Astroboffins spot a fat 'monster' ALIEN planet terrorizing tiny dwarf

Scientists have discovered a new “monster” alien world that challenges today's theories about planet formation due to its sheer size. The giant, known as NGTS-1b, is 600 light years away and is the biggest planet compared to the size of its parent star NGTS-1 ever found. NGTS-1b is a hot Jupiter, a rare class of exoplanet. …

[Anonymous Coward]

They should call the big one Planet Weinstein...

There are quite a lot of choices of names for the dwarf.

[A Non e-mouse]

Re: They should call the big one Planet Weinstein...

I'd say that's insulting to the plant. I think the planet & its star are on better terms than Weinstein and some of his past acquaintances...

[gormful]

Re: They should call the big one Planet Weinstein...

Nah. "Mesklin".

[Anonymous Coward]

Shouldn't hot Jupiters be common?

Binary star systems are common, but there wouldn't always be enough material to ignite fusion in the smaller one. Those would end up a hot Jupiter.

The hotter the Jupiter and closer the orbit, the more difficult it'll be to tell apart from its star.

[Measurer]

Re: Shouldn't hot Jupiters be common?

It's not for us to judge which Roman god you find attractive, or their social standing in your twisted fantasy!

[Frank Oz]

Re: Shouldn't hot Jupiters be common?

My thoughts exactly ... perhaps the system should be considered a failed binary. I'm guessing there are a few of those out there.

That said, the fact that they orbit every 2.6 days is unusual. Stable binaries typically have a much greater separation distance than what this orbit implies.

[Anonymous Coward]

So, does this imply that the Universe might be more random than was previously comfortably considered by those who like to explain its structure through the filter of $DEITY?

[unwarranted triumphalism]

I don't think there are any religious people here

Take your strawman for a walk elsewhere.

[Measurer]

That's no 'monster Alien Planet'

That's a friggin space station!!!

Or maybe a dyson sphere around one of the paired dwarfs.

I have absolutely no qualifications, or even much interest in this area, other than a passing knowledge of popular cinema and the urge to share it.

[Rich 11]

Wrong method

The periodic dimming of the star was monitored over several months to gather enough data to calculate the gargantuan planet’s size, position and mass.

The dimming shown by the light curve only gives the period and the likelihood that the object is a planet rather than a binary companion. Spectral shift -- caused by the planet tugging the star backwards and forwards -- provides the additional data needed to calculate the planet's radial velocity, from which its size, position and mass can be determined.

[Unicornpiss]

Re: Wrong method

Considering the size of the planet, possibly a failed star in itself, and the (comparatively) dinky size of the parent star, that's probably a pretty big tug.

[annodomini2]

I hate the formation reporting...

I'm not sure if it's the interviewee or the interviewer, but Solar systems move around.

We have loads of evidence for this in our own solar system, just because a planet is currently in a close orbit around a star doesn't necessarily mean it formed there.

[Scroticus Canis]

Boffins mount oscilloscope upside-down!

"...spotted a blip in the star’s brightness..." - if it was the right way up they would have seen a 'dip in the star's brightness' which is the usual way this is done.

[PhilBuk]

Re: Boffins mount oscilloscope upside-down!

The telescopes are in Chile. They were upside down.

Phil.

[Bob Dole (tm)]

“Such massive planets were not thought to exist around such small stars," said Bayliss.

So... it would be fair to say that the consensus was wrong about yet something else?

[Brewster's Angle Grinder]

It wasn't a consensus so much as the observational evidence to date. ("...were not thought to exist..." is a vernacular for "...we had yet to see any...")

[John Smith 19]

Or to put it another way...

Relying on heuristics with a formal model can lead you into false expectations.

IOW "We didn't think it could exist....but now we know it can."

So another data point for any model to satisfy, which should help to filter out models that don't work.

Although it is true at what point does a very hefty planet become a "proto sun" and at what point could one get so close to its sun (if any) that it ignites?

[Anonymous Coward]

AH i SEE the Weinstein theorem

Relying on heuristics with a formal model can lead you into false expectations.