The eight planets and three dwarf planets of the Solar System. Sizes are to scale, though distances are compressed
A 'planet', as
defined by the
International Astronomical Union (IAU), is a celestial body
orbiting a
star or
stellar remnant that is massive enough to be rounded by its own
gravity, not massive enough to cause
thermonuclear fusion in its core, and has
cleared its neighbouring region of
planetesimals.
The term ''planet'' is an ancient one, with ties to history, science, myth and religion. The planets were originally seen as a divine presence; as emissaries of the gods. As scientific knowledge improved, the human perception of the planets changed over time, incorporating
a number of disperate objects. Even now there is no unconstested definition of what a planet is. In 2006, the IAU officially adopted a resolution
defining planets within the
Solar System. This definition has been both praised and criticised, and remains disputed by some scientists.
When astronomers first gazed up at these strange objects that moved through the night sky, they noted that they appeared to
orbit the Earth in circular motions. With the development of the telescope, the planets, which now included Earth, were found to orbit the Sun, and rather than circular motions, their orbits were elliptical. As observational tools improved, astronomers saw that, like Earth, the planets rotated around tilted axes and shared such features as ice-caps and seasons. Since the dawn of the
space age, probes have been sent to every planet in the
Solar System, and the discoveries they have made have shifted
planetary science from the realm of astronomy to the realms of
geography and
geology. The planets have been found to share characteristics such as volcanism, hurricanes, tectonics and even hydrology, previously only known on Earth. Since 1992, and the discovery of hundreds of
extrasolar planets, scientists are beginning to observe similar features across the galaxy.
Under IAU definitions, there are eight planets in the Solar System (
Mercury,
Venus,
Earth,
Mars,
Jupiter,
Saturn,
Uranus, and
Neptune) and also at least three
dwarf planets (
Ceres,
Pluto, and
Eris). Many of these planets are orbited by one or more
moons, which can be larger than small planets. There have also been more than two hundred planets discovered
orbiting other stars.
[1] Planets are generally divided into two main types: large, low-density
gas giants and smaller, rocky
terrestrials. Dwarf planets, a separate category, can either be terrestrials or frozen
ice dwarfs.
Etymology
The gods of
Olympus, after whom the Solar System's planets are named
In ancient times, astronomers noted how certain lights moved across the sky in relation to the other stars. The lights were first called "πλανήται" (''planētai''),
[2] meaning "wanderers", by the ancient Greeks, and it is from this that the word "planet" was derived.
[3][4]
The Greeks gave the planets names: the farthest was called ''Phainon'', the shiner, while below it was ''Phaethon'', the bright one. The red planet was known as ''Pyroeis'', "fiery", while the brightest was known as ''Phosphoros'', the light bringer, and the fleeting final planet was called ''Stilbon'', the gleamer. However, the Greeks also made each planet sacred to one of their pantheon of gods, the
Olympians: Phainon was sacred to
Kronos, the
Titan who fathered the Olympians, while Phaethon was sacred to
Zeus, his son who deposed him as king.
Ares, son of Zeus and god of war, was given dominion over Pyroeis, while
Aphrodite, goddess of love, ruled over bright Phosphoros, and
Hermes ruled over Stilbon.
[ The History and Practice of Ancient Astronomy, James Evans, , , Oxford University Press, 1998, ]
The Greek practice of grafting of their gods' names onto the planets was almost certainly borrowed from the
Babylonians, a contemporary civilisation in what is now
Iraq, from whom they had begun to absorb astronomical learning, including constellations and the zodiac, by 600 BCE.
[5] The Babylonians had in turn inherited the practice from their predecessors, the
Sumerians, who flourished around 2500 years before. The Babylonians named Phosphoros after their goddess of love, Ishtar, Pyroeis after their god of war, Nergal, and Phaethon after their chief god, Marduk.
[ The Days of the Week ] There are too many concordances between Greek and Babylonian naming conventions for them to have arisen separately.
There does, however, appear to have been some confusion in translation. For instance, the Babylonian
Nergal was a god of war, and the Greeks, seeing this aspect of Nergal's persona, identified him with
Ares, their god of war. However, Nergal, unlike Ares, was also a god of the dead and a god of pestilence.
Early printed rendition of a geocentric cosmological model.
