Jupiter's Bigger Brother

  • Posts: 17
  • Thank you received: 0

Jupiter's Bigger Brother was created by Tom_Walsh

Guy's check this out, Jupiter may have a bigger brother!:scope: :bigshock:
Last edit: 11 years 11 months ago by Tom_Walsh. Reason: Hyperlink feture not working
11 years 11 months ago #88279

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • Posts: 8851
  • Thank you received: 237

Replied by dave_lillis on topic Re: Jupiter's Bigger Brother

wow, 4 times the mass of Jupiter, wouldnt it be great if it was there !
Dave L. on facebook , See my images in flickr
Chairman. Shannonside Astronomy Club (Limerick)

Carrying around my 20" obsession is going to kill me,
but what a way to go. :)
+ 12"LX200, MK67, Meade2045, 4"refractor
Last edit: 11 years 11 months ago by dave_lillis.
11 years 11 months ago #88282

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • Posts: 2676
  • Thank you received: 0
11 years 11 months ago #88285

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • Posts: 9637
  • Thank you received: 544

Replied by Seanie_Morris on topic Re: Jupiter's Bigger Brother

Correct me if I am wrong, but I think it's a shame that the cameras on the likes of the Voyagers and and Pioners are not good enough, they might have been able to do some planet prospecting for this monster. The chances of us finding it from Earth are slim in my opinion.

Midlands Astronomy Club.
Radio Presenter (Midlands 103), Space Enthusiast, Astronomy Outreach Co-ordinator.
Former IFAS Chairperson and Secretary.
11 years 11 months ago #88290

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • Posts: 4557
  • Thank you received: 0

Replied by dmcdona on topic Re: Jupiter's Bigger Brother

The chances of us finding it from Earth are slim in my opinion.

I understand that WISE (orbiting mission with IR imaging capabilities) ran out of coolant last year. It was then used to take some more images, concentrating on the solar system. My understanding is that these images plus any useful IR images from the full mission will be scoured for "Tyche". AFAIR, the prelim results are due in the next few months (April?) with further data available some time around or after the summer.

Whichever of Pioneer/Voyager was first (Pioneer?), they certainly were before the advent of CCD's. I think they may have used some cutting proprietary imaging devices though. That may also have applied to the later mission (Voyager?).

I could look it up of course, but I'll let ye all do that and correct me...

11 years 11 months ago #88296

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • Posts: 735
  • Thank you received: 113

Replied by eansbro on topic Re: Jupiter's Bigger Brother

In 1999, John Murray of the Open University (UK) did a study of 13 long-period comets and predicted the existence of a planet much further from the Sun than Pluto at 40,000 AU. He suggested that this planet X would be far bigger than any of those in the inner solar system, having a mass larger than that of Jupiter. Also in 1999 Matese, Whitman and Whitmire at the University of Lafayette, Louisiana published a similar study of 82 comets. They made a claim of 3-5MJupiter for the mass of the planet, but at a slightly closer distance of 25,000 AU. However, Horner and Evans have shown that comet discoveries are bedevilled by selection effects. These include anomalies caused by the excess of observers in the northern as against the southern hemisphere, seasonal and diurnal biases, directional effects which make it harder to discover comets in certain regions of the sky, as well as sociological biases.

A few years back Murray surveyed the predicted area of sky down to 21 mag with the 1.2m Schmidt telescope in Sidings Springs. 44 candidates were identified. Using a 0.9m here in Ireland, I imaged all these candidates multiple times to 22nd magnitude at 6 months apart over a 2 year period that had this 13 arc sec shift for that distance. Conclusion is that there were no large planets found.

However, there is every indication that the planet is there not just using the Matese Whitmore calculations based on cometray clumping, but that there is an additional planet much closer based on other parameters caused by the resonances within the Edgeworth Kuiper belt.

Some models show that this nearer planet 80-150 AU demonstrate and explains consistently the following:
1) excitation of the Kuiper Belt
2) the Belt’s outer edge at ~48AU
3) origin of the four main populations of TNOs
4) loss of ~99% of the Kuiper Belt initial mass
5) Neptune’s current orbit at 30.1AU

It means that a massive body (outer planet) was scattered by one of the giant planets in the early solar system. It then stirred the primordial planetesimal disk to the levels observed at 40-50 AU and truncated it at ~48AU, before planet migration (fossilized signatures). The long term signatures of the planetoid's perturbation are the detached and very high-i populations (>40 deg).

The research in narrowing down a smaller predicted field for surveying for this closer planet, may come to a successful conclusion at the end of this year. The planet will be either one of the two nodes. Hopefully the northern one for the next survey.

Eamonn A
11 years 11 months ago #88314

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • Posts: 483
  • Thank you received: 85

Replied by Mike on topic Re: Jupiter's Bigger Brother

Hi Eamonn,
This is most interesting; I remember such theorizing from my younger days. If I am not mistaken the key seems to be a theoretical planet about 1.5 – 2.0 times the mass of Jupiter, if this theoretical planet has an orbital radius of ~40 thousand AU then it roughly has an orbital period of about seven and a half million earth years, it may even be the case it might only show a displacement parallax as small as 7 arcsec over a six month period with a magnitude of +22 / +23, NO WONDER IT IS HARD TO FIND!
You also indicated the possibility of yet another planet but closer in, I guess it is not outside the realms of possibility, I mean we are detecting exoplanets around other stars, so I guess if such planets exist are relatively close by in cosmic terms then I am sure we will eventually find them.
I am theorizing that such a massive body at that distance moving through space would perturb comets within the nearer radius of the Oort cloud and thus clumping them as it were, would there be evidence of other such groupings of comets in space as a result from the wake of this theoretical planet, could such a body send comets our way into the inner solar system?
It’s interesting that you mention the 1.2m UKST in Australia, if I am not mistaken, a number of years ago the UKST was using photographic plates which covered about seven square degrees of sky, was this technology used for the search, can you give an indication of how much sky coverage was completed?
It’s also interesting that Dave mentioned IR data from satellites; do you think such an object would show up brighter in the IR, what about the older IRAS data? Could it be possible that such a massive planet could have been gravitationally captured by our solar system? Sorry for all the questions but I find it fascinating that there is now some progress on this issue.

