“This is among the hardest planets to explain in a traditional planet-formation framework,” study researcher Markus Janson, a Hubble postdoctoral fellow at Princeton University in New Jersey, said in a statement. “Its discovery implies that we need to seriously consider alternative formation theories, or perhaps to reassess some of the basic assumptions in the core-accretion theory.”
Gee, do ‘ya think?
With the late Dr. Tom Van Flandern in 2008
Of course, the usual village idiots have attacked the solar fission theory on the basis that it requires the planets to be spun off in roughly twin pairs, with one planet slightly larger than the other. So far, in the 2 cases here, only one planet has been observed. But that’s easily explainable.
Because of the intense light coming from any given star and the enormous distances at which the observations are taking place, most planets are obscured by the light of their own suns. Indeed, most exoplanets have only been discovered by either their gravitational effect on the parent star or by chance passing between (transiting) the star and the telescope.
Does that mean that it’s impossible to confirm to accuracy of the solar fission model? Not at all. If GJ 504b is still receding from its parent star, and the hypothetical GJ 504c along with it, it is possible that someday the 2nd planet in the twin pair may be imaged. That depends on a number of factors, including the speed of recession, the luminosity or GJ 504c, and the capabilities of the instruments human beings can create. But the chance to fulfill the prediction is there.
In the meantime, the fact that we can’t yet see GJ 504c does nothing to change the fact that this new observation fits the solar fission theory perfectly, and directly contradicts the increasingly discredited accretion model.