Vol.2, No.

11, 1181-1188 (2010) Natural Science

doi:10.4236/ns.2010.211146

Is it plausible to expect a close encounter of the Earth

with a yet undiscovered astronomical object in the next
few years?
Lorenzo Iorio
Ministero dell’Università, dell’Istruzione e della Ricerca (M.I.U.R.), Fellow of the Royal Astronomical Society (F.R.A.S.),
Permanent address: Viale Unità di Italia 68, 70125, Bari (BA), Italy; lorenzo.iorio@libero.it

Received 15 September 2010; revised 18 October 2010; accepted 21 October 2010.

ABSTRACT 20-30 au, contrary to all direct observational and

indirect dynamical evidences.
We analytically and numerically investigate the
possibility that a still undiscovered body X,
Keywords: Gravitation; Celestial Mechanics;
moving along an unbound hyperbolic path from
Planet-Star Interactions; Methods: Analytical; Method:
outside the solar system, may penetrate its in-
Numerical
ner regions in the next few years posing a threat
to the Earth. By conservatively using as initial
position of X the lower bounds on the present‐ 1. INTRODUCTION
day distance d X of X dynamically inferred from
the gravitational perturbations induced by it on Several free‐floating astronomical bodies traveling in
the orbital motions of the planets of the solar the interstellar space in the Milky Way have been re-
system, both the analyses show that, in order to cently detected.
reach the Earth’s orbit in the next 2 yr, X should In recent years a handful (16) of unbound astrophysi-
move at a highly unrealistic speed v , whatever cal objects lonely wandering through the Milky Way
its mass M X is. For example, by assuming for with speeds as large as about v ≈ 0.1%c , where c is the
it a solar ( M X = M ) or brown dwarf mass speed of light, have been discovered [1-12] They are the
( M X = 80m Jup ), now at not less than d X = 11 - 6 so‐called hypervelocity stars (HVSs), whose existence as
kau (1 kau=1000 astronomical units), v would be a consequence of the Massive Black Hole (MBH) hosted
of the order of 6 - 10% and 3 - 5% of the in the center of the Galaxy [13,14], was predicted in ref-
speed of light c, respectively. By assuming erence [15]. Gravitational mechanisms of ejection based
larger present‐day distances for X, on the ba- on three‐body mutual interactions of binary systems with
sis of the lacking of direct observational evi- the MBH, or possibly a pair of MBHs, have been pro-
dences of electromagnetic origin for it, its speed posed in references [15,16]. The consequent rates of
would be even higher. Instead, the fastest soli- HVSs creation would be of the order of 10−3 − 10−4
tary massive objects known so far, like hyper- yr −1 [16,17]. About 10−3 HVSs may exist within the
velocity stars (HVSs) and supernova remnants Galactic solar circle [16]. Contrary to those neutron stars
(SRs), travel at v ≈ 0.002 - 0.005c , having ac- exhibiting high proper motions, which are supernova
quired so huge velocities in some of the most remnants (SRs), known HVSs are mostly B‐type
violent astrophysical phenomena like interac- main‐sequence stars. As an example, HE 0437 − 5439
tions with supermassive galactic black holes [2], moving at heliocentric speed v = 723 km
and supernova explosions. It turns out that the s −1 = 152.517 au yr −1 = 0.0024c [2], is a B star with
orbit of the Earth would not be macroscopically mass M = 9M⊙ [11]. The study in reference [11] has
altered by a close (0.2 au) passage of such an yielded the first compelling evidence that these HVSs
ultrafast body X in the next 2 yr. On the contrary, actually come from the center of the Galaxy. All the
our planet would be hurled into the space if a known HVSs are at about 50 kpc and are unbound with
Sun‐sized body X would encounter it by mov- respect to the Galaxy.
ing at v / c = 10-4 . On the other hand, this Another class of isolated astrophysical objects moving
would imply that such a X should be now at just at very fast speeds, not related to HVSs, is represented

