A Second Earth-like Planet may exist in the distant Kuiper-Belt scientists say

Source:
www.forbes.com...

There may be an undiscovered planet in the outer solar system whose presence is revealed by the strange orbit of objects beyond the eighth planet Neptune.

The tantalizing prospect of a ninth planet is suggested by a paper published in The Astronomical Journal, which explores the orbit of objects in the distant Kuiper Belt.

The Kuiper Belt (also called the Edgeworth-Kuiper Belt) is a disc-shaped region beyond the orbit of Neptune’s in the outer solar system—50 Earth-sun distances—that’s home to dwarf planets like Pluto, Makemake and Eris. It’s also thought to be populated by comets and some odd objects that astronomers call Trans-Neptunian Objects.

You can find the published paper on this site:
iopscience.iop.org...

Title: Is There an Earth-like Planet in the Distant Kuiper-Belt?

Authors: Patryk Sofia Lykawka and Takashi Ito
Published: 25th August 2023


Abstract

The orbits of trans-Neptunian objects (TNOs) can indicate the existence of an undiscovered planet in the outer solar system. Here we used N-body computer simulations to investigate the effects of a hypothetical Kuiper Belt planet (KBP) on the orbital structure of TNOs in the distant Kuiper Belt beyond ∼50 au. We used observations to constrain model results, including the well-characterized Outer Solar System Origins Survey (OSSOS). We determined that an Earth-like planet (m ∼ 1.5–3 M⊕) located on a distant (semimajor axis a ∼ 250–500 au, perihelion q ∼ 200 au) and inclined (i ∼ 30°) orbit can explain three fundamental properties of the distant Kuiper Belt: a prominent population of TNOs with orbits beyond Neptune's gravitational influence (i.e., detached objects with q > 40 au), a significant population of high-i objects (i > 45°), and the existence of some extreme objects with peculiar orbits (e.g., Sedna). Furthermore, the proposed KBP is compatible with the existence of identified gigayear-stable TNOs in the 2:1, 5:2, 3:1, 4:1, 5:1, and 6:1 Neptunian mean motion resonances. These stable populations are often neglected in other studies. We predict the existence of an Earth-like planet and several TNOs on peculiar orbits in the outer solar system, which can serve as observationally testable signatures of the putative planet's perturbations.

The Earth-like planet (if it exists) has an estimated mass between 1.5 and 3 Earth masses and is located anywhere between 250 and 500 astronomical units from the sun.

It's evident from what the two scientists say that the existence of another planet can explain three properties of the distant Kuiper-Belt


1) A population of trans-neptunian objects, commonly known as TNOs, which are located in orbits beyond Neptune's gravitational influence.

These are nothing more than dwarf or minor planets such as Pluto, Eris, Haumea, Makemake and many other with distances greater than 30 Astronomical Units from the Sun.

There are more than 3,000 of these TNOs in our Solar System.


2) A significant population of high inclination objects with i > 45°

The term orbital inclination refers to the tilt of the orbits around a celestial objects. In this case the reference frame is the ecliptic orbit of the earth around the run and by definition the orbital inclination of our planet is zero.

Eris for example has an orbital inclination of 44°


3) Highly peculiar objects like Sedna.

This is a dwarf planet with very high eccentricity and record breaking perihelion.

pubs.aip.org...

a reply to: Venkuish1

There cannot possibly be an Earth like planet in the Kuiper belt. Not enough heat there for an oxygen/nitrogen atmosphere much less liquid water. If it had its own star for the heat, we would see it, even if it were a red dworf.

They got the story wrong. I think they are referring to a rockey planet and not just a gaseous planet like Neptune or Jupiter.

News organisations are famous for getting the details wrong.

originally posted by: BeyondKnowledge3
a reply to: Venkuish1

There cannot possibly be an Earth like planet in the Kuiper belt. Not enough heat there for an oxygen/nitrogen atmosphere much less liquid water. If it had its own star for the heat, we would see it, even if it were a red dworf.

They got the story wrong. I think they are referring to a rockey planet and not just a gaseous planet like Neptune or Jupiter.

News organisations are famous for getting the details wrong.

I have linked the published paper and the claim id that there is an earth like planet between 250-500 AU from the sun.

They are referring to a rockey planet and this is different to what the scientists proposed not that long ago which was the presence of a large gas giant planet in the outer regions of our solar system.

This is part of the Abstract from the paper

We determined that an Earth-like planet (m ∼ 1.5–3 M⊕) located on a distant (semimajor axis a ∼ 250–500 au, perihelion q ∼ 200 au) and inclined (i ∼ 30°) orbit can explain three fundamental properties of the distant Kuiper Belt: a prominent population of TNOs with orbits beyond Neptune's gravitational influence (i.e., detached objects with q > 40 au), a significant population of high-i objects (i > 45°), and the existence of some extreme objects with peculiar orbits (e.g., Sedna).

