Which of the nebular, tidal , planetisimal, big bang and condensation theories do you find most believable?

Question

kindly explain.. tnx! :]

Answer 1

Well, all of them are supported by observation, with perhaps the exception of the condensation theory. I can't think of anything that the condensation theory has been supported by (note, I may have overlooked something).

Nebular theory makes sense. We see nebulae, we see them forming stars, we've observed newborn stars with fresh protoplanetary disks in nebulae, especially the Orion Nebula.

Tidal forces are a definite "yes".  The ocean tends to experience them. Furthermore, tides mess around with orbits and rotation periods of various objects.

Planetesimals, hmm, quite a few of those still exist, Vesta for one. There's certainly no reason to believe they don't exist in other solar systems. That's all planetesimals are, just big asteroids that clump together later to be planets.

Big bang, well the universe is expanding.

Answer 2

I think you're confusing a bunch of theories here that don't contradict each other.  Nebular, tidal, planetesimal I've all heard in terms of planet formation, and while we're certain planets and stars form from a nebula, tidal/eddy vs. planetesimal is still up for debate - there's evidence on both sides.  Big bang is widely accepted and not related.