Astronomers Discover the Coolest Known Sub-Stellar Body

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Astronomers Discover the Coolest Known Sub-Stellar Body

Posted by Soulskill on Saturday January 30, 2010 @05:46AM from the miles-davis's-home-planet dept.

Hugh Pickens writes "Science Daily reports that using the United Kingdom Infrared Telescope (UKIRT) in Hawaii, astronomers have discovered what may be the coolest sub-stellar body ever found outside our own solar system. Too small to be stars and with insufficient mass to maintain hydrogen-burning nuclear fusion reactions in their cores, 'brown dwarfs' have masses smaller than stars but larger than gas giant planets like Jupiter, with an upper limit in between 75 and 80 Jupiter masses. 'This looks like the fourth time in three years that the UKIRT has made a record breaking discovery of the coolest known brown dwarf, with an estimated temperature not far above 200 degrees Celsius,' says Dr. Philip Lucas at the University of Hertfordshire. Due to their low temperature these objects are very faint in visible light, and are detected by their glow at infrared wavelengths. The object known as SDSS1416+13B is in a wide orbit around a somewhat brighter and warmer brown dwarf, SDSS1416+13A, and the pair is located between 15 and 50 light years from the solar system, which is quite close in astronomical terms."

60 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

I'm sure by More_Cowbell · 2010-01-30 06:00 · Score: 1

I'm sure there is a joke in here somewhere involving aliens and mood lighting...

--
Experience teaches only the teachable. -AH
1. Re:I'm sure by ozbird · 2010-01-30 11:50 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  "Coolest known sub-stellar body? Obviously they haven't met my wife."
2. Re:I'm sure by Anonymous Coward · 2010-02-01 04:01 · Score: 0
  
  I was more thinking of the Fonz...
It's the new coolest sub-stellar body by The+Archon+V2.0 · 2010-01-30 06:00 · Score: 1

But I'm still the awesomest sub-stellar body.
(Puts on shades.)
Yeah.
Coolest? by gmuslera · 2010-01-30 06:02 · Score: 1

Brown dwarfs stars are cooler than some of the (exo)planets found already?
1. Re:Coolest? by Mornedhel · 2010-01-30 07:04 · Score: 1
  
  I was thinking of this, too... Don't planets and other smaller bodies count as sub-stellar bodies ?
  
  --
  This /.-related sig is a stub. You can help Mornedhel by expanding it.
2. Re:Coolest? by John+Hasler · 2010-01-30 07:16 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  I think that by "sub-stellar body" they mean something not orbiting a star.
  BTW as most of the exoplanets found so far orbit very close to their stars and so are rather hot ("hot jupiters") it is likely that this thing is cooler than most of them.
  
  --
  Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
3. Re:Coolest? by dziban303 · 2010-01-30 08:46 · Score: 0
  
  I think that by "sub-stellar body" they mean something not orbiting a star.
  From the summary (not even the article!): "The object known as SDSS1416+13B is in a wide orbit around a somewhat brighter and warmer brown dwarf, SDSS1416+13A"
  Obviously you're literate in the most basic sense. So why not put that ability to use, genius?
4. Re:Coolest? by John+Hasler · 2010-01-30 08:53 · Score: 1
  
  A brown dwarf is not a star.
  
  --
  Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
5. Re:Coolest? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-30 09:23 · Score: 0
  
  You're whacko if you think that brown dwarves can't orbit stars.
6. Re:Coolest? by osu-neko · 2010-01-30 09:57 · Score: 1
  
  I think that by "sub-stellar body" they mean something not orbiting a star.
  From the summary (not even the article!): "The object known as SDSS1416+13B is in a wide orbit around a somewhat brighter and warmer brown dwarf, SDSS1416+13A"
  Obviously you're literate in the most basic sense. So why not put that ability to use, genius?
  Alas, it's not clear that you are literate in even the most basic sense. XD
  
  --
  "Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
7. Re:Coolest? by khallow · 2010-01-30 14:17 · Score: 1
  
  You're whacko if you think that brown dwarves can't orbit stars.
  So what? The previous poster did not make this claim.
8. Re:Coolest? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-31 01:51 · Score: 0
  
  Yes he did. Learn to read, fuckface.
9. Re:Coolest? by Hognoxious · 2010-01-31 05:13 · Score: 1
  
  a somewhat brighter and warmer brown dwarf
  A russet gnome?
  
