<p>No, the formation of planetary systems is not the result of the interaction of stars and planets which form at random in space post Big Bang. Stars form from density fluctuations in the gas in galaxies and planetary systems usually form (to the best of our knowledge) from the disks of gas and dust around stars that are a side effect of the formation of stars.</p>

<p>That is planar planetary systems should be usual because they form from planar systems which are largely the result of dynamical processes in star formation.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-09-14T04:02:37.703Z
2015-09-14T09:57:24.143Z
2015-09-14T09:57:24.143Z
Conrad Turner
<p>First, <strong><a href="https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/136860/did-the-big-bang-happen-at-a-point">the Big Bang did not happen at a point.</a></strong> I cannot emphasize this enough. It happened everywhere in space at the same time. You can't think of it as an explosion from one location pushing everything else away.</p>

<p>Furthermore, planets and stars didn't exist at the time of the Big Bang. The Solar System, for example, formed about 4.5 billion years ago, while the oldest stars - Population III stars - formed <a href="http://www2.astro.psu.edu/users/rbc/a534/redman.pdf" rel="nofollow noreferrer">within a few million years</a> after the Big Bang. At the beginning of the universe, everything was in an exotic soup-like state: a <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quark%E2%80%93gluon_plasma" rel="nofollow noreferrer">quark-gluon plasma</a>.</p>

<p>Therefore, your hypothesis is flawed in two places.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-09-13T20:12:27.593Z
ok, it is an image, but still, does it make sense ?
Thomas
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-09-13T20:13:20.973Z
@Thomas No, because it happened everywhere.
HDE 226868
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-09-14T18:19:12.577Z
@HDE_226868 ok, I didn't know that, but still my question holds  : stars and planets formed in a 3D manner, not in a plane. why are they in a plane now ? because of gravity and friction and time. no ?
Thomas
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-09-14T19:05:46.920Z
@Thomas See http://astronomy.stackexchange.com/questions/130/why-do-the-planets-in-our-solar-system-orbit-in-the-same-plane and http://astronomy.stackexchange.com/questions/2224/why-is-the-solar-system-often-shown-as-a-2d-plane. The same logic holds (to some extent) on a galactic scale.
HDE 226868
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-09-19T02:44:26.130Z
@HDE_226868 Thanks for the links. What explains the initial speed of planets and the fact that they all rotate in the same direction (e.g e clockwise) ?
Thomas
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-09-19T20:58:14.233Z
@Thomas The protoplanetary disk.
HDE 226868
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-09-13T19:28:56.040Z
2015-09-13T19:28:56.040Z
2017-04-13T12:40:15.377Z
HDE 226868
<p>The Big Bang scattered planets and stars everywhere in three dimensions.</p>

<p>But after billion years of moving and interacting with each others through gravity, planets moved on the same plane.</p>

<p>Given the very small but non zero friction in space, could we give a good estimate of the age of the universe?</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-09-13T21:32:43.140Z
Simple answer - no: The planar geometry of the solar system is totally unrelated to the age of the universe.
ProfRob
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-09-14T09:05:19.240Z
The Solar system formed well after the BB, but, of course, its age (which we can meaure from isotope ratios) is a **lower limit** for the age of the universe, though not a very useful one.
Walter
CC BY-SA 3.0
2015-09-19T02:41:36.920Z
Why the negative votes ? The question is so dumb ??
Thomas
<universe><big-bang-theory><age>
Could we estimate the age of the universe based on the planar property of the Solar System?
Thomas
# Could we estimate the age of the universe based on the planar property of the Solar System?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2015-09-13)

The Big Bang scattered planets and stars everywhere in three dimensions.

But after billion years of moving and interacting with each others through gravity, planets moved on the same plane.

Given the very small but non zero friction in space, could we give a good estimate of the age of the universe?

**Tags:** universe, big-bang-theory, age
> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Simple answer - no: The planar geometry of the solar system is totally unrelated to the age of the universe.  
> **username_2**: The Solar system formed well after the BB, but, of course, its age (which we can meaure from isotope ratios) is a **lower limit** for the age of the universe, though not a very useful one.  
> **username_0**: Why the negative votes ? The question is so dumb ??  

---

## 2 answers

### Answer by username_3 on 2015-09-14. Score: 0 | Accepted answer

No, the formation of planetary systems is not the result of the interaction of stars and planets which form at random in space post Big Bang. Stars form from density fluctuations in the gas in galaxies and planetary systems usually form (to the best of our knowledge) from the disks of gas and dust around stars that are a side effect of the formation of stars.

That is planar planetary systems should be usual because they form from planar systems which are largely the result of dynamical processes in star formation.


---

### Answer by username_4 on 2015-09-13. Score: 1

First, **[the Big Bang did not happen at a point.](https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/136860/did-the-big-bang-happen-at-a-point)** I cannot emphasize this enough. It happened everywhere in space at the same time. You can't think of it as an explosion from one location pushing everything else away.

Furthermore, planets and stars didn't exist at the time of the Big Bang. The Solar System, for example, formed about 4.5 billion years ago, while the oldest stars - Population III stars - formed [within a few million years](http://www2.astro.psu.edu/users/rbc/a534/redman.pdf) after the Big Bang. At the beginning of the universe, everything was in an exotic soup-like state: a [quark-gluon plasma](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quark%E2%80%93gluon_plasma).

Therefore, your hypothesis is flawed in two places.

> **Comments:**
> **username_0**: ok, it is an image, but still, does it make sense ?  
> **username_4**: @Thomas No, because it happened everywhere.  
> **username_0**: @HDE_226868 ok, I didn't know that, but still my question holds  : stars and planets formed in a 3D manner, not in a plane. why are they in a plane now ? because of gravity and friction and time. no ?  
> **username_4**: @Thomas See http://astronomy.stackexchange.com/questions/130/why-do-the-planets-in-our-solar-system-orbit-in-the-same-plane and http://astronomy.stackexchange.com/questions/2224/why-is-the-solar-system-often-shown-as-a-2d-plane. The same logic holds (to some extent) on a galactic scale.  
> **username_0**: @HDE_226868 Thanks for the links. What explains the initial speed of planets and the fact that they all rotate in the same direction (e.g e clockwise) ?  
> **username_4**: @Thomas The protoplanetary disk.  

---