Then why have we not seen it? We know of planets in galaxies hundreds of light years away and havent seen a planet in our own solar system? Not really buying it.

originally posted by: Phatal
Then why have we not seen it? We know of planets in galaxies hundreds of light years away and havent seen a planet in our own solar system? Not really buying it.

That's a good question but I think telescopes have picked up signs of potential candidates. Now it could be that there objects are TNOs (trans Neptunian objects) and not the Earth-like planet we are discussing. Astronomers are looking at this and we will have some results in the next few months.

If this planet exists it could that it's too cold to have any heat signature and too dark that can't reflect light (being so far away and with so small mass). Some guessing here.

originally posted by: Phatal
Then why have we not seen it? We know of planets in galaxies hundreds of light years away and havent seen a planet in our own solar system? Not really buying it.

This is why I have never been able to take the claims of Nibiru/planet X seriously.

originally posted by: Steinermath333

originally posted by: Phatal
Then why have we not seen it? We know of planets in galaxies hundreds of light years away and havent seen a planet in our own solar system? Not really buying it.

This is why I have never been able to take the claims of Nibiru/planet X seriously.

The scientific paper produced by the two scientists has nothing to do with speculation about the planetX or planet Nibiru. Based on certain facts the scientists have argued there could be a ninth planet and this is a valid hypothesis.

Our Solar System contains thousands of objects and there are over 3,000 TNOs (trans-neptunian objects) in the Kuiper-Belt which includes many dwarf planets/planetoids and asteroids or even comets. Something we didn't know 50-60 years ago just like we didn't know much about exoplanets back in the 60s and 70s.

It's not impossible there could be another planet in the distant Kuiper-Belt and all we need to do is wait for more data which will show if it exists or not.

The Nibiru/PlanetX 'theories' have nothing to do with astronomy.

We can NOT even get to are Moon!

a reply to: Scratchpost

Six missions landed human crews on the Moon.

Beginning with Apollo 11 in July 1969.

If you choose not to accept the facts, that's up to you.

a reply to: Phatal

We can detect exoplanets within our own galaxy using various indirect methods, but we don't directly observe or see them in the conventional sense.

As far as I'm aware detecting planets in galaxies thousands or millions of light-years away remains beyond our current technological capabilities.

For comparison, the closest galaxy to our own is Andromeda which is about 2.537 million light-years away from Earth which is an enormous distance.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Phatal

We can detect exoplanets within our own galaxy using various indirect methods, but we don't directly observe or see them in the conventional sense.

As far as I'm aware detecting planets in galaxies thousands or millions of light-years away remains beyond our current technological capabilities.

For comparison, the closest galaxy to our own is Andromeda which is about 2.537 million light-years away from Earth which is an enormous distance.

That's what I have tried to say in my posts but somehow the other poster confused a valid scientific hypothesis with conspiracy theories about Nibiru arguing we can see exoplanets directly when in reality that's not true. The telescopes we have cannot see exoplanets directly and the only exoplanets we have discovered so far are from out own galaxy with the possible exception of a few candidates outside the Milky Way.

originally posted by: Phatal
Then why have we not seen it? We know of planets in galaxies hundreds of light years away and havent seen a planet in our own solar system? Not really buying it.

I need to comment on the 6 stars you got until now. You may get more later on but a quick search on the internet without the need of having exceptional wisdom and knowledge will reveal the following (although in my posts I said we cannot directly see exoplanets even with the most powerful telescopes we have)

www.freethink.com...

Why can’t our current telescopes see exoplanets? While the Hubble and James Webb space telescopes can image distant galaxies and far-off stars, they can’t see exoplanets.

Even though exoplanets can be far closer — the nearest system to Earth, Proxima Centauri, has at least three exoplanets — they are also far smaller. Even if we used the highest resolution camera, the biggest telescope, and the longest exposure, we wouldn’t get a clear image, because our telescopes aren’t large enough to gather enough light to make out even the outline of an exoplanet.

a reply to: Venkuish1

Apparently the detection of exoplanets outside our solar system involves various methods like the transit method, microlensing or the radial velocity/doppler method.

Capturing actual images of exoplanets is challenging because planets are much dimmer than the stars they orbit, and are often drowned out by the glare.

Advancements with telescope technology are indeed beginning to make it more feasible, at least for larger exoplanets, orbiting at a greater distance from their stars.

Directly imaging the likes of Earth-like worlds that reside in the so-called "Goldilocks Zone" is problematic because of the proximity to the star and the fact that the stars tend to obscure the image.

Each of the above methods has its strengths and weaknesses, and often multiple methods are used in combination to confirm the existence of exoplanets.

lco.global...
www.planetary.org...
www.universetoday.com...

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Phatal

We can detect exoplanets within our own galaxy using various indirect methods, but we don't directly observe or see them in the conventional sense.

As far as I'm aware detecting planets in galaxies thousands or millions of light-years away remains beyond our current technological capabilities.