Today, most people in the western world know the planets by names derived from the
Olympian pantheon of gods; however, because of the influence of the
Roman Empire and, later, the
Catholic Church, they are known by their Roman (or Latin) names, rather than the Greek. The Romans, who, like the Greeks, were
Indo-Europeans, shared with them a
common pantheon under different names but lacked the rich narrative traditions that Greek poetic culture had given
their gods. During the later period of the
Roman Republic, Roman writers borrowed much of the Greek narratives and applied them to their own pantheon, to the point where they became virtually indistinguishable.
[6] When the Romans studied Greek astronomy, they gave the planets their own gods' names.
To the Greeks and Romans, there were five known planets; each presumed to be
circling the Earth according to the complex laws laid out by
Claudius Ptolemy in the 2nd century. They were, in increasing order from Earth (according to Ptolemy):
Mercury (
Hermes),
Venus (
Aphrodite),
Mars (
Ares),
Jupiter (
Zeus), and
Saturn (
Kronos). Although strictly the term "planetai" referred only to those five objects, the term was often expanded to include the Sun and the Moon.
[7] When subsequent planets were discovered in the 18th and 19th centuries, the naming practice was retained:
Uranus (
Ouranos) and
Neptune (
Poseidon). The Greeks still use their original names for the planets.
Some
Romans, following a belief imported from
Mesopotamia into
Hellenistic Egypt,
[8] believed that the seven gods after whom the planets were named took hourly shifts in looking after affairs on Earth. The order of shifts began with Jupiter and worked inwards; as a result, a list of which god had charge of the first hour in each day became Sun, Moon, Mars, Mercury, Jupiter, Venus, Saturn, i.e. the usual weekday name order.
[9] Sunday, Monday, and Saturday are straightforward translations of these Roman names. In English the other days were renamed after
Tiw, (Tuesday)
Wóden (Wednesday),
Thunor (Thursday), and
Fríge (Friday),
Anglo-Saxon gods considered similar or equivalent to Mars, Mercury, Jupiter, and Venus respectively.
Since Earth was only generally accepted as a planet in the 17th century, there is no tradition of naming it after a god. Many of the
Romance languages (including French, Italian, Spanish and Portuguese), which are descended from Latin, retain the old Roman name of ''Terra'' or some variation thereof. However, the non-Romance languages use their own respective native words. Again, the Greeks retain their original name, ''Γή'' (''Ge'' or ''Yi''); the
Germanic languages, including English, use a variation of an ancient Germanic word ''ertho'', "ground," as can be seen in the English ''Earth'', the German ''Erde,'' the Dutch ''Aarde'', and the Scandinavian ''Jorde.'' The same is true for the Sun and the Moon, though they are no longer considered planets.
Some non-European cultures use their own planetary naming systems. India uses a naming system based on the
Navagraha, which incorporates the seven traditional planets (Sun, Moon, Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, and Saturn) and the ascending and descending
lunar nodes
Rahu and
Ketu. China, and the countries of eastern Asia subject to Chinese cultural influence, such as
Japan,
Korea and
Vietnam, use a naming system based on the
five Chinese elements.
History
Heliocentrism (lower panel) in comparison to the geocentric model (upper panel)
As scientific knowledge progressed, understanding of the term "planet" changed from something that moved across the sky (in relation to the
starfield), to a body that orbited the Earth (or that were believed to do so at the time). When the
heliocentric model gained sway in the 16th century, it became accepted that a planet was actually something that directly orbited the
Sun. Thus the Earth was itself a planet,
[10] while the Sun and
Moon were not. At the end of the 17th century, when the first satellites of Saturn were discovered, the terms "planet" and "satellite" were at first used interchangeably, although "satellite" would gradually become more prevalent in the following century.
[11] Until the mid-19th century, any newly discovered object orbiting the Sun was listed with the planets by the scientific community, and the number of "planets" swelled rapidly towards the end of that period.
During the 1800s, astronomers began to realize most recent discoveries were unlike the traditional planets. They shared the same
region of space, between
Mars and
Jupiter, and had a far smaller mass. Bodies such as
Ceres,
Pallas, and
Vesta, which had been classed as planets for almost half a century, became classified with the new designation "
asteroid." From this point, a "planet" came to be understood, in the absence of any formal definition, as any "large" body that orbited the Sun. There was no apparent need to create a set limit, as there was a dramatic size gap between the asteroids and the planets, and the spate of new discoveries seemed to have ended after the discovery of
Neptune in 1846.
[12]
However, in the 20th century,
Pluto was discovered. After initial observations led to the belief it was larger than Earth, the recently-created
IAU accepted the object as a planet. Further monitoring found the body was actually much smaller, but, as it was still larger than all known asteroids and seemingly did not exist within a larger population, it kept its status for some seventy years.
