/sci/ - Science & Math

the suspense isn't killing me, it's killing science.

I wish scientists had more marketing skills

I hope it's bigger than the other snowballs in the Oort cloud.

>>6436886
HAHAHA! LOOK MOM, ITS THAT ORRT CLOUD THING THE DARKY WAS TALKING ABOUT AFTER FAMILY GUY!

>>6436887
You have problems. Deal with them.

A lot of colleges are getting shut down too for some reason.

>>6436886

>>6436920
It's in the outer solar system. The ONLY thing out there are snowballs.

Seriously, I get that you're angry at me, but the whole "why" escapes me.

I'm honestly pissed that the announcement comes from Brazil given that Brazil has not paid it's joining fee to ESO and is now holding back construction of the worlds largest telescope as a result.

>>6436886
i have my money on "we cant find any evidence of the oort cloud"

>>6436932
ESO do not call a press conference for a null result. That result couldn't even come from the telescope in the press release.
It's a transit telescope so it's reasonably likely a minor outer body drifted though the field of view.

If it was truly important it would have been announced a few minutes after confirmation

well they found alien?

is aliens

it's probably a brown dwarf orbiting the sol, near to oort cloud, frequently disturbing it and causing asteroids to bombard inner solar system.
it's already an expected thing.

IT'S ALEUNS

>>6436945
It's not, the announcement wouldn't be coming from Brazil. And no there is no evidence to support the hypothesis to support the existence of such an object.

And use English, it's the Sun.

>>6436952
What do you speculate the discovery is about?

Just another dwarf planet?

>>6436956
Probably.

>WE NEMISIS NAO

We binary system now!

aliens?

3 possibilities

Our suns dead twin
Another dwarf planet
Mass relay

>>6436945
>>6437050
>Suns dead twin
>brown dwarf orbiting sol
Am I the only one who thinks this sounds fucking incredible and stunning if it were the case? The only one whod be absolutely shocked if it were announced?

To all the brown dwarf buffs here, the WISE mission came to the conclusion just weeks ago that there is no evidence for major stellar or substellar bodies in or close to the solar system.

There are no bodies bigger than Saturn closer than 10,000 AU or bodies bigger than Jupiter closer than 26,000 AU.

There might still be companions hiding in the red zone. But has ESO the instruments to detect them?

>>6436945
>>6437125
Even a gas giant smaller than Neptune would be a pretty big deal.

Or it could be something as mundane as a variation in the Ort cloud we did not expect.

Scientist get excited for things, most normal people would shrug at.

I'll hope for something Monumental, but its probably a surprise in minor planetoids (like pluto) or some other abstract concept they have miscalculated.

While advancing human knowledge, it actually does little for the here and now, just trying to maintain perspective.

Nasa press briefings have burned any excitement outta me for these things.


Like >>6436940 said. I guess if it was something exciting something would have already leaked.

- Maybe something about the atmospheres of large Kuiper belt objects and dwarf planets (such as Eris, Haumea, Sedna, Quaoar, and the like). I know that ESO has often studied these large kuiper belt objects in the past looking for atmospheres. Last year, the ESO announced that the dwarf planet Makemake lacks an atmosphere.

- Maybe the discovery of additional dwarf planets even larger than Eris or Pluto in the Kuiper belt. Although, this would not be "surprising" considering astronomers are already pretty sure that additional Eris-sized or Pluto-sized objects exist that are yet to be discovered.

-Maybe the discovery of moons around these large kuiper belt objects. It is already known that Eris (which is larger than Pluto) has at least one moon.

- Maybe something that directly confirms the existence of the Oort Cloud. The Oort cloud is believed to exist, but nobody has ever made a direct observation of it.

>>6436832
Hopefully they haven't found a comet the size of Texas on a collision course with Earth.

Frankly I'm counting on Pluto 2: Electric Boogaloo.
>>6436881
I wish that scientists would just spill the damn beans already, I mean seriously all these big announcements can't be good for science, because sometimes they're wrong.

It's gonna confuse the public.

>>6437108
Just think, we might actually witness a mission to another star if this is the case

>>6437108
I'd be pretty excited as well. Think most people with any interest would.

