[quote]For decades astronomers have searched for a possible “Planet X” in the far outer reaches of our solar system, speculating that something big and dark may be lurking out there, its gravitational influence occasionally stirring up trouble in the orbits of the objects that we do see. There are major incentives to look: When astronomers sought a Planet X beyond Uranus in 1846, they discovered Neptune; when they looked for one beyond Neptune in 1930, they found Pluto. Since then, the search for a Planet X beyond Pluto has almost been too successful—astronomers have found so many new and Plutolike “trans-Neptunian objects” (TNOs) that it became more sensible to demote Pluto from planethood rather than swell the solar system’s planetary population into the hundreds. After all, even the largest of the newfound TNOs were just about Pluto’s size—astronomers knew of nothing out there worthy of the “Planet X” name.
That is, perhaps, until now. On December 8 researchers from Sweden and Mexico quietly submitted two papers to the prestigious journal Astronomy & Astrophysics, announcing their discovery of not one but two possible Planet X candidates. The quiet did not last for long. Even though neither paper has yet been accepted for peer-review and publication, the researchers uploaded both to the arXiv, a public online repository for preprint papers, where they appeared last night. Today, as claims of newfound planets in our solar system reverberate around the world in news stories and blog posts, other astronomers are reviewing the papers and reacting mostly with skepticism. The ensuing discussions between experts in public forums like Twitter and Facebook offer a rare, real-time glimpse of the sometimes messy scientific process as it unfolds.
[URL="http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/astronomers-skeptical-over-planet-x-claims/"][b]Click here to read the rest[/b][/URL][/quote]
Uh, I thought that the Planet X hypothesis was already disproved when Neptune's newly determined mass was used in calculations and the supposed discrepancies in the Uranian orbit vanished?
new planet x, read the article
between this and the kubrick thing the conspiracy community is probably going nuts right now
[QUOTE]When astronomers sought a Planet X beyond Uranus in 1846, they discovered Neptune; when they looked for one beyond Neptune in 1930, they found Pluto.[/QUOTE]
And Pluto is now confirmed not to be a planet, so this is a perfect example of confirmation bias. We went looking for a planet, and by golly we're going to say that this thing we found is a planet!
In fairness, in 1930 astronomy was still a tiny fraction as technically capable as the imaging and detection available to science today, and they [I]did[/I] find a larger-than-an-asteroid planet-like body when they went looking for one, so it's understandable.
If we actually find something, great, and credible detections should be investigated, but nothing's confirmed yet.
[QUOTE=Ninja Gnome;49299532]between this and the kubrick thing the conspiracy community is probably going nuts right now[/QUOTE]
By definition they're all nuts anyway.
[QUOTE=Ninja Gnome;49299532]between this and the kubrick thing the conspiracy community is probably going nuts right now[/QUOTE]
a little offtopic but has something new and more ridiculous come up, or do you mean the same ol' hoax claims?
[QUOTE=Ninja Gnome;49299532]between this and the kubrick thing the conspiracy community is probably going nuts right now[/QUOTE]
what kubrick thing?
[QUOTE=Ninja Gnome;49299532]between this and the kubrick thing the conspiracy community is probably going nuts right now[/QUOTE]
The conspiracy forums I lurk for laughs have pretty much stopped posting Nibiru bullshit after their annihilation fantasy never happened in 2012
[QUOTE=matt000024;49299619]what kubrick thing?[/QUOTE]
Probably how people think that Kubrick faked the Moon landings and 2001 is somehow tied to it.
would be sick if they kept Planet X one of the Planets names.
[QUOTE=matt000024;49299619]what kubrick thing?[/QUOTE]
new video supposedly depicting kubrick admitting to doing the moon landings
[video=youtube;vxXZRzDmZFA]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vxXZRzDmZFA[/video]
[URL="http://www.snopes.com/false-stanley-kubrick-faked-moon-landings/"](its a fake)[/URL]
Whatever happen to the planet that crashed into the earth? Was it thrown out of the solar system or is it stuck behind the sun orbiting it bit like counterclock wise earth and we just can't see it because its behind the sun at all times.
although that would be kinda disprove because they could calculate the displaced gravity and figure out that there's an object there.
