TNO/Scattered DIsc/Oort Cloud

[Anonymous No.7398966]

Is it possible there could be a large planet, either a gas giant or a super-Earth, somewhere beyond the orbit of Neptune?

Or would a large planet have been spotted by Astonomers already and we'll only find small things out there? I was thinking earlier about how huge the Oort Cloud is supposed to be and wondering if gravity would cause anything to form over time.

[Anonymous No.7398982]

>>7398966
im sorry what is that blue "cloud" in the moon?

[Anonymous No.7398989]

>>7398982

You don't know about Io?

[Anonymous No.7398991]

>>7398989
has volcanoes...ah thanks

[Anonymous No.7399036]

I read somewhere that it still is possible there is a large object out in the Kuiper belt or past it. There are still some gravitational anomalies that aren't explained by the current objects we have found.

Before you quote me on this, let me find the source and see if it was valid. It might have been /x/ tier shit.

[Anonymous No.7399060]

>>7398966
OK, found something. It looks like Mike Brown has made comments about the origin of objects such as Sedna and 2012 VP113. Both have huge perhelions, which doesn't make sense according to Brown. He seems to think there are some larger objects out past the Kuiper cliff - even some Mars or Earth sized. It's very hard to find something even that large that far out, however, the James Webb or some other massive ground based telescope might be able to find it.

[Anonymous No.7399085]

>>7399060
what
where's venus?

[Anonymous No.7399091]

>>7399085
venus is a gas planet of sulfur

[Anonymous No.7399092]

>>7399085
Idk, that's like a ten year old image I had saved in my space folder. It's stupidly wrong now.

[Anonymous No.7399099]

>>7399091
Retard.

[Anonymous No.7399108]

>>7399099
Look at that swirly current of storms
just like jupiter

[Anonymous No.7399130]

>>7398966
>As of March 2014, observations with the WISE telescope have ruled out the possibility of a Saturn-sized object out to 10,000 AU, and a Jupiter-sized or larger object out to 26,000 AU.

[Anonymous No.7399137]

>>7399130
>In 2014, astronomers announced the discovery of 2012 VP113, a large object with a Sedna-like 4200-year orbit and a perihelion of roughly 80 AU, which led to some speculation that it offered evidence of a potential trans-Neptunian planet. Trujillo and Sheppard argued that the clustering of arguments of perihelia for VP113 and other distant TNOs argued for the existence of a "super-Earth" of between 2 and 15 Earth masses near the ecliptic at 200–300 AU; however, subsequent calculations by Lorenzo Iorio argue a minimum distance of 496–570 AU for an object of 2 Earth masses and 970–1111 AU for an object of 15 Earth masses. In 2014 Astronomers at the Universidad Complutense in Madrid suggested that the available data actually argue for more than one trans-Neptunian planet.

[Anonymous No.7399140]

>>7399137
>Computer simulations by Patryk Lykawka of Kobe University have suggested that an object with a mass between 0.3 and 0.7 Earth masses, ejected outward by Neptune early in the Solar System's formation and currently in an elongated orbit between 101 and 200 AU from the Sun, could explain the Kuiper cliff and the peculiar detached objects such as Sedna and 2012 VP113.

[Anonymous No.7399165]

>>7399140
>In 2012, Rodney Gomes of the National Observatory of Brazil modelled the orbits of 92 Kuiper belt objects and found that six of those orbits were far more elongated than the model predicted. He concluded that the simplest explanation was the gravitational pull of a distant planetary companion, such as a Neptune-sized object at 1500 AU or a Mars-sized object at around 53 AU.

[Anonymous No.7399185]

>>7399165
WISE was not able to detect Kuiper belt objects, as their temperatures are too low. It was able to detect any objects warmer than 70–100 K. A Neptune-sized object would be detectable out to 700 AU, a Jupiter-mass object out to 1 light year (63,000 AU), where it would still be within the Sun's zone of gravitational control.

[Anonymous No.7399189]

>>7399108

[Anonymous No.7399190]

"The analysis of several possible scenarios strongly suggest that at least two trans-Plutonian planets must exist," they conclude.

Close, it's three of them. Also: Persistent Evidence of a Jovian Mass Solar Companion (arxiv.org/abs/1004.4584)

Would the dwarf count as a planet?

[Anonymous No.7400103]

>>7399185

Could a gas giant theoretically be colder than those, though?

[Anonymous No.7400111]

>>7399060
Why didn't they use Hubble?

[Anonymous No.7400419]

>>7400103
Nope, cooling curves after 5.6 Gyrs indicate that you'd be @ 150K roughly.

[Anonymous No.7400432]

>>7400419

I see, thanks. So basically there's no possibility of there being a gas giant out there because we'd have spotted it by now.

[Anonymous No.7400446]

>>7399091
>venus
>gas planet
someone hasn't been taking their daily dose of Sagan

[Anonymous No.7400587]

>>7398966
A popular theory to explain the current solar system has a giant planet ejected early on.

Perhaps the planet is still out there orbiting the sun.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypothetical_fifth_giant_planet

[Anonymous No.7400886]

>>7400432
Well, as in
>>7399185
>>7399165
>>7399137

a Neptune-sized object (~15 Earth masses) might be plausible at 1000-1500 AU yet undetectable. Brown dwarfs of several Jupiter masses or even red dwarfs can be completely ruled out though and smaller Earth to sub-Earth mass objects could still hide out there.

[Anonymous No.7401241]

It'd be visible indirectly by its gravity, just like even tiny Pluto was.

[Anonymous No.7401256]

>>7401241
Neptune was found by its gravitational influence on Uranus but can still be easily seen with a telescope.
Pluto was discovered with a telescope as well as a fluke result of a search based on faulty data that suggested Neptune might be under gravitational influence of an undiscovered planet.

[Anonymous No.7403250]

Would there even be a way to get decent heat for life out there?

[Anonymous No.7403992]

>>7403250
Considering mars is near edge of goldilocks zone. Definitely not

[Anonymous No.7404016]

>>7403250
Not from the light of the Sun but there are chances for nuclear decay or even limited nuclear fusion.

[Anonymous No.7404172]

>>7404016
don't you need a star for nuclear fusion?

[Anonymous No.7404174]

>>7404172
You're a star if you can fuse hydrogen-1 but there are other possible fusions like deuterium that require less mass.