Copyright © 2010 SciRes. Openly accessible at http://www.scirp.org/journal/NS/

 1182 L. Iorio / Natural Science 2 (2010) 1181-1188

by those neutron stars which are the remnants of asym- bound to the planet. The authors of reference [31] yield a
metric explosions of core‐collapse supernovæ (SNe) [18]. total number of free‐floating binary planets in the Ga-
Their extreme speeds are very likely to be attributed to laxy as large as 7 × 108 . At present, no planets like them
the kick [19] received in such a kind of peculiar defla- have yet been detected. Proposed microlensing surveys
grations1. By measuring the displacements of young of next generation will be sensitive to free‐floating terre-
pulsars from the apparent centers of their associated SN strial planets [32]; under certain circumstances, they may
shells and using the pulsar spin‐down periods as age be able to yield 10-100 detections of Earth‐mass
estimates, the authors of references [20-21] inferred that free‐floating planets [32]. One to a few detections could
pulsars are typically born with transverse velocities of be made with all‐sky IR surveys [31].
500 km s −1 , and that velocities v  2000 km s −1 may Are there some solitary traveling astronomical objects,
be possible. At present, the observational record belongs still undetected for some reasons, which may hit the
to the radio‐quiet neutron star RX J 0822 − 4300 , which Earth over a time scale of a few years? In view of the
moves at a record speed of 1570 km s −1 = 331.191 au growing attention that such a possibility may really oc-
yr −1 = 0.0052c at a distance of 7000 lyr = 4 × 108 , as cur on2 21 December 2012 is receiving in larger portions,
measured in 2007 by the Chandra X‐ray Observatory also (relatively) educated, of the large public, the present
[22]. It is thought to have been produced in an asymme- study may also have a somewhat pedagogical/educational
tric SN explosion. value contributing, hopefully, to dissipate certain fears
Moving to isolated substellar objects having smaller too often artificially induced simply for the sake of gain.
velocities by about one order of magnitude ( v ≈ 10−4 c ), Mere academic disdain and/or conceit, derision, and
we have the so‐called brown dwarfs. They are astro- hurling insults should not be retained as adequate prac-
physical objects in the range mass M ≈ 0.04 − 0.09M  tices to counter them. Moreover, the analysis presented
= 41 − 94mJup unable to sustain hydrogen fusion in their here can be repeated in future when other “doomsday”
cores; as a consequence, it is very difficult to detect dates will likely pop out.
them, since most of the energy of gravitational contrac- The paper is organized as follows. In Section 2 we
tion is radiated away within 108 yr, leaving only a very present a relatively simplified analytical calculation3
low residual luminosity. After that their existence was which, however, grasp the essential features of the situa-
postulated for the first time in references [23-24], the tion investigated. A more sophisticated numerical analy-
first undisputed discovered brown dwarf, and the first T sis is presented in Section 3. It is based on the numerical
dwarf, was Gl 229B [25], with a mass M= 20 − 50mJup . integration of the equations of motion by randomly va-
After the advent of large‐area surveys with near‐infrared rying the initial conditions. Section 4 summarizes our
(IR) capability in the late 1990’s, hundreds more brown findings.
dwarfs were discovered [26]. Actually, smaller brown
dwarf, with M ＜ 20mJup , exist [27]. In particular, in 2. ANALYTICAL CALCULATION
2005 the author of reference [28] discovered Cha
Let us consider a simplified two‐body scenario in
110913 − 773444 . It is a planetary‐mass brown dwarf
which a test particle X moves along a heliocentric
with M = 8mJup , which is well within the mass range
hyperbola4 hurling itself towards the Earth; the system is
observed for bounded extrasolar planets ( M  15mJup ).
represented by X and the Sun, while the Earth only indi-
An even smaller body, named rho Oph 4450 with
rectly enters through its heliocentric distance as a para-
M = 2 − 3mJup , has been recently discovered by the au-
meter of the X’s motion. The conserved (positive) total
thors of reference [29].
mechanical energy E of X is [33]
Concerning the existence of free‐floating planets of
smaller mass, the author of reference [30] noted that, 1 2 α
= µ v − ＞0
E  (1)
under certain circumstances, Earth‐sized solid bodies 2 r
wandering in the interstellar space after being ejected where r and v are the relative X‐Sun distance and speed,
during the formation of their parent stellar systems may respectively, µ is the system’s reduced mass
sustain forms of life. Again as a consequence of
three‐body interactions with Jovian gas giants, the au- 2
I See, e.g., http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nibiru collision on the WEB.
thors of reference [31] have recently shown that during 3
See also http://www.badastronomy.com/bad/misc/planetx/orbitmath.
planet formation a non‐negligible fraction of terrestri- html on the WEB for the case of a bound, highly eccentric orbit of X
al‐sized planets with lunar‐sized companions will likely coming close to the Earth.
4
A test particle acted upon by the Newtonian force of universal gravita-
be ejected into interstellar space with the companion tional can only move along three types of conic sections: ellipse
1
(closed), hyperbola (open) and parabola (open). The state of motion at
Indeed, if the explosion of a progenitor star expels the ejecta preferen- a given instant of time chosen as initial one determines the trajectory
tially in one direction, the compact core must recoil in the opposite effectively followed.
direction because of momentum conservation.

