The Oort Cloud May Not Exist And I`ll Explain Why

The Oort Cloud is a mysterious entity. Located at the edge of the Solar System, this hypothetical region is likely the source of long-period comets that occasionally venture close enough to intersect the orbits of the inner planets.
However, there's a catch... the existence of this cloud has only been hypothesized and never proven. Believing in its existence is, therefore, an act of faith. ! Stick with us until the end, because that's where we'll present our own alternative hypothesis to the Oort Cloud!

The Oort Cloud is a fantastic cosmic creature... it's like the mythical "Arabian Phoenix... that everyone says is there, but no one knows where." No one has ever seen it... It's a shell of debris that encases our solar system. It's a swarm of nocturnal butterflies crowding around the light of the Sun, a dynamic system of large cometary nuclei lazily orbiting our star with periods of tens of millions of years...
--
DISCUSSIONS & SOCIAL MEDIA

--
--
00:00 Intro
0:50 the Oort cloud explained
4:38 interstellar space
5:30 Talking about distances with an example: light
13:08 difference between Kuiper belt and Oort cloud
--
#insanecuriosity #oortcloud #kuiperbelt

[InsaneCuriosity]

Hey Squad! If you liked the video, we would love for you to share it with your friends or on other social networks like Facebook, Reddit Instagram, Tik Tok and Twitter, etc.. ( Since the algorithm is not cooperating in showing us to the public sometimes😅). In just 30 seconds, you will greatly help our Channel to grow and improve our future content. A big thank you from all of us.

[MOKPT]

Every recreation shows comets so thick you could walk on them. In reality you would rarely or never see one from another. Nobody ever seems to mention this either. Tiny bodies spread out over a huge distance. They also falsely do this with satellites around Earth. The ISS very rarely sees another object in orbit. But they would have us think it looks like a highway buzzing by.

[wheeljork]

It remains a hypothesis mostly because the objects within it are essentially invisible to us until they end up disturbed and pulled in by the sun's gravity. We may never be able to literally image any objects within the cloud, but it is pretty much the only serious hypothesis of the origin of long period comets. There are other hypotheses but there are some issues with those that are not discussed in the video.

[TerraRyzer]

I’ve been to the Oort Cloud. It’s there.

[mpetersen]

One thing to consider. Any close approach by a passing star will involve that star possibly passing through part of the Oort Cloud. And the Sun passing through that star's own Oort Cloud.

[alvinmick]

I like this alternative view. It seems less complicated than the Ort Cloud Hypothesis and usually less complicated equates to more likely. I really appreciate the video. Thanks!

[robadams]

I liked the analogy of branches washing up on the beach. There must be trees out there somewhere. right? So the presence of comets in our skies from time to time must mean that there's a cloud of them out there.

[mikeburkhart]

Oort Cloud:"Person on Earth claims I don't exist!!!" Pluto:"I can relate...those pesky humans claim I'm not a planet!" Eris:" They never even gave me a chance to be called a planet!!"

[stevenbaumann]

I like your alternate hypothesis. It is viable.

Here's the thing. An Oort Cloud or interstellar debris isn't needed to explain long period comets. There's so few of them that inter solar interactions can explain them.

Or even passing by stars rocking the Kuiper Belt. Sholz's star is a tiny red dwarf that came only 4x the distance that Proxima is from Alpha Cen. Granted Schotz's didn't do much (it is an M9.5V star), but even a G or F class main sequence star at that distance would. They likely have. If a red giant came within 1 LY of the sun, it would definitely rock the Kuiper Belt. Since somewhere around 54, 000 stars have come within 3 LYs (18, 000) and roughly 1/3 of those within 1 LY, I would say the likelihood of at least 10 really massive stars (A and F main sequence or massive red giants), passing within a distance to mess with the Kuiper Belt is essentially 100%. That number is actually more like 100-1, 000, not 10 massive stars. If they come close enough to jostle the Kuiper Belt, they would have decimated any Oort cloud a billion years ago.

There is absolutely no need to explain long period comets with an Oort Cloud.

