posted on Mar, 15 2004 @ 01:05 PM
Originally posted by HumptyDumpty
1. So why is it that this is not a big topic right now?
2. What is the significance of this discovery scienetificaly.
3. What new theories are going to be made?
4. How does this change the standard model of our solar system or does it?
5. What theories are out there that are supported by this discouvery?
1. Because we have discovered quite a few big Kuiper Belt Object in the last few years. Sedna not large enough for a real planet, it's a big KBO
(Kuiper Belt Object). Actually, Pluto is also too small for a planet and belongs to this group of KBOs. A list from
- Name, diameter (km), mean distance from sun (AU), discovery date
- 2004 DW, ~1600, 45, 2004
- Quaoar, 1200±200, 43.25, 2002
- Varuna, 1060±200, 43.23, 2000
- Ixion, 1055±165, 39.39, 2001
- 2002 TX300, ~965, 43.19, 2002
- 2002 UX25, ~910, 42.71, 2002
- 2002 AW197, 890±120, 47.52, 2002
We can now add Sedna, ~2200, 67, 2004 to this list.
2. It's a nice test of discovery methods using new CCD technology, but it's not really that amazing. As said above, we have found a lot more of
these objects. This one is about the same size, but just further away. It's just the fact that our technology was sophisticated enough to detect it
that makes it interesting.
4. It doesn't. It confirms our idea that there is a cloud of small planetesimals. We actually suspect large objects than those we've found.
5. The standard idea of the evolution of our solar system. It predicts the objects and explains them. They were formed at the same time of the other
planets, but were probably under influence of Jupiter never able to form really large objects.
[Edited on 16-3-2004 by amantine]