Is the existence of a planet so big that stars revolve around it, possible?

Answer 1

No, unless you want to propose that a dead star can be a planet.

The fact is that there is a critical size for a planet. Once it gets about 13 times as massive as Jupiter (the composition of large planets is to be more and more % hydrogen as planets get bigger) it turns into a dim brown dwarf. Add still more mass, and you get a red dwarf. Simply because the pressure and temperature at the core will get high enough to start hydrogen fusion.

So, there remains a transition point, a critical size below which an object is a planet, and beyond which it has to be a star.

But what if one was to put a lot of rocks on a telluric planets (a telluric planet like the earth formed in a zone where the heat of the sun blew away most of the hydrogen gas)?
Well, no natural process could do such a thing and create a mass that that could rival a star, but assuming that one could articiallially do so, the absence of heat pressure from a fusing core would mean that the planet would get very dense and not bigger as one adds more mass, and just about the mass of our sun, it would get so compact and simply become a neutron star.
But to have that much mass in a star system as to be able to turn a telluric planet into a body of such mass, it would have to be formed in a system of immense mass, thus with a very large star; and your very heavy planet would still have to revolve around a much more massive star that the planet itself.
There is no way out. Planets have to orbit more massive objects than they are, this is how they form.

Answer 2

A star and a planet orbit each other around a common center,the smaller the planet the closer the common center is to the star.
If the masses were equal the common center would be half way between them and the planet would have to be massive enough to become a star.

Answer 3

Nope, gravity would crush it into a star. Giant planets are made of the same stuff stars are made of: Hydrogen. Once gravity compresses hydrogen to the point that protons can touch other protons, nuclear fusion will switch on like turning on a light bulb. The only difference between planets and stars in these size ranges is their size. Planets have an upper limit of about 14 Jupiters before they glow weakly with their own heat.

Answer 4

Yeah, but the star would have to be one about 20 times smaller than our sun, for instance, a red giant or brown giant orbiting a planet like Jupiter that is at least 5 times the size of the original Jupiter, and would have to be orbiting very close, like less than 20 million kilometers, and even that is fraught with complications, seeing as red giants are very unstable, and could send one of those 'bridges of fire' straight to ward the planet which would....erm....explode seeing as it is made of hydrogen. oh, and the core would be extremely big and made out of rock and crap and be 78% of the planet's mass, or else it would fire up too and become a star.

Answer 5

What a massive body does is determined by its mass. If it were large enough for stars to orbit around it, then it would not be a planet, it would be big enough to begin fusion reactions of its own accord, and hence be another star.

Answer 6

No. By definition, planets revolve (orbit) around stars (the larger mass object).

Answer 7

No. If a planet were big enough to have stars revolve around it, it should be big enough to generate sufficient internal heat to begin internal fusion and become a star itself.

Answer 8

No. A planet that big would ignite to become a star in itself. There are, however, what are called brown dwarfs, which are intermediary between stars and planets.

Answer 9

A planet like this would collapse in on itself and beocme a neutron star or black hole- although stars can orbit those. But you will never get a lump of rock that big in size- gravity would overhwelm it and it would crush itself.

Answer 10

If you closely read that truth, it points to God. You talked about nonliving particles making conscious particles. Does science have any answer to that? Science does not prove that there is no God. You can be curious and look for the creator of life/consciousness. Many scientific discoveries are result of people defying science of their times and explored the impossible. So be wise, science does not favor atheism but it does favor quest for God. Join the club of the curious or be lost with atheism. Find God, find life. No God, back to dust! Your choice will decide your end...