Skip to comments.Giant planet ejected from the solar system
Posted on 11/11/2011 5:16:23 AM PST by decimon
Boulder, Colo. Nov. 10, 2011 Just as an expert chess player sacrifices a piece to protect the queen, the solar system may have given up a giant planet and spared the Earth, according to an article recently published in The Astrophysical Journal Letters.
"We have all sorts of clues about the early evolution of the solar system," says author Dr. David Nesvorny of the Southwest Research Institute. "They come from the analysis of the trans-Neptunian population of small bodies known as the Kuiper Belt, and from the lunar cratering record."
These clues suggest that the orbits of giant planets were affected by a dynamical instability when the solar system was only about 600 million years old. As a result, the giant planets and smaller bodies scattered away from each other.
Some small bodies moved into the Kuiper Belt and others traveled inward, producing impacts on the terrestrial planets and the Moon. The giant planets moved as well. Jupiter, for example, scattered most small bodies outward and moved inward.
(Excerpt) Read more at swri.org ...
Happily ever after ping.
Did it foul Jupiter or something?
Jupiter, you’re next, buddy.
"Oops. We were wrong. No giant planet. Sorry."
Planet Joe Paterno?
Martians, woman and minorities impacted most!
Couldn’t have ejected Uranus. Dang.
That’s cool and all but does it mean Hillary is still the smartest woman in the Milky Way?
The moon and all the planets look battle-scarred to me.
It was the body english at the end that dunked it.
obama has declared that all planet ejections are hereby on hold pending further review by federal agencies
That would be the planet Obama.
I like your comment.... Maybe by then there will also be a new theory on global warming, somking and lung cancer, and whether red meat is good for you.
Another Orpheus? But wait........ they just made that one up. This must be different.
In view of the missing giant we should readmit Pluto!
Well, if that is what his computer simulation showed it must be right.
There’s an author, name of Sitchin I believe, who would say this extra planet was the destroyed Tiamat, and it happened fairly recently.
Also I don’t quite understand how Jupiter can scatter little asteroids, if it’s close enough to affect them it should attract them, no? In some cases, like the Trojan asteroids, they get locked into Jupiter’s orbit. How many, of those on the same plane more or less, are going to “scatter?”
Get Off My Lawn you big gas bag!
The term “giant planet” is deceptive. The outer four planets are mostly gas and liquid or ice, possibly over a much small solid core. But they can likely only maintain this size while in orbit around the Sun.
Thrown out of the solar system, any number of things might happen to them that would diminish their size, leaving them looking much like a gigantic comet.
I find it comical that so called educated people actually believe that an explosion resulted in the complex, precise mechanical workings of our solarsystem. It is very difficult to put satellites in orbit, yet we are expected to believe the moons and planets achieved their orbit accidentally. LOL.
this is hughes and series...
It might have been ejected billions of years ago, but with your modest contribution today, together, we can all bring it back and be happy together once again.
My Solar Kumbaya. ;-)
Yeah, that is hilarious.
If you truly believe the solar system operates on a precise mechanical basis you need to read and study it more. The solar system and the galaxies are much more like chaos than anything else. They just happen to be operating on a time and distance scale that makes it hard to personally experience on a human lifetime scale. Andromeda and the Milky Way galaxy are presently in the process of an uncontrolled collision, our sun is a billion years away from a hiccup that will likely destroy earth and about four billion years away from it’s red giant phase. The universe is anything but precisely mechanical.
The ejected planet was the first known victim of political correctness. He made some crude jokes about Uranus and was ejected for homophobia.
And then we see them on "Behind the Music" after they're all washed up....talking about how they had it all, were the biggest planet, etc...
I hear that the Sun still cries about it late at night.
It would be impossible to prove, since our lost giant is probably light years away by now. However, if this sort of thing is common, we might be able to detect someone else’s wandering giant. The empty reaches of space might not be so empty
Well, which is it? Did it or may it have?
Also, expert chess players seldom sacrifice pieces to protect the queen. They sacrifice pieces to mate the opponent's KING. (I hate when journalist step outside their strength to use analogies in systems they know little about.)
Nearly infinite quantities of massive objects of various masses traveling at various velocities will automatically form their own orbits. Most of the objects will collide or miss but some will interact just right and begin to orbit. When colliding, some objects will bounce, some will fuse, some will break apart into hundreds of smaller objects. After nearly infinite lengths of time, they will form semi-stable systems. Some will even implode to become nuclear fireballs. This nuclear energy adds another twist to the equation.
The satellite orbits you refer to are considered difficult because we place one single object in a single deliberate orbit. The system must be calculated exactly and we dont have nearly infinite attempts at achieving the result. The universe does. The natural system you see around us can be the result of a one in octillion occurrence. We only see the one seemingly perfect result here on earth, not the 10^27 failures scattered throughout the near infinite universe.
The earth is an ideal mass/velocity (aka orbit) and has just the right composition for carbon-based life. The iron core rotates in such a way to create a magnetic shield from solar wind. As a result, nearly every square inch is covered with life. Every single life form on this planet uses the same basic mechanism from bacteria to humans. This mechanism could have easily began with a single random occurrence after hundreds of millions of years of failure. Again, we only see this good, seemingly miraculous result because it DID happen here. On a nearly infinite number of planets, it did not happen because the combination is so unlikely. Nobody is there to discuss it.
It is difficult to believe this could all be random because all of human history and every single thing man has ever done is nothing compared to the scale of the universe. It is barely one water atom in the universes ocean. Even the Earths history is barely comprehensible. Octillions of invisible chemical reactions over hundreds of millions of years are incomprehensible to humans.
Will proof that our creation is completely random cheapen life or make humans less special? NO It would mean we are the self-realization, or brain, of the universe. I find that far more incredible and special than if we did prove an intelligent, deliberate creator.
“This mechanism could have easily began with a single random occurrence after hundreds of millions of years of failure.”
That number has been calculated. It’s odds on the order of a dozen monkeys on typewriters banging out a Shakespearean Sonnet.
We aren’t without proof of an intelligent creator. For some, that burden is higher for them than it is for others. It’s why we call it faith.
We have absolutely no evidence, for example, of cross species evolution. This would tend to mitigate against the idea we evolved from protozoa.
There’s a lot of evidence that tends to support that E.T. may live, and that the most likely mode of transport is interdimensional. We can’t conceive of how this would work at the moment, but I think it tends to support an intelligent creation, or the lack of a ‘singularity’ creating mass and energy where there was none previously.
The ‘Great Gesundheit’.
Gas giants credited for solar system formationJupiter and Saturn form the basis of a "grand unified theory" of the solar system, according to new computer simulations. The research traces three seemingly unrelated phenomena -- the giant planets' orbits, craters on the Moon, and the behaviour of certain asteroids -- to the motions of the two gas giants nearly four billion years ago... an international team of researchers has performed computer simulations that reproduce the orbits of the four giant planets -- Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune -- in exquisite detail. The team has published a trio of papers about their findings in Nature. In the model, the four planets form in 10 million years within the current orbit of Uranus. Surrounding them in a ring are several thousand rocky objects called planetesimals, left over from the formation of the planets... planetesimals begin to "leak" into the giant planet zone and the orbits of the giant planets gradually change. After 700 million years, Saturn has migrated outward and Jupiter inward to the extent that they reach a "resonance" point. This means they begin to march in lockstep with each other, with Jupiter completing two orbits around the Sun for every one of Saturn's. The resonance allows the pair to greatly disturb the orbits of the other planets.
by Maggie McKee
25 May 2005Did Jupiter Bully Other Planets in Sibling Rivalry?One possible explanation, discussed in Thursday's issue of the journal Nature, is that Uranus and Neptune formed much closer to the center of the action than their current positions might indicate. In this scheme, Jupiter and Saturn were bullies of a protoplanetary playground, shoving the other two future giants out of the way.
by Robert Roy Britt
8 December 1999Jupiter gave birth to Uranus and NeptuneNot too long ago, scientists regarded the orbits that the planets circle our Sun as being the ones they were born in. Now they are realising that this is not the case. Uranus and Neptune may have migrated outwards and Jupiter may have come in from the outer cold. Scientists have always been slightly puzzled by the positions of Uranus and Neptune because in their present locations it would have taken longer than the age of the Solar System for them to form. Scientists from Queen's University suggest that the four giant planets started out as rocky cores in the Jupiter-Saturn region, and that the cores of Uranus and Neptune were tossed out by Jupiter's and Saturn's gravity.
by Dr David Whitehouse
8 December, 1999Jupiter's Composition Throws Planet-formation Theories into DisarrayExamining four-year-old data, researchers have found significantly elevated levels of argon, krypton and xenon in Jupiter's atmosphere that may force a rethinking of theories about how the planet, and possibly the entire solar system, formed. Prevailing theories of planetary formation hold that the sun gathered itself together in the center of a pancake-shaped disk of gas and dust, then the planets begin to take shape by cleaning up the leftovers. In Jupiter's current orbit, 5 astronomical units from the sun, temperatures are too warm for the planetesimals to have trapped the noble gases. Only in the Kuiper belt -- a frigid region of the solar system more than 40 AU from the sun -- could planetesimals have trapped argon, krypton and xenon.