Copyright © 2010 SciRes. Openly accessible at http://www.scirp.org/journal/NS/

 L. Iorio / Natural Science 2 (2010) 1181-1188 1183
118

M X M for the sake of concreteness. Of course, if we quite rea-

µ = (2) sonably postulate that X is made of baryonic5 matter
M X + M
emitting electromagnetic radiation, other, tighter bounds
and on its present‐day distance may be derived from its elec-
α = GM X M  (3) tromagnetic direct detectability. The recently launched
where G is the Newtonian constant of gravitation. The Wide‐field Infrared Survey Explorer (WISE) [39] survey
semi‐major axis a of the hyperbola is determined by the entire sky in the mid‐IR with far greater sensitivity
its total energy according to [33] than any previous all‐sky IR surveys [40] like, e.g., that
α performed by the Infrared Astronomical Satellite6 (IRAS)
a = (4) [41]. Among the scientific goals of WISE there is also
2E
the detection of solitary brown dwarf‐like bodies in the
The eccentricity e＞1 , which, in general, depends on neighborhood of the solar system. WISE should be able
E and on the conserved orbital angular momentum L, to reveal the existence of a body with the mass of Jupiter
can be fixed by making the simplifying assumption that within7 63= kau 0.3 = pc 1 lyr , while a lightweight
the perihelion distance of X, i.e. the minimum distance brown dwarf with M X= 2 − 3mJup would be detectable
reached by X with respect to the Sun, up to 412 − 618 kau = 2 - 3 pc = 7 -10 lyr . Moreover,
r (peri)
=  a (e − 1) (5) WISE could find a Neptune‐sized object out to 700 au.
Now, by keeping r = d X it is possible to extract the
coincides with, say, the average heliocentric distance of
contemporary value of the parameter ξ corresponding
the Earth
to the present‐day distance of X
 e2 
r⊕ = a⊕ 1 + ⊕  = 1.000142 au. (6)  1  d 
 2  = ξ arccos h  1 + X   (10)
Thus, e  a 
r⊕ By substituting Equation (10) into the parametric equ-
= e + 1. (7) ation of t of Equation (8), one can plot the time re-
a
quired to pass from d X to r⊕ as a function of the
As a consequence, e depends now only on the con-
alleged velocity of X at the present epoch: it is sufficient
served energy. E The parametric equations for the
to evaluate E of Equation (1) for r = d X . Thus, from
hyperbola are [33]
the value of the velocity required to take a given time
=r a (e cosh ξ − 1) interval‐typically of a few yr‐to reach the Earth’s orbit
µ a3 (8) starting from d X , it is possible to make reasonable
=t (e sinh ξ − ξ ) guesses about the plausibility of the hypothesis that such
α a putative body X moving towards our planet actually
where the parameter ξ takes all values from −∞ to exists out there.
+∞ ; at perihelion ξ = 0 . Let us, now, fix r to a given To be more specific, let us assume that X is an object
value. It is the heliocentric distance d X at which the with the mass of the Sun; in this case, the author of ref-
putative X should be located at the present epoch. Re- erence [34] yields d X = 12 kau as dynamically inferred
maining in the realm of celestial mechanics, d X can be lower bound of its present heliocentric distance. Figure
thought as dynamically constrained by its perturbations 1 shows that such a Sun‐sized body X should travel at a
of the orbital motions of the known bound major bodies implausibly high speed ( v ≈ 0.06 − 0.1c ) to reach our
of the solar system. In particular, upper limits on the orbit in a few years from now.
tidal parameter of X Recall that the highest recorded speeds of unbound
GM X objects of stellar size are 0.002 − 0.005c . Note that the
kX = (9)
d X3 situation is even worse if we take a larger value for the
limit distance d X in view of the fact that, after all, a
have been recently obtained [34] by using the secular
baryonic star should have been easily detected if it was
precessions of the longitudes of the perihelia ϖ of the
really at just 12 kau from us. Indeed, it turns out that by
inner planets: for each assumed value of the X’s mass
setting, say, d X = 100 kau the required speed would
there is a different lower limit for d X . Although, strictly
closely approach c . It may be of interest to note that,
speaking, they have been obtained by assuming X fixed
by traveling at= v 0.002 − 0.005c , a Sun‐sized body X
during a planetary orbital revolution, we will use them 6
See http://spider.ipac.caltech.edu/staff/tchester/iras/no tenth pla-
5
Concerning the putative existence of stars and planets made of a par- net yet.html on the WEB about the alleged discovery of a planet in
ticular kind of non-baryonic dark matter, i.e. the so-called mirror mat-
the remote peripheries of the solar system a by IRAS 7See on the
ter [35], see references [36-38]. WEB http://www.planetary.org/blog/article/00002070/

Copyright © 2010 SciRes. Openly accessible at http://www.scirp.org/journal/NS/

1184 L. Iorio / Natural Science 2 (2010) 1181-1188

Figure 1. Time t, in yr, required to a body X with Figure 3. Time t, in yr, required to a body X with
M X = M  to reach the terrestrial orbit from M X = m⊕ to reach the terrestrial orbit from d X = 175
d X = 12 kau as a function of its present day au as a function of its present day speed β X , in units
speed β X , in units of c.
of c.
would take 300 − 800 yr to reach our orbit if it was
tive colliding X is a rock‐ice body with the mass of the-
now at 100 kau from us, while 40 − 90 yr would be
kau as a function of its present day speed β X , in units of c
required if it was at just 12 kau. Incidentally, let us remark
Earth is unlikely because, by assuming d X = 175 au
that the closest black hole so far discovered, whose dis-
[34], it should travel at = v / c 0.001 − 0.003 to reach
tance has been directly measured from its parallax using
the orbit of our planet in the next few yr.
astrometric VLBI observations, is in the X‐ray binary
Given the ejection mechanisms occurring in the planet
V404 Cyg, at about 2 kpc= 4 × 108 [42]. Another close
formation processes which may be responsible for such
black hole is V4641 Sgr [43], at about 7 − 12 kpc .
free‐floating small planets, their typical velocities should
Figure 2 depicts the case of a brown dwarf with
M = 80mJup and d X = 5.2 kau [34]. be of the order of v ≈ 1 − 3 km s −=1 0.3 − 1× 10−5 c for
a Jupiter‐sized mass ejecting body [45]. Thus, 180 − 300
Also such a scenario looks highly implausible because
yr would be required by traveling at such speeds if an
it should be v / c ≈ 0.03 − 0.05 ; moreover, for d X = 20
Earth‐sized body X was now at d X = 175 au.
kau it turns out that v / c ≈ 0.08 − 0.2 . No brown dwarfs
As we will see in Section 3, the conclusions of such a
at all moving at speeds comparable to those of SNRs and
simplistic analytical two‐body scenario are also sup-
HVSs are known; on the contrary, their speeds are of the
ported by a more sophisticated, numerical analysis.
order of v ≈ 100 km s −1= 3 × 10−4 c [44]. Traveling at
It may be interesting to note that some reflections by
such typical speeds, it would take 1 − 3 kyr to reach the
M. Brown similar to the reasonings developed in detail
terrestrial orbit for d X = 20 kau, and 300 − 900 yr for
d X = 5.7 kau. in this Section can be found at http://news.discovery.com/
space/mike‐brown‐planetx‐pluto.html on the Internet.
Figure 3 shows that also the case in which the puta-
The case of a body, of unspecified mass, reaching the
Earth’s orbit on an unbound trajectory in the next 2 yr
starting now from 1 kau is touched. Strictly speaking,
the speed of such an unbound X is computed by assum-
ing that it travels uniformly, so that it is = v 2.4 × 103
−1
km s = 0.008c . According to reference [34], 1 kau is
the dynamically inferred lower limit for a body with
M X = mJup lying perpendicularly to the ecliptic; the
speed required to come here in the next 2 − 1.6 yr turns
out to be 0.8 − 1% of c . If we take d X = 1.2 kau for
a jovian‐sized body lurking now in the ecliptic [34], we
get v / c = 0.01 to reach 1 au in the next 2 yr. Concern-
ing a Jupiter‐sized body X, Brown at http://news.dis-
Figure 2. Time t, in yr, required to a body X with covery.com/space/mike‐brown‐planetx‐pluto.html puts it
M X = 80mJup to reach the terrestrial orbit from d X = 5.7 at at a few thousand au; in this case, by setting, say,
.
kau as a function of its present day speed β X , in units d X = 2.5 kau we have v / c = 0.02 .
of c.

Copyright © 2010 SciRes. Openly accessible at http://www.scirp.org/journal/NS/

 L. Iorio / Natural Science 2 (2010) 1181-1188 1185
118

3. NUMERICAL CALCULATION traveling at unrealistically high speeds, as seen in Sec-

tion 2. It turns out that, also according to such an analy-
We, first, numerically integrated the equations of mo-
sis, larger initial distances for X yield even larger speeds
tion of an unbound body X in a ICRF/J2000.0 heliocen-
for it, just as in Section 2. The inclusion of the major
tric frame with a coordinate system employing rectan-
planets of the solar system do not cause noticeable alte-
gular Cartesian coordinates along with the ecliptic and
rations to such a picture. Conversely, from our numerical
mean equinox of reference epoch J2000. In regard to the
analysis it turns out that the hypothetical passage of such
initial position chosen for X, we took the predicted
a fast body X would not distort the orbits of the planets
coordinates of the Earth at t0 = 21 December 2012 re-
considered, in particular of the Earth. This is clearly de-
trieved from the HORIZONS WEB interface by
picted by Figure 4 which shows the numerically inte-
NASA/JPL and added randomly generated small correc-
grated terrestrial orbit in the next 2 yr in the case of a
tions to them, i.e.,
Sun‐sized X body supposed located today at 11.241
x0(X) x⊕ (t0 ) + δ x
= kau and moving with v / c = 0.076 .
y0(X) y⊕ (t0 ) + δ y
= (11) Incidentally, in the example showed the mutual
X‐Earth distance at tfin amounts to ∆r =0.2 au. In-
z0(X) z⊕ (t0 ) + δ z
= stead, a much smaller velocity of X would induce ma-
where δ x , δ y , δ z were randomly generated from a uni- croscopically noticeable changes in the Earth’s orbit, as
form distribution within ±0.001 au. Concerning the shown in Figure 5. It is obtained for v /= c 2.2 × 10−4 ,
initial velocity, we randomly generated it by imposing with v / v p = 1.1 . Such a scenario would be catastrophic
the conditions since in it the Earth would be finally stripped from its
2G (M  + M X ) orbit and thrown away, as an extension of the time span
v0(X) ＞ of the numerical integration to 5 yr shows. Of course, it
r0X (12)
is highly unrealistic since it implies the present existence
v0(X) ＜ c of an undiscovered Sun‐sized body X at just 26.3 au.
where
2G (M  + M X ) 4. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
v p = X
(13)
r We analytically and numerically investigated the pos-
sibility‐which cyclically gains popularity for a variety of
is the limit parabolic velocity; a hyperbola occurs if
v＞ v p . Starting from such sets of randomly generated psychological and/or sociological reasons in extended
portions of the large public, even cultivated‐that a yet
initial conditions, we numerically propagated the trajec-
undiscovered astronomical body X, moving on an un-
tory of X backward in time over 2 yr, so that tfin
bound trajectory from outside the solar system, may pe-
represents the present-day epoch. In such a way, by per-
forming several runs, the conclusions of Section 2 turned
out to be substantially confirmed in the sense that, in
order to avoid finding X at the end of the integration, i.e.
at the present epoch, closer than the dynamically in-
ferred lower limits d X , too high velocities would be
required.
Then, we made a further numerical analysis in which
we used the final state vectors of X of each of the pre-
vious runs backward in time as initial conditions for new
runs performed, now, forward in time over 2 yr. In other
words, now t0 corresponds to the present epoch, while
tfin = 21 December 2012 . In such new runs we also
added the Earth, Jupiter and Saturn by modeling their
mutual interactions and their attractions on X. Their ini-
tial conditions, corresponding to the present epoch, were
retrieved from the HORIZONS WEB interface. The situa-
tion remains unaltered: starting today from positions Figure 4. Section in the { xy} plane of the numeri-
corresponding to the dynamically inferred lower limits cally integrated Earth’s orbit over the next 2 yr by as-
d X , all the numerically propagated trajectories of X suming for X M X = M  , d X = 11.241 kau,
reach heliocentric distances of about 1 au in next 2 yr v = 0.076c .