>LE PLANET X
LE END OF LE WORLD

>>6436945
>calling it sol on /sci/

>>6437221
Its a better name than 'The [word meaning star]'

>>6437221
i am not anglophone, so it's not a big deal i think.

>>6436945
we must name it Remina

>>6437223
Just bad form to call it "the Sol". It's either Sol or the Sun.

>>6437223
Except that everyone knows what you're takking about if you say "the sun" so no, not really, it just makes you look pretentious.

>>6437223
Sun doesn't mean star. "Sun" is a proper noun, a name, given to our star. We didn't know it was a star back then. We use the Sun's name to describe other stars.

>>6437223
>>6437232

so if you went to have a serious conversation with an astronomer you would say "sol" ?

>>6437242
Everyone knows what you're talking about if you refer to it as 'sol' too.
>>6437244
If its a proper noun it shouldnt be prefixed with The. Using its name to describe other stars also just means its used interchangeably with 'star' when talking from certain reference frames(an alien or colonist or whatever on another world in their system)
>>6437257
Astronomers use the term sol to describe an objects full orbit if I understand right. This would lead to confusion. Many scientific fields use terms in ways that have little to no connection to their everyday meanings.

>surprise discovery
hurr there's a 20 percent variance in the distribution of space dust in the xyz coordinate when we expected a 10 percent variance
>provoke much debate
among a tiny subset of astronomy geeks
>strict embargo
because that's the way these announcements which are meaningless to laymen yet career making to Ph.Ds are always made.

>>6437271
cross posting from /pol/ are we?

>>6437274
WOW

SUCH DISCOVERY

SURPRISE SOLAR SYSTEM

SO FAR AWAY

MUCH DEBATE

WOOF
BARK BARK

WOOF

AWOOF

>>6437267
>Astronomers use the term sol to describe an objects full orbit if I understand right.
No, that's called an orbit. A sol is the rotation of a planet around its axis, what we call a day on earth. Our star doesn't have an official name, but the IAU says to call it the common name in your own language but with a capital letter, so in English our star's unofficially official name is the Sun. However, calling it 'sol' is definitely wrong even though it doesn't have an official name because sol has an official use in astronomy already. The Sun's name is definitely not sol.

They could just straight out say what the discovery is in a small press release alongside with the announcement of a press conference where the subject is covered in more detail tomorrow giving the attending journalists a day to come up with relevant questions.

But no, lol i discovred worldchanging stuff, but i cant tell u now. come tommorow!

>>6437303
just because it's not released to the public doesn't mean the journalists aren't briefed before the conference under a strict non-disclosure form. That's actually pretty common practice for press conferences.

>>6437299
Ah. Rotation on its axis.
Regardless. Astronomers get to set the names for things only in the context of discourse between astronomers. People will often adopt that name for it normally as well, because thats the only one it has, but astronomers dont necessarily get to decide these things. They only get to decide technical terms and academic definitions.
>but the IAU says to call it the common name in your own language but with a capital letter
thats not a recommendation or even a guideline. Thats just "It doesn't have an official name, so pretty much whatever your language refers to it as."

>>6437309
>thats not a recommendation or even a guideline.
actually it is. IAU defers to language naming conventions for things they haven't voted on.
http://www.iau.org/public/themes/naming/

As for laypeople calling it whatever they want, sure they can do that, but they'll still be wrong. This is a science board, so I don't think it's too much to ask that proper science terms be used here.

>>6437321
>As for laypeople calling it whatever they want, sure they can do that, but they'll still be wrong.
No, they wont be. No individual comitte or person gets to say if a word is right or wrong, its just based on if everyone else uses it too. Dictionaries dont define, they record and codify. As I said, what academics call something has no intrinsic bearing on what its common and 'actual' name is, theyre generally just the first to name something in cases like this and thus it gets adopted following that, presuming its an actual name of sorts.
>This is a science board, so I don't think it's too much to ask that proper science terms be used here.
Being elitist over terminology when you do know what someone is saying is more of a hindrance to discussion than someone using a different term than real astronomers do because of its prominence in science fiction and the popular vernacular.

