From the cloud to the planets
- From the original cloud to the accretion disk.
- From dust to planets.
- Other thoughts: Jupiter; the Sun; the 9th planet

First topic: From the cloud to the accretion disk.
First step: The initial cloud
Shortly after the birth of the universe, the first hydrogen atoms appeared. Then, in some places, heat and high pressure triggered the first nuclear fusion, which created the first helium atoms and the first stars. When the first generation stars died, they spent all the other elements in the periodic table into space, ending with iron and uranium. When it comes to supernovas, we always talk about gas and dust, but it's difficult to imagine that an object that is nearly solid, thick millions of kilometers in size, could explode without leaving fragments. Unless, instead of exploding, the star instantly vaporizes. This contrary consists with the theory of the creation of elements heavier than iron due to the rebounding of the shock wave. Even if the star vaporized, the cold of space would still cause the materials to condense, transforming them into stones, nuggets, and ice. Among the various meteorites collected in the collection of the University of Arizona research center (USA), it is notable that those composed of iron are a single, integral and homogeneous piece. It is difficult to hypothesize that they formed on their own in space, from the union of only iron atoms. It seems more plausible that the first supernovae scattered not only gas and dust, but also more or less large fragments. Here the question arises: is it possible that in a "dirty cloud", full of all the elements of the table, dust and small objects, only hydrogen has concentrated, which in the cold of space tends to become liquid and adhere to objects? Only gas, no solids, dust or supernova fragments? The clouds that followed the primordial ones are not made up of hydrogen only, and this certainly influences the birth and shape of stars and planets. Furthermore, perhaps, the initial nucleus of stars that followed the first generations also contained other elements from the periodic table, and this could also influence the characteristics of the new stars. The basic question is: if stars are all born in the same way, how can we explain the great variety of characteristics and shapes? Perhaps, the variables considered up to now—mass, heat, and pressure—are not the only determining variables, and are there others not considered, for example, the "environment," the initial cloud?

Secondo passo : le stelle si accendono
Step two: The stars light up
The first nuclear reaction marks the passage from a cloud to a disk, because it generates gravity and electromagnetic fields that are much more intense and extended in space. According to the theory, the source of the ignition is the collision between hydrogen atoms which fuse together and create helium atoms; in order for this to happen, the initial cloud must have a mass X1, generate a temperature Y1 and a pressure Z1 at its center. Therefore, we can also say that these three values are the minimum quantity necessary for fusion to occur and we can also use them as “base values for fusion”. Here becomes the question: how do giant stars exist? How did they become so big without ignition after exceeding their minimum dimensions, considering that all their hydrogen must already be present at the time of ignition because the ensuring stellar wind would have washed it away? Is it possible that the “dirt” in the cloud, the presence of various elements of the table, creates different trigger conditions than those composed of only hydrogen? What if instead of two hydrogen atoms colliding and fusing, they were carbon or iron atoms? What if the beginning was even a “nuclear fission,” short-lived due to the shortage of heavy atoms, but capable of generating sufficient initial pressure and heat to ignite the hydrogen, as in H-bombs? For example, our Sun is made up almost entirely of hydrogen and helium, but the presence of other elements has also been detected: magnesium, sodium, potassium; are they perhaps residues of the original nucleus? Theoretically, after the ignition no element was able to penetrate the Sun's inside? Did the electromagnetic field play a role in turning the Sun on? When the center of gravity begins to form, it creates a magnetic field, and one of its main effects is to deflect cosmic rays and high-energy particles toward the center. What happens when this energy, these compressed and accelerated charged particles collide at the center of the protostar? Do they have the energy necessary to turn it on?

