There are many new theories about planet formation.

In traditional models, the rocky planets form between large gas giants and the parent star. There is a so-called Kepler radius (also known as Kepler orbit)where gravity pulls with the same force in both directions. That forms Kepler point the point where material can condensate to a planet. 

But when we think about those points the Kepler point can form between any other gravity centers. The small red dwarfs and metal-rich stars can also form at a similar point between gravity centers that can be nebulas, black holes, or any other heavy objects that can stabilize mass at that point. 

New observations about objects like brown dwarfs and JWST telescope observations from distant objects. This can cause a need to make new models for planet formation. When we think about things like fission stars, the stars that form lots of their energy from fission reactions might be so-called brown dwarfs. In that case, we think that the object that forms more energy than it gets is a star. And if there is a lot of fissile material in some interplanetary nebula they can form objects, there are enormous-scale natural nuclear reactors. 

Those stars require lots of fissile material. And that means they can condense from the old star's remnants. It is possible that in those brown dwarfs, the core of uranium or some other radioactive material pulls the hydrogen atmosphere around it. Then that hydrogen starts to fall. Against the fission shell. Until it gets enough energy that fusion starts. The fusion shell expands and fusion stops. That makes those brown dwarfs very special. 

"The Webb Space Telescope has provided evidence that contradicts existing theories by confirming long-lived planet-forming disks in environments with minimal heavy elements, suggesting a need to revise our understanding of early planet formation. Credit: NASA, ESA, CSA, STScI, Olivia C. Jones (UK ATC), Guido De Marchi (ESTEC), Margaret Meixner (USRA)" (ScitechDaily, Stunning Webb Discovery Forces Rethink of Planet Formation in the Early Universe)

The nebula far away looks a little bit like a DNA molecule. And the shadow that looks like two dolphins is also an interesting detail. 

"This graph shows, on the bottom left in yellow, a spectrum of one of the 10 target stars in this study (as well as accompanying light from the immediate background environment). Spectral fingerprints of hot atomic helium, cold molecular hydrogen, and hot atomic hydrogen are highlighted. On the top left in magenta is a spectrum slightly offset from the star that includes only light from the background environment. " (ScitechDaily, Stunning Webb Discovery Forces Rethink of Planet Formation in the Early Universe)

"This second spectrum lacks a spectral line of cold molecular hydrogen.

On the right is the comparison of the top and bottom lines. This comparison shows a large peak in the cold molecular hydrogen coming from the star but not its nebular environment. Also, atomic hydrogen shows a larger peak from the star. This indicates the presence of a protoplanetary disk immediately surrounding the star. The data was taken with the microshutter array on the James Webb Space Telescope’s NIRSpec (Near-Infrared Spectrometer) instrument. Credit: NASA, ESA, CSA, Joseph Olmsted (STScI)" (ScitechDaily, Stunning Webb Discovery Forces Rethink of Planet Formation in the Early Universe)

The fission star might not be very big. It might be a planet-size object where there are lots of heavy nuclear elements and that causes a situation where there is remarkable nuclear fission or natural nuclear reaction on the surface of the object. The idea is that the fission star is an enormous-scale natural nuclear reactor. But is that thing a star or planet? 

The planet's formation doesn't depend on stars as much as researchers previously thought. The planet can form even if it's outside the solar system. The brown dwarfs are the failed stars. Those objects cannot maintain stable nuclear reactions. 

And it's possible. That there is forming much lighter objects outside the stellar gravitational field. Maybe there are lots of heavy solid elements in some small interplanetary nebula and if there is starting the condensation. It's possible. That the fusion cannot start. The other thing is that. 

Rogue planets can start to orbit each other. There is a Kepler radius also between rogue planets. And it can form the planet between those planets. But when we think about the formation of the first planets. In a young, metal-poor universe could form the first gas giants. And when their parent stars detonated as supernovas the shockwave formed heavy elements in those planets. 

Planetary formation starts. If there is a point. Where material can condense. The mass and elementary structure of that condensate should be so low that it cannot form nuclear fusion. 

But then we must realize that the Kepler radius that forms a point, where material can condensate depending on the gravity of those objects. That means the shape of those objects doesn't matter. Those objects that form the point where planets can form can be stars, other planets, and even interplanetary nebulas can create those points. 

https://scitechdaily.com/james-webb-telescope-unveils-the-icy-secrets-of-our-solar-systems-birth/

https://scitechdaily.com/stunning-webb-discovery-forces-rethink-of-planet-formation-in-the-early-universe/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kepler_orbit