No planets have been officially recognised outside our galaxy, though more than 500 exoplanets have been identified outside our solar system. Our nearest galaxy is too far away to detect such planets, though we can assume that it will contain several millions of planets based on observations within our own galaxy.
First and recently are mutually exclusive and cannot be answered
False. A moon, by definition, orbits a planet.
In every book, the conflict is different. Basically, it's just Arthur Dent and his attempts to get used to the life outside of his recently blowed up home planet.
I forgot her name but she is from a planet outside our galaxy.
Astronomers have decided that Pluto does not meet the definition of a planet.
Astronomers think Pluto is a dwarf planet. And they're right.
Astronomers once believed that planets were probably rare and unusual, and that tere might not be very many planets. However, recent discoveries indicate that planets are far more common; in fact, almost every star that astronomers have closely observed is discovered to have some planets! So it is likely that the "furthest planet in our galaxy" is on the other side of the galaxy from the Earth. The Milky Way galaxy has a radius of about 40,000 light years, and our solar system is about 3/4 of the way out from the center. So the "furthest planet in our galaxy" is probably somewhere near 70,000 light years away.
No. It was categorised as a dwarf planet in 2006, but not all astronomers agree with that decision.
pluto
The dwarf planet Pluto is believed by astronomers might be the core of a much larger planet
The galaxy is not a planet. The galaxy is MADE of millions and millions of stars and planets.
Gliese 581g has been discovered recently and scientists and astronomers think that there could be life on it - as it is in the 'Goldilocks zone' - a zone where there could well be water and land on planets in this area.