Evidence for 'Planet 9' may actually show our theory of gravity is incomplete
Could data pointing toward a mysterious planet at the edge of the solar system actually suggest it's time to revisit our theory of gravity?
Evidence pointing toward the existence of an undiscovered ninth planet in the solar system may actually indicate our ideas of gravity are incorrect.
Such is the conclusion of two scientists who studied the effect the wider Milky Way galaxy would have on objects in the outer edges of the solar system if gravity is described by a theory known as Modified Newtonian Dynamics (MOND).
Various recipes of MOND might essentially explain how galaxies rotate as fast as they do without flying apart. Typically, most scientists believe this suspicious galactic structural hold suggests the existence of dark matter — an invisible form of matter that does emit or reflect light. The idea is that massive halos of dark matter envelop and gravitationally bind galaxies together, preventing their contents from flying outward like horses on a carousel spinning way too fast.
MOND does away with the need for dark matter, instead suggesting Isaac Newton’s famous law of gravity is correct — but only up to a point. Instead, MOND suggests that, under great rotational velocities, a different type of gravitational behavior takes over. And that type of behavior applies to rotating galaxies.
Related: Astronomers weigh ancient galaxies’ dark matter haloes for 1st time
"MOND is really good at explaining galactic-scale observations, but I hadn’t expected that it would have noticeable effects on the outer solar system," Case Western Reverse scientist Harsh Mathur, who conducted this new study with Hamilton College professor of physics Katherine Brown, said in a statement.
MOND or Planet 9?
The connection between MOND and a hypothetical Planet 9 may seem odd, but it emerges from the fact that the primary evidence for this world — that supposedly lurks at the edge of the solar system — is the strange behavior of objects in a distant structure called the Kuiper belt. The Kuiper belt is a disk in the outer reaches of our cosmic neighborhood that hosts various icy bodies like comets and asteroids.
Get the Space.com Newsletter
Breaking space news, the latest updates on rocket launches, skywatching events and more!
In 2016, some of these icy objects were found to have orbital anomalies and clustering unlike their fellow Kuiper belt dwellers — and this strange behavior, experts believed, could be the result of an undiscovered planet.
Strange orbits like these have revealed the presence of planets before, with Neptune found as a result of its gravitational tug on other solar system objects, but Mathur and Brown wanted to know if strange Kuiper belt orbits could be the result of something else. Perhaps those orbits could be explained if MOND is the right recipe for gravity.
"We wanted to see if the data that support the Planet Nine hypothesis would effectively rule out MOND," Brown said.
And ultimately, they found that the strange clustering could indeed be because of MOND. Mathur and Brown propose that over the course of millions of years, the orbits of some outer solar system dwellers could have been gravitationally dragged — instead of being aligned with the rest of the solar system, they find alignment with the gravitational field of the Milky Way.
Mathur said the duo found that “the alignment was striking.”
The scientists themselves urge caution in assessing their findings, admitting the dataset informing this research is small and suggesting that any number of other possibilities could be correct.
"Regardless of the outcome, this work highlights the potential for the outer solar system to serve as a laboratory for testing gravity and studying fundamental problems of physics," Brown concluded.
The duo’s work was published on Sept. 22 in The Astronomical Journal.
Join our Space Forums to keep talking space on the latest missions, night sky and more! And if you have a news tip, correction or comment, let us know at: community@space.com.
Robert Lea is a science journalist in the U.K. whose articles have been published in Physics World, New Scientist, Astronomy Magazine, All About Space, Newsweek and ZME Science. He also writes about science communication for Elsevier and the European Journal of Physics. Rob holds a bachelor of science degree in physics and astronomy from the U.K.’s Open University. Follow him on Twitter @sciencef1rst.
-
jim15936 A good alternate theory is that there is one or more small black holes in the Kuiper Belt, with event horizons the size of a tennis ball. So absent a very rare collision, it's invisible to us. From Wikipedia article on primordial black holes:Reply
"In August 2019, a study was published opening up the possibility of making up all dark matter with asteroid-mass primordial black holes (3.5 \00d7 10−17 – 4 \00d7 10−12 solar masses, or 7 \00d7 1013 – 8 \00d7 1018 kg)."
"In September 2019, a report by James Unwin and Jakub Scholtz proposed the possibility of a primordial black hole (PBH) with a mass 5–15 M🜨 (Earth masses), about the diameter of a tennis ball, existing in the extended Kuiper Belt to explain the orbital anomalies that are theorized to be the result of a 9th planet in the solar system." -
sbkenn I never could understand why gravitational attraction was proportional to distance squared rather than cubed. It's effect goes out in 3 dimensions, not 2.Reply -
George²
Distance is a linear parameter. Don't ask me why 😁sbkenn said:I never could understand why gravitational attraction was proportional to distance squared rather than cubed. It's effect goes out in 3 dimensions, not 2. -
Nirvana4ever It is funny or I am dumb!Reply
We have JW telescope in space and every day have many new discoveries from entire space BUT "Planet 9" in Kepler belt in our galaxy belt is STILL an "undiscovered planet"! -
George²
Unfortunately, the great astronomer Johann Kepler does not yet have an asteroid belt named after him.Nirvana4ever said:It is funny or I am dumb!
