Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Stellar Rejuvenation: Some Exoplanets May Get Facelifts

Posted by samzenpus on from the brand-new-look dept.

astroengine writes: Astronomers may have discovered an exoplanet that has found the elixir to planetary youth, knocking billions of years off its age. Until now, stellar rejuvenation has been pure conjecture, but after studying a white dwarf star called PG 0010+280, it turns out that one very interesting explanation for an excess in detected infrared radiation may be down to the presence of an exoplanet that was given a facelift. "When planets are young, they still glow with infrared light from their formation," said Michael Jura of the University of California, Los Angeles, co-author of the study published in The Astrophysical Journal. "But as they get older and cooler, you can't see them anymore. Rejuvenated planets would be visible again." This rejuvenation happens when stellar material shedding from a dying red giant star falls onto an exoplanet, causing heating and making it appear younger.

14 of 29 comments (clear)

  1. More bad science journalism by dreamchaser · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This just in: old, cool planets get hotter when their stars begin to die and dump hot stellar matter on them. No aspect of this is 'rejuvenation'.

    1. Re:More bad science journalism by gstoddart · · Score: 1

      Really? So, in theory, a planet could change from not being detected by our current techniques to detected by them, and that isn't "rejuvenation"?

      Nobody is saying it's Oil of Olay, but in terms of the observability of these planets, I think it's a fair term.

      In theory, a star could belch, and suddenly if you checked against previous data you'd find new planets. Because suddenly they glow. That in and of itself is mindboggling in terms of the probability of finding it.

      As much as it's a big-ass sky, we're kind of at a point where we can see the kind of things which have timescales in the thousands or millions of years ... only we might be lucky enough to see them and say "holy cow, that planet looks new because it got heated by its sun and we never thought of that".

      And the difference from 25 years ago is almost beyond comparison, and even the wildest dreams people had back then. Because even the basic idea of any of this stuff was bordering on speculative fiction.

      Bad science journalism my ass. This is some pretty cool stuff, and I can guarantee you 25 years ago nobody would have ever suggested what you think is easy, likely, or even possibly common enough in the universe for you to feel smug.

      The more we look out at space and realize how utterly jaw droppingly awesome it is, the more damned awesome it is.

      Yes, shit heats and cools. But this is way cooler than that.

      --
      Lost at C:>. Found at C.
    2. Re:More bad science journalism by penguinoid · · Score: 1

      Really? So, in theory, a planet could change from not being detected by our current techniques to detected by them, and that isn't "rejuvenation"?

      Correct. Just like when an obscure person becomes well-known, it doesn't make them any younger. And when your body temperature soars during cremation, you also aren't any younger.

      --
      Don't waste your vote! Vote for whoever you want, unless you live in a swing state it won't matter anyways
    3. Re:More bad science journalism by Sique · · Score: 1
      This just in: the difference between a just formed, new planet and a planet that got hot stellar matter from its central sol is much smaller than the difference between a newly formed planet and one that circles around the quiet central star for some billions of years.

      And thus it is a rejuvenation, as the planet gets more similar to its primordal state than before.

      --
      .sig: Sique *sigh*
    4. Re:More bad science journalism by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

      Just like when an obscure person becomes well-known, it doesn't make them any younger. And when your body temperature soars during cremation, you also aren't any younger.

      Except that the cooling off of a planet is the primary change that comes from a planet getting older. That matters far more than any analogy with the human body which behaves rather differently than a planet. You might was well complain that someone overhauling a small engine with new oil and gaskets so it runs just like new is not rejuvenation because blood transfusions don't make a person younger (actually, nothing you do to a person actually makes them younger...).

      Rejuvenation implies that the item rejuvenated is equivalent to function, performance, etc. of an earlier state. Rebuilding a small engine would be a type of rejuvenation. As for a planet, if it is rejuvenated, then not only temperature would change, but plate tectonics and other planetary systems would be, too. Your final comment actually, nothing you do to a person actually makes them younger applies to exoplanets, too.

    5. Re:More bad science journalism by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

      This just in: the difference between a just formed, new planet and a planet that got hot stellar matter from its central sol is much smaller than the difference between a newly formed planet and one that circles around the quiet central star for some billions of years.

      And thus it is a rejuvenation, as the planet gets more similar to its primordal state than before.

      Does the so called rejuvenated planet behave similar to the new planet - plate tectonics, chemistry, atmosphere, etc? Seems that to rejuvenate a planet would require more than just blasting it with stellar plasma and burning away it's surface. Just because it is now hotter so that we can detect it doesn't mean it is rejuvenated.

      If I leave the electric oven on and don't notice, but turning off the light in the kitchen allows me to see the orange glow does not mean my oven is rejuvenated. So, why should essentially the same thing mean a planet is?

  2. apocalyptic by Noah+Haders · · Score: 1

    This sounds like a nightmare scenario. your planet has mellowed to a nice sustainable temperature, and then your dying star starts dumping flaming radioactive matter on you, raising the surface temperature of the planet to hundreds of K

    1. Re:apocalyptic by cellocgw · · Score: 1

      Speaking of which, check out "Seveneves," the latest Neal Stephenson. The Earth gets a serious case of rejuvenation.

      --
      https://app.box.com/WitthoftResume Code: https://github.com/cellocgw
  3. Rejuvenation by Headw1nd · · Score: 3

    In the "Logan's Run" sense of the word

  4. Isn't our sun supposed to become a red giant? by Streetlight · · Score: 1

    If that's true, we won't have to worry about the trivial climate heating we are experiencing now. We will be toast!

    --
    In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. George Orwell
    1. Re:Isn't our sun supposed to become a red giant? by Dcnjoe60 · · Score: 1

      If that's true, we won't have to worry about the trivial climate heating we are experiencing now. We will be toast!

      That will never happen. Congress will pass a bill not allowing it.

  5. That's 'reheating', not 'rejuvenation' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Works the same with stale bread, when it gets cold again it is even worse. 'Publish or perish' doesn't only produce bad science, but bad language as well. Which is detrimental to both science and its popularity.

  6. Thats not a facelift... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Thats a hell of a sun burn.

  7. "Rejuvenated" by argStyopa · · Score: 1

    "Rejuvenated" is such a polite word for "bombarded, wrecked, and slagged to the point that the surface crust is really pretty much just a wreck of molten lava".
    As in "Mancini 'rejuvenated' Duk-koo Kim's face...."

    --
    -Styopa