10th Planet

[Jonathan]

I found three pictures of the newly discovered planet, taken 90 minutes apart. I made it into an animation, maybe you guys would like to see it. Until the IAU approves a better name, it is called 2003 UB313.

[ken_behrendt]

Very interesting...

I think I recall that someone came up with an unofficial name for it. It was something like "Sidra" or "Sidhartra"...wish I could recall it, but it was supposed to be the name of Hindu goddess.

Wouldn't it be cool if this 10th "planet" turns out to be something other than just a giant snowball? Like maybe its a giant alien space station which was purposely placed about three times the distance from the Sun as Pluto (and 9 billion miles away from Earth!) so that we would not discover it until we were "ready" for contact!

It that hypothesis does prove to be the case, then maybe all of those UFOs that have been sighted in Earth's atmosphere over the centuries were making a stop off at the space base for refueling and some R&R for their crews before investigating our Solar System and then getting on their way to other star systems. Maybe this 10th planet is a kind of "Deep Space 9" in reality!

Anyway, I wish we had some nice clear close up images of the this new "planet"...

ken

[ME]

Let's call it Sedna

[Jonathan]

We can't call it Sedna, the website you posted shows that something else is already called that! I suspect you think this is the same thing, but it's not. In order of probable size, recently discovered objects are 2003 UB313, 2005 FY9, 2003 EL61 (and its moon), Sedna, Orcus, and Quaoar.

[ME]

You're right...
Let's call it Xena?

[ken_behrendt]

I just saw another short news story on tv about this new "planet" that's been discovered.

Apparently, it is only about 1500 miles in diameter. The problem is that they are now saying that there are about 70,000 objects (!) out there at about the same distance which is about 3 times the radius of Pluto's orbit. Most of them are only a few miles across, but there could be dozens in the 100 to 1500 mile length/diameter range.

To tell you the truth, if all these new "planets" are just chunks/balls of ice that eventually become comets, then I think we should stop referring to them as "planets" and limit the "official" number of planets in our Solar System to just nine. I think that will make it easier for everybody in the long run.

ken

[jim_mich]

Something about the info of the new planet size is wrong?

According to http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/0 ... lanet.html

The new object, temporarily named 2003 UB313, is about three times as far from the Sun as is Pluto.

"It's definitely bigger than Pluto," said Brown, a professor of planetary astronomy. The object is round and could be up to twice as large as Pluto, Brown told reporters in a hastily called NASA-run teleconference Friday evening.

His best estimate is that it is 2,100 miles wide, about 1-1/2 times the diameter of Pluto.

According to my somewhat out of date 1982 edition of CRC handbook of Chemistry and Physics our ninth planet (Pluto) is 11,400 km +/- 826 km (7,084 mi +/- 513 mi) diameter. Either Pluto has shrunk during the last 23 years or the size of Pluto has been revised or the above article has serious errors.

I did a little research and found that a correct size for Pluto was not known until more recently. It's (revised) diameter is 2390 km (1485 mi) according to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pluto_(planet) so I guess Pluto has been on a 20 year long diet. :)

So, boys and girls, don't believe all that you are taught in school. They might be teaching you erroneous facts, which you will then need to unlearn.

[Jonathan]

EDIT Jim squeezed in before me.
I don't think so, the news media haven't been able to get it straight, they think 2003 UB313 and 2003 EL61 are the same thing. The method the astronomers used to determine the size isn't perfect, but it has unequivically put a lower limit on the size and it is bigger than Pluto. Also, this new planet has an orbit so eccentric that it comes within a few AU of Pluto's orbit, it just happens to be at 3x that now. I say that it should count as a planet; and to end that debate, we should just call any object equal to or bigger than Pluto a planet.
PS They've determined that 2003 UB313 has a very similar chemical make-up to Pluto, so it probably isn't a space station.

[ken_behrendt]

Gee...I'm glad I didn't go to the trouble of memorizing the diameter of Pluto 23 years ago!

I think there's still the possibility that these "planets" could be artificial in nature and alien space bases of some sort. Possibly, after construction, the exteriors are coated with something that will produce images for passing probes that give the impression that the surfaces are covered with ice or frozen ammonia or other gases.

The only way to definitely eliminate the possibility of an artificial origin would be to see if it was possible to send space probes to these "planets" and insert them into stable orbits about them. If they are truly solid objects with planetary scale masses, then probes would be able to orbit them with a certain characteristic orbital velocity. If, on the other hand, they are mostly hollow, artificial structures with far less than planetary mass, then such an orbit would not be possible for a probe and it would only be able to orbit at a very low velocity.

ken