Slashdot Mirror


First Evidence of Extrasolar Planets Discovered In 1917

KentuckyFC writes: Earth's closest white dwarf is called van Maanen 2 and sits 14 light-years from here. It was discovered by the Dutch astronomer Adriaan van Maanen in 1917, but it was initially hard to classify. That's because its spectra contains lots of heavy elements alongside hydrogen and helium, the usual components of a white dwarf photosphere. In recent years, astronomers have discovered many white dwarfs with similar spectra and shown that the heavy elements come from asteroids raining down onto the surface of the stars. It turns out that all these white dwarfs are orbited by a large planet and an asteroid belt. As the planet orbits, it perturbs the rocky belt, causing asteroids to collide and spiral in toward their parent star. This process is so common that astronomers now use the heavy element spectra as a marker for the presence of extrasolar planets. A re-analysis of van Maanen's work shows that, in hindsight, he was the first to discover the tell-tale signature of extrasolar planets almost a century ago.

58 comments

  1. Amazing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    As always, we were there first. We Europeans are truly the Master Race.

    1. Re:Amazing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Europeans are the Daleks? This explains so much.

  2. Roundabout by Tablizer · · Score: 2

    That's rather indirect evidence. The title is a bit misleading if you ask me. It's an interesting fact, I agree, but the title needs work.

    1. Re:Roundabout by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you find "From Slashdot" miseadling? http://i.imgur.com/gufTpkV.png

    2. Re:Roundabout by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      something that cannot be named or described, by it's very nature.

      But you named it the tanglon particle....

    3. Re:Roundabout by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is that 90 degrees Celsius or 90 degrees Fahrenheit? Because I already named the one that was 90 degrees Kelvin to Bob.

    4. Re:Roundabout by Teresita · · Score: 0

      Captain Picard, the tanglon particle flux is down to seventy percent! The warp core must be jettisoned in thirty seconds!

    5. Re:Roundabout by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Your techno-babble is weak...

    6. Re:Roundabout by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Picard never jettisoned the warp core, it was Janeway who made a semi-regular habit of that.

    7. Re:Roundabout by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why jettison the warp core when he can jettison the whole backside of his ship every other episode?

  3. Breaking news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Telescopes were not as advanced almost 100 years ago!

    1. Re:Breaking news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Telescopes from 20 years ago are a joke compared to what is being built today.

    2. Re:Breaking news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh come on. That's like saying cars from 20 years ago were a joke. They still look the same and act the same. Maybe you mean the computers attached to them are better. That's about it.

    3. Re: Breaking news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Two words, digital cameras

  4. Typical /. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Almost a century late to report the news.

    1. Re:Typical /. by rioki · · Score: 1

      +1 Funny

    2. Re:Typical /. by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      And in another 100 years, we'll see a dupe.

  5. Actually... by Thanshin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    So now the first discoverer is the one who sees it for the first time even if that person doesn't know what it was that he saw? Great! I might be the discoverer of a distant supernova if I'm the first human being whose eye is hit by a photon created during it's explosion!

    Now to play the waiting game until someone discovers it. Oh, no, I mean until someone correctly identifies it as a supernova and someone else points out that I am the discoverer, because the photon hit me first.

    1. Re:Actually... by itzly · · Score: 1

      Well, to be fair, van Maanen did more than see a photon. He did analysis of a strange phenomenon and documented it.

    2. Re:Actually... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So now the first discoverer is the one who sees it for the first time even if that person doesn't know what it was that he saw?

      As far as I know we still accept Columbus as the discoverer of America and still call native Americans for Indians because he didn't know what it was that he saw.
      I wouldn't really say "So now", since it been that way for several centuries at least.

    3. Re:Actually... by Thanshin · · Score: 1

      Indeed, so some criteria are needed to established who is the discoverer. As far as I know, one of those criteria is knowing what's being discovered.

    4. Re:Actually... by rossdee · · Score: 2

      "As far as I know we still accept Columbus as the discoverer of America"

      No we don't.

      I was taught in school that Lief Ericson did.

    5. Re:Actually... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Indeed, so some criteria are needed to established who is the discoverer. As far as I know, one of those criteria is knowing what's being discovered.

      At what point would you say that one "knew" what America was. We know that Columbus didn't know it. Was it when the west coast was discovered, or would one have to find both Alaska and the southern tip of Chile as well?
      Perhaps we can conclude that America has yet to be discovered?

    6. Re:Actually... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Didn't those red skinned guys who had been living in America discover the continent many years before Columbus or Lief were even existed?

    7. Re:Actually... by someone1234 · · Score: 1

      He discovered the evidence, he didn't draw any conclusion.

      --
      Patents Drive Free Software as Hurricanes Drive Construction Industry
    8. Re:Actually... by BlackPignouf · · Score: 1

      Exactly. "Where's Waldo?" just got way easier.

    9. Re:Actually... by mcvos · · Score: 1

      At what point would you say that one "knew" what America was. We know that Columbus didn't know it.

      I don't know, but if it takes credit away from that genocidal pedophile slaver, I'll take it.

    10. Re:Actually... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, I just got hit in the eye by your extra apostrophe.

      it's means it is. You think by the time you settle into your Mars condo you'll have figured that out?

    11. Re:Actually... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think discovering requires writing it down and spreading the knowledge in this way. Writing is more reliable evidence than passing on of stories. Alternatively, one could posess evidence (such as foreign objects, animals or plants) to document the discovery. The Vikings passed on their knowledge orally. The Native Americans did not spread the knowledge back to Asia via writing either, in fact I am not aware of any tribe going back and forth.