by Robert Roy Britt
Nov 17 1999
While lead researcher Tobias Owen does not put much stock in the idea that Jupiter might have migrated inward to its present position, other scientists on the team say the idea merits consideration. Owen expects the probes will find similarly high levels of noble gases in Saturn, Uranus and Neptune. Hints of these gases have even been found in the thick atmosphere of Venus, another planet now begging more study.Have Jupiter's smallest moons been obliterated?The Long Range Reconnaissance Imager (LORRI) camera on New Horizons should have been able to spot moons down to a diameter of about 1 kilometre. But it saw nothing smaller than Adrastea, a 16-kilometre-wide resident of Jupiter's faint ring system (see image at right). This is puzzling, because scientists expected the number of objects to increase at smaller size scales, as they do in the rings of Saturn. The missing moons may have been eroded away by micrometeoroids, say researchers led by Mark Showalter of the SETI Institute in Mountainview, California, US. A steady rain of small objects -- probably between the sizes of a grain of sand and a pebble -- would destroy small moons while leaving larger ones mostly intact, they say. For example, a 27-kilometre-wide moon could survive having its outer 5 km worn away over time, whereas an object just 5 km across would be eroded away to nothing in the same time period... But why did this process spare Saturn's small moons? Showalter thinks the answer has to do with the fact that Saturn is simply less massive than Jupiter.
by David Shiga
October 9, 2007
...the solar system may have given up a giant planet and spared the Earth, according to an article recently published in The Astrophysical Journal Letters.Deus ex machina. I'm getting a "Connection Refused!" error, must be very busy on FR, or there's a cyberattack going on.
Rogue Planet Find Makes Astronomers Ponder TheoryEighteen rogue planets that seem to have broken all the rules about being born from a central, controlling sun may force a rethink about how planets form, astronomers said on Thursday... "The formation of young, free-floating, planetary-mass objects like these is difficult to explain by our current models of how planets form," Zapatero-Osorio said... They are not linked to one another in an orbit, but do move together as a cluster, she said... Many stars in our own galaxy, the Milky Way, may have formed in a similar manner to the Orion stars, she said. So there could be similar, hard-to-see planets floating around free near the Solar System.
by Maggie Fox
October 5, 2000
|· join · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post new topic · subscribe ·|
|Google news searches: exoplanet · exosolar · extrasolar ·|
Is this the one that is causing perturbances in the Oort Cloud?
Nope, it’s out, gone, sayonara. “Fossil” disturbances might remain though, assuming that the Oort Cloud exists.
What ever happened to the conjecture that the asteroid belt was caused from the disintegration of a planet between Mars and Jupiter? Also, how big would such a planet have been? Might it have been damaged when the 5th giant planet was ejected, or could it have been that 5th planet?
I think there was a recent post by SC about complex organic molecules being found in space. I just checked the book Comet by Carl Sagan and Ann Druyan. There are a number of pages speculating on the origin of life on earth. Basic components may have been produced on earth, or may have been introduced by comets and even asteroids, or a combination of causes. Also interplanetary dust from comets falls on earth. Components found in comets include simple hydrocarbons, methane, ethane, methyl alcohol, hydrogen cyanide, and formaldehyde. Comets made a major contribution of water to our earth as well.
I am not clear what you mean by cross species evolution, but the book “The Ancestor’s Tale” lays out the divergence of new life forms in a very understandable, sequential manner, going all the way back to the most primative preCambrian single cell organisms. Incidentally, the first cells had no nucleus, then a nucleus but no mitochondria, and finally a cell with mitochonria. Then the cells needed to “learn” to stick together and form more complex life.
I agree. This is why the Big Bang and abiogenesis require much more faith than belief in the God of the Bible. Both are religious beliefs, and neither can be proven conclusively. We each must weigh the evidence and place our faith in what it most worthy, in our estimation.
It is practically impossible to prove anything in physics 100% conclusively. But there are theories of varying certainty based on quantifiable observations and experiments.
For example, there is a good deal of observable evidence of a “Big Bang”. Direction, velocity, and acceleration of galaxies can be determined. It paints a picture of a high energy event originating from one point with the relative intensity of an explosion. What exactly was that event and what caused it? We may never know since it was way before our time.
There is also observable evidence that the universe is like an energy pendulum, eventually imploding into a single black hole or many black holes. At each galaxy, there is a giant super black hole at the center. Perhaps there is a critical point where the energy absorbed by the black hole is once again released as mass to implode and create yet another universe. That can only be studied on paper for now.
But as far as an intelligent, deliberate Deity goes? We don't have a single piece of observable evidence or any experiments that show this possibility. It's not that most people in the scientific community don't want to admit God exists. There just has to be at least something tangible to point in that direction. A book written by man with no extraterrestrial qualities is not scientific evidence. Perhaps such a book did exist but there is nothing tangible that says it ever did.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.