Follow internet tradition and call it Planet McPlanety-Face ?
Just call it an URO and be done with it.
Welcome to 2016. Mike brown and Konstantin Batygin basically proved that the only way we could explain the orbits of Pluto and other KBO was a massive 9th, yet to be discovered rogue planet more than likely ejected from our inner solar system during planet formation.
wtf,they have several classifications.
- free-floating planetary-mass object
- exoplanet
- rogue planet
- brown dwarf
welcome to science where theres names, AND acknowledgement that things change with new data
SIMP? More like PGTOW (Planets Going Their Own Way)
This planet is no orbiter.
Planets Gone Wild
Orbs Gone Wild.
I hate that I laughed at that
Maybe we could attract it with an OnlyFans subscription.
You mean OnlyPlanets
Young, dumb, and not-orbiting a sun… ;)
Let’s not. I like the solar systems orbits exactly as they are
Well, there’s a stronger case being made every day for flinging ourselves into the sun.
Name seems wrong but you do you, SIMP 0136
Strangely Independent Massive Planet - Simp
So how come there’s an aurora when there’s no star to spray it with electromagnetic radiation?
Because the planet produces its own radiation. That much mass means this is less a “planet” and more of a proto star. It’s actually large enough to fuse deuterium if the right conditions arise. Pour enough hydrogen in there to raise the mass three of four times what it has now and it’d be comparable to our sun.
Would this be a star which wasn’t big enough and fizzled out into a big planet?
Every planet is a star which wasn’t big enough. Some are just more challenged than others.
Cool, thanks for that!
better question, is a star required for EMR?
Nah, that’s a yes or no question, that’s a worse question. I want to know what’s causing the aurora, if not a star.
Strangely attracted to distant stars yet unable to establish a stable orbit, Simp 0136 is condemned to a lonely existence.
Whoa, that’s deeper than deep space, bro. *exhales*
So, my understanding is that the Simp is all alone?
Being that size can be really fucking intimidating to others.
Just like me fr
Pretty normal for simps. Sorry.
If you are being serious, please find some local in person hobby groups that interest you and join them. It’s absolutely worth it.
I think it was a joke.
Ofc the simp is cucked in the corner not allowed to join the orgy of planets.
Doh!
That’s looks like a picture of Jupiter, or an artists impression of it, and there’s a star needed for an aurora to happen.
Any scientific sources to back this story up?
The picture is definitely just some artist’s conception, but it’s not claimed to be a photo or meant to be anything other than what it is, an artist’s conception. You’re right that for the most part, a star is needed for aurora, at least for the kind of aurora we have on Earth since it depends on the solar wind interacting with the planet’s magnetic field. But if there is anything that can be said about what we’ve discovered astronomically in the last century or so it’s that there are always exceptions to every supposed rule.
The authors attribute the auroras to SIMP-0136’s magnetic field being vastly more powerful than Jupiter’s (750 times stronger according to a previous study). Electrons (presumably stripped from atoms by internal processes) would flow with the field and hit atmospheric molecules fast enough to make them glow, they conclude.
Aside from the aurora part though, none of this is exceptional or rare (and maybe even the aurora part isn’t rare either). Rogue planets are probably extremely common, possibly even more common than planets that are gravitationally bound in a star system. And objects of this size, which is really around where we’d start calling it a brown dwarf, are also very common, with more of them than there are main sequence stars.
Thanks
No it is indeed an artists impression of the planet - it’s on the wiki page.
I’m assuming that aurora only needs solar wind to happen on earth - or that solar wind outside the heliosphere is strong enough you don’t need a star for it to happen.
In 2018 astronomers said "Detecting SIMP J01365663+0933473 with the VLA through its auroral radio emission, also means that we may have a new way of detecting exoplanets, including the elusive rogue ones not orbiting a parent star …
simp 0136 really needs love. seriously!
So, my understanding of auroras is, the planet’s magnetic field draws particles emitted by the sun toward the poles, and as those particles interact with the atmosphere they glow. So without a star and thus without solar wind, where do the aurora come from?
