Slashdot Mirror
Caltech Astronomers Say a Ninth Planet Lurks Beyond Pluto (sciencemag.org)
sciencehabit writes: The solar system may have a new ninth planet. Today, two scientists announced evidence that a body nearly the size of Neptune — but as yet unseen — orbits the sun every 15,000 years. During the solar system's infancy 4.5 billion years ago, they say, the giant planet was knocked out of the planet-forming region near the sun. Slowed down by gas, the planet settled into a distant elliptical orbit, where it still lurks today.
Here's a link to the full academic paper published in The Astronomical Journal.
or 15th if you want to count some of the other semi-small planets.
With a 15,000 earth-year long orbit of the sun, it could be a while before this is anything more than an inference.
SJW's don't eliminate discrimination. They just expropriate it for themselves.
To tell us how this planet oscillates the chemtrails so the 911 nuclear aliens can open up communications with the illuminati and space lizards to bring on the new world order and force us into fema camps.
But I thought that Pluto isn't a planet?
Ninth. If you RTFA you'll see that the paths of many of the other semi-small dwarf planets were used to intuit the existence of a real ninth planet.
"Slowed down by gas, __________ settled into a distant elliptical orbit, where it still lurks today."
...and here comes Nibiru?
Hint: +1 Funny
To tell us how this planet oscillates the chemtrails so the 911 nuclear aliens can open up communications with the illuminati and space lizards to bring on the new world order and force us into fema camps.
^^^ Pure win.
Lets name this planet Pluto and really piss off Neil deGrasse Glactus.
I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
Again, from TFA, we could perform a narrow infrared scan of the possible path until we find it. (We just did one ruling out "Saturn-sized" objects nearby, but this planet is smaller.) The authors expect discovery and confirmation within about 5 years.
Not really. There's going to be some very powerful telescopes involved in survey work coming online over the course of the next decade that should dramatically increase our detection capability. My favorite is the LSST which should, for example, move from our current knowledge of about 1% of 100km+ KBOs to nearly 100%. And one can expect even more powerful telescopes in the decades after that.
Next decade, whenever anything is detected, we'll also have James Webb to get a better look at it.
What the hells goin on in the engine room? Were there monkeys? Some terrifying space monkeys maybe got loose?
Step 1: Rename Pluto
Step 2: Name the new planet Pluto
Step 3: Profit!
Unless I read it on Forbes, I ain't believing it.
Please read TFA and consider it a good example of how to write something informative, accessible and entertaining, but most importantly not hosted on forbes.
Next decade, whenever anything is detected, we'll also have James Webb to get a better look at it.
If we're lucky, James will bring his telescope. :-)
It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
With a 15,000 earth-year long orbit of the sun, it could be a while before this is anything more than an inference.
Uh, no, that's not how celestial mechanics work in the solar system. Sorry.
Dude, made my day! Rock on...
This finally explains all the times my horoscope wasn't entirely accurate. With this new input, I'm sure that I will be able to use my horoscope to see what the stars have for me and I will be able to intelligently make life-decisions knowing how they are arranged.
N.B. - I started the above in jest, but let's observe a moment of silence for the poor folks who actually feel that way.
answer: OBAMA
A computer model that predicts the existence of a ninth planet (of substantial mass, ejected into a distant orbit, early in the solar system) does not, by the usual scientific method, constitute evidence. Evidence of its existence would be certain observables that others could also observe and verify: perturbations in the orbits of other planets, detection in a telescope, etc.
This is a prediction by a hypothesis - nothing more. I could create a model that predicts the existence of dragons that fart nerve gas - that does not count as "evidence of an impending apocalypse," although that would surely generate many clicks.
My brain's synapses have been raped by reinforcement conditioning. I'm not amused.
Also: these astronomers can make up their mind on how many fucking planets in our solar system and then get back to us with their identification data. Until then: STFU.
People born in the 1980's think there are 9 planets. 90's Kids and Millennials think there are 8. Now they want us to believe there are 9 again? FUUUUUUCKKK YOOOOOUUUUU!
Well now that made MY day. I spilled my coffee... thanks Obama.
Let's hope we get to observe it before the Vogon constructor fleet arrives.
ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI!?
It IS Planet Nine from outer space.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
Or is it from Bell Labs?
TFA contains some bold claims given that the planet's existence has not been observed, but instead comes out of work they did to make their mathematical model to work:
"The researchers, Konstantin Batygin and Mike Brown, discovered the planet's existence through mathematical modeling and computer simulations but have not yet observed the object directly."
"Effectively by accident, Batygin and Brown noticed that if they ran their simulations with a massive planet in an anti-aligned orbit—an orbit in which the planet's closest approach to the sun, or perihelion, is 180 degrees across from the perihelion of all the other objects and known planets—the distant Kuiper Belt objects in the simulation assumed the (correct) alignment"
I'm not saying they are wrong -- I hope they are right! But, these are bold bold claims given the present state of the evidence. I mean, bugs in their model could also explain why an extra Neptune-sized planet is needed...
Interesting, although it is hard to understand how such a large, potentially warm object has escaped detection when
Sedna is comparatively tiny and was readily found. The explanation may be that Sedna is near perihelion (though still well outside the orbit of Pluto), and the New Planet is not. Such a planet could also harbor moons. Pluto and Triton show us how much fun that might be.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
There's an early documentary about the planet. Apparently it's inhabited by aliens. While they're far away from the sun they sleep, but when they're close they come to our plant to harvest as many organic resources as they can. We need to get prepared. Last time we caused them a great deal of difficultly. They won't be so nice this trip around.
I could be several months before our orbit lines up with it.
Neil Degrasse Tyson is already working on having this soon-to-be planet declassified.
Space Cruiser Yamato (AKA Star Blazers in the USA), not only predicted Pluto's moon, but also a 10th planet -- I think it was called Brumus in 2nd Season (Comet Empire).
Can't remember too much because it was more than 20 years since I saw the show, but so far, their space science is more true than any other TV show I can think of.
If telephones are outlawed, then only outlaws will have telephones.
Neptune-sized is a pretty decent size. Seems like confirmation is well within possibly, if not now like the article says, within 5 years. Will be interesting to find out.
Python: 'And then suddenly you have a language which says "we're all stuck with whatever the whiniest coder wants".'
When is Kerbal Space Program going to be updated to reflect this new reality?
Lies, you and I both know they read that and said "Theyz cumming 2 take er jerbs"
An interesting thought. Even at its perihelion (1100 AU), helium won't be getting cold enough to condense out. But hydrogen probably will, condensing to planetwide hydrogen seas. Meaning that - combined with its lower mass - its atmospheric density at perihelion on top of that is probably surprisingly low. However, at aphelion its only about 400AU. That's probably not cold enough to condense hydrogen. So every 15000 years it would go from having hydrogen oceans and low atmospheric pressure to an ice surface under crazy pressures.
What the heck do you call a planet like that?
Such a large planet would certainly have the internal heat for tectonics and volcanism. But I'm still so baffled from trying to picture what such a planet would be like just from that first aspect that I can't even begin to imagine what effect the latter would have on it.
Certainly a lot of energy in play here.
What the hells goin on in the engine room? Were there monkeys? Some terrifying space monkeys maybe got loose?
There's going to be some very powerful telescopes involved in survey work coming online
The problem is that unless it's reflecting or emitting a significant amount of energy, it's not exactly easy to spot or pick out from the background unless you happen to look in exactly the right place at the right time.
Not really. There are going to be some very powerful telescopes involved in [...]
FTFY
The evidence consists of the observations which inspired them to make the computer model.
They already had the evidence; they just didn't know what it was evidence of. And then once the model predicted stuff like Sedna's orbit, they then had even more evidence: Sedna-and-friends. So that was an additional complex of evidence, for which they previously didn't know what it was evidence of.
Let's say you drop an apple out of a tree. It falls. You don't know why. Then someone notices that most of the apples eventually fall, and they run a sim where, if you hypothesize this weird (yet amazingly simple) force that makes things fall, you get consequences a whole lot like what people have observed. (Then someone realizes: "hey, this force should work on peaches too! It predicts peaches will fall." And then everyone is is "OMG, peaches do fall! We didn't understand those either, but here you are, giving us a really great hypothesis for all our observational evidence!") The sim isn't evidence of gravity, and yet it points to all these apples-falling as being evidence of the existence of gravity.
Same here. The sim isn't the evidence; it's the thing that helps you understand what the evidence means. It's a tool that was used for formulating the evidence-backed hypothesis, so that once you put your hypothesis out there, and people say "wtf? where's your evidence?" then you throw all your sim's inputs in their faces and say "there's the evidence! All that stuff you people have been seeing! My hypothesis finally made sense of the evidence for you."
"Believe me!" -- Donald Trump
This is what makes me think they're estimating the amount of matter in the universe incorrectly when it comes to the dark matter mathematical discrepancy. They can't even count our own planets correctly. I know the dark matter one is like 10:1 compared to visible light estimates but still, this really outlines how perpetually wrong astronomers are about everything.
