i

TITLE PAGE
A STUDY OF THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE NEW PLANET X

BY

OTUECHERE UCHECHUKWU DANIEL

REG NO: 2016030179202

SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS

FOR THE AWARD OF THE DEGREE OF BACHELOR OF SCIENCE
(B.Sc) IN INDUSTRIAL PHYSICS
ENUGU STATE UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
(ESUT), ENUGU

SUPERVISOR: PROF. UGWOKE A.C

MAY, 2021
 ii

CERTIFICATION

I Otuechere Uchechukwu Daniel with registration number

2016030176132, certify that this project titled the study of

characteristics of new planet x is research work carried out by

me, in the 2019/2020 academic section.

------------------

Out Uchechkwu Daniel.

2016030179202

Department of Industrial Physics

June, 2021
 iii

APPROVAL PAGE

This project has been read and approved by the under signed persons,
As meeting the requirements of the department of industrial physics, Enugu state
University of Science and Technology (ESUT), for
The award of Bachelor’s Degree in Industrial Physics.

------------------------- --------------------------
Prof. Ugwoke A.C Date
(supervisor)

------------------------ --------------------------
Prof. M. Nnabuchi Date
(Head of Department)

------------------------ ----------------------------
External Examiner Date
 iv

DEDICATION

This project work is dedicated to God Almighty, and also to my parents.

.
 v

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

I am most grateful to God and will forever be thankful to him for His unconditional
love and abundant grace, which sustained me throughout my stay in this university.
With great honor and pleasure, I celebrate my hardworking, disciplined and
supervisor prof Ugwoke A.C during the course your help, advice and supervision
are so fathering and I do not take any of those deeds for granted. May God
continually bless you sir
My appreciation also goes to my capable and dependable H.O.D prof Nnabuchi
and to all industrial physics lecturers.
 vi

ABSTRACT
The evidence for the existence of a ninth planet, which goes by the
provisional name of Planet X begins with the cataloguing of the most distant
objects of our Solar system, which has been an on-going effort over the past few
decades. Certain intriguing anomalies were noted regarding the collective orbits of
these objects. Beyond the orbit of Neptune dwells a vast population of small
objects that make up the Kuiper belt and, beyond that, the inner Oort cloud. The
best-known representative of the Kuiper belt is Pluto, which was discovered in
1930. Another is Eris, which was discovered in 2005 and initially believed to be
larger than Pluto, which led to the demotion of Pluto as just another dwarf planet
among many others. The sky survey performed by the spacecraft Wide-field
Infrared Survey Explorer allowed astronomers to rule out anything at least the size
of Saturn being located anywhere closer to the Sun than 104 astronomical units.
However, that did not rule out the existence of a planet comparable to or smaller
than Neptune.The distance between Planet X and the Sun is thought to vary
between 250 astronomical units at its closest and 1200 astronomical units at its
farthest. The astronomical unit is defined as the average distance between the Sun
and the Earth, about 1.5×1011 metres; for comparison, the outermost known
planet, Neptune, orbits at about 30 astronomical units from the Sun. The orbit of
Planet X is believed to be tilted about 30 degrees relative to the ecliptic, which is
the plane in which the Earth orbits the Sun.If it exists, the ninth planet is most
certainly not a dwarf planet and would be a genuine number nine, about ten times
as massive as Earth
 vii

TABLE OF CONTENT
Title page i
Certification ii
Approval iii
Dedication iv
Acknoledgment v
Abstract vi
Table of contents vii
List of Table viii
List of figures

CHAPTER ONE
1.0 Introduction 2
1.1 Statement of problem 3
1.2 Aim and Objectives 3
1.3 Significance of the Study 3
CHAPTER TWO
2.0 History 4
2.1 Batygin and brown hypothesis 6
2.1.1 Orbit 6
2.1.2 Mass and Radius 7
2.2 Origin of Planet x 7
2.3 Evidence of Planet Nine 9
2.3.1 Orbits of High-Inclination Object 19
2.3.2 Oort Cloud and Comets 19
 viii

2.3.3 Updated Model 20

2.3.4 Reception 20
2.4.0 Alternative Hypothesis 22
2.4.1 Temporary or coincidental clustering 22
2.4.2 Inclination Instability in a massive disk 24
2.4.3 Shepherding by a massive disk 25
2.4.4 Alignment due to the kozai mechanism 27
2.4.5 primordial black hole 29
CHAPTER THREE
3.0 Detection and attempts 32
3.1.1 Visibility and location 32
3.1.2 Search of existing data 33
3.1.3 Ongoing search 33
3.1.4 Radiation 34
3.1.4 Citizen science 34
3.1.5 Cassini measurement o Saturns orbit 35
3.2 Analysis of Pluto orbit 36
3.3 Orbits of nearly parabolic comets 37
3.4 Occultations by Jupiter Trojans 37
CHAPTER FOUR
4.0 Attempts to predict the semi-major axis 38
4.1 Naming of planet nine 39
CHAPTER FIVE
4.0 Conclusion and Summary 41
4.1 Putative physics characteristics of planet X 42
References 46
 1

CHAPTER ONE

1.0.INTRODUCTION
Planet Nine, sometimes referred to as Planet X (Mack, 2002;NASA,2020) is
a hypothetical planet in the outer region of the Solar System (Batygin et al.,
2016;Batygin et al., 2019). Its gravitational effects could explain the unusual
clustering of orbits for a group of extreme trans-Neptunian objects (eTNOs),
bodies beyond Neptune that orbit the Sun at distances averaging more than 250
times that of the Earth. These eTNOs tend to make their closest approaches to
the Sun in one sector, and their orbits are similarly tilted. These improbable
alignments suggest that an undiscovered planet may be shepherding the orbits of
the most distant known Solar System objects (Batygin et al., 2016;Trujillo et al.,
2014;Burdick,2016). Nonetheless, some astronomers do not think that the
hypothetical planet exists at all, based on detailed observations and studies
(Lawler, 2020).

Based on earlier considerations, this hypothetical super-Earth-sized planet would

have had a predicted mass of five to ten times that of the Earth, and an elongated
orbit 400 to 800 times as far from the Sun as the Earth. Konstantin
Batygin and Michael E. Brown suggested that Planet Nine could be the core of
a giant planet that was ejected from its original orbit by Jupiter during
the genesis of the Solar System. Others proposed that the planet was captured from
another star (Mustill et al., 2016), was once a rogue planet, or that it formed on a
distant orbit and was pulled into an eccentric orbit by a passing star.

As of January 2021, no observation of Planet Nine had been announced (Meisner

et al, 2017; Perdelwitz et al., 2018). While sky surveys such as Wide-field Infrared
Survey Explorer (WISE) and Pan-STARRS did not detect Planet Nine, they have
not ruled out the existence of a Neptune-diameter object in the outer Solar System
 2

(luhman., 2014).The ability of these past sky surveys to detect Planet Nine was
dependent on its location and characteristics. Further surveys of the remaining
regions are ongoing using NEOWISE and the 8-meter Subaru Telescope (Hand,
2016). Unless Planet Nine is observed, its existence is purely conjectural.
Several alternative hypotheses have been proposed to explain the observed
clustering of TNOs.

1.2 Statement of Problem

Caltech researchers have found mathematical evidence suggesting there may be a

PLANET X deep in the solar system. This hypothetical Neptune sized planet
nicknamed “planet nine”, orbits our sun in a highly elongated orbit far beyond
Pluto. The announcement of planet nine does not mean there is a new planet in our
solar system. The existence of this distant world is only theoretical at this point and
no direct observation of the object nicknamed “planet 9” have been made.
Astronomers are now searching for the predicted planet.

1.3 Aim and Objectives

The aim of this work is to study the characteristics of the new planet X. but its
basic objectives are;

i. Study previous works on planet X

ii. Examine the characteristics of this new planet X

1.4 Significance of The Study

The theoretical discovering and simulations of planet X do not only prove that
there is another massive planet in our solar system, but they are further evidence
that something big could be out there.
 3

CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

HISTORY

Following the discovery of Neptune in 1846, there was considerable speculation

that another planet might exist beyond its orbit. The best-known of these theories
predicted the existence of a distant planet that was influencing the orbits
of Uranus and Neptune. After extensive calculations Percival Lowell predicted the
possible orbit and location of the hypothetical trans-Neptunian planet and began an
extensive search for it in 1906. He called the hypothetical object Planet X, a name
previously used by Gabriel Dallet (Morton, 1964;Tombaugh, 1946). Clyde
Tombaugh continued Lowell's search and in 1930 discovered Pluto, but it was soon
determined to be too small to qualify as Lowell's Planet X
(ken,1997). After Voyager 2's flyby of Neptune in 1989, the difference between
Uranus' predicted and observed orbit was determined to have been due to the use
of a previously inaccurate mass of Neptune (brown,1993).

Attempts to detect planets beyond Neptune by indirect means such as orbital

perturbation date back to before the discovery of Pluto. Among the first
was George Forbes who postulated the existence of two trans-Neptunian planets in
1880. One would have an average distance from the Sun, or semi-major axis, of
100 astronomical units (AU), 100 times that of the Earth. The second would have a
semi-major axis of 300 AU. His work is considered similar to more recent Planet
Nine theories in that the planets would be responsible for a clustering of the orbits
of several objects, in this case the aphelion distances of periodic comets similar to
that of the Jupiter-family comets (Millholland and Laughlin, 2o17).
 4

The discovery of Sedna's peculiar orbit in 2004 led to speculation that it had
encountered a massive body other than one of the known planets. Sedna's orbit
is detached, with a perihelion distance of 76 AU that is too large to be due to
gravitational interactions with Neptune. Several authors proposed that Sedna
entered this orbit after encountering an unknown planet on a distant orbit, a
member of the open cluster that formed with the Sun, or another star that later
passed near the Solar System (wall,2011;brown et al,2004). The announcement in
March 2014 of the discovery of a second sednoid with a perihelion distance of 80
AU, 2012 VP113, in a similar orbit led to renewed speculation that an unknown
super-Earth remained in the distant Solar System (sample,2014;mortillaro, 2016).

At a conference in 2012, Rodney Gomes proposed that an undetected planet was

responsible for the orbits of some eTNOs with detached orbits and the large semi-
major axis Centaurs, small Solar System bodies that cross the orbits of the giant
planets (Wolchover, 2012;Lovett, 2012). The proposed Neptune-massed planet
would be in a distant (1500 AU), eccentric (Eccentricity 0.4), and inclined
(Inclination 40°) orbit. Like Planet Nine it would cause the perihelia of objects
with semi-major axes greater than 300 AU to oscillate, delivering some into planet-
crossing orbits and others into detached orbits like that of Sedna. An article by
Gomes, Soares, and Brasser was published in 2015, detailing their arguments
(Gomes, 2015).

In 2014, astronomers Chad Trujillo and Scott S. Sheppard noted the similarities in

the orbits of Sedna and 2012 VP113 and several other eTNOs. They proposed that
an unknown planet in a circular orbit between 200 and 300 AU was perturbing
their orbits.Later that year, Raúl and Carlos de la Fuente Marcos argued that two
massive planets in orbital resonance were necessary to produce the similarities of
so many orbits, 13 known at the time (Carlos and raul.,2014). Using a larger
 5

sample of eTNOs, 39, assuming that some of them may have experienced close
encounters with unseen planets during the last few tens of thousands years, and
applying Monte Carlo random search techniques, results appear to be compatible
with more than one planet and the closest one may have an orbit with a semi-major
axis in the range 300-400 AU, relatively low eccentricity, and an inclination of
nearly 14 degrees (Carlos and raul,2014).

BATYGIN AND BROWN HYPOTHESIS

In early 2016, California Institute of Technology's Batygin and Brown described

how the similar orbits of six eTNOs could be explained by Planet Nine and
proposed a possible orbit for the planet. This hypothesis could also explain eTNOs
with orbits perpendicular to the inner planets and others with extreme inclinations
(Batygin et al., 2016), and had been offered as an explanation of the tilt of the
Sun's axis (Gomes et al., 2016)

Orbit

Planet Nine is hypothesized to follow an elliptical orbit around the Sun with an

eccentricity of 0.2 to 0.5. The planet's semi-major axis is estimated to
be 400 AU to 800 AU,[A] roughly 13 to 26 times the distance from Neptune to the
Sun. It would take the planet between 10,000 and 20,000 years to make one full
orbit around the Sun (NASA,2019).Its inclination to the ecliptic, the plane of the
Earth's orbit, is projected to be 15° to 25°.The aphelion, or farthest point from the
Sun, would be in the general direction of the constellation of Taurus (Michael,
2017), whereas the perihelion, the nearest point to the Sun, would be in the general
direction of the southerly areas of Serpens (Caput), Ophiuchus, and Libra (batygin
et al, 2016;lemonick, 2016). Brown thinks that if Planet Nine is confirmed to exist,
a probe could reach it in as little as 20 years by using a powered
slingshot trajectory around the Sun (Becker et al., 2016).
 6

Mass and Radius

The planet is estimated to have 5 to 10 times the mass of Earth and a radius of 2 to
4 times Earth's.[1] Brown thinks that if Planet Nine exists, its mass is sufficient
to clear its orbit of large bodies in 4.6 billion years, the age of the Solar System,
and that its gravity dominates the outer edge of the Solar System, which is
sufficient to make it a planet by current definitions(Achenbach and Feltman,
2016). Astronomer Jean-Luc Margot has also stated that Planet Nine satisfies his
criteria and would qualify as a planet if and when it is detected
(Margot,2016;Margot, 2015).

ORIGIN OF PLANET X

Several possible origins for Planet Nine have been examined including its ejection
from the neighborhood of the known giant planets, capture from another star,
and in situ formation. In their initial article, Batygin and Brown proposed that
Planet Nine formed closer to the Sun and was ejected into a distant eccentric orbit
following a close encounter with Jupiter or Saturn during the nebular epoch. The
gravity of a nearby star, or drag from the gaseous remnants of the Solar nebula
(Bromley and Kenyon, 2016), then reduced the eccentricity of its orbit. This raised
its perihelion, leaving it in a very wide but stable orbit beyond the influence of the
other planets (Chang,2016;totten,2016). The odds of this occurring has been
estimated at a few percent (bailey and Daniel, 2019). Had it not been flung into the
Solar System's farthest reaches, Planet Nine could have accreted more mass from
the proto-planetary disk and developed into the core of a gas giant (D’ngelo and
Lissauer., 2018). Instead, its growth was halted early, leaving it with a lower mass
than Uranus or Neptune (Izidoro et al., 2015).

