The arXiv paper cited is interesting.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2109.11017, "...Finally, we use the resulting dynamical lifetime function to estimate the current inventory of captured interstellar material in the solar system. We find that capture from the field yields a steady state mass of only ∼10^−13M⊕, whereas the mass remaining from capture events in the birth cluster is roughly 10^−9M⊕."
My observation. A very small amount of interstellar comets or asteroids may be incorporated into our solar system apparently. There is another report out on this topic too. Protoplanetary disks throw out more material than gets turned into planets,
https://phys.org/news/2021-09-protoplanetary-disks-material-planets.html "When a young solar system gets going it's little more than a young star and a rotating disk of debris. Accepted thinking says that the swirling debris is swept up in planet formation. But a new study says that much of the matter in the disk could face a different fate. It may not have the honor of becoming part of a nice stable planet, orbiting placidly and reliably around its host star. Instead, it's simply discarded..."
Reference paper, Preliminary Evidence That Protoplanetary Disks Eject More Mass Than They Retain,
https://arxiv.org/abs/2108.13429, 30-August-2021. "If interstellar objects originate in protoplanetary disks, they can be used to calibrate the fraction of mass that such disks eject..."
It turns out that interstellar objects passing through our solar system could be created in massive *protoplanetary disks* that ejected large quantities of matter. My note. 10% of the Sun's mass as the original protoplanetary disk that evolves into our solar system today is a game changer model. That indicates the early accretion disk assumed to exist in our solar system needs about 33,300 earth masses or so, if we apply this new model to our solar system. Also, the solid matter content compared to gas content used in computer simulations for our solar system origin, other stars with disks observed and measured today do not seem to fit the model. "Around other stars, only 3 − 4% of observed protoplanetary disks have at least ∼ 10^2M⊕ in solids, although the true proportion may be greater.28"
The space.com report concludes, "This result has two important implications. One, we shouldn't bother looking for captured foreign objects, because they are exceedingly rare. Two, theories of panspermia, which posit that life may have started elsewhere and been carried to Earth later, aren't tenable. There simply isn't enough material flying through the galaxy, entering solar systems, coming into stable orbits and then impacting other planets to make the idea work."
Okay, panspermia is tossed out leaving only abiogenesis, something that has not been observed in nature today like observing the 4 Galilean moons moving around Jupiter, observable and tested for more than 400 years now. Another note that is important. Massive protoplanetary disks seem to be required for interstellar comets and asteroids ejected. This is very different than the MMSN model where the protoplanetary disk in our solar system is about 3,300 earth masses. Today we have about 447 earth masses documented from Mercury to Pluto. Using the gas cloud and protoplanetary disk to explain the origin of our solar system - must be very flexible
Abiogenesis must be very flexible too
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram