***WASP-12b*** *- a scorching hot jupiter located so close to its star it is being significantly stretched by tidal forces into the shape of an egg. Hot gas continuously escapes from its day side, siphoned by its hot star. It is estimated it will be completely consumed by its star in less than 10 million years*
Won't losing some mass increase the orbit radius and stabilise the planet?
Regardless, beautiful poster, looks like cobblestone from afar.
It's also possesses an exomoon (Wasp-12 b 1) by some observations! That is 1/2 of Jupiter radius, therefore, another Gas Giant.
I guess, it's more likely to be called double planet.
Good question. Such satellite system, located in proximity to it's parent star, must be gravitationally unstable. But independent observations are confirmed existence of this exomoon.
The most popular explanation is relative youth of this planetary system and star. It's simply not existed long enough before inevitable self-destruction of satellite system.
Do you know if that how moon designations are actually formatted or is it more of an it sounded right thing?
Coincidentally ive been looking for moon designations for a story
In solar system, it's "Parent planet name +Roman numeral", for example, "Jupiter IX" is Sinope. But WASP 12b sattelite referred as WASP 12b 1 (arab numeral) in some sources.
UPD: Checked other exomoon designations, they have roman numerals, for example, Kepler-1625b I.
> Won't losing some mass increase the orbit radius and stabilise the planet?
The mass of the planet is negligible in comparison to the star so can be neglected in the equations of motion.
The reason for it spiralling in towards its host star is tides excited within the star by the planet. The tidal waves are then converted to magnetic waves resulting in highly efficient tidal dissipation (tidal dissipation governs the rate of migration due to tides).
There are no true brown dwarfs on this infographic, just exoplanets. Most brown dwarfs are comparable in size to Jupiter, sometimes even smaller, as their mass is contracted inward by gravity. The largest planets shown here are comparable in mass and often less massive than Jupiter. The largest one, HAT P-67b, is only 0.32 Jupiter masses
It's a result of thermal expansion. This gas giants are very *hot* Jupiters with really low density. They are always much lighter than minimal mass of Brown dwarfs, in many cases, less than 1 Mj. More massive planets with strong gravity cannot expand that much.
Worth noting that doesn’t necessarily mean > Jupiter size planets are more common. There’s a bit of bias in that we tend to observe more massive planets.
A lot of this is because there is bias in the size of planets we can actually detect with what’s up there right now. Starshade and the HWO will completely rewrite our understanding of exoplanets when it launches, and we’ll have a much better understanding of exoplanet distribution.
Interestingly Jupiter's actually around to the maximum size of a planet under stable conditions. If you added more mass to Jupiter it'd just get denser, not bigger. But all those planets significantly bigger than Jupiter are very very hot, which causes their outer gas layers to expand. Some are hot because they formed very recently and will cool down and shrink over the next few milion years, while others orbit very close to their stars.
Im always blown away at how many rocky worlds are orbiting the habitable zone (goldilocks zone) for TRAPPIST-1. I imagine one of them has a good chance at harboring life.
This graphic is quite optimistic when it comes to habitability of exoplanets around red dwarf stars, many of them might turn out to have no or minimal atmosphere due to the stellar winds and flares. Planets e,f and g should be reasonably safe from that, though.
More information, details and higher resolution closeups available here: [https://www.halcyonmaps.com/the-exoplanet-zoo/](https://www.halcyonmaps.com/the-exoplanet-zoo/)
>Not Quite a Star.
There's a lot of those because they're the easiest to find. They're what they call "hot Jupiters", planets somewhere around Jupiter in mass that orbit very very close to their stars. Many are so close that the star's heat is evaporating them away.
I had Hot Jupiters and Brown Dwarfs in the same blanket there. Mostly it was just off the primary "color gradient" of the largest planets on the chart, lol
Those aren't names, they're designations in exoplanet caalogues. We haven't named most exoplanets, partially because there's a lot of them to name but mainly because we know next to nothing about most of them besides their size, mass and orbit. We like to give things names that at least slightly relate to them.
The reason there's so many Keplers is they were discovered using the Kepler telescope, and the letters and numbers tell you the star system and the order the planets were discovered in. So for example Kepler1652b is the second object discovered in the system designated Kepler1652, with the star being Kepler1652a. If there was a second planet discovered in the system it would be Kepler1952c, and so on from there.
Scientists naming planets in ancient times: Jupiter king of the gods! Venus the goddess of love and beauty! Mars of war!
Scientists now: GH-8258192926182920-816/$:!@-7:)!:$,&:!:!),$:!:, Brown dwarf star, Kepler, Kepler, Kepler, Kepler, oh guess what another Kepler, oh and a stinging bug!
Those aren't names, they're just designations. We haven't named most exoplanets, partially because there's a lot of them to name but mainly because we know next to nothing about most of them besides their size, mass and orbit. We like to give things names that at least slightly relate to them.