Step three: Accretion disk
How did we go from a chaotic cloud to an ordered disk? Until now, this has been explained as the effect of gravitational interaction with the central object. But gravity exerts its influence in every direction, like a sphere, so why privileged distribution along the equatorial plane? What if electromagnetism caused the change in the spatial distribution of objects? The north pole of the star attracts the south pole of the object and repulses the north pole, and the same happens in a mirror way with the south pole; in the end, the interaction between the “4 poles,” the attraction-repulsion process will distribute the objects along the equatorial plane where “magnetic equilibrium” is reached. The accrestion disk theory, the most plausible so far, still has some aspects to be clarified. Why do the moons have such different chemical compositions? According to theory, one of the main effects of the disk is to distribute gas, dust, and fragments along circular orbits based on their weight and mass. This would lead us to suppose that the moons were born at different distances from the Sun, in rings with a specific concentration of elements of the table (our Moon is a rock, Europa is made of ice, Io is rich in sulphur) but, if we also take into account the fact that the passage from cloud to disk took a lot of time, then it is possible to hypothesis that many moons could have been formed in areas far from the gravitational center of the nursing protosun, rich in single elements or fragments of supernovae and that they have reached large dimensions when they were still wandering objects in the cloud and only then were assimilated by the disk, continuing to grow inside it. The presence of objects born outside the disk would also explain the chaos and chaotic collisions of objects during the growth of the solar system. If the disk had formed slowly from dust and fragments, theoretically, all objects should have been ordered at birth, before growth. Taking all due proportions, the best example we have of an accretion disk are the rings of gas giants, especially those of Saturn. The objects are distributed in an orderly and uniform fashion along the rings, which are circular in shape depending on their mass. There are no crossings or elliptical orbits because, as the objects grow, they become distributed in an orderly fashion. However, the presence of crossing and elliptical orbits seems to indicate that some objects were captured only after their birth, while wandering in the initial cloud. Furthermore, we should also consider the possibility that some objects were born north or south of the equatorial plane and while moving to align themselves with it, they created gravitational interference with other objects (considering the off-path position of our Moon, perhaps, this is how it joined the Earth?). In conclusion, it is necessary to note that the accrestion disk theory of the formation of the solar system is based exclusively on the action of the force of gravity, without consideration of the action of the electromagnetic field, which acts in the same way: it attracts matter and retains it. However, except for some aspects that still need to be clarified, the accrestion disk theory is certainly valid, as the rings of the gas giants show us.

Second topic: From dust to planets
According to theory, the accretion disk is composed of gas, dust, and small stones that, pushed by gravity, tend to distribute in a more or less orderly way and join together during rotation; this process has been explained with the concept of microgravity. But, perhaps, there are other intermediate steps.

First step: Electromagnetism
The cloud inherited from a dead star is composed of free atoms, molecules, dust, and small fragments; their mass is minuscular, and the gravity they generate is too minuscular, therefore it is difficult to imagine that they will be able to attract and unite. Perhaps, they are able to do so thanks to the electromagnetic field of each atom. Atoms are electrically neutral because the charges of electrons and protons "cancel" each other, but it is equally true that any electrically charged object, when it moves in this case it rotates on itself and around another always produces an electromagnetic field. Furthermore, it is the very structure of molecules of any type that induces electromagnetic fields when individual atoms communicate the orbit of electrons. Ultimately, magnetic attraction-repulsion causes atoms and molecules to closer together.

Step two: Chemistry
After being brought together by individual electromagnetic fields, atoms and molecules begin to forge spontaneous chemical bonds that allow for larger and larger molecular structures. After a while, there is dust. But dust is still too little mass to justify a mutual gravitational attraction.

Third step: Ordinary mechanics.
It is necessary to clarify the first stages of objects' growth. Gas and dust, light materials, tend to join gradually, at low speed and without impact. Larger, heavier objects, however, tend to collide and fragment. However, at this stage in the birth of the solar system, there is still a lot of free material in the accrestion disk, and this removes the physical space for small rocks to acquire velocity and kinetic energy, therefore contacts between objects are low-energy. One of the most widespread molecules in space is water. If the outer surface of two colliding dust or rock grains contains some "ice" molecules, the energy of the impact may briefly be sufficient to melt them, allowing physical contact between the two. The ice then immediately freezes, locking them into a single object (as happens with a bag of peas placed in a freezer; an example of this process is the asteroid Arrocot in the Kuiper belt). In addition, there are also other elements such as hydrogen and nitrogen, which at the low temperatures of space tend to become fluid, semi-solid and could also contribute to the creation of ever larger conglomerates of dust and stones.