Dynamical friction from a massive belt of planetesimals could also enable Planet

Nine's capture in a stable orbit. Recent models propose that a 60–130 Earth mass
 7

disk of planetesimals could have formed as the gas was cleared from the outer
parts of the proto-planetary disk (Carrera et al, 2017). As Planet Nine passed
through this disk its gravity would alter the paths of the individual objects in a way
that reduced Planet Nine's velocity relative to it. This would lower the eccentricity
of Planet Nine and stabilize its orbit. If this disk had a distant inner edge, 100–200
AU, a planet encountering Neptune would have a 20% chance of being captured in
an orbit similar to that proposed for Planet Nine, with the observed clustering more
likely if the inner edge is at 200 AU. Unlike the gas nebula, the planetesimal disk
is likely to have been long lived, potentially allowing a later capture (Eriksson et
al, 2017).

Planet Nine could have been captured from outside the Solar System during a close
encounter between the Sun and another star. If a planet was in a distant orbit
around this star, three-body interactions during the encounter could alter the
planet's path, leaving it in a stable orbit around the Sun. A planet originating in a
system without Jupiter-massed planets could remain in a distant eccentric orbit for
a longer time, increasing its chances of capture.The wider range of possible orbits
would reduce the odds of its capture in a relatively low inclination orbit to 1–2
percent (Gongiie, 2016). Amir Siraj and Avi Loeb found that the odds of the Sun
capturing Planet Nine increases by a factor of 20 if the Sun once had a distant,
equal-mass binary companion (Siraj and Loeb, 2020;rabie, 2020). This process
could also occur with rogue planets, but the likelihood of their capture is much
smaller, with only 0.05–0.10% being captured in orbits similar to that proposed for
Planet Nine (parker et al, 2017).An encounter with another star could also alter the
orbit of a distant planet, shifting it from a circular to an eccentric orbit. The in
situ formation of a planet at this distance would require a very massive and
extensive disk, or the outward drift of solids in a dissipating disk forming a narrow
 8

ring from which the planet accreted over a billion years (Kenyo and Bromley,
2016). If a planet formed at such a great distance while the Sun was in its original
cluster, the probability of it remaining bound to the Sun in a highly eccentric orbit
is roughly 10% (Gongiie, 2016) . A previous article reported that if the massive
disk extended beyond 80 AU some objects scattered outward by Jupiter and Saturn
would have been left in high inclination (inc> 50°), low eccentricity orbits which
have not been observed (kretek et al, 2012). An extended disk would also have
been subject to gravitational disruption by passing stars and by mass loss due to
photoevaporation while the Sun remained in the open cluster where it formed.

EVIDENCE OF PLANET NINE

The gravitational influence of Planet Nine would explain four peculiarities of the
Solar System (Brennan,2017):

 the clustering of the orbits of eTNOs;

 the high perihelia of objects like 90377 Sedna that are detached from
Neptune's influence;
 the high inclinations of eTNOs with orbits roughly perpendicular to the
orbits of the eight known planets;
 high-inclination trans-Neptunian objects (TNOs) with semi-major axis
less than 100 AU.

Planet Nine was initially proposed to explain the clustering of orbits, via a
mechanism that would also explain the high perihelia of objects like Sedna. The
evolution of some of these objects into perpendicular orbits was unexpected, but
found to match objects previously observed. The orbits of some objects with
perpendicular orbits were later found to evolve toward smaller semi-major axes
when the other planets were included in simulations. Although other mechanisms
 9

have been offered for many of these peculiarities, the gravitational influence of
Planet Nine is the only one that explains all four. The gravity of Planet Nine would
also increase the inclinations of other objects that cross its orbit, however, which
could leave the scattered disk objects (Kaib et al., 2019), bodies orbiting beyond
Neptune with semi-major axes greater than 50 AU, and short-period comets with a
broader inclination distribution than is observed (Nesyomy et al., 2017). Previously
Planet Nine was hypothesized to be responsible for the 6 degree tilt of the Sun's
axis relative to the orbits of the planets (Stirone., 2017), but recent updates to its
predicted orbit and mass limit this shift to ~1 degree (Batygin et al., 2019).

Observations: Orbital clustering of high perihelion objects

Diagram illustrating the true anomaly, argument of periapsis, longitude of

ascending node, and inclination of a celestial body.

The clustering of the orbits of TNOs with large semi-major axes was first
described by Trujillo and Sheppard, who noted similarities between the orbits of
Sedna and 2012 VP113. Without the presence of Planet Nine, these orbits should be
distributed randomly, without preference for any direction. Upon further analysis,
Trujillo and Sheppard observed that the arguments of perihelion of 12 TNOs with
perihelia greater than 30 AU and semi-major axes greater than 150 AU were
clustered near zero degrees, meaning that they rise through the ecliptic when they
 10

are closest to the Sun. Trujillo and Sheppard proposed that this alignment was
caused by a massive unknown planet beyond Neptune via the Kozai mechanism
(Trujillo and sheppard, 2014). For objects with similar semi-major axes the Kozai
mechanism would confine their arguments of perihelion to near 0 or 180 degrees.
This confinement allows objects with eccentric and inclined orbits to avoid close
approaches to the planet because they would cross the plane of the planet's orbit at
their closest and farthest points from the Sun, and cross the planet's orbit when they
are well above or below its orbit (Barbara, 2010). Trujillo and Sheppard's
hypothesis about how the objects would be aligned by the Kozai mechanism has
been supplanted by further analysis and evidence (Batygin et al., 2016).

Batygin and Brown, looking to refute the mechanism proposed by Trujillo and
Sheppard, also examined the orbits of the TNOs with large semi-major axes
(Batygin et al., 2016).After eliminating the objects in Trujillo and Sheppard's
original analysis that were unstable due to close approaches to Neptune or were
affected by Neptune's mean-motion resonances, Batygin and Brown determined
that the arguments of perihelion for the remaining six objects (Sedna, 2012
VP113, 2004 VN112, 2010 GB174, 2000 CR105, and 2010 VZ98) were clustered
around 318°±8°. This finding did not agree with how the Kozai mechanism would
tend to align orbits with arguments of perihelion at 0° or 180°.
 11

Orbital correlations among six distant trans-Neptunian objects led to the

hypothesis.

Batygin and Brown also found that the orbits of the six eTNOs with semi-major
axis greater than 250 AU and perihelia beyond 30 AU (Sedna, 2012 VP113, 2004
VN112, 2010 GB174, 2007 TG422, and 2013 RF98) were aligned in space with their
perihelia in roughly the same direction, resulting in a clustering of their longitudes
of perihelion, the location where they make their closest approaches to the Sun.
The orbits of the six objects were also tilted with respect to that of the ecliptic and
approximately coplanar, producing a clustering of their longitudes of ascending
nodes, the directions where they each rise through the ecliptic. They determined
that there was only a 0.007% likelihood that this combination of alignments was
due to chance (Mcdonald, 2016;Lakdawalla, 2016). These six objects had been
discovered by six different surveys on six different telescopes. That made it less
likely that the clumping might be due to an observation bias such as pointing a
telescope at a particular part of the sky. The observed clustering should be smeared
out in a few hundred million years due to the locations of the perihelia and the
ascending nodes changing, or precessing, at differing rates due to their varied
semi-major axes and eccentricities. This indicates that the clustering could not be
due to an event in the distant past (Batygin et al, 2016), for example a passing star
(hands et al., 2019), and is most likely maintained by the gravitational field of an
object orbiting the Sun.

Two of the six objects (2013 RF98 and 2004 VN112) also have very similar orbits
and spectra (Deleon et al., 2017); This has led to the suggestion that they were
a binary object disrupted near aphelion during an encounter with a distant object.
The disruption of a binary would require a relatively close encounter, which
becomes less likely at large distances from the Sun (Dela Fuente et al., 2017).
 12

In a later article Trujillo and Sheppard noted a correlation between the longitude of
perihelion and the argument of perihelion of the TNOs with semi-major axes
greater than 150 AU. Those with a longitude of perihelion of 0–120° have
arguments of perihelion between 280 and 360°, and those with longitude of
perihelion between 180° and 340° have arguments of perihelion between 0° and
40°. The statistical significance of this correlation was 99.99%. They suggested
that the correlation is due to the orbits of these objects avoiding close approaches
to a massive planet by passing above or below its orbit (Sheppard and Scott, 2016).

A 2017 article by Carlos and Raul de la Fuente Marcos noted that distribution of
the distances to the ascending nodes of the eTNOs, and those of centaurs and
comets with large semi-major axes, may be bimodal. They suggest it is due to the
eTNOs avoiding close approaches to a planet with a semi-major axis of 300–
400 AU (de la Fuente et al, 2017;phys.org,2017).

The extreme trans-Neptunian object orbits

Six original and eight additional eTNO objects orbits with current positions near
their perihelion in purple, with hypothetical Planet Nine orbit in green
 13

Close up view of 13 eTNO current positions

Simulations: Observed clustering reproduced

The clustering of the orbits of eTNOs and raising of their perihelia is reproduced in
simulations that include Planet Nine. In simulations conducted by Batygin and
Brown, swarms of scattered disk objects with semi-major axes up to 550 AU that
began with random orientations were sculpted into roughly collinear and coplanar
groups of spatially confined orbits by a massive distant planet in a highly eccentric
orbit. This left most of the objects' perihelia pointed in similar directions and the
objects' orbits with similar tilts. Many of these objects entered high-perihelion
orbits like Sedna and, unexpectedly, some entered perpendicular orbits that
Batygin and Brown later noticed had been previously observed (batygin et al.,
2016).

In their original analysis Batygin and Brown found that the distribution of the
orbits of the first six eTNOs was best reproduced in simulations using a 10 Earth
mass planet in the following orbit:
 14

 semi-major axis a ≈ 700 AU (orbital period 7001.5=18,520 years)

 eccentricity e ≈ 0.6, (perihelion ≈ 280 AU, aphelion ≈ 1,120 AU)
 inclination i ≈ 30° to the ecliptic
 longitude of the ascending node Ω ≈ 100°.[G]
 argument of perihelion ω ≈ 140° and longitude of perihelion ϖ = 240°[69]

These parameters for Planet Nine produce different simulated effects on TNOs.
Objects with semi-major axis greater than 250 AU are strongly anti-aligned with
Planet Nine, with perihelia opposite Planet Nine's perihelion. Objects with semi-
major axes between 150 AU and 250 AU are weakly aligned with Planet Nine,
with perihelia in the same direction as Planet Nine's perihelion. Little effect is
found on objects with semi-major axes less than 150 AU. The simulations also
revealed that objects with semi-major axis greater than 250 AU could have stable,
aligned orbits if they had lower eccentricities. These objects have yet to be
observed (Batygin et,2016).

Other possible orbits for Planet Nine were also examined, with semi-major axes
between 400 AU and 1500 AU, Eccentricites up to 0.8, and a wide range of
inclinations. These orbits yield varied results. Batygin and Brown found that orbits
of the eTNOs were more likely to have similar tilts if Planet Nine had a higher
inclination, but anti-alignment also decreased. Simulations by Becker et al. showed
that their orbits were more stable if Planet Nine had a smaller eccentricity, but that
anti-alignment was more likely at higher eccentricities (Becker et al, 2017). Lawler
et al. found that the population captured in orbital resonances with Planet Nine was
smaller if it had a circular orbit, and that fewer objects reached high inclination
orbits (lawler et al, 2016). Investigations by Cáceres et al. showed that the orbits of
the eTNOs were better aligned if Planet Nine had a lower perihelion orbit, but its
perihelion would need to be higher than 90 AU (caceres and gomes, 2018). Later
 15

investigations by Batygin et al. found that higher eccentricity orbits reduced the
average tilts of the eTNOs orbits.While there are many possible combinations of
orbital parameters and masses for Planet Nine, none of the alternative simulations
have been better at predicting the observed alignment of objects in the Solar
System. The discovery of additional distant Solar System objects would allow
astronomers to make more accurate predictions about the orbit of the hypothesized
planet. These may also provide further support for, or refutation of, the Planet Nine
hypothesis (Scharping, 2016;allen,2016).

Simulations that included the migration of giant planets resulted in a weaker

alignment of the eTNOs orbits. The direction of alignment also switched, from
more aligned to anti-aligned with increasing semi-major axis, and from anti-
aligned to aligned with increasing perihelion distance. The latter would result in
the Sednoids' orbits being oriented opposite most of the other eTNOs.

Dynamics: How Planet Nine modifies the orbits of eTNOs[edit]

Long term evolution of eTNOs induced by Planet Nine for objects with semi-major
axis of 250 AU.[75][76] Blue (Beust, 2016; Batygin et al., 2017): anti-aligned, Red:
aligned, Green: Metastable, Orange: circulating. Crossing orbits above black line.
 16

Planet Nine modifies the orbits of eTNOs via a combination of effects. On very
long timescales Planet Nine exerts a torque on the orbits of the eTNOs that varies
with the alignment of their orbits with Planet Nine's. The resulting exchanges
of angular momentum cause the perihelia to rise, placing them in Sedna-like orbits,
and later fall, returning them to their original orbits after several hundred million
years. The motion of their directions of perihelion also reverses when their
eccentricities are small, keeping the objects anti-aligned, see blue curves on
diagram, or aligned, red curves. On shorter timescales mean-motion resonances
with Planet Nine provides phase protection, which stabilizes their orbits by slightly
altering the objects' semi-major axes, keeping their orbits synchronized with Planet
Nine's and preventing close approaches. The gravity of Neptune and the other giant
planets, and the inclination of Planet Nine's orbit, weaken this protection. This
results in a chaotic variation of semi-major axes as objects hop between
resonances, including high-order resonances such as 27:17, on million-year
timescales (Batygin et al, 2017). The mean-motion resonances may not be
necessary for the survival of eTNOs if they and Planet Nine are both on inclined
orbits (li et al, 2018).The orbital poles of the objects precess around, or circle, the
pole of the Solar System's Laplace plane. At large semi-major axes the Laplace
plane is warped toward the plane of Planet Nine's orbit. This causes orbital poles of
the eTNOs on average to be tilted toward one side and their longitudes of
ascending nodes to be clustered ( Batygin et al., 2017).
 17

Objects in perpendicular orbits with large semi-major axis

The orbits of the five objects with high-inclination orbits (nearly perpendicular to
the ecliptic) are shown here as cyan ellipses with the hypothetical Planet Nine in
orange.

