The 224th American Astronomical Science meeting in Boston has been abuzz with discussion on exoplanets, with many findings indicating that they have some big problems.

Exoplanets are gigantic planets, with some being 17 times larger than Earth. Described as “the Godzilla of Earths” by Dimitar Sasselov, an astronomer at the center and director of the Harvard Origins of Life Initiative, they are currently three being examined by astronomers.

The first two are residents of the Kepler-65 system, a system that has a sun slightly larger than the one Earth orbits around. Unfortunately for the exoplanets orbiting the Kepler-65 sun, the star is about to enter its red giant phase. A red giant phase occurs when a star exhausts its supply of hydrogen in its core, and is beginning its decline. In other words – the star is dying.

The exoplanets, Kepler-65b and Kepler-65c, both orbit extremely close to the star. Kepler-65b takes only 10.5 days to complete a full orbit, while Kepler-65c takes about three weeks. Given the distance from the star, the planets only have 130 million year left and 155 million years left, respectively. At those times, the star will engulf each planet, effectively destroying them.

While the Keper-65 exoplanets seem to be having trouble, a Kepler-10 exoplanet looks like it could support life. Kepler-10c is 2.3 times Earth’s radius and 17 times larger. Although scientists had thought that a planet with a radius at least twice at large as Earth’s would begin to start accumulating gas, that is not thought to be the case with Kepler-10c.

Instead, Kepler-10c is thought to have a radius made up of rocky material. And, because it is 17 times larger than Earth, it has more than enough mass to cling to an atmosphere. This means that it would not be filled with gas, but instead have an atmosphere that could have supported life.

This ‘Godzilla Earth’ is assumed to be a whopping 10 billion year old or older. That is over twice as old as Earth, which is only 4.5 billion years old. Due to its age and size, scientists are completely stumped as to how it was made and how it is still around. However, they believe more planets might still be around that are just as old or older, and will likely find some in the near future.

8 Responses

  1. NASA discovery of Kepler-10c steps up claims for alien life – CNET |

    […] planet, pair of doomed worldsChristian Science MonitorHuffington Post -PBS NewsHour -The Westside Storyall 349 news […]

  2. NASA discovery of Kepler-10c steps up claims for alien life – CNET |

    […] planet, pair of doomed worldsChristian Science MonitorHuffington Post -PBS NewsHour -The Westside Storyall 349 news […]

  3. Astronomers spot massive rocky planet, pair of doomed worlds – Christian Science Monitor | Fashion My Best in UK

    […] Kepler Space Telescope Finds Planet 17 Times The Size Of EarthChinatopixPBS NewsHour -The Westside Story -Gwinnettdailypost.comall 339 news […]

  4. Bill Meehan

    Sphere Volume: v = 4/3 * pi * r^3

    so… if the Radius is 2.3x as large as earth’s

    V.Earth = 4/3 * pi * (1) ^ 3 = 4.189 (roughly)
    V.Kepler-10c = 4/3 * pi * (2.3) ^3 = 50.965 (roughly)

    so…. V.Earth : V.Kepler-10c = 4.189 : 50.965 = 1: 12.166 (roughly)

    Not. 17x.

    Please stop using the area of a circle formula for volume measurements.

    • Bingo

      Bill, if I recall from other articles I’ve read, Kepler 10c is 17x more massive, not volume. It is made of heavier elements/is more dense. It is possible for a planet to have the exact same radius as earth and be 10x more massive.

      • Bill Meehan

        The quote in the article is:

        “Kepler-10c is 2.3 times Earth’s radius and 17 times larger.”

        But yes, in fact it’s 12x larger, but 17x more massive. I found out that the 17x figure was actually taken from the mass later on after I’d posted this comment.

  5. Nathan

    You don’t have this quite right. Exoplanets are simply any planet found outside the solar system. They don’t have to be “gigantic,” though some are.

    • Just a Guest

      also, it should be, “there are currently three” — not “they are currently three”


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.