New Scientist Space.Com is reporting the discovery of a new "planet" in our solar system. Beyond Pluto is the Kuiper belt of rocky objects, this unnamed planetary body is the largest object yet discovered orbiting our Sun beyond the orbit of Pluto. First analysis put its size twice that of Pluto, but further study has sized this rocky globe at roughly 70% the size of Pluto.
As if that wasn't impressive enough, this new "planet" is being orbited by a small moon. Expect a serious debate among astronomers over the definition of "planet" in the months ahead.
With a highly irregular orbit, and a solar year yet to be reported, this object orbits at 51 Astronomical Units from the Sun - 1 AU is the distance between the Earth and the Sun. Its orbit brings it comes as close to the Sun as 35 AU, while Pluto maintains an average distance of about 39 AU. It is also tilted 28° out of sync with the normal orbital plane of most of the planets in our solar sytem. Pluto is tilted 17°.
Click here to read the complete article on this unexpected discovery!
(Hot Damn!)
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Matt Paprocki
"That's no moon."
Sorry, I had to.
2 - Tan The Man
Pluto sure is selfish - trying to hide all of those planets from us.
3 - Aaman
Next up: Tiamat!
4 - Victor Plenty
Astronomers have debated the definition of "planet" for years now. Many argue from history and convention, which sets an arbitrary limit on the definition (in our star system, anyway) to the nine bodies we have called planets since Pluto was discovered in the 1930s. A simple resolution to the debate is available, one that follows from the laws of physics. (This is not my original idea, but I don't currently remember where I read it.)
Gravity compresses any object above a certain size into a nearly spherical shape. A smaller object will retain an irregular shape, resembling a potato, or just looking like any random chunk of rock you could find lying around just about anywhere.
If we defined any spherical object orbiting the sun as a planet, the class would include the largest object in the asteroid belt, Ceres, as well as more recently discovered objects like Ixion, Quaoar, Orcus, Sedna, and this new young whippersnapper. That would put us at 15 solar planets and rising.
5 - Bennett
Good points Victor, and thanks for the link to Ceres. By your definition, Pluto may not *quite* qualify, from what I understand it hasn't quite become spherical. Some of the articles I've read assign the word "world" to this newly discovered body. I was feeling rambunctious, and used "planet" in my headline...
It's size is still not certain, some reports have it bigger than Pluto, some smaller.
I say turn the Hubble in that direction and get a few close ups.
6 - Bennett
Update: NASA says... 10th Planet!
A planet larger than Pluto has been discovered in the outlying regions of the solar system.
The planet was discovered using the Samuel Oschin Telescope at Palomar Observatory near San Diego, Calif. The discovery was announced today by planetary scientist Dr. Mike Brown of the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena, Calif., whose research is partly funded by NASA.
The planet is a typical member of the Kuiper belt, but its sheer size in relation to the nine known planets means that it can only be classified as a planet, Brown said. Currently about 97 times further from the sun than the Earth, the planet is the farthest-known object in the solar system, and the third brightest of the Kuiper belt objects.
"It will be visible with a telescope over the next six months and is currently almost directly overhead in the early-morning eastern sky, in the constellation Cetus," said Brown, who made the discovery with colleagues Chad Trujillo, of the Gemini Observatory in Mauna Kea, Hawaii, and David Rabinowitz, of Yale University, New Haven, Conn., on January 8.
Brown, Trujillo and Rabinowitz first photographed the new planet with the 48-inch Samuel Oschin Telescope on October 31, 2003. However, the object was so far away that its motion was not detected until they reanalyzed the data in January of this year. In the last seven months, the scientists have been studying the planet to better estimate its size and its motions.
"It's definitely bigger than Pluto," said Brown, who is a professor of planetary astronomy.
Scientists can infer the size of a solar system object by its brightness, just as one can infer the size of a faraway light bulb if one knows its wattage. The reflectance of the planet is not yet known. Scientists can not yet tell how much light from the sun is reflected away, but the amount of light the planet reflects puts a lower limit on its size.
"Even if it reflected 100 percent of the light reaching it, it would still be as big as Pluto," says Brown. "I'd say it's probably one and a half times the size of Pluto, but we're not sure yet of the final size.
"We are 100 percent confident that this is the first object bigger than Pluto ever found in the outer solar system," Brown added.
The size of the planet is limited by observations using NASA's Spitzer Space Telescope, which has already proved its mettle in studying the heat of dim, faint, faraway objects such as the Kuiper-belt bodies. Because Spitzer is unable to detect the new planet, the overall diameter must be less than 2,000 miles, said Brown.
A name for the new planet has been proposed by the discoverers to the International Astronomical Union, and they are awaiting the decision of this body before announcing the name.
7 - gonzo marx
excellent1
thanx for the update Benett
Excelsior!