[13]
In the 1990s and early 2000s, there was a flood of discoveries of similar objects in the
same region of the Solar System. Like Ceres and the asteroids before it, Pluto was found to be just one small body in a population of thousands. A growing number of astronomers argued for it to be declassified as a planet, since many similar objects approaching its size were found. The discovery of
Eris, a more massive object widely publicised as the
tenth planet, brought things to a head. The IAU set about creating the
definition of planet, and eventually produced one in 2006. The number of planets dropped to the eight significantly larger bodies that had
cleared their orbit (
Mercury,
Venus,
Earth,
Mars,
Jupiter,
Saturn,
Uranus &
Neptune), and a new class of
dwarf planets was created, initially containing three objects (Ceres, Pluto and Eris).
[14]
Former planets
In
ancient times, astronomers accepted as "planets" the seven visible objects that moved across the starfield: the
Sun, the
Moon,
Mercury,
Venus,
Mars,
Jupiter and
Saturn. Since then, many objects have qualified as planets for a time:
| Body | Period of planethood | Solar System Region | Present status | Notes |
|---|
| Sun | Antiquity to 1600s | Centre | Star | Planet under the geocentric model. |
| Moon | Antiquity to 1600s | Earth's orbit | Satellite | Planet under the geocentric model. |
| Ceres | 1801-1864 | Asteroid belt | Dwarf planet | Asteroid until at least 2006.[15] |
| Pallas | 1802-1864 | Asteroid belt | Asteroid | |
| Juno | 1804-1864 | Asteroid belt | Asteroid | |
| Vesta | 1807-1864 | Asteroid belt | Asteroid | |
| Pluto | 1930-2006 | Kuiper belt | Dwarf planet | Officially accepted by IAU for this period. |
Definition and disputes
Main articles: Definition of planet
With the discovery during the latter half of the
twentieth century of more objects within the
Solar System and
large objects around other stars, disputes arose over what should constitute a planet. There was particular disagreement over whether an object should be considered a planet if it was part of a distinct population such as a
belt, or if it was large enough to generate energy by the
thermonuclear fusion of
deuterium.
Image:EightTNOs.png|thumb|275px|The largest Trans-Neptunian objects that prompted the IAU's decision.
#Earth
rect 646 1714 2142 1994 The Earth
#Eris and Dysnomia
circle 226 412 16 Dysnomia
circle 350 626 197 (136199) Eris
#Pluto and Charon
circle 1252 684 86 Charon
circle 1038 632 188 (134340) Pluto
#2005 FY9
circle 1786 614 142 (136472) 2005 FY9
#2003 EL61
circle 2438 616 155 (136108) 2003 EL61
#Sedna
circle 342 1305 137 (90377) Sedna
#Orcus
circle 1088 1305 114 (90482) Orcus
#Quaoar
circle 1784 1305 97 (50000) Quaoar
#Varuna
circle 2420 1305 58 (20000) Varuna
desc none
# - setting this to "bottom-right" will display a (rather large) icon linking to the graphic, if desired
#Notes:
#Details on the new coding for clickable images is here:
#While it may look strange, it's important to keep the codes for a particular system in order. The clickable coding treats the first object created in an area as the one on top.
#Moons should be placed on "top" so that their smaller circles won't disappear "under" their respective primaries.
In 2003, The
International Astronomical Union (IAU) Working Group on Extrasolar Planets made a position statement on the definition of a planet that incorporated a working definition:
[ Working Group on Extrasolar Planets (WGESP) of the International Astronomical Union ]
#Objects with
true masses below the limiting mass for thermonuclear fusion of deuterium (currently calculated to be 13 times the mass of Jupiter for objects with the same
isotopic abundance as the Sun)
[16] that orbit stars or stellar remnants are "planets" (no matter how they formed). The minimum mass and size required for an extrasolar object to be considered a planet should be the same as that used in our Solar System.
#Substellar objects with true masses above the limiting mass for thermonuclear fusion of deuterium are "
brown dwarfs", no matter how they formed nor where they are located.
#Free-floating objects in young
star clusters with masses below the limiting mass for thermonuclear fusion of deuterium are not "planets", but are "sub-brown dwarfs" (or whatever name is most appropriate).