Perihelion = closest to sun
Aphelion = farthest from sun
When it is actually found and they decide to name it, the new name needs to start with P so all the mnemonics that used to work with Pluto as #9 will work with this new planet.
From Wikipedia:
"My Very Educated Mother Just Served Us Nine Pizzas"
"My Very Easy Method Just Shows Us Nine Planets"
"My Very Efficient Memory Just Stores Up Nine Planets"
"Mary's violet eyes make Johnny stay up nights, pondering"
Persephone might work.
The Europeans took our planet away like tools, so we found another for the books! Ha - Ho - Mo - Fo! Shake it, shake it, baby. Shake it, Cali!
Imagine if, by ASTRONOMICAL coincidence, New Horizons could do a fly by in a few decades... the conspiracy theorists would go nuts.
Come to think of it, maybe I'd join them.
Pluto and various other plutinos are in orbital resonance with Neptune, which is the dominant gravitational body in Pluto's orbital band. Yes, there are fewer objects in the Solar System which are gravitationally dominant in their orbits, but it's not an arbitrary criterion, even if it has the effect of excluding many small solar objects. "Dwarf planet" does in fact refer to, well, dwarf planets: objects of the appropriate size, orbiting the sun, which have not cleared their orbit. Objects smaller than that are usually referred to as asteroids or "small solar bodies". And as for your nitpick about barycenters, that's a semantic argument: it's just as valid (if not more so) to say that Jupiter and the Sun orbit each other.
Those who advocate genocide deserve every protection afforded by law, and none afforded by common human decency.
Well then get a broom and get out there. You have the whole solar system to do! Quick, or we won't have any planets at all!
Or you could, you know, accept that there's always going to be some degree of crap in Lagrange points. They're still under the gravitational control of the larger orbiting body, which was kinda the point: we're only counting the big things that go around the sun, not the big things that go around the sun but have weird gravitational relationships with other bodies.
Those who advocate genocide deserve every protection afforded by law, and none afforded by common human decency.
Surely it has to be known as IX (pronounced "icks") !
dom
To tell us how this planet oscillates the chemtrails so the 911 nuclear aliens can open up communications with the illuminati and space lizards to bring on the new world order and force us into fema camps.
No problem. We'll just flee and hide in the center of earth, since it's hollow...
Video of some good progressive thrash music
What does the solar system look like out at the distance of this suspected planet? One of the reasons for demoting Pluto to dwarf planet status was that it hadn't cleared it's neighbourhood so if this new object is orbiting in an area where there is lots of other materials then it shouldn't be called a planet either.
I wasn't commenting on the Lagrange Point objects. My point was simply that "clearing the neighborhood" does not mean being the "dominant object in that orbit". They are two entirely separate things, even if they are intrinsically tied together in a solar system. But one does not mean the other, one is not the defining characteristic of the other.
If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
Don't get Kepler to do it. He'll just sweep out the same area every night.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
"Slowed down by gas, __________ settled into a distant elliptical orbit, where it still lurks today."
It must have been deficient in simethicone.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
And do you have any more fascinating-yet-pointless semantic arguments to make? Personally, I define "clearing the neighborhood" as "putting painted tarps over the homeless people" but for some reason that's not the definition the IAU used. However, if you'd like a more precise definition (or set of definitions), you can consult this paper. This graph is also relevant.
Those who advocate genocide deserve every protection afforded by law, and none afforded by common human decency.
I'm waiting for this guy to weigh in.
The Bee Girls that is, https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
IT evicted US.
Again, from TFA, we could perform a narrow infrared scan of the possible path until we find it. (We just did one ruling out "Saturn-sized" objects nearby, but this planet is smaller.) The authors expect discovery and confirmation within about 5 years.
You may be close to the authors, but they didn't said that in TFA.
Since we're on the subject of the Solar System a relatively rare phenomenon is occurring Jan. 20 to Feb. 20. All five of the easily visible planets (Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn) are visible together in the early morning sky. The last time that occurred was Dec./Jan. 2004/2005. They will be visible together again Aug. 13 to 19 but will be more easily seen in the Southern Hemisphere because Mercury and Venus will be difficult to see in the dusk sky.
From TFA: "For the first time in over 150 years, there is solid evidence that the solar system's planetary census is incomplete."
OK I get the point of the breathless marketing quote, but I think any reasonable extrapolation of the whole Plutonian controversy (and I'm still in the "it's a planet" camp) would be that lacking a bright, clear definition of a planet* then, the census of "planetary bodies" "in" the "solar system" was as much as guaranteed to increase. Hell we not only can't define a planet, we can't even define SOLAR SYSTEM.
