Two planets found sharing one orbit!

I just stumbled across this and thought that this was worthy of discusion. I am continually amazed with what Kepler is discovering.

Buried in the flood of data from the Kepler telescope is a planetary system unlike any seen before. Two of its apparent planets share the same orbit around their star. If the discovery is confirmed, it would bolster a theory that Earth once shared its orbit with a Mars-sized body that later crashed into it, resulting in the moon's formation.

link:www.newscientist.com...

This could shead light on Earth's early life in our solar system.

Fantastic find! It never ceases to amaze me what we are finding almost daily in the heavens these days.

reply to post by TheHistorian


I wish I could contribute some meaningful reply to this thread but I can't...

However, I can tell you that you have won a Star and a Flag from the Wide-Eyes. I have come to be a little tight with my SF contributions but you my friend, have tickled my pickle!

wow imagine having 3 earths in synchronous orbit? just a hop and a skip to a whole other world!

you could designate one for republicans one for democrats and one for libertarians!!! jk!

or one for mining one for processing and one for living!

or all three in perfect balance... would be so awesome to look up and see a sister planet so close constantly...

nice find S&F for you, we are seeing more and more of the unseen and unknown, in the space around us, what was once thought to be just a thought, is now becoming fact. what more, awaits us?

Originally posted by prevenge
would be so awesome to look up and see a sister planet so close constantly...

we do, the moon! jk.
it would be fantastic to travel to other / sister planets. talk about consciousness.

What happen to Occam's Razor?

Why do they think that a secondary body "shared" orbit with the Earth, than it eventually crashed Into Earth? Which caused the Moon to form in outer space 250k miles away from Earth?

Seems a lot simpler to just say that Earth captured that body (which could have been just merely passing through).

There are several theories about the Moon's formation, and I think many of them have good and bad points.
Link for info
Moon formation wiki

Essentially we have various versions of the "Impact Hypothesis".
Also, scroll down on link2 and check out the section on "Alternate Hypothesis".

Oh and just to be fair, many religious folk (of many types of Faiths) believe that "God created it" already separate from the Earth. Most of us may scoff at such asinine theories as these, but we have No Proof either way.

So it is only logical to include the religious communities theories because without hard evidence of what really happened, we honestly don't have a clue. There is a slight 1% or less chance that the religious theories could be true. So it's worth considering.

My personal preferences would be the Asteroid impact hypothesis to explain Moon formation.
I don't really like the shared orbit version of the impact hypothesis. It just is very problematic. (It could be true though, we honestly don't know).

Originally posted by zooplancton

Originally posted by prevenge
would be so awesome to look up and see a sister planet so close constantly...

we do, the moon! jk.
it would be fantastic to travel to other / sister planets. talk about consciousness.

Just imagine what it's like to look into the sky from the surface of Saturn or one of it's moons?

Huge rings filling the sky, and countless moons to look at. Ahhh it would be so awesome!!

Do some random Google's of "view from saturn" or "view from saturn's moon", or other variations of those key terms. Then click the "Images" tab.

There are some very high quality artworks created depicting these types of "out of this world" ideas. Ton's of amazing paintings/drawings/renderings.

I thought the moon is made of different elemental compounds than earth and this was the reason that the moon is no longer thought to have originated this way. The mechanics of such a shift in orbit (the moon) are also thought to be near impossible.

Originally posted by prevenge
wow imagine having 3 earths in synchronous orbit? just a hop and a skip to a whole other world!

you could designate one for republicans one for democrats and one for libertarians!!! jk!

or one for mining one for processing and one for living!

or all three in perfect balance... would be so awesome to look up and see a sister planet so close constantly...

Nah, the Geminons would hate the Capricans and the Capricans would hate tha Taurons and then someone would invent a robot and stick his dead daughters memories into it and it would become alive, spawning a religious war between the polytheists and the monotheists but ultimately ending with a cancellation so we never really know the outcome.

So say we all..

Forgetting the Arians and Cancerians, man.

I really do hope this turns out to be real though.

