Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Rogue Worlds Throw Planetary Ideas Out of Orbit

quantamagazine.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 27 posts

Re: Rogue Worlds Throw Planetary Ideas Out of Orbit

#11

Post by klyrs »

thriftwy wrote: post #2

Maybe the actual sentient life in universe lives deep within those rogue worlds. It is also trivial for them to hop worlds - either wait for a flyby or put nuclear reactor on a blob of ices and drive away. They use stars as beacons and can't imagine anyone willing to live directly in the bonfire. If they are using laser communication, our Sun will likely drown any signals in noise.

"Deep within" gas giants, physics gets incredibly weird due to the pressures involved. Life arising on a moon seems more likely to me.

Re: Rogue Worlds Throw Planetary Ideas Out of Orbit

#12

Post by thriftwy »

klyrs wrote: post #11
thriftwy wrote: post #2

Maybe the actual sentient life in universe lives deep within those rogue worlds. It is also trivial for them to hop worlds - either wait for a flyby or put nuclear reactor on a blob of ices and drive away. They use stars as beacons and can't imagine anyone willing to live directly in the bonfire. If they are using laser communication, our Sun will likely drown any signals in noise.

"Deep within" gas giants, physics gets incredibly weird due to the pressures involved. Life arising on a moon seems more likely to me.

I was thinking more of tectonically active ice giants with large oceans under the ice shield. To explore space, you will have to drill your way out first.

Re: Rogue Worlds Throw Planetary Ideas Out of Orbit

#13

Post by thegrim33 »

pavel_lishin wrote: post #7

I think I commented this the last time it was posted, but I'm vain enough to post it again: > Rather than answering this question, the JWST observation adds to the mystery: The telescope’s infrared eye found that dozens of the worlds appear to be in pairs orbiting each other — a puzzling arrangement that, if confirmed, would defy expectations. > “We’re missing something,” said Nienke van der Marel, a researcher who s…

But why? It's much easier and cheaper to just leech off a star for energy. Your theory also doesn't explain why "most intelligent life" would choose that approach rather than only a subset, with the rest staying around stars like normal.

Re: Rogue Worlds Throw Planetary Ideas Out of Orbit

#14

Post by m4rtink »

pavel_lishin wrote: post #7

I think I commented this the last time it was posted, but I'm vain enough to post it again: > Rather than answering this question, the JWST observation adds to the mystery: The telescope’s infrared eye found that dozens of the worlds appear to be in pairs orbiting each other — a puzzling arrangement that, if confirmed, would defy expectations. > “We’re missing something,” said Nienke van der Marel, a researcher who s…

Single gas giant & moons would easier - see how it keeps Io and possibly other moons warm. :)

Re: Rogue Worlds Throw Planetary Ideas Out of Orbit

#15

Post by api »

pavel_lishin wrote: post #9
api wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I had a thought a while back about interstellar flight: If there are a lot of massive objects out there (rogue planets, maybe primordial black holes) then these could be used to aid acceleration and deceleration through gravity assist and the Oberth effect. (The latter describes how you get more acceleration thrusting near a massive body.) You could fly along with an ultra sensitive gravity telescope / sensor and hop…

I think gravity assists only really make sense when you're talking about orbits - a solitary object floating through the void won't help you accelerate, though it can help you make a cheaper "turn" in space.

Doesn’t the Oberth effect still work?

Re: Rogue Worlds Throw Planetary Ideas Out of Orbit

#16

Post by WJW »

pavel_lishin wrote: post #7

I think I commented this the last time it was posted, but I'm vain enough to post it again: > Rather than answering this question, the JWST observation adds to the mystery: The telescope’s infrared eye found that dozens of the worlds appear to be in pairs orbiting each other — a puzzling arrangement that, if confirmed, would defy expectations. > “We’re missing something,” said Nienke van der Marel, a researcher who s…

I personally don't think this is very likely (main question: how do they actually manage to get those planets paired and ejected in the first place??? The energy requirements are quite literally astronomical) but it is a very cool idea.

Would make a great novel.

Re: Rogue Worlds Throw Planetary Ideas Out of Orbit

#17

Post by WJW »

thriftwy wrote: post #2

Maybe the actual sentient life in universe lives deep within those rogue worlds. It is also trivial for them to hop worlds - either wait for a flyby or put nuclear reactor on a blob of ices and drive away. They use stars as beacons and can't imagine anyone willing to live directly in the bonfire. If they are using laser communication, our Sun will likely drown any signals in noise.

> It is also trivial for them to hop worlds - either wait for a flyby

How so? The gravity well of a gas/ice giant would be absolutely massive. Even if you could get away from the planet, waiting for a flyby in interstellar space could well take millions of years between encounters.

Re: Rogue Worlds Throw Planetary Ideas Out of Orbit

#18

Post by AtlasBarfed »

pavel_lishin wrote: post #7

I think I commented this the last time it was posted, but I'm vain enough to post it again: > Rather than answering this question, the JWST observation adds to the mystery: The telescope’s infrared eye found that dozens of the worlds appear to be in pairs orbiting each other — a puzzling arrangement that, if confirmed, would defy expectations. > “We’re missing something,” said Nienke van der Marel, a researcher who s…

Occams razor: the simpler explanation.

A majority of star systems (iirc) are binary star systems.

Why wouldn't failed stars / rogue planets similarly follow that pattern?

Re: Rogue Worlds Throw Planetary Ideas Out of Orbit

#19

Post by pavel_lishin »

api wrote: post #15
pavel_lishin wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think gravity assists only really make sense when you're talking about orbits - a solitary object floating through the void won't help you accelerate, though it can help you make a cheaper "turn" in space.

Doesn’t the Oberth effect still work?

Actually, hm, I don't know. If you're approaching a mass in space, and firing your engine close to it - do you end up with a faster relative velocity than if you'd just fired your engines for the same amount of time in empty space?

edit: I did the most basic possible amount of research by reading the first paragraph of the wikipedia article (can we call that a milliHbomberguy?), and you're right, you do gain more velocity than just firing your engine in space. Although it puts a limit on where you'll be going after your approach.

Re: Rogue Worlds Throw Planetary Ideas Out of Orbit

#20

Post by ithkuil »

AtlasBarfed wrote: post #18
pavel_lishin wrote: post #7

I think I commented this the last time it was posted, but I'm vain enough to post it again: > Rather than answering this question, the JWST observation adds to the mystery: The telescope’s infrared eye found that dozens of the worlds appear to be in pairs orbiting each other — a puzzling arrangement that, if confirmed, would defy expectations. > “We’re missing something,” said Nienke van der Marel, a researcher who s…

Occams razor: the simpler explanation. A majority of star systems (iirc) are binary star systems. Why wouldn't failed stars / rogue planets similarly follow that pattern?

Because Occam's razor works but has to work with the actual mechanics of how stuff is formed and processes evolve and not necessarily just by observing the end result
Post reply on HN