"10th planet" found

[Kullat Nunu]

I think this deserves own thread.

See this Sky & Telescope article

And nope, it isn't 2003 EL61!

It is less than 3000 km wide, but if it is 100% reflective it must be still bigger than Pluto. It's distance is whopping 97 Astronomical Units and its orbit is highly inclined, 44°. Its magnitude is 18 and is currently in the constellation Cetus.

[Van Rijn]

This is very confusing, since some of the reports on 2003 EL61 were wrong and suggested that it was bigger than Pluto. Take a look here:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8756128/

But if the Sky and Telescope article is right, this is a different object, and some of the same people are involved. It is further out (97 AU versus 52) and has not received a designation yet.

I won't be convinced until I see confirmation, but it sounds like this one really might get a "tenth planet" designation or will (as many of us have hoped) finally force a better definition of the term.

[pumpkinpie]

But if the Sky and Telescope article is right, this is a different object, and some of the same people are involved. It is further out (97 AU versus 52) and has not received a designation yet.

S&T has updated to give it designation 2003 UB 313

[Kullat Nunu]

Mike Brown has a page for the new object here (currently no content yet).

[Padawan]

This is really interesting stuff. It makes you wonder how many other objects there might be out there with this size.

Is it possible that NASA's new SIM (Space Interferometry Mission) mission, which is part of the Origins program will have time to study these objects? As far as I know, the SIM won't be searching for extrasolar planets all the time, and it's resolution power will be unprecedented.

[Kullat Nunu]

Discovery MPEC is here.

Absolute magnitude of 2003 EL61 is 0.4, way brightest until, well, today. 2003 UB313's magnitude is -1.1!

[Kullat Nunu]

Mike Brown has a page for the new object here (currently no content yet).

Small update:

The lower limit to this object is the size of Pluto. This object is at least the size of Pluto and likely a bit larger.

[pumpkinpie]

Small update:

The lower limit to this object is the size of Pluto. This object is at least the size of Pluto and likely a bit larger.

Very exciting! It gives me a lot to look forward to coming into work on Monday. I work in a Science Museum, and the media will very likely be contacting us for our take on it. I did a live bit on the morning news back when Sedna was discovered!

[Stardate]

You do realize the Kuiper Belt (including Pluto) is just a huge "10th" planet waiting to form slowly but surely?

<--- **RUNS AND HIDES FOR THINKING OUTSIDE OF THE BOX**

[Jorge]

You do realize the Kuiper Belt (including Pluto) is just a huge "10th" planet waiting to form slowly but surely?

<--- **RUNS AND HIDES FOR THINKING OUTSIDE OF THE BOX**

nah its just bits and piece that didn't make it.

like endeavour was before it became endeavour

[Stardate]

You do realize the Kuiper Belt (including Pluto) is just a huge "10th" planet waiting to form slowly but surely?

<--- **RUNS AND HIDES FOR THINKING OUTSIDE OF THE BOX**

nah its just bits and piece that didn't make it.

like endeavour was before it became endeavour

At the rate those puppies keep smacking together forming tiny planets, I can't wait for the big one to actually form. I'm now bumming, because it won't be in my lifetime.

[iron4]

I only hope that this time is for real. I couldn't bear another deception like that of 2003 EL61

[Van Rijn]

Mike Brown has a page for the new object here (currently no content yet).

Small update:

The lower limit to this object is the size of Pluto. This object is at least the size of Pluto and likely a bit larger.

It also says:

We have proposed a name to the IAU and will announce it when that name is accepted.

But interestingly, the title of the web page is "Planet Lila" (and look at the url). Is that a hint? I dunno ... "Lila" just doesn't sound right for a planet name.

[01101001]

I think this deserves own thread.

See this Sky & Telescope article

And nope, it isn't 2003 EL61!

Are we sure there are two different objects just announced?

From Space.com article (Probably same as MSNBC article above.)

Brown was surprised last night to learn that Ortiz' group had independently found the object, which only yesterday gained the tag 2003 EL61 from the Minor Planet Center. It was a rare case of one group of astronomers unwittingly scooping another.

Is there an article that talks about their actually being two objects?

Edit: I guess S&T writes about 2 objects, but I'm still not sure they are diffferent.

[iron4]

Mike Brown has a page for the new object here (currently no content yet).

Small update:

The lower limit to this object is the size of Pluto. This object is at least the size of Pluto and likely a bit larger.

It also says:

We have proposed a name to the IAU and will announce it when that name is accepted.

But interestingly, the title of the web page is "Planet Lila" (and look at the url). Is that a hint? I dunno ... "Lila" just doesn't sound right for a planet name.

Possibly the person that chose the name is a fan of Oasis

[azazul]

A second big Kuiper Belt discovery also made news today: 2003 EL61.

