[HN Gopher] Orion's mysterious free-floating planets
___________________________________________________________________
Orion's mysterious free-floating planets
Author : belter
Score : 22 points
Date : 2024-05-31 12:52 UTC (1 days ago)
(HTM) web link (www.bbc.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.bbc.com)
| largbae wrote:
| The article spends a lot of time painting it as mystery before
| this seemingly obvious paragraph: "Portegies Zwart favours a
| different explanation, where Jumbos form in the same way as
| stars, directly from the collapse of a cloud of gas. Known as in-
| situ formation, this would require us to rethink how low the
| density of a gas cloud can be in order to trigger such a
| collapse. But for Portegies Zwart, "I think in-situ formation is
| the only one in which I don't have theoretical problems," he
| says. "It is the most promising."
|
| Why would a nebula not produce _every_ possible size of object
| over its billions of years?
|
| Maybe this is how stars actually form, gas accretes into chunks
| of icy matter similar to what happens in Saturn's rings. Then
| those small objects gravitationally meet and sometimes coalesce
| into moons, then small planets, big planets, brown dwarves etc.
| finally when enough stuff has coalesced, the gravity is strong
| enough to cause fusion and boom you have a star.
| powerbroker wrote:
| This seems the most straightforward of explanations. I know
| that a planet tends to loose its heat (and visibility in
| infrared) quickly after formation -- and might be hard to spot
| as a rogue planet.
|
| But, the Zwart explanation seems to suggest that the pairs are
| still potentially drawing stuff in, and might not be the final
| form that the planet-pairs will take once they exist (or
| consume) the nebulae. Nothing seems to be stopping these pairs
| from evolving into stars themselves (aren't binaries far more
| common than solitary suns, like our own?).
| jessriedel wrote:
| (Purposely terrible writing, but par for the course in popular
| science.)
|
| More specifically: although it's certainly plausible there's a
| threshold in nebular dynamics for solid object formation
| because clouds of less total mass fail to congeal, I see no
| reason a prior why this mass threshold would coincide with the
| mass necessary to start fusion (i.e., the lightest brown
| dwarfs). And since we have seen brown dwarfs just above the
| threshold, but those below it would have been invisible to use
| before the past ~decade, it seems completely natural to find
| free-floating planets just below the threshold now that we have
| acquired the technology to see them.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-06-01 23:01 UTC)