Tuesday, February 26, 2019


The scientific process is, at its core, iterative. There is no such thing as a truly final/definitive answer - there are only solutions that are good enough for now. In a day-to-day sense, what this really means is that when you’ve been chugging away at some problem and you finally arrive at the result, you can be damn sure that you probably haven’t understood the Full Picture (even if in the moment it feels like you have). “Maybe there is a more elegant way to arrive at the solution? Maybe some approximation has introduced a hidden uncertainty? Maybe there’s a better way to look at the data?” Every step in the right direction is inevitably haunted by questions that fall along these lines. 

The Planet Nine story is no exception to this rule. Back when Mike and I published our first P9 paper three years ago, we didn’t worry that there might be a lot more work to be done on this problem - we were certain of it. Instead, what we worried about was that there exists a simpler, or perhaps more natural resolution to the anomalies we were seeing in the data, and that the Planet Nine hypothesis will be rendered irrelevant shortly after publication. That didn’t happen.

To our joint relief (and to some extent surprise), thus far, the P9 hypothesis has fared the test of time rather well. Inevitably, questions have come up regarding the role of observational biases in shaping the orbital clustering we see in the distant Kuiper belt, but these concerns have been largely put to rest. Alternative theories, on the other hand, require the existence of a hidden, coherent, and massive belt of icy planetesimals at hundreds of AU - a scenario that suffers from a number of astrophysical drawbacks. The P9 story thus continues to be in pretty good shape. Nevertheless, we have always felt the need to drive our understanding of the Planet Nine hypothesis a little bit further (and then a bit further after that). So, in collaboration with Juliette Becker and Fred Adams from University of Michigan (as well as Elizabeth Bailey here at Caltech and Alessandro Morbidelli from Nice observatory on earlier works), we spent the last couple years characterizing P9-induced dynamics from analytical grounds and trying to constrain the mass and orbit of Planet Nine to better precision.
The results of these endeavors are compiled in our new review article entitled “The Planet Nine Hypothesis,” published in Physics Reports today. Admittedly, in writing this manuscript, we ended up erring on the side of completeness over completion, so the paper is not exactly short. As a result, with an eye towards providing an “executive summary” of the results, in the next couple posts, I will highlight some of the main take-away points of the article, beginning with brief historical account of planetary predictions based on dynamical evidence.


  1. То что вы ищите имеет название, планета у которой нет земли но она вся усеяна звёздами
    В 3600 лет исчисляется её вытянутая орбита

    1. Ты хоть сам то понял, что ляпнул..

    2. Просто смоделируйте такой вариант что 9я планета о который вы пишите - есть, поставьте условие её прохождения вокруг солнца в 3600 земных лет, где сейчас она по вашему?

    3. Представьте что она 3я от нас но это не сатурн, примерно так можно описать её прохождение

  2. Konstantin, 100% of the audience will not understand what you describe in the article. It is necessary to discuss by simple categories. Namely: the postulates of classical mechanics. You should answer the following the questions. And the answers should be clear to many.

    1. What mechanical causes of Kozai-Lidov resonance?
    2. Why is the inclination of the plane of the orbits of Pallas and Hidalgo, respectively, of 35 and 42 degrees?
    3. Why Uranus is lying on its side?
    4. Why do the orbits of Venus and Neptune have an eccentricity almost equal to "ZERO", while in Jupiter and Saturn it is slightly larger than "ZERO"?
    5. How are the orbital parameters of remote KBO's proved? Did the radar scan in determing orbital parametrs of remote KBO's? What time was observed remote KBO's?
    6. Why are there Kirkwood gaps?

    Maybe the answer to these and other questions is ONE. The massive body is in the inner part of the solar system.

    And to confirm the orbital parameters of remote KBO's requires 250-300 years.

    Well, and besides, the main criterion for evaluating a theory is the result of an experiment. You have a negative result. I have a positive result of the experiment.A completely simple conclusion suggests itself: My theory is correct, and your theory is wrong.

    I am essentially saving your and Brown reputation, as well as Caltech's reputation.

    I have no desire to harm you. I just want to help. The prospect of work in this case, 150 years ahead, no less.

    To do scan ephemeris by Subaru telescope . I indicated ephemeris in my blog and you will see the object and its sattelite which I discovered.
    It is very simple.

  3. I remind you: The diameter of the main object is 93,750.0 km (with dust), 74,785.0 km (without dust). The satellite diameter is 37,500 km (with dust). Main object densinity of substances(estimate) - 2700 kg per cubic meter. It is Super Earth. Mass of Main object+Satellite of 103.3 Earth masses.The Мagnitude is not brighter + 23.0m. Conditions of visibility and justification of conditions of visibility can be found in the technical versions. You can see the evolution of articles in the form of corrections.

  4. In any case, I invite Dr. Batygin and Dr. Brown to hunt. Accepting an invitation from a madman like me - it's up to you.

  5. Planet Nine was initially located in the inner part of solar system but exiled by Jupiter to remote outer part of solar system.

  6. Thank you for this useful content, It’s a very useful content that helps me to complete my assignment at right time. I would like to write about my experience of assignment help Australia. I am an academic expert here who provides reference assignment including Accounting, Management, Finance, IT, Economics, Computer Science, Nursing, Marketing; all Academic subjects to University Students across Australia or even globe. We are a big online assignment help providers who help students to get HD grades according to assessment guidelines and instructions.

    Those who are searching for assignment help in Melbourne, Perth, Brisbane, Adelaide etc. They can get an Online Assignment Expert - the No.1 Assignment provider. Any student who is ready to buy an assignment at affordable price, they can visit our marked website & can enjoy the benefits of our amazing and informative services. You can avail of our convenient online assignment help and samples available on our website for free. You can also download it from our website. If you want to get more marks in your university assessment. We assign the best writer according to the subject for your academic problems and help in assignment writing services. Our Customer Care Executives are available 24*7 hours to assist you in the best possible manner. Phone calls and emails are the best methods used by assignment provider.