Planet Nine can deliver eTNOs into orbits roughly perpendicular to the ecliptic
(Hruska,2016;siegel, 2016). Several objects with high inclinations, greater than
50°, and large semi-major axes, above 250 AU, have been observed ( Minor planet
center, 2016). These orbits are produced when some low inclination eTNOs enter
a secular resonance with Planet Nine upon reaching low eccentricity orbits. The
resonance causes their eccentricities and inclinations to increase, delivering the
eTNOs into perpendicular orbits with low perihelia where they are more readily
observed. The eTNOs then evolve into retrograde orbits with lower eccentricities,
after which they pass through a second phase of high eccentricity perpendicular
orbits, before returning to low eccentricity and inclination orbits. The secular
resonance with Planet Nine involves a linear combination of the orbit's arguments
and longitudes of perihelion: Δϖ – 2ω. Unlike the Kozai mechanism this resonance
causes objects to reach their maximum eccentricities when in nearly perpendicular
orbits. In simulations conducted by Batygin and Morbidelli this evolution was
relatively common, with 38% of stable objects undergoing it at least once (Batygin
 18

et al, 2017). The arguments of perihelion of these objects are clustered near or

opposite Planet Nine's and their longitudes of ascending node are clustered around
90° in either direction from Planet Nine's when they reach low perihelia. This is in
rough agreement with observations with the differences attributed to distant
encounters with the known giant planets ( Batygin et al., 2016).

ORBITS OF HIGH-INCLINATION OBJECT

A population of high-inclination TNOs with semi-major axes less than 100 AU

may be generated by the combined effects of Planet Nine and the other giant
planets. The eTNOs that enter perpendicular orbits have perihelia low enough for
their orbits to intersect those of Neptune or the other giant planets. An encounter
with one of these planets can lower an eTNO's semi-major axis to below 100 AU,
where the object's orbits is no longer controlled by Planet Nine, leaving it in an
orbit like 2008 KV42. The predicted orbital distribution of the longest lived of
these objects is nonuniform. Most would have orbits with perihelia ranging from 5
AU to 35 AU and inclinations below 110°; beyond a gap with few objects are
would be others with inclinations near 150° and perihelia near 10 AU.Previously it
was proposed that these objects originated in the Oort Cloud (Brasser et al,
2012), a theoretical cloud of icy planetesimals surrounding the Sun at distances of
2,000 to 200,000 AU (Williams, 2015). In simulations without Planet Nine an
insufficient number are produced from the Oort cloud relative to observations,
however. A few of the high-inclination TNOs may become retrograde Jupiter
Trojans (Kohne and Batygin, 2020).

OORT CLOUD AND COMETS

Planet Nine would alter the source regions and the inclination distribution of
comets. In simulations of the migration of the giant planets described by the Nice
model fewer objects are captured in the Oort cloud when Planet Nine is included.
 19

Other objects would be captured in a cloud of objects dynamically controlled by

Planet Nine. This Planet Nine cloud, made up of the eTNOs and the perpendicular
objects, would extend from semi-major axes of 200 AU to 3000 AU and contain
roughly 0.3–0.4 Earth masses.When the perihelia of objects in the Planet Nine
cloud drop low enough for them to encounter the other planets some would be
scattered into orbits that enter the inner Solar System where they could be observed
as comets. If Planet Nine exists these would make up roughly one third of
the Halley-type comets. Interactions with Planet Nine would also increase the
inclinations of the scattered disk objects that cross its orbit. This could result in
more with moderate inclinations of 15–30 degrees than are observed. The
inclinations of the Jupiter-family comets derived from that population would also
have a broader inclination distribution than is observed (Gibbs, 2017). Recent
estimates of a smaller mass and eccentricity for Planet Nine would reduce its effect
on these inclinations (NASA).

UPDATED MODEL

In February 2019, the total of eTNOs that fit the original hypothesis of having
semi-major axis of over 250 AU had increased to 14 objects. Based on the new
objects, the updated orbital parameters of hypothesized Planet Nine were
(findplanetnine.com):

 semi-major axis of 400–500 AU;

 orbital eccentricity of 0.15–0.3;
 orbital inclination around 20°;
 mass of about 5 Earth masses.
Reception
 20

Batygin was cautious in interpreting the results of the simulation developed for his
and Brown's research article, saying, "Until Planet Nine is caught on camera it
does not count as being real. All we have now is an echo (Levenson, 2026). Brown
put the odds for the existence of Planet Nine at about 90%. Greg Laughlin, one of
the few researchers who knew in advance about this article, gives an estimate of
68.3%. Other skeptical scientists demand more data in terms of additional KBOs to
be analyzed or final evidence through photographic confirmation (Grush, 2016;
Crocket, 2016). Brown, though conceding the skeptics' point, still thinks that there
is enough data to mount a search for a new planet (crocket, 2016).

The Planet Nine hypothesis is supported by several astronomers and

academics. Jim Green, director of NASA's Science Mission Directorate, said, "the
evidence is stronger now than it's been before" (fecht,2016). But Green also
cautioned about the possibility of other explanations for the observed motion of
distant eTNOs and, quoting Carl Sagan, he said, "extraordinary claims require
extraordinary evidence.Massachusetts Institute of Technology Professor Tom
Levenson concluded that, for now, Planet Nine seems the only satisfactory
explanation for everything now known about the outer regions of the Solar System
(Levenson, 2016). Astronomer Alessandro Morbidelli, who reviewed the research
article for The Astronomical Journal, concurred, saying, "I don't see any alternative
explanation to that offered by Batygin and Brown.

Astronomer Renu Malhotra remains agnostic about Planet Nine, but noted that she
and her colleagues have found that the orbits of eTNOs seem tilted in a way that is
difficult to otherwise explain. "The amount of warp we see is just crazy," she said.
"To me, it's the most intriguing evidence for Planet Nine I've run across so far
(Choi, 2016).
 21

Other authorities have varying degrees of skepticism. American

astrophysicist Ethan Siegel, who previously speculated that planets may have been
ejected from the Solar System during an early dynamical instability, is skeptical of
the existence of an undiscovered planet in the Solar System (Siegel, 2015). In a
2018 article discussing a survey that did not find evidence of clustering of the
eTNOs' orbits he suggests the previously observed clustering could have been the
result of observing bias and claims most scientists think Planet Nine does not exist
( Siegel, 2018). Planetary scientist Hal Levison thinks that the chance of an ejected
object ending up in the inner Oort cloud is only about 2%, and speculates that
many objects must have been thrown past the Oort cloud if one has entered a stable
orbit (Beatty, 2014).

Some skepticism for Planet Nine in 2020 is based on results from the Outer Solar
System Origins Survey and the Dark Energy Survey. With the OSSOS
documenting over 800 trans-Neptunian objects and the DES discovering 316 new
ones (Bamardinelli et al, 2020). Both surveys adjusted for observational bias and
concluded that of the objects observed there was no evidence for clustering
(www.sciencealert.com). The authors go further to explain that practically all
objects orbits can be explained by physical phenomena rather than a ninth planet as
purposed by Brown & Batygin. An author of one of the studies Samantha Lawler
said the hypothesis of planet nine proposed by Brown & Batygin "does not hold up
to detailed observations" pointing out the much larger sample size of 800 objects
compared to the much smaller 14 and that conclusive studies based on said objects
were "premature". She went further to explain the phenomenon of these extreme
orbits could be due to gravitational occultation from Neptune when it migrated
outwards earlier in the Solar System's history (universetoday.com).

ALTERNATIVE HYPOTHESES
 22

Temporary or Coincidental Clustering

The results of the Outer Solar System Survey (OSSOS) suggest that the observed
clustering is the result of a combination of observing bias and small number
statistics. OSSOS, a well-characterized survey of the outer Solar System with
known biases, observed eight objects with semi-major axis > 150 AU with orbits
oriented in a wide range of directions. After accounting for the observational biases
of the survey, no evidence for the arguments of perihelion (ω) clustering identified
by Trujillo and Sheppard was seen, [I] and the orientation of the orbits of the objects
with the largest semi-major axis was statistically consistent with being random
(Shankman et al., 2017).Pedro Bernardinelli and his colleagues also found that the
orbital elements of the eTNOs found by the Dark Energy Survey showed no
evidence of clustering. However, they also noted that the sky coverage and number
of objects found were insufficient to show that there was no Planet Nine (Ratner,
2020; Bemandelli et al., 2020). These result differed from an analysis of discovery
biases in the previously observed eTNOs by Mike Brown. He found that after
observation biases were accounted for, the clustering of longitudes of perihelion of
10 known eTNOs would be observed only 1.2% of the time if their actual
distribution was uniform. When combined with the odds of the observed clustering
of the arguments of perihelion, the probability was 0.025% brown, 2017). A later
analysis of the discovery biases of 14 eTNOs by Brown and Batygin determined
the probability of the observed clustering of the longitudes of perihelion and the
orbital pole locations to be 0.2% (Brown and Batygin, 2019).

Simulations of 15 known objects evolving under the influence of Planet Nine also
revealed differences from observations. Cory Shankman and his colleagues
included Planet Nine in a simulation of many clones (objects with similar orbits) of
15 objects with semi-major axis > 150 AU and perihelion > 30 AU.While they
 23

observed alignment of the orbits opposite that of Planet Nine's for the objects with
semi-major axis greater than 250 AU, clustering of the arguments of perihelion
was not seen. Their simulations also showed that the perihelia of the eTNOs rose
and fell smoothly, leaving many with perihelion distances between 50 AU and 70
AU where none had been observed, and predicted that there would be many other
unobserved objects (Shankman et al., 2017). These included a large reservoir of
high-inclination objects that would have been missed due to most observations
being at small inclinations, and a large population of objects with perihelia so
distant that they would be too faint to observe. Many of the objects were also
ejected from the Solar System after encountering the other giant planets. The large
unobserved populations and the loss of many objects led Shankman et al. to
estimate that the mass of the original population was tens of Earth masses,
requiring that a much larger mass had been ejected during the early Solar System.
[K]
 Shankman et al. concluded that the existence of Planet Nine is unlikely and that
the currently observed alignment of the existing eTNOs is a temporary
phenomenon that will disappear as more objects are detected (Shankman et al.,
2017).

Inclination Instability in A Massive Disk

Ann-Marie Madigan and Michael McCourt postulate that an inclination

instability in a distant massive belt is responsible for the alignment of the
arguments of perihelion of the eTNOs (Madigan and McCourt, 2016). An
inclination instability could occur in a disk of particles with high eccentricity orbits
(e > 0.6) around a central body, such as the Sun. The self-gravity of this disk would
cause its spontaneous organization, increasing the inclinations of the objects and
 24

aligning the arguments of perihelion, forming it into a cone above or below the
original plane (Madigan et al,2018). This process would require an extended time
and significant mass of the disk, on the order of a billion years for a 1–10 Earth-
mass disk. While an inclination instability could align the arguments of perihelion
and raise perihelia, producing detached objects, it would not align the longitudes of
perihelion. Mike Brown considers Planet Nine a more probable explanation, noting
that current surveys have not revealed a large enough scattered-disk to produce an
"inclination instability" (wall, 2016; Snell, 2016). In Nice model simulations of the
Solar System that included the self-gravity of the planetesimal disk an inclination
instability did not occur. Instead, the simulation produced a rapid precession of the
objects' orbits and most of the objects were ejected on too short of a timescale for
an inclination instability to occur (Fan and Batygin, 2017). In 2020 Madigan and
colleagues showed that the inclination instability would require 20 Earth masses in
a disk of objects with semi-major axes of a few hundred AU. An inclination
instability in this disk could reproduce the observed gap in the perihelion distances
of the extreme TNOs (Zderic et al,2020). The observed apsidal alignment could
also occur following the inclination instability given sufficient time (zderic et al,
2020).

Shepherding by A Massive Disk

AntranikSefilian and Jihad Touma propose that a massive disk of moderately

eccentric TNOs is responsible for the clustering of the longitudes of perihelion of
the eTNOs. This disk would contain 10 Earth-mass of TNOs with aligned orbits
and eccentricities that increased with their semi-major axes ranging from zero to
0.165. The gravitational effects of the disk would offset the forward precession
driven by the giant planets so that the orbital orientations of its individual objects
 25

are maintained. The orbits of objects with high eccentricities, such as the observed
eTNOs, would be stable and have roughly fixed orientations, or longitudes of
perihelion, if their orbits were anti-aligned with this disk (Sefilian and Touma,
2019). Although Brown thinks the proposed disk could explain the observed
clustering of the eTNOs, he finds it implausible that the disk could survive over the
age of the Solar System (Patel, 20190. Batygin thinks that there is insufficient mass
in the Kuiper belt to explain the formation of the disk and asks "why would the
protoplanetary disk end near 30 AU and restart beyond 100 AU (dvorsky,2019)?"

Planet in Lower Eccentricity Orbit

Proposed resonant objects for

a > 150 AU, q > 40 AU

Barycentric
Body period Ratio
(years)

2013 GP136 1,830 9:1

2000 CR105 3,304 5:1

2012 VP113 4,300 4:1

2004 VN112 5,900 3:1

 26

Proposed resonant objects for

a > 150 AU, q > 40 AU

Barycentric
Body period Ratio
(years)

2010 GB174 6,600 5:2

90377 Sedna ≈ 11,400 3:2

Hypothetical planet ≈ 17,000 1:1

The Planet Nine hypothesis includes a set of predictions about the mass and orbit
of the planet. An alternative theory predicts a planet with different orbital
parameters. Renu Malhotra, Kathryn Volk, and Xianyu Wang have proposed that
the four detached objects with the longest orbital periods, those with perihelia
beyond 40 AU and semi-major axes greater than 250 AU, are in n:1 or n:2 mean-
motion resonances with a hypothetical planet. Two other objects with semi-major
axes greater than 150 AU are also potentially in resonance with this planet. Their
proposed planet could be on a lower eccentricity, low inclination orbit,
with eccentricity e < 0.18 and inclination i ≈ 11°. The eccentricity is limited in this
case by the requirement that close approaches of 2010 GB174 to the planet be
avoided. If the eTNOs are in periodic orbits of the third kind, [L] with their stability
enhanced by the libration of their arguments of perihelion, the planet could be in a
 27

higher inclination orbit, with i ≈ 48°. Unlike Batygin and Brown, Malhotra, Volk
and Wang do not specify that most of the distant detached objects would have
orbits anti-aligned with the massive planet (Malhotra et al., 2016; Malhotra.,
2017).

