Planet X, and other planets that have such eccentric & large orbits but are quite large, will need their own category of planet, not Dwarf, or Rocky or Gas Giant, but Outer Orbiting Planets or OOPS!
right? they just make it so much more complicated than it has to be. just call them planets. rocky, gas, icy, ocean planets as distinctions are good enough.
I like that. You should seriously propose that to the IAU, or maybe something like outer orbiting planet-like specimen (OOPS) so it always has an S on the end
I feel bad for the two dummies in here that can’t keep up lol. “hur dur distinction and classifications make me thonk too much hur dur hur dur” *proceeds to shit pants while thinking of the scary possibility we have to remember one more word for planets*
There are a few errors here worth mentioning, but it is largely a good video! 1. Reached technological limit. We have reached the limit of what is currently possible in surveys, but you didn't mention the important Vera Rubin Observatory which is expected to start operating in 2024. This is exactly the telescope we need to find these sort of objects - if planet 9 exists this is virtually certain to find it, along with a lot more besides. It is also worth mentioning that the JWST is a completely different kind of telescope, it has an extremely narrow field of view which means it's totally unsuited to survey work, it'd be like searching a room by looking through a keyhole! Once it knows where to look, thats where the JWST comes in. As a side note, sometime this year we can expect papers on JWST observations of a number of Kuiper belt objects, which means better measurements of size/mass and moons etc as well. The best images will still be very pixelated but it's better than sometimes only a few pixels across from hubble. 1.b) "why can't we see a planet in our solar system when we can see distant galaxies" is probably something that needs to be explained. Those distant galaxies are also very big (thousands of light years in diameter) and very bright, shining with a billion suns worth of light. A large object in the solar system would be say 1000 km in diameter, many many orders of magnitude less. An object in the solar system also doesn't shine brightly in visible light, so there are two options: A - make a big telescope to collect enough light to see it and B - everything glows at some wavelength, so use a telescope that detects longer wavelengths as you know its going to be cold so far from the sun. The problem with A is the inverse square law - if you go 10 times further out, you receive 10^2 = 100 times less light from the sun. Then the light has to go back to you from the planet so is hit by the inverse square law a second time! 10 times further out from the sun means 10^4 = 10,000 times dimmer to your telescope! The problem with B is that while objects might glow more in longer wavelengths, luminosity also has a relationship with temperature - its proportional to the *fourth* power! Considering these objects are at 30K or so, this means that they remain extremely dim, even in the brightest wavelengths. tl;dr - rocks are small and dark, galaxies are big and bright. 2. The figures you gave for planet 9 are out of date. The current estimates for planet 9 are 6.3 +2.3/-1.5 earth masses, an average distance of 460 +160/-100 AU and closest approach of the orbit of 340 +80/-70 AU and finally an inclination of 16+-5 degrees (edited this because I accidentally out of date estimates). It may still be a mini-neptune type world, but could also have a thick atmosphere but still a solid surface (a super earth) 3. The figures given for similarly sized objects as sedna are also out of date, its now thought there are about 40 sedna size objects - and this is steadily lowering as we get further out without finding anything rivalling in size. A mars sized world remains possible, as does several plutos. Back in 2015 Mike Brown said that there is still about a 1/3 chance that there is something big (i.e pluto size world) less than 100 AU distant that remains undetected due to its position in the sky being against the background of our galaxy. I don't know how much this remains true.
I am pretty sure that IF it exists, it's already been photographed in a past survey. Once it has been found and people know where to look,they will find it hidden in the enormous mountains of data we have already gathered with past telescopes
I was wondering through the whole video when Vera Rubin would be mentioned. The part about his "only two ideas he could think of" to find this thing being many JWSTs or a probe had huge sniffing my own farts vibes since the actual solution exists and should be well known and his ideas were stupid.
For those trying to read the freeze-frames, here's what they say: 8:23 - "When you take into acount _[sic]_ Planet X's orbital inclination, this pushes the search into three dimensions. Then figuring out where in its orbit it is adds a fourth dimension as well, time." 9:38 - "I know their sunshields are pointing in the wrong direction, the visual just felt more clear this way" 20:38 - "On second thought, I think it's pronounced more like 'Say-lus'" 20:57 - "and Earth"
IF your talking about a star, then we'd have seen it by now. It would glow enough for us to see it even if it was a small red dwarf. And depending on how far away it is, we would have definately noticed it move.
honestly, regardless of if planet X or Y actually exist or not it still would be absolutely sick to have more places out there that aren't light years away from us around another star
@@enjoidapuci641 No, we're searching for Planet X, the source of the shaving cream atom. It comes after Planet W and if you hit Planet Y you've passed it.
@@enjoidapuci641 it's technically called planet 9, but the person who originally conceptualized it called it planet x so that name stuck it's kinda like variables in math, y = 2+x whatnot
@@Designed1 No that is not true, we had nine planets, including Pluto, so we were looking for planet 10 or X, at the time all the movies came out used ROMAN NUMERALS, just like the Super Bowl, now everyone is an idiot and forgot that we only have 8 planets and still use the WRONG terminology. I was born in the 70s, I lived this, I am not an idiot. I have followed astronomy very closely, since I had all A's in every science and math all the way up to Calculus IV, that's 4, for the idiots, and I remember Rocky IV very clearly... stop being idiots and then trying to justify it with a nonsense excuse...Its planet 9 or IX that we are looking for. Do you know what a roman numeral is? X is a roman numeral, it stands for 10. Thats it, dont try to weasel a bullchit answer you f'ing bafoon. Nothing stuck at all, its just a bunch of idiots that don't understand a simple roman numeral like yourself, then making up a silly answer like the one in your last reply, fix yourself so you don't look so dumb all the time. Its nothing like a variable in math, you are making yourself look EXTREMELY dumb, slow, and well, a retard, like in that movie, Idiocracy. You would not call Super Bowl 9, Super Bowl X, would you? So fix your brain, put some knowledge in it, and stop commenting and making things up completely as you go, pick up a reference book and understand what your typing, otherwise, someone like me will point out your ridiculous misinformation. Your so dumb you put 2 variables in a simple equality, OMG...your equation should state: 5 = 2 + x I feel like the guy on Spaceballs, "Who else in here is an a-hole? I'm surronded by A-holes!"
The primordial black hole scenario for Planet X would be - while very fascinating and an unbelievable scientific goldmine on our astronomical doorstep - utterly terrifying to me conceptually. Though I do suppose the kinds of names you could slap on an object like that would be pretty awesome (eg, gods of night like Ereshkigal or Nyx, or mythological underworld terms like Abaddon)
@@titan-1802 Yes they have, it's now confirmed that it's a blackhole the size of an apple. So our instruments can't pick it up but data shows it's there, so it's there.
I love the grandstanding he does, "Ptolemy was the Atlas Pro of his time", "Friend of the channel Urbain Le Verrier" and he says all of them without breaking character.
I’m a bit excited to see this video on my homepage. I can remember when I first saw the existence of the word ‘Planet X’ back in 2012. I think the existence of Planet X is very likely, as it explains the weird orbits of dwarf planets. It could also be a victim of Jupiter and Saturn when they messed up the Solar System 4 and half billion years ago.