Copyright © 2010 SciRes. Openly accessible at http://www.scirp.org/journal/NS/

1186 L. Iorio / Natural Science 2 (2010) 1181-1188

tances of thousands‐ten thousands astronomical units

would be 6 − 10% and 3 − 5% of c , respectively.
Even higher speeds are involved if we adopt larger val-
ues of the initial distance of X relying upon the still
missing direct detection of it from electromagnetic radi-
ation. The fastest Sun‐sized objects known so far travel
at speeds as large as 0.2 − 0.5% of c , and are pro-
duced in some of the most violent astrophysical
processes known like interactions with supermassive
galactic black holes and supernova deflagrations. More-
over, it turns out that the orbit of the Earth would not be
distorted in a macroscopically noticeable way by the
close (0.2 au) passage of such a hypothetical ultrafast
body. The terrestrial path would be sensibly altered in
such a way that the Earth would be thrown away if the
speeds involved by a passing star‐sized body were quite
smaller, of the order of 0.01% of c . Such a scenario
is highly unrealistic because, in this case, X should be
Figure 5. Section in the { xy} plane of the numeri-
now at just a few ten astronomical units.
cally integrated Earth’s orbit over the next 2 yr by as-
suming for X M X = M  , d X = 26.3 au,
=v 2.2 × 10−4 c . REFERENCES
[1] Brown, W.R., Geller, M.J., Kenyon, S.J. and Kurtz, M.J.
netrate its inner regions by closely encountering the (2005) Discovery of an unbound hypervelocity star in the
Earth in the next few years. For the sake of concreteness milky way halo. The Astrophysical Journal, 62,
we choose a time span of 2 yr ending at 21 December L33‐L36.
2012, familiar to a non‐negligible amount of people, but [2] Edelmann, H., Napiwotzki, R., Heber, U., Christlieb, N.
and Reimers, D. (2005) HE 0437‐5439: An unbound
the strategy outlined here can naturally be extended to
hypervelocity main-sequence B‐type star. The
any temporal interval and dates in the not unlikely case Astrophysical Journal, 634, L181‐L184.
that in the more or less near future‐presumably after [3] Hirsch, H.A., Heber, U., O’Toole, S.J. and Bresolin, F.
2012‐other analogous “doomsdays” of astronomical ori- (2005) US 708—An unbound hyper-velocity
gin will be proposed. subluminous O star. Astronomy and Astrophysics, 444,
As initial positions, we conservatively choose the L61‐L64.
lower limits d X for the present‐day distance of such a [4] Brown, W.R., Geller, M.J., Kenyon, S. J. and Kurtz, M.J.
(2006) A successful targeted search for hypervelocity
putative X from the bounds dynamically inferred from stars. The Astrophysical Journal, 640, L35‐L38.
the magnitude of the perturbations that it would induce [5] Brown, W.R., Geller, M.J., Kenyon, S.J. and Kurtz, M.J.
on the orbital motions of the inner planets of the solar (2006) Hypervelocity stars. I. The spectroscopic survey.
system. Given that, at present, there are no direct obser- The Astrophysical Journal, 647, 303‐311.
vational evidences of electromagnetic origin for the ex- [6] Brown, W.R., Geller, M.J., Kenyon, S.J., Kurtz, M.J. and
istence of X, tighter constraints on its distance, i.e. larger Bromley, B.C. (2007) Hypervelocity stars. II. The bound
population. The Astrophysical Journal, 660, 311‐318.
values for d X , may well have been adopted. The initial
[7] Brown, W.R., Geller, M.J., Kenyon, S.J., Kurtz, M.J. and
velocities were chosen by allowing for unbound, hyper- Bromley, B.C. (2007) Hypervelocity stars. III. The space
bolic trajectories in the field of the Sun. Both analytical density and ejection history of main‐sequence stars
and numerical calculations, performed for different val- from the galactic center. The Astrophysical Journal, 671,
ues of the mass of X by randomly varying its initial con- 1708‐1716.
ditions and including also the Earth, Jupiter and Saturn, [8] Heber, U., Edelmann, H., Napiwotzki, R., Altmann, M.
show that, in all cases, X should move at unrealistically and Scholz, R.‐D. (2008) The B‐type giant HD 271791 in
high velocities to reach heliocentric distances of 1 au in the galactic halo. linking run-away stars to
hyper-velocity stars. Astronomy and Astrophysics, 483,
the next 2 yr. No known astrophysical objects with high
L21‐L24.
speeds, acquired in certain known physical processes, [9] Brown, W.R., Geller, M.J. and Kenyon, S.J. (2009)
move as fast as the putative X should do. In the case of a MMT hypervelocity star survey. The Astrophysical
body with the mass of the Sun or of a typical brown Journal, 690, 1639‐1647.
dwarf ( M X = 80mJup ) the speed required to come close [10] Tillich, A., Przybilla, N., Scholz, R. and Heber, U. (2009)
the Earth in the next 2 yr from presently assumed dis- SDSS J013655.91+242546.0—An A‐type hyper-velocity