ALIGNMENT DUE TO THE KOZAI MECHANISM

Trujillo and Sheppard argued in 2014 that a massive planet in a circular orbit with
an average distance between 200 AU and 300 AU was responsible for the
clustering of the arguments of perihelion of twelve TNOs with large semi-major
axes. Trujillo and Sheppard identified a clustering near zero degrees of the
arguments of perihelion of the orbits of twelve TNOs with perihelia greater
than 30 AU and semi-major axes greater than 150 AU. After numerical simulations
showed that the arguments of perihelion should circulate at varying rates, leaving
them randomized after billions of years, they suggested that a massive planet in a
circular orbit at a few hundred astronomical units was responsible for this
clustering. This massive planet would cause the arguments of perihelion of the
TNOs to librate about 0° or 180° via the Kozai mechanism so that their orbits
crossed the plane of the planet's orbit near perihelion and aphelion, the closest and
farthest points from the planet. In numerical simulations including a 2–15 Earth
mass body in a circular low-inclination orbit between 200 AU and 300 AU the
arguments of perihelia of Sedna and 2012 VP113 librated around 0° for billions of
years (although the lower perihelion objects did not) and underwent periods of
libration with a Neptune mass object in a high inclination orbit at 1,500
AU. Another process such as a passing star would be required to account for the
absence of objects with arguments of perihelion near 180°.

These simulations showed the basic idea of how a single large planet can shepherd
the smaller TNOs into similar types of orbits. They were basic proof of concept
 28

simulations that did not obtain a unique orbit for the planet as they state there are
many possible orbital configurations the planet could have (crocket, 2014). Thus
they did not fully formulate a model that successfully incorporated all the
clustering of the eTNOs with an orbit for the planet. But they were the first to
notice there was a clustering in the orbits of TNOs and that the most likely reason
was from an unknown massive distant planet. Their work is very similar to
how Alexis Bouvard noticed Uranus' motion was peculiar and suggested that it was
likely gravitational forces from an unknown 8th planet, which led to the discovery
of Neptune (O’connor and Robertson, 2017).

Raúl and Carlos de la Fuente Marcos proposed a similar model but with two
distant planets in resonance. An analysis by Carlos and Raúl de la Fuente Marcos
with Sverre J. Aarseth confirmed that the observed alignment of the arguments of
perihelion could not be due to observational bias. They speculated that instead it
was caused by an object with a mass between that of Mars and Saturn that orbited
at some 200 AU from the Sun. Like Trujillo and Sheppard they theorized that the
TNOs are kept bunched together by a Kozai mechanism and compared their
behavior to that of Comet 96P/Machholz under the influence of Jupiter (de la
Fuente et al, 2015). They also struggled to explain the orbital alignment using a
model with only one unknown planet, and therefore suggested that this planet is
itself in resonance with a more-massive world about 250 AU from the Sun
(Atkinson, 2015). In their article, Brown and Batygin noted that alignment of
arguments of perihelion near 0° or 180° via the Kozai mechanism requires a ratio
of the semi-major axes nearly equal to one, indicating that multiple planets with
orbits tuned to the data set would be required, making this explanation too
unwieldy.

Primordial Black Hole

 29

In 2019, Jakub Scholtz and James Unwin proposed that a primordial black
hole was responsible for the clustering of the orbits of the eTNOs. Their analysis
of OGLE gravitational lensing data revealed a population of planetary mass objects
in the direction of the galactic bulge more numerous than the local population of
stars. They propose that instead of being free floating planets, these objects are
primordial black holes. Since their estimate of the size of this population is greater
than the estimated population of free floating planets from planetary formation
models they argue that the capture of a hypothetical primordial black hole would
be more probable as the capture of a free floating planet. This could also explain
why an object responsible for perturbing the orbits of the eTNOs, if it exists, has
yet to be seen (Scholtz and Unwin, 2020; Overbye, 2020). A detection method was
proposed in the paper, stating that the black hole is too cold to be detected over
the CMB, but interaction with surrounding dark matter would produce gamma
rays detectable by the FERMILAT. Konstantin Batygin commented on this, saying
while it is possible for Planet Nine to be a primordial black hole, there is currently
not enough evidence to make this idea more plausible than any other alternative
(Parks,2019). Edward Witten proposed a fleet of probes accelerated by radiation
pressure that could discover a Planet Nine primordial black hole's location,
however Thiem Hoang and Avi Loeb showed that any signal would be dominated
by noise from the interstellar medium (rafi,2020;hoang and loeb, 2020). Amir Siraj
and Avi Loeb proposed a method for the Vera C. Rubin Observatory to detect
flares from any low-mass black hole in the outer solar system, including a possible
Planet Nine primordial black hole (Overbye, 2020; Siraj and Loeb, 2020).
 30

CHAPTER THREE

DETECTION ATTEMPTS
Visibility and Location

Due to its extreme distance from the Sun, Planet Nine would reflect little sunlight,
potentially evading telescope sightings. It is expected to have an apparent
 31

magnitude fainter than 22, making it at least 600 times fainter than Pluto. If Planet

Nine exists and is close to perihelion, astronomers could identify it based on
existing images. At aphelion, the largest telescopes would be required, but if the
planet is currently located in between, many observatories could spot Planet Nine
(Fesenmaier, 2016).Statistically, the planet is more likely to be close to its aphelion
at a distance greater than 600 AU (Drake, 2016). This is because objects move
more slowly when near their aphelion, in accordance with Kepler's second law. A
2019 study estimated that Planet Nine, if it exists, may be smaller and closer than
originally thought. This would make the hypothetical planet brighter and easier to
spot, with an apparent magnitude of 21–22 (Phys.org,2019). According
to University of Michigan professor Fred Adams, within the next 10 to 15 years,
Planet Nine will either be observable or enough data will have been gathered to
rule out its existence (Carter,2019).

Searches of Existing Data

The search of databases of stellar objects by Batygin and Brown has already
excluded much of the sky along Planet Nine's predicted orbit. The remaining
regions include the direction of its aphelion, where it would be too faint to be
spotted by these surveys, and near the plane of the Milky Way, where it would be
difficult to distinguish from the numerous stars. This search included the archival
data from the Catalina Sky Survey to magnitude c. 19, Pan-STARRS to magnitude
21.5, and infrared data from the Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer (WISE)
satellite. They have more recently also searched the first-year data release from
the Zwicky Transient Facility without identifying Planet Nine (Brown,2019).

Other researchers have been conducting searches of existing data. David Gerdes,
who helped develop the camera used in the Dark Energy Survey, claims that
software designed to identify distant Solar System objects such as 2014
 32

UZ224 could find Planet Nine if it was imaged as part of that survey, which
covered a quarter of the southern sky (Palka, 2018;hall,2016). Michael Medford
and Danny Goldstein, graduate students at the University of California, Berkeley,
are also examining archived data using a technique that combines images taken at
different times. Using a supercomputer they will offset the images to account for
the calculated motion of Planet Nine, allowing many faint images of a faint
moving object to be combined to produce a brighter image. [84] A search combining
multiple images collected by WISE and NEOWISE data has also been conducted
without detecting Planet Nine. This search covered regions of the sky away from
the galactic plane at the "W1" wavelength (the 3.4 μm wavelength used by WISE)
and is estimated to be able to detect a 10-Earth mass object out to 800–900 AU
(Meisner et al., 2016).

ONGOING SEARCHES

Because the planet is predicted to be visible in the Northern Hemisphere, the

primary search is expected to be carried out using the Subaru Telescope, which has
both an aperture large enough to see faint objects and a wide field of view to
shorten the search two teams of astronomers—Batygin and Brown, as well as
Trujillo and Sheppard—are undertaking this search together, and both teams
expect the search to take up to five years (wall, 2016). Brown and Batygin initially
narrowed the search for Planet Nine down to roughly 2,000 square degrees of sky
near Orion, a swath of space that Batygin thinks could be covered in about 20
nights by the Subaru Telescope (Crockett, 2016). Subsequent refinements by
Batygin and Brown have reduced the search space to 600–800 square degrees of
sky (choi, 2016). In December 2018, they spent 4 half–nights and 3 full nights
observing with the Subaru Telescope (Stirone, 2019). Due to the elusiveness of the
hypothetical planet, it has been proposed that different detection methods be used
 33

when looking for a super-Earth mass planet ranging from using differing

telescopes to using multiple spacecraft. In late April and early May 2020, Scott
Lawrence and ZeeveRogoszinski proposed the latter method for finding it as
multiple spacecraft would have advantages that land-based telescopes do not have
(Lawrence, 2020).

Radiation

Although a distant planet such as Planet Nine would reflect little light, due to its
large mass it would still be radiating the heat from its formation as it cools. At its
estimated temperature of 47 K (−226.2 °C) the peak of its emissions would be
at infrared wavelengths (Linder et al., 2016). This radiation signature could be
detected by Earth-based submillimeter telescopes, such as ALMA,
(Powel,2016) and a search could be conducted by cosmic microwave
background experiments operating at mm wavelengths (Cowen et al., 2016; Aron,
2016; Wood, 2018). Jim Green of NASA's Science Mission Directorate is
optimistic that it could be observed by the James Webb Space Telescope, the
successor to the Hubble Space Telescope, that is expected to be launched in 2021.

Citizen Science

The Zooniverse Backyard Worlds project, originally started in February 2017,

which was using archival data from the WISE spacecraft to search for Planet Nine.
The project will also search for substellar objects like brown dwarfs in the
neighborhood of the Solar System (Byrd and Mister, 2017; Hinckley,
2017). 32,000 animations of four images each, which constitute 3 percent of the
WISE spacecraft's data, have been uploaded to the Backyard Worlds website. By
looking for moving objects in animations, citizen scientists might be able to find
Planet Nine (Strom,2017).
 34

In April 2017, (Byrd,2017) using data from the SkyMapper telescope at Siding

Spring Observatory, citizen scientists on the Zooniverse platform reported four
candidates for Planet Nine. These candidates will be followed up on by
astronomers to determine their viability (Wall, 2017). The project, which started on
28 March 2017, completed their goals in less than three days with around five
million classifications by more than 60,000 individuals.

The Zooniverse Catalina Outer Solar System Survey project, started in August

2020, is using archived data from the Catalina Sky Survey to search for TNOs.
Depending on the size, and the distance and magnitude, citizen scientists might be
able to find Planet Nine (Catalina outer solar system survey, 2017; NASA,2020).

Attempts to predict location

Cassini Measurements of Saturn's Orbit

Precise observations of Saturn's orbit using data from Cassini suggest that Planet

Nine could not be in certain sections of its proposed orbit because its gravity would
cause a noticeable effect on Saturn's position. This data neither proves nor
disproves that Planet Nine exists (Fienga et al, 2016).

An initial analysis by Fienga, Laskar, Manche, and Gastineau using Cassini data to
search for Saturn's orbital residuals, small differences with its predicted orbit due
to the Sun and the known planets, was inconsistent with Planet Nine being located
with a true anomaly, the location along its orbit relative to perihelion, of −130° to
−110° or −65° to 85°. The analysis, using Batygin and Brown's orbital parameters
for Planet Nine, suggests that the lack of perturbations to Saturn's orbit is best
explained if Planet Nine is located at a true anomaly of 117.8°+11°
−10°. At this location, Planet Nine would be approximately 630 AU from the
Sun, with right ascension close to 2h and declination close to −20°, in Cetus.[165] In
 35

contrast, if the putative planet is near aphelion it would be located near right
ascension 3.0h to 5.5h and declination −1° to 6° (de la Fuente, 2916).

A later analysis of Cassini data by astrophysicists Matthew Holman and Matthew

Payne tightened the constraints on possible locations of Planet Nine. Holman and
Payne developed a more efficient model that allowed them to explore a broader
range of parameters than the previous analysis. The parameters identified using
this technique to analyze the Cassini data was then intersected with Batygin and
Brown's dynamical constraints on Planet Nine's orbit. Holman and Payne
concluded that Planet Nine is most likely to be located within 20° of RA = 40°,
Dec = −15°, in an area of the sky near the constellation Cetus (Holman and Payne,
2016).

William Folkner, a planetary scientist at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL), has

stated that the Cassini spacecraft was not experiencing unexplained deviations in
its orbit around Saturn. An undiscovered planet would affect the orbit of Saturn,
not Cassini. This could produce a signature in the measurements of Cassini, but
JPL has seen no unexplained signatures in Cassini data (carlos and raul, 2016;
Holman and Payne, 2016).

ANALYSIS OF PLUTO'S ORBIT

An analysis in 2016 of Pluto's orbit by Holman and Payne found perturbations

much larger than predicted by Batygin and Brown's proposed orbit for Planet Nine.
Holman and Payne suggested three possible explanations: systematic errors in the
measurements of Pluto's orbit; an unmodeled mass in the Solar System, such as a
small planet in the range of 60–100 AU (potentially explaining the Kuiper cliff); or
a planet more massive or closer to the Sun instead of the planet predicted by
Batygin and Brown (Holman and Payne, 2016).
 36

Orbits of Nearly Parabolic Comets

An analysis of the orbits of comets with nearly parabolic orbits identifies five new

comets with hyperbolic orbits that approach the nominal orbit of Planet Nine
described in Batygin and Brown's initial article. If these orbits are hyperbolic due
to close encounters with Planet Nine the analysis estimates that Planet Nine is
currently near aphelion with a right ascension of 83–90° and a declination of 8–10°
(Medvedev et al, 2017). Scott Sheppard, who is skeptical of this analysis, notes
that many different forces influence the orbits of comets.

Occultations By Jupiter Trojans

Malena Rice and Gregory Laughlin have proposed that a network of telescopes be
built to detect occultations by Jupiter Trojans. The timing of these occultations
would provide precise astrometry of these objects enabling their orbits to be
monitored for variations due to the tide from Planet Nine (Rice and Laughlin,
2019)

CHAPTER FOUR

ATTEMPTS TO PREDICT THE SEMI-MAJOR AXIS

 37

An analysis by Sarah Millholland and Gregory Laughlin identified a pattern

of commensurabilities (ratios between orbital periods of pairs of objects consistent
with both being in resonance with another object) of the eTNOs. They identify five
objects that would be near resonances with Planet Nine if it had a semi-major axis
of 654 AU: Sedna (3:2), 2004 VN112 (3:1), 2012 VP113 (4:1), 2000 CR105 (5:1),
and 2001 FP185 (5:1). They identify this planet as Planet Nine but propose a
different orbit with an eccentricity e ≈ 0.5, inclination i ≈ 30°, argument of
perihelion ω ≈ 150°, and longitude of ascending node Ω ≈ 50° (the last differs from
Brown and Batygin's value of 90°).

Carlos and Raul de la Fuente Marcos also note commensurabilities among the
known eTNOs similar to that of the Kuiper belt, where accidental
commensurabilities occur due to objects in resonances with Neptune. They find
that some of these objects would be in 5:3 and 3:1 resonances with a planet that
had a semi-major axis of ≈700 AU ( carlos and raul, 2016).

Three objects with smaller semi-major axes near 172 AU (2013 UH15, 2016
QV89 and 2016 QU89) have also been proposed to be in resonance with Planet
Nine. These objects would be in resonance and anti-aligned with Planet Nine if it
had a semi-major axis of 315 AU, below the range proposed by Batygin and
Brown. Alternatively, they could be in resonance with Planet Nine, but have orbital
orientations that circulate instead of being confined by Planet Nine if it had a semi-
major axis of 505 AU (Kaine et al, 2018).

A later analysis by Elizabeth Bailey, Michael Brown and Konstantin Batygin

found that if Planet Nine is in an eccentric and inclined orbit the capture of many
of the eTNOs in higher order resonances and their chaotic transfer between
resonances prevent the identification of Planet Nine's semi-major axis using
current observations. They also determined that the odds of the first six objects
 38

observed being in N/1 or N/2 period ratios with Planet Nine are less than 5% if it
has an eccentric orbit (Bailey et al, 2018).

In late 2020 it was determined HD 106906 b, a candidate exoplanet, had an

eccentric orbit that took it outside the debris disk of its binary host stars. Its orbit
appears to be similar to the predictions made for Planet Nine's semi-major axis and
it may serve as a proxy for Planet Nine that helps explain how such planetary
orbits evolve (NASA,2020).

NAMING OF PLANET NINE

Planet Nine does not have an official name and will not receive one unless its
existence is confirmed via imaging. Only two planets, Uranus and Neptune, have
been discovered in the Solar System during recorded history. However,
many minor planets, including dwarf planets such as Pluto, asteroids, and comets
have been discovered and named. Consequently, there is a well-established
process for naming newly discovered solar system objects. If Planet Nine is
observed, the International Astronomical Union will certify a name, with priority
usually given to a name proposed by its discoverers (international astronomical
union, 2016).  It is likely to be a name chosen from Roman or Greek mythology
(Totten, 2016).

In their original article, Batygin and Brown simply referred to the object as
"perturber",[2] and only in later press releases did they use "Planet Nine"
(Fesenmaier, 2016). They have also used the names "Jehoshaphat" and "George" (a
reference to William Herschel's proposed name for Uranus) for Planet Nine.
Brown has stated: "We actually call it Phattie[Q] when we're just talking to each
other. In a 2019 interview with Derek Muller for the YouTube channel Veritasium,
Batygin also informally suggested, based on a petition on Change.org, to name the
planet after singer David Bowie, and to name any potential moons of the planet
 39

after characters from Bowie's song catalogue, such as Ziggy Stardust or Starman

(youtube.com,2019).

Jokes have been made connecting "Planet Nine" to Ed Wood's 1959 science-fiction
horror film Plan 9 from Outer Space.[159] In connection with the Planet Nine
hypothesis, the film title recently found its way into academic discourse. In 2016,
an article titled Planet Nine from Outer Space about the hypothesized planet in
the outer region of the Solar System was published in Scientific American.
[181]
 Several conference talks since then have used the same word play,as did a
lecture by Mike Brown given in 2019 (Brown, 2019).Persephone, the wife of the
deity Pluto, had been a popular name commonly used in science fiction for a planet
beyond Neptune (see Fictional planets of the Solar System). However, it is
unlikely that Planet Nine or any other conjectured planet beyond Neptune will be
given the name Persephone once its existence is confirmed, as it is already the
name for asteroid 399 Persephone .

In 2018, planetary scientist Alan Stern objected to the name Planet Nine, saying,

"It is an effort to erase Clyde Tombaugh's legacy and it's frankly insulting",
suggesting the name Planet X until its discovery. He signed a statement with 34
other scientists saying, "We further believe the use of this term [Planet Nine]
should be discontinued in favor of culturally and taxonomically neutral terms for
such planets, such as Planet X, Planet Next, or Giant Planet Five (Paul et al,
2018). According to Brown, "'Planet X' is not a generic reference to some
unknown planet, but a specific prediction of Lowell's which led to the (accidental)
discovery of Pluto. Our prediction is not related to this Predictionmosher.

CHAPTER FIVE

CONCLUSION AND SUMMARY

 40

The evidence for the existence of a ninth planet, which goes by the provisional
name of Planet X begins with the cataloguing of the most distant objects of our
Solar system, which has been an on-going effort over the past few decades. Certain
intriguing anomalies were noted regarding the collective orbits of these objects
(Morbidelli, 2016).

Beyond the orbit of Neptune dwells a vast population of small objects that make up
the Kuiper belt and, beyond that, the inner Oort cloud. Both regions are named for
Dutch astronomers: Gerrit Kuiper (1905–1973) and Jan Oort (1900–1992). The
best-known representative of the Kuiper belt is Pluto, which was discovered in
1930. Another is Eris, which was discovered in 2005 and initially believed to be
larger than Pluto, which led to the demotion of Pluto as just another dwarf planet
among many others (Brown et al., 2006).

The sky survey performed by the spacecraft Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer
allowed astronomers to rule out anything at least the size of Saturn being located
anywhere closer to the Sun than 104 astronomical units
(http://wise.ssl.berkeley.edu/) . However, that did not rule out the existence of a
planet comparable to or smaller than Neptune.

Simulations Suggest That Planet X Has Been Sweeping the Inner Oort Cloud

Using numerical simulations, Lykawka and Mukai argued in 2008 that the large
eccentricities and inclinations which are characteristic of the orbits of the inner
Oort objects could be explained by the presence of a massive transNeptunian
object. Later, in 2016, Brown and Batygin8 carried out another numerical analysis
of the dynamics of deep-space orbits and found that seven of these objects have a
chaotic orbit, meaning that the present alignment is just a coincidence. On the other
hand, in the case of six other objects, including Sedna and VP113, the alignment is
a genuine physical phenomenon. They orbit in a similar plane, at about 20 degrees,
 41

and are confined to the same corner of the region beyond the Kuiper belt. The
chances of this alignment occurring at random are minute, suggesting that such an
odd configuration could only be due to the gravitational influence exerted by some
unknown but massive object. The simulation model accounts for the movements of
all bodies concerned over a period of 4 Gigayears. Numerical evaluation indicated
that, with a planet of ten Earth masses and an orbit between 250 and 1200
astronomical units, the only deep objects that would remain after 4 Gigayears
would have orbits similar to these six objects that we see. The hypothetical planet
would orbit in the same plane, but in a different sector.

Furthermore, the model predicted that this planet would also cause another group
of objects to be injected into orbits lying virtually perpendicular to the ecliptic, and
retrograde (that is, in the opposite sense to the Sun’s own rotation). It so happens
that five objects with just those characteristics were discovered in 2002, and since
no other explanation for their origin has been out forward, this observation can be
regarded as bolstering confidence in the validity of numerical simulations of solar
system dynamics as a predictive tool.

PUTATIVE PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF PLANET X

The distance between Planet X and the Sun is thought to vary between 250
astronomical units at its closest and 1200 astronomical units at its farthest (Batygin
and Brown, 2016). The astronomical unit is defined as the average distance
between the Sun and the Earth, about 1.5×1011 metres; for comparison, the
outermost known planet, Neptune, orbits at about 30 astronomical units from the
Sun. The orbit of Planet X is believed to be tilted about 30 degrees relative to the
ecliptic, which is the plane in which the Earth orbits the Sun.

If it exists, the ninth planet is most certainly not a dwarf planet and would be a
genuine number nine, about ten times as massive as Earth (Lykawkaand Mukai,
 42

2008). In view of its mass, we should expect something like a small Neptune, with
a rocky core shrouded in a fluid envelope. Neptune and Uranus are referred to as
ice giants, with masses equivalent to 14 and 17 Earths, respectively, and Planet X
would be another such ice giant.

The Kuiper belt is an unlikely birthplace for massive planets, which is why it is
believed that Planet X may have formed in the same region as the other two ice
giants, Uranus and Neptune , which arose somewhat later than the gas giants
Jupiter and Saturn, which formed within the first million years or so of the Solar
system’s existence (Morbidelli, 2016). The pronounced tilting angles of the
rotational axes of Uranus and Neptune (98 degrees and 30 degrees, respectively)
betray a violent history full of planetary collisions, which gives us good grounds to
believe that Uranus and Neptune were formed out of a swarm of proto-planets with
masses varying between five and seven times that of the Earth(Morbidelli, 2016).
Due to the gravitational influences of Jupiter and Saturn, some of these bodies
collided and merged to form more massive planets, whereas others were ejected
towards the outer reaches of the Solar system.

REFERENCES

"Catalina Outer Solar System Survey - About". Catalina Outer Solar System

Survey. Retrieved 1 September 2020.
 43

"Comb the Edges of the Solar System with the Catalina Outer Solar System
Survey". NASA Science. 11 August 2020. Retrieved 1
September2020.

"Does Planet 9 Exist?". YouTube.com. 13 September 2019. Retrieved 13

September 2019.

"Hubble Pins Down Weird Exoplanet with Far-Flung Orbit". nasa.gov. 10

December 2020. Retrieved 18 December 2020.

"Hypothetical Planet X". NASA Solar System Exploration. 19 December 2019.

Retrieved 28 November 2020.

"More support for Planet Nine". Phys.org. 27 February 2019. Retrieved 26

June 2019.

"MPC list of a > 250, i > 40, and q > 6". Minor Planet Center. Archivedfrom the
original on 2 August 2017. Retrieved 4 February 2016.

"Naming of Astronomical Objects". International Astronomical

Union. Archived from the original on 17 June 2016. Retrieved 25
February 2016.

"Planet X". NASA Solar System Exploration. Retrieved 14 May 2019.

"What is the faintest object imaged by ground-based telescopes?". Sky &

Telescope. 24 July 2006. Retrieved 18 July 2016.

"Where is Planet Nine?". The Search for Planet Nine (Blog). 20 January

2016. Archived from the original on 30 January 2016.

Achenbach, Joel; Feltman, Rachel (20 January 2016). "New Evidence Suggests a

Ninth Planet Lurking at the Edge of the Solar System". The
Washington Post. Archived from the original on 20 January 2016.
Retrieved 20 January 2016.

Allen, Kate (20 January 2016). "Is a Real Ninth Planet out There Beyond
Pluto?". The Toronto Star. Archived from the original on 17 April
2016. Retrieved 18 July 2016.
 44

Aron, Jacob (24 February 2016). "Planet Nine Hunters Enlist Big Bang Telescopes
and Saturn Probe". New Scientist. Archived from the original on 25
February 2016. Retrieved 27 February 2016.

Atkinson, Nancy (15 January 2015). "Astronomers Are Predicting at Least Two

More Large Planets in the Solar System". Universe
Today. Archivedfrom the original on 6 February 2016. Retrieved 7 February 2016.

Bailey, Elizabeth; Brown, Michael E.; Batygin, Konstantin (2018). "Feasibility of

a Resonance-Based Planet Nine Search". The Astronomical Journal. 156 (2):

74. arXiv:1809.02594. Bibcode:2018AJ....156...74B. doi:10.3847/1538-
3881/aaccf4. S2CID 55192116.

Bailey, Nora; Fabrycky, Daniel (2019). "Stellar Flybys Interrupting Planet-Planet

Scattering Generates Oort Planets". The Astronomical
Journal. 158(2):
94. arXiv:1905.07044. Bibcode:2019AJ....158...94B. doi:10.3847/1538-
3881/ab2d2a. S2CID 158047152.
Batygin, K. and Brown, M.E. (2016) Evidence for a distant giant planet in the solar
system. Astronomical Journal, 151, 22.

Batygin, Konstantin (2017), "Planet Nine from Outer Space", American

Astronomical Society Meeting Abstracts #230, 230:
211.01, Bibcode:2017AAS...23021101B
Batygin, Konstantin; Adams, Fred C.; Brown, Michael E.; Becker, Juliette C.
(2019). "The Planet Nine Hypothesis". Physics Reports. 805: 1–
53. arXiv:1902.10103. Bibcode:2019PhR...805....1B. doi:10.1016/j.physrep.
2019.01.009. S2CID 119248548.

Batygin, Konstantin; Brown, Michael (2018), "Planet Nine from Outer

Space", 42Nd Cospar Scientific Assembly, 42: PIR.1–14–
18, Bibcode:2018cosp...42E.229B

Batygin, Konstantin; Brown, Michael E. (2016). "Generation of Highly Inclined

Trans-Neptunian Objects by Planet Nine". The Astrophysical Journal
Letters. 833 (1):

L3. arXiv:1610.04992. Bibcode:2016ApJ...833L...3B. doi:10.3847/2041-
8205/833/1/L3. S2CID 6751947.
 45

Batygin, Konstantin; Brown, Mike (20 January 2016). "Where is Planet

Nine?". The Search for Planet Nine. Michael E. Brown and Konstantin Batygin.
RA/De c chart. Archived from the original on 30 January 2016. Retrieved 24
January 2016.

Batygin, Konstantin; Morbidelli, Alessandro (2017). "Dynamical Evolution

Induced by Planet Nine". The Astronomical Journal. 154 (6):

229. arXiv:1710.01804. Bibcode:2017AJ....154..229B. doi:10.3847/1538-
3881/aa937c. S2CID 119704953.
Batygin, Konstantin; Brown, Michael E. (2016). "Evidence for a Distant Giant
Planet in the Solar System". The Astronomical Journal. 151 (2):
22. arXiv:1601.05438. Bibcode:2016AJ....151...22B. do
i:10.3847/0004- 6256/151/2/22. S2CID 2701020.

Beatty, Kelly (26 March 2014). "New Object Offers Hint of "Planet X"". Sky &
Telescope. Retrieved 18 July 2016.

Becker, Adam; Grossman, Lisa; Aron, Jacob (22 January 2016). "How Planet Nine
May Have Been Exiled to Solar System's Edge". New
Scientist. Archived from the original on 24 January 2016.
Retrieved 25 January 2016.

Becker, Juliette C.; Adams, Fred C.; Khain, Tali; Hamilton, Stephanie J.; Gerdes,
David (2017). "Evaluating the Dynamical Stability of Outer Solar
System Objects in the Presence of Planet Nine". The Astronomical
Journal. 154 (2):
61. arXiv:1706.06609. Bibcode:2017AJ....154...61B. doi:10.3847/1538-
3881/aa7aa2. S2CID 111384673.

