The Blistering Hot Exoplanet Where It Snows

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

The Blistering Hot Exoplanet Where It Snows

Posted by Soulskill on Tuesday March 13, 2012 @09:10PM from the blame-the-space-alien-groundhogs dept.

cylonlover writes "Today's weather on HD 189733b: It will be hazy with high wispy clouds. The wind will be steady from the east at speeds approaching 6,000 miles per hour (9,656 km/h). Daytime temperatures will average a balmy 800C (1,472F), while the equatorial hot spot at 30 degrees longitude is expected to top 900C (1,652F). But, there is a high chance of silicate snow showers, with accumulations expected except in the vicinity of the hot spot. Just how much can astronomical observations tell us about exoplanets — those worlds orbiting other stars in our galaxy? With patience and cunning, more than you might think."

68 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Weather forecasters by Rhodri+Mawr · 2012-03-13 21:17 · Score: 4, Funny

I don't know. I travelled all the way to HD 189733b, I was promised snow showers, wispy clouds, high winds. But, just my luck, it rained. It must be because I'm Welsh.
1. Re:Weather forecasters by Saintwolf · 2012-03-13 22:06 · Score: 1
  
  At least Michael Fish didn't do the forecast ;)
2. Re:Weather forecasters by flyneye · 2012-03-13 23:22 · Score: 2
  
  Weather men can't predict much better than a coin flip on this planet. Suddenly I should believe a prediction on a distant planet?
  
  --
  *Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
3. Re:Weather forecasters by niktemadur · 2012-03-13 23:39 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  Does being Welsh make you arrive 63 years late at 99.99% the speed of light?
  
  --
  Lil' Thindime, lilting a lacrimose lament, krashes the kwaint konfines of Kokonino Kounty
4. Re:Weather forecasters by ciderbrew · 2012-03-14 00:18 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  Having waited in a pub for a Welsh bloke to turn up on a number of occasions, I'd say 63 years late was rather prompt. The amount of drinking done after they arrive is worth the wait. You'd not want to start much earlier.
5. Re:Weather forecasters by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-14 00:41 · Score: 1
  
  I thought the weather quite dry. I'm from Seattle.
6. Re:Weather forecasters by niktemadur · 2012-03-14 00:46 · Score: 1
  
  Great. Only too late do I wish I had mod points.
  You'd not want to start much earlier.
  Yes, factoring in the shut-ins at pubs. Been there in Wales (Raglan, to be precise), great fun until shamefully late hours.
  Ah, the memories...
  
  --
  Lil' Thindime, lilting a lacrimose lament, krashes the kwaint konfines of Kokonino Kounty
7. Re:Weather forecasters by ArsenneLupin · 2012-03-14 01:08 · Score: 1
  
  You'd not want to start much earlier.
  Well, with a wait of 63 years, that takes a lot of self-control...
8. Re:Weather forecasters by terrox · 2012-03-14 01:21 · Score: 2
  
  more like, we can hardly predict the surface conditions of Mars until we go there with a probe - further planets are mostly a guess, and planets lightyears away?.. hahahah.. super guestimate based on guesses based on earth. 1% chance of being correct.
9. Re:Weather forecasters by need4mospd · 2012-03-14 04:57 · Score: 1
  
  At least it wasn't some Canadian guy trying to sing reggae music.
10. Re:Weather forecasters by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-14 08:35 · Score: 0
  
  Uranus is being circled by a Brown Horizon. A deep space probe.
11. Re:Weather forecasters by Rhodri+Mawr · 2012-03-14 09:43 · Score: 1
  
  There's a reason that jokes start "An Englishman, a Scotsman and an Irishman walk into a bar..." - the Welshman was already there from the night before.
12. Re:Weather forecasters by Thing+1 · 2012-03-18 03:20 · Score: 1
  
  Not sure whether Welsh are late, but being from Wight helps to make you early:
  There once was a man from Wight
  Who could travel much faster than light
  He set off one day
  In a relative way
  And returned home the previous night.
  My favorite non-licentious limerick!
  
  --
  I feel fantastic, and I'm still alive.
I welcome by Dave+Whiteside · 2012-03-13 21:19 · Score: 0

our sandy overlords.
it's all very interesting but we're not likely to visit anytime soon so is there a point ? or is knowledge for knowledge sake enough ?

--
who where what when now?
1. Re:I welcome by dominious · 2012-03-13 21:29 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  This is not just for knowledge sake. Weather conditions on other planets may help us understand weather behaviour in general, and in turn understand better the weather conditions on our own planet.
2. Re:I welcome by An+Anonymous+Coward · 2012-03-13 22:36 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Well sure, if we could actually observe the weather on this planet and confirm or refine our speculations, that would be great. Unfortunately, the technology to do so is well beyond our means at this point. By the time we actually are able to directly observe this planet, our weather models will probably be much more refined as well.
  I'm reminded of the planet discovered over a year ago that was tidally locked to its star, which created a habitable zone circling the planet where the light from the star would hit it at an oblong angle, creating a zone of essentially perpetual twilight where life could form. We had quite a few ideas already for what the environment on this planet must be like, until further measurements of the star system revealed that the "planet" was really just minor errors in the calculations of the star's wobble, and there wasn't even a planet there to begin with.
  This article isn't "just knowledge for knowledge's sake." Indeed, it seems to be purely speculation for speculation's sake. I'm actually very concerned by the line in the summary, "With patience and cunning, more than you might think," because that really implies we know a lot more about what we're talking about than we actually do. I'll just be happy when the weather forecaster on TV can accurately tell me the weather for the next week.
3. Re:I welcome by troon · 2012-03-13 23:36 · Score: 1
  
  What, this one?
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gliese_581_g
  All sorts of data and predictions, mixed in with a large dose of "it's probably not there"...
  
  --
  Ydco co ,df C erb-y go. a Ekrpat t.fxrapev
4. Re:I welcome by theguyfromsaturn · 2012-03-14 01:56 · Score: 2
  
  Of course knowledge for knowledge sake is enough. Who knows when "useless" knowledge becomes useful. When computers first appeared lot of theory on discrete compuations and methods had been developped, decades, and in some cases centuries, before it became practical. This then was only "knowledge for knowledge's sake". Then the electronic computers made it so much more useful. But without that background work, it might not even have been practical to develop computers without anything to use them with. While it's good to look for practical applications for knowledge, the lack of immediate application does not render said knowledge irrelevant. One day it may turn out that that bacground info becomes the seed of something revolutionnary.
  
  --
  I like my dinosaurs feathery, and my pterosaurs hairy (or is it pycnofibery?)
5. Re:I welcome by flyneye · 2012-03-14 22:58 · Score: 0
  
  No, he WENT to a different party, the last one only had a keg and hookers, this one has nitrous oxide and hermaphroditic geminids.
  There are no parties,there is a party that pretends it is two by having cosmetic differences to fool the suckers.
  Repubmocrats have ruled us nearly unopposed for more than a century.
  
  --
  *Repent!Quit Your Job!Slack Off!The World Ends Tomorrow and You May Die!
It's all speculation until you go there by Spy+Handler · 2012-03-13 21:22 · Score: 3, Interesting

Take Mars for instance. There was a lot of good scientific guesswork based on indirect observation, but when they finally sent a probe there, all the talk about canals and whatnot faded away...
1. Re:It's all speculation until you go there by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-13 21:33 · Score: 1
  
  the Canals nonesense was explained by the astronomer who observed them actually seeing the blood vessels in his own eyes.
2. Re:It's all speculation until you go there by SuricouRaven · 2012-03-13 21:43 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  He didn't even call them canals - he thought they were a naturally-occuring formation - but a translation error rendered them as 'canals' when his work was translated to english.
3. Re:It's all speculation until you go there by amck · 2012-03-13 21:49 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  We actually run weather and climate models for Mars, now. Currently we've run models on Mars, Titan and Venus, based on Earth weather models. Its a good check on whether the models are right: physics is physics, and bar changing some specific details (water -> methane, CO2 condenses out on Mars, etc) if the model doesn't work on Mars, somethings wrong with the model.
  
  --
  Anyone who believes exponential growth can go on forever in a finite world is either a madman or an economist
4. Re:It's all speculation until you go there by AdrianKemp · 2012-03-14 00:05 · Score: 1
  
  Yeah, but it doesn't work on Earth either.
  Although there is truth behind what you say you have the reasoning wrong. Models on other planets allow us more than one point of data for atmospheric study, and do thus allow for better understandings.
  It's not about testing the model, it's about trying to make it work at all.
5. Re:It's all speculation until you go there by Muad'Dave · 2012-03-14 01:39 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  He called them 'canali' which is Italian for channels; a word that does not carry the same anthropomorphic baggage as canals.
  Thank heaven it didn't get mistranslated into cannoli - we'd have a line of Paula Dean wannabees lines up for launch.
  
  --
  Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
But if its a gas giant, where... by Viol8 · 2012-03-13 21:28 · Score: 1

.... does the silicate come from? Will it have migrated all the way from the (presumably) rocky core through thousands of miles of gas or is it formed by some sort of reaction in the atmosphere?
1. Re:But if its a gas giant, where... by captainpanic · 2012-03-14 00:40 · Score: 1
  
  On such a planet, silicate IS perhaps the gas (in a similar way that our atmosphere consists partially of water vapor)?
2. Re:But if its a gas giant, where... by Muad'Dave · 2012-03-14 01:44 · Score: 1
  
  Hopefully it's not the silicon analog to methane - silane. Here on Earth it's toxic and pyrophoric (self-igniting) in air. Nasty business. Imagine opening a valve on a silane tank and getting a '30 FOOT TONGUE OF LETHAL FLAME!' [homage to a jet dragster commercial from my youth].
  
  --
  Tiller's Rule: Never use a word in written form that you've only heard and never read. You will end up looking foolish.
Speculation and hypothesis by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-13 21:34 · Score: 1

...Not to put this work down at all. It is important and difficult and it is amazing how far we've come. But our ability to observe is limited so a lot of this is by necessity speculation and hypothesis. The planets in our own solar system - much nearer - still offer suprrises when we visit them. To think that we can know with any real certainty what exoplanets are like from the limited data our current tech gathers is foolish to say the least.
Better name for planet by TheHonch · 2012-03-13 21:44 · Score: 1

Hoth of course!
1. Re:Better name for planet by Anne_Nonymous · 2012-03-14 01:40 · Score: 1
  
  >> Daytime temperatures will average a balmy 800C
  Or at least Hot.
2. Re:Better name for planet by Zephyn · 2012-03-14 03:13 · Score: 1
  
  But it only feels like 780C with the wind chill.
3. Re:Better name for planet by wonkey_monkey · 2012-03-14 04:14 · Score: 1
  
  Shoulda called it Coldth. Am I right? I'm right.
  
  --
  systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
AGW again! by billrp · 2012-03-13 22:03 · Score: 4, Funny

By just observing the weather we've probably already changed it!
Oh yeah? by corisco · 2012-03-13 22:04 · Score: 0

One could multiply all those numbers by a 1000 and no one would know the difference !
9,656 km/h by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-13 23:04 · Score: 0

You whip your scientific superdupermegacalculator and unit conversion tool (or just use google.com). You enter "6000 mph in km/h". You get back a figure of 9656. You paste it to the article you're writing. Everything is OK.
Except you have no business writing about science. The source figure has one (that's 1.000e0 for you) significant digit. One. The result cannot be more precise than that. Got it? GOT IT?
1. Re:9,656 km/h by ridley4 · 2012-03-13 23:12 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  This is a prime example of over-applying significant digits in your math.
  Don't let this happen to you. Millions of nitpicks are made each year when significance arithmetic is misused and overused. They need your help.
  Please use significant digits responsibly. Thank you.
2. Re:9,656 km/h by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-14 00:46 · Score: 0
  
  How can you tell?
  Maybe the source has 4 significant digits and was measured to be EXACTLY 6000 mph?
3. Re:9,656 km/h by ediron2 · 2012-03-14 03:17 · Score: 1
  
  Damn shame you didn't go for the ironic and say '8,675,309 nitpicks are made each year...'
4. Re:9,656 km/h by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-14 04:09 · Score: 0
  
  The internationalization is also inconsistent. ... Miles/hour ... C
  Either list them in US (/sigh) units with non-US in parenthesis or vice versa; listing US speed and non-US temperature is correct for no audience.
5. Re:9,656 km/h by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-14 05:52 · Score: 0
  
  What is the imperial unit for nitpicks ? Because they can only be metric themselves...
Orbitting an "exosun"? by Rogerborg · 2012-03-13 23:21 · Score: 2

Planet. It's a planet. Flash Gordon didn't rock the spandex on "exoplanets". Captain Kirk didn't put the beat-down on that Gorn on an "exoearth".
They're just planets. The context makes it all clear, and "exo" is just meaningless marketeer blurb. Please stop it.

--
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
1. Re:Orbitting an "exosun"? by VortexCortex · 2012-03-14 01:45 · Score: 1
  
  Planet. It's a planet. Flash Gordon didn't rock the spandex on "exoplanets". Captain Kirk didn't put the beat-down on that Gorn on an "exoearth".
  They've tried to stop it, but have made a compromise... The term was shortened from: Extra-Terrestrial Planets.
2. Re:Orbitting an "exosun"? by homsar · 2012-03-14 01:54 · Score: 1
  
  Oh, I thought it was extra-solar. As in, not part of our solar system. Non-exo planets would be much more exciting to discover (if far less likely, unless you count dwarf planets).
3. Re:Orbitting an "exosun"? by tomhath · 2012-03-14 03:26 · Score: 1
  
  Call in an "exosolar planet", "unbound free-floating planetary-mass body", or "exoplanet", but it's reasonable to qualify the word to indicate that the planet is not bound to our Sun or another star.
4. Re:Orbitting an "exosun"? by mcgrew · 2012-03-14 03:31 · Score: 1
  
  Flash Gordon and Star Trek were fiction. We knew of no exoplanets in the 1930s and 1960s. The name wasn't thought up by marketers, it was coined by astronomers.
  Likewise, the SF guys all call our star the "sun" while Alpha Proxima is simply a "star". Solar planets are unique in that they circle not a star, but the sun -- even though the sun is a star.
  It's a lot more logical than planets vs dwarf planets.
  