We haven't really much begun to count/classify the bodies whose orbital focus is the sun - that region called the Oort cloud stretches out as much as a light year, by some arguments. (http://static.ddmcdn.com/gif/blogs/dnews-files-2013-03-Voyager-1-Finds-Mayhem-in-the-Heliopause-2-jpg.jpg)
I am absolutely certain that there are going to be other 'planet'-class bodies out there. This one at 600 au is stated to have an orbital period of 15000 years. Nemesis, @ 95000 AU (which astronomers have poo-poo'd) was postulated to have a period of 26 million years. At a certain point, one even has to start wondering if the search for such planets could even rely on periodicity, as their passage around this system may not even have stabilized since the early formation of the system itself.
In any case, there are likely many bodies out in the extra-Plutonian reaches of our system. Almost certainly.
*the IAUs 2006 vague rules are nearly meaningless: ...could, arguably, apply to Pluto (or if it doesn't apply to Pluto because it crosses Neptune's orbit, then wouldn't that ipso facto also remove Neptune (which would be ridiculous)?
1) is in orbit around the Sun,
2) has sufficient mass to assume hydrostatic equilibrium (a nearly round shape), and
3) has "cleared the neighborhood" around its orbit
-Styopa
Imagine if, by ASTRONOMICAL coincidence, New Horizons could do a fly by in a few decades....
New Horizons is heading 90 deg relative to the current position of "planet Nine", which is still one third of its way towards aphelion [when its orbital velocity is lower]. Unfortunately, New Horizons will cross its path a few thousand years earlier.
Talking to Mike Brown the morning after they submitted this paper, he acknowledged the inevitability of kooks, but didn't seem too concerned.
Village idiot in some extremely smart villages.
We already got 2 blue gassy planets. Don't need 3.
We want something really different this time, like a lava planet, ocean world, or full of pizza's. Can we barter with nearby stars who may be short blue gassies?
Table-ized A.I.
I call it "Miranda".
Is it hollow though? Or is it flat? Because some unwashed half literate guy on youtube made a 2 hour video with N64 quality graphics that clearly explains how the world is flat. It's the darn Go Pro cameras putting FAKE curves to the earth. Or something.
Wow, way to get your panties in a bunch. You have way to much emotion invested in this topic.
But on point, if you look at the graphic supplied in the article, it is clear that this "new" planet has done no such thing. There are several objects shown that are in its orbit, and we have no idea of the number besides those.
So, for this to be on the list for possible planets, it seems to fall short of this one phrase you are having fits of rage over.
If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
Can't it be both? Like, it's flat, but if you dig long enough you reach the secret subterranean world of joy and paradise that our disguised lizard overlords are hiding? Sort of a "lasagna world", if you want.
Anyway, the better truth will probably be told in iron sky 2.
Video of some good progressive thrash music
Oh, look!
http://science.slashdot.org/st...
You may have gotten your panties in a bunch over nothing after all.
If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
I'm not sure how you're reading any sort of emotional excursions here; maybe your sense of humor needs recalibration. Although I should probably have written petaliter in the title instead. Economies of scale and whatnot.
You've failed to understand the definition, or read the arXiv article I linked, or even look at the graph. Well done -- batting 1000. Those objects would only be relevant if they were gravitationally dominant. This really isn't that hard of a concept if you're not ideologically motivated against it.
Those who advocate genocide deserve every protection afforded by law, and none afforded by common human decency.
You type this:
And do you have any more fascinating-yet-pointless semantic arguments to make? Personally, I define "clearing the neighborhood" as "putting painted tarps over the homeless people"
and then say you aren't putting emotion into an argument?
If you think I voted for Trump because of this post, you're wrong. I voted for Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party. Again.
Sure. That was a sardonic jab, followed by a humorous and equally nonsensical definition of "clearing the neighborhood", followed by a scientific paper precisely defining what "clearing the neighborhood" means. If you don't think putting painted tarps over homeless people is funny, you must not live in Portland.
Those who advocate genocide deserve every protection afforded by law, and none afforded by common human decency.
It could have already thrown a comet at us. One sort of like a hot fudge sundae.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
I thought we already had nine planets. Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto.
In the past, there was talk about considering Pluto as not being a planet, however, Jupiter is a failed star, not actually a planet.
About half of the GOP voters in this country (which is roughly 25% of the total population) think this makes sense.
And half of the democrat voters, too.
And they both are still smarter than half the people here!
So what is new about that?
Funniest post all day.
You want to feel privileged by having the blind law of gravity kill you, instead of a neighbour's toddler with a gun?
Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
You forgot how they are polluting your precious bodily fluids.
Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"