Technology Review - Published By MIT
Advertisement

arXiv blog

The Physics arXiv Blog produces daily coverage of the best new ideas from an online forum called the Physics arXiv on which scientists post early versions of their latest ideas. Contact me at KentuckyFC @ arxivblog.com

Email Subscription

Recently on the arXiv blog...

Recent comments on the arXivblog

  • mulliguns : Points to why a pair may be the most difficult to row successfully, and that sometimes odd size...
  • shaase : It would seem difficult to guarantee that oarsmen all pull with the same force, so it will still...
  • seth : Even though the new arrangements were not immediately obvious, I do think they make common sense....
  • ... : I have examined the major uranium producing countries and made a forecast for 2009, 2010 and...
  • ZephirAWT : Frankly, I don't believe in communication hypothesis wery much, but there's is at least another...
  • ... : http://www.technologyreview.com/energy/22114/The link above goes to your Technology Review...
  • jmc8888 : Great explanation of an issue that only concerns the idiots. If running out of nuclear fuel was a...
  • spad12 : "Federally insured loans do not reduce the overall cost of projects, they just shift part of the...
  • Siphon : Of course, many things do change with temperature: density of the radioactive material, which...
  • mbelvadi : I wonder if this model takes into account the slow cumulation of very tiny increments of...
  • ZephirAWT : That's OK, it's word consumption (110 thousands tons of uranium concentrate) - enough to next ten...
  • Bob... : 1) "Federally back the loans..."  Federally insured loans do not reduce the overall cost of...
  • tsport100 : What a load of alarmist rubbish this article is. Australia has 1.2 MILLION tonnes of known...
  • ZephirAWT : /*..Uranium is being taken from coal ash waste...*/It isn't - we are only speculating about it...
  • Colonel... : Says this blog: "The combined threats of climate change, energy security and fears over the high...
  • spad12 : "The initial costs (overnight costs) are very large.    Financing the construction effectively...
  • Bob... : "it is cheap after the initial costs (and even then a large portion of the costs is in the form...
  • pasward : Do they?  If you are headed toward a star, being off by 1,000,000 km is still going to get you...
  • spad12 : A: Most of the current estimates brought up on when we will run out of uranium are based on no...
  • Eutropia : Isn't uranium responsible for a large amount of the heat generated within the earth? Isn't it...
Advertisement
Tuesday, April 14, 2009

Estimating the orbit of Planet X

If Planet X is out there in the icy reaches of the Solar System, we should see its affect on the orbital motion of the inner planets

"Does the Solar System contain undiscovered massive planets or a distant stellar companion of the Sun?" asks Lorenzo Iorio at the Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare in Pisa, Italy.

If it does, then the orbital period of such a body would be so long that any gravitational influence on the known planets can be thought of as a constant, tiny perturbation.

Iorio has looked at a the perihelion precessions of Venus, Earth and Mars in the last century and asked whether there is any indication of such a force in action.

Apparently not, he says, but that doesn't rule out its presence. Instead, it has allowed Iorio to place limits on how far away such a planet might be.

His conclusion is that if Planet X is out there and about the size of Earth, it must more than 130 AU away. If it is the size of Jupiter, it cannot be closer than 886 AU and if it were a brown dwarf with a mass around 80 times that of Jupiter, it would have to be more than 3800 AU away.

Let's get looking!

Ref: arxiv.org/abs/0904.1562: Constraints on Planet X and Nemesis from Solar System's Inner Dynamics


Comments

  • Ummm... typo?
    Hi

    The distances you quote as distance limits don't appear anywhere in the paper. In fact you seem out by quite big factors.
    Rate this comment: 12345

    qraal
    04/14/2009
    Posts:2
  • [no subject]
    Corrected. Thanks!
    Rate this comment: 12345

    kfc
    04/14/2009
    Posts:5
    Avg Rating:
    5/5
  • [no subject]
    We should see its >>effect<<, not affect. Affect is a verb, effect is a noun.
    Rate this comment: 12345

    Grammarian
    04/14/2009
    Posts:2
    Avg Rating:
    5/5
    • Re: affect
      Both of affect and effect are both nouns and verbs.

      http://xkcd.com/326/

      http://www.wsu.edu/~brians/errors/affect.html
      Rate this comment: 12345

      djweber
      04/14/2009
      Posts:5
      Avg Rating:
      3/5
      • Re: affect
        Affect can be used as a noun in psychology. Wrong is still wrong.
        Rate this comment: 12345

        Grammarian
        04/14/2009
        Posts:2
        Avg Rating:
        5/5
        • Re: affect
          My dear Grammarian: Why not ‘affect’? One body would make the other to wobble by their mutual closeness, because they would exchange streams of affection in the realm of Cosmic Love and Harmony. Do the terrenal rules of grammar rule in space? I doubt it!
          Rate this comment: 12345

          hdginzo
          04/15/2009
          Posts:6
          Avg Rating:
          3/5
          • affect/effect
            bodies have an effect (noun) on each other.  bodies affect (verb) each other.
            Rate this comment: 12345

            mbloore
            04/17/2009
            Posts:28
            Avg Rating:
            4/5
  • Nemesis anyone?
    Back to the subject of this evening's symposium...has anyone else here read Richard Muller's book "Nemesis"?(http://muller.lbl.gov/pages/lbl-nem.htm)  I noticed the reference to Nemesis in the article, so I assume yes? Their calculated orbit is nominally 1.5 light years across, so 100K AU?
    Just wanted to see if you are aware that this is  a well plowed field.  
    Rate this comment: 12345

    garylynn
    04/15/2009
    Posts:4
    Avg Rating:
    3/5
Advertisement

Log In

Forgot your password?     Register »
Advertisement
Technology Review November/December 2009

Current Issue

Natural Gas Changes the Energy Map
The United States has vast supplies of this cleaner fossil fuel. But how should we use it?
•  Subscribe
Save 36%
•  Table of Contents
•  MIT News
» Gift Subscription
» Digital Subscription
» Reprints, Back Issues
» Subscribe
» Table of Contents
» MIT News

More Technology News from Forbes

Advertisement
MIT Massachusetts Institute of Technology © 2009 Technology Review. All Rights Reserved.