Fingers crossed for Mass Relay!

Dibs on Liara.

>>6437187
>I wish that scientists would just spill the damn beans already

do you remember the superluminous neutrinos?

>>6437337

If we cannot agree in consensus on a base communication protocol in which we can carry our our discourse then we cannot effectively discuss anything.

So you might want to leave, because anything you say hereonout is irrelevant, because you don't abide by the basic rules that define this community.

you may be a troll, but if you aren't, this is exactly the reason why we have these pointless discussions on life, sentience, consciousness, etc. because these assholes don't speak the right language. and you're one of them.

>>6437340

Dibs on redheaded Shepard with the freckles

Almanac of the Outer Solar System: Planets beyond the Kuiper Belt

Planet - Distance from Sun - Diameter - Composition
X1 - 570 billion miles - 7,000 miles - solid matter
X2 - 830 billion miles - 18,000 miles - hydrogen, ammonia
X3 - 1600 billion miles - 46,000 miles - hydrogen, ammonia

Exercise:

Estimate the length of year for X1, X2, X3.
Compare to the orbital period of the Sun's binary companion.

Fuck all science,
Until they prove there is no god, they haven't accomplished shit.
Praise Yahweh!

>>6437267
>If its a proper noun it shouldnt be prefixed with The.
The Hauge? The Earth? The Sahara? Are these not proper nouns.

>Using its name to describe other stars also just means its used interchangeably with 'star' when talking from certain reference frames
No it's not. The Sun is the Sun, capital letter. A sun is lower case. It's not hard.

>>6437337
>No individual comitte or person gets to say if a word is right or wrong
Yeah it does, this is science not literature. Words need explicit definition. the IUPAC names the elements and gives as explicit terminology to remove confusion. The IAU does the same for astronomers.

There's a difference between elitism and convention. You can say current flows negative to positive but in the eye's of science you are wrong.

>>6437374
We can discuss shit effectively if we make it clear what we're talking about. I know you knew damn well what someone meant when someone referred to our star as 'sol.'
You make quite the good few assumptions, dont you? It must feel good to be so high above those dirty plebeians musnt it.

>>6437393
> this is science not literature.
No, this is common conversation. You are correct only if talking about actual scientific discourse. Not shmucks on an internet forum having relatively loose discussions about astronomy. Even if it is a science board, thatd mean scientific terms would be the norm and if a serious and lengthy conversation popped up theyd be mostly bound to the explicit terminology. But as I said to the other guy, you know damned well what someone means if they refer to our star as 'sol.' Vehemently insisting, outside of an intricate and in depth discussion about these things, that its 'wrong' is just elitism, applying the convention where it is not needed.

>Tyche
>Nemesis
>WOW IT'S FUCKING NOTHING

Pick one.

>>6437421
>>>/lit/

There's no discussion here, you're using wrong terminology intentionally. That's just unhelpful. This is a science board, people have every right to say you are wrong. It's not elitism, it's clarity.

>>6437405
>>6437421

just get out.

>>6437449
>It's not elitism, it's clarity.
>Its clarity
No its fucking not. Its not clarity unless there was an actual impediment to discussion because of it to begin with.
And it is -impossible-, by definition, for there to have been any sort of impediment to discussion if you knew exactly what he meant by 'sol.'
Which you did, and if you didnt, youre either a liar or a moron.
Also,
>there is no discussion here
Oh, maybe you are that autistic and bad at talking to people. Because I dont think you have a damn clue what I was saying.
>Vehemently insisting,
>-outside of an intricate and in depth discussion about these things, -
>that its 'wrong' is just elitism, applying the convention where it is not needed.
IE: Unless there is such a discussion, there is no need to be anal about terms at all.

What about our "sol"ar system? Does it have a name? Btw.. I have a wiener dog... its name? Wiener dog.

https://www.google.com/search?q=asteroid+with+rings#q=asteroid+with+rings&tbm=nws

Someone spilled the beans.

