One way to remember the difference between the geocentric model and the

heliocentric model is to look at the etymology of the words.

Geocentric means the Earth is at the center. The prefix geo means of the Earth.
Thus geometry is the measure of the earth, geology is the study of the earth, etc...

Heliocentric means the sun is at the center. The prefix helio means of the sun.
One can speak of the heliosphere, the region of space dominated by the sun
gravitationally or the heliopause which is the theoretical edge where the stellar
wind is stopped by the interstellar medium.

The geocentric model posited that the entire universe revolved about Earth. After
Aristotle this theory is most attached to Ptolemy who wrote the Algamest. In the
Algamest Ptolemy collected and refined the theories for planetary motions
including the use of epicycles to describe the orbits. This system was widely held
in the West until the sixteenth century when a predictive geocentric model was
proposed.

The heliocentric model puts the sun at the center of the solar system. This theory
was put forth in pre-Socratic time, but was not widely believed and disappeared
possibly due to the loss of ancient greek works. Copernicus published one of the
first descriptions of the theory with work by Kepler, Galileo, and Newton
providing mathematical support later.
How Was the Solar System Formed? – The Nebular Hypothesis
Since time immemorial, humans have been searching for the answer of how the
Universe came to be. However, it has only been within the past few centuries,
with the Scientific Revolution, that the predominant theories have been empirical
in nature. It was during this time, from the 16th to 18th centuries, that
astronomers and physicists began to formulate evidence-based explanations of
how our Sun, the planets, and the Universe began.
When it comes to the formation of our Solar System, the most widely accepted
view is known as the Nebular Hypothesis. In essence, this theory states that the
Sun, the planets, and all other objects in the Solar System formed from nebulous
material billions of years ago. Originally proposed to explain the origin of the Solar
System, this theory has gone on to become a widely accepted view of how all star
systems came to be.

Nebular Hypothesis:

According to this theory, the Sun and all the planets of our Solar System began as
a giant cloud of molecular gas and dust. Then, about 4.57 billion years ago,
something happened that caused the cloud to collapse. This could have been the
result of a passing star, or shock waves from a supernova, but the end result was
a gravitational collapse at the center of the cloud.

From this collapse, pockets of dust and gas began to collect into denser regions.
As the denser regions pulled in more and more matter, conservation of
momentum caused it to begin rotating, while increasing pressure caused it to
heat up. Most of the material ended up in a ball at the center while the rest of the
matter flattened out into disk that circled around it. While the ball at the center
formed the Sun, the rest of the material would form into the protoplanetary disc.

The planets formed by accretion from this disc, in which dust and gas gravitated
together and coalesced to form ever larger bodies. Due to their higher boiling
points, only metals and silicates could exist in solid form closer to the Sun, and
these would eventually form the terrestrial planets of Mercury, Venus, Earth, and
Mars. Because metallic elements only comprised a very small fraction of the solar
nebula, the terrestrial planets could not grow very large.
In contrast, the giant planets (Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune) formed
beyond the point between the orbits of Mars and Jupiter where material is cool
enough for volatile icy compounds to remain solid (i.e. the Frost Line). The ices
that formed these planets were more plentiful than the metals and silicates that
formed the terrestrial inner planets, allowing them to grow massive enough to
capture large atmospheres of hydrogen and helium. Leftover debris that never
became planets congregated in regions such as the Asteroid Belt, Kuiper Belt, and
Oort Cloud.

Within 50 million years, the pressure and density of hydrogen in the center of the
protostar became great enough for it to begin thermonuclear fusion. The
temperature, reaction rate, pressure, and density increased until hydrostatic
equilibrium was achieved. At this point, the Sun became a main-sequence star.
Solar wind from the Sun created the heliosphere and swept away the remaining
gas and dust from the protoplanetary disc into interstellar space, ending the
planetary formation process.

History of the Nebular Hypothesis:

The idea that the Solar System originated from a nebula was first proposed in
1734 by Swedish scientist and theologian Emanual Swedenborg. Immanuel Kant,
who was familiar with Swedenborg’s work, developed the theory further and
published it in his Universal Natural History and Theory of the Heavens (1755). In
this treatise, he argued that gaseous clouds (nebulae) slowly rotate, gradually
collapsing and flattening due to gravity and forming stars and planets.

A similar but smaller and more detailed model was proposed by Pierre-Simon
Laplace in his treatise Exposition du system du monde (Exposition of the system
of the world), which he released in 1796. Laplace theorized that the Sun originally
had an extended hot atmosphere throughout the Solar System, and that this
“protostar cloud” cooled and contracted. As the cloud spun more rapidly, it threw
off material that eventually condensed to form the planets.
The Laplacian nebular model was widely accepted during the 19th century, but it
had some rather pronounced difficulties. The main issue was angular momentum
distribution between the Sun and planets, which the nebular model could not
explain. In addition, Scottish scientist James Clerk Maxwell (1831 – 1879) asserted
that different rotational velocities between the inner and outer parts of a ring
could not allow for condensation of material.

It was also rejected by astronomer Sir David Brewster (1781 – 1868), who stated
that:

“those who believe in the Nebular Theory consider it as certain that our Earth
derived its solid matter and its atmosphere from a ring thrown from the Solar
atmosphere, which afterwards contracted into a solid terraqueous sphere, from
which the Moon was thrown off by the same process… [Under such a view] the
Moon must necessarily have carried off water and air from the watery and aerial
parts of the Earth and must have an atmosphere.”

By the early 20th century, the Laplacian model had fallen out of favor, prompting
scientists to seek out new theories. However, it was not until the 1970s that the
modern and most widely accepted variant of the nebular hypothesis – the solar
nebular disk model (SNDM) – emerged. Credit for this goes to Soviet astronomer
Victor Safronov and his book Evolution of the protoplanetary cloud and formation
of the Earth and the planets (1972). In this book, almost all major problems of the
planetary formation process were formulated and many were solved.

or example, the SNDM model has been successful in explaining the appearance of
accretion discs around young stellar objects. Various simulations have also
demonstrated that the accretion of material in these discs leads to the formation
of a few Earth-sized bodies. Thus the origin of terrestrial planets is now
considered to be an almost solved problem.

While originally applied only to the Solar System, the SNDM was subsequently
thought by theorists to be at work throughout the Universe, and has been used to
explain the formation of many of the exoplanets that have been discovered
throughout our galaxy.

Problems:

Although the nebular theory is widely accepted, there are still problems with it
that astronomers have not been able to resolve. For example, there is the
problem of tilted axes. According to the nebular theory, all planets around a star
should be tilted the same way relative to the ecliptic. But as we have learned, the
inner planets and outer planets have radically different axial tilts.

Whereas the inner planets range from almost 0 degree tilt, others (like Earth and
Mars) are tilted significantly (23.4° and 25°, respectively), outer planets have tilts
that range from Jupiter’s minor tilt of 3.13°, to Saturn and Neptune’s more
pronounced tilts (26.73° and 28.32°), to Uranus’ extreme tilt of 97.77°, in which its
poles are consistently facing towards the Sun.

Also, the study of extrasolar planets have allowed scientists to notice irregularities
that cast doubt on the nebular hypothesis. Some of these irregularities have to do
with the existence of “hot Jupiters” that orbit closely to their stars with periods of
just a few days. Astronomers have adjusted the nebular hypothesis to account for
some of these problems, but have yet to address all outlying questions.

Alas, it seems that it questions that have to do with origins that are the toughest
to answer. Just when we think we have a satisfactory explanation, there remain
those troublesome issues it just can’t account for. However, between our current
models of star and planet formation, and the birth of our Universe, we have come
a long way. As we learn more about neighboring star systems and explore more of
the cosmos, our models are likely to mature further.

Planetesimals
A planetesimal is an object formed from dust, rock, and other materials. The word
has its roots in the concept infinitesimal, which indicates an object too small to
see or measure. Planetesimals can be anywhere in size from several meters to
hundreds of kilometers. The term refers to small celestial bodies formed during
the creation of planets. One way to think of them is as small planets, but they are
much more than that.