Copyright © 2010 SciRes. Openly accessible at http://www.scirp.org/journal/NS/

 L. Iorio / Natural Science 2 (2010) 1181-1188 1187
118

star from the outskirts of the galaxy. Astronomy and [26] Kirkpatrick, J.D. (2005) new spectral types L and T.
Astrophysics, 507, L37‐L40. Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 43,
[11] Brown, W.R., Anderson, J., Gnedin, O.Y., Bond, H.E., 195‐245.
Geller, M.J., Kenyon, S.J. and Livio, M., (2010) A [27] Lodieu, N., Hambly, N.C., Jameson, R.F., Hodgkin, S.T.,
galactic origin for HE 0437–5439, the hypervelocity star Carraro, G. and Kendall, T.R. (2007) New brown dwarfs
near the large magellanic cloud. The Astrophysical in upper Sco using UKIDSS galactic cluster survey
Journal Letters, 719, L23‐L27. science verification data. Monthly Notices of the Royal
[12] Irrgang, A., Przybilla, N., Heber, U., Fernanda Nieva, M. Astronomical Society, 374, 372‐384.
and Schuh, S. (2010) The nature of the hyper‐runaway [28] Luhman, K.L., Adame, L., D’Alessio, P., Calvet, N.,
candidate hip 60350. The Astrophysical Journal, 711, Hartmann, L., Megeath, S.T. and Fazio, G.G. (2005)
138‐143. Discovery of a planetary-mass brown dwarf with a
[13] Ghez, A.M., Salim, S., Weinberg, N.N., Lu, J.R., Do, T., circumstellar disk. The Astrophysical Journal, 635, L93‐
Dunn, J.K., Matthews, K., Morris, M.R., Yelda, S., L96.
Becklin, E.E., Kremenek, T., Milosavljevic, M. and [29] Marsh, K.A., Kirkpatrick, J.D. and Plavchan, P. (2010) A
Naiman, J. (2008) Measuring distance and properties of young planetary-mass object in the oph cloud core. The
the milky way’s central supermassive black hole with Astrophysical Journal Letters, 709, L158‐L162.
stellar orbits. The Astrophysical Journal, 689, 1044‐ [30] Stevenson, D.J. (1999) Life‐sustaining planets in
1062. interstellar space. Nature, 400, 32.
[14] Gillessen, S., Eisenhauer, F., Trippe, S., Alexander, T., [31] Debes, J.H. and Sigurdsson, S. (2007) The survival rate
Genzel, R., Martins, F. and Ott, T. (2009) Monitoring of ejected terrestrial planets with moons. The
stellar orbits around the massive black hole in the Astrophysical Journal, 668, L167‐L170.
galactic center. The Astrophysical Journal, 692, [32] Bennett, D.P. and Rhie, S.H. (2002) Simulation of a
1075‐1109. space-based microlensing survey for terrestrial extrasolar
[15] Hills, J.G. (1988) Hyper‐velocity and tidal stars from planets. The Astrophysical Journal, 574, 985‐1003.
binaries disrupted by a massive galactic black hole. [33] Landau, L.D. and Lifshitz, E.M. (1976) “Mechanics,
Nature, 331, 687‐689. third edition: vol. 1 (course of theoretical physics),”
[16] Yu, Q. and Tremaine, S. (2003) Ejection of Butterworth‐Heinemann.
hypervelocity stars by the (binary) black hole in the [34] Iorio, L. (2009) Constraints on planet X/Nemesis from
galactic center. The Astrophysical Journal, 599, solar system’s inner dynamics. Monthly Notices of the
1129‐1138. Royal Astronomical Society, 400, 346-353.
[17] Perets, H.B., Hopman, C. and Alexander, T. (2007) [35] Lee, T.D. and Yang, C.N. (1956) Question of parity
Massive perturber‐driven interactions between stars and conservation in weak interactions. Physical Review, 104,
a massive black hole. The Astrophysical Journal, 656, 254‐258.
709‐720. [36] Foot, R. (1999) Have mirror stars been observed?
[18] Burrows, A. (2000) Supernova explosions in the universe. Physics Letters B, 452, 83‐86.