>>6437471
well if if our stars official name was sol, the solar system would be a fitting name for it. If there were a star named Kael, kaelar system would be pretty much as fitting a name for it as 'the kael system.' But that doesnt apply to say, a star with a name such as 'Sirius,' for example.
Its not, though, our star doesnt have an official name. We only call ours the solar system though, I think. We generally just refer to others as star systems.

>>6437476
fucking nothing my ass, thats cool as hell

>>6437476
>asteroid with rings
Sweeeeeeeeeeet.

>>6437471
>not calling it Tosev

>>6437476
>404

HA!

>>6437497
its the illuminati obvs

There's still a 'trace' in G news when searching asteroid rings.

"The European Southern Observatory announced this week the discovery ofringsaround anasteroid1.4 billion miles from Earth."

>>6437497
>>6437476
They still have an animation (from eso itself) online.

http://www.wral.com/weather/video/13511002/

The discovery is rings around asteroid Chariklo guys.

>>6437537
>http://www.wral.com/weather/video/13511002/
Does it have potential to become a planet? No. Who cares? More irrelevant astrology.

>>6437486
I see, that makes sense. I've heard another term for solar system is "logos".

Now, does this withstand the hype?

>>6436952
Sol is the Sun's name in English as well. Other planets have suns as well.

>>6437569
Hell no.
It barely justifies wading through the "what do we call the Sun" drivel in this thread.

>>6437554
>Astrology
1/10
Trying too hard.

>>6437572
It doesnt have an actual name in english. Nobody thought those things in the stars were like the one that gives us light when these words came about.

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:http://www.wral.com/discovery-an-asteroid-with-rings/13510966/

>The European Southern Observatory announced this week the discovery of rings around an asteroid 1.4 billion miles from Earth. Chariklo is the largest of the class of asteroids orbiting the sun between Saturn and Uranus known as Centaurs. Results were published online today in the journal Nature.

>Rings are not an unusual feature in the solar system. Each of the outer planets: Jupiter, Uranus, Neptune and of course Saturn have rings. However Chariklo is the smallest ringed body found to date.

>Just 160 miles wide, Chariklo's ring system spans 12 miles with a five-mile gap between two dense rings.

>"We weren't looking for a ring and didn't think small bodies like Chariklo had them at all, so the discovery – and the amazing amount of detail we saw in the system – came as a complete surprise!" says Felipe Braga-Ribas (Observatório Nacional/MCTI) author of the paper.

>Researchers observed Chariklo during a June 2013 occultation visible only from South America. As the asteroid passed in front of star UCAC4 248-108672, the star's brightness dimmed as expected. However it also dimmed seconds before and after. Comparisons of observations made from seven telescopes allowed researchers to construct a detailed view of the asteroid as well as the shape, width and orientation of the rings.

>The rings, provisionally named Oiapoque and Chuí for rivers in Brazil, may be debris created by a past collision.

>"So, as well as the rings, it's likely that Chariklo has at least one small moon still waiting to be discovered," added Ribas.

>>6437599
omfg.

This is the equivalent of a ruined orgasm.

I remember watching nasa very importand discovery, watched the stream and i was dissapointed so hard... They discovered some organisms in some poison, i realy hoped they discoverd aliens, or that they would just admit that they are somewhere...

>>6437631
>I need people to explain to me why things are significant. I'm going to now throw a tantrum as if knowledgeable people actually care what I think.

>>6437641
well discoverys are importand dont you think so? although they might not effect our lives the same second they are made but they can change the future and perspective of the world of how we understand it.

The Carnegie Institute will make an announcement as well tomorrow and it's also about the "outer solar system".

What I know:
It's probably about stuff beyond the Kuiper belt.
It's supposedly more impressive than the ESO story about the asteroid rings.
It's not "Nibiru" (could be understood as "not a large TNO" or "lol get serious guyz")
Also, no public teasing so far.

>>6437706
It'll also be just a press release and there'll be no press conference.

Stay hyped.

It ain't aliens, guys.

If they actually found aliens, why would they make a quiet announcement like that?

>>6437379
Are answers in the hundreds of thousands of earth years reasonable? The distance from the Sun is large, but I didn't expect answers that high

>>6437737
Because religious people would go fucking insane. Then kill themselves after realizing their whole life was a lie and that there's nothing to live for. I.E Less money in the governments pockets (churches, massive suicide, etc. etc.)

