Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Extremely cool stuff here:

http://ipad.aol.com/article/2014/11/07/detailed-planet-formation-image-lets-alma-telescope-show-off/20990078/?ncid=txtlnkusaolp00000058

I read this earlier as well. Here is a picture for the workblocked:



That is not an artist's interpretation, but an actual proto-planetary disk around HL Tauri.

Wow...this is...wow...

That is awesome sauce.

If we build a ship now, and send a colonizing team out once it's done, the planet should be ready for us when we get there

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:
If we build a ship now, and send a colonizing team out once it's done, the planet should be ready for us when we get there

We're also seeing just what was there during the 1600s.

 Grey Templar wrote:

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:
If we build a ship now, and send a colonizing team out once it's done, the planet should be ready for us when we get there

We're also seeing just what was there during the 1600s.

A few centuries here or there make no difference, planetary coalescence takes hundreds of millions of years. ts nice to look at a planetary system in its infancy

Pretty damn awesome. That guys voice though...

 Orlanth wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:
If we build a ship now, and send a colonizing team out once it's done, the planet should be ready for us when we get there

We're also seeing just what was there during the 1600s.

A few centuries here or there make no difference, planetary coalescence takes hundreds of millions of years. ts nice to look at a planetary system in its infancy

Actually, we are finding out that planetary formation may take considerably less time, which is the main reason why this image is important.

What we know about HL Tauri suggests that the star is most likely close 100,000 years old and definitely no more than a million years old, a practical newborn as far as stars are concerned, and the structure of the disk is the result of large planetary bodies already formed.

 ScootyPuffJunior wrote:

 Orlanth wrote:

 Grey Templar wrote:

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:
If we build a ship now, and send a colonizing team out once it's done, the planet should be ready for us when we get there

We're also seeing just what was there during the 1600s.

A few centuries here or there make no difference, planetary coalescence takes hundreds of millions of years. ts nice to look at a planetary system in its infancy

Actually, we are finding out that planetary formation may take considerably less time, which is the main reason why this image is important.

What we know about HL Tauri suggests that the star is most likely close 100,000 years old and definitely no more than a million years old, a practical newborn as far as stars are concerned, and the structure of the disk is the result of large planetary bodies already formed.

Is our own geological history being rewritten, this evidence is certainly news to me.
I was brought up with earlier thinking on planetary cosmology back before we could observe extra-solar planets; and frankly mostly worked to fit paleantological timelines.
Should we be reassessing how quickly after formation life started on earth, or by extension reassessing the age of the earth?

 Orlanth wrote:

Is our own geological history being rewritten, this evidence is certainly news to me.
I was brought up with earlier thinking on planetary cosmology back before we could observe extra-solar planets; and frankly mostly worked to fit paleantological timelines.
Should we be reassessing how quickly after formation life started on earth, or by extension reassessing the age of the earth?

Our geological history is not being rewritten. If you are asking that question because this new information might lend credence to something like creationism; no.

The age of our Solar System are accurately documented so finding a system that formed more quickly isn't going to make the information we have about our solar system invalid.

Did they get a photo of a sky guy building the system then picking which planet he was going to inteligently put life down on it?
No?
Well that is going to be some bad news for some of the simpler and gullible on this world

It is an awesome find and shot, almost as good as the Pillars of Creation shot.

This goes along way in validating some of the early solar system formation theorems

 Ribon Fox wrote:
Did they get a photo of a sky guy building the system then picking which planet he was going to inteligently put life down on it?
No?

He's hiding in the big black spot.