What do you think, what's the maximum size of solid planet. Earth is yet the greatest known solid body in the universe.

 

In what situation and around what kind of star would a giant solid planet be born.

Do you mean in terms of diameter, or total mass?

schwarzchild radius isn't it?

That's black holes duder, and that's for a given mass

I would have thought black holes are pretty solid.

But how can you be sucked into one if it's solid? I guess you would be solid... Don't they come from stars that are gas?

We need to find out more about black holes... preferably without experiencing it firsthand!

Well, just use the law of relativity for explanation here.

 

The earth too sucks things in, but, its mass is not enough to totally distort space time. A black hole basically just totally rips spacetime so when you get "sucked" into it you basically don't exsist.

But it's not possible for matter to "dissapear"! Or do you mean space time makes it not possible to see you or detect you?

A black hole has a strong gravitational field because it's a dense point of high mass.

 

 

Hence, it pulls things in.

 

&

 

Hence, it's solid.

Also, there would be no heat at all, which wouldn't that mean it would be the only object to achieve absolute zero? (that would also freeze any gas...and plasma)

Yea, I meant that basically you don't exsist in the sense that your have been totally ripped from space time.

 

Can you edit posts on these forums? (newbie)

Well, MrL says there's no way really of knowing what state the matter from the original star is in where black holes are concerned. As for the internal energy forces, you'd have to ask him or Rad.

 

If you are using the default style, the "edit" link is next to the date and time, at the top-left of your post.

Tinymidget said in post #10 :

Also, there would be no heat at all, which wouldn't that mean it would be the only object to achieve absolute zero? (that would also freeze any gas...and plasma)

 

It wouldn't be absolute zero, because quite clearly the average energy (terrible, terrible phrase, but I'm tired) of the object isn't nil.

MrL_JaKiri said in post #4 :

That's black holes duder, and that's for a given mass

 

oh yeah it is for a given mass, but then how do we define "solid planet".... solid what? solid iron, solid gold, solid rock, solid neutrons.... then what defines a "planet" other than say, an object orbiting a star. I see no real reason why an incredibly large planet right on the verge of collapsing to a black hole couldn't form around a star (other than ripping the star apart, so lets put it far away from the star) and this would be a planet that crumpled so that it is solid neutrons, give or take a bit. what we can say though is that the largest solid planet could not be any greater in mass than the mass dictated by the schwarzchild radius. If we want sheer volume on the other hand, it would be the chandrasekhar limit. technically that is calculated for white dwarves, but I see no reason why one could not apply it to planets. so the largest planet would be about 1.44 solar masses

It's a silly thread, given that the earth ISN'T solid. The mantle is a tad liquid.

 

That aside, I don't know if a neutron star would count as a planet, and not as a binary system.

its a good question though. It would be hard to answer properly though

Check out this book

Worlds Without End: Exploration of Planets Known and Unknown

by

John S. Lewis

 

Talks about how planets gas and terrestrial planets form. For instance if the Earth was larger it would be hoter and more covered by oceans. Smaller and like Mars. A little short but covers the subject in great detail.

MrL_JaKiri said in post # :

It's a silly thread, given that the earth ISN'T solid. The mantle is a tad liquid.

 

That aside, I don't know if a neutron star would count as a planet, and not as a binary system.

 

good shot. the earth is not solid, and has an atmosphere too. Just like Jupiter.

 

when is a planet not a planet I wonder. Even brown dwarves should be regarded as planets since they are not fusing.

yes, it was once thought taht borwn dwarf which had cooled down may have the rights elements for life...

 

...but who knows how big a terra type planet could grow

Going back to planets, there is a certain size above which a planet cannot exceed, otherwise fusion reactions would begin occuring in its centre, making it a star.

 

I assume this refers to the planets mass and I would guess elemental mix came into it somewhere.

 

Ive read in a lot of astrology textbooks that if Jupiter were a little more massive it would have become a small star. I dont have any more information apart form that, Ill Google and post more later. Better yet, you can Google and post it as well.

 

hell, lets all Google.

Aren't black holes one compressed atom? The actually gravity is not solid.

 

And a natural occuring planet has to be a reasonable size.

Black holes can suck in the atoms of whole stars that pass, so they are accumulations of atoms but the small ones created in the near future in our labratories will be the mass and energies of many atoms for a short period of time until they destabilize. I don't know how a black hole could exist with the mass of a single atom unless it was a super heavy element which we don't have a clue exists yet.

The largest planet would probably be a lithium planet with a hydrogen atmosphere somewhere in the universe. Just my opinion.

Just aman