>>6438115
A few would. Most of them would just reinterpret the scriptures so that the aliens had been "predicted" all along.

>>6438135
Very true. Then they would say how they are evil and are spawns of satan.

Wait, so is the nemesis star "inside" the asteroid's rings? Or am I missing something.

Another article that breaks the embargo, it's still online.

http://aerospace.firetrench.com/2014/03/20-seconds-that-changed-our-understanding-of-the-solar-system-surprise-discovery-of-double-ring-system-around-asteroid-like-body/

>In the space of 20 seconds astronomers from the University of St Andrews made the surprising discovery of a double-ring system surrounding one of the many small objects in the Solar System. This object is the Centaur named “Chariklo”, which has a diameter of just about 250 km.

>>6437108
incredible? i think the word you are looking for is terrifying.

>>6439207
why terrifying?

>>6437476
lel beans.

>>6437482
it is kinda meh when you were expecting something like the end of the world tho.

>inb4 it's something only interesting to people very involved in astronomy

>>6439208
this part
>near to oort cloud, frequently disturbing it and causing asteroids to bombard inner solar system.

>>6439217
If it's out there, then it's been there for a long time, so discovering it wouldn't change anything.

That being said, I doubt there's a brown dwarf out there. Jupiter is enough to screw with the orbits of just about everything else in the solar system, and is most of the reason the Oort cloud even exists. Having such a huge object out there wouldn't make sense.

>>6436932
Comets themselves are evidence of it. Not very GOOD evidence, IMO, and CERTAINLY not proof, but evidence nonetheless.

And I'm not really sure why everyone ITT is talking about the Oort cloud; the "outer solar system" includes everything beyond the asteroid belt, so given current capabilities I think it's far more likely to be a discovery within the Kuiper belt or scattered disc.

>>6437257
Yes, afterall, the brazilian word for Sun is Sol.

>>6438115
I've always wondered what the reaction to discovering aliens would be from the biggest (read, Christian and Islamic) religions. I imagine at the very least it would put a really big dent in the whole 'we're God's special creation' narrative

Every time they do this shit, it's some asinine bullshit. Astronomers apparently don't realize that what the general public wants and expects our scientists to be working on is not what they actually do (nor does the public understand their job isn't to look for aliens all day long). There have only been a few important things in astronomy (to lay people) in the past hundred years. Sputnik. Apollo. The big bang. The first exoplanet.

>>6439511
Big bang never happened and you're an ignoramus for believing it did.

>>6439511
>astronomy
>Sputnik. Apollo.

Lay people are stupider than I thought, if they confuse political aerospace projects with astronomy.

Anyway, this discovery is cool not just for science, but for planetary exploration. We have one more interesting destination for deep space probe. I bet there are mission planners already sharpening their pencils planning a visit to Charikio.

>>6438115

No they wouldn't, they'd just fit it into their belief system, claim science is wrong, or outright ignore it. Same thing with anything else (flat earth, geocentricism, evolution, vaccines, etc.).

>>6437599
I hate how scientists report shit like this. Don't get me wrong, the discovery is cool, but why do they play it up the way they do. Reporting something "big" to the general public is new life or a new planet. All it does it make people disappointed.

>>6439511
>first exoplanet
>surprising
>important
>implying anyone but a complete and total retard would assume that other stars dont have planets
>implying it was anything more than confirming 'Yep, that water stuff gets your -arms- wet too!' after spending a few hundred years only touching water with ones hands
>>6439588
>flat earth
Weve known the earth has been round since the egyptians.
Religions did not argue this.

Is it likely to be a dwarf planet larger than Pluto/Eris?

>>6439652
its an asteroid that has rings.
I think its pretty cool actually

Is there a livestream?

When does that shit start?

>>6439695
the press conference starts at 1730GMT, there's no stream and its mainly held in portuegese.
The "infomation embargo" ends at 1800GMT

>>6437706
>>6437706

I'm back again and there are news about this Carnegie announcement. This is much more interesting than the ESO revelation about that ringed asteroid.