Bernardelli, Pedro; et al. (2020). "Testing the isotropy of the Dark Energy Survey's
extreme trans-Neptunian objects". The Planetary Science Journal. 1(2):
28. arXiv:2003.08901. Bibcode:2020PSJ.....1...28B. do
i:10.3847/PSJ/ab9d8 0. SID  213175490.

Bernardinelli, Pedro H.; Bernstein, Gary M.; Sako, Masao; Liu, Tongtian;
Saunders, William R.; Khain, Tali; Lin, Hsing Wen; Gerdes, David
W.; Brout, Dillon; Adams, Fred C.; Belyakov, Matthew; Somasundaram,
Aditya Inada; Sharma, Lakshay; Locke, Jennifer; Franson, Kyle;
Becker, Juliette C.; Napier, Kevin; Markwardt, Larissa; Annis, James;
 46

Abbott, T. M. C.; Avila, S.; Brooks, D.; Burke, D. L.; Rosell, A. Carnero;
Kind, M. Carrasco; Castander, F. J.; Costa, L. N. da; Vicente, J. De;
Desai, S.; et al. (2020). "Trans-Neptunian Objects Found in the First Four
Years of the Dark Energy Survey". The Astrophysical Journal Supplement
Series. 247 (1):
32. arXiv:1909.01478. Bibcode:2020ApJS..247...32B. doi:10.3847/1538-
4365/ab6bd8. S2CID 202537605.

Beust, H. (2016). "Orbital Clustering of Distant Kuiper Belt Objects by

Hypothetical Planet 9. Secular or Resonant?". Astronomy &
Astrophysics. 590:
L2. arXiv:1605.02473. Bibcode:2016A&A...590L...2B. doi:10.1051/0004-
6361/201628638. S2CID 53994177.

Brasser, R.; Schwamb, M.E.; Lykawka, P.S.; Gomes, R.S. (2012). "An Oort Cloud
Origin for the High-Inclination, High-Perihelion Centaurs". Monthly
Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society. 420 (4): 3396–
3402. arXiv:1111.7037. Bibcode:2012MNRAS.420.3396B. doi:10.1111/j.13
65-2966.2011.20264.x. S2CID 56403467.

Brennan, Pat. "The Super-Earth that Came Home for Dinner". Jet Propulsion

Laboratory. Archived from the original on 16 October 2017. Retrieved 13
October 2017.

Bromley, Benjamin C.; Kenyon, Scott J. (22 July 2016). "Making Planet Nine: A
Scattered Giant in the Outer Solar System". The Astrophysical
Journal. 826 (1):
64. arXiv:1603.08010. Bibcode:2016ApJ...826...64B. doi:10.3847/0004-
637X/826/1/64. S2CID 118448057.
Brown, M.E., Schaller, E.L., Roe, H.G., Rabinowitz, D.L. and Trujillo, C.A.
(2006) Direct measurement of the size of 2003 UB313 from the
Hubble Space Telescope. Astrophysical Journal, 643, L61–L63.
Brown, M.E., Trujillo, C.A. and Rabinowitz, D.L. (2004) Discovery of a candidate
inner Oort cloud planetoid. Astrophysical Journal, 617, 645–649.

Brown, Michael E. (2017). "Observational Bias and the Clustering of Distant

Eccentric Kuiper Belt Objects". The Astronomical Journal. 154 (2):

65. arXiv:1706.04175. Bibcode:2017AJ....154...65B. doi:10.3847/1538-
3881/aa79f4. S2CID 56043830.
 47

Brown, Michael E. "Planet Nine: Where Are You? (Part 1)". The Search for Planet
Nine. Michael E. Brown and Konstantin Batygin. Archived from the
original on 20 October 2017. Retrieved 19 October 2017.

Brown, Michael E.; Batygin, Konstantin (2016). "Observational Constraints on the

Orbit and Location of Planet Nine in the Outer Solar System". The
Astrophysical Journal Letters. 824 (2):
L23. arXiv:1603.05712. Bibcode:2016ApJ...824L..23B. 
doi:10.3847/2041- 8205/824/2/L23. S2CID 10904017.

Brown, Michael E.; Batygin, Konstantin (2019). "Orbital Clustering in the Distant

Solar System" (PDF). The Astronomical Journal. 157 (2):

62. arXiv:1901.07115. Bibcode:2019AJ....157...62B. doi:10.3847/1538-
3881/aaf051. S2CID 119361145.

Brown, Michael E.; Trujillo, Chadwick; Rabinowitz, David (2004). "Discovery of

a Candidate Inner Oort Cloud Planetoid". The Astrophysical
Journal. 617 (1): 645–649. arXiv:astro- ph/0404456. Bibcod
e:2004ApJ...617..645B. doi:10.1086/422095. S2CID 77 38201.

Brown, Michael. "@plutokiller". Twitter. Retrieved 7 June 2019.

Brown, Mike (15 March 2019), Planet Nine from Outer Space, CalTech Astro,
retrieved 8 April 2019

Browne, Malcolm W. (1 June 1993). "Evidence for Planet X Evaporates in

Spotlight of New Research". New York Times. Retrieved 9 February 2019.

Burdick, Alan (20 January 2016). "Discovering Planet Nine". The New

Yorker. Archived from the original on 21 January 2016. Retrieved 20
January 2016.

Byrd, Deborah (27 March 2017). "Another Planet 9 Search! You Can

Help". EarthSky. Archived from the original on 9 April 2017.
Retrieved 8 April 2017.

Byrd, Deborah; Imster, Eleanor (20 February 2017). "Help Astronomers Look for
Planet 9". EarthSky. Archived from the original on 10 April 2017.
Retrieved 9 April 2017.
 48

Cáceres, Jessica; Gomes, Rodney (2018). "The Influence of Planet 9 on the Orbits
of Distant TNOs: The Case for a Low Perihelion Planet". The
Astronomical Journal. 156 (4):

157. arXiv:1808.01248. Bibcode:2018AJ....156..157C. doi:10.3847/1538-
3881/aad77a. S2CID 119064276.

Carrera, Daniel; Gorti, Uma; Johansen, Anders; Davies, Melvyn B. (2017).

"Planetesimal Formation by the Streaming Instability in a
Photoevaporating Disk". The Astrophysical Journal. 839 (1):

16. arXiv:1703.07895. Bibcode:2017ApJ...839...16C. doi:10.3847/1538-
4357/aa6932. S2CID 119472343.

Carter, Jamie (25 March 2019). "Are we getting closer to finding 'Planet Nine'?".
Future tech. TechRadar. Retrieved 14 May 2019.

Chang, Kenneth (20 January 2016). "Ninth Planet May Exist Beyond Pluto,
Scientists Report". The New York Times. Archived from the original
on 24 January 2016. Retrieved 18 July 2016.

Choi, Charles C. (25 October 2016). "Closing in on a Giant Ghost

Planet". Scientific American. Archived from the original on 26
October 2016. Retrieved 26 October 2016.

Choi, Charles Q. (25 October 2016). "Closing in on a Giant Ghost

Planet". Scientific American. Archived from the original on 28 July
2017. Retrieved 21 March 2017.

Cowan, Nicolas B.; Holder, Gil; Kaib, Nathan A. (2016). "Cosmologists in Search
of Planet Nine: the Case for CMB Experiments". The Astrophysical
Journal Letters. 822 (1):

L2. arXiv:1602.05963. Bibcode:2016ApJ...822L...2C. doi:10.3847/2041-
8205/822/1/L2. S2CID 119308822.

Crocket, Christopher (14 November 2014). "A Distant Planet May Lurk Far
Beyond Neptune". Science News. Archived from the original on 15 April
2015. Retrieved 7 February 2015.
 49

Crocket, Christopher (31 January 2016). "Computer Simulations Heat up Hunt for

Planet Nine". Science News. Archived from the original on 6
February 2016. Retrieved 7 February 2016. 'It's exciting and very compelling
work,' says Meg Schwamb, a planetary scientist at Academia Sinica in
Taipei, Taiwan. But only six bodies lead the way to the putative planet.
'Whether that's enough is still a question.'

Crockett, Christopher (5 July 2016). "New Clues in Search for Planet

Nine". Science News. Archived from the original on 5 July 2016. Retrieved 6
July 2016.

D'Angelo, G.; Lissauer, J.J. (2018). "Formation of Giant Planets". In Deeg H.,
Belmonte J. (ed.). Handbook of Exoplanets. Springer International
Publishing AG. pp. 2319–
2343. arXiv:1806.05649. Bibcode:2018haex.bookE.140D. doi:10.1007/978-
3-319-55333-7_140. ISBN 978-3-319-55332-0. S2CID 116913980.

de la Fuente Marcos, C.; de la Fuente Marcos, R. (5 February 2021). "Memories of

past close encounters in extreme trans-Neptunian space: Finding unseen
planets using pure random searches". Astronomy and
Astrophysics Letters. arXiv:2102.02220. Bibcod
e:2021arXiv210202220D. d oi:10.1051/0004-6361/202140311.

de la Fuente Marcos, C.; de la Fuente Marcos, R.; Aarseth, S.J. (1 November

2017). "Binary Stripping as a Plausible Origin of Correlated Pairs of
Extreme Trans-Neptunian Objects". Astrophysics and Space
Science. 362(11):198 arXiv:1709.06813. Bibcod
e:2017Ap&SS.362..198D. doi:10.1007/s10509- 017-3181-1. S2CID 11889090
3.

de la Fuente Marcos, Carlos; de la Fuente Marcos, Raúl (2014). "Extreme Trans-

Neptunian Objects and the Kozai Mechanism: Signalling the Presence of
Trans-Plutonian Planets". Monthly Notices of the Royal
Astronomical Society Letters. 443 (1): L59–
L63. arXiv:1406.0715. Bibcode:2014MNRAS.443L..59D. doi:10.1093/mnra
sl/slu084. S2CID 118622180.

de la Fuente Marcos, Carlos; de la Fuente Marcos, Raúl (2016).

"Commensurabilities between ETNOs: a Monte Carlo survey". Monthly
Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society Letters. 460 (1): L64–
 50

L68. arXiv:1604.05881. Bibcode:2016MNRAS.460L..64D. do
i:10.1093/mnr asl/slw077. S2CID 119110892.

de la Fuente Marcos, Carlos; de la Fuente Marcos, Raúl (2016). "Finding Planet

Nine: a Monte Carlo Approach". Monthly Notices of the Royal
Astronomical Society Letters. 459 (1): L66–
L70. arXiv:1603.06520. Bibcode:2016MNRAS.459L..66D. do
i:10.1093/mnr asl/slw049. S2CID 118433545.

de la Fuente Marcos, Carlos; de la Fuente Marcos, Raúl (2016). "Finding Planet

Nine: Apsidal Anti-Alignment Monte Carlo Results". Monthly
Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society. 462 (2): 1972–
1977. arXiv:1607.05633. Bibcode:2016MNRAS.462.1972D. do
i:10.1093/mn ras/stw1778. S2CID 119212828.

de la Fuente Marcos, Carlos; de la Fuente Marcos, Raúl (2017). "Evidence for a

Possible Bimodal Distribution of the Nodal Distances of the Extreme
Trans- Neptunian Objects: Avoiding a Trans-Plutonian Planet or Just Plain
Bias?". Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society
Letters. 471 (1): L61–
L65. arXiv:1706.06981. Bibcode:2017MNRAS.471L..61D. doi:10.1093/mn
asl/slx106. S2CID 55469849.

de la Fuente Marcos, Carlos; de la Fuente Marcos, Raúl; Aarseth, Sverre J. (2015).

"Flipping Minor Bodies: What Comet 96P/Machholz 1 Can Tell Us About
the Orbital Evolution of Extreme Trans-Neptunian Objects and the
Production of Near-Earth Objects on Retrograde
Orbits". Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society. 446 (2):
1867–187. arXiv:1410.6307. Bibcode:2015MNRAS.446.1867D. doi:10.1093/mnra
s/stu2230. S2CID 119256764.

de León, Julia; de la Fuente Marcos, Carlos; de la Fuente Marcos, Raúl (2017).

"Visible Spectra of (474640) 2004 VN112-2013 RF98 with OSIRIS
at the 10.4 M GTC: Evidence for Binary Dissociation near Aphelion Among the
Extreme Trans-Neptunian Objects". Monthly Notices of the Royal
Astronomical Society: Letters. 467 (1): L66–
L70. arXiv:1701.02534. Bibcode:2017MNRAS.467L..66D. do
i:10.1093/mnr asl/slx003. S2CID 119419889.

Deep Astronomy (19 February 2016). "Ninth Planet Beyond Neptune?". YouTube.

46:57.
 51

Drake, Nadia (20 January 2016). "Scientists Find Evidence for Ninth Planet in
Solar System". National Geographic. Archived from the original on 29 June 2016.
Retrieved 15 July 2016.

Dvorsky, George (22 January 2019). "Is the Elusive 'Planet Nine' Actually a
Massive Ring of Debris in the Outer Solar System?". Gizmodo.
Retrieved 23 January 2019.

Eriksson, Linn E.J.; Mustill, Alexander J.; Johansen, Anders (2017). "Circularizing
Planet Nine through Dynamical Friction with an Extended, Cold
Planetesimal Belt". Monthly Notices of the Royal
Astronomical Society. 475(4):4609

arXiv:1710.08295. Bibcode:2018MNRAS.475.4609E. doi:10.1093/mnras/s 111. S
2CID 119230823.

Fan, Siteng; Batygin, Konstantin (2017). "Simulations of the Solar System's early
dynamical evolution with a self-gravitating planetesimal disk". The
Astrophysical Journal. 851 (2):
L37. arXiv:1712.07193. Bibcode:2017ApJ...851L..37F. doi:10.3847/2041-
8213/aa9f0b. S2CID 55887558.

Fecht, Sarah (22 January 2016). "Can There Really Be a Planet in Our Solar
System That We Don't Know About?". Popular Science. Retrieved 18
July 2016.

Fesenmaier, Kimm (20 January 2016). "Caltech Researchers Find Evidence of a

Real Ninth Planet". Caltech. Archived from the original on 20
January 2016. Retrieved 20 January 2016.

Fesenmaier, Kimm (20 January 2016). "Caltech Researchers Find Evidence of a

Real Ninth Planet". Caltech. Retrieved 15 January 2019.

Fienga, A.; Laskar, J.; Manche, H.; Gastineau, M. (2016). "Constraints on the
Location of a Possible 9th Planet Derived from the Cassini
Data". Astronomy and Astrophysics. 587 (1):

L8. arXiv:1602.06116. Bibcode:2016A&A...587L...8F. doi:10.1051/0004-
6361/201628227. S2CID 119116589.
 52

Gibbs, W. Wayt. "Is There a Giant Planet Lurking Beyond Pluto?". IEEE

Spectrum. Archived from the original on 1 August 2017. Retrieved 1
August 2017.