Don't forget that the parts of the sky where we have to look is aimed towards the galactic center, with literal billions of background stars that could drown out the planet, like a galactic Where's Waldo? book... it's what made the search for (and discovery of) pluto such a big, time-consuming deal!
21:01 Caelus means sky in Latin, just like Earth means earth, so sky and earth is Caelus et Terra. There are a couple romance languages with hundreds of millions of people speaking them, so it really would seem strange to them to see a planet named "sky". I believe that may be the reason for Uranus being named as it is.
I don't think that is a modern romance language that has a word that sounds like caelus, it is Cielo or something like that for Spanish or Italian and Cer for Romanian.
@@theOrionsarms Yes, but all planet's names are translated to be how it's spoken in the language. Mars is Marte in the Iberian languages and not Martius like Latin. Neptunus becomes Netuno and so on. Seeing planet Sky would be very strange. Volcano also was strange but it doesn't exist anymore so whatever.
@@irmaosmatos4026 I understand what you mean, but actually very little speakers of a romance language would think that caelus mean sky,I mean if they don't know very well original latin language, thrust me I am also a native speaker of one of those languages and didn't know it.
Eh, "C" has become a "S" in most Romance languages for the word sky, "Ciel", "Cielo" use the soft "C" ("See-el" "See-el-o") while "Caelus" would be rendered as "Kaelus" or "Kalus".
@@jeremyholland4527 There's some theories that Planet X is a planet called Nibiru, with an elliptical orbit taking many thousands of years. There are also theories that suggest where the asteroid belt now exists was originally another planet
sometimes i wish we didnt stick to just roman gods for naming planets. naming the bigger ''planet X'' something like Amun, an ancient Egyptian deity would be cool i think. not because of it's characteristics or specific elements related to Amun, but because Amun means ''hidden one'' or ''invisible''. And since we have been trying, are still trying and most likely will be looking for this elusive planet for a long while longer. I think its fitting!
Personally as an indian, considering the fact that the literal number system is our invention and we coined the atomic theory before Dalton Indian gods should've been used....
You're a prime example of why I can still be more hopeful for newer content creators man. Thanks for the absolute quality content you're putting out there.
The quality of the videos on this channel, like those of Atlas Pro, are just so good. I can’t wait to continue to see both these channels grow to the extent they deserve!
I just wanted to say that I really enjoy your videos in which we can see you. Your other videos are fantastic as well, of course, but it’s nice to feel a more personal connection with you when you’re speaking to us while visible onscreen. That said, this video is especially interesting for me because I’ve been fascinated by Planet X for decades, ever since I heard that such a planet could exist. Thanks for your work in putting this video together!
Would you consider doing a video on what different gasses make the different color planets? Like what combination of gasses would make that pink hue you used for planet x
Another way to find Planet X is to build a wormhole capable of going back in time 22 minutes. That way we only have to shoot one probe and if it fails, go back in time and try another vector. Of course this needs a lot of energy but maybe we could explode the sun or something. Idk just a thought
Very good summary, but it would have been important to include the 2021 paper by Napier et al which shows that the TNO clustering might be nothing more than selection bias. Doesn't necessarily rule out Planet 9 but gives a credible alternative explanation.
This is the kind of content that excites me. I'm a huge space-nut and I'm always looking for new space-related channels but don't find many good ones all that often that I'm not already subscribed to. I will definitely be subscribing!
I remember being a little kid in 2012 and being scared Planet niberu or planet x was gonna come by and kill all of us because I watched a sketchy RUclips video. Obviously nothing happened but I've always been curious to hear more about the subject since there probably was a very small element of truth to it Edit: le schizophrenics in the replies have arrived
Don't worry Niberu should be seen in April or May. It's not on a collision course with Earth but will come close. Look up 'poleshift' to understand what will happen.
I’m endlessly fascinated with the human obsession with it’s own destruction. Total sadists. They can’t wait, and would welcome the suffering of billions, so they can finally declare to no one, “I knew it!”
The many Hubble telescope option is basically a variant of a Sky Survey in astronomy. And there is in fact a new far more powerful sky survey instrument coming online in a few years time previously called the LSST - Large Synoptic Survey Telescope, but now renamed to Vera C. Rubin Observatory which sadly doesn't make its purpose as clear any more. Another option is to make a more powerful version of the Gaia space observatory, which can also do large scale surveys of the sky. Either of these options would greatly help together with things like AI assistance to pick out faint signals from large objects in the Oort Cloud. On the arbitrariness of names, like what are planets, well that's partially true. But on the same hand you'd prefer to describe something that is very much different usually from other things with technical terms if you can. So for instance a star tends to have pretty different properties from other objects like say a black hole or an asteroid. So in this aspect I think a more useful question would be, does the planet range have anything that is notably different from asteroids and stars, the objects they would lie between. And in this the answer I think is yes, asteroids are mostly undifferentiated masses with only some tendency to roundness, but in general being quite rough shaped. How ever as you go up the mass scale not only does gravity start smoothing the shape out, but the heat going in to producing such objects tends to liquefy the interior leading to large scale differentiation of internal materials. This in my opinion means there is very much a difference between the physical characteristics of a class of objects we could call planet and asteroids. In comparison the clearing the orbit definition the IAU is also using seems kind of arbitrary as it doesn't really say anything about the physical and mostly on if there is much of anything else around. But that's just my thoughts on it, where I think a useful section could be carved out for a term like planet, where it would actually immediately tell you that you can expect that kind of object to be different in nature from an asteroid.
"Vera C. Rubin Observatory" is not the telescope, it's the observatory. LSST is a project rather than a telescope; it is the Legacy Survey of Space and Time. The (first) telescope at the observatory is the 8.4-meter Simonyi Survey Telescope.
I like that we've progressed and now can have an reasonable conversation about this theory. I remember it was so taboo and fringe even to speak out loud back in my day.
In 2002 I saw diagrams of a theoretical orbit of Planet X, which made it elliptical and crossing earth's orbit, visiting every few thousand years. Makes sense, then, if it's so far away right now that we can't see it or don't know where to look. It's also a great way to formulate a conspiracy theory, and I bought into it. I was suffering extreme stress and anxiety at the time - unhappy with relationships and job, feeling trapped in a pathless life, needing a calamity to make everyone equal. Today, it makes more sense that if such a planet with such an orbit actually existed, in the billions of years that the solar system has existed, it more stands to reason that Planet X would have already collided with or affected the orbits of the planets. So I don't tend to think there is any elliptical orbit planet out there, that would cross earth's orbit.
Honestly stuff like this is so mind boggling to think about because it just reminds you how little we actually know and that makes me appreciate our little blue rock that much more
There's a lot out there in the local neighborhood and a lot of space. We definitely haven't found everything "there is to find". The immensity of the area to search, and how hard it would be to find most putative objects more or less defined as 'Planet X', suggest it's definitely worth the effort to keep looking.
I don't know much about astrophysics, but it definitely makes sense to me that there could be series of objects being pulled into elliptical orbits by other series of objects the further you get away from neighboring star systems. I mean, the gravity of everything has some sort of effect on everything around it, and the universe is ever-evolving. It seems only logical that as a nebula settles, and stars and planets have formed, there could be certain outlying objects too far away from any one star or planet to necessarily form a regular orbit, but close enough to others to be affected by theirs, meanwhile potentially still sucking up matter in their journey, right...? Eventually forming an intricate interlocking pattern, of circles closest to stars, becoming more and more elliptical as they're affected by neighboring outliers and systems, then finally back down to circles... Almost like when you do one of those continuously outward circular/elliptical doodles in a notebook that ends up kind of resembling resembling a flower, except a million of them overlapping on the page on the page lol. Does that make sense?
"Planet X" is an outdated term. The X is the Roman numeral for 10, and this planet was first hypothesized when Pluto was still considered the 9th planet. Planet X has recently been referred to as _Planet 9_ since Pluto's demotion to dwarf planet.
"Planet X" has been known as such for a very long time, even pre-Pluto. Indeed Pluto was thought initially to _be_ Planet X. It's true that while Pluto was considered the ninth planet, the "X" got a double meaning in that it represented an unknown variable (the original definition) and the Roman numeral 10, but the the hypothesized planet acting on Neptune's orbit was called Planet X even before Pluto was found.
20:39 Caelus is actually pronounced Kay-Lus if you’re using the ancient Roman pronunciations. Latin did not have a soft c sound until the Middle Ages with Liturgical Latin.
If planet X is a Neptune-like planet, I think the name Terminus or Janus would work since they're the gods of doorways/endings, and planet X would be near the edge of the Solar System. As for planet Y, I think Chione works pretty well
One small thing: the I.A.U's definition of "cleared its orbit" is that the object's mass is at greater than the mass of objects in its orbital path. So planet X (the neptune mass one) would definitely be considered a planet, and the earth mass one likely would be as well given the kuiper belt is estimated to have a mass of roughly 6% of earth.
I like the hypothesis that planet X is a primordial black hole (one with a planet~ish mass formed in the early years of the universe) It would be too small to bend star light, but large enough to affect local gravity
Some name ideas: Nyx, goddess of the night, for the gas planet, and Styx, goddess of the river/marsh which separates Earth from the underworld, for the planet with methanum/ice. Unfortunately these are also the names of two of Pluto’s moons :(
I just saw a (well done) documentary on the same subject. Can't wait to see where your research has taken you ! I'm currently participating in the "Backyard Worlds: Planet 9" program to find brown dwarfs and, who knows, a new planet in our solar system ! 😉
@@marcelohenrique1040 "À la recherche de Planète 9" (french version) or "Planet 9 - Fahndung im All" (german version), a documentary on the Franco-German channel ARTE. However, you need to understand french or german because there is no english version of it (nor english subtitles).
A planet X with the predicted properties should be well within the detection capabilities of our current telescopes. And the predicted orbit even tells us where to look. It's very difficult to find something that isn't there.
Because so many of the exoplanets we’ve found are 100+ AU from their star, I feel like there’s a non-zero chance that there could be an alien species out in the galaxy that has discovered Planet X before we have
If they look hard enough with top-level tech we have available, they just might, and if yes, well, that's gonna be the biggest astronomy celebration perhaps since the moon landing!
Hi, really nice video just as usual ! I wanted to take some time to give some more info since I also like the topic and there's a few things you did not say (or I did not pay attention enough), if some people are interested. At 0:55 you say that Uranus was made visible by telescope. While that's true that it was thanks to a telescope that Uranus was identified as a planet, it was actually observed with the naked eye a lot before that. Uranus is just at the limit of the human eye capabilities. Since it was so faint and moved so slowly in the sky, it was missidentified as a star, possibly as early as 128 BCE by Hipparchos. This happened several time before its correct identification as a planet. Same goes for Neptune which was observed by Galileo (with a telescope this time, since Neptune really is too faint). At 7:05 While it was considered solid at the time of the discovery, some later studies claim the fact the orbits are so well organized is not the sign of a far away planet, but rather, an observation biais. Some new large bodies have been found since then, that do not seem to fit the trend ! I also wanted to get back to the 8:17 segment where you state that the fact that there's several mass/size configurations possible for planet X, which make it harder to find than Neptune. And while of course the volume of space is far greater, the same problem happened for Neptune at the time. Le Verrier actually used the law of Titus-Bode to determine the distance of Neptune, but that law is false, in that regard it was just lucky that it worked out, while Neptune was more or less where he predicted in the sky, he expected its orbit to be generally farther out and a lot more excentric ! Predicted distance : 38.8 then 36.15 AU Real distance : 30,07 AU Predicted excentricity : 0,10761 Real excentricity : 0,008586 Since he expected the planet to be further out, he also expected it to be twice as massive as it truly is, to explain its effect on the orbit of Uranus. Hope some people find these informations interesting, and sorry if my english is not good, it's not my first language.
How hilarious would it be if we found out Caelus started out as an inner planet and had something to do with Venus‘ formation, given that in mythology Venus was born from Caelus’s dismembered tackle?
I wanted to say that I’m very interested in finding planet Y in particular because I’ve always thought that a rogue planet could possibly hold life. It would be similar to umbara from star wars. If a planet had an immensely thick atmosphere, as well as a very very volcanically active center, the atmosphere could have a venus effect abd hold in enough heat to allow for life to exist, and ‘plants’ or whatever they would be on such a planet, would survive through chemosynthesis rather than photosynthesis due to the, in essence complete lack of sunlight. Again, massive assumptions but it is in the realm of possibility
yeah but iirc they would also have to have achieved hydrostatic equilibrium to be a planet, and so far the only object to do so beyond neptune is pluto edit: wait nvm you're talking about the kuiper cliff planet
I remember that I read somewhere saying that it might not be planet X, but maybe a small black hole that could possibly hinder all the mysterious orbits of exoplanets
I believe it's likely that a planet similar in size to Uranus exists on an elliptical 16000 year orbit of our star, but is so dim that we're yet to observe it at it's current location. The 16000-year timescale coincides with high activity of asteroid impacts on our moon and here on Earth where a large body disturbs the Kuiper Belt.
moon impacts were from late heavy bombardment periods mostly, far from dinosaur impacts caused by gravity shenanigans from jupiter and saturn which caused neptune to toss the kuiper belt at the inner solar system
Hey Caelan! Long time viewer of both channels. I was wondering if you could give us a tour of your bookshelf in the background? I’ve noticed some awesome books on there like The Swarm and Sevenves. Would love to see what other ones you have!
There was a nice hypothesis in a PBS Space Time video, Planet X could be a primordial black hole. Then again that is a hypothesis about a hypothetical object so pretty far fetched but I like the idea.
I don't think I get why "there must be tons of objects" is more scientific than "we caught it at a good time". Like...sometimes luck does happen? If I were one of THE experts I'd want more things to discover, too.
Just a crazy idea I had when trying to think of new ways of seeing close by objects more brightly. We put up a space telescope that sees in the X-ray range of light. Then we can send off a powerful X ray burst using a nuclear X-ray laser. And see what bounces back. Not sure of how wide the view will be though it should spread out the further it goes. Should light up anything in its way quite brightly and automatically tells us the distance as well so rather convenient.
Great video, and very eye opening! It's cool to know that many cool things are yet to be discovered in our own backyard! Will you have a video about circumbinary planets? The wiki page about habitability of binary star systems is not enough to satisfy my thirst for knowledge (and also I'd like to know if Tatooine is plausible)!
That Rubik's cube in the background is only two turns from being solved. Why hasn't it been done? This is stressing me out and I can't focus on the video.
That’s tough and requires a ridiculous amount of speculation. It all depends on how Mars becomes habitable. If we terraformed it then we’d most likely populate it with generalist species of plants and animals that are more tolerant to variable conditions. Those species would diversify and fill ecological niches over time.
I would imagine Mars would be covered in vast deserts and grasslands since it has less water. Also, tundra, since it's further from the sun and would be colder. The seasons would be extreme since the orbit of Mars is very elliptical. Mars could have a very successful aerosphere since the gravity is lower.
Pluto was discovered by a guy who lived in my town. I used to live right across the street from the city park and they had a "Pluto fest" one year when my daughter was about 4. She's now 9 and learning about planets and stuff in school. Shes still convinced that Pluto IS a planet and she doesn't care what they say! To her and dad, Pluto will always be a planet in our heart. ♥️
Good old Planet X, it's been around the corner for the last 22 years. Like me dating my high school sweet heart, she'll always be the white whale that got away
Probably the supposed disturbance in the outer solar system has rather been caused by a passing star or brown dwarf, rather than a planet orbiting our sun.
a possible interaction in the distant past with a passing star may have elongated the orbits and created an egg shape as it left the proximity of the system as well, so there might not be a planet x and only a grouping of objects whose mass is in balance with the system and reorganizes itself over time once the larger object has moved on in this orbit of the galaxy
Great video! You mentioned needing a new technology to look for planets. With the LIGO Lab results, could our next telescopes develop this technology to look for gravitational wells and therefore planets?
"Because it's [Mike Brown], I'm going to believe him". My only comment is that the same was said about Le Verrier's calculations on the existence of Vulcan on inner-Mercurian orbit. And his hypothesis was based on another unquestioned sage, Newton. What we have to remember is that in science, we should never, NEVER trust the word of a guy just because he was mostly right. Science are not only objective calculations, but also people doing it, and people can always be wrong. Because Newton was not always right, Einstein made his mistakes, and even Hawking wasn't out of the wrong.
Planet X. This is so cool. By the way, I have difficulty communicating because I had a stroke in Broca’s area, the part of the brain that controls speech. 2/8/2021 but I lived again. (My wife helped me compose this.)
I love videos like this , we are actually quite insignificant There is so much going on out there I enjoy watching RUclips It’s like an information download 👍🏼
You mentioned the search field for a Planet X going from 1 dimension to 2, but couldn't it also be 3? And I don't mean a relative plane, I mean like, a whole big chunk of space, as if you were to take a wedge (or 2 or 3 or 4) out of an orange. Pluto's orbit is not within the same relative plane as the main eight planets and it would be foolish to think the other bodies outside the Keiper Belt aren't also doing the same thing on their own orbital planes. Unless all these other weird bodies beyond the Keiper Belt are also in alignment with each other (which would be super weird), or the scientists have accurately measured the angles of all their other finds and averaged out the most likely plane to search on for a Planet X that would create those eliptical orbits, it seems to me that the reason we can't find Planet X is because it's not as simple as just scanning along a plane, you have to look along a whole three dimensional area.
one small problem remember that pluto video you did? the kuiper belt IS planet X i did the math the combined pull of eris, pluto, and other cryasteroids would be enough to pull neptune that far back
Planet X, and other planets that have such eccentric & large orbits but are quite large, will need their own category of planet, not Dwarf, or Rocky or Gas Giant, but Outer Orbiting Planets or OOPS!
And why would such planets be distinct from the inner planets, exactly?
right? they just make it so much more complicated than it has to be. just call them planets. rocky, gas, icy, ocean planets as distinctions are good enough.
@@princesszelda8577 Nonsense
I like that. You should seriously propose that to the IAU, or maybe something like outer orbiting planet-like specimen (OOPS) so it always has an S on the end
I feel bad for the two dummies in here that can’t keep up lol. “hur dur distinction and classifications make me thonk too much hur dur hur dur” *proceeds to shit pants while thinking of the scary possibility we have to remember one more word for planets*
There are a few errors here worth mentioning, but it is largely a good video!
1. Reached technological limit. We have reached the limit of what is currently possible in surveys, but you didn't mention the important Vera Rubin Observatory which is expected to start operating in 2024. This is exactly the telescope we need to find these sort of objects - if planet 9 exists this is virtually certain to find it, along with a lot more besides. It is also worth mentioning that the JWST is a completely different kind of telescope, it has an extremely narrow field of view which means it's totally unsuited to survey work, it'd be like searching a room by looking through a keyhole! Once it knows where to look, thats where the JWST comes in. As a side note, sometime this year we can expect papers on JWST observations of a number of Kuiper belt objects, which means better measurements of size/mass and moons etc as well. The best images will still be very pixelated but it's better than sometimes only a few pixels across from hubble.
1.b) "why can't we see a planet in our solar system when we can see distant galaxies" is probably something that needs to be explained. Those distant galaxies are also very big (thousands of light years in diameter) and very bright, shining with a billion suns worth of light. A large object in the solar system would be say 1000 km in diameter, many many orders of magnitude less. An object in the solar system also doesn't shine brightly in visible light, so there are two options: A - make a big telescope to collect enough light to see it and B - everything glows at some wavelength, so use a telescope that detects longer wavelengths as you know its going to be cold so far from the sun. The problem with A is the inverse square law - if you go 10 times further out, you receive 10^2 = 100 times less light from the sun. Then the light has to go back to you from the planet so is hit by the inverse square law a second time! 10 times further out from the sun means 10^4 = 10,000 times dimmer to your telescope! The problem with B is that while objects might glow more in longer wavelengths, luminosity also has a relationship with temperature - its proportional to the *fourth* power! Considering these objects are at 30K or so, this means that they remain extremely dim, even in the brightest wavelengths. tl;dr - rocks are small and dark, galaxies are big and bright.
2. The figures you gave for planet 9 are out of date. The current estimates for planet 9 are 6.3 +2.3/-1.5 earth masses, an average distance of 460 +160/-100 AU and closest approach of the orbit of 340 +80/-70 AU and finally an inclination of 16+-5 degrees (edited this because I accidentally out of date estimates). It may still be a mini-neptune type world, but could also have a thick atmosphere but still a solid surface (a super earth)
3. The figures given for similarly sized objects as sedna are also out of date, its now thought there are about 40 sedna size objects - and this is steadily lowering as we get further out without finding anything rivalling in size. A mars sized world remains possible, as does several plutos. Back in 2015 Mike Brown said that there is still about a 1/3 chance that there is something big (i.e pluto size world) less than 100 AU distant that remains undetected due to its position in the sky being against the background of our galaxy. I don't know how much this remains true.
I am pretty sure that IF it exists, it's already been photographed in a past survey.
Once it has been found and people know where to look,they will find it hidden in the enormous mountains of data we have already gathered with past telescopes
Planets that have 6 Earth masses are not gas giant, they are either super-earths or they are gas dwarves aka mini-neptunes.
@@durshurrikun150 That was an oversight, fixed.
@@durshurrikun150 I was trying to use simpler language, but I agree that was a simplification too many.
I was wondering through the whole video when Vera Rubin would be mentioned. The part about his "only two ideas he could think of" to find this thing being many JWSTs or a probe had huge sniffing my own farts vibes since the actual solution exists and should be well known and his ideas were stupid.
For those trying to read the freeze-frames, here's what they say:
8:23 - "When you take into acount _[sic]_ Planet X's orbital inclination, this pushes the search into three dimensions. Then figuring out where in its orbit it is adds a fourth dimension as well, time."
9:38 - "I know their sunshields are pointing in the wrong direction, the visual just felt more clear this way"
20:38 - "On second thought, I think it's pronounced more like 'Say-lus'"
20:57 - "and Earth"
Thank you!
Thank you
Doing god's work
It's moves too quickly
Thank you for including the typo I was really worried you'd forget :)
Imagine if, instead of having Planet X, we just have Nemesis lurking around menacingly
IF your talking about a star, then we'd have seen it by now. It would glow enough for us to see it even if it was a small red dwarf. And depending on how far away it is, we would have definately noticed it move.
Is this a resident evil joke?
@@VeggiePun No its a wierd theory on there being a second star in our solar system. Though it has very little evidence other than circumstantial.
@@nexustheninja1927 What about a brown dwarf?
@@DarthSanguine Too large and would emit a lot of non-visable things like Radiation and Infa-red light.
honestly, regardless of if planet X or Y actually exist or not
it still would be absolutely sick to have more places out there that aren't light years away from us around another star
X means 10, is everyone a idiot? we need planet IX or 9 now.
@@enjoidapuci641 No, we're searching for Planet X, the source of the shaving cream atom. It comes after Planet W and if you hit Planet Y you've passed it.
@@Phos9 AWESOME, I needed this so early in the morning, lol
@@enjoidapuci641 it's technically called planet 9, but the person who originally conceptualized it called it planet x so that name stuck
it's kinda like variables in math, y = 2+x whatnot
@@Designed1 No that is not true, we had nine planets, including Pluto, so we were looking for planet 10 or X, at the time all the movies came out used ROMAN NUMERALS, just like the Super Bowl, now everyone is an idiot and forgot that we only have 8 planets and still use the WRONG terminology. I was born in the 70s, I lived this, I am not an idiot.
I have followed astronomy very closely, since I had all A's in every science and math all the way up to Calculus IV, that's 4, for the idiots, and I remember Rocky IV very clearly... stop being idiots and then trying to justify it with a nonsense excuse...Its planet 9 or IX that we are looking for.
Do you know what a roman numeral is? X is a roman numeral, it stands for 10. Thats it, dont try to weasel a bullchit answer you f'ing bafoon. Nothing stuck at all, its just a bunch of idiots that don't understand a simple roman numeral like yourself, then making up a silly answer like the one in your last reply, fix yourself so you don't look so dumb all the time.
Its nothing like a variable in math, you are making yourself look EXTREMELY dumb, slow, and well, a retard, like in that movie, Idiocracy. You would not call Super Bowl 9, Super Bowl X, would you? So fix your brain, put some knowledge in it, and stop commenting and making things up completely as you go, pick up a reference book and understand what your typing, otherwise, someone like me will point out your ridiculous misinformation.
Your so dumb you put 2 variables in a simple equality, OMG...your equation should state:
5 = 2 + x
I feel like the guy on Spaceballs, "Who else in here is an a-hole? I'm surronded by A-holes!"
The primordial black hole scenario for Planet X would be - while very fascinating and an unbelievable scientific goldmine on our astronomical doorstep - utterly terrifying to me conceptually. Though I do suppose the kinds of names you could slap on an object like that would be pretty awesome (eg, gods of night like Ereshkigal or Nyx, or mythological underworld terms like Abaddon)
though however, Primordial Black Hole's are Hypothetical, and we haven't even found one (depending if they exist or not)
Nibiru lol
Yeah, would be cool af
I think nyx is already taken by one of Plutos moons but yeah
Why is it terrifying?
@@titan-1802 Yes they have, it's now confirmed that it's a blackhole the size of an apple. So our instruments can't pick it up but data shows it's there, so it's there.
The fact that Mike Brown said it is a classic example of the Appeal to Authority Fallacy. Show me data.
I love the grandstanding he does, "Ptolemy was the Atlas Pro of his time", "Friend of the channel Urbain Le Verrier" and he says all of them without breaking character.
yeah, but I could do without his breathy laughing in the middle of words
Lol he is so deadpan about it that I barely even noticed
@@phoule76 I find it endearing :)
I remember a lot of conspiracy theories of Planet X/Nibiru destroying the world in 2016 and 2017. Good times
I’m a bit excited to see this video on my homepage.
I can remember when I first saw the existence of the word ‘Planet X’ back in 2012. I think the existence of Planet X is very likely, as it explains the weird orbits of dwarf planets. It could also be a victim of Jupiter and Saturn when they messed up the Solar System 4 and half billion years ago.
That is rediculous, they stopped looking for planet 10 when pluto was removed from being planet IX...smh
Maybe the real Planet X was the friends we made along the way
I love this comment 😂
Don't forget that the parts of the sky where we have to look is aimed towards the galactic center, with literal billions of background stars that could drown out the planet, like a galactic Where's Waldo? book... it's what made the search for (and discovery of) pluto such a big, time-consuming deal!
21:01 Caelus means sky in Latin, just like Earth means earth, so sky and earth is Caelus et Terra. There are a couple romance languages with hundreds of millions of people speaking them, so it really would seem strange to them to see a planet named "sky". I believe that may be the reason for Uranus being named as it is.
Also the fact that calling it 'Georges Star' would've just been so weird, even in the 1700's.
I don't think that is a modern romance language that has a word that sounds like caelus, it is Cielo or something like that for Spanish or Italian and Cer for Romanian.
@@theOrionsarms Yes, but all planet's names are translated to be how it's spoken in the language. Mars is Marte in the Iberian languages and not Martius like Latin. Neptunus becomes Netuno and so on. Seeing planet Sky would be very strange. Volcano also was strange but it doesn't exist anymore so whatever.
@@irmaosmatos4026 I understand what you mean, but actually very little speakers of a romance language would think that caelus mean sky,I mean if they don't know very well original latin language, thrust me I am also a native speaker of one of those languages and didn't know it.
Eh, "C" has become a "S" in most Romance languages for the word sky, "Ciel", "Cielo" use the soft "C" ("See-el" "See-el-o") while "Caelus" would be rendered as "Kaelus" or "Kalus".
Could Planet X been a rogue planet passing by just long enough to mess with some orbits?
It wouldn’t have influence for long enough if it was just passing through, especially if it was just a planet sized object
@@pocketmarcy6990 and I imagine any stars that would have passed through would be easily visible and would have been found by now
@@jeremyholland4527
There's some theories that Planet X is a planet called Nibiru, with an elliptical orbit taking many thousands of years.
There are also theories that suggest where the asteroid belt now exists was originally another planet
@@TheZombiesAreComing there is no Tiamat planet only Marduk planet
@@karlwhite8481
Not anymore there isn't. It's theorized to have gone BOOM in the distant past.
sometimes i wish we didnt stick to just roman gods for naming planets.
naming the bigger ''planet X'' something like Amun, an ancient Egyptian deity would be cool i think. not because of it's characteristics or specific elements related to Amun, but because Amun means ''hidden one'' or ''invisible''.
