The planet is 11 times heavier than Jupiter, and is 100 billion kilometers from its sun - 650 times the distance between the Earth and the sun
Scientists from the United States have discovered a giant planet in a distant solar system, orbiting its sun at a huge distance from it, a discovery that undermines the accepted theories about how planets form. The planet known as HD106906b is 11 times heavier than Jupiter, and is 100 billion kilometers from its sun - 650 times the distance between Earth and the sun.
Despite the huge distance from the Sun, the temperature on the surface of the planet reaches 1,500 degrees, because it is a relatively young celestial gram, whose core is still hot. It was discovered in observations led by researchers from the University of Arizona in a system about 300 light years away from Earth.
A new theory
Until now, scientists believed that planets formed from clumps of dust and rocks, leftovers from the formation of their sun. However, according to the researchers from Arizona, the planet that has now been discovered is too large and too far from its sun, and could not have formed this way. The researchers are examining other theories, including the possibility that this is not an ordinary planet, but a binary star system, that is, a system of two suns, one of which failed to accumulate enough mass to "ignite" and start the nuclear process of hydrogen combustion that occurs in stars. With that, the researchers point out that in binary systems one of the stars is usually up to 10 times larger than the other, while the planet in this system is 100 times smaller than its sun. To solve the mystery, the researchers hope to obtain photographs and measurements of improved quality of the system, for example with the help of the "Hubble" space telescope. They hope that a careful study of this solar system and its surroundings will eventually allow a better understanding of the whole process of the formation of planets.
24 תגובות
I'm dying to know who that strange chicken is and who that NN is. Why doesn't he confess? 🙁
Emanuel
This is not true?
Nissim meant the self-rotation of the planet Venus and the planet Uranus... but it is true that all the planets rotate in the same direction
Miracles, where did you get the data that two planets rotate oppositely?
All planets rotate counterclockwise
Most of the planets rotate in the same direction, that is, the rotational momentum of the nebula that created the sun (every sun-like star) is what caused the planets to rotate in the same direction
Planets that do not orbit the same planet may have formed during the collision of two very large objects or the capture of a very large object.
Most of the moons of the planets also orbit in the same direction
In short, the theory of formation by a nebula continues to be very strong
Anonymous (unidentified) user
You make a good point. Not only the planets orbit in the same direction, most other objects as well (asteroids and comets). It's interesting when they checked the direction of rotation of other planets in Galakdia.
On the other hand - 2 out of 8 planets rotate in the opposite direction to the rotation direction. Does it have any meaning?
Or maybe it's a small star captured by the gravity of a big star???
This still does not contradict the accepted theory
And it makes a lot of sense that planets formed from the same cloud that formed the central star
It is certainly possible that a certain star is caught in the gravitational field
The fact that all the planets rotate in the same direction is a very strong point for their creation from the same initial cloud
Google the name of the star, click on images and you will get the image of the telescope that photographed the mother star and the planet... even Wikipedia in English has this image..
What a shame for "scientists"...
The followers of the "Big Bang" are still alive and kicking...
Scientists have no shame in theories that were only yesterday considered "safe" when they shatter into pieces...
Abi Alon, thank you!
So it is not clear to me how it is determined that the star orbits its sun? After all, the angle of change they observed is really zero. Unless they reached this conclusion based on other observed data?
As for the parent star, it is about 1.5 times more massive than our Sun...
Regarding the telescope that broke down, it is certainly not the Hubble, but Kepler (2009) and there is a situation that can be repaired if we don't wait for its replacement in 2017...
Yossi - to be fair because it is the most massive planet and it is best to compare it with another massive body that is more convenient in terms of numbers and that's how we will understand the difference
I can't find data about the mother star and question 2 cannot be answered
As for around the axis, I don't know and I don't think there is an extrasolar planet whose axis time is known
Find out where water vapor exists as well as the colors of planets (such as red and blue) and even a cloud map for one of the planets
But about the rotation time of the axis, I have not heard that such a one was discovered..
How long is the coffee? Let's say that it is a very long time. 650 assortanomic units is a distance that is more than 21 times farther from Neptune to the Sun... (Neptune's orbit takes about 164 of our years) depending on the speed and the orbit of the planet
NN - I love you!!!
Just a few clarification questions:
1. Why is the weight of the star attributed to the planet Jupiter?
2. What is the weight of his sun relative to the weight of our sun?
3. In light of the huge distance between the star and the sun, shouldn't it escape the region of attraction to the sun?
4. How long does it take for a star to orbit its sun in relation to our times.
5. And what is the length of his day (the coffee around its axis - if the coffee even exists) in relation to our day?
A brown dwarf has an internal fusion of deuterium and of course has such an internal heat that it must be at least thirteen Jupiter masses. This planet is only 11 masses and it shouldn't be that far away - about a fifteen percent s difference, so maybe it's still a brown dwarf (upgraded?) and not a planet??
Please respond gently
Sabdarmish Yehuda
Hubble was not shut down - you got confused with Kepler.
Czur, even writing nonsense advances humanity
And that's what's beautiful about "very tenuous theories"
It is very fun to hear about such discoveries, which remind us from time to time that we actually know nothing, and all we have are very flimsy theories.
No one has ever seen a planet form, or a sun turn into a brown dwarf and the like. All we have is a large collection of observations over a span of several decades/hundreds of years, on a system that evolves over billions of years, and we try with nothing we know to describe the laws of the system.
Today it is believed that planets are formed from the accumulation of hot gases and fragments of rocks, and that they slowly cool down. Tomorrow they may discover a new physical principle that will show that we were all right confused. that the planets in general absorb energy from their sun and slowly grow. A planet like Pluto evolves into a planet like Earth, which evolves into a planet like Jupiter, etc.
who knows….
Right. He was shut down. But I assume (and maybe I'm wrong) that the results came before he was shut down.
Wasn't Hubble shut down a few months ago?
Amit
they are not.
This is simply what the observations determine...
Every now and then new information is discovered that determines differently - then the knowledge is perfected and the person learns better..
The world we live in...
The Iranian nuclear? housing prices?? kim jong the dumbass gay????
The future of humanity is more intriguing than any fucking politics.
Wait, and why not actually?
Why must the mass ratio between binary stars be at most 1:10?