'Planet nine' theory boosted by Kuiper Belt Object with odd orbit The long-controversial notion that there's an as-yet-undiscovered “ninth planet*” has had a boost from the best kind of science: a prediction of its effects, borne out by observation. The boffins that re-opened the debate in January this year, Caltech's Konstantin Batygin and Mike Brown, are feeling vindicated after a …
in any way
Yes, in that gravity's range is infinite. In any significant way, no, not really. Something 75 times further away than Pluto would have to be twice as massive as Saturn to have the same effect on the Earth as Pluto presently does (and Pluto only has about 2% of the Earth's mass).
If the orbit is very eccentric and the average distance from the Sun is 75x Plutos, it's closest approach might affect Earth's gravity significantly.
However I'm confused that an object of that size could have escaped observation for so long, given that astronomers can measure visible light emitted from exoplanets.
Because they aren't measuring light emitted by exoplanets, but rather light reflected by them. That's why we mostly discover planets close to their sun, or really huge ones. The number of planets we've discovered 75 Plutos from their star is probably near zero.
Also, depending on where it is currently, Kuiper Belt objects may be in the way.
and we have lots of manufacturing capacity for Agenothree. Upvoted for the Pern reference.
On a related note, I have always thought that, with proper cinematic treatment, that series could rival the Star Wars saga. And for bonus points: it's never been done so, not a [string of expletives] remake/reimagining/reclusterfuck.
Discuss, using a shovel (see item 3).
If the boffins could please hurry up and find out lots bout this planet please. My space obsessed 5yr old needs to know what it's called, how big it is, how many moons etc etc.
Also wasn't Ix a planet in the Dune books.
[clicky click]
"Ix is the ninth planet in the star system Alkalurops, and ruled by the Ixian Technocracy. The Ixian economy depends on manufacturing complex machinery, which sometimes flouts the moral-juridical proscriptions of the Butlerian Jihad"
"If Brown and Batygin are right, the new planet would have an orbit so distant (75 times further from the Sun than Pluto) and elongated it needs between 10,000 years and 20,000 years to complete."
Something doesn't add up.
With nothing specified, when talking about a planet's distance from the Sun I'd assume it to be a reference to the semi-major axis. Pluto's is about 6 billion km from the Sun, so 75 times that is 450 billion km.
Back in January it was suggested that it could get as far as 200 times further out from the Sun than Earth - which wording makes me think aphelion, but for Earth that isn't hugely far out (astronomically speaking) than its semi-major axis. And that's 150 million km, so 200 times that is 30 billion.
The mystery planet seems to be getting further away.
Even basing the first suggestion on Pluto's aphelion and perihelion, the numbers are inconsistent:
Its aphelion is 7.3 billion km: 75 times that is 547.5 billion km, and its perihelion is 4.4 billion km, which gives us 330 billion km. Both of which are considerably further out than 30 billion.
But looking at that last calculation, based on Pluto's perihelion, I wonder if someone's misplaced a decimal point somewhere?*
Also: Perhaps they only think they're looking for a single planet when there are actually two (or more) at different distances. Try 11.5 billion and 22.5 billion.
* And I wonder if it's me?
Is something will stick. It may be this orbit suggests a ninth planet, but if the thousands of others don't, then is not another theory more likely?
If they found lots of these things, then it would suggest it. But have other mistakes like this not been made in the past and it was not an additional planet, but the existing setup that was causing the changes/orbits.
As ever, we need more data. Finding a couple of KBOs with an orbit suggesting some large object is "shepherding" them is interesting, but not proof. Finding another object in an orbit that might be consistent with it is also interesting, but not proof. What it does mean is that we have reason to look for more data. At some point we might get a sufficient excess of KBOs in compatible orbits to prove it is unlikely that it is caused by chance. Finding the planet itself would of course clinch it.
Time will tell (soon I hope)
"perhaps the conjectural planet should be known as planet 9.1?"
If you watch the video, you'll see the name 'Microsoft' on the podium.
Microsoft went from eight to ten with Windows - so this must be planet ten. Which means that in order to find it, we just need to look for the telemetry it's spewing out.
(Also: We now know the real reason Pluto was demoted to a dwarf planet).
The Solar System: Sponsored by Microsoft.
Having spent too much time on youtube seeing videos about Niburu, Planet X Anu, Enki and Enlil etc. I was feeling smug in my scientific belief "listen kids if there really was a big planet out there don't you think we would detected it by now?"
Then this comes along, I feel like the guy who has stepped in bigfoot crap, I want to brush it off but there is a lot of it.
@NomNomNom no one said jet fuel could melt steel. It can however burn hot enough to turn steel into a form that will bend and warp. It's a fundamental property of pretty much any metal that has been well understood by blacksmiths for centuries (it's why you don't try and make a sword from cold iron, you have to heat it in a forge first). The forging temperature of steel is around 1000C. To weaken steel you don't even have to reach this temperature, at about 500C the structural strength of steel is about 50% of it's strength at room temperature. The temperature reached in the WTC was estimated to be around 1200C and the jet fuel itself was estimated to be around 900C (aviation fuel wasn't the only thing that was on fire).
While this does not in itself disprove a conspiracy theory, it does fit the evidence at the time. It's more than plausible that the planes were the cause of the towers collapsing, no further interference was necessary and tin foil hats are not required.
@ Alien8n
Much as I hate to get drawn on this subject, mainly because “thinking” is unpatriotic.
I have found there are two basic types of people when it comes to this subject
1. those who look at hundreds of facts, observations, motivations and connections.
2. those who would rather not have to think.
The second group are normally identified by the urge to other stop people thinking too.
Ending and comments with “Period”, or “No further thought required”
For those with brains feel free to use them, with my blessing.
With all the advances in science recently I have to think nothing is impossible until proven impossible. A couple of examples:
1. Nothing can escape from a black hole. Except recent studies have shown this is no longer true.
2. The Standard Model is proven. And so far all proven observations do fit the Standard Model of particle physics (up to and including the Higgs Boson). Except recent observations are increasingly breaking the Standard Model, while not to a level of certainty to be classed as proof as yet.
We're at a level technologically where science fiction is just a few years in the future. Anti gravity, teleportation, cloaking devices, all are being shown to be theoretically possible, we just need to advance technology far enough to make it happen.
"1. Nothing can escape from a black hole. Except recent studies have shown this is no longer true."
If you're referring to Hawking Radiation then matter isn't escaping as such - one half of a (usually short-lived) pair of virtual particles is consumed by the hole, leaving its partner to escape... the appearance is thus that the hole has emitted it (and loses mass as a result)
Actual mass loss occurred when the two black holes collided that generated the gravity waves that were recently detected:
A mass three times the mass of the sun was lost!
That mass was turned into energy, which caused the ripples in spacetime – gravitational waves – that LIGO detected 1.3 billion years later.
So energy/matter can escape black holes in certain extraordinary conditions.
I just get the luminous solar system set up on my daughter's bedroom ceiling ("Pack contains 8 planets and a Pluto" before you ask), all orbits proportionately scaled (sort of; the planets themselves are too similar in size - and an orbit accurately scaled to the size of the Earth model would have required a 5 mile wide bedroom) and now this.
I suppose we'll just have to blutack a bouncy ball to the bathroom ceiling or something.
The really exciting bit would be getting to see what a planet of ~10 terrestrial masses looks like. Earth is the heaviest of all the inner planets and the lightest gas giant (Uranus) is about 15 Earth masses. So is Planet IX a (frozen?) gas giant or is it a rocky terrestrial planet? It would have implications for models of solar system formation, too.
When we ignore adjectives (rocky, gas giant, dwarf) the planet under discussion would be planet eleven-plus. Ceres was promoted to dwarf planethood also, restoring it to its glory as of its discovery, making Pluto planet ten. (Let's just fold Charon into that "ten" to keep things simple.)
Who knows what other dwarf planets lie between Pluto and this hypothesis?
Found this snorkeling the 'net: Periodic mass extinctions and the Planet X model reconsidered, Monthly Notices Letters of the Royal Astronomical Society (abstract free / article pay walled)
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