Carnegie’s Scott Sheppard and Chad Trujillo (those names should ring some bells) discovered a new TNO named 2012 VP113, which was found beyond the known edge of the solar system. This is likely one of thousands of distant objects that are thought to form the so-called inner Oort cloud. What’s more, their work indicates the potential presence of an enormous planet, perhaps up to 10 times the size of Earth, not yet seen, but possibly influencing the orbit of 2012 VP113, as well as other inner Oort cloud objects.

Minor Planet Center info about 2012 VP113:
http://www.minorplanetcenter.net/mpec/K14/K14F40.html

more:
http://www.astrobio.net/components/com_news/newsPrintDetail.php?id=6082

Nibiru/Tyche/Planet X whatever you call it, it's back in business guys.

>>6439727
>>6439730
These are actually two separate embargoed press conferences.

The OP story (the ESO embargo) is about the ringed asteroid.

This other one is just another Senda like thing.

I am a intern

"We" find world after solar system, with artificial satellite, space elavador, earth like, asteroid fleet with mirrors and propulsion . we find life

GUYS! FORGET THAT ESO SHIT!

http://www.astrobio.net/components/com_news/newsPrintDetail.php?id=6082

American astronomers found a new dwarf planet as well as evidence for a *much* bigger planet in the outer solar system.

NIBIRU HERE I COME BABY!

>>6439742
Nope, everyone already knows what it is.

>>6439730

>tfw no mind blowing, history-changing cosmic discoveries will be made in our lifetimes

>tfw mankind will be alone with a woefully incomplete knowledge of the universe until we all go extinct

Search Google News for 2012 VP113. Site is gone but still available on Google Cache.

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:http://www.astrobio.net/pressrelease/6082/solar-systems-edge-redefined

https://twitter.com/search?q=2012%20vp113&src=typd

leaks about new TNO, more at 18:00UTC

>>6439730
>Both Sedna and 2012 VP113 were found near their closest approach to the Sun, but they both have orbits that go out to hundreds of AU, at which point they would be too faint to discover. In fact, the similarity in the orbits found for Sedna, 2012 VP113 and a few other objects near the edge of the Kuiper belt suggests that an unknown massive perturbing body may be shepherding these objects into these similar orbital configurations. Sheppard and Trujillo suggest a super Earth or an even larger object at hundreds of AU could create the shepherding effect seen in the orbits of these objects, which are too distant to be perturbed significantly by any of the known planets.

>a super Earth or an even larger object at hundreds of AU

So, what's more surprising? Ringed asteroid or second Sedna? What's the greater discovery? And which was worth the hype?

>>6439803
Ringed asteroid is more surprising and important, if boring. Second Sedna + possible phantom Planet X is more hype worthy, but not that important. Maybe for the excitement of us earthlings, but not really for science....

But to be honest both are kinda meh

Is there any way we can effectively chart the outer solar system with all its small and dim objects?

>>6439795
>gas dwarf or super earth at hundreds of AU now a real possibility, again
>That fucking feel when

>>6439588
>I hate how scientists report shit like this. Don't get me wrong, the discovery is cool, but why do they play it up the way they do. Reporting something "big" to the general public is new life or a new planet. All it does it make people disappointed.
It's not scientists' fault that people on reddit and 4chan expect the detection of extraterrestrial life or the disclosure of some ELE-scale impactor every fucking time they hold a press conference to announce a discovery.

15 minutes.

will there be a stream of the conference?

>>6438026
>hundreds of thousands of earth years reasonable?
I think so. I arrived at 478000, 841000 and 2.26 million earth years.

>>6439811
Why is the ringed asteroid more important?

funny how this thread died right at the moment when the actual announcement was eventually made.

>>6440202
It had no point anon, we all know what was going to be announced anyway

>>6439862
I had around 485000, 858000 and 2.27 million., reassuring.

>>6437554
Hey is anyone not getting any sound here?

>>6439803
The idea that there could be many Earth sized or larger objects in the Oort cloud has way more significance than a ringed asteroid, as cool and 'how the fuck?' as a ringed asteroid is.

