I just learned that there's a "planet 9" so bear

>that close
Mean Pluto's distance from the sun is 40AU. And it's dark out there m8.

200 to 1200 AU is stretching the definition of 'close' a bit.

File: 2016-07-03 13_58_09-Planet Nine animation - Planet Nine - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.png (34KB, 607x443px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 607x443px

>>8180406
Even 1200 AU is less than 0,02 light years so it's not that far away in the context of SPACE and the stuff we've been able to detect like all these possibly earth-like planets out there.

Pic related the small blue circle in the middle is Earth's orbit and purple is Neptune.

>>8180411
>we've been able to detect like all these possibly earth-like planets out there.

How are those exo-solar planets detected?

>>8180426
sorry, I (>>8180426) may have misread your post.

Is Sedna 'earth-like'?
Same question wrt the other 5 objects in the pic?

>>8180387
lets assume the planet reflects all the sunlight that hits it. Thats gives it an albedo of 1. The luminosity of the sun is 3.846*10^26 W. At a distance of 200 AU, this gives a flux of .034 W/m^2. If the planet has a diameter of 4 times earth, then the amount of light hitting the planet is 6.97*10^13 W. Even with an albedo of 1 this is tiny. Its 10^13 times dimmer than the sun and at least 200 times further away.

Another reason planet 9 would be incredibly hard to spot is because telescopes are limited by the diffraction of light. In order to see the planet in the visible range, you'd need a telescope of at least 1 meter out in space. Hubble is 2.4 meters, but it uses high exposures to study deep space, which is the opposite of whats needed to find a planet like this. What we need is precision photometry. The angular diameter of the planet i calculated earlier was 4*10^-7 radians or ~.08 arc seconds. Now this is perfectly reasonable for today's technology to spot, but because of it's distance from the sun this planet needs to be moving extremely fast. Using Kepler's Laws we can find it's average velocity to be about 2100 m/s. This might explain why it's so difficult to find using sky sweeps, if it even exists at all.

>Would something that big that close not pop out noticably from the background when they do their "sweeps" of the sky like they do?
Not necessarily. Firstly it could be as faint as 24-25th magnitude in the most distant part of it's orbit which is beyond the depth of current large sky surveys. Much of it's orbit has already been ruled out by existing surveys, some have not been searched for it yet either. I work on a small sky survey and we had someone contact us about looking for Planet 9 but our survey is not set up for this, we only have one pass so we don't detect moving objects.


>>8180458
>Another reason planet 9 would be incredibly hard to spot is because telescopes are limited by the diffraction of light. In order to see the planet in the visible range, you'd need a telescope of at least 1 meter out in space.

That's not true. You don't need to resolve the planet in order to detect it. People are looking for it now in ground based surveys.

>>8180458
>>8180485
thanks for insight

>>8180485
>You don't need to resolve the planet in order to detect it.
Really? Then how do you detect it? You're right that a 1 m telescope in space isn't the only way to detect it, but the ground based telescopes doing this are much larger than 1 m and they sure as hell better resolve SOMETHING if they are gonna claim they can detect it.

>>8180513
>Then how do you detect it?
Unresolved objects can still be detected, as point sources. Angular resolution doesn't limit your ability to detect objects (in general). All but a few dozen stars are unresolved by even the best telescopes, yet any image you see is full of them.

The ground based telescopes doing these surveys have much poorer resolution than a 1m class space telescope (like Euclid), you can't use adaptive optics on wide fields.

>>8180426
>How are those exo-solar planets detected?
By detecting a wobble in the host star (requires a huge planet to cause a visible wobble), or
detecting occlusion of host star on transiting. The latet ris what is driving up the number of detections and is also more sensitive. The thing is that it requires occlusions which means we rely on the massive coincidence of the hist star, the exo-planet and Earth to line up in one straight line. A slightly different orbital inclination and we will never see that planet.

File: 2016_01_21-Tinfoil-PlanetX-Theories-ILL_16-9-header504647409.png (2MB, 1290x725px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1290x725px

It was originally called planet X, but NASA didn't want to concede to the conspiracy theorists, so they demoted Pluto from planet status and made Planet X the new Planet 9.

>>8180567
The demotion of Pluto and the claim of planet 9 were not NASA and they were a decade apart.

>>8180387
>that close
>between 200 and 1200 AU
fgt pls

>>8180387
>Would something that big that close not pop out noticably from the background when they do their "sweeps" of the sky like they do?

Not without a telescope capable of resolving it, and the whole sky hasn't been 'swept'.

File: find planet nine.jpg (202KB, 750x875px) Image search: [Google]

202KB, 750x875px

>Fig. 10.— Using all constraints on the orbital and physical pa-rameters of Planet Nine, we can predict the location, distance, brightness, and speed of the planet throughout its orbit. Regions within 10 degrees of the galactic plane are outlined in red, and the ecliptic plane is shown in blue. The colored portions show regions where Planet Nine would have been or should be detected by pre-vious or ongoing surveys. Light blue shows limits from the CRTS reanalysis, yellow shows Dark Energy Survey limits and cover-age, dark blue shows Pan-STARRS transient analysis limits, green shows Pan-STARRS moving object analysis current limits, and red shows eventual Pan-STARRS expected limits. Orange shows the region exclusively ruled out by lack of observed perturbation to Saturn (Fienga et al. 2016; Holman & Payne 2016). The black re-gions show regions of phase space where Planet Nine could not have been or will not be detected in previous or currently planned surveys.

tl:dr look in the black area's of its predicted orbit

>>8180883
I understand this

Translating from 4chanese to English:

"I just learned" => "I read on a woo site that sells fake medicine"