Possible planet detected beyond galaxy

[Trekker09]

Astronomers have found evidence for a possible planet in the M51 ("Whirlpool") galaxy, using NASA's Chandra X-ray Observatory.
https://exoplanets.nasa.gov/news/1691/first-evidence-of-a-planet-identified-beyond-our-galaxy/

Not sure about Trek novels, but I couldn’t recall any example in the Star Trek world of planets beyond our galaxy. Maybe the Great Barrier that supposedly surrounds the Milky Way, prevented extra-galactic travel? It still took too long even with warp speed?

 

[Asbo Zaprudder]

There were stories concerning aliens from other galaxies in the original series. Although their home worlds were never described, they must have existed.

Extra-galactic species | Memory Alpha | Fandom

 

[Trekker09]

Ah, yes - though the ship never made it to the Kelvan home world or any of the others. I guess Sha Ka Ree from Final Frontier was actually in the same galaxy though somehow they got through the Great Barrier.

 

[Asbo Zaprudder]

I guess for the purpose of telling stories, our Galaxy sufficed and the Galactic Barrier was perhaps invented to limit the scope of the series. The Enterprise-D went well beyond the Galaxy in the season one TNG episode "Where No One Has Gone Before" and the barrier wasn't an issue apparently.

Where No One Has Gone Before (episode) | Memory Alpha | Fandom

 

[dupersuper]

I guess for the purpose of telling stories, our Galaxy sufficed and the Galactic Barrier was perhaps invented to limit the scope of the series. The Enterprise-D went well beyond the Galaxy in the season one TNG episode "Where No One Has Gone Before" and the barrier wasn't an issue apparently.

Where No One Has Gone Before (episode) | Memory Alpha | Fandom

Traveler trumps barrier...

 

[Santaman]

Its not like we can go see that planet anytime soon, and the star might have gone red giant/nova/supernova/other kboom ages ago already..

 

[Paul Weaver]

I guess Sha Ka Ree from Final Frontier was actually in the same galaxy though somehow they got through the Great Barrier.

Different barrier. Sha Ka Ree was as the "center of the galaxy" beyond a "great barrier" which no ship had ever gone in, and no probe had ever returned.

The galactic barrier at the edge of the galaxy was different, and crossed multiple times by multiple ships (including several times by Kirk and the Enterprise)

 

[Trekker09]

Different barrier. Sha Ka Ree was as the "center of the galaxy" beyond a "great barrier" which no ship had ever gone in, and no probe had ever returned.
The galactic barrier at the edge of the galaxy was different, and crossed multiple times by multiple ships (including several times by Kirk and the Enterprise)

Thanks for clarifying that.
Also good point about the barrier in "Where no one has gone before."

Back to reality, it just amazes me that anything in another galaxy can be detected-- regardless of the fact that it could take decades for another transit to confirm, and that the planet could be long gone, and that we’ll never travel anything like those distances. Headlines like this are more inspiring than most of the news.

 

[Asbo Zaprudder]

In galactic terms, M51 is relatively close at 31 million light years distance; the edge of the observable universe is 46.5 billion light years away - about 1,500 times farther.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

This is incredibly impressive. Even if, for whatever reason, it ends up not being confirmed or even refuted (and I'm not saying either will happen), I'm still very impressed.

 

[Brobdingnag]

Well, it's impressive but it's not really a shock there are hundreds of billions of stars in a galaxy... It's likely there are more than a trillion planets there.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Of course it wouldn't be a shock for there to be a planet in another galaxy, but it's very impressive that scientists actually believe they have the means to detect planets in another galaxy.

 

[Asbo Zaprudder]

It would great if astronomers could refine their methods so that Earth-like planets in the habitable zones of their stars could be detected. The transit method is skewed in favour of detecting an "Earth" at 1 AU against a "Jupiter" at 5.2 AU in orbit around a Sun-like star but the respective chances of detection at all by this method are only 0.47% and 0.089% if we use the real Sun, Earth, and Jupiter as examples. However, the respective transit depths are 0.0084% and 1.01%, which skews detection odds back towards detecting a "Jupiter" if noise in the data hides the dimming due to the "Earth".

About Transits | NASA

 

[diankra]

Problem is that the finding can't be confirmed till the planet next transits its star from our point of view, in about 2090 (our date, many millions of years ago for it).

 

[thribs]

I imagine there are many planets beyond our galaxy

 

[Asbo Zaprudder]

There are probably over twenty sextillion stars in the observable universe: 2x10^23 or 2 followed by 23 zeros. Our galaxy contains as many as 400 billion stars by some estimates: 4x10^11 or 4 followed by 11 zeros. That our galaxy would be the only one where stars have planets would seem a tad unlikely even before this latest observation. Assuming an average of one planet per star - some will have none but others will have several - that's 2x10^23 planets in the observable universe. And the universe is thought to extend well beyond what we observe...

 

[Brobdingnag]

There are probably over twenty sextillion stars in the observable universe: 2x10^23 or 2 followed by 23 zeros. Our galaxy contains as many as 400 billion stars by some estimates: 4x10^11 or 4 followed by 11 zeros. That our galaxy would be the only one where stars have planets would seem a tad unlikely even before this latest observation. Assuming an average of one planet per star - some will have none but others will have several - that's 2x10^23 planets in the observable universe. And the universe is thought to extend well beyond what we observe...

It's possible that this universe is not even the only one of its kind. In fact, there could be a great many universes. This is not so surprising when you consider that the notion of a universe has grown throughout the ages. At first, it was just a flat surface with a dome, then the solar system, then our galaxy, and less than a century ago the universe as we know it now. So why assume that everything we see is everything there is?

 

[Asbo Zaprudder]

Yes, some theorists such as Max Tegmark postulate that there could be infinite universes beyond our own universe's horizon, in different mathematical realms, in parallel dimensions, and in quantum-state space.

The Universes of Max Tegmark (mit.edu)

 

[Brobdingnag]

You know, according to theory, there must be millions of rogue planets (planets that have been knocked out of orbit) in this galaxy alone. I wonder if we'll ever detect any one of them. Just imagine how dangerous such a planet would be to interstellar travelers. You're moving at high speed in an almost empty interstellar space and all of a sudden, boom, you crash into a nearly undetectable planet!!

 

[Paul Weaver]

You're moving at high speed in an almost empty interstellar space and all of a sudden, boom, you crash into a nearly undetectable planet!!

Space is big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind- bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist's, but that's just peanuts to space. The chance of a collision in space is tiny

And any rogue planet would be easily detectable from the gravitational force they would enact on you. They'd be easy to avoid too for any traveller capable of boosting to such a speed

Smaller debris, grains of sand for example, is a different matter. If you're travelling at 30,000km/s (relative to an object in the milky way - which near Earth are all within 1000km/s of each other otherwise they'd be travelling at escape veloicty) and hit something weighing 1 gram at relative 'rest', that's 100 tons of TNT, enough to put a dent in your spaceship.