Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Large New World Discovered Beyond Neptune!
So, now all the scientific data will need to be changed. It appears that we are a ten planet system, not a nine planet one. And who knows, there may be more out there inside the Ort Cloud limits.

Quote:A newfound object in our solar system's outskirts may be larger than any known world after Pluto, scientists said today.

It also has a moon.

Designated as 2003 EL61, the main object in the two-body system is 32 percent as massive as Pluto and is estimated to be about 70 percent of Pluto's diameter.

Other news reports that the object could be twice as big as Pluto are false, according to two astronomers who found the object in separate studies and another expert who has analyzed the data.

If the mass is only one-third that of Pluto, then theory holds that it can't be larger than Pluto, according to Brian Marsden of the Minor Planet Center, which serves as a clearinghouse for data on all newfound objects in the solar system.

Marsden, who was not involved in the discovery but has reviewed the data, told that the mass estimate is very firm, within 1 or 2 percent. "I don’t think it is bigger than Pluto," he said.

Obviously they need to get the mass and size down pat before giving it a REAL name for us to use.

Ain't science wonderful and full of surprises? S6
“Don’t confuse me with facts, my mind is made up” — Saint Al of the Gore -
What Roman God are they going to name this one after?
Well, Your anus is already taken. perhaps we can start a contest here to pick the more appropriate and funny to use.

“Don’t confuse me with facts, my mind is made up” — Saint Al of the Gore -
John L Wrote:Well, Your anus is already taken.....

What a post to end the week with John! =D>

(week ending for me as I don't do the internet thingy during the weekends!)
[Image: SalmaHayekcopy.jpg]
Vesta(Hestia) mabye?

Goddess of the Hearth. Guards the hearth and all home life.

Since its the outer-most body, why not give it the name as it could be the "guard of the solar system" and its life and the sun, which is the "hearth"?
what's the roman equivalent for Artemis? always liked her.
StereoMike Wrote:what's the roman equivalent for Artemis? always liked her.

Diana, I believe.
“Don’t confuse me with facts, my mind is made up” — Saint Al of the Gore -
Indeed, that would be a good one, I guess. Bit common though, isn't it?
whats the Roman word for "So F-ing What"?

this is what, then tenth year in a row i have heard this? remember "Planet X"?

how many times are they going to come out with this and make it seem like its a new discovery?

send out a fleet of sensory satellites, and find out for sure...

this is getting embarrassing. there's always something out there, but then its Neptune's Moon, then its a comet...

last ti knew, they weren't even sure Pluto was a planet...
[Image: 760.png]
New Planet

So two bodies have been discovered? One smaller then Pluto, the other Larger?
No, not Vesta. Vesta is an asteroid to the best of my knowledge.
It must be called Proserpina. Astrologists always said we have another planet behind Pluto with 222 years of revolution.
Let's don't mix life and fantasy and call it the name it should be named. S2
2003 EL61? I thought it was called 2003 UB313?

Last one they found they called it "Sedna". This one ought to be even more mundane, how about Brian?
benjamin Wrote:2003 EL61? I thought it was called 2003 UB313?

(Not a joke warning): it may be that they actually found two such objects; both were tracked for a year or more. An astronomer on radio yesterday thought that announcement of one of them triggered the other group to stake their claim to the other.

If so, one can be called Niburu, and the other Planet-X. Wink1

See the Bad Astronomy Blog .
Sanders 2020

Some say that Pluto is really only an escaped moon (which right now is inside the orbit of Neptune, so Neptune presently is the ninth planet). If this new planet is only one-third the size/mass of Pluto, then should it really be thought of as a planet?

Another thing---has anyone come up with any real proof yet that the Oort Cloud actually exists? Or is it just an ad hoc postulate dreamed up to explain why there are so many short-term comets in the solar system, that can only last for about 10,000 years? Of course, the scientific mainstream has to reject or explain away any evidence that might indicate the solar system is not billions of years old!
Ron, didn't they prove this on the last manned mission?

Seriously I believe one of the early probes was sent out there to check on it. Anyway, where are all those comets coming from?
“Don’t confuse me with facts, my mind is made up” — Saint Al of the Gore -
I have been watching for it, and I have never yet seen any report of direct observation or other empirical evidence that the Oort Cloud really exists.
Ron Lambert Wrote:I have been watching for it, and I have never yet seen any report of direct observation or other empirical evidence that the Oort Cloud really exists.

Let's you and I check into this and start a thread on it. I am Really fascinated with the Ort Cloud and it's positive implications. There is "potentially enough water out there to provide for several planets in this solar system like our planet, and perhaps even more let over to spare.

The estimate is in the high billions or low trillions. I think.

I'll look it up. You too, ok? S1
“Don’t confuse me with facts, my mind is made up” — Saint Al of the Gore -
so does water on other planets come from Comets?
[Image: 760.png]
ghoullio Wrote:so does water on other planets come from Comets?

Actually, you are getting the cart before the horse.

first some astronomy. the galaxy is made up of trillions of stars of varying age. However in the beginning, the only stars were what we call "first generation" stars, meaning that they began life by accumulating huge masses of hydrogen and a tiny percentage of helium. I think that in the very betinning the universe consisted of 99.9999% hydrogen. the rest was helium pretty much.

Now a first generation star would probably be huge, hot(a blue star) and do a quick job of converting the hydrogen to helium and other heavy elements. Fortunately, these first generation stars had a habit of becoming supernovas, thus blowing up and spreading all this other newly made elements around the universe. Blue stars burn ever so brightly because they burn ever so quickly, sometimes only as little as one million years.

All this debris floated around until it finally coellesced into a large area and objects of any mass usually are attracted to each other. With time, this debris became concentrated together and began to swirl around creating a plane of rotation AND gathering in toward the center. As the center became heavier in mass, eventually it became hot enough to ignite the fusion process.

But what is important is that the area no longer was made up of just hydrogen and a timy bit of helium. It had all sorts of different matter, oxygen and hydrogen being able to mix and create water. So, as the sun and inner planets eventually set up stable orbits and attracted more loose objects, the outer solar system lacked the necessary gravity to pull in ALL the huge amounts of objects on the outer fringes.

That is what Dr. Ort, in 1950 hypothisized, and like physics and Einstein calculated the fission bomb by the use of equations, so Dr. Ort calculated the existence of the Ort Cloud.

Now back to your origional question. Yes comets contain HUGE amounts of water and other matter. But the water and formation of second or third generation stars had to come first to create the oxygen to form with hydrogen in order to create water.

Does that answer your question in a round about manner?
“Don’t confuse me with facts, my mind is made up” — Saint Al of the Gore -
Like I said, John, I have been looking for a long time. I have not seen anything yet that reported actual observations of an Oort Cloud. It is a myth that all mainstream scientists seem willing to take on faith. They are sure, really sure, that it exists. Because otherwise they are left with having to explain how there could still be comets in the solar system that could only at max last 10,000 years. The only alternative is that the solar system has only existed for less than 10,000 years. To avoid having to entertain that idea for even a moment, they have to postulate some way that the short-term comets can be continually replenished.

Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Super Earth Water World Discovered John L 2 1,004 01-07-2010, 08:44 AM
Last Post: Canuknucklehead

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)