You are describing the solar nebula theory to a friend. You point out that it provides an explanation for the regular motion in our solar system, the division of the planets into terrestrial and Jovian types, and an explanation for the origin and nature of comets and asteroids. Your friend agrees that this is all very nice, but that it seems that the solar nebula theory fails the basic criteria for a scientific theory, to make predictions about the natural world that can be observationally tested. In her opinion, all the solar nebula theory does is explain known facts, albeit in a compelling and economical way. How would you answer your friend and make the case that the solar nebula theory is indeed a scientific theory that has passed many observational tests? What are some predictions that the solar nebula theory has made that were confirmed only within the last decade or so?

Explanation:

The widely accepted theory which explains the formation of the solar system is known as the Nebular theory of origin.

The Nebular theory states that the solar system is formed by the explosion of the large gaseous clouds in the centre due to various factors which took place around 457 million years ago.

The explosion leads to the formation of the dust particles which accumulated in large amount in the centre and the suspended particles revolved around it and formed the planets and the centre is known as the sun.

The theory can be proved as :

1. the direction of rotation of planetary bodies are in the same around the same direction.

2. The suspended particles formed the disk around the planets.

3. The planets near the Sun are small and possess lass amount of metals and the silicates whereas the planets far away from the Sun-like Jupiter are larger due to the presence of these metals and silicate which attracted the hydrogen and Helium.

because the light is a great source of energy for the plants to survive. (i hope this )