You /x/ fags need to stop coming here. Seriously all you guys do is set you self up for disappointment time and time again.

>>6439863

because before astronomers wasn't sure such a thing could exist.

>>6437050
>Mass Relay
I really wish.
A nigga would.

>>6439862
>478000, 841000 and 2.26 million earth years.

What if it was small pulsar and it took hundreds of thousands of years to rotate bathing the entire solar system in deadly radiation.

>>6437599
>miles miles miles miles
Fucking shitty system, metric is best.

>>6439640
>>implying anyone but a complete and total retard would assume that other stars dont have planets
You could say the same about life, but there's still people who think we are alone just because there's no evidence.

>>6437221
This so much

>>6437421
I would also like to express my opinion for you to get the fuck out.
I only hope that one day you will realize how retarded you are being right now.

Lets discuss Biden VP113... NO Lets bicker about words instead... '-.-

>>6437631

If you're implying that finding arsenic-based lifeforms isn't cool or at all groundbreaking then you're a class 5 retard.

It's a icy body bigger than pluto but smaller than Neptune. And it' has an atmosphere.

>>6443242

>bigger than pluto but smaller than Neptune

That's a pretty fucking huge margin of error.

>>6436945

You know we would see that right? Do you know how hot it would be? We can see Jupiter and it's not even as hot as a brown dwarf.

If the core of a dead star was floating beyond pluto, you'd fucking see it easily.

>>6443239
Too bad it wasn't real.

>>6437421
Just want to say that I agree with you.

>>6439795
smartfag wat was that recent story on google news about astronomers confirming that there is no planet x? is wat you are describing not a "planet x"?

>>6439819
i blame "science" channels like natgeo for showing documentaries about catastrophic asteroid impacts every other day for years. it is like they are trying to scare the crap out of normal people. also my google sci news is usually jammed with stories about comets and asteroids and close misses.

>>6441667
"weren't". and you are doing a bad job of explaining why that is in anyway important.

>>6437108
>>6436945


your a idiot

>>6443559
WISE ruled out planets on the scale of Jupiter or Saturn or even red or brown dwarves. This new possible planet has 10 earth-masses tops, probably just earth-sized. WISE couldn't detect that.

>>6444010
Earth sized up to ten earth masses is still pretty fucking amazing and I badly hope that it really is out there so we can study it.

>>6444045
Well this objects could well be explained without any additional planets. They could even serve as proof for more conventional models.

http://www.planetary.org/blogs/emily-lakdawalla/2014/03261345-a-second-sedna-what-does-it-mean.html

>>6444126
Yeah, we dont know for sure yet. I really hope that it does turn out to be another earth sized planet though.

One announcement

Two discoveries

Zero world shattering events*


*Rings around an asteroid? Well, we certainly know that rings basicly are a thing that can exist. And now we've seen them around an asteroid. Nobody ruled that out on principle, we've just not seen it yet. Cool find but not groundbreaking. They don't even know if the rings are stable or just a transient phenomenon we happen to see as a fluke.

A new object beyond the Kuiper belt? There are tons of models and theories on the formation and evolution of the solar system that don't rule out those things, some even predict them! Without the need of an unkwown planet. Also, this new thing is tiny and unless they detect a whole new asteroid belt worth of these things they don't point to anything at all yet.

>>6438135
>implying most ancient cultures don't talk about aliens coming to earth

Call it mythology or bullshit or whatever but at least acknowledge it

>>6444209
want to hear about something truly groundbreaking?

Some of the nation's top cryptographers have finally determined that the Gorillaz song "Clint Eastwood" is actually named after the actor who starred in the Dirty Harry movies whose name was Clint Eastwood

>>6444762
No, they dont. They arent aliens like you're implying or like those conspiracy people imply. AT ALL.

>>6443247
>brown dwarf = core of a dead star
>seeing an object at 100+ AU is as easy as seeing Jupiter

>>6436910
this makes me fearful

>>6436910
source?
>notimpressedbybiden

>>6443568

It is important, before it didn't exist now it exist. Unlike /x/'s imaginary tumblr planet.