• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Astronomers say there are two unknown planets in our solar system

Status
Not open for further replies.

gutshot

Member
From Universe Today:

Could there be another Pluto-like object out in the far reaches of the Solar System? How about two or more?

Earlier this week, we discussed a recent paper from planet-hunter Mike Brown, who said that while there aren’t likely to be any bright, easy-to-find objects, there could be dark ones “lurking far away.” Now, a group of astronomers from the UK and Spain maintain at least two planets must exist beyond Neptune and Pluto in order to explain the orbital behavior of objects that are even farther out, called extreme trans-Neptunian objects (ETNO).

We do know that Pluto shares its region Solar System with more than 1500 other tiny, icy worlds along with likely countless smaller and darker ones that have not yet been detected.

In two new paper published this week, scientists at the Complutense University of Madrid and the University of Cambridge noted that the most accepted theory of trans-Neptunian objects is that they should orbit at a distance of about 150 AU, be in an orbital plane – or inclination – similar to the planets in our Solar System, and they should be randomly distributed.

But that differs from what is actually observed. What astronomers see are groupings of objects with widely disperse distances (between 150 AU and 525 AU) and orbital inclinations that vary between 0 to 20 degrees.

“This excess of objects with unexpected orbital parameters makes us believe that some invisible forces are altering the distribution of the orbital elements of the ETNO,” said Carlos de la Fuente Marcos, scientist at UCM and co-author of the study, “ and we consider that the most probable explanation is that other unknown planets exist beyond Neptune and Pluto.”

He added that the exact number is uncertain, but given the limited data that is available, their calculations suggest “there are at least two planets, and probably more, within the confines of our solar system.”

In their studies, the team analyzed the effects of what is called the ‘Kozai mechanism,’ which is related to the gravitational perturbation that a large body exerts on the orbit of another much smaller and further away object. They looked at how the highly eccentric comet 96P/Machholz1 is influenced by Jupiter (it will come near the orbit of Mercury in 2017, but it travels as much as 6 AU at aphelion) and it may “provide the key to explain the puzzling clustering of orbits around argument of perihelion close to 0° recently found for the population of ETNOs,” the team wrote in one of their papers.

They also looked at the dwarf planet discovered last year called 2012 VP113 in the Oort cloud (its closest approach to the Sun is about 80 astronomical units) and how some researchers say it appears its orbit might be influenced by the possible presence of a dark and icy super-Earth, up to ten times larger than our planet.

“This Sedna-like object has the most distant perihelion of any known minor planet and the value of its argument of perihelion is close to 0°,” the team writes in their second paper. “This property appears to be shared by almost all known asteroids with semimajor axis greater than 150 au and perihelion greater than 30 au (the extreme trans-Neptunian objects or ETNOs), and this fact has been interpreted as evidence for the existence of a super-Earth at 250 au. In this scenario, a population of stable asteroids may be shepherded by a distant, undiscovered planet larger than the Earth that keeps the value of their argument of perihelion librating around 0° as a result of the Kozai mechanism.”

Of course, the theory put forth in two papers published by the team goes against the predictions of current models on the formation of the Solar System, which state that there are no other planets moving in circular orbits beyond Neptune.

But the team pointed to the recent discovery of a planet-forming disk around the star HL Tauri that lies more than 100 astronomical units from the star. HL Tauri is more massive and younger than our Sun and the discovery suggests that planets can form several hundred astronomical units away from the center of the system.


The team based their analysis by studying 13 different objects, so what is needed is more observations of the outer regions of our Solar System to determine what might be hiding out there.

Here are the quoted research papers:
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015MNRAS.446.1867D
http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2014MNRAS.443L..59D
 

Jacobi

Banned
ngbbs43cddec7e2b26.jpg

Ya'll got anymore of them planets

But that's great. Send a probe pronto!
 
How they managed to find a super-Earth thousands of lightyears away, but skip past these two guys in the backyard without noticing, is beyond me.
 

HeySeuss

Member
Wow it's hard to conceive of a planet 10 times the size of the earth in the Oort cloud or beyond that would still orbit the sun.
 

Log4Girlz

Member
How they managed to find a super-Earth thousands of lightyears away, but skip past these two guys in the backyard without noticing, is beyond me.

Its easier to find planets when they pass in front of a star. Also these planets are in no way confirmed. Having said that they would be very fall and very far away.
 

HeySeuss

Member
Is it hard to conceive of binary stars?

I'm not following. We aren't in a binary system. I'm saying a planetoid that large still being in a elliptical orbit with our sun despite being beyond the Oort cloud blows my mind.