Clear skies
I83 Cherryvalley Observatory

After one look at this planet any visitor from outer space would say; "I WANT TO SEE THE MANAGER".
11 years 11 months ago #88332

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

  • Posts: 735
  • Thank you received: 113

Replied by eansbro on topic Re: Jupiter's Bigger Brother

Hi Mike,

Alot of questions will require detailed answers.

1. A farther Planet X: Based on the recent research by Matese such a large planet is almost on the boundary of being a small Brown Dwarf. Brown Dwarfs are very small, cool stars and because they are difficult to see, not much is known about them. If the Sun had such a companion star it would not only tell us more about Brown Dwarfs but also about the formation of the solar system. Many extra-solar planets have now been discovered with masses close to those estimated for Planet X. However, they have all been found much closer to the star than planetary formation theories would have previously predicted.

2. A closer Planet X: Periodic comet showers are associ¬ated with the passage of a planet's perihe¬lion and aphelion points through a pri¬mordial disc of comets within the Oort Cloud, which lies beyond the orbit of Neptune. According to Matese and Whitmore, the required orbital ele¬ments and mass of Planet X are consist¬ent with independently predicted values based on the residuals in the motions of Uranus and Neptune. Comets scattered directly into the zones of influence of Saturn and Jupiter can contribute to a shower whose duration is consistent with observation in less than 15 million years. This imposes a minimum planetary incli¬nation of 25°, which in turn restricts the semi-major axis to around 100 A.U. The number of showers and steady state comets are in agreement with known terrestrial crater rates. The old model of the 1990s of Planet X, could create the required density gradiant of comets near perihelion and aphelion during the life of the solar system. The inclination of Planet X’s orbit by more than 25 degrees may explain the failure of previous surveys to discover the planet as its present latitude is not likely to be near the ecliptic.

3. John Murray carried out a search using plates taken with the UK Schmidt Telescope and digitally scanned using SuperCOSMOS. The planet was expected to have characteristic parallax of 5 to 8 arcsecs based on the estimated distance from the Sun. The plates were 6 by 6 degrees which allowed a significant area of the predicted position. The search covered 42 per cent of the error ellipse around the predicted position and revealed 44 potential “planet” suspects in total, all with R-band magnitude greater than 20. The object would have been brightest in the infrared when applying the R-band filter. The “planet” suspects were close to the photometric limit of the plate which has not revealed the planet.

4. Previous old theories and searches: Predictions of the possible location of Planet X have been made, but selected searches have revealed nothing so far. Infrared Astronomy Satellite (IRAS) and Pioneer observations exist as addi¬tional sources of observational data. In addition the HST doesn’t have the parallax to determine a small shift. However, IRAS is a to low resolution telescope to show any unambiguous shift. Various astronomers have concluded that an object at a distance of 50 to 100 AU should not ex¬ceed 5 Earth masses. This would limit the visual magnitude to 15 or less. Past visual (i.e. photographic visual) searches for Planet X in the ecliptic plane have not yielded positive results. These searches included Tombaugh's search to magnitude 16 in 1961; Luu and Jewitt in 1988; and Harrington's 6-year search up until 1992 which covered Scorpius and Centaurus to magnitude 16. None of the above surveys used large, wide-field instruments. Kowal’s extensive 10¬-year survey on the Palomar 48-inch Schmidt telescope (ending in 1985) which covered 15° on either side of the ecliptic to magnitude 20.

5. However, Lykawka has a very convincing case for a Planet X within the Solar System based on the resonances of the EKB. His model is very robust and deserves a serious case for developing further. In fact, the chances of detecting the planet using Lykawka’s model are more favourable to detect in my opinion.
It will have a shift of about 1.5 arc secs, as compared to the recent Matese model that will be problematic again in discriminating shifts in the IR of 10 arc secs. Matese and Whitmore have been hobby horsing this model for the last 25 years, gradually refining the model with a improvement of comet clumping.
All their papers during that period, have suggested the planet is there, but have never worked out a search location.

On the other hand, Lykawka is at present refining the search location, this will take at least to the end of this year. The planet so far is estimated to be 10k to 14k in diameter, 80-150 AU with an inclination of around 40 degrees.

All the models make a convincing case for the potential success of a renewed search for a Planet X in our Solar System. The fact that a Planet X in our Solar System has not been found does not prove it is not there. Indeed in only removes the more unlikely theories as to its properties such as age and mass. In addition if we discover this planet X, we may have a new class of planets within our Solar System, which may have resulted partially by capture or perhaps by ejection. Planetary formation theorists may have to accommodate new classes of planetary systems; however this may come about most effectively through searching for extended planets or Brown Dwarfs within our own solar system, which then may indicate that there are other exoplanets with similar characteristics. The potential therefore is the detection of 2 planets, one considerably further out at 25k AU as compared to one at 150 AU. The farther one been huge at 3 to 4 Jupiter mass compared to the closer one 1.5 earth mass.

Eamonn A
11 years 11 months ago #88334

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Time to create page: 0.058 seconds
Powered by Kunena Forum