From the Sky & Telescope article.

[Van Rijn]

See this Sky & Telescope article

And nope, it isn't 2003 EL61!

Are we sure there are two different objects just announced?

Is there an article that talks about their actually being two objects?

Did you read the article?

In a sense, there are three objects: 2003 EL61 has a moon. 2003 UB313 is substantially larger. If you look back at my first post in this thread, you can see why there was some initial confusion, but there's no doubt that we are talking about different objects now. I'll wait for confirmation, but it does sound like we found something larger than Pluto.

[01101001]

A second big Kuiper Belt discovery also made news today: 2003 EL61.

From the Sky & Telescope article.

Yeah, but why does Brown's web page call his discovery 2003 EL61, and credit Ortiz for announcing it first.

The existence of 2003 EL61 was announced on 28 July 2005 by a group using the Telescopio Sierra Nevada in Baja, California. Some details of their discovery can be found here.

In the meantime, our group (Mike Brown, Chad Trujillo, David Rabinowitz) also found the object [...]

Confusing.

Edit: OK. Brown's other page seems to describe a second object (2003UB313) and claims:

Note that this object is NOT 2003EL61, announced yesterday by Jose Ortiz.

[Van Rijn]

A second big Kuiper Belt discovery also made news today: 2003 EL61.

From the Sky & Telescope article.

Yeah, but why does Brown's web page call his discovery 2003 EL61, and credit Ortiz for announcing it first.

Go to the page above that:

http://www.gps.caltech.edu/~mbrown/

which has links to pages about both objects.

Also, on the credit issue on 2003 EL61 see the MSNBC article I linked to earlier:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8756128/

Read the "Who gets credit?" section. Two groups found 2003 EL61 independently.

[Kullat Nunu]

This ain't real!

MPEC 2005-O42 : 2005 FY9

Orbital elements:
2005 FY9
Epoch 2005 Aug. 18.0 TT = JDT 2453600.5                 MPC
M 213.91871              (2000.0)            P               Q
n   0.00319661     Peri.  245.84775     +0.70933335     +0.51938413
a  45.6397027      Node    79.41551     -0.32755355     +0.84151339
e   0.1518904      Incl.   28.99834     -0.62414330     +0.14864500
P 308              H    0.1           G   0.15           U   8

Another body larger than 2003 EL61 !?

[01101001]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8756128/

Read the "Who gets credit?" section. Two groups found 2003 EL61 independently.

It's that darn CalTech Brown who gets mentioned in both discoveries. He's getting me mixed up. The flaky reporting on the sizes isn't helping.

I need an updated Sloar System map. Here's the Sun. Earth is here. OK? Here's Ortiz's Sedna-sized 'EL' over here. And here's Brown's bigger 'UB' way over here.

[Jorge]

you forgot the other planets, earth is very lonely now

[Tuckerfan]

Can anybody spill the goods on what was said at the press conference?

[Kullat Nunu]

News release is here, but it doesn't contain anything that we don't already know.

Brown believes that the object is perhaps one and half the size of Pluto.

They seem to be much more careful announcing the name after the Sedna incident.

[Kullat Nunu]

New York Times article

Looks like the discovery was to be announced in October, but information leaked to Internet (observation logs) forced Brown to make the announcement now.

[Tom]

It almost sounds like a game of "my new planet's bigger than YOUR new planet! Nyah!".

Nice, though. but a magnitude of -1.1 for 313? Gads.

[Jorge]

Pff, my planet W and Y are far bigger than those! and there made of anti-matter too!

ha beat that stupid pro-astronomers *mhahahahahahahahahahah... slowly faids away*


Note: this should not be taken sereiusly, it is here soly for entertainment perpus only

[Kullat Nunu]

It almost sounds like a game of "my new planet's bigger than YOUR new planet! Nyah!".

Nice, though. but a magnitude of -1.1 for 313? Gads.

If it has similar albedo to a typical KBO it would have to be as large as Mars. More likely (and because it was not detected by Spitzer) its diameter is around 3000 km meaning that it is has as bright surface as Pluto. Does this mean that it too may have similar atmosphere?

[tracer]

New York Times article

From the article:

"The new object - as yet unnamed, but temporarily designated as 2003 UB313 - is currently 9 billion miles away from the Sun, or 97 times as far away as the Earth and about three times Pluto's current distance from the Sun. But its 560-year elliptical orbit also brings it as close as 3.3 billion miles. Pluto's orbit ranges between 2.7 billion and 4.6 billion miles."

Wow -- they just discovered that it was moving in relation to the background stars, and now they already know the eccentricity of its orbit?!?

[The Bad Astronomer]

I'll be on Coast to Coast AM radio tonight to talk about this. See my main page for details and links.