The theory seems to be captured radiation (electron) fields. Earth even has one. A stray planet and its halo of interstellar objects might have a very large and complex radiation belt system.
I mean, it has a magnetic field 6 or 7 orders of magnitude higher than ours. Id guess that extra strength allows it to pull particles from much further away and possibly from sources much more reticent to give up their particles than solar wind
Both the magnetic field strength and charged particle flux fall off proportional to the square of the distance from the planet / star respectively, so I doubt it gets much of anything even with a strong magnetic field unless it’s also near a star.
I’d also point out that the particles aren’t really attracted by the earths magnetic field, we’re just in the pathway, and the magnetic field funnels them to the poles. It’s more guidance than attraction.
If the rogue planet is truly all alone in space, you’re definitely right. 4 million times is a lot, but space is really, really big, and solar radiation falls off with 1/r^2.
Let’s assume the auroras are proportional to the size of the magnetic field. That’s probably not true, it’s probably actually proportional to the square root of the magnetic field because field strengths fall off with 1/r^2, but let’s give it the best possible chance of having huge auroras. That would mean that a planet with 4x the magnetic field of Earth would have the same Aurora brightness at 2x the distance. So, something with 4 million times the magnetic field would have the same brightness at sqrt(4,000,000) the earth-to-sun distance, or 2000x the distance. If it were in our solar system, or even just near our solar system, it would be bright. But, space is big.
Since the earth is about 500 light-seconds from the sun, 2000 earth-distances is about 1 million light seconds, or about 11.5 days. By comparison, the closest star to Sol is Proxima Centauri at 4 light years. So, these Auroras would only be earth-like if the rogue planet were very close to some star. It wouldn’t have to necessarily be in orbit of that star, but it would have to be pretty close. If it were out in the space between the stars, there’s just nothing there for the magnetic field to interact with.
I dont think you’re quite understanding how big 6 orders of magnitude is. 4000000/r2 still falls off way slower than 1/r2.
Also the funnel diagram of the earth’s magnetic field you’re referring to is a near field effect. In the far field regime the only field components that stay strong enough to be relevant are those parallel to the axis of the dipole; a dipole is functionally identical to a bar magnet if you’re measuring it from far enough away. If my understanding of solar wind is correct and the aurora refers to an interaction that occurs between the earth’s magnetic field and particles near the sun, we’re definitely in the far field regime
I don’t think you’re quite understanding the distances involved in what I’m getting at. The particle flux is minuscule, and it’s not the magnetic field that’s attracting particles. It’s only guiding the particles that were already headed towards the planet.
This planet would have great aurorae if it were near a star, but it’s not, so the magnetic field strength is kind of a moot point.
The absolute distance is strictly irrelevant given this is a relative comparison between two magnetic fields. The one that is 6 orders of magnitude higher will maintain that 6 orders of magnitude difference exactly the same at a distance of 100m as it will at a distance of 100au. That means that the stronger field will maintain the minimum strength required to “guide” particles towards the dipole at a greater distance than the weaker magnetic field would. I feel you if you’re only trying to argue that it would still need to be within some neighborhood of some star to produce an aurora, but your posts read like you’re claiming 6 orders of magnitude on the magnetic field makes no difference on how close that object would need to be to produce an aurora, which is flatly incorrect.
No star = no charged particles = no lights. Doesn’t matter how big the magnetic field is.
That’s all he’s saying.
From how far could the planet guide particles into its aurora?
I see cheap MRIs
Im guessing it only occurs when it is in a cloud or trail of charged particles. or perhaps there is a local (climatic?) cycle that sends charged particles to the poles.
The Wikipedia linked in these comments says it is likely from electron precipitation. Basically the magnetic field traps free elections and thus “wiggles” as they interact with the field. This can make a (pulsed) radio jet shooting from the pole, which is how this planet was observed. These electrons can fine from atmospheric phenomena such as lightning or large storms.
Earth has the same but much weaker phenomenon, the Van Allen belt, which was a difficult challenge to handle in the early days of space exploration.
Just what I was wondering.
