Sorry, Pluto: The solar system could have a 9th planet after all, astronomers say
That research paper, accepted last month for publication in the Publications of the Astronomical Society of Australia, suggests that a Neptune-sized planet lies within the Kuiper Belt, an expanse of icy debris surrounding the solar system.
Hints of this object, dubbed by the researchers as Planet Nine, were found in two photos taken by two infrared space telescopes in 1983 and 2006, the paper stated.
Two researchers, National Tsing Hua University astronomy graduate student Terry Long Phan and his Ph.D. advisor Tomotsugu Goto, looked at the photos and found that it was enough time for a mysterious object in those photos to have moved.
After they removed known sources such as stars from the photos, Phan and Goto noticed a dot with matching colors and brightness.
The hypothesized planet's orbit around the sun would likely take around 10,000 years, California Institute of Technology astronomers Mike Brown and Konstantin Batygin told Science. Brown and Batygin were not part of the Planet Nine research team, but both men previously suggested a 'Planet X' existed in the far reaches of the solar system.
'It's kind of fun that a paper that purports to find a candidate for Planet Nine is really finding something that would basically say that we were wrong the entire time,' Brown said to the scientific news website.
Elsewhere, there are doubts. University of Regina astronomer Samantha Lawler told Science that Planet Nine's existence would be 'really cool ... But I'm not convinced, with current data, that you can't just go with the simplest explanation.'
Phan and Goto will have to wait until later this year for more evidence of their findings, as the Vera C. Rubin Observatory in the Atacama Desert in Chile is expected to scan the night sky, Science reported. With enough detail taken by the observatory's large digital camera, it could detect the ninth planet.
Failed '70s-era Soviet spacecraft bound for Venus could soon crash back to Earth
This 'Star Wars' Day, check out a moon that looks like iconic space station
Pieces of Halley's Comet could leave glowing trails across the night sky
Look up: This planet is about to pass through cosmic beehive in unique sky event
Halley's Comet debris soon to leave glowing streaks in the sky
Read the original article on MassLive.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Times
21 minutes ago
- New York Times
Margaret Boden, Philosopher of Artificial Intelligence, Dies at 88
Margaret Boden, a British philosopher and cognitive scientist who used the language of computers to explore the nature of thought and creativity, leading her to prescient insights about the possibilities and limitations of artificial intelligence, died on July 18 in Brighton, England. She was 88. Her death, in a care home, was announced by the University of Sussex, where in the early 1970s she helped establish what is now known as the Center for Cognitive Science, bringing together psychologists, linguists, neuroscientists and philosophers to collaborate on studying the mind. Polymathic, erudite and a trailblazer in a field dominated by men, Professor Boden produced a number of books — most notably 'The Creative Mind: Myths and Mechanisms' (1990) and 'Mind as Machine: A History of Cognitive Science' (2006) — that helped shape the philosophical conversation about human and artificial intelligence for decades. 'What's unique about Maggie is that she's a philosopher who has informed, inspired and shaped science,' Blay Whitby, a philosopher and ethicist, said on the BBC radio show 'The Life Scientific' in 2014. 'It's important I emphasize that, because many modern scientists say that philosophers have got nothing to tell them, and they'd be advised to look at the work and life of Maggie Boden.' Professor Boden was not adept at using computers. 'I can't cope with the damn things,' she once said. 'I have a Mac on my desk, and if anything goes wrong, it's an absolute nightmare.' Nevertheless, she viewed computing as a way to help explain the mechanisms of human thought. To her, creativity wasn't divine or a result of eureka-like magic, but rather a process that could be modeled and even simulated by computers. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
Gizmodo
2 hours ago
- Gizmodo
Scientists Taught AI to Predict Nuclear Fusion Success—and It's Actually Working
AI is giving a huge efficiency boost to one of the biggest nuclear fusion facilities in the world—but perhaps not in the way you think. In research published today in Science, scientists at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory report how its newly developed deep learning model accurately predicted the results of a 2022 fusion experiment at the National Ignition Facility (NIF). The model, which assigned 74% probability for ignition in that experiment, outperforms traditional supercomputing methods by covering more parameters with greater precision. 'What we're excited about with this model is the ability to explicitly make choices for future experiments that maximize our probability of success each time,' study co-author Kelli Humbird told Gizmodo during a video call. Even a facility as large and well-established as the NIF can only 'do a couple dozen of these ignition attempts per year—so really not very many at all, given how much territory we have to cover,' added Humbird, who leads the Cognitive Simulation Group at NIF's Inertial Confinement Fusion Program. Currently, nuclear power plants run on nuclear fission, which captures the energy generated by the splitting of heavy atoms, like uranium. Researchers eventually want to shift toward nuclear fusion, a process that combines lightweight hydrogen atoms to release massive amounts of energy. Fusion produces more energy and doesn't create harmful, radioactive byproducts, so having fusion as a reliable source of energy would greatly benefit our society's transition to sustainable energy. Although the field has made some promising advances, the consensus is that we're still far from implementing nuclear fusion on a commercial scale. NIF's fusion experiments are laser-driven. First, the lasers heat up a gold cylinder called the hohlraum, which then emits a flow of powerful X-rays. The extreme temperatures compress the fuel pellets containing deuterium and tritium, two hydrogen isotopes used in fusion experiments. In an ideal scenario, this triggers enough deuterium-tritium fusion reactions to produce more energy than the lasers consume. Computer simulations