8 - Aaman
So, what's the name? Or do we have to beat it out of you?;)
9 - Duane
As always, I have recommended to the IAU that they name the new world "Planet Claire."
10 - Bennett
The IAU has a short list with three or four Greek names, and two others, "Kirsten" and "Durst".
The Duke will be pleased.
"Planet Elastigirl" was eliminated in the last cut, much to my dismay.
11 - Dean
Sci-fi writers Larry Niven and Jerry Pournelle postulated a 10th planet in one of their works. If I recall correctly, they named it Nemesis, which might be a good one to use in these circumstances.
12 - Aaman
Whose nemesis?
13 - Victor Plenty
Our nemesis. The nemesis of life on Earth, and of life on neighboring planets as well.
Some theorists think a large Jupiter-sized tenth planet, or a small dwarf star, might orbit far out beyond Pluto. Supposedly, every few million years this Nemesis object disturbs the Oort Cloud and sends a deadly hail of comets into the inner solar system. The mass extinctions caused by these comet barrages may explain why Venus and Mars are lifeless rocks, and why Earth now lacks any dinosaurs to populate its theme parks.
However, the newly discovered object is probably not large enough to cause any of that.
14 - Bennett
Yeah, exactly the scenario described so well in the opening of Lucifer's Hammer.
15 - Floris Vermeir
It makes one wonder how many other might be out there. I mean this one, and "Ceres, Ixion, Quaoar, Orcus, Sedna" and Varuna have been found recently. How many more worlds are out there that we did not even expect or thought of ?
I presume that an inclination of 90 % would be something that might be rather impossible, but this recent discovery may point ot a question, we as humans have to ask ourselves: Do we not look to our solar system in a to much 2- dimensional way ? And if we would look more in a 3d way, to which inclinatoins would we have to look to find potential new ones ?
Could the nemesis thing if it would exist be one that would have an inclination of 45 degrees or more or somewhere between 75 and 90 degrees ? As that has the potential of causing more trouble when it would pass trough lets say the main disk (if that is a correct way of saying it) in which the other planets move. I wanted to pose another question but can't find the correct way of getting it written down.
I'll try,b ut I'll need your help on this. There is this thing that enclose all the planets, a bit like the earths magnetic field that forms a long elongated prottective shield under influence of the solar wind.
And I thought, but correct me if I'm worng, that there is something simillar for all the planets a kind of bubble it was called. If the form of the bubble would be know or several possible forms could be calculated, then could we not figure out where the most possible locations would be, or range of locations, where other world could be found. The bubble is a 3d object so that means above the main planetary disk as well.
I am aware that I may have posed questions on which you do not know a exact answer, but then you're not alone, neither do I.
Thanks for the NASA post, I was unaware of that.
16 - Floris Vermeir
The questions are related to two questions I posesd on my own blog, band I have not posted on blogcritics because of there complexity, but if you want to I'll post them as a comemnt on your post.
17 - Bennett
Go for it Floris. I'll give it a read. Regarding a magnetic field "bubble" surrounding our solar system, I have not read anything on that. Victor?
18 - Aaman
Looks like they call it Xena informally, current designation is 2003 UB313
19 - Duane
Floris is referring to the heliosphere, which envelops the entire solar system. Its boundary extends beyond the orbit of Pluto. Beyond that -- the interstellar medium. The boundary is defined by the location of the solar wind termination shock, which is also a layer of enhanced magnetic field. The shock layer occurs at roughly the distance where the ram pressure of the solar wind is equal to the thermal pressure of the interstellar medium. It might be considered protective in some sense, in the same way that the Earth's magnetic field diverts charged particles because of the Lorentz force, but it will have no effect on Earth-bound masses, such as asteroids and comets, or alien armadas with evil intentions.
20 - Bennett
"or alien armadas with evil intentions."
:-]
Good one! Thanks for that Duane, I learn something new every day. Of course the boundary was referenced recently as Viking made its way to the "edge" of our system, a fascinating concept, the push between the solar wind and the interstellar medium.
So, is the Kuiper Belt within, or outside this boundary? It would be odd, eh? A planet of our solar system, not IN our solar system, or within the heliosphere at any rate, for part of its solar orbit...
21 - Duane
The boundary of the heliosphere is at about 150 AU, about three times farther out than the Kuiper belt. So the new planet, in that sense, is part of the solar system.
22 - Victor Plenty
A boundary for our star system ought to include all objects orbiting our sun. The Oort Cloud could extend our "territory" something like a quarter of the way to the nearest known star. There is a vast wealth of resources in those rocks and dirty snowballs. Why leave them unclaimed just because they are outside the reach of the solar wind? Our sun's gravity reaches them, and that's good enough.
Of course the best way to stake our claim to these worlds is to get out there and establish settlements on them. Or at the very least, land a few probes on some of them. Otherwise, if alien armadas do arrive, we risk being treated the same way Europeans treated the American Indians: "Hey, you guys aren't even using most of this stuff, so our legal system says we can just take it away from you."