Gomes, Rodney (2015). "The Observation of Large Semi-Major Axis Centaurs:

Testing for the Signature of a Planetary-Mass Solar
Companion". Icarus. 258: 37–
49. Bibcode:2015Icar..258...37G. doi:10.1016/j.icarus.2015.06.020.

Gomes, Rodney; Deienno, Rogerio; Morbidelli, Alessandro (2016). "The

Inclination of the Planetary System Relative to the Solar Equator May Be
Explained by the Presence of Planet 9". The Astronomical
Journal. 153 (1):
27. arXiv:1607.05111. Bibcode:2017AJ....153...27G. doi:10.3847/1538-
3881/153/1/27. S2CID 118330945.

Grush, Loren (20 January 2016). "Our Solar System May Have a Ninth Planet
After All – but Not All Evidence Is in (We Still Haven't Seen It Yet)". The
Verge. Archived from the original on 29 July 2016. Retrieved 18
July2016. The statistics do sound promising, at first. The
researchers say there's a 1 in 15,000 chance that the movements of these
objects are coincidental and don't indicate a planetary presence at
all. ... 'When we usually consider something as clinched and air tight, it
usually has odds with a much lower probability of failure than what they have,'
says Sara Seager, a planetary scientist at MIT. For a study to be a slam
dunk, the odds of failure are usually 1 in 1,744,278. ... But researchers often
publish before they get the slam-dunk odds, in order to avoid getting
scooped by a competing team, Seager says. Most outside experts agree that
the researchers' models are strong. And Neptune was
originally detected in a similar fashion—by researching observed
anomalies in the movement of Uranus. Additionally, the idea of a
large planet at such a distance from the Sun isn't actually that unlikely,
according to Bruce Macintosh, a planetary scientist at Stanford University.

Hall, Shannon (20 April 2016). "We Are Closing in on Possible Whereabouts of

Planet Nine". New Scientist. Archived from the original on 17 June 2016.
Retrieved 18 July 2016.
 53

Hand, Eric (20 January 2016). "Astronomers say a Neptune-sized planet lurks

beyond Pluto". Science. doi:10.1126/science.aae0237. Archived from
the original on 20 January 2016. Retrieved 20 January2016.

Hands, T. O.; Dehnen, W.; Gration, A.; Stadel, J.; Moore, B. (2019). "The fate of
planetesimal discs in young open clusters: implications for 1I/'Oumuamua,
the Kuiper belt, the Oort cloud and more". Monthly Notices of the
Royal Astronomical Society. 490 (1): 21–
36. arXiv:1901.02465. Bibcode:2019MNRAS.490...21H. do
i:10.1093/mnras/ stz1069. S2CID 118597453.

Hinckley, Story (17 February 2017). "Hunt for Planet 9: How You Can Help
NASA Search for Brown Dwarfs and Low-Mass Stars". The Christian
Science Monitor. Archived from the original on 8 April 2017.
Retrieved 9 April 2017.

Hoang, Thiem; Loeb, Abraham (29 May 2020). "Can Planet Nine Be Detected
Gravitationally by a Subrelativistic Spacecraft?". The Astrophysical
Journal. 895 (2):
L35. arXiv:2005.01120. Bibcode:2020ApJ...895L..35H. doi:10.3847/2041-
8213/ab92a7. ISSN 2041-8213.

Holman, Matthew J.; Payne, Matthew J. (2016). "Observational Constraints on

Planet Nine: Cassini Range Observations". The Astronomical
Journal. 152 (4):
94. arXiv:1604.03180. Bibcode:2016AJ....152...94H. doi:10.3847/0004-
6256/152/4/94. S2CID 118618464.

Holman, Matthew J.; Payne, Matthew J. (9 September 2016). "Observational

Constraints on Planet Nine: Astrometry of Pluto and Other Trans-Neptunian
Objects". The Astronomical Journal. 152 (4):

80. arXiv:1603.09008. Bibcode:2016AJ....152...80H. doi:10.3847/0004-
6256/152/4/80. S2CID 119189007.

Hruska, Joel (20 January 2016). "Our Solar System May Contain a Ninth Planet,
Far beyond Pluto". ExtremeTech. Archived from the original on 28
Jul y 2016. Retrieved 18 July 2016.

https://www.sciencealert.com/astronomers-now-doubt-there-is-an-undiscovered-
9th-planet-in-our-solar-system
 54

https://www.universetoday.com/146283/maybe-the-elusive-planet-9-doesnt-exist-
after-all/

Illingworth, G.; Magee, D.; Oesch, P.; Bouwens, R. (25 September 2012). "Hubble
goes to the extreme to assemble the deepest ever view of the
universe". Hubble Space Telescope. Archived from the original
on 1 February 2016. Retrieved 7 February 2016.

Izidoro, André; Morbidelli, Alessandro; Raymond, Sean N.; Hersant, Franck;

Pierens, Arnaud (2015). "Accretion of Uranus and Neptune from
Inward- Migrating Planetary Embryos Blocked by Jupiter and
Saturn". Astronomy & Astrophysics. 582:
A99. arXiv:1506.03029. Bibcode:2015A&A...582A..99I. doi:10.1051/0004-
6361/201425525. S2CID 118356267.

Kaib, Nathan A.; Pike, Rosemary; Lawler, Samantha; Kovalik, Maya; Brown,
Christopher; Alexandersen, Mike; Bannister, Michele T.; Gladman,
Brett J.; Petit, Jean-Marc (2019). "OSSOS XV: Probing the Distant Solar
System with Observed Scattering TNOs". The Astronomical Journal. 158(1):

43. arXiv:1905.09286. Bibcode:2019AJ....158...43K. doi:10.3847/1538-
3881/ab2383. PMC 6677154. PMID 31379385.

Kaine, T.; et al. (2018). "Dynamical Analysis of Three Distant Trans-Neptunian

Objects with Similar Orbits". The Astronomical Journal. 156 (6):

273. arXiv:1810.10084. Bibcode:2018AJ....156..273K. doi:10.3847/1538-
3881/aaeb2a. S2CID 85440531.

Ken Croswell (1997). Planet Quest: The Epic Discovery of Alien Solar Systems.
New York: The Free Press. pp. 57–58. ISBN 978-0-684-83252-4.

Kenyon, Scott J.; Bromley, Benjamin C. (2016). "Making Planet Nine: Pebble
Accretion at 250–750 AU in a Gravitationally Unstable Ring". The
Astrophysical Journal. 825 (1):

33. arXiv:1603.08008. Bibcode:2016ApJ...825...33K. doi:10.3847/0004-
637X/825/1/33. S2CID 119212968.
 55

Kohler, Susanna (25 April 2016). "Can CMB experiments find Planet Nine?". AAS
Nova. American Astronomical Society. Archived from the original
on 31 May 2016. Retrieved 29 April 2016.

Köhne, Tobias; Batygin, Konstantin (2020). "On the Dynamical Origins of

Retrograde Jupiter Trojans and their Connection to High-Inclination
TNOs". Celestial Mechanics and Dynamical
Astronomy. 132 (9) : .arXiv:2008.11242. Bibcode:2020CeMDA.
132...44K. doi:10.1007/s10569-020- 09985-1. S2CID 221319701.

Koponyás, Barbara (10 April 2010). "Near-Earth Asteroids and the Kozai-

Mechanism" (PDF). 5th Austrian Hungarian Workshop in
Vienna. Archived (PDF) from the original on 14 March 2016.
Retrieved 18 July2016.

Kretke, K.A.; Levison, H.F.; Buie, M.W.; Morbidelli, A. (2012). "A Method to
Constrain the Size of the Protosolar Nebula". The Astronomical
Journal. 143(4):
91. arXiv:1202.2343. Bibcode:2012AJ....143...91K. doi:10.1088/0004-
6256/143/4/91. S2CID 16924588.

Lakdawalla, Emily (20 January 2016). "Theoretical Evidence for an Undiscovered

Super-Earth at the Edge of Our Solar System". The Planetary
Society. Archived from the original on 23 April 2016.
Retrieved 18 July 2016.

Lawler, S.M.; Shankman, C.; Kaib, N.; Bannister, M.T.; Gladman, B.; Kavelaars,
J.J. (29 December 2016) [21 May 2016]. "Observational Signatures
of a Massive Distant Planet on the Scattering Disk". The Astronomical
Journal. 153 (1):

33. arXiv:1605.06575. Bibcode:2017AJ....153...33L. doi:10.3847/1538-
3881/153/1/33. S2CID 54854087.

Lawler, Samantha (25 May 2020). "Why astronomers now doubt there is an

undiscovered 9th planet in our solar system". The Conversation.
Retrieved 26May 2020.

Lawrence, Scott; Rogoszinski, Zeeve (2020). "The Brute-Force Search for Planet

Nine". arXiv:2004.14980 [astro-ph.EP].
 56

Lemonick, M. D. (2016), "Planet Nine from Outer Space", Scientific

American, 314 (5):
36, Bibcode:2016SciAm.314e..36L, doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0516-
36, PMID 27100252

Lemonick, Michael D. (20 January 2016). "Strong Evidence Suggests a Super

Earth Lies beyond Pluto". Scientific American. video. Archivedfrom the original
on 22 January 2016. Retrieved 22 January 2015.

Levenson, Thomas (25 January 2016). "A New Planet or a Red Herring?". The

Atlantic. Retrieved 18 July 2016. 'We plotted the real data on top of
the model' Batyagin recalls, and they fell 'exactly where they were
supposed to be.' That was, he said, the epiphany. 'It was a dramatic
moment. This thing I thought could disprove it turned out to be the
strongest evidence for Planet Nine.'

Li, Gongjie; Adams, Fred C. (2016). "Interaction Cross Sections and Survival
Rates for Proposed Solar System Member Planet Nine". The Astrophysical
Journal Letters. 823 (1):
L3. arXiv:1602.08496. Bibcode:2016ApJ...823L...3L. doi:10.3847/2041-
8205/823/1/L3. S2CID 15890864.

Li, Gongjie; Hadden, Samuel; Payne, Matthew; Holman, Matthew J. (2018). "The
Secular Dynamics of TNOs and Planet Nine Interactions". The
Astronomical Journal. 156 (6):

263. arXiv:1806.06867. Bibcode:2018AJ....156..263L. doi:10.3847/1538-
3881/aae83b. S2CID 118898729.

Linder, Esther F.; Mordasini, Christoph (2016). "Evolution and Magnitudes of

Candidate Planet Nine". Astronomy & Astrophysics. 589 (134);
arXiv:1602.07465. Bibcode:2016A&A...589A.134L. do
i:10.1051/0004- 6361/201628350. S2CID 53702941.

Lovett, Richard A. (12 May 2012). "New Planet Found in Our Solar

System?". National Geographic News. Archived from the original on
10 July 2016. Retrieved 18 July 2016.

Luhman, Kevin L. (2014). "A Search for a Distant Companion to the Sun with the
Wide-Field Infrared Survey Explorer". The Astrophysical
 57

Journal. 781 (4): 4. Bibcode:2014ApJ...781....4L. doi:10.1088/0004-
637X/781/1/4.
Lykawka, P.S. and Mukai, T. (2008) An outer planet beyond Pluto and the origin
of the transNeptunian belt architecture. Astronomical Journal, 135,
1161 – 1200.

Mack, Eric. "The solar system's hidden Planet X may finally be spotted

soon". CNET. Retrieved 26 November 2020.

Madigan, Ane-Marie; McCourt, Michael (2016). "A New Inclination Instability

Reshapes Keplerian Discs into Cones: Application to the Outer Solar
System". Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society:
Letters. 457 (1): L89–
93. arXiv:1509.08920. Bibcode:2016MNRAS.457L..89M. do
i:10.1093/mnra sl/slv203. S2CID 119181329.

Madigan, Ann-Marie; Zderic, Alexander; McCourt, Michael; Fleisig, Jacob

(2018). "On the Dynamics of the Inclination Instability". The
Astronomical Journal. 156 (4):
141. arXiv:1805.03651. Bibcode:2018AJ....156..141M. doi:10.3847/1538-
3881/aad95c. PMC 6677160. PMID 31379384.

Malhotra, Renu (15 April 2018). "The search for Planet Nine". YouTube.

Retrieved 18 January 2019.

Malhotra, Renu (2017). "Prospects for Unseen Planets Beyond Neptune". ASP

Conference Series. 513:
45. arXiv:1711.03444. Bibcode:2018ASPC..513...45M.

Malhotra, Renu; Volk, Kathryn; Wang, Xianyu (2016). "Corralling a distant planet
with extreme resonant Kuiper belt objects". The Astrophysical
Journal Letters. 824 (2):
L22. arXiv:1603.02196. Bibcode:2016ApJ...824L..22M. doi:10.3847/2041-
8205/824/2/L22. S2CID 118422279.

Margot, Jean-Luc (2015). "A Quantitative Criterion for Defining Planets". The

Astronomical Journal. 150 (6):

185. arXiv:1507.06300. Bibcode:2015AJ....150..185M. doi:10.1088/0004-
6256/150/6/185. S2CID 51684830.
 58

Margot, Jean-Luc (22 January 2016). "Would Planet Nine Pass the Planet
Test?". University of California at Los Angeles. Archived from the
original on 1 April 2016. Retrieved 18 July 2016.

May 2020, Rafi Letzter-Staff Writer 07. "Renowned string theorist proposes new
way to hunt our solar system's mysterious 'Planet 9'". livescience.com
. Retrieved 12 November 2020.

McDonald, Bob (24 January 2016). "How Did We Miss Planet 9?". CBC

News. Archived from the original on 5 February 2016. Retrieved 18
July2016. It's like seeing a disturbance on the surface of water
but not knowing what caused it. Perhaps it was a jumping fish, a whale
or a seal. Even though you didn't actually see it, you could make an
informed guess about the size of the object and its location by the nature
of the ripples in the water.

Medvedev, Yu D.; Vavilov, D.E.; Bondarenko, Yu S.; Bulekbaev, D.A.;

Kunturova, N.B. (2017). "Improvement of the Position of Planet X Based
on the Motion of Nearly Parabolic Comets". Astronomy Letters. 42 (2):
120– 125. Bibcode:2017AstL...43..120M. doi:10.1134/S1063773717020037. S2C
I D 125957280.