    12. Re:Actually... by rioki · · Score: 1

      The notion that Columbus, "discovered" America is odd at best. The fact that it was already inhabited and he was not even the first European sort of renders the "discovered" point moot. He not even was able to notice that he was not really in India. Sure the travel was sort of epic for the time, but the "Columbus discovered America" meme is sort of nonsense.

    13. Re:Actually... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Some Chinese dude got there first. Does that count?

    14. Re:Actually... by Alomex · · Score: 1

      If you are going to count Leif Ericson as a "discoverer" then you must count the Mongols who populated America across the Bering Straight as earlier discoverers.

      If on the other hand we use "discoverer" in the standard sense or person who first widely disseminated a fact then there is no doubt Columbus deserves the moniker.

    15. Re:Actually... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Indeed, so some criteria are needed to established who is the discoverer. As far as I know, one of those criteria is knowing what's being discovered.

      That's the dumbest thing I've read in a long time. According to your puny brain, no one can know of anything until the phenomena is fully understood. What a plank you are.

    16. Re:Actually... by jfengel · · Score: 1

      He was the one who kicked off European colonization and exploitation of the place. Other Europeans who came made only a tenuous foothold. Columbus was the one who said, "There's a place over there, and it's worth living in and taking stuff." He's the reason Europeans in general came to know about it.

      It's not entirely out of keeping with other uses of "discover". The OED's first definition is "To disclose, reveal, etc., to others". The fact that it's first is historical, rather than a matter of present usage; the present use "to find out" is also very old. But it also includes notions of "finding out for oneself", i.e. not necessarily being the very first.

      All told the OED gives over a dozen different shades of meaning for "discover", and I don't think this one is entirely wrong. It can be misleading, since as you say there were already people there and other Europeans had lived there, but he was an important "first" whatever word one applies.

    17. Re:Actually... by Immerman · · Score: 1

      I would think living in a place for 10,000+ years and leaving plentiful archaeological evidence behind would qualify as evidence that you had in fact discovered it.

      No, they didn't spread word back to Asia or Europe (or maybe they did - 10,000 years is a long time for legends to survive in a largely pre-literate society), but since when has publication become synonymous with discovery? Even in science publication was rare until quite recently - it used to be that scientists would "publish" their findings primarily in encrypted form, so that they could later prove that they were the original discoverer of some new phenomena or principle, without having to share their hard-earned knowledge in the meantime.

      --
      --- Most topics have many sides worth arguing, allow me to take one opposite you.
    18. Re:Actually... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That depends. Did they have a flag?

    19. Re:Actually... by rioki · · Score: 1

      I did no say that Columbus did not have an important part in world history. But in the US the meme "Columbus discovered America" is somewhat misguided. But then again world history is glossed over in US schools.

  6. Roundabout by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For the record: I discovered the tanglon particle yesterday. It's a particle not on the matter / antimatter axis, but off by 90 degrees into something that cannot be named or described, by it's very nature.

  7. Sirius B! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    "Earth's closest white dwarf is called van Maanen 2 and sits 14 light-years from here." Balderdash! Sirius B is a white dwarf that 7 years from here.

    1. Re:Sirius B! by rioki · · Score: 1, Informative

      Sirius B is a white dwarf that 7 years from here

      Just to be pedantic... 7 light-years.

    2. Re:Sirius B! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, it's 8.6ly but I'll let you slide this time.

    3. Re:Sirius B! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right - 7 years - that is what the parent said.

      You got a quicker way of getting there?

    4. Re:Sirius B! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm glad you clarified, because here I was thinking Sirius B will be created in the year 2021.

    5. Re:Sirius B! by TheCarp · · Score: 1

      actually I do but, it requires some investment funds in order to get enough negative matter to work. I would be happy to give you the once in a lifetime opportunity however to get in on the ground floor in this world changing investment.

      --
      "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
    6. Re:Sirius B! by rioki · · Score: 1

      How far do you get in 7 years, if you walk?

    7. Re:Sirius B! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wouldn't that depend upon how fast you walk?

      Hypothetical case: Assume I am walking at the speed of light . . .

  8. The closest? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Did something happen to Sirius B recently?

    1. Re:The closest? by Teresita · · Score: 2

      Van Maanen's star is the closest white dwarf that's all by its lonesome, that's what the article meant.

    2. Re:The closest? by mcvos · · Score: 1

      Why did this get modded down? I know Anonymous Coward regularly posts some inane crap, but this is a very valid question.

    3. Re:The closest? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why did this get modded down? I know Anonymous Coward regularly posts some inane crap, but this is a very valid question.

      Odd that somebody spent a point to mod AC redundant when he posted only 14 minutes after other AC pointed out Sirius B is closer.

      Seeing as it is AC though, I'm not wasting a mod point on an underrated to correct it.

  9. Data, not evidence by Required+Snark · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Evidence is the loaded term here. It's only evidence in the context of a hypothesis, otherwise it is an observation, i.e. data.

    The Hertzsprung–Russell diagram was proposed in 1910. It wasn't until the 1930's that it was understood how fusion was the energy producing mechanism for stars. Without understanding fusion and stellar evolution, there was no context in which to fit the observation of enhanced metallic elements in the star's spectrum.

    So this only became evidence decades after the initial observation. It's interesting that the observation was made so early, but only retrospect makes it significant.

    --
    Why is Snark Required?
  10. I Took A Picture by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I took a picture of the night sky and just discovered everything that has not yet been discovered.

    There will be a book signing on Friday.

  11. Who else thought by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    .... by Maanen!

  12. Dont read slashdot before coffee by JustNiz · · Score: 1

    My pre-coffee reading is terrible.
    I scanned this as:
    First Evidence of extra solar panels Discovered In 1917