  --
  Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Scientists confirming what everybody already knows by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-30 06:03 · Score: 0

It's Fonzi, right?
(pre-shark, of course)
I wonder by EgNagRah · 2010-01-30 06:03 · Score: 0

What would a brown dwarf do if it passed close by to earth... since they are hard to detect I can assume we wouldn't see it coming. Would it possible be able to cause the earth to spew out a moon? http://www.physorg.com/news183884450.html?xid=rss-fullcontent
1. Re:I wonder by BigSlowTarget · 2010-01-30 06:12 · Score: 1
  
  All depends on how close it is and what it masses. True for any body that passed by that wasn't radiating so much it would vaporize the place.
2. Re:I wonder by BigSlowTarget · 2010-01-30 06:14 · Score: 1
  
  Oops - and it's velocity of course.
3. Re:I wonder by mister_playboy · 2010-01-30 06:16 · Score: 1
  
  An object with 75 to 80 times the mass of Jupiter passing through the Solar System would cause way more chaos than that. Trust me, you'd be well aware of its presence.
  
  --
  Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law ::: Love is the law, love under will
4. Re:I wonder by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-30 08:36 · Score: 0
  
  As I understand it, the Moon was formed when a Mars-sized body collided with proto-Earth, dumping its iron core and some matter into our own planet. The rest bounced back into space and settled in an orbit around the Earth.
  If a brown dwarf were to collide with the Earth it would be completely destroyed. It would be as if Earth fell into Jupiter or the Sun.
5. Re:I wonder by osu-neko · 2010-01-30 10:03 · Score: 1
  
  What would a brown dwarf do if it passed close by to earth... since they are hard to detect I can assume we wouldn't see it coming.
  Um, it would be a lot easier to see coming than the planet Jupiter. What makes a brown dwarf hard to detect is that it's not close to a star (if it was, it would be a large exoplanet instead). Obviously it one was passing close by Earth, it would be close to a star (the Sun) and would be extremely easy to detect. "Impossible to miss" would be a better description. Depending on how close, it would likely be the brightest object in the sky, visible in broad daylight, for a few centuries before it got too close.
  
  --
  "Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
6. Re:I wonder by tragedy · 2010-01-30 10:20 · Score: 1
  
  I was always of the understanding that most of the mass for the moon came not from some of the mars sized mass that hit earth rebounding, but instead from the opposite side of the earth from the impact. Sort of like a Newtons cradle. So, mars sized mass hits earth and some of it does break up and maybe end up as part of the moon, but most of it just gets swallowed by earth, the shockwave blows off a huge piece of the earth on a similar trajectory some of which returns to earth and the rest of which accumulates into the moon.
Not "brown dwarf" by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-30 06:04 · Score: 3, Funny

That's "African-American little person".
y'know... by kaini · 2010-01-30 06:27 · Score: 0

that *is* pretty cool.

--
please restate bitrate in libraries of congress per hour.
What's the bigger news here? by T+Murphy · 2010-01-30 06:30 · Score: 2, Interesting

Given brown dwarfs generally have no heat source, they cool quickly and we expect there to be cold ones out there. Is the bigger news the fact that we could detect this cool object, or the information gained by finding this brown dwarf?

--
My webcomic
Re:Scientists confirming what everybody already kn by JustOK · 2010-01-30 06:32 · Score: 4, Funny

Zaphod Beeblebrox

--
rewriting history since 2109
Hm? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-30 06:39 · Score: 0

I didn't know my bowel movements were considered sub-stellar bodies.
Re:Scientists confirming what everybody already kn by Rockoon · 2010-01-30 06:48 · Score: 3, Funny

He's just this guy.. 'ya know?