This definition has since been widely usedby astronomers when publishing discoveries in
journals,
[17] although it remains a temporary yet effective, working definition until a more permanent one is formally adopted. It also did not address the dispute over the lower mass limit and steered clear of the controversy regarding objects within the
Solar System.
This matter was finally addressed during the 2006 meeting of the IAU's General Assembly. After much debate and one failed proposal, the assembly voted to pass a resolution that
defined planets within the Solar System as:
[ IAU 2006 General Assembly: Result of the IAU resolution votes Staff ]
Under this definition, the Solar System is considered to have eight planets. Bodies which fulfill the first two conditions but not the third (such as Pluto and Eris) are classified as
dwarf planets, providing they are not also
natural satellites of other planets. Originally an IAU committee had proposed a definition that would have included a much larger number of planets as it did not include (c) as a criterion. After much discussion, it was decided via a vote that those bodies should instead be classified as dwarf planets.
This definition is based in modern theories of planetary formation, in which planetary embryos initially clear their orbital neighborhood of other smaller objects. As described by astronomer
Steven Soter:
In the aftermath of the IAU's 2006 vote, there has been criticism of the new definition,
[18] and some astronomers have even stated that they will not use it.
[19] Part of the dispute centres around the belief that point (c) (clearing its orbit) should not have been listed, and that those objects now categorised as dwarf planets should actually be part of a broader planetary definition. The next IAU
conference is not until 2009, when modifications could be made to the definition, also possibly including extrasolar planets.
Beyond the scientific community, Pluto has held a strong cultural significance for many in the general public considering its planetary status during most of the 20th century, in a similar way to Ceres and its kin in the 1800s. More recently, the discovery of Eris was widely reported in the
media as the "
tenth planet". The reclassification of all three objects as dwarf planets has attracted much media and public attention.
[20]
Formation
Main articles: Planetary formation
It is not known with certainty how planets are formed. The prevailing theory is that they are formed during the collapse of a
nebula into a thin disk of gas and dust. A
protostar forms at the core, surrounded by a rotating
protoplanetary disk. Through
accretion—a process of sticky collision—dust particles in the disk steadily accumulate mass to form ever-larger bodies. Local concentrations of mass known as
planetesimals form, and these accelerate the accretion process by drawing in additional material by their gravitational attraction. These concentrations become ever more dense until they collapse inward under gravity to form
protoplanets.
[21] After a planet reaches a diameter larger than the Earth's moon, it begins to accumulate an extended atmosphere, greatly increasing the capture rate of the planetesimals by means of
atmospheric drag.
[22]
An artist's impression of protoplanetary disk.
When the protostar has grown such that it ignites to form a
star, the surviving disk is removed from the inside outward by photoevaporation, the
solar wind,
Poynting-Robertson drag and other effects.
[23][24] Thereafter there still may be many protoplanets orbiting the star or each other, but over time many will collide, either to form a single larger planet or release material for other larger protoplanets or planets to absorb.
[25][26] Those objects that have become massive enough will capture most matter in their orbital neighbourhoods to become planets. Meanwhile, protoplanets that have avoided collisions may become
natural satellites of planets through a process of gravitational capture, or remain in belts of other objects to become either
dwarf planets or
small solar system bodies.
The energetic impacts of the smaller planetesimals (as well as
radioactive decay) will heat up the growing planet, causing it to at least partially melt. The interior of the planet begins to differentiate by mass, developing a denser core. Smaller terrestrial planets lose most of their atmospheres because of this accretion, but the lost gases can be replaced by outgassing from the mantle and from the subsequent impact of
comets.
[27] (Smaller planets will lose any atmosphere they gain through various
escape mechanisms.)
With the discovery and observation of planetary systems around stars other than our own, it is becoming possible to elaborate, revise or even replace this account. The level of
metallicity—a astronomical term describing the abundance of
isotopes with an
atomic number greater than 2 (Helium)—is now believed to determine the likelihood that a star will have planets.
[28] Hence it is thought less likely that a metal-poor,
population II star will possess a more substantial planetary system than a metal-rich
population I star.
Within the Solar System
The terrestrial planets: Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars ''(Sizes to scale)''
.jpg)
The four gas giants against the Sun: Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune. ''(Sizes to scale.)''
According to the
IAU's current definitions there are eight planets in the Solar System. In increasing distance from the
Sun, they are:
#
'
Mercury'
#
'
Venus'
#
'
Earth'
#
'
Mars'
#
'
Jupiter'
#
'
Saturn'
#
'
Uranus'
#
'
Neptune'
The larger bodies of the Solar System can be divided into categories based on their composition:
★ '
Terrestrials': Planets (and possibly dwarf planets) that are similar to Earth — with bodies largely composed of
rock: Mercury, Venus, Earth and Mars. If including dwarf planets,
Ceres would also be counted, with as many as three other
asteroids that might be added.
