Astronomy / Space Another new exo planet breaks all the rules

[Oddball]

You can read the article below....

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2013/08/06/low_mass_jupiter_exoplanet/

 

[Cody]

As they say, rules are there to be broken. Perhaps the Universe has no rules - only guidelines.

 

[Patrick_68000]

Human rules are not always universal

 

[gunbladelad]

Only if they're made by the movie company...

Seriously though, our current understanding of the way the universe operates is still extremely basic - there will always be stuff popping up that defies human explanation.

 

[Daminvs]

Rules? lol

 

[PacalB]

"Its discovery implies that we need to seriously consider alternative formation theories, or perhaps to reassess some of the basic assumptions in the core-accretion theory."

Hmmm? I'm not so sure I'd agree with that. There is such a thing known as planetary migration which could have happened in its distant past. Who's to say what anomalous orbital effects might have happened to GJ 504b in its past? You can be sure they don't know.

What needs to be kept in mind is that the sightings of these planets are mere snapshots in time. I mean think about it, if you look at our system from the outside and you happened to spot Venus spinning the wrong way round, would that be reason enough to throw out your theory? Of course not, you'd look for other possible explanations.

To say; "seriously consider alternative formation theories" is majorly jumping the gun.

The outer two planets of the Solar System, Uranus and Neptune, are believed to have migrated outward in this way from their formation in orbits near Jupiter and Saturn to their current positions, over hundreds of millions of years.[2] Eventually, friction within the planetesimal disc made the orbits of Uranus and Neptune circular again.

Whats to say GJ 504b isn't an extreme case of this effect?

 

[Cathy]

Well really. That's just inconsiderate But it's forgiven because it's a lovely colour.

That is it's real colour, right? Someone's been to take a proper photo?

Good.

 

[PacalB]

Well really. That's just inconsiderate But it's forgiven because it's a lovely colour.

That is it's real colour, right? Someone's been to take a proper photo?

Good.

Exactly, they don't know its actual colour, they are just going on what it would be radiating spectrum wise with its gasses. To your actual eyes, it might look something way different to that, certainly not that pink panther blob in that artist impression there.

 

[Cody]

... certainly not that pink panther blob in that artist impression there.

A planet that is positively pink?

It is (by their estimate: 160 million years old) a very young system. Too young for planetary migration, perhaps?

 

[PacalB]

A planet that is positively pink?

It is (by their estimate: 160 million years old) a very young system. Too young for planetary migration, perhaps?

Again, we don't know what kind of interactions were going on in that stellar system, even if it is just 160 million years old. Orbital bodies interact with each other as systems form and sometimes in very extreme ways. For all we know this could have interacted with another body and was partially ejected out of the young system. We know things like that were happening in our solar system in its early days, why not there as well?

I just think one data point is not enough to be throwing out wild statements like that. If this kind of thing becomes common place maybe there's some validity in it but one data point? They should know better.