--
"His name was James Damore."
So... by drej · 2010-01-30 06:56 · Score: 3, Funny

So Fonzie is now a body in outer space?
1. Re:So... by blue+l0g1c · 2010-01-30 10:23 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  Yeah, when he jumped the shark, he escaped Earth's gravity.
So? by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-30 07:05 · Score: 1, Funny

Shouldn't they be looking for the hottest stellar body, if you know what I mean?
These should be common by Toonol · 2010-01-30 07:06 · Score: 2, Interesting

I know we can't make too many assumptions, but I think common sense would indicate there's trillions of these things floating out there. I would think there's more of these in the galaxy than stars, if you just continue the mass/frequency curve past the point that fusion ignites.
1. Re:These should be common by clyde_cadiddlehopper · 2010-01-30 07:33 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  What percentage of dark matter would these account for? Or is the mass of these sub-stellar objects already included in gravitational models of galaxies?
  
  --
  Obi-Wan: "I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror and were sudden
2. Re:These should be common by Eudial · 2010-01-30 08:25 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  I know we can't make too many assumptions, but I think common sense would indicate there's trillions of these things floating out there. I would think there's more of these in the galaxy than stars, if you just continue the mass/frequency curve past the point that fusion ignites.
  That's a pretty common astrophysical assumption though, that the universe is homogenous and isotropic. Or in simpler words, our corner of space is not significantly different from any other corner of space. So if we find these guys floating around in space, similar objects will likely float around elsewhere as well.
  
  --
  GAAH! MY PRINTER IS ON FIRE!!! PUT IT OUT! PUT IT OUT!
3. Re:These should be common by Tim+C · 2010-01-30 09:27 · Score: 2, Informative
  
  0; dark matter isn't normal matter that we just can't see, it's an entirely different form of matter (at least according to the theory).
  
  --
  It's official. Most of you are morons.
4. Re:These should be common by clyde_cadiddlehopper · 2010-01-30 09:43 · Score: 1
  
  Thank you. I should've known the distinction between baryonic dark matter (not-glowing-ordinary-proton-and-neutron-stuff) and the spooky kind that doesn't interact with light.
  
  --
  Obi-Wan: "I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of voices suddenly cried out in terror and were sudden
5. Re:These should be common by Urkki · 2010-01-31 08:12 · Score: 1
  
  0; dark matter isn't normal matter that we just can't see, it's an entirely different form of matter (at least according to the theory).
  Actually "dark matter" refers to an matter we don't see. So brown dwarfs etc. (that are sufficiently far to be undetectable) qualify as dark matter. But current understanding is, that baryonic dark matter (ie. brown dwarfs and stuff) is tiny fraction of non-baryonic dark matter, which is what you're talking about above.
This calls for a facepalm. by SilverHatHacker · 2010-01-30 07:11 · Score: 1

For everyone who read this thinking it meant "cool" as in "awesome".

--
Funny may not give karma, but +5 Informative never made anyone snort coffee out their nose.
1. Re:This calls for a facepalm. by hldn · 2010-01-30 07:58 · Score: 1
  
  double facepalm to those that thought 'sub-stellar body' meant it was kinda tubby.
  
  --
  http://www.accountkiller.com/removal-requested
Isn't Jupiter cooler? by Hurricane78 · 2010-01-30 07:50 · Score: 1

I mean if Jupiter’s surface temperature is below 200 degrees Celsius (and i bet it is), and since it’s also a brown dwarf (even with nuclear reactions going on in its core), shouldn’t it be even cooler?
Also, what about Saturn, Neptune and Uranus, who just as much count as brown dwarfs, since they are mainly built like a star.

--
Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
1. Re:Isn't Jupiter cooler? by John+Hasler · 2010-01-30 08:58 · Score: 0, Flamebait
  
  > I mean if Jupiter's surface temperature is below 200 degrees Celsius (and i
  > bet it is)...
  165K (defining "surface" as "1 bar pressure level")
  > ...and since it's also a brown dwarf...
  No it isn't.
  
  --
  Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
2. Re:Isn't Jupiter cooler? by MichaelSmith · 2010-01-30 09:06 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah but all of those object are not "outside our own solar system". If they were, they would be very hard to detect.
  
  --
  http://michaelsmith.id.au
3. Re:Isn't Jupiter cooler? by osu-neko · 2010-01-30 10:19 · Score: 1
  
  I mean if Jupiter’s surface temperature is below 200 degrees Celsius (and i bet it is), and since it’s also a brown dwarf...
  Jupiter is not a brown dwarf. It orbits the Sun.
  
