No: The ninth planet
has not been discovered!
By MUNGAI KIHANYA
The Sunday Nation
Nairobi,
24 January 2016
In 1911, Sir Ernest
Rutherford proposed a model of the atom in which the motion of electrons
was similar to that of planets going round the sun. This came to be
popularly known as the nuclear model. Even though the details of the
electrons were soon found to be quite inaccurate, the basic structure of
a heavy nucleus and tiny particles “whizzing” around it is still
accepted by the scientific community to this day.
Rutherford came up
with this profound idea after studying data from an experiment that had
been done by his students (Geiger and Marsden) a few years earlier
(1909). They had found that when a beam of hig-speed charged particles
was fired onto an extremely thin gold foil, about one out of 8,000 were
scattered backwards.
Now, one out of 8,000
is an extremely small fraction – 0.0125% – but still, Rutherford
recognised its importance inasfarus the atom was concerned. He tested
the previously accepted atomic model and found that the predicted
fraction of back-scattered charged particles was about one in
ten-to-the-power-of 3,200; that is, a number with 3,200 zeroes!
It is a similar kind
of thinking that has lead a pair of astronomers to predict that there
ought to be a ninth planet in the solar system. Now, some media houses
reported that the ninth planet had been discovered: that is NOT true. It
has NOT been seen yettw.
On studying the
motions of the six outermost objects of the solar system, astronomers
Konstantin Batygin and Michael Brown found that the
orbits cluster together as they come to their points of closest approach
to the sun. After doing the (very complex) math, Batygin and Brown
established that the probability of that happening completely at random
was about one in 15,000 (0.007%)!
That led the pair to
seek another explanation apart from a random happenstance. So they tried
the possibility of a planet existing in that vicinity. It turned out
that the kind of object that explains the observed orbits would be about
ten times the mass of the earth and be at least 45 billion kilometres
from the Sun. The calculations also predict that such a planet would
take about 20,000 years to complete one revolution.
45 billion km is very,
very far away! Travelling at 300,000km per second, light from the sun
takes almost two days (41 hours) to get there. It is also very cold and
very dim. In fact, the estimated brightness of the proposed planet is
far below what the most sensitive telescope can see. Chances are that it
cannot be seen with current technology!
It is important to
emphasise that no planet has been OBSERVED – neither directly through a
telescope nor indirectly from gravitational influence of nearby objects.
What Batygin and Brown have done is simply given one possible
explanation of the orbits of the six outermost objects in the solar
system.
|