Step four: Gravity
Over time, objects increase in mass through growing gravity, which attracts other objects, such as the asteroid Ida and its moon, Dactylus. But, in addition to this, growing size also increases their ability to withstand impact with ever larger and higher-energy objects without shattering, allowing the absorption of material and growth. The larger the object, the greater its capacity to grow; for example, the Theia virus was almost destroying Earth because they were similar in size, but if it had impacted Jupiter, it would have been absorbed with lesser consequences.

Conclusions:
The electromagnetic field of atoms and molecules pushes them to grow. Chemical bonds make molecules stable, triggering their growth, until the size of an ice crystal or a grain of dust. Classical mechanics, through the physical properties of ice, nitrogen, and hydrogen, induces the physical union of dust and rock fragments. Eventually, the object reaches sufficient mass to develop significant gravity and resistance to impacts.

Other thoughts:

Jupiter
- A failed star. The simplest explanation seems to be that there was not enough hydrogen in the cloud to generate two stars, but, perhaps, there's also the possibility that Jupiter assimilated too much dust and rocks, and this inhibited the ignition.
- The big turn. It is possible that at a some point it collided with a planetoid, the theoretical 5th rocky planet, with sufficient force to kick it back. Perhaps, the planetoid was destroyed, and part of the object became the first asteroid belt. It is also possible that its nucleus merge with that of Jupiter and now forms its third magnetic pole. If we take into account the fact that Jupiter is composed of gas and only the core is solid, there could not have been a real impact and we assume that the fifth planet had an ferrous core, then, perhaps, it is possible that the pressure of gravity and the friction with the dense atmosphere destroyed the crust and mantle of the planetoid but its even more compact core remained intact until it reached and united with that of Jupiter.
- The great red spot. It would be interesting to find out if it is an impact scar, like comet Schumacher-Levin, which survives because it was fuelled by the still dissolving object.
- What causes counter-rotation in storm belts? Neither gravity nor electromagnetism predicts a similar distribution, unless the magnetic field distributes materials into horizontal bands based on their electromagnetic properties, which interact to create counter-rotation. The theory of heat rise from the core also has some points to clarify: why is the heat source distributed in stable horizontal bands? On Earth this happens because of the solar heat, the difference between the equator and the poles; does the same happen on Jupiter? If, however, the belts between the two hemispheres are mirror-shaped and do not vary in width based on Jupiter's inclination towards the Sun, then any distribution of heat in horizontal belts is to be seeked in the characteristics of the planet, but it seems unlikely that Jupiter's core produces heat and distributes it in parallel horizontal belts rather than in a spherical shape.

The Sun
- Could nickel and magnesium found in the Sun be residues of materials present before the ignition?
- Could sunspots be "accumulations of waste," elements the Sun produces even before it dies, waiting to be expelled? (If they re-appear in 11-year cycles, it means they are an integral part of the Sun's normal functioning.)
- The surface of the Sun appears to be warmer than the internal part; is it possible that the internal pressure inhibits the emission of heat while the lower pressure on the surface allows it?

The 9th planet
- Is it possible that it is an object coming from the Hoort cloud, passing by or waiting to find a stable orbit around the Sun? If there is an object interfering with the Kuipert belt, it is very likely an extrasolar object because if, as has been hypothesised, it has a regular orbit, the belt should no longer exist. If this object interfered with the orbits of others every 10,000 or 20,000 years, considering the millions of years that have passed since the creation of the solar system, there should be no object left, similar to what Jupiter did while moving through the solar system. Furthermore, the Sun's gravitational attraction is low, and it takes very little to create chaos in the solar system. Why do only a few objects have orbits extended in one direction and not the entire belt?
- Could the direction depend on the galaxy's rotation direction? (The orbits are extended because the objects arrived front-handed into the solar system with high kinetic energy.)
- In none of the observations, with any instrument, has a "transit" been detected, an anomaly created by the ninth planet? Considering the theoretical size of a planet and its proximity to Earth, it should be fairly clear, even though it could appear like a halo because it was out of focus. Furthermore, it could not be an object as big as a planet but smaller and denser.