7 ms·
Extremely cool that they were able to predict when to look for additional, undetected planets and then actually find them. Also, despite being a huge nerd for
by digging 3y ago
Extremely cool that they were able to predict when to look for additional, undetected planets and then actually find them.
Also, despite being a huge nerd for astronomical scales, I'm still easily shocked at them. I didn't expect a system to exist with six (!) larger-than-Earth planets in stable sub-Mercury orbits around a sun-like star. My mind tells me there's not enough space, that they should be ripped apart by each other or the star. Yet it's actually one of the most peaceful, gentle systems we've ever found.
- vikingerik 3y agoJupiter has four stable resonant satellites on the order of 1% of Earth's mass within an orbital radius of 1% of Earth's orbit. It's plausible by that example.
- digging 3y ago[flagged]
- vikingerik 3y agoI meant the Galileans. I'm going to ignore the accusatory tone and not debate further.
- digging 3y agoI'm only further confused. I literally don't have any idea if the system you're describing is similar to the one in the article without looking up the data and doing the math. You claimed they're similar, so I figured you had done the math, and I wanted you to show me so I could believe you. If you take that as offensive, after making a technical comment, I don't know what the point of this conversation is.
- ant6n 3y agoOmg this is tedious
- digging 3y ago[flagged]
- unethical_ban 3y agoIn case this isn't a troll, let it be known that a detailed, sources-cited comment in a friendly thread isn't expected. It's one thing to ask "hey, what satellites are you talking about, I'm unaware", vs. the tone of expectation and admonishment presented.
- digging 3y agoI guess I messed up in thinking that the comment was a response to my mention of the tiny orbits of these planets then. Because if it was, it was not a good response, since I still don't even know if the system mentioned is in actually similar to the one in TFA. So I guess it was just an offhand comment about something unrelated and I should have ignored it.
- ramblenode 3y agoThe parent isn't trying to prove this to you like an argument in a debate. They are providing you with a potential direction for further research in case you are interested in learning more.
- tessierashpool 3y agothis is an inappropriate response
- digging 3y agoIn what way?
- xen2xen1 3y agoYour being a jerk, demanding technical answers from someone making a off the cuff comment? "I assumed you did the math" is rude and inflammatory.
- digging 3y ago> demanding technical answers from someone making a off the cuff comment It's a technical discussion. Asking for proof of a technical claim that confused me is correct, not rude.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- some_furry 3y ago> It's a technical discussion. Who decided that? When was this negotiated? Reread your comments and ask yourself these questions.
- digging 3y ago> Who decided that? When was this negotiated? I did, when I began by discussing technical aspects of an article about astronomy? I wish I could edit my first reply for better tone because it was difficult to write, but we're not allowed to edit comments here so the misunderstandings continue.
- 3y ago
- javajosh 3y agoNot an expert, but the wikipedia article on orbital resonance[0] mentions Laplace's discovery of a 3 body resonance, Io–Europa–Ganymede. They are indeed OOM 1% of Earth's mass (Ganymede being 2.5% for example[1]). 0 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbital_resonance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orbital_resonance 1 - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ganymede_(moon) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ganymede_(moon)
- BurningFrog 3y agoI think the proximity is what caused the orbit resonances. So your intuition that they should affect each other is correct, but the end result less catastrophic. Of course, we don't know how many sibling planets crashed into their sun earlier...
- digging 3y ago> Of course, we don't know how many sibling planets crashed into their sun earlier... My understanding is that it would be 0. A planet can't fall into its sun without being disturbed, because the planets and their sun all coalesce from the same rotating disc of material. If any planet had been disturbed enough to slow down and crash into the sun, it's hard to imagine that happening without the slightest disturbance to the 6 extant planets.
- stouset 3y agoMain belt asteroids and comets are perturbed out of their orbits all the time. Why would planets be meaningfully different?
- digging 3y agoBecause there's evidence that they weren't.
- djbusby 3y agoCould have been 7 or 9 wonky planets, then some fell into their sun and maybe one flew off or was torn apart then these remaining six wiggled around a bit from all that into resonance. Space has, like, infinite possibilities.
- digging 3y agoCould be, but I don't think it's likely, which is why the article states that these planets have probably all been in their orbits since formation.
- 3y ago
- leptons 3y ago> Yet it's actually one of the most peaceful, gentle systems we've ever found You shouldn't assume that. With so much synchronicity I have to wonder if it creates any forces that would result in things like wildly high tides if a planet had any water on it, or increased quakes or some other phenomena caused by the alignments. It could be far from peaceful.
- digging 3y agoIt's not an assumption - I meant gentle on a solar-system scale. You're right that the surface of the planets could be chaotic, but it sounded like they had massive atmospheres and potentially small rocky cores.
- leptons 3y agoI mean, "peaceful" and "gentle" are kind of an anthropomorphism of sorts. I'm not even sure what "gentle on a solar-system scale" is supposed to mean.
- pedrosbmartins 3y agoShameless plug, but if you're into astronomical scales you might like this little visualization tool I've built recently! https://github.com/pedrosbmartins/downtoearth https://github.com/pedrosbmartins/downtoearth
- user3939382 3y agoThis is an awesome project, really great work. Also, how dare you omit Pluto!
- pedrosbmartins 3y agoThank you! And you can change visualizations in the dropdown, there is a special one for Pluto's eccentric orbit :)
- moring 3y agoI found this to be the best visualization for me: https://omgspace.net https://omgspace.net
- PawgerZ 3y agoMan there's some amazing graphics on there. Just 5 minutes into exploring it, and everything is laid out so beautifully.
- ana_winters 3y ago[dead]