Lonely Rogue Worlds Surprisingly Outnumber Planets with Suns

Space.com ^ | 05/18/2011 | Mike Wall

[Redcitizen]

Astronomers have discovered a whole new class of alien planet: a vast population of Jupiter-mass worlds that float through space without any discernible host star, a new study finds.

While some of these exoplanets could potentially be orbiting a star from very far away, the majority of them most likely have no parent star at all, scientists say.

And these strange worlds aren't mere statistical anomalies. They likely outnumber "normal" alien planets with obvious parent stars by at least 50 percent, and they're nearly twice as common in our galaxy as main-sequence stars, according to the new study.

Astronomers have long predicted the existence of free-flying "rogue alien planets." But their apparent huge numbers may surprise many researchers, and could force some to rethink how the planets came to be.

[null and void]

Now I have a question. Logic tells me that a big bang or universal wear and tear would make the objects spherical. Is that true? Would they have to be or could they be other shapes?

Any object big enough will form into a sphere, gravity will try to pull everything in as close to the center as possible, that's a sphere.

Can spin be reversed or stopped?

Yes and no. In a closed system the amount of spin is fixed. Stopping a small rapidly spinning mass transfers the spin to whatever stopped it. Usually one doesn't notice the trivial spin a big object picks up doing this.

[mylife]

That’s funny right there LoL

[null and void]

Even in a rotating black hole?

[buwaya]

Yes it seems to.

Why should matter mostly clump into stars, instead of just being out there ?

[mylife]

Thats what scientific instruments are for.

I like that we have tools that keep us from slogging though the entire known world, but I always end up testing the devices for accuracy, and when satisfied with the baseline, I record the results.

I use these things like a layman, because that’s what I am.

[I see my hands]

When I was young I did eagerly frequent,
Doctor, Saint and heard great argument,
About it and about,
But evermore came out,
The same door which in I went.

[Jack Hammer]

The planets’ surface is reported to be very nearly as dark as Washington.

[Aliska]

Thank you. That mostly makes sense. What if the system isn't closed, bounded or inter-penetrated by another in the same universe? I guess if it was the same universe, we ought to know that by now.

I forgot what somebody told me once I got on the internet why the sky is blue. But when I was a kid I asked my father how far out the universe was. I can't remember what he said, but it always seemed to me that it had to be infinite; I used to think of a huge wall and then something just had to be on the other side. I know it probably can't be exactly like that, and I can't seem to escape that kind of reasoning.

Sooner or later those free planets will be captured in a gravitational field or will themselves capture an object or objects by its gravitational field. Or something else. And when matter collides or other celestial event, the matrix changes. I forgot all about anti-matter and don't know what that is.

I tried to read that history of space and time, and it was too far beyond me. So was that one comment where the big bang was arrived at by a series of equations.

One thing I've always thought is that the more we know, what we don't know increases exponentially but couldn't have put it in those terms when young. Is it normal for young girls to think about things like that? I never got too far with it and was yanked back by the fascinations or distractions of my world.

Could we blow up the sun if we wanted to? I shouldn't ask stupid questions where mostly I couldn't understand the answers. I still can't remember why when that girl in physics class touched that some kind of jar, her hair would stand out lol.

[dr_lew]

I sure wish we could travel to see these things in the Universe.

We have as good a vantage point as any right where we are. For example, the Andromeda nebula ( a spiral galaxy like our own ) is right next to us, and is several times as large as the moon in the night sky. The trouble is that it's too dim to see, and this is true of all the spectacular nebular objects we know from time exposure images.

It's true that many of them are farther away and hence small in the sky, but even if you were near them the would only appear as a dim glow at best.

[EasySt]

Check this out to get an idea of the scale of things...

let it load... it’s big. Slide the bar right or left.

http://primaxstudio.com/stuff/scale_of_universe/

Enjoy!

[maine-iac7]

But there is more to the universes than our math and observation can explain.

"33And worlds without number have I created; and I also created them for mine own purpose; and by the Son I created them, which is mine Only Begotten."

[piytar]

Space is big. Not just big, but BIG. Mind boggling BIG. Huge. In fact, beyond huge.

Really really big. Just stupid big. Think of the biggest thing you've seen. That thing is to space waht an atom is to everything you can see right now. Actually, that thing is smaller than that. A lot. A WHOLE lot.

So if something doesn't show up in our tiny solar system, that means exactly nothing.

Or did I miss the /sarc tag?

[piytar]

“Why should matter mostly clump into stars, instead of just being out there ?”

That’s actually a VERY good question that physicists are still struggling with. To wit, why is the universe “lumpy”?

Dunno. Figure it out, get a Nobel in physics...

[USFRIENDINVICTORIA]

It seems to me that an Earth-like rouge planet would make a great “generations ship”, to travel in deep, deep space. Of course, you'd need to figure out how to get aboard, and you'd have to bring a power supply (portable fusion reactors, perhaps). Does anyone know of a SciFi story, based on such a scenario?

[piytar]

I just spent 20 minutes trying to track that link down using my BlackBerry, and you’d already posted it. LOL.

[PastorBooks]

“33And worlds without number have I created; and I also created them for mine own purpose; and by the Son I created them, which is mine Only Begotten.”

While I agree with the sentiment, I need to mention to the readers that this quote was taken from Mormon literature, which most Freepers reject.

If you are going to quote from Mormon writings in the future, please give the reference so there won’t be any confusion.

Thank you!

[Puckster]

So how does this fit in with gravitational theory of planet formation around suns?

If a sun super nova’s, there wouldn’t be any planets left.

These couldn’t have formed around stars per gravity.

Sounds like the “Electrical Universe” theory comes closer to describing formation of matter “more than” gravity.

[AZLiberty]

Last I heard was that Schrödinger’s cat is still dead.

You won't know until you open the microwave.

[maine-iac7]

well,now, Pastor, I deliberately didn't give the reference - because, should anyone want to know - all they had to do was copy, paste and hit search.

Simple as that.

But I noticed you didn't comment on the fact that this verse was printed over 150+ years ago - and it's only been a couple of decades since scientists have been realizing we're not only NOT the only planet in the Universe = but there are MANY out there.

So what the verse says is true. Even if it does come from Mormon scripture.

Truth is truth.

And Freepers are smart enough to protect themselves, they don't have to be coddled.

[AZLiberty]

My astronomer son, who’s skeptical about the rogue planets in the first place, doesn’t think that the rogue planets could account for the apparent mass of dark matter. The data suggest that there may be as many rogue planets as there are stars, but the mass of a rogue planet is less than 1% of a star, hence the total mass of all rogue planets would be less than 1% of the total mass of all stars.