Solar system

(Credit: © Tryfonov - stock.adobe.com)

In a Nutshell

  • Scientists measured magnetic signals in the oldest known solid objects from our solar system and found they recorded a field stronger than Earth’s magnetic field today.
  • The magnetic field strength detected is consistent with magnetism, rather than gravity alone, playing a central role in driving the growth of the early solar disk.
  • This is the first time ancient magnetic records have been recovered from materials dating to the earliest stage of solar system formation.

Billions of years before Earth existed, a swirling cloud of gas and dust was collapsing into what would eventually become our solar system. Somewhere in that chaos, tiny crystals formed near the infant Sun, cooling and freezing in place a record of the magnetic forces surrounding them. Now, scientists have read that record, and what they found points to magnetism as a driving force behind the birth of planets.

A research team has measured ancient magnetic signals locked inside some of the oldest solid objects ever identified: tiny mineral grains, called calcium-aluminum-rich inclusions, or CAIs, found inside a meteorite that fell to Earth. These microscopic crystals are roughly 4.567 to 4.568 billion years old, making them the oldest known solid materials from our solar system. According to the study, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, the magnetic field those crystals recorded was roughly 150 to 600 microtesla in strength, stronger than Earth’s magnetic field today. That level of magnetic force, the researchers argue, was almost certainly powerful enough to have driven the process that gathered gas and dust into a full-grown star, and possibly into the planets around it.

For decades, scientists have debated what powered the early solar system’s growth. Was it gravity pulling material inward? Magnetic forces channeling it? Both? This study offers the first direct physical evidence from the very earliest era of solar system formation, a window into a time that has, until now, been almost completely dark.

How Ancient Space Crystals Captured the Solar System’s Magnetic Field

CAIs are not glamorous objects. Under a microscope, they look like small, irregularly shaped grains embedded in a rocky meteorite. But they formed before anything else in our solar system, condensing out of a hot gas cloud very close to the young Sun, at temperatures well above 2,000 degrees Fahrenheit. Because they formed so early and so close to the proto-Sun, they were present at the very moment when the disk of material surrounding the newborn star was just beginning to sort itself out.

Inside some of these crystals are tiny bits of iron and iron-nickel metal, each far smaller than a human hair. When those metal particles cooled below a critical temperature long ago, they locked in the direction and strength of whatever magnetic field was present around them, like microscopic compass needles frozen in place. Reading those signals nearly 4.6 billion years later requires extraordinarily sensitive instruments.

To do that, the research team used two specialized tools: a SQUID microscope and a quantum diamond microscope, both capable of detecting magnetic fields far too faint for conventional equipment. Researchers extracted five CAIs from a meteorite called Dominion Range 08006, a well-preserved space rock recovered from Antarctica that had experienced very little chemical change since it formed. That pristine condition was critical, because any significant heating or chemical alteration after the crystals formed could have erased or overwritten the original magnetic signal.

Ruling Out Contamination

Before trusting the magnetic signals they detected, the team had to confirm that the crystals had not been re-magnetized by later events, such as the meteorite being struck by other space rocks, altered by water, or heated after it landed on Earth.

Researchers examined the orientations of the magnetic signals across different crystals and small rocky grains in the same meteorite. If the rock had been uniformly re-magnetized by a later event, all those signals would tend to point in the same direction. Instead, they were scattered randomly, exactly what scientists would expect if each grain had frozen in its original signal independently, before they were all packed together in the same space rock.

Chemical fingerprints inside the CAIs told a consistent story as well. Measurements comparing slightly different forms of oxygen atoms trapped in the crystals showed the CAIs had not been heated to temperatures that would have erased the magnetic record. Weathering on Earth was also minimal, confirmed by the meteorite’s classification.

Infographic showing ancient meteorite crystals that recorded a 150 to 600 microtesla magnetic field in the early solar system.
Infographic by StudyFinds

What the Magnetic Field Strength Tells Us About Planetary Formation

A magnetic field of 150 to 600 microtesla sounds like a dry technical detail. But its meaning for planetary science runs deep. Previous studies had measured ancient magnetic fields from somewhat younger meteorite materials, roughly 50 to 100 microtesla, corresponding to the solar nebula between 1 and 4 million years after the solar system started forming. Those earlier measurements were already strong enough to support the idea that magnetic forces drove the disk’s activity during a calmer, later phase of the Sun’s development.

CAIs date to an even earlier phase, when the young Sun was still deeply embedded inside a collapsing cloud of gas and dust, and the rate at which material was falling inward was many orders of magnitude higher. During this wild early period, more than 90 percent of the Sun’s eventual mass was being gathered in. Whether gravity or magnetism did the heavy lifting during that chaotic time has been one of planetary science’s most stubborn open questions.