[paulsartorello]

When you say 62, 000 AU’s, doesn’t sound far, until I converted it into miles😳JFC!! IF, there’s life out there, which there should be, we ain’t gonna run into it in our lifetime. Everything is tooo far. Ya kno, we have a piece of paradise here, let’s not mess it up by inviting aliens here!!

[wakkosick]

Has no one acknowledged that if there were a ton of rocks on the edge of our solar system that they would block line of sight to other objects outside our solar system?

[alexhigginbotham]

If the objects are numerous enough they should be visible as a group. But I don't think that the Oort cloud is a consistent cover of rocks, but likely orbit the Sun in groups more like the Trojan asteroids within Jupiter's orbit. So they may exist... but we just have to look in the right places. But being that it appears that the further out we go from the Sun that the orbits of objects appear to stray from the orbital plane they could be very difficult to locate.

[davidl]

A stars gravity would make little sense without some amount of Oorr cloud like effect occurring. Right?

[NavarroRefugee]

There have been some proposals for spotting at least inner Oort cloud objects using an approach like the Kepler mission, where you watch stars and try to spot transit events where an Oort cloud object passes in front of it. No missions currently slated for this unfortunately, the telescopes that can do this sort of thing are all hunting exoplanets, but the question doesn't seem unanswerable.

[burkhardstackelberg]

Oort cloud objects and interstellar objects could differ by their velocity distribution and type of trajectory. If an unbound interstellar object meets the gravitational well of Sun, it follows a hyperbolical path around sun, leaving the solar system soon after. A bound object on the other hand follows an elliptical path. Most of the comets we have seen so far, are gravitationally bound to Sun, hence suggesting a cloud of gravitationally bound objects known as the Oort cloud.

Unless, though, this picture is distorted by objects swapping into and out from elliptical orbits around Sun by gravitational interactions with other interstellar objects. Hence, an Oort cloud rather would be a cloud of temporarily bound objects swapping in and out like interstellar ice bees.

[danielhall]

Asteroids don't sit as close as these animations depict.

[kanakTheGold]

To detect Oort objects, I'd imagine a couple approaches:-
1. New space craft (only if willing to burn budget) that would focus Lasers/ Masers into the very distant depths in the hopes of "minute reflections" and both onboard, ground based and in orbit probes (in Earth's Lagrange points) equipped with instruments sensitive enough to detect such low energy reflected radiation. If there are known long period comets, then tail them into their future orbits and you should focus in the rough inner areas of the Oort region.
2. Multiple telescopes & Interferometers (Ground based) operating in sync and separated across continents - to give you a giant 100-1000km wide telescope capable of resolving few 100km objects at distance of 0.5AU or more.
3. Same as 2, but this time, multiple space based observatories - near Earth and in L1/L2 points in Earth's orbit - potentially acting as a "single instrument" with advanced resolution capabilities ?
Again, all of this needing enormous time, energy, money, investments in a world short on all these and having dozens of higher priorities at global and national levels. Only an eccentric Billionaire from Carl Sagan's world, Hadden, could invest in this. Even Musk would see 'better wastage' of resources.
Unfortunate as it is, there is no hope other than a planned space mission running into many millennia. Or some exotic propulsion that achieves it within few centuries.

[ObatongoSensei]

I think that, more than an improbable spherical ancestral cloud, the Sun and other stars possess a halo of scattered and captured tiny objects, with more and more coming in continuously. It makes more sense than something which would be gravitationally destroyed by any star passing within its boundaries or somewhat nearby.

Probably, a considerable chunk of our galaxy mass is made out of such icy pebbles. And we cannot see it.

[TheJasonBorn]

I have a feeling that interstellar debris is what we are mistaking for the Oort cloud or something between a stable Oort cloud and interstellar debris.

[nirorbach]

I agree with your judgement about the lack of observational evidence regarding the Oort cloud.
Nevertheless I do have a comment about a possible visibility of an object. It is not the same as the ability to resolve details of it. An object may be small and bright, viewed as a visible point in our sky.