  Also, what about Saturn, Neptune and Uranus, who just as much count as brown dwarfs,
  Correct, insofar as "just as much count" correctly notes that none of these bodies are brown dwarves.
  
  ... since they are mainly built like a star.
  How something is built does not alone define its astronomical classification. If the Earth orbited a gas giant, it would be a moon rather than a planet. If Titan did not orbit Saturn but orbited the Sun, it would be a planet, not a moon. If Jupiter would flying free through interstellar space with no star to orbit, it would be a brown dwarf. But in fact, it is not.
  
  --
  "Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
4. Re:Isn't Jupiter cooler? by John+Hasler · 2010-01-30 11:38 · Score: 0, Flamebait
  
  > If Jupiter would flying free through interstellar space with no star to
  > orbit, it would be a brown dwarf.
  No it wouldn't.
  
  --
  Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
Fonz by Junior+J.+Junior+III · 2010-01-30 07:51 · Score: 1

Since it's the coolest known, if Fonzie doesn't already have a sub-stellar body named after him, this one should be it.

--
You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
Too Hot by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-30 07:54 · Score: 0

200 celcius? Thats way too hot to be called cool.
Aren't some of the further out gas giants in this solar system Like Neptune more like 200 Kelvin.
What about Uranus? I know mine is about 310 kelvin :)
Unimpressed by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-30 08:02 · Score: 0

Us /.ers have known about Chuck Norris for years!
update WP by bcrowell · 2010-01-30 09:31 · Score: 2, Interesting

Sounds like it's time for someone with the relevant expertise to update this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brown_dwarf#Spectral_class_Y

--
Find free books.
Re:Scientists confirming what everybody already kn by ChrisMaple · 2010-01-30 11:17 · Score: 1

It's Gary Coleman

--
Contribute to civilization: ari.aynrand.org/donate
The coolest! by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-30 14:04 · Score: 0

I went to highschool with this guy. He actually used to be a total nerd.
Funny they don't know far it is by physburn · 2010-01-30 15:05 · Score: 1

Actually there are suspected to be more brown drawfs, failed stars with not enough gas for fusion , in the galaxy than there will be normal stars. If thats so they should be many (tens) brown drawfs within ten light years of us. Brown drawfs of course are so very dim, that its very difficult to spot them at all. But UKIRT is any all sky survey that will take years to complete, and we can expect them to find a lot more brown drawfs.
---
Astronomy Feed @ Feed Distiller
1. Re:Funny they don't know far it is by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-30 15:38 · Score: 0
  
  I wonder what happens when Brown Dwarves collide. I'm such a schmutz when it comes to these things. Even though they really do pique my interest.
Cool! by ianalis · 2010-01-30 15:43 · Score: 1

:)
Off-topic by Petrushka · 2010-01-30 16:33 · Score: 1

Posting to remove an erroneous moderation.
Re:Scientists confirming what everybody already kn by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-30 19:18 · Score: 0

No. Just no. Hitchhiker sucks. Badly. Nothing about it is cool. Nothing about it is funny. its not intelligent, not cleaver. Comedy is about two things, timing and knowing the limits of a joke. If you push a joke too little its not funny. If you push a joke too far, its not funny. Hitchhiker takes the joke beyond funny to the point where it not only beats the dead horse, it saddles it up and tries to ride it painfully unaware that the the horse is dead. Monty Python knows the horse is dead and lets you know that it knows the horse is dead and then beats the guy trying to beat the horse. That's funny. That's not Hitchhiker. Its just painful to see so many smart people be so freaking clueless when it comes to what is and is not good comedy.
Re:Scientists confirming what everybody already kn by Anonymous Coward · 2010-01-30 21:53 · Score: 0

You is good comedy.
What a sight... by MattBD · 2010-01-31 02:12 · Score: 1

A system of brown dwarfs (dwarves?) like this must be an awesome sight, although I expect this one is probably too widely separated to be all that spectacular. But the idea of a gas giant/brown dwarf so large it has planets the size of Jupiter as moons is pretty staggering.
Re:Scientists confirming what everybody already kn by Svartalfar · 2010-01-31 04:08 · Score: 0

Have you ever thought that maybe if all these smart people think it's good comedy... you might just be wrong? Or maybe, just maybe, different people have different senses of humor. One very different than yours?