Field strength at that level matches theoretical models in which magnetic fields in a spinning disk create turbulence that drives gas inward, a process that would have been actively operating in the hot inner regions of the disk near the proto-Sun. Those inner regions would have been hot enough to allow the gas to conduct electricity, which in turn allows magnetic fields to grab hold of the gas and move it. Under this interpretation, magnetism was not a minor player but a central engine of planet formation from the very beginning.

Researchers were careful to acknowledge an important uncertainty: they cannot be completely certain exactly when the CAIs acquired their magnetic signal. Two scenarios both fit the data. In the first, the CAIs recorded the magnetic field when they initially formed, or very shortly afterward, during brief heating events in the earliest phase of the solar system. In the second, the CAIs were later transported outward in the disk and re-heated during the same era that other small rocky objects were forming, roughly 2 million years after CAI formation. Under that reading, the magnetic signal would be slightly younger, but would still represent a period billions of years before any known planetary body had fully formed.

Either way, the measured field intensity points toward magnetic forces playing a dominant role. Gravity-driven instability, an alternative mechanism, was most likely not operating in the regions where these crystals would have acquired their magnetic memory, based on the team’s modeling.

Beyond the specific findings, this work opens a new avenue for studying the early solar system. Before this research, no one had successfully extracted reliable ancient magnetic records from CAI-bearing materials. Now that the method has been demonstrated, other CAIs from other meteorites could potentially be analyzed the same way, filling in more of the timeline and helping researchers understand not just how our solar system formed, but how planetary systems in general get their start. Magnetism, it turns out, may have been one of the forces doing the actual work of building ours.


Paper Notes

Limitations

The authors identify several important limitations. Most significantly, they cannot definitively determine whether the magnetic signals in the CAIs date to the very earliest phase of solar system formation or to a later heating event roughly 2 million years afterward. The study acknowledges that isotopic and petrological data do not fully exclude the possibility of later remagnetization before the crystals were incorporated into the meteorite’s parent body. Additionally, the iron-to-magnetite ratio in the samples introduces uncertainty in the paleointensity calculations, and the value used for the ratio of ancient magnetization to laboratory-applied magnetization carries a substantial uncertainty factor. Only five CAIs were studied, and not all of them yielded the high-quality magnetic components needed for full paleointensity estimates, with some providing only upper-limit constraints.

Funding and Disclosures

The authors declare no competing interests. Funding sources acknowledged in the paper include the Morton K. Blaustein Scholars Fund, the NASA Laboratory Analysis of Returned Samples program (grant 80NSSC23K1267), the NASA Emerging Worlds program (grant 80NSSC25K0347), the National Science Foundation of China (grant 12325304), the European Union’s Research and Innovation program (grant agreements 101005611 and 101131765), and EXCITE and EXCITE2 awards (G106564 and G122171). Meteorite samples were allocated by the NASA Johnson Space Center Meteorite Working Group.

Publication Details

Authors: Cauê S. Borlina, Benjamin P. Weiss, Xue-Ning Bai, Po-Yen Tung, Richard J. Harrison, Elias N. Mansbach, Nilanjan Chatterjee, François L. H. Tissot, and Kevin D. McKeegan

Affiliations: Massachusetts Institute of Technology; Tsinghua University; University of Cambridge; California Institute of Technology; University of California, Los Angeles

Journal: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, Vol. 123, No. 36

Paper Title: “Paleomagnetic evidence for a nebular magnetic field from calcium-aluminum-rich inclusions”

DOI: 10.1073/pnas.2521660123

Published: August 24, 2026

About StudyFinds Analysis

Called "brilliant," "fantastic," and "spot on" by scientists and researchers, our acclaimed StudyFinds Analysis articles are created using an exclusive AI-based model with complete human oversight by the StudyFinds Editorial Team. For these articles, we use an unparalleled LLM process across multiple systems to analyze entire journal papers, extract data, and create accurate, accessible content. Our writing and editing team proofreads and polishes each and every article before publishing. With recent studies showing that artificial intelligence can interpret scientific research as well as (or even better) than field experts and specialists, StudyFinds was among the earliest to adopt and test this technology before approving its widespread use on our site. We stand by our practice and continuously update our processes to ensure the very highest level of accuracy. Read our AI Policy (link below) for more information.

Our Editorial Process

StudyFinds publishes digestible, agenda-free, transparent research summaries that are intended to inform the reader as well as stir civil, educated debate. We do not agree nor disagree with any of the studies we post, rather, we encourage our readers to debate the veracity of the findings themselves. All articles published on StudyFinds are vetted by our editors prior to publication and include links back to the source or corresponding journal article, if possible.

Our Editorial Team

Steve Fink

Editor-in-Chief

John Anderer

Associate Editor