We have JW telescope in space and every day have many new discoveries from entire space BUT "Planet 9" in Kepler belt in our galaxy belt is STILL an "undiscovered planet"! -
Unclear Engineer
Your problem with understanding the situation seems to be that you think that our telescopes look at the "entire space". Actually, they see only extremely tiny fractions of space at very high magnification. So, the issue is where to point a high magnification telescope to find a very distant planet in our solar system. If we don't already know where it is, we are likely to miss it when we point in roughly the right direction.Nirvana4ever said:It is funny or I am dumb!
We have JW telescope in space and every day have many new discoveries from entire space BUT "Planet 9" in Kepler belt in our galaxy belt is STILL an "undiscovered planet"!
And, even when looking in the right direction, it might not be visible to the sensors in our telescope. It is really dark out there, so far from the Sun. So, just looking for reflected light takes quite a bit of exposure time. Looking for a "heat signature" in infrared light frequencies is another tactic, but without knowing much about the planet, we might not be looking at the right light frequencies, either.
And, then there are those who propose that it is really a small black hole, which would be tiny to be pointing at and would not be visible anyway - at least until it flashes some light as it devours some other object in the Kuiper Belt. -
George² I somewhat agree with the colleague. You only pay attention to observations with the top 10 largest telescopes in the world. Besides them, there are thousands of professional observers and hundreds of thousands of amateurs with smaller, but far from negligible, telescopes. Which must have watched the sky for a trillion man-hours in last 50-60 years.Reply -
Unclear Engineer
Perhaps Rod will chime in here about why he has not yet found "Planet Nine" with his "far from negligible telescope".George² said:I somewhat agree with the colleague. You only pay attention to observations with the top 10 largest telescopes in the world. Besides them, there are thousands of professional observers and hundreds of thousands of amateurs with smaller, but far from negligible, telescopes. Which must have watched the sky for a trillion man-hours in last 50-60 years.
Yes, there are professional people looking with some very powerful telescopes. But, I have not read about anybody who understands the situation making any claim that "Planet Nine" can't exist because the search has already been so thorough that it surely would have been found already if it is really there.
And that is the point for answering the question that Nirvana4ever asked.
Also, check your math on how many person hours (let's not slight the lady astronomers) you think have been spent looking for this planet in the last "50 to 60" years. A trillion person hours over that time would require about 2.3 million telescopes looking for every hour of every day of each of 50 years! While there may be that many telescopes in the world, a doubt that a substantial fraction of them have the parameters needed to see a plant nine. And I am sure that even Rod doesn't spend every hour of the entire year looking through his telescope. For major scopes, yes, they are expensive and probably working 24/7 except during maintenance or improvement outages - but they still aren't spending all of those hours looking for planet 9. -
George² Given that a great number of Kuiper belt objects have been discovered in the meantime, some of them extremely smaller than a planet. This suggests that it is not as if there are no observations, and many. We even have an object that was imaged by a passing New Horizons probe that also imaged several other asteroids in the belt, but from a great distance. Akrokoth is literally the size of a pebble compared to a planet, but it was previously discovered and chosen as a target for New Horizons to pass.Reply -
Unclear Engineer Consider those smaller object to be the "hay" in the "haystack" that may also contain the "needle" planet 9.Reply
Akrokoth was discovered by the Hubble Telescope at a distance of about 45 AU with an orbit inclination of only about 2.5 degrees. It is just one of a huge number of objects in the Kuiper Belt. If Hubble had looked elsewhere instead of where it found Akrokoth, it would have found other objects instead of Akrokoth. Finding just anything in a large batch of things is not the same as finding one predesignated thing.
If there is a planet 9, it is estimated to be much farther out there than Akrokoth. The orbit parameter estimates are something like 340 to 560 AU distance with an inclination estimated around 16 degrees, and a lot of uncertainty in those parameters. So, there is a lot of space to look at before concluding there is nothing there the size of a "super earth".
Wikipedia says:
"Although sky surveys such as Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer (WISE) and Pan-STARRS did not detect Planet Nine, they have not ruled out the existence of a Neptune-diameter object in the outer Solar System. The ability of these past sky surveys to detect Planet Nine was dependent on its location and characteristics. Further surveys of the remaining regions are ongoing using NEOWISE and the 8-meter Subaru Telescope. Unless Planet Nine is observed, its existence remains purely conjectural. Several alternative hypotheses have been proposed to explain the observed clustering of trans-Neptunian objects (TNOs)." (see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planet_Nine )
So, it definitely is not yet possible to say that a planet 9 is certainly not out there, somewhere. People are still working to find it with powerful telescopes. Currently, it is time to "stay tuned" rather than to just dismiss the possibility.