Astronomers say they've spotted lonesome planet without a sun

abeverage
No Red Kachina or Nibiru comments yet? Surprising really!

I was waiting for them too.

Pretty cool find, nonetheless.

Getting crazy at the level of detail we can now see at such distances. We have even seen cloud patterns on at least one Exo Planet.

That Planet is falling around something...

I think it's likely that this planet was formed in a binary star system, and got ejected due to the gravitational perturbations of those two stars. I'm pretty sure a planet cannot form in the emptyness of space all by its own.

Can anyone cite its coordinates please? I wanna see if it comes up on previous infrared surveys like 2MASS and WISE. Strangely, I can't find coordinates in the articles about PSO J318.5-22.

Up to 100,000 times more rogue Planets
as there are Stars? Wow !
en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by teamcommander


It's easier to detect an incoming nuclear missile than a gunman firing a machine gun

pavil

abeverage
No Red Kachina or Nibiru comments yet? Surprising really!

I was waiting for them too.

Pretty cool find, nonetheless.

Getting crazy at the level of detail we can now see at such distances. We have even seen cloud patterns on at least one Exo Planet.

What surprised me was 80 light years, and they were able to spot it! Talk about a needle in a haystack!

reply to post by SasquatchHunter


186,282.4 mi/sec * 3600 sec * 24* 365 = 5874589152000 mi/yr *80 = 46996716160000 miles

15000 m/h = 131400000 mi/yr

357661 years and change. (I need a dum dum award for that original math work)

Still a drop in the bucket in cosmic time.

The article didn't say where it was located relative to alpha centauri or other neighboring stars so with the available information, the leading candidate is our solar system. There is no physical model for a planet to form outside a solar system nor do I put any creedance in the age estimate of the body. So in lieu of more data, the origin is most likely to be solar system. The trajectory determination should be the test of this model.

So 80 isn't as close as I thought it was - sue me!? Haters.

It`s been randomly floating around for 12 million years and hasn`t been pulled into orbit around any stars?
is that unusual?

reply to post by InverseLookingGlass

The article didn't say where it was located relative to alpha centauri or other neighboring stars so with the available information, the leading candidate is our solar system.

Why?
There are at least 133 naked eye visible stars within 50 light years of Earth, substantially more than that within 80.

www.atlasoftheuniverse.com...

InverseLookingGlass
reply to post by SasquatchHunter

 

186,282.4 mi/sec * 3600 sec * 24* 365 = 5874589152000 mi/yr *80 = 46996716160000 miles

15000 m/h = 131400000 mi/yr

357661 years and change. (I need a dum dum award for that original math work)

Still a drop in the bucket in cosmic time.

The article didn't say where it was located relative to alpha centauri or other neighboring stars so with the available information, the leading candidate is our solar system. There is no physical model for a planet to form outside a solar system nor do I put any creedance in the age estimate of the body. So in lieu of more data, the origin is most likely to be solar system. The trajectory determination should be the test of this model.

Wrong again.... Back to the drawing board.
Light year = 5.87849981 × 10^12 or 5,878,625,373,200 miles
131400000 miles per year of planet (your math didn't, check this part)
5878625373200 / 131400000 = 44738.3970563(years object takes to travel one light year)
44738.3970563 * 80light years = 3579071.76451
3,579,071.76451 years, thats millions of years.

Nibiru! They finally found it...

Seriously, if it doesn't orbit a sun, doesn't that make it a big ass meteor or asteroid?

What is the criteria to call a body a planet?

HooHaa
Nibiru! They finally found it...

Seriously, if it doesn't orbit a sun, doesn't that make it a big ass meteor or asteroid?

What is the criteria to call a body a planet?

You are right in terms of what is called a planet or not.

Somewhat - it is a certain size (Earth is about the bottom of that scale)

And the definitions are a bit fluid -- it used to be that a 'body' had to orbit around a larger one.
Believe it or not, scientists DO change what they think when better info comes along.

You know, when I see stories like this, it brings me back to the Urantia Book, even though I no longer have a lot of faith in said book. The Urantia Book stated that there were many worlds out there that did not need suns to survive, and that produced their own heat and light from the planet itself. I have to say it is interesting to see things like this, which might confirm what the book taught. *sigh* how I miss my old crutch to lean on. Guess things like this give me hope that the book had some validity.