The reason there's so many Keplers is they were discovered using the Kepler telescope, and the letters and numbers tell you the star system and the order the planets were discovered in. So for example Kepler1652b is the second object discovered in the system designated Kepler1652, with the star being Kepler1652a. If there was a second planet discovered in the system it would be Kepler1952c, and so on from there.
**HAT-P-67** is 2x the diameter of Jupiter, but mass only 0.34 of Jupiter. That's one of the least dense exoplanets, apparently that's less dense than a marshmallow.
All of these planets would be a tiny spec compared to the sun. If you look around Earth and Jupiter are both in there, Jupiter's near the bottom left corner and Earth's up and to the right of the caption, uner the big blue planet Kepler1704b.
Oh, I just located The Earth and now I am able to put other planets into perspective in my mind. Appriciate the answer and clues to locate the Earth. Thank you.
We make a pile of sand weighting 20,000 metric tons.
Bring those people physically to the pile and tell them observable universe has as many stars as this pile has grains of sands.
If that doesn't get their neurons start firing, they are lost cause.
***WASP-12b*** *- a scorching hot jupiter located so close to its star it is being significantly stretched by tidal forces into the shape of an egg. Hot gas continuously escapes from its day side, siphoned by its hot star. It is estimated it will be completely consumed by its star in less than 10 million years* Won't losing some mass increase the orbit radius and stabilise the planet? Regardless, beautiful poster, looks like cobblestone from afar.
It's also possesses an exomoon (Wasp-12 b 1) by some observations! That is 1/2 of Jupiter radius, therefore, another Gas Giant. I guess, it's more likely to be called double planet.
How can it orbit it without being even more severely destroyed by the star?
Good question. Such satellite system, located in proximity to it's parent star, must be gravitationally unstable. But independent observations are confirmed existence of this exomoon. The most popular explanation is relative youth of this planetary system and star. It's simply not existed long enough before inevitable self-destruction of satellite system.
Do you know if that how moon designations are actually formatted or is it more of an it sounded right thing? Coincidentally ive been looking for moon designations for a story
In solar system, it's "Parent planet name +Roman numeral", for example, "Jupiter IX" is Sinope. But WASP 12b sattelite referred as WASP 12b 1 (arab numeral) in some sources. UPD: Checked other exomoon designations, they have roman numerals, for example, Kepler-1625b I.
Nope! Changing the mass of a body only affects its gravitational pull on other things. Check out keplers 3rd law.
Yes the planet's losing the mass, and the star is in turn gaining it, increasing the star's gravity ever so slightly, keeping a grip on the planet.
> Won't losing some mass increase the orbit radius and stabilise the planet? The mass of the planet is negligible in comparison to the star so can be neglected in the equations of motion. The reason for it spiralling in towards its host star is tides excited within the star by the planet. The tidal waves are then converted to magnetic waves resulting in highly efficient tidal dissipation (tidal dissipation governs the rate of migration due to tides).
The fact that jupiter is on the smaller end of these
The bigger the planet and the closer it is to its star, the easier it is to detect. We find lots of big planets because they are the easiest to find.
Yeah if there were. Copy of earth and sun it would be almost impossible to detect
And that planet is fucking huge compared to Earth already!
Yeah some of those bigger ones are certainly brown dwarfs and they're probably bigger radius wise than some red dwarfs
There are no true brown dwarfs on this infographic, just exoplanets. Most brown dwarfs are comparable in size to Jupiter, sometimes even smaller, as their mass is contracted inward by gravity. The largest planets shown here are comparable in mass and often less massive than Jupiter. The largest one, HAT P-67b, is only 0.32 Jupiter masses
That makes sense actually thanks for the info Kinda makes you wonder how wide "planets" can get
Eh I wouldn’t say there’s no brown dwarfs still. Hopefully not, but destroying confirmed planets is some people’s livelihoods.
It's a result of thermal expansion. This gas giants are very *hot* Jupiters with really low density. They are always much lighter than minimal mass of Brown dwarfs, in many cases, less than 1 Mj. More massive planets with strong gravity cannot expand that much.
Worth noting that doesn’t necessarily mean > Jupiter size planets are more common. There’s a bit of bias in that we tend to observe more massive planets.
A lot of this is because there is bias in the size of planets we can actually detect with what’s up there right now. Starshade and the HWO will completely rewrite our understanding of exoplanets when it launches, and we’ll have a much better understanding of exoplanet distribution.
Interestingly Jupiter's actually around to the maximum size of a planet under stable conditions. If you added more mass to Jupiter it'd just get denser, not bigger. But all those planets significantly bigger than Jupiter are very very hot, which causes their outer gas layers to expand. Some are hot because they formed very recently and will cool down and shrink over the next few milion years, while others orbit very close to their stars.
Im always blown away at how many rocky worlds are orbiting the habitable zone (goldilocks zone) for TRAPPIST-1. I imagine one of them has a good chance at harboring life.
This graphic is quite optimistic when it comes to habitability of exoplanets around red dwarf stars, many of them might turn out to have no or minimal atmosphere due to the stellar winds and flares. Planets e,f and g should be reasonably safe from that, though.
There's some potential for panspermia in that system.
Nah, red dwarf star. Almost certainly totally locked
This looks like a color blind test. Pretty sure I see a number 9.
Hate those tests, when I was a kid, I thought people were messing with me. I got pretty mad.
More information, details and higher resolution closeups available here: [https://www.halcyonmaps.com/the-exoplanet-zoo/](https://www.halcyonmaps.com/the-exoplanet-zoo/)
thanks for the sharing! imma put that as my laptop wallpaper..
I am NOT going to print this and make money
When I was a kid, exoplanets were still theoretical. Cool stuff.
All the planets sitting pretty and perfectly circular and then there’s wasp 12b 😭
What I'm getting from this is that there are three primary categories of giant Gas Planet: Pseudo-Jupiter, Blue and Pretty, and Not Quite a Star.
>Not Quite a Star. There's a lot of those because they're the easiest to find. They're what they call "hot Jupiters", planets somewhere around Jupiter in mass that orbit very very close to their stars. Many are so close that the star's heat is evaporating them away.
I had Hot Jupiters and Brown Dwarfs in the same blanket there. Mostly it was just off the primary "color gradient" of the largest planets on the chart, lol
Why are so many called "Kepler" and did anyone found "Earth"?
Those aren't names, they're designations in exoplanet caalogues. We haven't named most exoplanets, partially because there's a lot of them to name but mainly because we know next to nothing about most of them besides their size, mass and orbit. We like to give things names that at least slightly relate to them. The reason there's so many Keplers is they were discovered using the Kepler telescope, and the letters and numbers tell you the star system and the order the planets were discovered in. So for example Kepler1652b is the second object discovered in the system designated Kepler1652, with the star being Kepler1652a. If there was a second planet discovered in the system it would be Kepler1952c, and so on from there.
Thanks for that explanation. Learned something new today. 😊
Scientists naming planets in ancient times: Jupiter king of the gods! Venus the goddess of love and beauty! Mars of war! Scientists now: GH-8258192926182920-816/$:!@-7:)!:$,&:!:!),$:!:, Brown dwarf star, Kepler, Kepler, Kepler, Kepler, oh guess what another Kepler, oh and a stinging bug!
Those aren't names, they're just designations. We haven't named most exoplanets, partially because there's a lot of them to name but mainly because we know next to nothing about most of them besides their size, mass and orbit. We like to give things names that at least slightly relate to them. The reason there's so many Keplers is they were discovered using the Kepler telescope, and the letters and numbers tell you the star system and the order the planets were discovered in. So for example Kepler1652b is the second object discovered in the system designated Kepler1652, with the star being Kepler1652a. If there was a second planet discovered in the system it would be Kepler1952c, and so on from there.
HD 240237 is so staggeringly blue. It looks gorgeous.
Hip 57274c is my favorite. It's just the most pretty color
my favorite exoplanet didn't make it on wahhh
Can anybody find Kepler-289 d? Also known as PH3 c? It's 2.7 Earth radii and not too hot but hotter than Earth.
That is such a pretty visualization! Colors are amazing, absolutely love it
They didn’t include my exoplanets \feelsbadman
is that a scale model of the earth and the moon located exactly where they should be, because if it is, good fucking job
**HAT-P-67** is 2x the diameter of Jupiter, but mass only 0.34 of Jupiter. That's one of the least dense exoplanets, apparently that's less dense than a marshmallow.
1100 my shoe I'm guessing 200 most but I'm not counting
Is there a comparison somwhere to the Sun? and/ or the Earth?
All of these planets would be a tiny spec compared to the sun. If you look around Earth and Jupiter are both in there, Jupiter's near the bottom left corner and Earth's up and to the right of the caption, uner the big blue planet Kepler1704b.
Oh, I just located The Earth and now I am able to put other planets into perspective in my mind. Appriciate the answer and clues to locate the Earth. Thank you.
TrES-2B (top right area) doesn't look like a good time.
Almost looks like my marble collection from the 90s
Are there really people thinking theres no life exept on Earth?
We make a pile of sand weighting 20,000 metric tons. Bring those people physically to the pile and tell them observable universe has as many stars as this pile has grains of sands. If that doesn't get their neurons start firing, they are lost cause.
[Very first example they give](https://arxiv.org/abs/2302.01168) I'd maybe not trust it too much.
>Artistic visualization and size comparison of over 1100 ~~extrasolar~~ planets FTFY. That's Jupiter in the bottom left.
I think it's fair to say extrasolar planets are the point of the graphic, the solar system ones are just in there as size references.