Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Lonely Rogue Worlds Surprisingly Outnumber Planets with Suns
Space.com ^ | 05/18/2011 | Mike Wall

Posted on 05/18/2011 8:47:19 PM PDT by Redcitizen

Astronomers have discovered a whole new class of alien planet: a vast population of Jupiter-mass worlds that float through space without any discernible host star, a new study finds.

While some of these exoplanets could potentially be orbiting a star from very far away, the majority of them most likely have no parent star at all, scientists say.

And these strange worlds aren't mere statistical anomalies. They likely outnumber "normal" alien planets with obvious parent stars by at least 50 percent, and they're nearly twice as common in our galaxy as main-sequence stars, according to the new study.

Astronomers have long predicted the existence of free-flying "rogue alien planets." But their apparent huge numbers may surprise many researchers, and could force some to rethink how the planets came to be.

(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...


TOPICS: Miscellaneous; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: astronomy; catastrophism; deusexmachina; exploration; immanuelvelikovsky; rogueplanet; rogueplanets; science; space; velikovsky; worldsincollision; xplanets
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 141-149 next last

1 posted on 05/18/2011 8:47:28 PM PDT by Redcitizen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Redcitizen

The more we learn, the more we realize we have to learn. Fascinating.


2 posted on 05/18/2011 8:48:43 PM PDT by ilovesarah2012
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Redcitizen

Try to get the day shift if you live on one of these planets.


3 posted on 05/18/2011 8:50:56 PM PDT by oldbill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ilovesarah2012

I sure wish we could travel to see these things in the Universe. Stars, planets, moons, nebulas. Just out of reach, but I can look at the night sky.


4 posted on 05/18/2011 8:50:58 PM PDT by Redcitizen (In case of economic breakdown, make sure you have a case of Snickers candy bars.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Redcitizen

5 posted on 05/18/2011 8:51:27 PM PDT by Vince Ferrer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Redcitizen

So basically, the idea of a big bang in which worlds spun out, is bogus.


6 posted on 05/18/2011 8:52:30 PM PDT by mylife (OPINIONS ~ $ 1.00 HALFBAKED ~ 50c)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: oldbill

Keep an eye out for little green men.


7 posted on 05/18/2011 8:53:44 PM PDT by Redcitizen (In case of economic breakdown, make sure you have a case of Snickers candy bars.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Vince Ferrer

That’s no moon, it’s a space station.


8 posted on 05/18/2011 8:55:08 PM PDT by Redcitizen (In case of economic breakdown, make sure you have a case of Snickers candy bars.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Redcitizen

I can so relate to them! I’ve no sons either.


9 posted on 05/18/2011 8:55:46 PM PDT by 668 - Neighbor of the Beast (America is in dire distress and nobody is lifting a finger except to strike the keyboard.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mylife

Please clarify how this discovery supports your contention that there was no big bang.


10 posted on 05/18/2011 8:57:07 PM PDT by null and void (We are now in day 846 of our national holiday from reality. - OBL Dead? The TSA can go away!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: 668 - Neighbor of the Beast

hahahaha!!! :D


11 posted on 05/18/2011 9:00:28 PM PDT by Redcitizen (In case of economic breakdown, make sure you have a case of Snickers candy bars.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: ilovesarah2012
Interesting. One would think that after billions of years they would have been captured by the gravity of some great star as they passed by.
12 posted on 05/18/2011 9:02:54 PM PDT by hinckley buzzard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: null and void

If all the celestial bodies spun out of one mass and bang, wouldn’t they all have the same direction of spin?


13 posted on 05/18/2011 9:03:32 PM PDT by mylife (OPINIONS ~ $ 1.00 HALFBAKED ~ 50c)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: hinckley buzzard
One would think that after billions of years they would have been captured by the gravity of some great star as they passed by.

Space is just too big for this to be likely. Even over the course of billions of years, the chance of such a planet wandering close enough to a star to be gravitationally captured is very small.

14 posted on 05/18/2011 9:07:08 PM PDT by Abin Sur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: mylife

“If all the celestial bodies spun out of one mass and bang, wouldn’t they all have the same direction of spin?”

Um, no. Not even the debris of a firecracker exhibits that property...


15 posted on 05/18/2011 9:12:55 PM PDT by piytar (Obama opposed every tool used to get Osama. So of course he gets the credit. /hurl)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: piytar

Ever hear of a catherine wheel?


16 posted on 05/18/2011 9:14:32 PM PDT by mylife (OPINIONS ~ $ 1.00 HALFBAKED ~ 50c)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: piytar

I am not a scientist. I dont even play one on TV.
But there is more to the universes than our math and observation can explain.

That’s just an opinion.


17 posted on 05/18/2011 9:17:39 PM PDT by mylife (OPINIONS ~ $ 1.00 HALFBAKED ~ 50c)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: mylife
If all the celestial bodies spun out of one mass and bang, wouldn’t they all have the same direction of spin?

What you just described has nothing to do with the Big Bang. Here's a boatload of information that may help:

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/astronomy/bigbang.html#theory

A small excerpt:

Giving an accurate description of BBT in common terms is extremely difficult. Like many modern scientific topics, every such attempt will be necessarily vague and unsatisfying as certain details are emphasized and others swept under the rug. To really understand any such theory, one needs to look at the equations that fully describe the theory, and this can be quite challenging. That said, the quotes by Peebles and Kippenhahn should give one an idea of what the theory actually says. In the following few paragraphs, we will elaborate on their basic description.

The simplest description of the theory would be something like: "In the distant past, the universe was very dense and hot; since then it has expanded, becoming less dense and cooler." The word "expanded" should not be taken to mean that matter flies apart -- rather, it refers to the idea that space itself is becoming larger. Common analogies used to describe this phenomenon are the surface of a balloon (with galaxies represented by dots or coins attached to the surface) or baking bread (with galaxies represented by raisins in the expanding dough). Like all analogies, the similarity between the theory and the example is imperfect. In both cases, the model implies that the universe is expanding into some larger, pre-existing volume. In fact, the theory says nothing like that. Instead, the expansion of the universe is completely self-contained. This goes against our common notions of volume and geometry, but it follows from the equations. Further discussion of this question is found in the What is the Universe expanding into? section of Ned Wright's FAQ.

18 posted on 05/18/2011 9:18:24 PM PDT by Abin Sur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Redcitizen; SunkenCiv; KevinDavis

Well, that might just destroy a bunch of accepted theories


19 posted on 05/18/2011 9:19:48 PM PDT by GeronL (The Right to Life came before the Right to Happiness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mylife
Yes, but that is specifically designed to have a given spin from the start. No particular reason any given random explosion would share that designed in property.

An explosion of space has no particular orientation in space.

20 posted on 05/18/2011 9:19:51 PM PDT by null and void (We are now in day 846 of our national holiday from reality. - OBL Dead? The TSA can go away!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 141-149 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson