust is sufficiently dense, gravity begins to pull it together and the material accumulates into what could become a star.



2. As mass builds, the material begins to collapse.
Once there’s enough mass, it begins to collapse and heat up to create the central core. More material is collected as it begins to collapse, so it grows in size and heats up further. At this point, it is known as a protostar.

3. The core begins to accumulate more gas and dust.
The star isn’t finished once it forms a core. It will continue to grab up more gas and dust, growing larger and larger in size. Some of this dust won’t become part of the star, however. As was the case in our solar system, some of that surrounding gas and dust becomes planets that orbit the central star.
 
  • Like
Reactions: IG2007 and Helio
Jul 15, 2020
8
2
15
Congratulations! Well done, a mathematical and Physics good, rational, explanation. But... still, is a theory, nobody can watch the formation of a star, it takes millions, billions years. Two questions: 1) before the dust, how and where the first gaseous stars got that dusts?; 2) There are two process of cell´s system formation, the first one was symbioses and then, they learned how to reproduce. So, why the academic staff is ignoring the only unique theory that are investigating if astronomic systems formation have also two processes of formation? At least their model has explanation for those dust and a different history for formation of all seven different kinds of astronomical bodies formation... Isn´t they two equally plausible theories?
 
  • Like
Reactions: IG2007
Feb 18, 2020
1,201
859
1,570
You asked:
Two questions:

1) before the dust, how and where the first gaseous stars got that dusts?;
The 'dusts' are/were simply anything heavier than H/He. Produced by nucleosynthesis.

2) There are two process of cell´s system formation, the first one was symbioses and then, they learned how to reproduce.
Similarly in star formation. The BB produced roughly 75% H 25% He, thereafter nucleosynthesis slowly joined smaller units to make larger units all the way up to Fe.

Those were the two questions. You then continued:

So, why the academic staff is ignoring the only unique theory that are investigating if astronomic systems formation have also two processes of formation? At least their model has explanation for those dust and a different history for formation of all seven different kinds of astronomical bodies formation... Isn´t they two equally plausible theories?

I, for one, do not understand what you are proposing. What, for example, are the seven different kinds of astronomical bodies formation to which you refer? How does this relate to two equally plausible theories?
 
Feb 18, 2020
1,201
859
1,570
Surely in this day and age, you are not proposing this?

"In classical antiquity, the seven classical planets or seven sacred luminaires were (are) the seven moving astronomical objects in the sky visible to the naked eye: the Moon, Mercury, Venus, the Sun, Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn." [Wiki]
My emphasis.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY