Could billions upon billions of free-floating 'nomadic' planets be seeding our galaxy

• Hundreds of thousand billion planets could be floating nomadically through the galaxy
• Theory would explain the unexplained 'missing matter' of the Milky Way
• Planets would cross the galaxy, picking up living cells as they floated through cosmic dust

Researchers have come up with a startling suggestion for how life could propagate across our galaxy.

Identifying the mathematical hole between the expected mass of our galaxy - The Milky Way - and what is observed, they theorise that there are billions and billions of 'nomadic' planets, unaffiliated to any particular star, floating through the darkness of space.

The scientists from the Astrobiology department at the University of Buckingham have proposed that these planets originated in the early Universe, within a few million years of the Big Bang, and that they make up most of the so-called 'missing mass'.

D ailyMail

This theory is interesting as it would presumably explain where much of the missing matter of the universe is. It would also perhaps help to explain some anomalies observed in terms of the gravitational pull on deep space probes.

The scientists calculate that these planetary body would cross the inner solar system every 25 million years on average - and during each transit, dust from the neighbourhood, including living cells, would become implanted at its surface.

These free-floating planets would then end up mixing harbouring the living cells with the planet's own make-up, and life could spread by this method on a galaxy-wide scale.

The possibility of a much larger number of planets was first suggested in earlier studies where the effects of gravitational lensing of distant quasars by intervening planet-sized bodies were measured.

Recently several groups of investigators have suggested that a few billion such objects could exist in the galaxy.

The team, led by Professor Chandra Wickramasinghe, have increased this grand total of planets to a few hundred thousand billion (a few thousand for every Milky Way star) - each one harbouring the legacy of cosmic primordial life.

D aily Mail

The original article unfortunately is SpringerLInk here which is behind a firewall.

Sounds very interesting, but how would these planets actually disperse life to one another? Surely if they came close enough they would either a)impact and destroy each other or b) become another planet in orbit of the star or larger planet?

My knowledge on this stuff isn't much but if someone could explain it that would be nice.

Originally posted by BigBruddah
Sounds very interesting, but how would these planets actually disperse life to one another? Surely if they came close enough they would either a)impact and destroy each other or b) become another planet in orbit of the star or larger planet?

That's a good question. I do know that we have rocks from Mars on earth that were presumably thrown into space after a meteorite impact and were later pulled into earth due to its gravitational force.

Rare Mars Rocks Crashed to Earth in July

A hail of Martian meteorites crashed to Earth last July, and collectors and scientists around the world are snapping up the ultra-rare rocks for display and study.

The meteorites fell in the Moroccan desert in July and were recovered a few months later. Scientists confirmed today (Jan. 17) that the rocks are Martian, presumably blasted off the Red Planet by an asteroid strike.

Yahoo News

reply to post by ollncasino


yes.and its the only perpetual motion we will know

Doesnt the question become "Could billions upon billions of free-floating 'nomadic' planets be seeding other galaxies??" as well??

Are we the only Galaxy that exists??

reply to post by ollncasino


Setting us up for the revelation we have a companion star.

reply to post by BigBruddah


A lot of 'alternative' material states that Venus is not an original planet in our Solar System and actually was a large comet that may or may not have anything to do with why Mars is no longer habitable or what happened to the planet that is now the Kuiper belt.

The team, led by Professor Chandra Wickramasinghe, have increased this grand total of planets to a few hundred thousand billion (a few thousand for every Milky Way star) - each one harbouring the legacy of cosmic primordial life.

So, does that mean that there are a few thousand of those planets in the Sun's neighbourhood?

But other scientists have spoken of early solar system planet's that got thrown out, so it looks like they are getting to a point where at least several planets per star are travelling through space.

Originally posted by LightAssassin
reply to post by ollncasino

 

Setting us up for the revelation we have a companion star.

I hope mine is Emma Watson.

I could see the logic behind this train of thought. In our own solar system's formation, it is theorized that at least a few planets were flung out of orbit before things settled the way we see now; I suppose its possible, if unlikely, that such a planet could spread biological matter between stars.
I've often wondered if such a nomad could support life, and not simply ferry dormant cells and materials. Knowing that the gravity and magnetism of Jupiter are why Europa (probably) has liquid water beneath its surface, it doesn't seem out of reason to presume that life could develop devoid of light. Our own oceans have life in regions which have never known a photon of sunlight. Suppose a gas giant becomes a nomad, and takes it's moons with it; presuming the orbits remain stable, a moon with H20 could be stimulated by friction alone into existing in a warm state, perhaps for long enough to allow complex life to develop.
I doubt any such theory would become fact in any of our lifetimes, though; its all we can do to spot a planet near a neighboring star, and I highly doubt we'll find a way to spot these unlit giants until we develop much more sophisticated means of astronomy.

Originally posted by Malfeitor
Knowing that the gravity and magnetism of Jupiter are why Europa (probably) has liquid water beneath its surface, it doesn't seem out of reason to presume that life could develop devoid of light.

I think live can evolve without light, but I don't think it can without any source of energy, and a planet out a star system will get very little energy.

reply to post by PeaNice


Scarlett Johansson for mine. Hehe.

Thanks for the laugh.