Meisner, A.M.; Bromley, B.C.; Kenyon, S.J.; Anderson, T.E. (2017). "A 3π Search
for Planet Nine at 3.4μm with WISE and NEOWISE". The
Astronomical Journal. 155 (4):

166. arXiv:1712.04950. Bibcode:2018AJ....155..166M. doi:10.3847/1538-
3881/aaae70. S2CID 119504867.

Meisner, Aaron M.; Bromley, Benjamin B.; Nugent, Peter E.; Schlegel, David J;
Kenyon, Scott J.; Schlafly, Edward F.; Dawson, Kyle S. (2016). "Searching
for Planet Nine with Coadded WISE and NEOWISE-Reactivation
Images". The Astronomical Journal. 153 (2):

65. arXiv:1611.00015. Bibcode:2017AJ....153...65M. doi:10.3847/1538-
3881/153/2/65. S2CID 118391962.

Michael E. Brown (3 March 2017). "Planet Nine". YouTube. 19:06. Archived from

the original on 6 April 2017. Retrieved 15 March 2017.
 59

Millholland, Sarah; Laughlin, Gregory (2017). "Constraints on Planet Nine's Orbit

and Sky Position within a Framework of Mean-Motion Resonances". The
Astronomical Journal. 153 (3):
91. arXiv:1612.07774. Bibcode:2017AJ....153...91M. do
i:10.3847/1538- 3881/153/3/91. S2CID 119325788.

Millholland, Sarah; Laughlin, Gregory (2017). "Constraints on Planet Nine's Orbit

and Sky Position within a Framework of Mean-Motion Resonances". The
Astronomical Journal. 153 (3):

91. arXiv:1612.07774. Bibcode:2017AJ....153...91M. doi:10.3847/1538-
3881/153/3/91. S2CID 119325788. supplemented by Millholland,
Sarah. "Planet Nine's Orbit in Space". GitHub. Archived from the
original on 21 February 2017. Retrieved 8 August 2017.
Morbidelli, A. (2016) « Les arguments enfaveur de l’existenced’uneneuvième
planètesontconvaincants ». Pour la Science, 461.

Mortillaro, Nicole (9 February 2016). "Meet Mike Brown: Pluto Killer and the
Man Who Brought Us Planet 9". Global News. Archived from the original on 10
February 2016. Retrieved 10 February 2016. 'It was that search for
more objects like Sedna ... led to the realization ... that they're all being
pulled off in one direction by something. And that's what finally led us
down the hole that there must be a big planet out there.' —Mike Brown

Morton Grosser (1964). "The Search For A Planet Beyond Neptune". Isis. 55 (2):

163–183. doi:10.1086/349825. JSTOR 228182. S2CID 144255699.

Mosher, Dave (7 June 2018). "Is It Planet 9 or Planet X? Scientists Spar over What
to Call the Solar System's Hypothetical Missing World". Business
Insider. Archived from the original on 8 June 2018. Retrieved 9 June 2018.

Mustill, Alexander J.; Raymond, Sean N.; Davies, Melvyn B. (21 July 2016). "Is
there an exoplanet in the Solar System?". Monthly Notices of the
Royal Astronomical Society: Letters. 460 (1): L109–
L113. arXiv:1603.07247. Bibcode:2016MNRAS.460L.109M. do
i:10.1093/m nrasl/slw075. S2CID 119229382.

Nesvorny, D.; Vokrouhlicky, D.; Dones, L.; Levison, H.F.; Kaib, N.; Morbidelli,
A. (2017). "Origin and Evolution of Short-Period Comets". The
Astrophysical Journal. 845 (1):
 60

27. arXiv:1706.07447. Bibcode:2017ApJ...845...27N. doi:10.3847/1538-
4357/aa7cf6. S2CID 119399322.

O'Connor, J.J.; Robertson, E.F. "Alexis Bouvard". MacTutor History of

Mathematics archive. Archived from the original on 25 October
2017. Retrieved 20 October 2017.

Overbye, Dennis (11 September 2020). "Is There a Black Hole in Our

Backyard?". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 12
November 2020.

Overbye, Dennis (11 September 2020). "Is There a Black Hole in Our Backyard? -

Astrophysicists have recently begun hatching plans to find out just
how weird Planet Nine might be". The New York Times. Retrieved 11
September 2020.

Palka, Joe. "A Friend For Pluto: Astronomers Find New Dwarf Planet In Our Solar
System". NPR. Archived from the original on 5 April 2018. Retrieved 5
April 2018.

Parker, Richard J.; Lichtenberg, Tim; Quanz, Sascha P. (2017). "Was Planet 9
Captured in the Sun's Natal Star-Forming Region?". Monthly Notices
of the Royal Astronomical Society: Letters. 472 (1): L75–
L79. arXiv:1709.00418. Bibcode:2017MNRAS.472L..75P. doi:10.1093/mnr
asl/slx141. S2CID 10792152.

Parks, Jake (1 October 2019). "Planet Nine may be a black hole the size of a
baseball". Astronomy magazine. Retrieved 23 August 2020.

Patel, Neel V. (21 January 2019). "Planet Nine Might Not Actually Be a

Planet". Popular Science. Retrieved 21 January 2019.

Perdelwitz, V.M.; Völschow, M.V.; Müller, H.M. (2018). "A New Approach to
Distant Solar System Object Detection in Large Survey Data
Sets". Astronomy & Astrophysics. 615 (159):

arXiv:1805.01203. Bibcode:2018A&A...615A.159P. doi:10.1051/0004 -
6361/201732254. S2CID 119243579.
 61

Powel, Corey S. (22 January 2016). "A Little Perspective on the New "9th Planet"
(and the 10th, and the 11th)". Discover. Archived from the original
on 14 July 2016. Retrieved 18 July 2016.

Rabie, Passant. "Did the Sun Have a Twin? New Study Rewrites the Star's Early
History". Inverse. Retrieved 28 August 2020.

Ratner, Paul. "New study deepens the controversy over Planet Nine's

existence". Big Think. Retrieved 25 April 2020.

Rice, Malena; Laughlin, Gregory (2019). "The Case for a Large-Scale Occultation
Network". The Astronomical Journal. 158 (1):

19. arXiv:1905.06354. Bibcode:2019AJ....158...19R. doi:10.3847/1538-
3881/ab21df. S2CID 155099837.

Sample, Ian (26 March 2014). "Dwarf Planet Discovery Hints at a Hidden Super
Earth in Solar System". The Guardian. Archived from the original on
29 April 2016. Retrieved 18 July 2016.

Scharping, Nathaniel (20 January 2016). "Planet Nine: A New Addition to the

Solar System?". Discover. Archived from the original on 16 July 2016.
Retrieved 18 July 2016.

Scholtz, Jakub; Unwin, James (29 July 2020). "What if Planet 9 is a Primordia

l Black Hole?". Physical Review Letters. 125 (5):
051103. arXiv:1909.11090. Bibcode:2020PhRvL.125e1103S. doi:10.1103/P
hysRevLett.125.051103. ISSN 0031-9007. PMID 32794880.

Sefilian, Antranik A.; Touma, Jihad R. (2019). "Shepherding in a Self-gravitating

Disk of Trans-Neptunian Objects". The Astronomical
Journal. 157(2):
59. arXiv:1804.06859. Bibcode:2019AJ....157...59S. doi:10.3847/1538-
3881/aaf0fc. S2CID 118965345.

Shankman, Cory; et al. (2017). "OSSOS. VI. Striking Biases in the Detection of

Large Semimajor Axis Trans-Neptunian Objects". The Astronomical
Journal. 154 (2):
50. arXiv:1706.05348. Bibcode:2017AJ....154...50S. doi:10.3847/1538-
3881/aa7aed. hdl:10150/625487. S2CID 3535702.
 62

Shankman, Cory; Kavelaars, J.J.; Lawler, Samantha; Bannister, Michelle

(2017). "Consequences of a Distant Massive Planet on the Large
Semi-Major Axis Trans-Neptunian Objects". The Astronomical Journal. 153(2):

63. arXiv:1610.04251. Bibcode:2017AJ....153...63S. doi:10.3847/1538-
3881/153/2/63. S2CID 56067774.

Sheppard, Scott S., Scott S.; Trujillo, Chadwick (2016). "New Extreme Trans-
Neptunian Objects: Toward a Super-Earth in the Outer Solar System". The
Astronomical Journal. 152 (6):

221. arXiv:1608.08772. Bibcode:2016AJ....152..221S. doi:10.3847/1538-
3881/152/6/221. S2CID 119187392.

Siegel, Ethan (14 September 2018). "This Is Why Most Scientists Think Planet

Nine Doesn't Exist". Forbes.

Siegel, Ethan (20 January 2016). "Not So Fast: Why There Likely Isn't A Large
Planet Beyond Pluto". Forbes. Archived from the original on 14
October 2017. Retrieved 22 January 2016.

Siegel, Ethan (3 November 2015). "Jupiter May Have Ejected a Planet from Our
Solar System". Forbes. Archived from the original on 28 January
2016. Retrieved 22 January 2016.

Siegel, Ethan. "This Is Why Most Scientists Think Planet Nine Doesn't Exist".
Starts With A Bang. Forbes. Archived from the original on 18 September 2018.
Retrieved 17 September 2018.

Siraj, Amir; Loeb, Abraham (16 July 2020). "Searching for Black Holes in the
Outer Solar System with LSST". The Astrophysical Journal. 898 (1):

L4. arXiv:2005.12280. Bibcode:2020ApJ...898L...4S. doi:10.3847/2041-
8213/aba119. ISSN 2041-8213. S2CID 218889510.

Siraj, Amir; Loeb, Abraham (18 August 2020). "The Case for an Early Solar
Binary Companion". The Astrophysical Journal. 899 (2):

L24. arXiv:2007.10339. Bibcode:2020ApJ...899L..24S. doi:10.3847/2041-
8213/abac66. ISSN 2041-8213. S2CID 220665422.
 63

Snell, Jason (5 February 2016). "This Week in Space: Weird Pluto and No Plan for
Mars". Yahoo! Tech. Archived from the original on 18 August 2016
. Retrieved 18 July 2016.

Spanish Foundation for Science and Technology (FECYT). "New Evidence in

Support of the Planet Nine Hypothesis". phys.org. Archived from the
original on 30 July 2017. Retrieved 29 July 2017.

Stirone, Shannon (22 January 2019). "The Hunt for Planet Nine". Longreads.

Retrieved 22 January 2019.

Stirone, Shannon. "Planet Nine May Be Responsible for Tilting the

Sun". Astronomy. Archived from the original on 10 August 2017.
Retrieved 29 July 2017.

strom, Marcus (16 February 2017). "You Can Help Find Planet Nine from Outer
Space Through Citizen Science". The Sydney Morning
Herald. Archived from the original on 18 June 2018.
Retrieved 12 November 2018.

The Search for Planet Nine findplanetnine.com February 26, 2019

Tombaugh, Clyde W. (1946). "The Search for the Ninth Planet,

Pluto". Astronomical Society of the Pacific Leaflets. 5 (209): 73–
80. Bibcode:1946ASPL....5...73T.

Totten, Sanden (20 January 2016). "Caltech Researchers Answer Skeptics'

Questions about Planet 9". 89.3 KPCC. Archived from the original on
6 July 2016. Retrieved 18 July 2016.

Totten, Sanden (22 January 2016). "Planet 9: What Should Its Name Be If It's
Found?". 89.3 KPCC. Archived from the original on 7 February
2016. Retrieved 7 February 2016. 'We like to be consistent,' said Rosaly
Lopes, a senior research scientist at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory
and a member of the IAU's Working Group for Planetary System
Nomenclature. ... For a planet in our solar system, being consistent means
sticking to the theme of giving them names from Greek and Roman
mythology.

Trujillo, Chadwick A.; Sheppard, Scott S. (2014). "A Sedna-like Body with a

Perihelion of 80 Astronomical
 64

Units" (PDF). Nature. 507(7493): 471–
474. Bibcode:2014Natur.507..471T. doi:10.1038/nature13156. PMID 24670
765. S2CID 4393431. Archived from the original (PDF) on 16 December
2014. Retrieved 20 January2016.

Wall, Mike (21 January 2016). "How Astronomers Could Actually See 'Planet
Nine'". Space.com. Archived from the original on 23 January 2016.
Retrieved 24 January 2016.

Wall, Mike (24 August 2011). "A Conversation With Pluto's Killer: Q & A With
Astronomer Mike Brown". Space.com. Archived from the original on
2 February 2016. Retrieved 7 February 2016.

wall, Mike (3 April 2017). "Where's Planet Nine? Citizen Scientists Spot 4

Possible Candidates". Space.com. Archived from the original on 9 April
2017. Retrieved 8 April 2017.

Wall, Mike (4 February 2016). "'Planet Nine'? Cosmic objects' strange orbits may
have a different explanation". Space.com. Archived from the original
on 8 February 2016. Retrieved 8 February 2016. We need more mass in
the outer solar system," she (Madigan) said. "So it can either come from
having more minor planets, and their self-gravity will do this to themselves
naturally, or it could be in the form of one single massive planet—a Planet
Nine. So it's a really exciting time, and we're going to discover one or the
other.
Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer http://wise.ssl.berkeley.edu/

Williams, Matt (10 August 2015). "What is the Oort Cloud?". Universe Today.

Retrieved 25 February 2019.

Wolchover, Natalie (25 May 2012). "Planet X? New Evidence of an Unseen Planet

at Solar System's Edge". LiveScience. Archived from the original on
30 January 2016. Retrieved 7 February 2016. More work is needed to
determine whether Sedna and the other scattered disc objects were sent on
their circuitous trips round the Sun by a star that passed by long ago, or by
an unseen planet that exists in the solar system right now. Finding and
observing the orbits of other distant objects similar to Sedna will add more data
points to astronomers' computer models.

Wood, Charlie (2 September 2018). "Is there a mysterious Planet Nine lurking in

our Solar system beyond Neptune?". Washington
 65

Post. Archived from the original on 2 September 2018. Retrieved 17

January2019.

Zderic, Alexander; Collier, Angela; Tiongco, Maria; Madigan, Ann-Marie (2020).

"Apsidal Clustering following the Inclination Instability". The
Astrophysical Journal. 895 (2):
L27. arXiv:2004.01198. Bibcode:2020ApJ...895L..27Z. doi:10.3847/2041-
8213/ab91a0. S2CID 214794969.

Zderic, Alexander; Madigan, Ann-Marie (2020). "Giant Planet Influence on the

Collective Gravity of a Primordial Scattered Disk". The Astronomical
Journal. 160 (1):
50. arXiv:2004.00037. Bibcode:2020AJ....160...50Z. doi:10.3847/1538-
3881/ab962f. S2CID 214743005.