I would think being that massive it would just drift being so far out since the gravitational pull from the sun would be so small compared to the size of the objects own gravity.

Maybe I'm just easily impressed I suppose.
 

Soul Beat

Member
Those are mobile planets full of a race of colonizing alien warriors making their way to us.

Good game gentlemen. See you on the other side.
 

gutshot

Member
I'm not following. We aren't in a binary system. I'm saying a planetoid that large still being in a elliptical orbit with our sun despite being beyond the Oort cloud blows my mind.

I would think being that massive it would just drift being so far out since the gravitational pull from the sun would be so small compared to the size of the objects own gravity.

Maybe I'm just easily impressed I suppose.

These hypothetical planets aren't out beyond the Oort cloud. The Oort cloud is really far out there, estimated to beginning out around 2,000 AU.

They are beyond the Kuiper Belt though.
 

Pbae

Member
Dear God...

We've reached the tipping point in terms of population T_T

Prepare for the Spiral Nemesis
 
Pluto should have never been a planet it's a shitty little ice rock. The coolest thing a about it is its temperature. Pluto isn't even large in size as the United States and there are thousands of other ice rocks the same size or bigger all around that area.
 

CrankyJay

Banned

Haha, glad I'm not the only one that remembers Planet X, but isn't Nibiru supposed to technically be in a different solar system? If it was in our solar system there's no way it would collide with earth unless it's orbit around the sun was much more elliptical than Earth's....like....essentially flat.
 

nico1982

Member
A giant icy earth 10 times the mass of our planet... holy shit. That things must be REAAAAALLY distant to go unnoticed.
10 times the mass, assuming same density, it is just twice the diameter. Assuming the same density of Pluto, it would be 27 times the volumes but just three times the diameter of Earth. In both cases, it would be a very small planet.
 

Beefy

Member
Pluto should have never been a planet it's a shitty little ice rock. The coolest thing a about it is its temperature. Pluto isn't even large in size as the United States and there are thousands of other ice rocks the same size or bigger all around that area.

Size doesn't matter, it's what you do with it that counts....
 

v1lla21

Member
Someone school me, pl0x. How is it that planets or objects go unnoticed for a long time yet we can find things that are farther than these objects. Are they too small to be seen and need different equipment?
 

BobLoblaw

Banned
On a side note, does anyone else think it's weird that we call our moon "Moon." We call our planet Earth, our nearest star The Sun, and yet we call our moon "Moon."
 

marrec

Banned
Someone school me, pl0x. How is it that planets or objects go unnoticed for a long time yet we can find things that are farther than these objects. Are they too small to be seen and need different equipment?

We can focus our various detection techniques at far away stars (they're very bright) and have multiple ways to check for and verify planet orbits. Even that, however, isn't perfect as we can really only reliably detect planets that are huge, much larger than the small rocky ones like Earth. Far away larger objects/planetoids are much harder to detect because the farther they are from anything the less effect they have on anything and the less light they give off. Something that is 100 AU units away from us is 930,000,000 miles away. That's quite far for normal detection techniques to be very effective without the gravitational/light distortion we can see in systems around distant stars.
 
Because space is big and these are tiny.

The one's we detect 1000's of light years away are still close enough to a star that we can see a "wobble" in the light being sent to use as it orbits. These would be far out enough that our Sun isn't helping us detect them by reflecting light. How do you find something you can't see and can barely see the effects they may leave behind?
 
Someone school me, pl0x. How is it that planets or objects go unnoticed for a long time yet we can find things that are farther than these objects. Are they too small to be seen and need different equipment?

It's the technique. The current crop of extra solar planets we see are going in front of thier stars, or skimming their edges and we are detecting them by the dip in light of thier parent star/stars. This one, if it does exist needs to be discovered by a different technique entirely.
 

Mengy

wishes it were bannable to say mean things about Marvel
I honestly think it's entirely possible that there are one or two more planets beyond the "known" edge of our solar system. I really doubt it would be a large planet though, most likely it would be a small, dark, far away planet. Something with little gravitational influence, something very hard to detect or spot, and certainly something not very reflective. It would have a huge orbital path, so from our perspective it would be a very slow moving planet simply due to it's distance from our sun.

Now, what would be INTERESTING is if there were two tidally locked little planets out there, circling each other as they slowly orbit our sun, exerting gravitational forces on each other. They would be far too far away to get any energy from our sun to do anything worthwhile, but if they had a lot of gravitational forces working on each other, possibly creating seismic activity or even keeping water in a liquid state, well then they would become FAR more interesting as exploration targets.


Either way, with the state of our space exploration today, I doubt we'll ever truly know in our lifetimes.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom