Theories
about planetary formation seem to be full of a lot of black holes (pun
intended). Sometimes it’s hard to sift the stardust in the lens to see the
picture underneath. There are many insightful theories about how it happens
(many excellent ones which we’ll talk about here in this entry today.) Just as
there are many very bad ones, (also ones we’ll talk about today.)
Since
the dawn of time, man has looked to the heavens for answers. In early days we
feared the sight of Mars in the sky and revered the warmth of the sun as holy.
We were simple people. So why’d we stop doing all that? Well the answer is
science, and telescopes. With the creation of telescopes we eventually decided
to put our ingenuity into space exploration. Once we learned how to put
telescopes into space, well, that’s when the magic happened.
Perhaps
the most famous of all these telescopes is the Hubble, which is still in use
today. But one of the telescopes that we’re going to be discussing and focusing
on primarily here is much more powerful than that. The Kepler Satellite is
tasked with staring at one section of the universe for as long as it has power.
That’s a daunting task, the expanse is huge, but what it has uncovered has many
scientists throwing tantrums and crying over a life’s work wasted. But where
some see complete failure, others see incredible promise.
We
discussed Kepler 78 B earlier on in this blog. (You can follow the link to that
article here) But now we’re going to talk about its latest discovery.
A planet so massive that not only should it not exist according to current
formation theories, but also should not be in its current orbit given its
location. I’m going to fill you in on what I know about this neat little
planet, and what it means to current theories in the scientific community.
(Fig. 1) Demonstrates the distance of HD 106906 B from
its parent star
(Fig. 2)
Artist’s Rendering of HD 106906 B
The “Star” of the
Show
That’s
an artist’s rendering of the planet HD 106906 B. Pretty nifty huh? The young
astrologer, Vanessa Bailey who discovered it thought so too. See, the planet is
11 times the size of Jupiter, but that’s not what’s so incredible. Its parent
star is located 650 AU (Astronomical Units which is the relative distance from
the Earth to the sun) away. That’s 60 billion miles! That’s a long way when you
think about it, considering Neptune, which is our most distant planet (since
the unfair deportation of Pluto) is 30 AU away. That means this planet is most
likely receiving no radiation from its star, but yet it’s still generating a ton of energy.
Aside
from how it’s generating this energy (it’s a gas giant so there are many
different ways it could) the other thing that perplexes us is how it formed. One theory is that when that
particular system (The Crux system) formed it originally had two suns
locked in a bitter competition with each other. Eventually, one of them was
victorious, using up the vital elements it needed to form leaving HD with the
scraps.
However
it happened, our current understanding of how planets and star systems form
isn’t leading us any closer to figuring this out. Following Nebular Hypothesis
a planet couldn’t form that far away from its star. That’s kind of bad
considering Nebular Hypothesis Theory has been around since the 1700’s. It’s also
so widely accepted that it’s taught in schools. (Whoops…) But all scientific
progress has to begin somewhere! Nebular Hypothesis may be wrong in this case,
but as the old saying goes “There’s more than one way to skin a cat.”
The Big “Bow Chicka
Wow Wow”
(Fig.
3) Timeline of the widely accepted “Big Bang Theory”
In
order to fully understand the theories we’re going to talk about today one must
understand what scientists believe set all this in motion. The Big Bang Theory
is the center of it all. It basically subscribes to the ideal that in the
beginning of time the universe essentially “imploded” on itself. This caused it
to superheat, creating the primordial elements. Over time these gases bonded
together causing electrical storms as the galaxies gradually cooled. This
lightening superheated the gases, creating heavy bonds. From that point gravity
took over and pulled these asteroids together creating the planets. Stars,
giant fission reactions of gravity, electro-magnetism, and gases, and this is
all irrefutable.
Except
it isn’t irrefutable, but it is the single handedly the most widely accepted
theory on why our little rock is here. (Second is Creationism I’d wager a
guess) But from this theory came Nebular Hypothesis theory. In 1734, when
Swedish cosmologist Emanuel Swedberg proposed that planets were the result of collapsing
stars’ violent forces creating heavy elements he was basically laughed at.
Immanuel
Kant refined this theory later, in 1755. Using Science and Mathematics he
attempted to show how gravity affected the swirling gases, causing them to
collapse over time and the forces create planets. It wasn’t until someone with
a reputation in the Astronomical community stepped in and created a model
showing how stars collapse and contract.
Enter
Pierre-Simon Laplace. His protosolar nebulae model was widely received as the
definitive answer throughout the 19th century, but there were
problems with it. Namely physics and mathematics related.
How
did these small particles come together to form these giant planets? Why did
some stars have planets around them and some not even so much as a dust belt?
If planets are the result of a collapsing star then shouldn’t it stand to
reason that all stars have planets? Not to mention where do all these heavy
elements come from? Some take some extreme conditions to form, but yet they’re
all here.
Other
failed attempts at making this theory work were Thomas Chamberlin and Forest
Moulton’s Planetesimal Theory, The
Planetesimal theory basically says that the matter collides into each other
forming balls of larger matter. The problem with this is how does dust collide?
It’s too light for gravity to effect. There is also Woolfson’s Capture Theory, which claims tidal
effects between our sun and a protostar caused the planets to form. The problem
with this one is it requires special conditions and draws on the assumption our sun formed first and the planets
formed later. Our current knowledge however tells us it all happened around the
same time, making Woolfson’s theory the least likely.
