]]>

]]>

Statistics: Posted by Banana — 24 Jun 2017 13:26

]]>

]]>

Supposedly shot a few days ago near Barybino, Moscow oblast. Little info to be found so far. An article, mostly nonsense, here.

Statistics: Posted by midtskogen — 23 Jun 2017 13:39

]]>

The biggest takeaway is that there really isn't a whole lot of room remaining in terms of observations for more planets to be out there. Either they are there and we will find them soon, or they aren't there and we'll be soon be confident that they aren't.

There's a helpful (and humorous) chart from xkcd that shows this. (From xkcd.com/1633/.)

Statistics: Posted by Mr. Missed Her — 23 Jun 2017 08:14

]]>

For those unfamiliar, Soter's Discriminant is a measure of orbital clearing by the ratio of the object's mass to the total mass of all other objects sharing the orbital space. The more the object cleared the orbit the bigger that ratio will be, and there's a pretty large gap between planets and dwarf planets. Of course, using it requires some knowledge of the population of objects in that space, which right now is rather poor that far out.

Margot's Pi is a dynamical measure of the object's ability to clear its neighborhood over the lifetime of the star. The larger the mass and the smaller the orbit, the shorter the clearing time:

So for example, if Planet Nine is at 700AU, then it must be at least twice the mass of Earth to clear its orbit over the age of the solar system.

Statistics: Posted by Watsisname — 23 Jun 2017 00:54

]]>

]]>

Goodbye Planet 9, Hello Planet 10

The biggest takeaway is that there really isn't a whole lot of room remaining in terms of observations for more planets to be out there. Either they are there and we will find them soon, or they aren't there and we'll be soon be confident that they aren't.

Statistics: Posted by Watsisname — 22 Jun 2017 16:44

]]>

so there could be not one, but two planets that are out there to be found.

the ninth and this one.

Statistics: Posted by Spacer — 22 Jun 2017 09:47

]]>

Statistics: Posted by midtskogen — 21 Jun 2017 23:06

]]>

Statistics: Posted by Gnargenox — 21 Jun 2017 17:44

]]>

Nah! The first thing I did after seeing the result was checking the professional ones and the difference is quite noticeable. But I still can't believe that I managed to pull those up!

HarbingerDawn wrote:

DoctorOfSpace wrote:

Thank you! It's good to know that I'm not the only one impressed!

Watsisname wrote:

Really? I like M8 a little bit more, even if after the processing it ended up a little overexposed.

I'll keep posting my results each time I get something new and interesting enough.

Statistics: Posted by pzampella — 21 Jun 2017 16:39

]]>

Statistics: Posted by Watsisname — 20 Jun 2017 20:47

]]>

]]>