2007-07-11 07:36:30 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Science & Mathematics ➔ Astronomy & Space
No. The sun takes up 99% of all the mass in the solar system, and it is a medium star. The remaining 1% are the planets. Even if you got all 8 of them, heck, even throw in pluto, you still wouldn't be anywhere close to a star.
2007-07-11 07:39:43 · answer #1 · answered by Jimbomonkey1234 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Pluto replaced into no longer demoted for being "too small" - whoever advised you that replaced into uneducated. Its a shame that they do no longer coach any effortless technology at school anymore, this replaced into introduced basically approximately 5 years previous. In August 2006, the IAU defined a planet as an merchandise that: a million. Is around as a results of its very own gravity 2. Orbits the solar and not yet another planet 3. Has cleared its orbital process debris Pluto meets variety a million and 2, yet no longer 3 - Pluto orbits interior the Kuiper Belt that's a area crammed with debris. So, Ceres (interior the asteroid belt), and Pluto, Haumea, Makemake, and Eris (all interior the Kuiper Belt area) have been designtated as "dwarf planets" - no longer as a results of length yet due the certainty they do no longer meet each and all the standards for being a planet. Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune all meet all 3 of the IAU standards for being a planet. I basically study your "further archives" - so, you think of that the human definition of planet truly makes a single little bit of difference to Pluto itself? on account that we did no longer additionally recognize it existed till 1930 do you think of it felt unloved or something? Does it easily count what we call an merchandise in area - planet, cubewano, KBO, asteroid - they are basically words we use to make it much less stressful for us to categorize issues. in case you prefer to evaluate Earth the only planet, it is truly your top. Be waiting for individuals to snigger, yet it is your determination of course.
2016-11-09 00:58:59 · answer #2 · answered by piazza 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Sometimes the proto-star never becomes hot enough to undergo hydrogen fusion. Such stars are called brown dwarfs because of their dull red-brown color. The temperatures and pressures never reached high enough in these stars to initiate hydrogen fusion in the core. Brown dwarfs can only be a maximum of 80 times more massive than Jupiter; any greater, and the mass would be such that fusion could occur.
2007-07-11 09:02:35 · answer #3 · answered by justask23 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No. Combining the four large gas giants still would not make 1% of the combined mass of the sun and the planets. The Sun has over 99% of the mass of the solar system.
2007-07-11 07:41:56 · answer #4 · answered by gfminis 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Even if you add up the masses of these planets, you don't get even to the mass of a brown dwarf. So, no, you would have a larger planet.
2007-07-11 07:38:42 · answer #5 · answered by mathematician 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
No. The smallest brown dwarf (fusion) we have found has a mass 500 times that of Jupiter
2007-07-11 07:45:30 · answer #6 · answered by Gene 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
NO... a binary star system is two (fairly close-together) stars being orbitted simultaneously.
2007-07-11 07:39:43 · answer #7 · answered by jonboy2five 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, they wouldn't be nearly big enough to initiate fusion.
Also, not enough hydrogen between them.
2007-07-11 07:38:40 · answer #8 · answered by U_Mex 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