Astronomers say they've spotted lonesome planet without a sun

reply to post by teamcommander


I'm thinking there is quite a bit of difference between finding something 6 times the size of the largest planet in our solar system and something the size of Rhode Island or smaller.

lucifersghost
...it brings me back to the Urantia Book, even though I no longer have a lot of faith in said book.

I apologize for being off-topic (again), but I'm in the middle of this book. Just curious as to how you became disenchanted in this book.

Note: I would have PM'd you but this site seems to have many limitations.

reply to post by wildespace

If it were a Dyson sphere, it would be a lot more massive than the current estimates, and it would also have to be a Dyson shell.

Fair enough on the mass: a kosher Dyson sphere should contain a star. However, please note that the current estimate of the object's mass is based on its luminosity (in the infrared). Correct me if I'm wrong, but it seems to me they're extrapolating size from luminosity and mass from size. There is no direct calculation of mass from the gravitational perturbation of nearby objects, orbital velocity around a primary of known mass or anything of that kind.

It could be the case that the object is actually far more massive than estimated.

And no, it needn't be a solid shell surrounding a star. A series of overlapping plates in different orbits around the star would obscure its light equally well.

teamcommander
reply to post by SuperFrog

 

Hurray for technolgy!
They can find a planet, which casts no light of it's own, at a distance of 80 light years.
Yet, they have trouble finding a way to find and keep up with the many near-earth objects which could end life on our planet.
You would think someone would develope a simple means of keeping these things in check. It will only take one and ......

The difference in technology in just imaging a dark object in space and actually physically manipulating the path or orbit of an object with any notable mass is staggering!

reply to post by wildespace


Hi again, wildespace. Would you (or anyone else here) be able to calculate the radius of a sphere that would radiate the equivalent energy of a G-type star of 1 sol mass at the frequency at which this object was detected?

I only ask because I'm sure you would do it a lot faster than I... and correctly to boot.

Astyanax
reply to post by wildespace

 

Hi again, wildespace. Would you (or anyone else here) be able to calculate the radius of a sphere that would radiate the equivalent energy of a G-type star of 1 sol mass at the frequency at which this object was detected?

I only ask because I'm sure you would do it a lot faster than I... and correctly to boot.

I'm sorry I'm not proficient in astrophysics enough to do this calculation for you.

But I did just notice that the temperature of the object is approximately 886 C (1628 F), possibly as high as 926 C (1700 F). That's a very hot Dyson sphere you have there.
en.wikipedia.org...

I think astronomers have also other data apart from temperature, such as spectroscopy, that points to this being a planet. arxiv.org...

P.S. Had a look at the above scientific paper, and I finally know the coordinates: 21 14 08.13 -22 51 37.3
Sky-Map.com link

it's the planet mongo and ming the merciless is back for revenge! flash, we need you! cue freddy mercury and queen.

seriously, cool discovery!

Hi, Galileo400.

You said:

I also read about stars that don't have a galaxy. (anymore) In the same way that
a planet can be hurled out of a solar system, a star can be hurled out of a galaxy.

Hey ! I have just seen a show, on good TV, about that kind of star.

And in the show they said:
== Imagine the night sky view from a planet near that star.
If the star is UP from the galaxy and far enough, the sky view
would be the galaxy itself. ==

WOW !! A total galaxy in my night sky !! I would go see that right now !! B-)

Blue skies.

i am linking to another thread here on ATS

jjsr420


Scientists have actually found a planet that has no parent star, which they've named PSO J318.5-2.


....from what I read they detected it via its heat signature, which means the planet -has- heat. Don't planets NEED their parent stars FOR heat?

let's see... if we use the Earth as a model..... we figure the Earth & solar system are ~4 billion years old...

the Earth has a hot core which also heats the thick layers of molton metals & elements that make up the mantle and the thin surface crust helps retain all that heat being generated by the 4 billion year old 'inner-sun'

PSO J318.5-2 might just be such a inter-stellar Planet turned 'vehicle' because the planets' former Sun was going to go Nova & the population just moved their planet from orbit.

the Earth could be put in a huge bubble and be piloted out of orbit if we geared up our technology to do so because the Earth molten interior would be a source of heat...albiet with cities located way below the surface





80 light years away.... that would likely exclude the planet sized object being from OOrt cloud ice or Kuiper belt comets...thats way into interstellar regions, out in the boonies

if it is a piloted bubble wrapped planet, that is on its voyage to a new younger Sun as a home place... i wonder what a billion years of searching would be like to the travelers inside that 'mother ship'...




now that i've gone back & read the replies i have a theory

i have posted about small blackholes that wander between the Stars....
we might be looking at the 'hot' disintegrating Event-horizon that is enveloping a small wandering Black Hole and not a planet sized accumulation of inter-stellar dirt-ice-gas


that 'heat signature' indicates something unique or Anamolous in nature...and if it ain't a product of intelligent design it must be something truly exotic

It needs a better name then Planet PSO J318.5-22
How about The Lonely Planet?