Originally posted by Bee2010
I thought the moon is made of different elemental compounds than earth and this was the reason that the moon is no longer thought to have originated this way. The mechanics of such a shift in orbit (the moon) are also thought to be near impossible.

Here is an article to get you going.
UniverseToday- Moon Composition

The composition of the Moon is a bit of a mystery. Although we know a lot about what the surface of the Moon is made of, scientists can only guess at what the internal composition of the Moon is. Here’s what we think the Moon is made of.

So we really only know about 1% of the Moon's composition. And the rest is merely hypothesis and guesstimates based on various evidences or conjectures.

Scientists think that the lunar core is made of metallic iron, with small amounts of sulfur and nickel.

Keyword here is "Think", which means we don't "know" yet.

Scientists believe that the mantle of the Moon is largely composed of the minerals olivine, orthopyroxene and clinopyroxene. It’s also believed to be more iron-rich than the Earth’s mantle.

Keyword here is "believed", again we really don't know for absolute sure yet.

The outermost layer of the Moon is called the crust, which extends down to a depth of 50 km. This is the layer of the Moon that scientists have gathered the most information about. The crust of the Moon is composed mostly of oxygen, silicon, magnesium, iron, calcium, and aluminum. There are also trace elements like titanium, uranium, thorium, potassium and hydrogen.

Ahh finally some solid info to work with. We do actually know about some aspects of the top layer. We have taken many samples and examined them very closely.

I have personally seen Moon rocks on display in various locations throughout my life. If they are indeed the real deal, than I would have to say we have a very good idea of what the top layer of the Moon is, based on empirical evidence collected through first-hand investigations.

But discussions on anything else are typically based on theory and assumption. Without evidence, we honestly do not know.

Also another article I found on the subject from the Washington Post.
NASA Mission's findings

Moon Wiki
Discovery Channel- What's the Moon made of?

I think the moon is a remnant of Mercury.

Just my own opinion, of course.

Originally posted by Atlantican
I think the moon is a remnant of Mercury.

Just my own opinion, of course.

You just had to do that didn't you?

Here's a curve ball for you...

How do you know that Mercury isn't a remnant of the Moon?

Originally posted by TheHistorian
I just stumbled across this and thought that this was worthy of discusion. I am continually amazed with what Kepler is discovering.

Buried in the flood of data from the Kepler telescope is a planetary system unlike any seen before. Two of its apparent planets share the same orbit around their star. If the discovery is confirmed, it would bolster a theory that Earth once shared its orbit with a Mars-sized body that later crashed into it, resulting in the moon's formation.

link:www.newscientist.com...

This could shead light on Earth's early life in our solar system.

edit on 2/24/2011 by TheHistorian because: (no reason given)

edit on 2/24/2011 by TheHistorian because: (no reason given)

I gave you a star for your awesome reinterpretation of the word shed

reply to post by muzzleflash


Mercury is a lot smaller than our moon and could be the left over core. I call the moon a remnant of Mercury as the planets tend to be given priority over moons. Either way I think there's a story that will unwind about this possibility on the current Mercury mission. Tehe!

Originally posted by muzzleflash

Originally posted by Atlantican
I think the moon is a remnant of Mercury.

Just my own opinion, of course.

You just had to do that didn't you?

Here's a curve ball for you...

How do you know that Mercury isn't a remnant of the Moon?

Lmao Muzz, are you turning to the dark side with us?

Thats a great reply!!

Or do you know more than we do... Oo

Originally posted by Atlantican
reply to post by muzzleflash

 

Mercury is a lot smaller than our moon and could be the left over core. I call the moon a remnant of Mercury as the planets tend to be given priority over moons. Either way I think there's a story that will unwind about this possibility on the current Mercury mission. Tehe!

My mercury goes up around here...

I need uranus to cool my mercury. Where can I stick it? OO

lol j/k

no I'm just being jovial.. I shall say

giggidy

This topic was covered in a classic SciFi film from the late 60s by Gerry Anderson, the creator of Thunderbirds, Stingray and Space 1999. The film was titled "Journey to the far side of the sun". A little dated now but still well worth watching.

Waiting for the nasty space porn, "Two Planets, One Orbit"