Planet X Larger Than Pluto? 561
nova_planitia writes "The Minor Planet mailing list is buzzing with the discovery by an amateur astronomer of a 17th magnitude object 51 astronomical units from the Sun, tentatively designated 2003 EL61. For those not versed in astronomical lingo, this is an object several times brighter than Pluto even though it is 25% farther out from the Sun (the orbit vizualised by JPL). This means that barring a strangely reflective surface, this object is larger than Pluto, possibly Mars-sized! The debate whether Pluto is a planet is likely to get rekindled by this discovery."
Re:Broken Link, Naming Contest. (Score:1, Interesting)
Something non-Greek/Roman at last.
Of our Solar System? (Score:3, Interesting)
Maybe I will move my telescope from being pointed at the neighbors shower and point it towards the sky.
What I love about space, is that the more we discover, the more we have to learn.
Re:Broken Link, Naming Contest. (Score:4, Interesting)
Oh great. (Score:1, Interesting)
Never noticed it before? (Score:2, Interesting)
If the object is as big as the story says (With orbit that JPL predicted for it) why haven't we noticed it before? Given its (apparent) proximity to Pluto's orbit, wouldn't we have detected some sort of gravitational interaction?
The question "is pluto a planet" IS... (Score:2, Interesting)
There's so much variance in objects in the solar system it's difficult to even come up with a definition of what a planet is although a popular definition is "large enough for it to form a sphere". This means that many satellites also become planets.
The best way to describe these objects is size, density, distance(s) from sun, orbital period, rotation period/direction etc... "planet" is a single word that expresses very little. Most common single words turn out to be quite abstract in their definitions!
Having said that - this is a very, very interesting little planet. Isn't it about time that we built a sizeable, nuclear powered, ion drive probe filled with instruments and hires telescopes and sent it hurtling off through the solar system with enough juice for say 50 years complete with a big transmitter to get the data back?
Pluto is not a planet (Score:2, Interesting)
Trick to Finding This Object (Score:5, Interesting)
Since this was found so easily, one has to wonder just how many of them there are out there. This might be only the first of many.
This, by the way, is an excellent reason to call these things TNOs (Trans-Neptunian Objects). Who wants to memorize the 85 planets of our solar system?
Nibiru (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Broken Link, Naming Contest. (Score:2, Interesting)
Pioneer (Score:5, Interesting)
Obligatory freaky objects mention (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:New Scientist Coverage (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Broken Link, Naming Contest. (Score:1, Interesting)
Micky
Yes, naming stuff in space is supposed to follow mythology theme but I don't know why we need to continue the practice. Pluto could be the start of a break with tradition - both the Roman god of the underworld AND a friendly cartoon dog.
So.
Pluto
Mickey
Goofy
and so on through the Disney-verse. And then we've got the Looney Tunes-verse, and so on.
Re:Never noticed it before? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Broken Link, Naming Contest. (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Pluto is a planet? (Score:4, Interesting)
Or maybe we should throw out the periodic table of elements and just go back to earth, wind, fire, water? After all, we did categorize things that way at one time.
As we learn more about the universe, we'll learn that our categorizations need and update to be more coherent and inclusive. While the original models might "work," as we add more variables to the system, there becomes the need to modify our system of classification.
It's happened with elements and species, so why not large objects in the universe as well?
Re:Broken Link, Naming Contest. (Score:3, Interesting)
Pluto and 2003 EL61 (Score:4, Interesting)
There does seem to be a point where Pluto's and EL61's orbits get rather close. I wonder if this could point to a potential common origin? Maybe Something Else (tm) passed by and flung 2003 El61 out of the little triad. (I would doubt Pluto and Charon would be the ones tossed because the odds of them staying together would be low) The distance between the orbits might be explained by precession.
Unfortunately the Java app only covers from Jan 1, 1600-2200 so I couldn't test this theory. Can someone else play with the app and look into the distant past for a near miss?
Re:New Scientist Coverage (Score:2, Interesting)
First - submit it to Technocrat [technocrat.net] - they can use all the stories they can get, so are much more likely to accept your submission.
Second - whenever you submit a story, place a copy into a journal entry. That way, people can see what is being submitted and rejected to Slashdot.
While I understand and agree with the
Oh well - IMHO
Perfect Name (Score:4, Interesting)
(a) In a more eccentric orbit than any other planet.
(b) In a longer orbit than any other planet.
(c) In a more inclined orbit than any other planet.
So it's more eccentric, lazier, and tipsier than any other planet. Bacchus is therefore a perfect name for it.
Oh, and since it's so cold there should be plenty of ice for the alcholic beverages.
Re:Perhaps a New King of the Kuiper Belt (Score:3, Interesting)
Can't remember who it was first said it, but the best classification I ever read was:
"The Solar System contains the Sun, Jupiter, and assorted debris."
Re:Broken Link, Naming Contest. (Score:3, Interesting)
"Hi! So you're from Sedna, eh? Let's see, she was the Inuit goddess of the sea, so that must be in the Betelgeuse system, right? What! But I thought the Sol planets were named after Roman gods?
In case anybody is curious, I thought I'd note that the current distace to 2003 UB313 of 97 AU's is a bit further than Sedna's closest approach of 76 AU's, but well within it's aphelion of 928 AU's, due to Sedna's extremely eccentric orbit. No word that I've seen on estimations of 2003 UB313's eccentricity.