And since we have been trying, are still trying and most likely will be looking for this elusive planet for a long while longer. I think its fitting!
Personally as an indian, considering the fact that the literal number system is our invention and we coined the atomic theory before Dalton
Indian gods should've been used....
When I was a kid the X was roman, it was the 10th planet of the time iirc...
I think naming the local cluster objects as Roman gods makes sense. You can’t exactly name them Egyptian names as Set, Sol, are primordial.
Ok, I'm gonna say it cause it needs to be said. If and when planet X is discovered, just name it PLANET KRYPTON!
You're a prime example of why I can still be more hopeful for newer content creators man. Thanks for the absolute quality content you're putting out there.
he already has another channel that I’ve been watching for years - Atlas pro
@@lsr3794 is it also full of hilarious factual errors 😂
@@baconatorrodriguez4651 like?
And people like you make me lose complete faith in humanity. Theres not even 9 planets, how can we find a 10th one if there's no 9th one?
@@joemungus6063like we have 8 planets. A planet 10 would mean we already have 9. This guys an idiot
Boreas is actually a Greek name too. The Roman equivalent is Aquilo.
i thought it was aquilon
chione is still the better name
Beyond the Aquilo rift?
The quality of the videos on this channel, like those of Atlas Pro, are just so good. I can’t wait to continue to see both these channels grow to the extent they deserve!
lol
I just wanted to say that I really enjoy your videos in which we can see you. Your other videos are fantastic as well, of course, but it’s nice to feel a more personal connection with you when you’re speaking to us while visible onscreen.
That said, this video is especially interesting for me because I’ve been fascinated by Planet X for decades, ever since I heard that such a planet could exist. Thanks for your work in putting this video together!
Would you consider doing a video on what different gasses make the different color planets? Like what combination of gasses would make that pink hue you used for planet x
I think he done a planet that would be red because of its gas before but would love to see more of it
@@ahha6304 yeah he did a video on the color of plants based on the planets relation to its sun. It was awesome!
I absolutely LOVE Atlas Pro and instantly subscribed when I found this channel! Love all your great work!!! ❤
Another way to find Planet X is to build a wormhole capable of going back in time 22 minutes. That way we only have to shoot one probe and if it fails, go back in time and try another vector. Of course this needs a lot of energy but maybe we could explode the sun or something. Idk just a thought
This really activates my almond
the pinnacle of science fiction
How’d you come up with that? You should be working with NASA right now!
14:34 What if planet X was the friends we made along the way?
Very good summary, but it would have been important to include the 2021 paper by Napier et al which shows that the TNO clustering might be nothing more than selection bias. Doesn't necessarily rule out Planet 9 but gives a credible alternative explanation.
Thank you. This guy is a bit too "All Hail Mike Brown!" for my tastes.
This is the kind of content that excites me. I'm a huge space-nut and I'm always looking for new space-related channels but don't find many good ones all that often that I'm not already subscribed to. I will definitely be subscribing!
I remember being a little kid in 2012 and being scared Planet niberu or planet x was gonna come by and kill all of us because I watched a sketchy RUclips video. Obviously nothing happened but I've always been curious to hear more about the subject since there probably was a very small element of truth to it
Edit: le schizophrenics in the replies have arrived
Don't worry Niberu should be seen in April or May. It's not on a collision course with Earth but will come close. Look up 'poleshift' to understand what will happen.
@@ryanloomis3033 Don't believe everything you see on the internet man... Quacks have been saying that crap forever
I’m endlessly fascinated with the human obsession with it’s own destruction. Total sadists. They can’t wait, and would welcome the suffering of billions, so they can finally declare to no one, “I knew it!”
same i was scared too for ages, and also i remeber it being in scooby doo mystery inc lol
@@ryanloomis3033 💀 bro is delusional 💀
Man I was so excited to watch this after watching your ocean biogeography video; such a tease.
I want to see our suns orbit of the galaxy, and the whole position in our Galaxy that includes all of these other orbits as well.
The many Hubble telescope option is basically a variant of a Sky Survey in astronomy. And there is in fact a new far more powerful sky survey instrument coming online in a few years time previously called the LSST - Large Synoptic Survey Telescope, but now renamed to Vera C. Rubin Observatory which sadly doesn't make its purpose as clear any more. Another option is to make a more powerful version of the Gaia space observatory, which can also do large scale surveys of the sky. Either of these options would greatly help together with things like AI assistance to pick out faint signals from large objects in the Oort Cloud.
On the arbitrariness of names, like what are planets, well that's partially true. But on the same hand you'd prefer to describe something that is very much different usually from other things with technical terms if you can. So for instance a star tends to have pretty different properties from other objects like say a black hole or an asteroid. So in this aspect I think a more useful question would be, does the planet range have anything that is notably different from asteroids and stars, the objects they would lie between. And in this the answer I think is yes, asteroids are mostly undifferentiated masses with only some tendency to roundness, but in general being quite rough shaped. How ever as you go up the mass scale not only does gravity start smoothing the shape out, but the heat going in to producing such objects tends to liquefy the interior leading to large scale differentiation of internal materials. This in my opinion means there is very much a difference between the physical characteristics of a class of objects we could call planet and asteroids. In comparison the clearing the orbit definition the IAU is also using seems kind of arbitrary as it doesn't really say anything about the physical and mostly on if there is much of anything else around.
But that's just my thoughts on it, where I think a useful section could be carved out for a term like planet, where it would actually immediately tell you that you can expect that kind of object to be different in nature from an asteroid.
"Vera C. Rubin Observatory" is not the telescope, it's the observatory. LSST is a project rather than a telescope; it is the Legacy Survey of Space and Time. The (first) telescope at the observatory is the 8.4-meter Simonyi Survey Telescope.
@@gnome53 My mistake if I got the naming wrong, thank you for the clarifications then.
I like that we've progressed and now can have an reasonable conversation about this theory.
I remember it was so taboo and fringe even to speak out loud back in my day.
In 2002 I saw diagrams of a theoretical orbit of Planet X, which made it elliptical and crossing earth's orbit, visiting every few thousand years. Makes sense, then, if it's so far away right now that we can't see it or don't know where to look.
It's also a great way to formulate a conspiracy theory, and I bought into it.
I was suffering extreme stress and anxiety at the time - unhappy with relationships and job, feeling trapped in a pathless life, needing a calamity to make everyone equal.
Today, it makes more sense that if such a planet with such an orbit actually existed, in the billions of years that the solar system has existed, it more stands to reason that Planet X would have already collided with or affected the orbits of the planets. So I don't tend to think there is any elliptical orbit planet out there, that would cross earth's orbit.
And then planet X was off predicted orbit~
We then discover a extraterrestrial was fucking with us 😂
The real planet x was the friends we made along the way...