★ '
Gas giants': Planets with a composition largely made up of
gaseous material and are significantly more massive than terrestrials: Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune.
Ice giants are a sub-class of gas giants, distinguished from gas giants by their depletion in hydrogen and helium, and a significant composition of rock and ice: Uranus and Neptune.
★ '
Ice dwarfs': Objects that are composed mainly of ice, and do not have planetary mass. The dwarf planets
Pluto and
Eris are ice dwarfs, and several dwarf planetary candidates also qualify.
Dwarf planets
Main articles: Dwarf planet
Before the
August 2006 decision, several objects were proposed by astronomers, including at one stage by the
IAU, as planets. However in 2006 several of these objects were reclassified as
dwarf planets, objects distinct from planets. Currently three dwarf planets in the
Solar System are recognized by the IAU:
Ceres,
Pluto and
Eris. Several other objects in both the
asteroid belt and the
Kuiper belt are under consideration, with as many as 50 that could eventually qualify. There may be as many as 200 that could be discovered once the Kuiper Belt has been fully explored. Dwarf planets share many of the same
characteristics as planets, although notable differences remain—namely that they are not
dominant in their orbits. Their attributes are:
By definition, all dwarf planets are members of larger
populations. Ceres is the largest body in the
asteroid belt, while Pluto is a member of the
Kuiper belt and Eris is a member of the
scattered disc. According to
Mike Brown there may soon be over forty
trans-Neptunian objects that qualify as dwarf planets under the IAU's recent definition.
[29]
Beyond the Solar System
Extrasolar planets
Main articles: Extrasolar planet
Since the 1988 discovery of
Gamma Cephei Ab, a number of confirmed discoveries have been made of planets orbiting stars other than the Sun. Of the 239
extrasolar planets discovered by August 2007, most have masses which are comparable to or larger than Jupiter's.
[30] Exceptions include a number of planets discovered orbiting burned-out star remnants called
pulsars, such as
PSR B1257+12,
[31] the planets orbiting the stars
Mu Arae,
55 Cancri and
GJ 436 which are approximately Neptune-sized,
[32] and a planet orbiting
Gliese 876 that is estimated to be about 6 to 8 times as massive as the Earth and is probably rocky in composition.
It is far from clear if the newly discovered large planets would resemble the gas giants in the Solar System or if they are of an entirely different type as yet unknown, like ammonia giants or carbon planets. In particular, some of the newly discovered planets, known as
hot Jupiters, orbit extremely close to their parent stars, in nearly circular orbits. They therefore receive much more
stellar radiation than the gas giants in the Solar System, which makes it questionable whether they are the same type of planet at all. There is also a class of hot Jupiters that orbit so close to their star that their atmospheres are slowly blown away in a comet-like tail: the
Chthonian planets.
More detailed observation of extrasolar planets will require a new generation of instruments, including
space telescopes. Currently the
CoRoT spacecraft is searching for stellar luminosity variations due to
transiting planets. Several projects have also been proposed to create an array of
space telescopes to search for extrasolar planets with masses comparable to the Earth. These include the proposed NASA's
Kepler Mission,
Terrestrial Planet Finder, and
Space Interferometry Mission programs, the
ESA's
Darwin, and the CNES'
PEGASE.
[33] The
New Worlds Mission is an occulting device that may work in conjunction with the
James Webb Space Telescope. However, funding for some of these projects remains uncertain. The frequency of occurrence of such terrestrial planets is one of the variables in the
Drake equation which estimates the number of
intelligent, communicating civilizations that exist in our galaxy.
[34]
Interstellar "planets"
Several
computer simulations of stellar and planetary system formation have suggested that some
objects of planetary mass would be ejected into interstellar
space. Some scientists have argued that such objects found roaming in deep space should be classed as "planets". However, many others argue that only planemos that directly orbit
stars should qualify as planets, preferring to use the terms "planetary body", "planetary mass object" or "planemo" for similar free-floating objects (as well as planetary-sized moons). The
IAU's working definition on extrasolar planets takes no position on the issue. The discoverers of the bodies mentioned above decided to avoid the debate over what constitutes a planet by referring to the objects as planemos. However, the original IAU proposal for the 2006 definition of planet favoured the star-orbiting criterion, although the final draft avoided the issue.