Nature, 403, 727‐733. [37] Foot, R. (1999) Have mirror planets been observed?
[19] Fryer, C.L. (2004) Neutron star kicks from asymmetric Physics Letters B, 471, 191‐194.
core collapse. The Astrophysical Journal Letters, 601, [38] Foot, R. and Silagadze, Z.K. (2001) Do mirror planets
L175‐L178. exist in our solar system? Acta Physica Polonica B, 32(7),
[20] Caraveo, P.A. (1993) Associating young pulsars and 2271‐2278.
supernova remnants: PSR 1610‐50 and the case for [39] Wright, E.L., Eisenhardt, P.R.M., Mainzer, A., Ressler,
high-velocity pulsars. The Astrophysical Journal Letters, M.E., Cutri, R.M., Jarrett, T., Kirkpatrick, J.D., Padgett,
415, L111‐L114. D., McMillan, R.S., Skrutskie, M., Stanford, S.A., Cohen,
[21] Frail, D.A., Goss, W.M., and Whiteoak, J.B.Z. (1994) M., Walker, R.G., Mather, J.C., Leisawitz, D., III Gautier,
The radio lifetime of supernova remnants and the T.N., McLean, I., Benford, D., Lonsdale, C.J., Blain, A.,
distribution of pulsar velocities at Birth. The Mendez, B., Irace, W.R., Duval, V., Liu, F., Royer, D.,
Astrophysical Journal, 437, 781‐793. Heinrichsen, I., Howard, J., Shannon, M., Kendall, M.,
[22] Winkler, P.F. and Petre, R. (2007) Direct measurement Walsh, A.L., Larsen, M., Cardon, J.G., Schick, S.,
of neutron star recoil in the oxygen-rich supernova Schwalm, M., Abid, M., Fabinsky, B., Naes, L. and Tsai,
remnant puppis a. The Astrophysical Journal, 670, C.‐W. (2010) The wide-field infrared survey explorer
635‐642. (wise): Mission description and initial on-orbit perfor-
[23] Kumar, S.S. (1963) The structure of stars of very low mance. The Astronomical Journal, 140, 1868-1881.
mass. The Astrophysical Journal, 137, 1121‐1125. [40] Price, S.D. (2009) Infrared sky surveys. Space Science
[24] Hayashi, C. and Nakano, T. (1963) evolution of stars of Reviews, 142, 233‐321.
small masses in the pre-main-sequence stages. Progress [41] Beichman, C.A. (1987) The IRAS view of the galaxy and
of Theoretical Physics, 30, 460‐474. the solar system annual review of astronomy and
[25] Nakajima, T., Oppenheimer, B.R., Kulkarni, S.R., astrophysics. Annual Review of Astronomy and
Golimowski, D.A., Matthews, K. and Durrance, S.T. Astrophysics, 25, 521‐563.
(1995) Discovery of a cool brown dwarf. Nature, 378, [42] Miller‐Jones, J.C.A., Jonker, P.G., Dhawan, V., Brisken,
463‐465. W., Rupen, M.P., Nelemans, G. and Gallo, E. (2009) The
first accurate parallax distance to a black hole. The

Copyright © 2010 SciRes. Openly accessible at http://www.scirp.org/journal/NS/

1188 L. Iorio / Natural Science 2 (2010) 1181-1188

Astrophysical Journal Letters, 706, L230‐L234. Walter, F.M. and Gelino, C.R. (2009) The brown dwarf
[43] Orosz, J.A., Kuulkers, E., van der Klis, M., McClintock, kinematics project I. proper motions and tangential
J.E., Garcia, M.R., Callanan, P.J., Bailyn, C.D., Jain, R.K. velocities for a large sample of late-type M, L, and T
and Remillard, R.A. (2001) A black hole in the dwarfs. The Astronomical Journal, 137, 1‐18.
superluminal source SAX J1819.3‐2525 (V4641 Sgr). [45] Goldreich, P., Lithwick, Y. and Sari, R. (2004) final stag-
The Astrophysical Journal, 555, 489‐503. es of planet formation. The Astrophysical Journal, 614,
[44] Faherty, J.K., Burgasser, A.J., Cruz, K.L., Shara, M.M., 497‐507.

Copyright © 2010 SciRes. Openly accessible at http://www.scirp.org/journal/NS/