Note 6

 I am a poet: an amateur astronomer without a telescope.   Here's my idea I like to refer to as the "organic hypothesis of planet-formation" (as opposed to the standard "gravitational theory" and alternative ones such as the recent "electrical theory" of planetary formation).  In my organic hypothesis—strictly fanciful for the express purpose of keeping us on our mental toes, so to speak—our local star produces all the planets: birthing them like seeds.  Over epochal periods of time, each planet gradually (indiscernible to our mayfly-like existences) moves farther away from their parent star...each recently birthed planetoid eventually replacing the spot formerly occupied by their next elder sibling. (This would explain how Mars now contains traces of the life that once flourished when it formerly occupied the space Earth currently does; and furthermore, it may explain how all the spat-out and spent planetary husks end up as plutinos and twotinos, etc., arriving throughout the scattered disc and beyond the Kuiper belt to ultimately end up in the Oort Cloud)—Earth itself being destined to take the place of Mars eventually...(whether we survive the epochal transition is anyone's guess)...then, after passing through the remnants of the asteroid belt, the dry barren Earth would transform into its next phase as a gas giant, just as Jupiter did.  At this stage of our organic growth, the living planets develop their first "Gas Giant property"; then, by stages, passing through Saturn's spot, Uranus's spot, and finally, after reaching Neptune's glorious, frozen location—they are destined to join Pluto and the rest—"spat out" into the graveyard of hundreds of thousands of planets our local star has already given birth to.  It's why I think of the proposed Oort Cloud as a sort of inverse Eggshell—a planetary graveyard—because it signifies the epochal formed exterior of the cosmic mausoleum being formed.  In my organic hypothesis of planet-formation.