Actually, our knowledge of the outer solar system is so scant at the moment, if there already were alien fleets mining the comets right now, we wouldn't have any way to know about it.
23 - Floris Vermeir
I wonder if there is no cheaper way then what is currently used/done to build/transport probes to the outer reaches of the solar system.
Perhaps reuse the shuttles external fuel tank, and transfer it to a cargo ship so that, it can hold several probes, and then send the whole thing to the Kuiper belt. It would be like a kind of taxi, and the fuel tanks are big enough to hold instruments of there own, as well as probes, and small landers. They are bigger than most likley any satelite we can launch and they can hold several.
The advantage is that the fuel tank, rather then having it burnt up as is now case, can be reused. That creates more possibilities. I have an other idea, related to storing them for further use, but I'll post the drawings of that when they are ready. That makes it cheaper, and its a waste of material otherwise.
24 - Floris Vermeir
A while back a dark galaxy was found, the astronomers took 4-5 years to check all posibilties, and only one was left.
I don't quite agree whit it. I will post the questions and waht is related in perhaps two comments as its to long otherwise. The questions are complicated but I found no easier way to pose them. You may want to check whith an astronomer on them, but by all means you know more on parts of this then I do. So give it your best shot, the answer may be more important then first thought.
25 - Floris Vermeir
Two Sentences that stuck
One is that if you could put a tap in the extra dimension, that would be useful.
Can't help it, but it set me thinking, but in which direction ... beats me. Anyhow if anything would come out of it, the credit goes to the gentlemen who made that remark.
The other one, is condenses out of tin air.
The only liquid that I know that condsenses out of tin air is water. I would have to ask this to an astronomer/astrophysict. One theory say that the univerise is expanding and will at one time in the future reach its maximum expansion, like a rubber (not a condom) can only be expanded so much before it breaks. After that it becomes smaller again, until it gets back to its original state. My question is this, what happens when the universe expands so much that the effect of gravitity no longer can help forming planets ? Is this possible ?
And if yes, how would matter be spread ? Does the birth of new star systems becomes less likley ? Could it be that when maximum expandure has reached, matter is spread to the universe like water molecules in thin air ? And that when the universe starts crimping again, this matter comes back together, and forms a dense liquid ? Or a spot if formed where gravity starts pulling matter back together ? And pulls all the matter surounding it back together ? Which may then reach a untradense state, perhaps plasma like, and perhaps when the pressure becomes to big, and it can not become any smaller then it already is, it explodes again, as the pressure looks for a way out. Not so long ago, a study showed that matter may have behaved like an ultradense liquid around the time of the big bang.
Of course pressure does not think. I'll expalin it using hte example of how a water rocket works. It works because pressure is build up in side a an area, and when the pump is removed, there is an inequality in the pressure, there is a place whit less pressure and that way it flows. If the pressure at the outside would be the same as that at the inside, nothing would happen. If the ultradense liquid behaved in the same way, meaning it went one particular way, where there was an inequality in the surface pressure, then this might explain, about why the form of the universe is the way it is.
If one would buid a simulation of such an ultradense state, one might notice, that not all of the liquid will go in the same way, and perhaps at the same speed.
Fill a baloon whith water. If you fill it to much, it blows and you get wet. I know the feeling. If you fill it just enough, then you can put a knot in it, and its ok. You won't get wet, or just a little.
If you put a needle in it, a small hole forms, and water will come out. The whole might become bigger, because of the water wanting to go out, the pressure of the water coming out makes the hole becoming bigger, which also changes the directions the water ejects to. And the more pressure, the faster this may go. If you didn't put a knot in it, and you release the water, then it ejects in a certain direction. Now when it has stopped doing that, check if all the water is out. It might not be the case. Now imagine that this ultradense state, is far denser then anything you know. Probbaly denser then white dwarfs. And that timescale is bigger then what we are used to think about. Many thousands of years. And that material, of which all else that currenlty exist, is like nothing you have ever seen.
The methaphor of the rubber (not a condom) is not form me. A question one can ask, is if this ultradense liquid stook one place, and only this liquid or the primordial form of matter, that formed everything we know, ejected into one direction or a limited amount of directions, and if so what it points to. It would mean that there was a force, perhap its own gravity that held it in place. If one would do this experiment in space, then there is a lot of chance that the baloon would go one way, and the water the other way.
Of course this isn't completly correct, as water freezes in space, and the only thing that would happen is that you get a frozen baloon, that would perhaps melt a little if heated by something, like the sun.
This of course does not explain everything, but somethings look like they are already know, and could well fit in, the trouble is, I'd have to find someone who study's astronomy, or knows enough about astronomy and astrophysics to give an answer to that question.
It is a very long shot, but I'm just wondering.
Op dit werk is de Creative Commons Licentie van toepassing.