If anything, I'm feeling overexposed these days. There's only so much I can take of stuff that's obviously untrue. Fortunately this isn't a case of obvious untruth. The more I look at it, the more complex it grows.
Here's some more links I dug up. I know there's better somewhere, but how to find it!? Anyhow, here's a couple from a fairly pro-banger forum. You'll need to find the "flat" button to view the whole threads. Then "find" words from my quotes below if you care enough.
http://uplink.space.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=sciastro&...http://uplink.space.com/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=askastron...
"Star formation is usually thought to require a fairly good sized and energetic event such as a supernova, which can compress a gas cloud and begin the process of gravitational collapse."
Then from the other:
"The cloud started out spinning. This spin was very slow, in fact the same rate of rotation as the Galaxy as a whole. However, as the cloud collapses, it spins faster. The centrifugal force created by the spin counters gravity and this should prevent the cloud from collapsing, since it increases faster than gravitational force.
This is called the 'angular momentum problem' and it was a vexing puzzle to astronomers throughout the 19th Century and into the earliest part of the 20th Century. In our solar system, the enormous Sun has over 98% of the mass of the system, and yet the planets orbiting around the sun have over 90% of the angular momentum (the spin). What mechanism could have carried away the spin?"
As if we didn't have enough to deal with, they throw angular momentum into the mix. Oh, and the first guy's pretty much saying what I've was saying earlier. These guys probably aren't experts, but I'd say they represent pretty well what's taught in the mainstream.
But here's a nice find for you! Ever hear of a fellow named James Hopwood Jeans? He worked out some relatively simple formulas about gas clouds collapsing.
James Jeans - Wikipedia
Be sure to take the links to Jeans Length and Jeans Instability while you're there. Good looking short-cuts, if you ask me. How's that for a bone?
And if you just can't get enough Wiki,
Molecular cloud - Wikipedia
The physics of molecular clouds are poorly understood and much debated. Their internal motions are governed by turbulence in a cold, magnetized gas, for which the turbulent motions are highly supersonic but comparable to the speeds of magnetic disturbances. This state is thought to lose energy rapidly, requiring either an overall collapse or a steady reinjection of energy. At the same time, the clouds are known to be disrupted by some process”most likely the effects of massive stars”before a significant fraction of their mass has become stars.
Which is why I'll save my energy for something else. There just aren't too many areas where the big official brains so obviously don't know what's going on. I mean no insult by that. It's very much to their credit that they don't make more of an effort to hide it.
I mean just after what little research I've done for my posts on this thread it's my opinion that anyone who just up and says "yes it will" or "no it won't" is probably not taking everything into consideration. At this point I would not be confident betting on either side, myself. Times are changing, and I don't consider you "wrong".
Here's another bone: if some YEC wants to say you need the supernovas, just whip out a little magnetism & electricity on 'im. There are other not-so-obvious factors. You don't have to fall back on dark matter, not for a long time. But be prepared for some surprises the other way too, if he's sharp & up-to-date.
Goodness! It's been a while since I learned so much about something I care so little about. But it was more fun than watching any Hollywood awards show.
Good Luck, TD. I look forward to clashing with you on an issue I do care about sometime.
™ Version 4.2