The planets are smaller and lighter than the Saturn planets. They also do not shine in their own right, but reflect the light that reaches them from the Shabbat star that they circle around
The planets are smaller and lighter than the Saturn planets. They also do not shine due to their own space, but reflect the light that reaches them from the Shabbat star around which they circle. This distinction may sound simple and familiar, but new studies reveal that it is not necessarily accurate. The discovery of giant planets, on the one hand, and "dwarf" Saturn planets.
Small and cold and having a mass similar to that of the planets, on the other hand, created an overlap between fields that were previously perceived as separate: astronomy of the Saturn planets and astronomy of the planets. At the conference held at the beginning of June in Flagstaff, Arizona, under the title "From huge planets to cold Saturday stars", the benefit of cross-fertilization between the scientists in these two fields of research was expressed. The scientists looking for planets study the behavior of the Saturn planets to know for sure that the fluctuations in the light emitted from them are indeed caused by planets that are not visible. Whereas those interested in understanding the behavior of small, cold Saturnian stars base their theories on the behavior of giant planets such as Jupiter. But the highlight of the conference was the revelation of a "missing link" between the stars of Saturday and the planets. It is a new type of small and cold Saturn, but only slightly heavier than the largest known planets. The blurring of the fields raises the question: does it make sense to continue to stick to the distinction between planets and planets of the Sabbath?
The discovery that raised this question was revealed as part of the Sloan Digital Sky Survey ("SDSS") project, which uses an automatic telescope. The telescope scans the sky and records objects as it moves. A few weeks ago, while analyzing some of the reflections captured by the SDSS, Michael Strauss and Xiao Huifen of Princeton University discovered an unusual object. Observations made afterwards using an infrared telescope, which can distinguish objects too cold to produce radiation in the visible range, revealed that it was a star with a very weak radiation - too weak to be counted with the stars of the Sabbath according to the classification accepted by astronomers.
This is surprising, because this classification index was recently expanded. Before that, it ranged from the hottest and largest category of stars, called O, to the coldest stars - M stars. However, a paper by Davy Kirkpatrick and his colleagues from the California Institute of Technology gives a new classification, @, L for stars that should not be classified as M stars because they are too cold. These stars are so small and light—less than 1/12 the mass of the Sun or 70 times the mass of Jupiter—that there is not enough gravitational pressure in their cores to fuse hydrogen into helium, the basic thermonuclear process that makes stars shine.
The light emanating from the planet Saturn can reveal to astronomers a lot of information not only about its temperature but also about its chemical composition. The spectrum of the sky gram recently discovered by the SDSS shows signs of something not found in L-type stars - the methane gas. This gas can only exist in stars colder than stars of type @, L where its molecules would disintegrate from the heat.
This means that there is a good chance for a new category of Sabbath stars, for which Dr. Kirkpatrick proposed the letter T. The idea is supported by the additional discovery of the five "methane dwarfs". Methane dwarfs are even smaller than L-type brown dwarfs and some of them can reach a weight as low as 13 times the mass of Jupiter - very close to the definition of planets. On the other hand, it was determined for example that the planet revolving around the star
70 Virginis is considered to have a weight seven times the mass of Jupiter. In other words, the gap between the heaviest known planets and the smallest Saturn planets is almost non-existent.
Kirkpatrick emphasizes that the radiation spectrum (and therefore also the chemical composition) of Nance Methane
same as that of justice. He also proposed another stellar definition (Y), which would go beyond @ L and @ T and include gas giant planets. This would mean classifying Jupiter as a @, Y-type star at least according to these criteria.
If the planets and the planets of Saturday are indeed different from each other, where will the dividing line pass between them? The definition preferred by most astronomers depends on how the two are formed. Saturn's stars are the result of the gravitational collapse of a huge cloud of gas and dust, while the explanation is that planets are formed from the crystallization of the material left over from such collapses, which forms a sort of disk revolving around the newly formed star.
According to Halacha, this should provide a clear distinction between the stars of Saturday and the planets. The problem is that brown dwarfs have been discovered orbiting other Saturnian planets, and the explanation is that planets may sometimes drift out of their local solar system, into space, as a result of gravitational interactions. Therefore, it is impossible to determine, when an object is discovered, whether it was formed as a result of gravitational collapse or gravitational crystallization.
This will change once the astronomers' instruments are sophisticated enough to provide the first images of planets orbiting other stars.