The planetesimal theory was suggested by the Russian astronomer Viktor

Safronov. The planetesimal theory is a theory on how planets form. According to
the planetesimal hypothesis, when a planetary system is forming, there is a
protoplanetary disk with materials from the nebulae from which the system
came. This material is gradually pulled together by gravity to form small chunks.
These chunks get larger and larger until they form planetesimals. Many of the
objects break apart when they collide, but some continue to grow. Some of these
planetesimals go on to become planets and moons. Since the gas giants are balls
of gas with liquid cores, it may seem impossible that an asteroid-like object
formed them. The planetesimals formed the core of these gaseous planets, which
turned molten when it enough heat was created.
Other planetesimals turn into comets, Kuiper Belt Objects (KBOs), and trojan
asteroids. There is some debate as to whether KBOs and asteroids can be called
planetesimals. This is one reason why nomenclature of celestial objects is so
difficult. The planetesimal theory is not universally accepted though. Like many
theories, there are some observations that cannot be explained, but the
planetesimal theory is still very popular.

Many people think that around 3.8 billion years ago, many of the planetesimals
were thrown into far away regions, such as the Oort cloud or the Kuiper Belt.
Other objects collided with other objects after being affected by gas giants.
Phobos and Deimos are believed to be planetesimals that were captured by Mars’
gravity and became satellites. Many of Jupiter’s moons are believed to be
planetesimals as well.

Planetesimals are very valuable to scientists because they can provide

information about the creation of our Solar System. The exterior of planetesimals
have been bombarded with solar radiation, which can change their chemistry, for
billions of years. Inside though, there is material that has been untouched since
the object was first formed. Using this material, astronomers hope to learn about
the condition of the nebulae from which our Solar System was formed.

Universe Today has a number of articles to check out including formation of

Mercury and hunting for meteors on Earth.

Protoplanet, in astronomical theory, a hypothetical eddy in a whirling cloud of gas

or dust that becomes a planet by condensation during formation of a solar
system. As the central body, or protostar, of the system contracts and heats up,
the increasing pressure of its radiation is believed to drive off much of the thinner
material of the protoplanets, particularly those closer to the nascent star.
Protoplanets are small celestial objects that are the size of a moon or a bit bigger.
They are small planets, like an even smaller version of a dwarf planet.
Astronomers believe that these objects form during the creation of a solar
system.

The most popular theory of how a solar system is formed says that a giant cloud
of molecular dust collapsed, forming one or more stars. Then a cloud of gas forms
around the new star. As a result of gravity and other forces, the dust and other
particles in this cloud collide and stick together forming larger masses. While
some of these objects break apart on impact, a number of them continue to grow.
Once they reach a certain size – around a kilometer – these objects are large
enough to attract particles and other small objects with their gravity. They
continue to get larger until they form protoplanets. Some protoplanets continue
colliding and growing until they form planets while others stay that size.

As the protoplanets grew to become planets, parts of them melted due to

radioactivity, gravitational influences, and collisions. Where the objects had
melted, the composition of the planets changed. Heavier elements sank, forming
the cores of the planets, and lighter objects rose to the surface. This process is
called planetary differentiation and explains why planets have heavy cores.
Astronomers have discovered that even some asteroids have differentiated, so
their cores are heavier than their surfaces.

Protoplanets used to be highly radioactive due to how they were formed.

However, over thousands of years, the radioactivity of these objects has greatly
decreased because of radioactive decay. Astronomers are still discovering new
protoplanets, and most likely, they will discover many more. With better
technology, astronomers are now able to find protoplanets in other star systems.
Last year, scientists discovered a protoplanet HL Tau b that will probably turn into
an actual planet one day. Astronomers say that will not happen for about a
million years though because the protoplanet’s star is also very young. In its final
form, HL Tau b will look like Jupiter – a gas giant around the same size as that
massive planet. It is hard to believe that thousands of years ago our planets were
objects about the size of a moon, which were slowly evolving and growing.
Astronomers continue to study protoplanets, the same way they study
planetesimals, to find out more about how the Solar System was formed.

Universe Today has articles on Earth-sized planets and planetesimal