• Welcome to League Of Reason Forums! Please read the rules before posting.
    If you are willing and able please consider making a donation to help with site overheads.
    Donations can be made via here

Weekend Links - January 29, 2016

arg-fallbackName="WarK"/>
It'd be so awesome if the news about the new planet turned out to be true.
 
arg-fallbackName="he_who_is_nobody"/>
WarK said:
It'd be so awesome if the news about the new planet turned out to be true.

I am putting down my money right now, no new planet. It seems highly unlikely that a planet the size of Neptune would be out there for so long without us ever noticing its gravitational effects until now. My money is that they are attributing a pattern to what is most likely noise with the known Kuiper Belt objects. Once we start finding more Kuiper Belt objects, that pattern will most likely disappear. However, I truly hope I am wrong about that, because NEW PLANET!
 
arg-fallbackName="SpecialFrog"/>
he_who_is_nobody said:
WarK said:
It'd be so awesome if the news about the new planet turned out to be true.

I am putting down my money right now, no new planet. It seems highly unlikely that a planet the size of Neptune would be out there for so long without us ever noticing its gravitational effects until now. My money is that they are attributing a pattern to what is most likely noise with the known Kuiper Belt objects. Once we start finding more Kuiper Belt objects, that pattern will most likely disappear. However, I truly hope I am wrong about that, because NEW PLANET!
As usual, XKCD has a useful view on it.

possible_undiscovered_planets.png
 
arg-fallbackName="TheUrbanSheperd"/>
The video link reminds me of an odd situation that occurred last year with my local SciBar group. We invited in a speaker to present his work within the field of Bio-engineering. It was interesting enough - a good mix of laymens and technical terms - until he mentioned the significance of the bacterial flagellum. I laughed it off as an funny coincidence, until one of the videos he played flashed a 'Creation.org' URL at the bottom, and the narrator made mention of 'clear proof of design'. I turned to face the group organiser, who just gave me a look of "seriously, I had no idea...". We did talk to the chap afterwards, but to this day none of us know for sure whether he was really a creationist or IDer, or he just felt the clip (which did have some real science in it) was a good tool to better explain his research...

For any Asimov readers out there, could Dr. Grimes work technically be considered a form of psycho-history? ;)
 
arg-fallbackName="he_who_is_nobody"/>
TheUrbanSheperd said:
We invited in a speaker to present his work within the field of Bio-engineering.

It would not surprise me one bit to find out he was a intelligent design creationist. There are a surprising amount of intelligent design creationists that are also engineers (at least from my anecdotal experience). I bet it has something to do with hammers seeing all their problems as nails.
 
arg-fallbackName="Collecemall"/>
Do we not have telescopes that are able to see this planet should it exist? Or is the only way to identify it measuring it's effects? It sounds cool but I'm skeptical that it is out there and we haven't identified it yet.
 
arg-fallbackName="WarK"/>
Collecemall said:
Do we not have telescopes that are able to see this planet should it exist? Or is the only way to identify it measuring it's effects? It sounds cool but I'm skeptical that it is out there and we haven't identified it yet.

I think they'll now use telescopes to search for it.

Wasn't Neptune discovered in a similar way? They first saw that Uranus wasn't where it was supposed to be so they posited that there was another body near it.
 
arg-fallbackName="Mr_Wilford"/>
WarK said:
Collecemall said:
Do we not have telescopes that are able to see this planet should it exist? Or is the only way to identify it measuring it's effects? It sounds cool but I'm skeptical that it is out there and we haven't identified it yet.

I think they'll now use telescopes to search for it.

Wasn't Neptune discovered in a similar way? They first saw that Uranus wasn't where it was supposed to be so they posited that there was another body near it.

It was either that or they noticed because it's Axis is completely tipped on its side that they postulated some other body was tugging on it and throwing the planet off kilter
 
arg-fallbackName="Dragan Glas"/>
Greetings,

As always, it's a case of patterns and anomalies.

Spotting an anomaly indicates an, as yet, undiscovered pattern.

A possible planet that far away would only be found if one knows where to look - hence the need for discovering an anomaly first indicating a possible pattern (orbit).

Kindest regards,

James
 
Back
Top