Planets past Pluto
 
Notifications
Clear all

Planets past Pluto

7 Posts
4 Users
0 Likes
69 Views
Brian Blake
(@brian-blake)
Posts: 597
Honorable Member
Topic starter
 

http://t.co/YirbbMzkNb. I would be interested to hear what you all think.

 
Posted : 29/06/2014 5:56 pm
Mike Meynell
(@mikem)
Posts: 875
Prominent Member
 

Interesting stuff... discussions around "Planet X" have taken place since Percival Lowell in the early part of the 20th century... which led to the discovery of Pluto by Tombaugh in 1930 (the first two letters of the name "Pluto" are, of course, the initials of Lowell... in honour to the contribution he made to the discovery).

However, Pluto was not of sufficient mass based on Lowell's calculations, but we discovered recently that this was because an incorrect mass of Neptune was used in the calculations.

If there are more planets at 200-250 AU, we will have quite a job trying to observe them. That's one hell of a long way out!!

 
Posted : 29/06/2014 7:44 pm
Andy Sawers
(@andy-sawers)
Posts: 742
Honorable Member
 

I hadn't heard the story about the 'PL' in Pluto - only the story about the young girl in England who suggested the name. There's a podcast (and transcript) on the Nasa website with a 2006 interview with her that discusses the point, concluding that the first two letters of her suggestion may have been an important factor in the decision to call it Pluto.

 
Posted : 30/06/2014 10:25 am
Andy Sawers
(@andy-sawers)
Posts: 742
Honorable Member
 

BTW, while a New Scientist story the other day referred to a planet hiding 'beyond' Pluto, their tweet to link to the story said "There is a hidden "Planet X" lurking behind Pluto". I replied asking if that meant we needed to rewrite Kepler's third law...

 
Posted : 30/06/2014 10:31 am
Brian Blake
(@brian-blake)
Posts: 597
Honorable Member
Topic starter
 

Lurking, makes it sound perverse. Like some sort of stalker.

 
Posted : 30/06/2014 11:11 am
Tej
 Tej
(@tej)
Posts: 636
Honorable Member
 

With all the success of finding exoplanets thus far, its ironic that we may not have found all of our own solar system planets! Was it not suggested that the expected normal structure for a planetary system was to have rocky planets further out orbits and large gas planets within the inner orbital zones. Thus, our solar system is of a non standard structure? So if there are more larger than earth rocky planets further out, then our solar system might be edging towards being slightly more normal than first thought 🙂

 
Posted : 30/06/2014 4:50 pm
Brian Blake
(@brian-blake)
Posts: 597
Honorable Member
Topic starter
 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-34615229

 
Posted : 23/10/2015 1:52 pm
Share: