Timsup2nothin
Deity
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2013
- Messages
- 46,737
Both the alleged planet and dark matter are not find by direct observation.Funny, we're looking for dark matter and we can't even find all the planets in our solar system....
"There" where?Saw that. Will be interesting when they spot it. And if so, is there any chance New Horizons could be re-routed there?
The other point is that the possible orbit brings the alleged planet at a whopping 600 AU of distance!
Pluto orbit is between 30 & 50 AU.
I think that 600 AU might be the mean. The theoretical orbit is substantially elongated, with the nearest approach at "only" 200 AU.
If that planet exists, it is very unlikely to be anywhere near that point at the moment. A body with a highly elliptical orbit spends only a small fraction of that orbit near perihelion and lurks far away from the sun most of the time. And if it was close, it would have been almost certainly detected by now.
Keep in mind that there is not one theoretical orbit, but a lot of possible orbits that could fit this planet. That increases the difficulty of finding it, because it could be anywhere in a very large region of the sky.
Agreed on all counts.
Additionally...depending on composition, given the distance it most likely is from the sun reflected light may be very close to zero. We look up and see planets as among the brightest objects in the sky. This thing won't be visible to anything but the highest end of telescopes, if that.
My understanding was that Pluto doesn't count as a planet because planets initially form as matter is thrown out from the centre of the solar system - in other words, they should decrease in density as they get further from the sun. Since Pluto is a rock, and not gas, it cannot have been formed along with the other planets, and so must simply be the first of the many big rocks that make up the Kuiper Belt, which we realised when we started finding more. Is there anything different about this one?
EDIT: I see that it's supposedly a gas giant, and suspect that explains something. The position might be a bit like somebody who announced that anything beyond Mars would have to be part of the asteroid belt.
I wouldn't think so.At that distance it would be outside of the heliosphere and thus in interstellar space. I expect the discussions about the definition of a planet to flare up again if this new potential planet would be detected.
A planet is a celestial body that (a) is in orbit around the Sun, (b) has sufficient mass for its self-gravity to overcome rigid body forces so that it assumes a hydrostatic equilibrium (nearly round) shape, and (c) has cleared the neighbourhood around its orbit.
Funny, we're looking for dark matter and we can't even find all the planets in our solar system....
Entirely tangental but:
If something knocked Mercury hard enough for it to start flying through the Solar System and intersecting other orbits would be cease to be a planet? The current IAU definition seems to demand both state and behavior so I assume it would.
If it was entirely knocked out of the solar system, it would be considered a 'rogue planet'. I'm not sure if there is a rigorous definition for those as there is for 'planet', namely because we haven't found any yet. They are exceedingly hard to spot.
I just read an article where they discovered that the one rogue planet they had discovered turned out to be in the orbit of a very distant (to the planet) and dim brown dwarf and so is no longer a 'rogue'.
If that planet exists, it is very unlikely to be anywhere near that point at the moment. A body with a highly elliptical orbit spends only a small fraction of that orbit near perihelion and lurks far away from the sun most of the time. And if it was close, it would have been almost certainly detected by now.
Keep in mind that there is not one theoretical orbit, but a lot of possible orbits that could fit this planet. That increases the difficulty of finding it, because it could be anywhere in a very large region of the sky.
Firstly, it's not an 'if'. Secondly, you won't find it in the sky. It's too far out - even at the closest part of its ellips - to reflect sunlight.
Which makes it a bit odd that the Caltech video ends with request for telescope viewing. It's unviewable by telescope.
Firstly, it's not an 'if'. Secondly, you won't find it in the sky. It's too far out - even at the closest part of its ellips - to reflect sunlight.
Which makes it a bit odd that the Caltech video ends with request for telescope viewing. It's unviewable by telescope.
Firstly, it's not an 'if'.
Secondly, you won't find it in the sky. It's too far out - even at the closest part of its ellips - to reflect sunlight.
Which makes it a bit odd that the Caltech video ends with request for telescope viewing. It's unviewable by telescope.