  --
  Free Martian Whores!
5. Re:Orbitting an "exosun"? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-14 07:02 · Score: 0
  
  Sorry, according to the IAU, only objects within the solar system are considered 'planets'.
6. Re:Orbitting an "exosun"? by LWATCDR · 2012-03-14 07:48 · Score: 1
  
  Extra-Terrestrial means not Earth.
  
  --
  See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
7. Re:Orbitting an "exosun"? by LWATCDR · 2012-03-14 07:54 · Score: 1
  
  Exosolar planet means not around our star. Our sun's name is Sol.
  Exostellar would mean an unbounded free-floating planetary-mass body but that has other issues since the current definition of a plant involves it sweeping it's orbit clear of other bodies which a free-floating mass can not really do but it is still workable.
  
  --
  See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
i think this would put a damper by decora · 2012-03-14 00:08 · Score: 1

on captain kirk's love life
1. Re:i think this would put a damper by emmjayell · 2012-03-14 00:21 · Score: 1
  
  He'd be smokin hot for at least a second or two until he vaporized.
What to name it? by Dogbertius · 2012-03-14 01:14 · Score: 1

So would this be ShiverBurn or FreezeFlame I? So long as I don't have to run up the volcano without touching lava once, I think I'll be fine.

And I, for one, would just like to say: "Welcome, new a galaxy!!"
...and? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-14 01:20 · Score: 0

Fine, but what's the low going to be?
...And? by milkman479 · 2012-03-14 01:26 · Score: 1

Fine, but what's the low going to be?
Oh I know the answer to this one.. by willie3204 · 2012-03-14 01:43 · Score: 1

It's Mars, right?

--
The answer to all your problems
Silica haze: aka dust by jbeaupre · 2012-03-14 02:09 · Score: 1

As anyone who has lived in the desert can tell you, silica haze is pretty common when the wind blows. When it settles, we don't call it snow. We call it dust.

--
The world is made by those who show up for the job.
Significant digits! PLEASE! by FormOfActionBanana · 2012-03-14 03:28 · Score: 1

What is this 9656, 1472, 1652 bullshit? COME ON.
Why not:

The wind will be steady from the east at speeds approaching 3,000 m/s (6,000 mph). Daytime temperatures will average a balmy 800C (1500F), while the equatorial hot spot at 30 degrees longitude is expected to top 900C (1700F).

--
Take off every 'sig' !!
1. Re:Significant digits! PLEASE! by FormOfActionBanana · 2012-03-14 03:29 · Score: 1
  
  This really makes me CRAZY. "Lady found a three foot alligator (0.9144 m) in her bathtub!" What the fuck is wrong with one meter in this case???
  
  --
  Take off every 'sig' !!
Somebody get some significant digits up in this! by TangoMargarine · 2012-03-14 04:09 · Score: 1

Daytime temperatures will average a balmy 800C (1,472F)
Because 800C is of course precise to the degree...try 1500F instead.

--
Unity? Screw that: XFCE. Slashdot Beta? Screw that: SoylentNews. Australis? Screw that: Pale Moon. UX developers DIAF
Global Warming? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-14 04:15 · Score: 0

Just another case of the scary liberals trying to promote their hidden global warming agenda using science and facts to come to logical conclusions.
Raining sand by jouassou · 2012-03-14 04:35 · Score: 1

high chance of silicate snow showers
Does this mean that it's basically raining sand?
1. Re:Raining sand by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-14 05:46 · Score: 0
  
  It's raining sand...
  Hallelujah.
Unit conversions? by Anonymous Coward · 2012-03-14 07:06 · Score: 0

Interestingly enough, we first convert 6,000 miles per hour (with km/h here), then 800 celcius (with Fahrenheit in here)
I don't get it by saveferrousoxide · 2012-03-14 07:41 · Score: 1

How does "a plausible scenario for this species, a high-altitude silicate haze" translate to "a high chance of silicate snow showers." "High-altitude" alone removes any connotation of "showers." Sounds more like "clouds" to me.