The New Class of Planets

page: 1
0

log in

join

posted on Aug, 31 2004 @ 01:41 PM
link   
Well as most of us assumed, it was just the official announcement of the large rocky planets recently discovered. Here's the article.



www.nasa.gov...

Scientists Discover First of a New Class of Extrasolar Planets

Astronomers announced today the first discovery of a new class of planets beyond our solar system about 10 to 20 times the size of Earth ? far smaller than any previously detected. The planets make up a new class of Neptune-sized extrasolar planets.

In addition, one of the new planets joins three others around the nearby star 55 Cancri to form the first known four-planet system.

The discoveries consist of two new planets. They were discovered by the world renowned planet-hunting team of Drs. Paul Butler and Geoffrey Marcy of the Carnegie Institute of Washington and University of California, Berkeley, respectively; and Barbara McArthur of the University of Texas, Austin. Both findings were peer-reviewed and accepted for future publication in the Astrophysical Journal. NASA and the National Science Foundation (NSF) funded the research.


Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


Related ATS stories
'Super Earth' Discovered at Nearby Star
Jupiter-sized Planet Found With Small Telescope
NASA Soon To Announce New Class Of Planets



Odd

posted on Aug, 31 2004 @ 02:04 PM
link   
They're Neptune-sized and rocky? Hot damn.

I guess it wasn't the earth-shattering revelation that I know all us romantics here had hoped for, but it'll earn the grants for this year.



posted on Aug, 31 2004 @ 03:38 PM
link   
Very cool. So now our view of the size of rocky planets must change. The standard concept sets Earth and Venus as the "large" rocky planets with Mars and Mercury being smaller versions.

Now it would seem that all 4, including Earth, are medium to small rocky planets.

Imagine an alien civilization having to cross oceans 4-10 times as wide...or having the ability to grow to up to 50 times the capacity of Earth in population!



posted on Aug, 31 2004 @ 04:58 PM
link   
If anyone of these planets is inhabited, its occupiers will be giants (due to increased gravity). Therefore, it would take them the same time that it takes us to cross their oceans.



posted on Aug, 31 2004 @ 05:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by masterp
If anyone of these planets is inhabited, its occupiers will be giants (due to increased gravity). Therefore, it would take them the same time that it takes us to cross their oceans.


Not necessarily. If a giant humanoid lifeform, for example, would stumble and fall, the impact would instantly crush it because of the huge gravitation. However, their bodies will have a very low center of gravity, like cockroaches and scorpions for example.



[edit on 2004-8-31 by EyesOfTheFuture]



posted on Aug, 31 2004 @ 05:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by masterp
If anyone of these planets is inhabited, its occupiers will be giants (due to increased gravity). Therefore, it would take them the same time that it takes us to cross their oceans.


Sorry, double post.



[edit on 2004-8-31 by EyesOfTheFuture]



posted on Aug, 31 2004 @ 06:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by masterp
If anyone of these planets is inhabited, its occupiers will be giants (due to increased gravity). Therefore, it would take them the same time that it takes us to cross their oceans.


I agree with EOTF. Also don't you remember the dinasours? They were gigantic compared to us.

If life worked like that, mice and small animals/insects wouldn't exist in our planet.



posted on Aug, 31 2004 @ 09:43 PM
link   
Wouldn't it make it much harder to leave their planent because of increased gravity? Wouldn't this then set their race back on space exploration in omparison to humans (assuming near equal IQ)?



posted on Aug, 31 2004 @ 10:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by American Mad Man
Wouldn't it make it much harder to leave their planent because of increased gravity? Wouldn't this then set their race back on space exploration in omparison to humans (assuming near equal IQ)?


I guess so. Is gravity actually related to the planet's mass or size?



posted on Sep, 1 2004 @ 01:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by VirusClock
I guess so. Is gravity actually related to the planet's mass or size?


Mass/density as opposed to Size so my sources tell me.



posted on Sep, 1 2004 @ 01:26 AM
link   
How about Jupiter and Saturn? They're density isn't that great compared to their size. I had always wondered if the rotation of the core has any effect on the gravity field.



posted on Sep, 1 2004 @ 03:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by masterp
If anyone of these planets is inhabited, its occupiers will be giants (due to increased gravity). Therefore, it would take them the same time that it takes us to cross their oceans.


Actually stronger gravity would cause them to be small not large... or so I hear.



posted on Sep, 1 2004 @ 09:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by VirusClock
How about Jupiter and Saturn? They're density isn't that great compared to their size. I had always wondered if the rotation of the core has any effect on the gravity field.


Jupiters gravity increases the closer to the core you come. In the outer layers the gravity is neglectable, close to the core it's immense.



posted on Sep, 1 2004 @ 10:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by Chuck Stevenson

Originally posted by VirusClock
I guess so. Is gravity actually related to the planet's mass or size?


Mass/density as opposed to Size so my sources tell me.


Yes, correct. This is why even the tiniest singularity (black hole) has such immense gravity. The density of a star, seconds before it collapses into a black hole, is so high that a teaspoon of it would weigh literally billions of tons.






top topics



 
0

log in

join