The
formation of HD 106906 B is believed to be attributed to a Binary Star system.
Originally the universe had planned for there to be two stars there. However
there were not enough elements available to double up and they began to form
too close. Because of this only one star formed and the other burned out,
unable to start the nuclear reaction in its core to light up the cosmos. This
is just a theory, but it sure sounds like a darn good one. To read more about
Binary Stars check out the Wikipedia page, here.
However
it happened we’re never going to know without looking into the sky. Let’s take
a look at how Astronomers are mapping the stars, and what technology may lead
them to the breakthroughs they need to answer one of the age old questions,
“how did we get here?”
The Space Renaissance
(Fig.4) The Kepler Telescope under construction
at NASA
Even
though HD 106906 was discovered by a ground telescope (The Magellan) located in
Chile, we’re going to talk about one that’s currently floating around in space
right now staring boldly into the heavens. The Kepler Telescope was launched
back in 2009 and since then has discovered a plethora of planets.
(Fig.
5) Breakdown of Kepler Satellite and it’s equipment
Mercurien (Like Mercury), Sub-Terran (Like
Mars), Terran (Earth-like) Even ones like Saturn and Jupiter sized ones. The
environments found on these planets is as diverse as the human race itself,
ranging from absolute zero to virtually barren magma ridden landscapes like
Kepler 78 B even planets that scientists speculate are close enough to Earth to
sustain life like ours. But how do these strange and unique solar systems and
planets actually form?
Sadly
we’ve been studying this for centuries and it seems we’re no closer to
uncovering the truth. Thanks to the Kepler Telescope however, we are getting
closer. Since 2009, NASA has reported over 2,000 exoplanets and over 2,000
stars have been discovered. As technology continues to evolve and we are able
to push further into the stars, these systems, some young, some old, could lead
us to the answers that have so long eluded us.
(Fig. 6)
Confirmed results from Kepler Exploration
The
Kepler telescope is named after 17th century astronomer Johannes
Kepler. While he wasn’t responsible for the discovery of how planets form, he
did figure out how they move. Kepler is credited with the Laws of Planetary
Motion. Not only is that important to modern day astronomy, it was also the
basis of Newton’s laws of Universal Gravitation which states that
every point mass in the universe attracts every other point mass with
a force that is directly proportional to the product of
their masses and inversely proportional to the square of the distance between
them. In other words, multiply the weight of the objects, that’s how much
force you have. Then do the math for the distance between them. You got their
movement.
Even
though Einstein superseded Universal Gravitation with General Relativity it’s
still used as a basis for explanation of gravitational forces. Relativity is
used when extreme precision is required. But I digress. Back to Kepler.
There
were three parts to his law of planetary motion:
1.
The
orbit of every planet is an ellipse with the sun at one of the two foci.
2.
A line joining
a planet and the Sun sweeps out equal areas during equal intervals of
time.
3.
The
square of the orbital period of a planet is proportional to the cube of the
semi-major axis of its orbit.
While
the first two were published in 1609 it would be ten more years till
observations led him to the discovery of his third law. Those are some pretty
incredible discoveries given the technology he had to work with in those early
days. It seems fitting to name our deep space stargazing telescope after the
man.
The Kepler Probe
Don’t Give A Schmidt
(Fig.
7) Palomar Observatory, California
So
how do telescopes like the Kepler Satellite and the Magellan Observatory see
into space so clearly? As centuries go by we have been improving on the
telescope. That led us all the way to 1930, to a man named Bernhard Schmidt.
His design would revolutionize the clarity of which we see the sky, one that
almost 100 years later, is so tried and true we sent it up into the Kepler
Probe in 2009.
“The
Schmidt camera was invented by Estonian optician Bernhard
Schmidt in 1930. Its optical components are an easy-to-make spherical primary
mirror, and an aspherical correcting lens, known as a Schmidt Corrector Plate,
located at the center of curvature of the primary mirror. The film or other
detector is placed inside the camera, at the prime focus. The design is noted
for allowing very fast focal ratios, while controlling coma and astigmatism.
Schmidt
cameras have very strongly curved focal planes, thus requiring that the
film, plate, or other detector be correspondingly curved. In some cases the
detector is made curved; in others flat media is mechanically conformed to the
shape of the focal plane through the use of retaining clips or bolts, or by the
application of a vacuum. A field flattener, in its simplest form a
planoconvex lens in front of the film plate or detector, is sometimes used.
Since the corrector plate is at the center of curvature of the primary mirror
in this design the tube length can be very long for a wide-field telescope. There
are also the drawbacks of having the obstruction of the film holder or detector
mounted at the focus half way up the tube assembly, a small amount of light is
blocked and there is a loss in contrast in the image due to diffraction effects
of the obstruction and its support structure.” – From Wikipedia
This
new design changed the astronomy world forever, (obviously if we’re still
building satellites that use it today!) As innovation and exploration continue
to drive us forward into the world I’m excited to see what scientists come up
next. I’ll be following HD 106906 B as well as Kepler 78 B and when more is
known I’ll be sure to write more on it. Thanks for reading this guys!
(Fig.
8) The largest Schmidt telescope (2 m), located in Germany.
-Ryan
Sanders
For further reading on any of the
above mentioned materials you can follow the links below as always. Feel free
to share this around on Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, where you want to! J
Happy learning!
.png)