For comparison, the closest galaxy to our own is Andromeda which is about 2.537 million light-years away from Earth which is an enormous distance.

It isn't beyond current tech.

More than 4,800 planets have been discovered orbiting stars other than our sun. But until now, all of them have been inside our Milky Way galaxy. The potential new world orbits two stars in the Whirlpool galaxy. That galaxy is some 28 million light-years from Earth. (That’s more than 250 times as far as the Milky Way is wide.) Astronomers are calling the possible exoplanet M51-ULS-1b.

Planet detection in Whirlpool Galaxy
It isn't yet confirmed, but it probably is there as they have discovered.

If they can now do this focused on a galaxy 28 million light years away, they should have some luck finding planets in Andromeda.

a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

Looks like thats correct but I don't think they have directly imaged worlds around stars in other galaxies NoCorruptionAllowed.

They have implied they exist using a combination of the methods i mentioned.

But our ability to detect planets in other galaxies is currently limited to those indirect methods, like observing the gravitational effects they have on their parent stars.

Technology is advancing just about every month where the likes of the field of astronomy is concerned.

Mainly down to the likes of the James Webb Space Telescope and other ground-based arrays.

At some point in the not-too-distant future, it may be possible to directly image the planets around other stars in distant galaxies, but i don't think we are anywhere close to doing so just yet.

We live in very interesting times, put it that way.

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Phatal

We can detect exoplanets within our own galaxy using various indirect methods, but we don't directly observe or see them in the conventional sense.

As far as I'm aware detecting planets in galaxies thousands or millions of light-years away remains beyond our current technological capabilities.

For comparison, the closest galaxy to our own is Andromeda which is about 2.537 million light-years away from Earth which is an enormous distance.

It isn't beyond current tech.

More than 4,800 planets have been discovered orbiting stars other than our sun. But until now, all of them have been inside our Milky Way galaxy. The potential new world orbits two stars in the Whirlpool galaxy. That galaxy is some 28 million light-years from Earth. (That’s more than 250 times as far as the Milky Way is wide.) Astronomers are calling the possible exoplanet M51-ULS-1b.

Planet detection in Whirlpool Galaxy
It isn't yet confirmed, but it probably is there as they have discovered.

If they can now do this focused on a galaxy 28 million light years away, they should have some luck finding planets in Andromeda.

It's very difficult to detect exoplanets outside our galaxy with the current technology we have. But the important part is we can't see these planets directly with our telescopes as some posters think. It could be difficult to detect a planet in the distant Kuiper-Belt in our solar system that doesn't reflect light and doesn't have any heat signature (being so far away).

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: NoCorruptionAllowed

Looks like thats correct but I don't think they have directly imaged worlds around stars in other galaxies NoCorruptionAllowed.

They have implied they exist using a combination of the methods i mentioned.

But our ability to detect planets in other galaxies is currently limited to those indirect methods, like observing the gravitational effects they have on their parent stars.

Technology is advancing just about every month where the likes of the field of astronomy is concerned.

Mainly down to the likes of the James Webb Space Telescope and other ground-based arrays.

At some point in the not-too-distant future, it may be possible to directly image the planets around other stars in distant galaxies, but i don't think we are anywhere close to doing so just yet.

We live in very interesting times, put it that way.

I don't remember anyone referring to getting an exoplanet in an image was for ones in another galaxy. People were just saying no exoplanet has ever been imaged directly. And someone said no planets in other galaxies had been detected... Anyway, yes very interesting times.

The VLT telescope in Chile imaged this in 2004. Composite image , the first exoplanet actually imaged optically. (It's the red one is the planet.)

First Exoplanet Image
Not a very good or clear image, but it is really an image using more than one image layered using different wavelengths then making the composite image.

I think NASA did another one since then, I'll look further. Have to go shopping right now haha...

For the image above:

This composite image shows an exoplanet (the red spot on the lower left), orbiting the brown dwarf 2M1207 (center). 2M1207 b is the first exoplanet directly imaged and the first discovered orbiting a brown dwarf.

More
Observing Exoplanets: What Can We Really See?
It was imaged for the first time in 2004 by the Very Large Telescope (VLT), operated by the European Southern Observatory in the Atacama Desert of northern Chile. Its planetary identity and characteristics were confirmed after one year of observations in 2005. 2M1207 b is a Jupiter-like planet, 5 times more massive than Jupiter. It orbits the brown dwarf at a distance 55 times larger than the Earth to the Sun, nearly twice as far as Neptune is from the Sun.

The system 2M1207 is 230 light-years from Earth, in the constellation of Hydra. The photo is based on three near-infrared exposures (in the H, K and L wavebands) with the NACO adaptive-optics facility at the 8.2-m VLT Yepun telescope at the ESO Paranal Observator

a reply to: Venkuish1

Some have indeed already been photographed optically.

And yeah, it isn't easy.

Planet detection and imaging them two different things right? A planet was detected in the Whirlpool galaxy, but not imaged.