Posted on 03/18/2019 11:59:35 PM PDT by SunkenCiv
To determine exactly why Kepler-107c is so dense, first the researchers considered what they already knew. Previous research has shown that intense stellar radiation can strip the atmosphere from a planet that sits too near its host star. But if the innermost planet lost its lighter atmospheric elements, it should be more dense than its twin, not less. According to the study, this would "make the more-irradiated and less-massive planet Kepler-107b denser than Kepler-107c," which is clearly not the case.
However, there is another way that a planet can lose a lot of mass: by getting smacked with another planet. And this is exactly what the researchers think happened to Kepler-107c.
The researchers argue that the denser planet, Kepler-107c, likely experienced a massive collision with a third, unknown planet at some point in its past. Such a gigantic impact, the study says, would have stripped the lighter silicate mantle from Kepler-107c, leaving behind an extremely dense, iron-rich core. According to the study, Kepler-107c could be as much as 70 percent iron.
Because the mass and radius of Kepler-107c matches what would be expected from a giant planetary impact, the researchers are fairly confident that the collisional scenario they've outlined in their paper is accurate; however, they still need to confirm their hypothesis. If proven correct, this new find would become the first-ever evidence of a planetary collision outside our solar system.
(Excerpt) Read more at blogs.discovermagazine.com ...
A planetary collision is exactly as bad as you would imagine. Unlike an asteroid impact, there's not just a crater left behind. Instead, such a massive crash causes the surviving world to be stripped of much of its lighter elements, leaving behind an overly dense core. Credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech
In before the first moron makes a moronic boilerplate comment about seeking grants.
|
It seems amazing that we know the ‘density’ of the core of a distant planet, but still aren’t sure what is at the core of Earth, or even what’s at the bottom of the ocean.
Let's ask Morgan Freeman, he knows the answer!
And they’re going to try to prove their hypothesis without direct observation.
Makes ya wonder about them experts, eh?
Somehow I am reminded of Immanuel Velikovsky’s Worlds in Collision.
Pictures at 11:00.
So, maybe on the order of 1 billion cubic miles of iron?
That's a whole lot of rebar and steel framed buildings.
Or still don't know what happened to Hillary's emails....
Good luck taking off from such a planet with your payload. Assuming you survived the "landing".
look up Younger Dryas Impact and ignore the establishment dead-enders. It happened. Changed Everything. We remembered it. Proof is in the ground now, nearing acceptance stage of academic grief.
I still watch that movie from time to time. It’d be a prime candidate for an MST3K riff.
Though dated. George Pal sci-fi movies were great in their day. My favorite being War Of The Worlds
The ‘comet’ that probably crunched the Laurentide Ice Sheet, 12000 years ago. Sent a warming world back into another millennium of ice age and perhaps helped kill off the Pleistocene megafauna ( along with our help)
Ditto with Pal’s The Time Machine.
MMMmmmmm. Weena.
Re: “Good luck taking off from such a planet with your payload.”
I have a feeling that trying to mine or refine basic materials in space, or in near Earth orbit, will never be commercially viable.
Rare minerals and rare elements - maybe.
“Pictures at 11:00.”
Ahh...good early RP solo work.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
