Planetesimal Hypothesis Of Chamberlin & Moulton
The origin of the earth:
The followings are a few major points on which his hypothesis was criticised and discarded by various scientists.
- According to many astronomers the planetesimals would have so volatized due to excessive heat of friction and collision at the time of their ejection from the ‘proto- sun’ that it would have been impossible for them to condense in the form of orbits around the ‘proto-sun’ without being defused violently in the universe. Under these circumstances the equation of accretion and aggregation of planetesimals around the ‘proto-sun’ in condensed form of planets does not arise.
- According to the ‘planetesimal hypothesis’ by Chamberlin, the size of the planets were dependent upon ;
- The amount of accretion and aggregation of planetesiamls around the nucleus.
- Amount of planetesimals available in the particular orbit. And
- The attractional force of the so-called nucleus of the planets.
However, the planets of our present day solar system are arranged according to their size around the sun in a systematic order. But, chamberlin ‘s hypothesis, does not offer any explanation for this type of arrangement of the planets in our solar system.
- Why only nine planets were formed? Why not one more or one less? No answer offered by Chamberlin.
- The infinite space of the universe makes such a close encounter between the stars a remote possibility.
- The planetesimal hypothesis does not explain the present higher amount of our solar system.
- There is no explanation in Chamberlin’s hypothesis about the planets of the outer circle which are of very low densities and are in gaseous state.
- K.Siddhartha – “The Earth’s Dynamic Surface”
- S.Singh – Geomorphology
- Strahler & Strahler – Physical Geography
- M.J.Shelby – Earth’s Changing Surface