For a brief time in 2006, astronomers believed they had found a binary system of such objects,
Oph 162225-240515, which the discoverers described as "planemos". However, recent analysis
[35] of the objects has determined that their masses are each greater than 13 Jupiter-masses, making the pair
brown dwarfs.
[36]
Attributes
Although each planet has unique physical characteristics, a number of broad commonalities do exist between them. Some of these characteristics, such as rings or natural satellites, have only as yet been observed in planets in the Solar System. Others are common to extrasolar planets as well.
Dynamic characteristics
Orbit
The orbits of the planets compared to the trans-Neptunian objects
Eris and
Pluto. Note the extreme elongation of both objects' orbits in relation to those of the planets (
eccentricity), as well as their large angles to the ecliptic (
inclination)
All planets revolve around stars. In the Solar System, all the planets orbit in sync with the Sun's rotation. It is not yet known whether all extrasolar planets follow this pattern. The period of one revolution of a planet's orbit is known as its
sidereal period or
year.
[37] A planet's year depends on its distance from the Sun; the farther a planet is from its star, not only the longer the distance it must travel, but also the slower its speed, as it is less affected by the star's gravity. Because no planet's orbit is perfectly circular, the distance of each varies over the course of its year. Its closest distance to its is called its
periastron (
perihelion in the Solar System), while its farthest distance from the star is called its
apastron (
aphelion in the Solar System). As a planet approaches periastron, its speed increases as the pull of its star's gravity strengthens; as it reaches apastron, its speed decreases.
[38]
Each planet's orbit is delineated by a set of
elements:
★ The ''
eccentricity'' of an orbit describes how elongated a planet's orbit is. Planets with low eccentricities have more circular orbits, while planets with a high eccentricities have more elliptical orbits. The planets in our Solar System have very low eccentricities, and thus nearly circular orbits.
Comets and Kuiper belt objects (as well as several extrasolar planets) have very high eccentricities, and thus exceedingly elliptical orbits.
[39][40]
an illustration of the semi-major axis
★ The ''
semi-major axis'' is the distance from a planet to the half-way point along the longest diameter of its elliptical orbit (see image). This distance is not necessarily the same as its apasteron, as no planet's orbit has its star at its exact centre.
★ In our Solar System, the ''
inclination'' of a planet tells how far above or below the plane of Earth's orbit (called the
ecliptic) a planet's orbit lies. The eight planets of our Solar System all lie very close to the ecliptic; comets and
Kuiper belt objects like
Pluto are at far more extreme angles to it.
[41] The points at which a planet crosses above and below the ecliptic are called its
ascending and
descending nodes.
Other orbital elements used to describe the orientation of a planet's orbit within our Solar System include the ''
argument of periapsis'' and ''
longitude of the ascending node''.
Axial tilt
Planets also have varying degrees of
axial tilt; they lie at an angle to the
plane of the
their stars' equators. This causes the amount of light received by each hemisphere to vary over the course of its year; when the northern hemisphere points away from its star, the southern hemisphere points towards it, and vice versa. Each planet therefore possesses
seasons; changes to the climate over the course of its year. The point at which each hemisphere is farthest or nearest from its star is known as its
solstice. Each planet has two in the course of its orbit; when one hemisphere has its summer solstice, when its day is longest, the other has its winter solstice, when its day is shortest. Jupiter's axial tilt is very small, so its seasonal variation is minimal; Uranus, on the other hand, has an axial tilt so extreme it is virtually on its side, which means that its hemispheres are either perpetually in sunlight or perpetually in darkness around the time of its solstices.
[ Weather, Weather, Everywhere? ] Among extrasolar planets, axial tilts are not known for certain, though most hot Jupiters are believed to possess negligible to no axial tilt, as a result of their proximity to their stars.
[42]
Rotation
The planets also rotate around invisible axes through their centres. A planet's
rotation period is known as its
day. All the planets rotate in a counter-clockwise direction, except for Venus, which
rotates clockwise (Uranus, because of its extreme axial tilt, can be said to be rotating either clockwise or anti-clockwise, depending on whether one states it to be inclined 82° from the ecliptic in one direction, or 98° in the opposite direction). There is great variation in the length of day between the planets, with Venus taking 243 Earth days to rotate, and the gas giants only a few hours. The rotational periods of extrasolar planets is not known; however their close proximity to their stars means that hot Jupiters are
tidelocked; their orbits are in sync with their rotations. This means they only ever show one face to their stars, with one side in perpetual day, the other in perpetual night.
