Kepler Mission Options

[Syrinx]

Have they considered looking at a different field-of-view during the extended mission? Or would the goal be just to find longer period planets in the current FOV near Cygnus?

Yes, and yes.

Indeed it seems that the same FOV would yield decreasing results as the years pile on. But remember, Kepler does not function in isolation. Before Kepler launched, the Kepler ground team studied thousands of stars in the current FOV. The study enabled precise categorization of parent stars and therefore more accurate and precise results for their planets. The team would need to do the same study for any prospective FOV, and it's unlikely they'll find the time or the funding.

But, 10 years is a long time. Plans change.

[Syrinx]

I just got a Tweet from Kepler saying there's a press conference Aug. 26 at 10am PDT to discuss "an intriguing star system."

-- edit --

Link:

http://www.nasa.gov/centers/ames/news/rele...10/10-72AR.html

[K-P]

I just got a Tweet from Kepler saying there's a press conference Aug. 26 at 10am PDT to discuss "an intriguing star system."

-- edit --

Link:

http://www.nasa.gov/centers/ames/news/rele...10/10-72AR.html

Could this be considered as intriguing too...?

http://www.eso.org/public/news/eso1035/

[Stu]

Could this be considered as intriguing too...?

http://www.eso.org/public/news/eso1035/

Fascinating news, and a great achievement to be sure, but personally I just can't bring myself to think of an object with a "year" of just over 1 day as a planet. Something moving that closely and quickly around a star isn't a planet. It's a moth.

[Drkskywxlt]

Indeed it seems that the same FOV would yield decreasing results as the years pile on. But remember, Kepler does not function in isolation. Before Kepler launched, the Kepler ground team studied thousands of stars in the current FOV. The study enabled precise categorization of parent stars and therefore more accurate and precise results for their planets. The team would need to do the same study for any prospective FOV, and it's unlikely they'll find the time or the funding.

Good points. If they got ended with a total mission time of ~10 years, that should allow transiting planets with periods up to 5 years detected. But, with such long periods, you're looking at a REALLY narrow window of orbital inclinations to allow transits from our POV. I hope they'll pick a new FOV, but I imagine they'll stay on this one and just refine parameters on the planets they do find as well as look for longer period planets.

[PDP8E]

Kepler News conference this Thursday ... intriguing star system ... yikes! ... cant wait!
<speculation>
part of the system has a (large) planet (with potential moons) within the calculated habitable zone...
</speculation>

[ugordan]

Fascinating news, and a great achievement to be sure, but personally I just can't bring myself to think of an object with a "year" of just over 1 day as a planet.

Well, the other four potentials sure fit that category then.

[Drkskywxlt]

<speculation>
part of the system has a (large) planet (with potential moons) within the calculated habitable zone...
</speculation>

That would certainly be a find! But, I doubt it. I looked for moons in the Kepler data for the first 5 published planets (and didn't find any). What I did find out is that it will be a pretty amazing achievement to find a moon by transit-timing variation or transit-duration variations. The reasons are :
1. To get a big TTV or TDV, you want a small planet/big moon combination close to the star. In a close orbit, you get more precise transit times, which can let you tease out those TTVs or TDVs a little better. But, it's very unlikely for a large moon to be stable over a long period of time in a Hot Jupiter type orbit...ignoring the probable difficulty of giant planet migration while keeping its retinue of moons.
2. So, with planets farther out (closer to their original orbits), you're more likely to have stable very large (Mars or Earth-sized) moons, but it's going to be much harder to find transits on those planets and even harder to get precise TTV/TDV data.
David Kipping has a host of papers on the topic of finding moons with Kepler data.

I suspect their announcement will be a multiple planet (3 or 4 planet) system. Perhaps one will be in the habitable zone, but I bet one will be ~1-1.5 Earth masses. I bet their a bit bummed that the Europeans scooped them!

[hendric]

I think that after 6 years of looking at the current FOV, they should move on to another. 6 years gives enough time for 3-9 transits of semi-earths (say, 8 months to 2 years orbit time), which should give enough information to do significant statistics on. Also, once found, followup studies can be conducted from Earth.

Edit: And for the next FOV, choose one with a different galactic population, ie different metallicity and average age. That would help inform models of system formation.

[Stu]

Well, the other four potentials sure fit that category then.

Oh, absolutely they do, wasn't belittling that at all. And I'm really looking forward to the Kepler announcement! But a "year" that's a day long? That's just... silly.

[nprev]

I understand your argument, Richard, but at the same time it might be wise to constrain the mission's objective appropriately. Is it really to find possible Earth-analogs, or is it to get some idea in a statistical sense about the overall nature & frequency of occurrence of planetary systems in general around Sunlike stars?

From a scientific viewpoint, I'd argue that that latter objective would be more productive at this stage of the game. Until Kepler, we've generally only been able to see large planets in tight orbits around other stars, but we knew already that's not the only possibility since we don't live in a Solar System like that. The sad fact of the matter is that if Kepler finds an Earth-sized planet (or many!) dead smack in the middle of a given star's Goldilocks zone then what I just wrote is literally all we're gonna know about it for quite awhile. The discovery of these bodies hopefully would spike enough interest to fly the best TPF we can as a follow-on to Kepler, and that's when the real science on that very interesting niche of planetology will happen.

Meanwhile, for as long as Kepler survives, I think that X^nMs should be spent gathering as much data as possible about the distribution of planets & the nature of solar systems. In this case, that would mean staring at this same patch to map as many solar systems as completely we can.

[Stu]

The discovery of these bodies hopefully would spike enough interest to fly the best TPF we can as a follow-on to Kepler, and that's when the real science on that very interesting niche of planetology will happen.

Woooooooooh!!! Every time I think about that I genuinely get shivers running up and down my spine. Just imagine THAT day, when we're all sat here, at our computers, waiting for the press conference from the TPF Team. There are rumours that they've found a true Earth-like planet, and have images, but NASA has stayed silent on the speculation, and amazingly no info has leaked out. Then the conference begins and an image flashes up on the screen... a tiny ball, just a couple of dozen pixels wide, but it's blue, and white...

That's why I love Kepler so much. With Kepler we're all standing on the shore of Sagan's cosmic ocean, looking out to sea. We've known there must be other islands out there, other beaches, but we've had no proof. Until now.

Amazing times we live in. Amazing times...

[ugordan]

But a "year" that's a day long? That's just... silly.

Well, not any more silly than a day that's longer than a year!

[Stu]

I dunno... I frequently have days at work that seem longer than a year...

[SFJCody]

Then the conference begins and an image flashes up on the screen... a tiny ball, just a couple of dozen pixels wide, but it's blue, and white...

That would require something a bit more advanced than TPF.

http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclopedia/...anetImager.html