can't reliably predict all the physics in this process, Humbird said. That's in part because the codes are often simplified so they're 'computationally tractable,' but the simulations themselves can also introduce some errors. Even if you've taken all sorts of precautions, it still takes days for the computers to finish running through the code, she added. Achieving nuclear fusion is like scaling a tall, uncharted mountain, Humbird said. The computer simulations are like an 'imperfect' map that's supposed to teach researchers how to reach the peak—but this map could be rife with errors that may or may not be the product of their research design. Meanwhile, the clock is ticking, and researchers have to quickly decide whether they'll take the hike that day and which tools they're going to use. And of course, each 'hike,' or ignition attempt, burns a huge hole in the budget. And so, Humbird's team embarked on a mapmaking quest, stitching together 'previously collected NIF data, high-fidelity physics simulations, and subject matter expert knowledge' to build a comprehensive dataset. Then, they uploaded the data to state-of-the-art supercomputers, which ran a statistical analysis lasting over 30 million CPU hours. 'What we basically came up with was a distribution of things that go wrong [at] NIF,' Humbird explained. 'All of the different ways that we have observed implosions. Sometimes the laser doesn't fire exactly how you asked it to. Sometimes your target has defects in it that can cause things to not go super well.' The model allows researchers to preemptively determine the efficacy of their experimental design, saving them considerable time and money. Humbird used the model to assess their own design from a 2022 experiment, which accurately described the results of the specific run in advance. In particular, Humbird was pleased to see that subsequent tweaks to the model's physics increased the accuracy of its predictions from 50 to 70%. For Humbird, the strength of the new model is that it accepts and replicates the imperfections of the real world—whether that's a flaw in the instrument, research design, or just some silly trick of nature. At the same time, it's a reminder that, while quick progress is exciting, things often take a lot of time and will even result in outright failure. 'People have been working on fusion for decades… We shouldn't be so bummed about the times things don't work,' Humbird said. 'The fact that we sometimes get 1 megajoule of yield instead of two shouldn't upset us, because not too long ago we were only getting 10 kilojoules. It's a huge step forward for research, and hopefully a huge step forward for clean energy in the future.'
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Yahoo
Are Wall Street Analysts Predicting Danaher Stock Will Climb or Sink?
Science and technology company Danaher Corporation (DHR), headquartered in Washington, D.C., designs, manufactures, and markets innovative products and services in the fields of life sciences, diagnostics, and biotechnology. The company operates through three broad segments: Biotechnology, Life Sciences, and Diagnostics. With a market capitalization of $147.31 billion, Danaher's offerings are used in research labs, hospitals, and industrial settings to advance scientific discovery, improve patient care, and ensure water quality and food safety. Shares of this medical technology company have declined by 22.2% over the past 52 weeks, as the company experiences a slowdown in its performance. More News from Barchart Why This Cannabis Penny Stock Could Be Wall Street's Next Meme Trade Breakout Apple Stock Is Gaining Momentum, Is AAPL Stock a Buy? Peter Thiel-Backed Bullish Is About to IPO. Should You Buy BLSH Stock? Get exclusive insights with the FREE Barchart Brief newsletter. Subscribe now for quick, incisive midday market analysis you won't find anywhere else. For comparison, the broader S&P 500 Index ($SPX) has gained 19% over the same period. This year, Danaher's stock price has declined by 8.9% year-to-date (YTD), while the S&P 500 index has increased by almost 10%. Taking a closer look, Danaher's shares have also been underperforming the sector-specific Robo Global Healthcare Technology and Innovation ETF (HTEC), which has gained 5.2% over the past 52 weeks and 4.7% YTD. For the fiscal year 2024, Danaher's topline declined marginally year-over-year (YOY). While the company's weak price action has coincided with an annual topline slowdown, its recent quarterly financials came in better than expected, sparking a 4.2% surge in its share on Jul. 23. For the second quarter of fiscal 2025, its sales increased by 3.4% YOY to $5.94 billion, which was better than the $5.84 billion that Wall Street analysts were expecting. At the heart of this growth was the Danaher Business System, along with gains in its bioprocessing business. Along with its latest earnings reveal, Danaher also announced a notable executive shakeup, with a new CFO expected to take over next year and a new General Counsel already appointed. For the fiscal year 2025, ending in December 2025, Wall Street analysts expect a modest growth in Danaher's bottom line, forecasting a 3.9% YOY growth in its EPS to $7.77 on a diluted basis. The company has a mixed history of surpassing consensus estimates, topping them in three of the trailing four quarters and missing them on one occasion. Among the 23 analysts covering Danaher's stock, the consensus is a 'Strong Buy.' That's based on 19 'Strong Buy' ratings, one 'Moderate Buy' rating, and three 'Holds.' The configuration of the ratings appears slightly more bullish than two months ago, when the stock had 18 'Strong Buy' ratings. Highlighting confidence in the company's prospects amid current market conditions, Guggenheim analyst Subbu Nambi maintained a 'Buy' rating on Danaher's stock in late July and reiterated the $250 price target. Additionally, underscoring a positive outlook, Baird analyst Catherine Schulte reaffirmed the firm's 'Outperform' rating, while raising the price target on the stock from $226 to $229. Danaher's mean price target of $243.33 indicates a premium of 16.3% from the current market prices. The Street-high price target of $310 implies a potential upside of 48.2%. On the date of publication, Anushka Mukherjee did not have (either directly or indirectly) positions in any of the securities mentioned in this article. All information and data in this article is solely for informational purposes. This article was originally published on Sign in to access your portfolio
