Slashdot Mirror
Trio of Super-Earths Discovered
FiReaNGeL writes "A group of astronomers have now discovered a system of three super-Earths around a rather normal star, which is slightly less massive than our Sun, and is located 42 light-years away towards the southern Doradus and Pictor constellations. 'We have made very precise measurements of the velocity of the star HD 40307 over the last five years, which clearly reveal the presence of three planets.' The planets, having 4.2, 6.7, and 9.4 times the mass of the Earth, orbit the star with periods of 4.3, 9.6, and 20.4 days, respectively. 'The perturbations induced by the planets are really tiny — the mass of the smallest planets is one hundred thousand times smaller than that of the star — and only the high sensitivity of HARPS made it possible to detect them' says co-author François Bouchy, from the Institut d'Astrophysique de Paris, France. Clearly these planets are only the tip of the iceberg."
Those who believe the Internet is private,
find their privates are on the Internet.
Why is it that most of the planets discovered have extremely short orbital periods compared to our own? Is it because those are the easiest types to detect, or is it because we are a cosmic oddity with our slow orbit around our star?
Also, I wonder if one were on one of these planetary speedsters, would you be able to tell you were whizzing around your star so fast.
Every time there's news of earth or super-earth sized planets, we always find that they're orbital period is like 5 days, which would mean the planet is completely scorched and incapable of supporting life or bearing liquid water. Such a downer....it doesn't matter what sized planet you have if its orbit places it so close to the star. Is this because the whole eclipse-detection method requires the planet to be close to its star so we can't actually detect planets further out from the star? I'm actually kind of tired hearing about "exciting" new of another planet being discover 5-30 million km from its star...that is not even close to being in the habitable zone people.
What exactly makes these Earth-like? From the data it appears that their masses are several times greater than Earth and their orbital periods are much much shorter than Earth. Is it because the star they orbit is similar to Sol? Is there any indication of water or an atmosphere on any of them? Not that this isn't a cool find, but it seems that the use of the word "Earth" is just sensationalism. I would've been just as happy if they had simply said "three planets."
God, schmod. I want my monkey man!
I think it just means its relatively solid, ie: non-gasious, plus they may deem it to be in the proper "zone" to become an earth-like planet (not too close, not too far)
Im not expert, but they (or at least one) may have an atmosphere of some sort, but I dont think anything that revolves around its sun that quickly, is likely to have "life", at least not intelligent life, they would have to be stupid yet productive, like insects...
> ... and is located 42 light-years away ...
So that was why the answer to the ultimate question was 42 - and the ultimate question itself must be something like "Are we alone in the universe, and if not, how many light-years away is the nearest other life?"
---they can't be very Earth-like. "Super-Mercury" would be more like it.
Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
> I think it just means its relatively solid, ie: non-gasious, plus they may deem it to be
> in the proper "zone" to become an earth-like planet (not too close, not too far)
With orbital periods of less than three weeks around a sun-like star they are going to be hotter than Mercury: far too hot for life.
Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
Space race just found a new meaning for its life, its universe, and everything.
It's a planet devoted to fighting crime, and supporting truth, justice, and the American way.
Need Geek Rock? Try The Franchise!
The planets, having 4.2, 6.7, and 9.4 times the mass of the Earth, orbit the star with periods of 4.3, 9.6, and 20.4 days, respectively.
Anything orbiting a star in 4.3 DAYS is extremely close to the star, and could not possibly anything more than a cinder, probably at near rock melting temperatures.
Mercury has an orbital period of 88 days for comparison.
Sig Battery depleted. Reverting to safe mode.
Gee, if we had a telescope array with a baseline of, say, the radius of the Moon's orbit, then we could resolve some REALLY small orbital perturbations, vastly improving our ability to identify planetary systems.
It occurs to me that such a system wouldn't even need to be (continuously) staffed after installation, just the occasional maintenance call.
I think I see an opportunity for a Lunar observatory project...
"My strength is as the strength of ten men, for I am wired to the eyeballs on espresso."
I think it's the "42 light-years away" that makes them less than useful.
No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
"Tip of the iceberg"? We found icebergs on a trio of extraterrestrial Super-Earths? That means water! That means life! That means green super-women, out there for the asking, who haven't heard how weird it is to have a space nerd boyfriend!
--
make install -not war
but maybe when we get there we could turn them into 20.3 Earth-sized planets in a decent orbit. We could also take the extra 0.3 and make a moon for each planet, or maybe something fancy like a ring. Who knows, by the time we actually figure out how to get there, we might be able to do this too...