I have heard that half of the planets in the Universe are so called "rogue-planets" which do not orbit any star. They are not rare at all. But spotting them is nearly impossible, as they usually are very cold objects and they don't dim the light of stars like exoplanets orbiting planets. So they are not visible in infrared or visible spectrum.

These rogue-planets escape from their system if massive body (e.g star) passes next to it. It drives the orbits in chaos and planets could easily collide, or escape from the system. I believe its only option why there is these rogue-planets.

And I hope other stars will stay away from our system

HooHaa
Nibiru! They finally found it...

Seriously, if it doesn't orbit a sun, doesn't that make it a big ass meteor or asteroid?

What is the criteria to call a body a planet?

Its not really planet, but they are called rogue-planets

Planet criteria:
A "planet"1 is a celestial body that: (a) is in orbit around the Sun, (b) has sufficient mass for its self-gravity to overcome rigid body forces so that it assumes a hydrostatic equilibrium (nearly round) shape, and (c) has cleared the neighbourhood around its orbit. (Pluto fails the last one, it doesn't clear its orbit)

These "rogue-planets" do not orbit any star, they orbit the center of galaxy like stars.

SasquatchHunter

InverseLookingGlass
I have to wonder where this planet came from. Without any additional information, I would say the most likely source is our solar system.

If the planet was traveling a mere 15,000 mph straight away from Earth, it would only take 45,000 years to get to it's current position. 80 light years is actually pretty close.

Observations over a period of years should yield a rough trajectory. Should be interesting.

What? How did you arrive at those figures. If it was traveling 22k mph it would take like 2,560,000 years to travel 80 light years which BTW is most definitely NOT CLOSE. Either way why would you speculate its origin as our solar system?

1 Light year = 9.4607 x 10^12 (94,067,000,000,000) kilometers

at 90,000 mph, that would be one thousand million years ago (one billion)
45,000 mph, two billion years ago)
6,000 mph, fifteen billion years ago.

Maybe it's parent star exploded.

reply to post by Astyanax


Great reply friend, you stated exactly what I was thinking. I also had thought that this could be a Dyson Sphere.
Some may say that this is an impossibility, but this could not be further from the truth. Let's look at our own history, of how 300 years ago, one might have been burnt at the stake, for saying that one day man would fly in the sky like the birds. But now, this is an everyday experience. So with that in mind, what if there was a civilization which has had perhaps MILLIONS of years of stable development? How incredible do you suppose their technological capabilities could potentially be??

How advanced do you suppose a civilization such as this could be? Especially when you consider, that at this point--of only a few hundred years of stable progress, that we are now at the point where we can control/manipulate the weather/tectonics of our entire planet.....Is it beyond possibility, that a species which has millions of years of advancement, could posses the capability to control entire stars or entire solar systems??

But I suppose that this all comes back to whether or not you believe, that humans are the greatest example of evolution in the entire cosmos. That whether or not you think that , tens of thousands of different types of life sprung up here on Earth......and for some strange reason, life evolved no where else in the universe. To me, believing that humanity is the BE ALL/END ALL of evolution in the entire existence of the universe....is utterly ludicrous. There are so many different types of life just on our own little planet, that it is beyond all probability that life exists no where else in the cosmos.

reply to post by InCeNdIaDrAcOnIs


If it were a Dyson sphere, it would be a lot more massive than the current estimates, and it would also have to be a Dyson shell - a solid sphere around the star, otherwise the star would be shining bright and hot through the gaps in the sphere. But there are several serious theoretical difficulties with the solid shell variant of the Dyson sphere, as explained in the link.

As the rest of the article explains, a Dyson shell would be most likely composed of a network of satellites around a star, and detected through the increased infrared emissions and heavy element signatures from the star. en.wikipedia.org...

I also read about stars that don't have a galaxy. (anymore) In the same way that a planet can be hurled out of a solar system, a star can be hurled out of a galaxy. If a star is orbiting close to the super massive black hole at the center of a galaxy and is interacting with other stars there, it can be accelerated to galactic escape velocity and leave the galaxy at very high speed. I suppose it could also be hurled through the galactic plane. That would make for a very bad day if a high speed star came roaring through our solar system. I'm pretty sure that is an unlikely event though.