Unconfirmed exomoon could be unlike any of those in our solar system

According to the article, basically this can change what we know about the current three main moon creation theories:

Something impacting a planet;
Assimilation of material orbiting a planet;
And a passing object captured by a planet's gravity.

For those as me who don't understand much of physics and need to read the keywords to absorb anything, I'll highlight the main infos.

René Heller, a space scientist with the Maxx Planck Institute for Solar System Research has uploaded a paper to the arXiv preprint server offering possible attributes for the still-unconfirmed exomoon Kepler 1625 b-i. He suggests that if the exomoon does truly exist, it is probably unlike any of the moons in our solar system, which suggests that theories about the origins of moons might have to be expanded.

Back in July, a team of researchers led by Alex Teachey and David Kipping of Columbia University announced that they had found possible evidence of a moon circling a planet outside of our solar system. If the exomoon turns out to be real, it would mark the first time that one has ever been discovered. News of a possible exomoon sighting has set off speculation regarding what it might be like.

It's pretty obvious that there are exomoons even they've not confirmed yet.

What's so special about our solar system to be the only one with one of those?

In his paper, Heller describes the research he has conducted studying the Kepler data that suggests the possible exomoon. He notes the data is not strong enough to pin down a size for the moon, suggesting it could be anywhere from approximately the size of the Earth to the size of Saturn. He does not suggest the data proves the existence of an exomoon, but does offer a wild guess on the size of the exomoon if it is there—approximately the size of Neptune.

A moon that size does not exist in our own solar system, of course, which suggests that if one that large does exist elsewhere, it likely formed in ways that are not described by one of the three main moon creation theories—something impacting a planet, assimilation of material orbiting a planet, or a passing object captured by a planet's gravity. This means that if the exomoon is confirmed and its size and makeup can be determined, it is likely that there will be a race between space groups around the world to find a theory explaining its existence.

Teachey and Kipping have been vocal about their view that researchers should wait to see if the exomoon exists before conducting research or creating theories, lest it all be in vain. They have their sights set firmly on this weekend, when the Hubble Space Telescope will be aimed at the system, possibly confirming or ruling out its existence.

Exciting that we're probably the first humans seeing this.

Sources:

Unconfirmed exomoon could be unlike any of those in our solar system

Possible first sighting of an exomoon

originally posted by: vinifalou

According to the article, basically this can change what we know about the current three main moon creation theories:

Something impacting a planet;
Assimilation of material orbiting a planet;
And a passing object captured by a planet's gravity.

For those as me who don't understand much of physics and need to read the keywords to absorb anything, I'll highlight the main infos.

René Heller, a space scientist with the Maxx Planck Institute for Solar System Research has uploaded a paper to the arXiv preprint server offering possible attributes for the still-unconfirmed exomoon Kepler 1625 b-i. He suggests that if the exomoon does truly exist, it is probably unlike any of the moons in our solar system, which suggests that theories about the origins of moons might have to be expanded.

Back in July, a team of researchers led by Alex Teachey and David Kipping of Columbia University announced that they had found possible evidence of a moon circling a planet outside of our solar system. If the exomoon turns out to be real, it would mark the first time that one has ever been discovered. News of a possible exomoon sighting has set off speculation regarding what it might be like.

It's pretty obvious that there are exomoons even they've not confirmed yet.

What's so special about our solar system to be the only one with one of those?

In his paper, Heller describes the research he has conducted studying the Kepler data that suggests the possible exomoon. He notes the data is not strong enough to pin down a size for the moon, suggesting it could be anywhere from approximately the size of the Earth to the size of Saturn. He does not suggest the data proves the existence of an exomoon, but does offer a wild guess on the size of the exomoon if it is there—approximately the size of Neptune.

A moon that size does not exist in our own solar system, of course, which suggests that if one that large does exist elsewhere, it likely formed in ways that are not described by one of the three main moon creation theories—something impacting a planet, assimilation of material orbiting a planet, or a passing object captured by a planet's gravity. This means that if the exomoon is confirmed and its size and makeup can be determined, it is likely that there will be a race between space groups around the world to find a theory explaining its existence.

Teachey and Kipping have been vocal about their view that researchers should wait to see if the exomoon exists before conducting research or creating theories, lest it all be in vain. They have their sights set firmly on this weekend, when the Hubble Space Telescope will be aimed at the system, possibly confirming or ruling out its existence.

Exciting that we're probably the first humans seeing this.

Sources:

Unconfirmed exomoon could be unlike any of those in our solar system

Possible first sighting of an exomoon

Why exactly couldn't it be explained by the three main theories? Did I miss that explanation in the post?

a reply to: imthegoat

They say it's because of its size (waaay to big). But yea, I'm not sure either why it couldn't be formed the same way our moon did...

I mean, it could've impacted on a gigantic planet as well.

Waiting for furthest observations to see.

Even how our moon was formed has been called into question.

Here is a good read if you have the time!

Quanta Magazine - What Made the Moon? New Ideas Try to Rescue a Troubled Theory.

Basically, the accepted "huge impact" does match the evidence because of the lack of evidence of the body that hit the earth are not present in moon rock samples. The article give some different explanations of what could have happened (and how the physics works out).

The exomoon adds to the questions of theory. Which in the end is a good thing. A theory is only an idea and can (and should) be questioned until it is robust enough to withstand questioning.

Here is what an UNCONFIRMED exomoon might be like.
I't might be made of green cheese, it's very existence not being confirmed at all
It might have a smiley face on one side, it's very existence not being confirmed at all.
It might be square, it's very existence not being confirmed at all.

And for the size, it states that it ''may'' be circling a planet because if it isn't circling a planet it would not be a moon. For the moon to be circling a planet the planet would have to be much larger than the moon and if the moon is ''wildly guessed' to possibly be as big as Neptune that planet would have to be much larger otherwise the planet would be the moon circling the unconfirmed exomoon. More likely they would be in some kind of thing where they circle around a common central point.
I found no mention of the size of the planet even. It would have to be huge wouldn't it?

How was the moon created? The waveform was already there. The particles just fall into position.

There's really no simpler way to understand the universe, than to understand that planetary bodies are detecting waves and riding them to their exact waveform, determining orbit rotation and makeup of said vibrating particle clump.


The whole thing can be mapped as predictable Sine functions, giving us a better insight on the Life-death cycle as we fly through space.

originally posted by: imthegoat

originally posted by: vinifalou

According to the article, basically this can change what we know about the current three main moon creation theories:

Something impacting a planet;
Assimilation of material orbiting a planet;
And a passing object captured by a planet's gravity.

For those as me who don't understand much of physics and need to read the keywords to absorb anything, I'll highlight the main infos.

René Heller, a space scientist with the Maxx Planck Institute for Solar System Research has uploaded a paper to the arXiv preprint server offering possible attributes for the still-unconfirmed exomoon Kepler 1625 b-i. He suggests that if the exomoon does truly exist, it is probably unlike any of the moons in our solar system, which suggests that theories about the origins of moons might have to be expanded.

Back in July, a team of researchers led by Alex Teachey and David Kipping of Columbia University announced that they had found possible evidence of a moon circling a planet outside of our solar system. If the exomoon turns out to be real, it would mark the first time that one has ever been discovered. News of a possible exomoon sighting has set off speculation regarding what it might be like.

It's pretty obvious that there are exomoons even they've not confirmed yet.

What's so special about our solar system to be the only one with one of those?

In his paper, Heller describes the research he has conducted studying the Kepler data that suggests the possible exomoon. He notes the data is not strong enough to pin down a size for the moon, suggesting it could be anywhere from approximately the size of the Earth to the size of Saturn. He does not suggest the data proves the existence of an exomoon, but does offer a wild guess on the size of the exomoon if it is there—approximately the size of Neptune.

A moon that size does not exist in our own solar system, of course, which suggests that if one that large does exist elsewhere, it likely formed in ways that are not described by one of the three main moon creation theories—something impacting a planet, assimilation of material orbiting a planet, or a passing object captured by a planet's gravity. This means that if the exomoon is confirmed and its size and makeup can be determined, it is likely that there will be a race between space groups around the world to find a theory explaining its existence.

Teachey and Kipping have been vocal about their view that researchers should wait to see if the exomoon exists before conducting research or creating theories, lest it all be in vain. They have their sights set firmly on this weekend, when the Hubble Space Telescope will be aimed at the system, possibly confirming or ruling out its existence.

Exciting that we're probably the first humans seeing this.

Sources:

Unconfirmed exomoon could be unlike any of those in our solar system

Possible first sighting of an exomoon

Why exactly couldn't it be explained by the three main theories? Did I miss that explanation in the post?

Yours is a good question and was my first question too.

The article seems to suggest two large bodies (One jupiter sized, one Neptune sized). That to me seems more like two planets orbiting each other rather than a planet-satellite situation.

originally posted by: TEOTWAWKIAIFF
Even how our moon was formed has been called into question.

Here is a good read if you have the time!

Quanta Magazine - What Made the Moon? New Ideas Try to Rescue a Troubled Theory.

Basically, the accepted "huge impact" does match the evidence because of the lack of evidence of the body that hit the earth are not present in moon rock samples. The article give some different explanations of what could have happened (and how the physics works out).

The exomoon adds to the questions of theory. Which in the end is a good thing. A theory is only an idea and can (and should) be questioned until it is robust enough to withstand questioning.

I was reading some articles about the structure of the Earth and one thing they noticed was the metal core of our planet actually has two layers, each with separate magnetic field alignments. Researchers aren't sure if this is due to the pressure at those depths forcing Iron atoms into different electron configurations or if it were due to a collision that mixed the cores of two planetoids together.

I've always wondered when they say that a Mars sized planet collided with Earth, why it couldn't be Mars itself?