[43]
Physical characteristics
Hydrostatic equilibrium
One of a planet's defining characteristics is that it is large enough for the force of its own gravity to dominate over the
electromagnetic forces binding its physical structure, leading to a state of
hydrostatic equilibrium. This effectively means that all planets are spherical or spheroidal. Up to a certain size, an object can be irregular in shape, but beyond that point, which varies depending on the chemical makeup of the object, gravity begins to pull an object towards its own centre of mass until the object collapses into a sphere.
[44]
Internal diffrentiation
Every planet began its existence in an entirely fluid state; in early formation, the denser, heavier materials sank to the centre, leaving the lighter materials near the surface. Each therefore has a
differentiated interior consisting of a dense
planetary core surrounded by a
mantle which either is or was a
fluid. The terrestrial planets are sealed within hard
crusts, but in the gas giants the mantle simply dissolves into the upper cloud layers. The terrestrial planets possess cores of magnetic elements such as
iron and
nickel, and mantles of
silicates.
Jupiter and
Saturn are believed to possess cores of rock and metal surrounded by mantles of
metallic hydrogen.
Uranus and
Neptune, which are smaller, possess rocky cores surrounded by mantles of
water,
ammonia,
methane and other ices.
Atmospheres
All of the planets have
atmospheres as their large masses mean gravity is strong enough to keep gaseous particles close to the surface. The larger gas giants are massive enough to keep large amounts of the light gases
Hydrogen and
Helium close by, although these gases mostly float into
space around the smaller planets. Earth's atmosphere is greatly different to the other planets because of the various life processes that have transpired there, while the atmosphere of Mercury has mostly, although not entirely, been blasted away by the
solar wind. Planetary atmospheres are affected by the varying degrees of energy received from either the Sun or their interiors, leading to the formation of dynamic
weather systems such as
hurricanes, (on Earth), planet-wide
dust storms (on Mars) and
Earth-sized anticyclones (on Jupiter).
At least one extrasolar planet,
HD 189733b, has been shown to possess such a weather system, similar to the Great Red Spot on Jupiter but twice as large.
[45] Hot Jupiters have been shown to be losing their atmospheres into space due to stellar radiation, much like the tails of comets.
[46] These planets have vast differences in temperature between their day and night sides which produce supersonic windspeeds.
[47]
Secondary characteristics
Many of the planets have
natural satellites, often called "moons." Mercury and Venus have no moons, the Earth has one, and Mars has two, but the
gas giants all have numerous moons in complex planetary systems. Many gas giant moons have similar features to the terrestrial planets and dwarf planets, and some have been studied for signs of life.
The four largest planets in the Solar System are also orbited by
planetary rings of varying size and complexity. The rings are composed primarily of dust or particulate matter, but can host tiny '
moonlets' whose gravity shapes and maintains their structure. Although the origins of planetary rings is not precisely known, they are believed to be the result of natural satellites which fell below their parent planet's
Roche limit and were torn apart by
tidal forces.
See also
★
Brown dwarf
★
Planemo
★
Planetoid
★
Planetary science
★
Planetary system
★
Table of planets and dwarf planets in the Solar System
★
Extraterrestrial skies
★
Planetary habitability
★
Hypothetical planets
★
Landings on other planets
★
Planets in science fiction
★
Planets in astrology
★
Navagraha
References
1. Interactive Extra-solar Planets Catalog
2. See romanization of Greek for the transcription scheme.
3. Definition of planet
4. Words For Our Modern Age: Especially words derived from Latin and Greek sources
5. A Chronological History of Babylonian Astronomy Gary D. Thompson
6. Greek Mythography in the Roman World, Alan Cameron, , , OUP, 2005,
7. Astra Planeta
8. Appendix 5: Planetary Linguistics
9. Astronomical Names for the Days of the Week, , Michael, Falk, Journal of the Royal Astronomical Society of Canada, 1999
10. Copernican System
11. ''A Discovery of two'' New Planets ''about'' Saturn, ''made in the Royal Parisian Observatory by Signor'' Cassini, ''Fellow of both the Royal Societys, of'' England ''and'' France; ''English't out of French.'', , Signor, Cassini, Philosophical Transactions (1665-1678), 1673
12. When Did the Asteroids Become Minor Planets?
13. Is Pluto a giant comet?
14.