Honestly stuff like this is so mind boggling to think about because it just reminds you how little we actually know and that makes me appreciate our little blue rock that much more
There's a lot out there in the local neighborhood and a lot of space. We definitely haven't found everything "there is to find". The immensity of the area to search, and how hard it would be to find most putative objects more or less defined as 'Planet X', suggest it's definitely worth the effort to keep looking.
we buoikt the çity we belong too the cuty
I don't know much about astrophysics, but it definitely makes sense to me that there could be series of objects being pulled into elliptical orbits by other series of objects the further you get away from neighboring star systems. I mean, the gravity of everything has some sort of effect on everything around it, and the universe is ever-evolving. It seems only logical that as a nebula settles, and stars and planets have formed, there could be certain outlying objects too far away from any one star or planet to necessarily form a regular orbit, but close enough to others to be affected by theirs, meanwhile potentially still sucking up matter in their journey, right...? Eventually forming an intricate interlocking pattern, of circles closest to stars, becoming more and more elliptical as they're affected by neighboring outliers and systems, then finally back down to circles... Almost like when you do one of those continuously outward circular/elliptical doodles in a notebook that ends up kind of resembling resembling a flower, except a million of them overlapping on the page on the page lol. Does that make sense?
"Planet X" is an outdated term. The X is the Roman numeral for 10, and this planet was first hypothesized when Pluto was still considered the 9th planet. Planet X has recently been referred to as _Planet 9_ since Pluto's demotion to dwarf planet.
"Planet X" has been known as such for a very long time, even pre-Pluto. Indeed Pluto was thought initially to _be_ Planet X. It's true that while Pluto was considered the ninth planet, the "X" got a double meaning in that it represented an unknown variable (the original definition) and the Roman numeral 10, but the the hypothesized planet acting on Neptune's orbit was called Planet X even before Pluto was found.
20:39 Caelus is actually pronounced Kay-Lus if you’re using the ancient Roman pronunciations. Latin did not have a soft c sound until the Middle Ages with Liturgical Latin.
If planet X is a Neptune-like planet, I think the name Terminus or Janus would work since they're the gods of doorways/endings, and planet X would be near the edge of the Solar System. As for planet Y, I think Chione works pretty well
One small thing: the I.A.U's definition of "cleared its orbit" is that the object's mass is at greater than the mass of objects in its orbital path. So planet X (the neptune mass one) would definitely be considered a planet, and the earth mass one likely would be as well given the kuiper belt is estimated to have a mass of roughly 6% of earth.
I like the hypothesis that planet X is a primordial black hole (one with a planet~ish mass formed in the early years of the universe)
It would be too small to bend star light, but large enough to affect local gravity
Some name ideas: Nyx, goddess of the night, for the gas planet, and Styx, goddess of the river/marsh which separates Earth from the underworld, for the planet with methanum/ice. Unfortunately these are also the names of two of Pluto’s moons :(
I just saw a (well done) documentary on the same subject. Can't wait to see where your research has taken you !
I'm currently participating in the "Backyard Worlds: Planet 9" program to find brown dwarfs and, who knows, a new planet in our solar system ! 😉
What is the name of the documentary?
@@marcelohenrique1040 "À la recherche de Planète 9" (french version) or "Planet 9 - Fahndung im All" (german version), a documentary on the Franco-German channel ARTE. However, you need to understand french or german because there is no english version of it (nor english subtitles).
@@zehunter6664 I'll check it!! Thanks!
Have u found planets? I really want a Update to the system lol
I literally just watched a video from Astrum about Vulcan so this is pretty in line i think
A planet X with the predicted properties should be well within the detection capabilities of our current telescopes. And the predicted orbit even tells us where to look.
It's very difficult to find something that isn't there.
So you haven’t payed attention to the video then
“Must clear their neighbourhood”
Mercury: “I-I-I did not ch-cheat the test!!”
Wow, never thought id ever get excited about undiscovered bodies (other than planet X) beyond the kuiper belt. Great video!
Because so many of the exoplanets we’ve found are 100+ AU from their star, I feel like there’s a non-zero chance that there could be an alien species out in the galaxy that has discovered Planet X before we have
If they look hard enough with top-level tech we have available, they just might, and if yes, well, that's gonna be the biggest astronomy celebration perhaps since the moon landing!
Hi, really nice video just as usual !
I wanted to take some time to give some more info since I also like the topic and there's a few things you did not say (or I did not pay attention enough), if some people are interested.
At 0:55 you say that Uranus was made visible by telescope. While that's true that it was thanks to a telescope that Uranus was identified as a planet, it was actually observed with the naked eye a lot before that. Uranus is just at the limit of the human eye capabilities.
Since it was so faint and moved so slowly in the sky, it was missidentified as a star, possibly as early as 128 BCE by Hipparchos.
This happened several time before its correct identification as a planet.
Same goes for Neptune which was observed by Galileo (with a telescope this time, since Neptune really is too faint).
At 7:05 While it was considered solid at the time of the discovery, some later studies claim the fact the orbits are so well organized is not the sign of a far away planet, but rather, an observation biais.
Some new large bodies have been found since then, that do not seem to fit the trend !
I also wanted to get back to the 8:17 segment where you state that the fact that there's several mass/size configurations possible for planet X, which make it harder to find than Neptune.
And while of course the volume of space is far greater, the same problem happened for Neptune at the time.
Le Verrier actually used the law of Titus-Bode to determine the distance of Neptune, but that law is false, in that regard it was just lucky that it worked out, while Neptune was more or less where he predicted in the sky, he expected its orbit to be generally farther out and a lot more excentric !
Predicted distance : 38.8 then 36.15 AU
Real distance : 30,07 AU
Predicted excentricity : 0,10761
Real excentricity : 0,008586
Since he expected the planet to be further out, he also expected it to be twice as massive as it truly is, to explain its effect on the orbit of Uranus.
Hope some people find these informations interesting, and sorry if my english is not good, it's not my first language.
You are my second favorite RUclipsr, your videos are gems
How hilarious would it be if we found out Caelus started out as an inner planet and had something to do with Venus‘ formation, given that in mythology Venus was born from Caelus’s dismembered tackle?
It should definitely be called Kahless :D He's also an important character in mythology
Sadly I don’t think a Klingon really fits in with the whole “Roman gods” thing we’ve got going on
I wanted to say that I’m very interested in finding planet Y in particular because I’ve always thought that a rogue planet could possibly hold life. It would be similar to umbara from star wars. If a planet had an immensely thick atmosphere, as well as a very very volcanically active center, the atmosphere could have a venus effect abd hold in enough heat to allow for life to exist, and ‘plants’ or whatever they would be on such a planet, would survive through chemosynthesis rather than photosynthesis due to the, in essence complete lack of sunlight. Again, massive assumptions but it is in the realm of possibility
Pluto used to be Planet 9 (=roman IX), X stands for roman no. 10. Therefore planet Y doesn't exist at all, it's simple roman XI = 11 😉
Wait. If the planets are found in the Kuiper Cliff region, doesn't that imply they cleared their orbit?
yeah but iirc they would also have to have achieved hydrostatic equilibrium to be a planet, and so far the only object to do so beyond neptune is pluto
edit: wait nvm you're talking about the kuiper cliff planet
@@Designed1Eris? Haumea? Makemake?
It amazes me that people cant get that JWST can only point in one direction and focus on a distance. To find planet 9/x you need much more then that.