[QUOTE=Passing;49299885]Whatever happen to the planet that crashed into the earth? Was it thrown out of the solar system or is it stuck behind the sun orbiting it bit like counterclock wise earth and we just can't see it because its behind the sun at all times.
although that would be kinda disprove because they could calculate the displaced gravity and figure out that there's an object there.[/QUOTE]
Theoretically, what's left of it became the Moon.
[QUOTE=kobalt;49299901]Theoretically, what's left of it became the Moon.[/QUOTE]
Alright, That's an interesting theory. Logic would suggest that it would then have some volcanic activity and maybe a core?
[QUOTE=Passing;49299925]Alright, That's an interesting theory. Logic would suggest that it would then have some volcanic activity and maybe a core?[/QUOTE]
[URL="http://volcano.oregonstate.edu/oldroot/volcanoes/planet_volcano/lunar/Overview.html"]it does have a core and volcanic activity[/URL]
[URL="http://news.sciencemag.org/space/2014/10/recent-volcanic-eruptions-moon"]
even more recently![/URL]
[editline]12th December 2015[/editline]
the moon we have is actually abnormally large for a planet of ours' size and composure
[QUOTE=Passing;49299885]Whatever happen to the planet that crashed into the earth? Was it thrown out of the solar system or is it stuck behind the sun orbiting it bit like counterclock wise earth and we just can't see it because its behind the sun at all times.
although that would be kinda disprove because they could calculate the displaced gravity and figure out that there's an object there.[/QUOTE]
To clarify what was said before, most of it was absorbed by Earth and the rest solidified into the moon. It is believed that the hypothetical object, named Theia, was a Mars-sized trojan planet that was positioned in one of the Earths' two largest Lagrange points (L4 and L5, roughly 33% ahead or behind the Earth, where a large swath of gravity is roughly equal between the Sun and Earth and thus allows objects to stably remain there if outside influence isn't too extreme. There are additionally 3 other Lagrange points that are in between the Sun and Earth, behind the Earth and behind the Sun in respect to the Earth, but all three are too small for a non-artificial object to remain in any of those three, let alone a planet-sized object.
At some point, Theia left either the L4 or L5 Lagrangian point and started to desync in orbit around the sun from the Earth until eventually, after many gravitational perturbations and near misses, they collided with each other. If Theia was Mars-sized, it'd only be around one-tenth the mass of the Earth, so the likely consensus is that which wasn't "immediately" absorbed became a disk of material surrounding the Earth that coalesced to form the moon (which is about one-eighth the mass of Mars).
how cool would it be to be a planet? orbiting around in space and shit
[QUOTE=ridinmybike;49310451]how cool would it be to be a planet? orbiting around in space and shit[/QUOTE]
pretty fucking boring
[QUOTE=Ninja Gnome;49299957][URL="http://volcano.oregonstate.edu/oldroot/volcanoes/planet_volcano/lunar/Overview.html"]it does have a core and volcanic activity[/URL]
[URL="http://news.sciencemag.org/space/2014/10/recent-volcanic-eruptions-moon"]
even more recently![/URL]
[editline]12th December 2015[/editline]
the moon we have is actually abnormally large for a planet of ours' size and composure[/QUOTE]
That's kind of because the moon was a planet that slammed into earth, biut it is unusually large for earth's size, though we can only compare it to the other earth like planets we have found so far which aren't much to go by
[QUOTE=Passing;49299885]Whatever happen to the planet that crashed into the earth? Was it thrown out of the solar system or is it stuck behind the sun orbiting it bit like counterclock wise earth and we just can't see it because its behind the sun at all times.
although that would be kinda disprove because they could calculate the displaced gravity and figure out that there's an object there.[/QUOTE]
If I recall correctly we've had probes outside of earth's orbit that were able to take direct photographs of the space "behind" the sun, definitively proving that there is not a planet there or however the theory goes.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