15. Questions and Answers, part 2 Staff — "Ceres 'was' an asteroid" - but note it then talks about "'other' asteroids" crossing Ceres' path.
16. A Theory of Extrasolar Giant Planets, Saumon, D.; Hubbard, W. B.; Burrows, A.; Guillot, T.; Lunine, J. I.; Chabrier, G., , , Astrophysical Journal, 1996
17. See for example the list of references for: Catalog of Nearby Exoplanets Butler, R. P. ''et al''
18. Pluto Demoted: No Longer a Planet in Highly Controversial Definition
19. Pluto: Down But Maybe Not Out
20. Scientist who found '10th planet' discusses downgrading of Pluto Clara Moskowitz
21. Formation of the Terrestrial Planets, , G. W., Wetherill, Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 1980
22. Enhanced Collisional Growth of a Protoplanet that has an Atmosphere, Inaba, S.; Ikoma, M., , , Astronomy and Astrophysics, 2003
23. The Evolution of Dust in the Terrestrial Planet Region of Circumstellar Disks Around Young Stars
24. Halting Planet Migration by Photoevaporation from the Central Source, Matsuyama, I.; Johnstone, D.; Murray, N., , , The Astrophysical Journal, 2003
25. Dusty Rings & Icy Planet Formation Kenton, S.; Bromley, B.
26. Planet Formation on the Fast Track Ron Cowen
27. The Standard Model of Planet Formation
28. Lifeless Suns Dominated The Early Universe
29. Behind the Pluto Mission: An Interview with Project Leader Alan Stern Brad Amburn
30. Interactive Extra-solar Planets Catalog
31. Scientists reveal smallest extra-solar planet yet found Barbara Kennedy
32. Fourteen Times the Earth
33. Future American and European Planet Finding Missions Staff
34. The Drake Equation Revisited Frank Drake
35. The Wide Brown Dwarf Binary Oph 1622-2405 and Discovery of A Wide, Low Mass Binary in Ophiuchus (Oph 1623-2402): A New Class of Young Evaporating Wide Binaries? Close, L. M. ''et al''
36. Likely First Photo of Planet Beyond the Solar System
37. Manual of Astronomy: A Text Book, , Charles Augustus, Young, Ginn & company, 1902,
38. Chaos And Stability in Planetary Systems, Dvorak, R.; Kurths, J.; Freistetter, F., , , Springer, 2005,
39. Eccentricity evolution of giant planet orbits due to circumstellar disk torques Althea V. Moorhead, Fred C. Adams
40. Kuiper Belt Objects
41. A Correlation between Inclination and Color in the Classical Kuiper Belt Chadwick A. Trujillo and Michael E. Brown
42. Obliquity Tides on Hot Jupiters Joshua N. Winn and Matthew J. Holman
43. Magnetically-Driven Planetary Radio Emissions and Application to Extrasolar Planets Philippe Zarka, Rudolf A. Treumann et al.
44. The Dwarf Planets Mike Brown
45. First Map of an Extrasolar Planet Aguilar, D. A.; Pulliam, C.
46. Hubble Probes Layer-cake Structure of Alien World's Atmosphere Weaver, D.; Villard, R.
47. NASA's Spitzer Sees Day and Night on Exotic World Clavin, W.; Watanabe, S.
External links
★
International Astronomical Union
★
Solar System Live (an interactive
orrery)
★
Solar System Viewer (animation)
★
Pictures of the Solar System
★
NASA Planet Quest
★
Illustration comparing the sizes of the planets with each other, the sun, and other stars
Definition and reclassification debate
★
Working definition of "planet" from
IAU WGESP — the lower bound remained a matter of consensus in February 2003
★ Steven Soter's article "''What is a Planet''" in
Scientific American, January 2007, pp 34-41.
★ Dan Green's page on
planet classification
★ Stern & Levinson's article
"Regarding the criteria for planethood and proposed planetary classification schemes."
★
Gravity Rules: The Nature and Meaning of Planethood; S. Alan Stern;
March 22,
2004
★
IAU Press Release 01/99 "The status of Pluto: A Clarification";
IAU, 1999-02-03
★
BBC: "Planets plan boost tally 12" 2006-08-16
★
BBC: "Pluto loses status as a planet" 2006-08-24
★
BBC: "Pluto vote 'hijacked' in revolt" 2006-08-25
العربية
中国
Français
Deutsch
Ελληνική
हिन्दी
Italiano
日本語
Português
Русский
Español
