Ninth planet may actually exist

[Zontar]

https://www.caltech.edu/news/caltech-researchers-find-evidence-real-ninth-planet-49523

The long and short of this article is that there is, based on observation and mathmatical models, a very high likelihood that there is a 9th planet in our solar system beyond the Kuper belt on an orbit between 10,000 and 20,000 years. If this turns out to be true then it not only means we will have once again 9 planet names to remember, but it would also mean that our solar system would find itself possesing a gas giant that's of the size we've found to be the most common in our observations of other systems: a planet whose mass is between that of Earth and Neptune, meaning our system may be much more common then we initially believed.

Whether or not this turns out to be true remains to be seen, but if it is it would be quite the discovery.

 

[CeeBod]

Whilst I am excited by the prospect, the potential planet is likely to have an eccentric eliptical orbit, which means it might end up falling foul of the latest definition of what is and isn't a Planet -

The definition of planet set in Prague in 2006 by the International Astronomical Union (IAU) states that, in the Solar System, a planet is a celestial body which:

is in orbit around the Sun,
has sufficient mass to assume hydrostatic equilibrium (a nearly round shape), and
has "cleared the neighborhood" around its orbit.

That 3rd stipulation could be a problem depending on where its orbit is and what other Kuiper Belt objects are around in that particular "neighbourhood" and so it might just end up being defined as just another Dwarf planet - a Dwarf planet that's potentially bigger than Mercury! Cue the next definition change perhaps? )

Edit - I just realised that the actual method of discovery is based on the resonance of existing Dwarf planets' orbits, which surely means that by definition it can't have cleared the neighbourhood of its orbit, so this is definitely going to be a Dwarf Planet (if it exists) so it won't replace the demoted Pluto, it'll just join it.

 

[Aerosteam]

My very educated mother just served us nine...

Hopefully the new planet ends the sentence once again.

 

[DrownedAmmet]

You know what I don't get, why is a "dwarf planet" not considered a planet?
We still consider "Dwarf people" to be people

 

[Zontar]

You know what I don't get, why is a "dwarf planet" not considered a planet?
We still consider "Dwarf people" to be people

Because they're not large enough to clear their own orbital area of debris, and if we where to consider them planets then instead of 8 names we have to learn in school we'd have around 60. On top of that it's hard to tell just where one draws the line between dwarf planet and big ass asteroid, and helped even less by the fact that in the case of Pluto the point between which it and its two moons rotate around each other's gravity is about half way in the middle of them, meaning while Pluto is the largest of the three all are orbiting each other.

 

[DrownedAmmet]

You know what I don't get, why is a "dwarf planet" not considered a planet?
We still consider "Dwarf people" to be people

Because they're not large enough to clear their own orbital area of debris, and if we where to consider them planets then instead of 8 names we have to learn in school we'd have around 60. On top of that it's hard to tell just where one draws the line between dwarf planet and big ass asteroid, and helped even less by the fact that in the case of Pluto the point between which it and its two moons rotate around each other's gravity is about half way in the middle of them, meaning while Pluto is the largest of the three all are orbiting each other.

Then why call them anything to do with planet? They should have been called "Big Astroids"....
Get it, big ass-troid, cuz they're big-ass astroids

 

[laggyteabag]

I find it funny that we can detect planets from entire solar systems away, but we have only maybe just discovered that there may be a 9th in ours.

 

[P-89 Scorpion]

Whilst I am excited by the prospect, the potential planet is likely to have an eccentric eliptical orbit, which means it might end up falling foul of the latest definition of what is and isn't a Planet -

The definition of planet set in Prague in 2006 by the International Astronomical Union (IAU) states that, in the Solar System, a planet is a celestial body which:

is in orbit around the Sun,
has sufficient mass to assume hydrostatic equilibrium (a nearly round shape), and
has "cleared the neighborhood" around its orbit.

That 3rd stipulation could be a problem depending on where its orbit is and what other Kuiper Belt objects are around in that particular "neighbourhood" and so it might just end up being defined as just another Dwarf planet - a Dwarf planet that's potentially bigger than Mercury! Cue the next definition change perhaps? )

Edit - I just realised that the actual method of discovery is based on the resonance of existing Dwarf planets' orbits, which surely means that by definition it can't have cleared the neighbourhood of its orbit, so this is definitely going to be a Dwarf Planet (if it exists) so it won't replace the demoted Pluto, it'll just join it.

It won't be a dwarf planet as it's closer in size to Neptune than Earth which is currently the 5th largest planet in the solar system.

From the source

"The object, which the researchers have nicknamed Planet Nine, has a mass about 10 times that of Earth"

"Brown notes that the putative ninth planet?at 5,000 times the mass of Pluto?is sufficiently large that there should be no debate about whether it is a true planet."

 

[P-89 Scorpion]

I find it funny that we can detect planets from entire solar systems away, but we have only maybe just discovered that there may be a 9th in ours.

We detect plants as they pass in front of their star this planet has a believed orbit of over 10,000 years.

When we look for plants we look for those closest to their star as that's what we believe to be the most likely to have life since that's how ours is.

 

[Zontar]

Then why call them anything to do with planet? They should have been called "Big Astroids"....
Get it, big ass-troid, cuz they're big-ass astroids

In the case of Dwarf Planets the main reason stems to be due to the fact they have a sufficient mass to be round, have a stable orbit around the Sun, and the fact we've had several named in the Asteroid Belt for centuries now (Pluto wasn't the first object to be downgraded from planet status).

 

[Something Amyss]

Then why call them anything to do with planet? They should have been called "Big Astroids"....
Get it, big ass-troid, cuz they're big-ass astroids

Because until relatively recently in astronomical history (about a decade ago), there was no real definition of planet. Bodies like Pluto have been a problem for ages, because they don't behave entirely like the other planets in our solar system.

There have been other terms to describe them, but they often revolve around use of the term planet, because they meet similar criteria. Had we only the "major" planets and a clear definition when we discovered Pluto or Ceres, we might have come up with a different name. also, they were considered asteroids (at least, some of them), but that was before there was a formal definition of "asteroid."

It makes sense, because they have properties similar to planets.

 

[Vicarious Reality]

I recently learned that Sedna has an aphelion (orbit point furthest from the sun) of 936 AU
The earth has 1

Good luck seeing stuff at that distance