You’re reaching so hard but I like it. Your videos are awesome
I remember that I read somewhere saying that it might not be planet X, but maybe a small black hole that could possibly hinder all the mysterious orbits of exoplanets
I believe it's likely that a planet similar in size to Uranus exists on an elliptical 16000 year orbit of our star, but is so dim that we're yet to observe it at it's current location. The 16000-year timescale coincides with high activity of asteroid impacts on our moon and here on Earth where a large body disturbs the Kuiper Belt.
Planet Nine is Super Earth en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planet_Nine
No it doesn't
The moon impacts are ALL dated to have happened back when the dinosaur impacts happened.
moon impacts were from late heavy bombardment periods mostly, far from dinosaur impacts
caused by gravity shenanigans from jupiter and saturn which caused neptune to toss the kuiper belt at the inner solar system
Planet X should be named Amphillogia, the name of the goddess of dispute, since the existence of the planet has been disputed for such a long time.
Hidden planets; those incorrigible rascals!
Caelus sounds a lot like Kahless, the Star Trek character that is a mythical symbol to Klingons, this makes me like the name more.
Hey Caelan! Long time viewer of both channels. I was wondering if you could give us a tour of your bookshelf in the background? I’ve noticed some awesome books on there like The Swarm and Sevenves. Would love to see what other ones you have!
There was a nice hypothesis in a PBS Space Time video, Planet X could be a primordial black hole.
Then again that is a hypothesis about a hypothetical object so pretty far fetched but I like the idea.
I don't think I get why "there must be tons of objects" is more scientific than "we caught it at a good time". Like...sometimes luck does happen? If I were one of THE experts I'd want more things to discover, too.
luck sometimes does happen, but it can never be a good proof for something as scientific as sedna's orbit
Imagine if we did find Planet X, but then realised there was a discrepancy in its orbit that could only result from another planet
It’s been a while since the planet naming video, hope your name was chosen
Just a crazy idea I had when trying to think of new ways of seeing close by objects more brightly.
We put up a space telescope that sees in the X-ray range of light. Then we can send off a powerful X ray burst using a nuclear X-ray laser. And see what bounces back. Not sure of how wide the view will be though it should spread out the further it goes. Should light up anything in its way quite brightly and automatically tells us the distance as well so rather convenient.
Great video, and very eye opening! It's cool to know that many cool things are yet to be discovered in our own backyard!
Will you have a video about circumbinary planets? The wiki page about habitability of binary star systems is not enough to satisfy my thirst for knowledge (and also I'd like to know if Tatooine is plausible)!
I’m so happy
"Planet X is like an idea, man" lol
In fact caelus would be more like kai-lus
That Rubik's cube in the background is only two turns from being solved. Why hasn't it been done? This is stressing me out and I can't focus on the video.
Hey Astro! Could you make a video on if Mars became habitable like the Earth, which animals/plants and which habitats would mars have?
That’s tough and requires a ridiculous amount of speculation. It all depends on how Mars becomes habitable. If we terraformed it then we’d most likely populate it with generalist species of plants and animals that are more tolerant to variable conditions. Those species would diversify and fill ecological niches over time.
I would imagine Mars would be covered in vast deserts and grasslands since it has less water. Also, tundra, since it's further from the sun and would be colder. The seasons would be extreme since the orbit of Mars is very elliptical. Mars could have a very successful aerosphere since the gravity is lower.
@@Sk8err09 I think so. Reptiles and mammals like camels would probably inhabit Mars.
yes temoutter mibues 74 ferhite
Good old plant x - coming back In the news every 10y
Pluto was discovered by a guy who lived in my town. I used to live right across the street from the city park and they had a "Pluto fest" one year when my daughter was about 4. She's now 9 and learning about planets and stuff in school. Shes still convinced that Pluto IS a planet and she doesn't care what they say! To her and dad, Pluto will always be a planet in our heart. ♥️
Mine too!
How about Eris?
@@Tatusiek_1All of them
Let's not find Planet X. If Godzilla movies have taught me anything, Planet X is bad news, they're gonna send Ghidorah our way.
when you do find it you should name it jeff
I’m just so glad they actually found MyAnus.
Thanks for more amazing content! We have sent some incredible tech into space in the past few years, I can't wait to see what we find!
Good old Planet X, it's been around the corner for the last 22 years.
Like me dating my high school sweet heart, she'll always be the white whale that got away
yes please and call it bob
Probably the supposed disturbance in the outer solar system has rather been caused by a passing star or brown dwarf, rather than a planet orbiting our sun.
What makes the Webb telescope so special is what makes real estate so special, location location location...
a possible interaction in the distant past with a passing star may have elongated the orbits and created an egg shape as it left the proximity of the system as well, so there might not be a planet x and only a grouping of objects whose mass is in balance with the system and reorganizes itself over time once the larger object has moved on in this orbit of the galaxy
So wait... another Europa-like world lurking but MUCH bigger? Fascinating stuff! Thanks for posting!
Great video! You mentioned needing a new technology to look for planets. With the LIGO Lab results, could our next telescopes develop this technology to look for gravitational wells and therefore planets?
"Because it's [Mike Brown], I'm going to believe him". My only comment is that the same was said about Le Verrier's calculations on the existence of Vulcan on inner-Mercurian orbit. And his hypothesis was based on another unquestioned sage, Newton.
What we have to remember is that in science, we should never, NEVER trust the word of a guy just because he was mostly right. Science are not only objective calculations, but also people doing it, and people can always be wrong.
Because Newton was not always right, Einstein made his mistakes, and even Hawking wasn't out of the wrong.
Meanwhile Pluto: "I used to be your planet X 😢"
In the words of one of our finest scholars of the day "Ain't no planet x cause ain't no space cause ain't no globe earth"
Planet X. This is so cool. By the way, I have difficulty communicating because I had a stroke in Broca’s area, the part of the brain that controls speech. 2/8/2021 but I lived again. (My wife helped me compose this.)
They should check on top of the shelves. When I misplace things, I often find them on top of shelves I can't see the top of.
I love videos like this , we are actually quite insignificant
There is so much going on out there
I enjoy watching RUclips
It’s like an information download 👍🏼
Maybe Planet X was the friends we made along the way
You mentioned the search field for a Planet X going from 1 dimension to 2, but couldn't it also be 3? And I don't mean a relative plane, I mean like, a whole big chunk of space, as if you were to take a wedge (or 2 or 3 or 4) out of an orange. Pluto's orbit is not within the same relative plane as the main eight planets and it would be foolish to think the other bodies outside the Keiper Belt aren't also doing the same thing on their own orbital planes. Unless all these other weird bodies beyond the Keiper Belt are also in alignment with each other (which would be super weird), or the scientists have accurately measured the angles of all their other finds and averaged out the most likely plane to search on for a Planet X that would create those eliptical orbits, it seems to me that the reason we can't find Planet X is because it's not as simple as just scanning along a plane, you have to look along a whole three dimensional area.
There's a freeze-frame in that part of the video that addresses this, and the answer is "yes".
Is this for people not already in the know? Planet X is an obsolete idea. We have discovered the kuiper belt.
This channel is so underrated…
Pluto will always be a planet in my heart
But what happens to Earth when these mystery planets get close? Apocalypse! It's happened before and it will happen again.
This is really interesting and well researched. Thank you.
one small problem
remember that pluto video you did?
the kuiper belt IS planet X
i did the math
the combined pull of eris, pluto, and other cryasteroids would be enough to pull neptune that far back