IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

81 Pages V  « < 66 67 68 69 70 > »   
Reply to this topicStart new topic
Kepler Mission
antipode
post Dec 27 2011, 09:53 PM
Post #1006


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 151
Joined: 1-October 06
Member No.: 1206



Maybe there will be some announcements along precisely those lines at this conference in a few weeks...

http://www.mpia-hd.mpg.de/PLANETS2012/index.html

P

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Syrinx
post Jan 26 2012, 11:03 PM
Post #1007


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 130
Joined: 31-May 08
From: San Jose, California, USA
Member No.: 4168



http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/...20126155915.htm

QUOTE
NASA's Kepler Announces 11 New Planetary Systems Hosting 26 Planets

ScienceDaily (Jan. 26, 2012) NASA's Kepler mission has discovered 11 new planetary systems hosting 26 confirmed planets. These discoveries nearly double the number of verified Kepler planets and triple the number of stars known to have more than one planet that transits
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
belleraphon1
post Jan 27 2012, 12:16 PM
Post #1008


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 741
Joined: 29-December 05
From: NE Oh, USA
Member No.: 627



WONDEROUS! and WEIRD ... What a Universe we inhabit.

NASA's Kepler announces 11 planetary systems hosting 26 planets

From the KEPLER web site - more details
http://kepler.nasa.gov/news/index.cfm?Fuse...&NewsID=182

Papers:
Kepler-23 and Kepler-24 - Transit Timing Observations from Kepler: II. Confirmation of Two Multiplanet Systems via a Non-parametric Correlation Analysis. Confirms KOI-168=Kepler-23 and KOI 1102=Kepler-24
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1201.5409.pdf

Kepler-25, 26, 27 and 28 - Transit Timing Observations From Kepler: IV. Confirmation Of 4 Multiple Planet Systems By Simple Physical Models
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1201.5412.pdf

Kepler-29, 30, 31 and 32 - Transit Timing Observations from Kepler: III. Confirmation of 4 Multiple Planet Systems by a Fourier-Domain Study of Anti-correlated Transit Timing Variations
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1201.5415v1.pdf

kepler-33 - Almost All of Kepler's Multiple Planet Candidates are Planets, and Kepler-33 5-planet system
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1201.5424v1.pdf

Enjoy
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
brellis
post Feb 17 2012, 03:11 AM
Post #1009


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 718
Joined: 9-February 07
Member No.: 1700



Kepler has found lots of 'Hot Jupiters' in its survey thus far. Are there models that would indicate the chance that the equivalent of our Kuiper Belt might exist in those systems?

What if 'hot KBOs' are floating in 'habitable zones'?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Gsnorgathon
post Feb 17 2012, 04:27 AM
Post #1010


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 251
Joined: 23-January 05
From: Seattle, WA
Member No.: 156



Wouldn't a hot KBO just be a really big comet?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
nprev
post Feb 17 2012, 06:40 AM
Post #1011


Senior Member
****

Group: Moderator
Posts: 7143
Joined: 8-December 05
From: Los Angeles
Member No.: 602



...yep. And unless they were MUCH rockier than our KBOs are thought to be, they wouldn't last very long in terms of geological time...they'd become garden-variety asteroids in short order.

Let's not go off the deep end on the speculation front, please. Hot Jupiters, Neptunes, super-Earths, etc. are acceptable discussion topics since there is considerable observational evidence that they exist. I'm sure as time marches on exo-solar system research will provide even more surprises for us to discuss.


--------------------
A few will take this knowledge and use this power of a dream realized as a force for change, an impetus for further discovery to make less ancient dreams real.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
brellis
post Feb 17 2012, 08:33 AM
Post #1012


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 718
Joined: 9-February 07
Member No.: 1700



Seems like the very shallow end of speculation to me. Actually, just an innocent question. smile.gif

One interesting answer to the 'Hot Jupiter planetary model' question exists here:

http://astronomy.stackexchange.com/questio...their-host-star

QUOTE
There is mounting evidence from the Kepler mission that these hot Jupiters migrated in by scattering other planets out.


Sorry I asked.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
marsophile
post Feb 28 2012, 04:27 PM
Post #1013


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 313
Joined: 10-September 08
Member No.: 4338



http://arxiv.org/abs/1202.5852

New release: more planets, developing trends.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Syrinx
post Feb 28 2012, 09:36 PM
Post #1014


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 130
Joined: 31-May 08
From: San Jose, California, USA
Member No.: 4168



Thanks for the link!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
belleraphon1
post Feb 29 2012, 07:26 PM
Post #1015


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 741
Joined: 29-December 05
From: NE Oh, USA
Member No.: 627



KEPLER 02.28.2012 release news
http://kepler.nasa.gov/news/index.cfm?Fuse...&NewsID=190

Go to Nasa Planet Archive to download a spreadsheet with updated Kepler candidate data from the 02.28.2012 release.
Need to use firefox browser
http://exoplanetarchive.ipac.caltech.edu/c...xotbls?kepler=1

Craig
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Holder of the Tw...
post Mar 8 2012, 04:36 PM
Post #1016


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 393
Joined: 17-November 05
From: Oklahoma
Member No.: 557



One report out today on Space Daily suggests that exact earth analogs are relatively rare. Less than one per cent of all stellar systems will have one, if this analysis turns out to be correct.

Earthlike Planets Very Rare

Not what most of us want, but if it's true, then it is what it is.

Edit: When I posted I hadn't noticed who the author of the paper was. If I had, I certainly would have mentioned it. Sorry about that John.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
brellis
post Mar 8 2012, 05:54 PM
Post #1017


Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 718
Joined: 9-February 07
Member No.: 1700



How many of the 158,000 stars are tilted enough that their planets wouldn't transit Kepler's pov?

I'm glad I'm just a musician, I'm sticking with my optimism! biggrin.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
JRehling
post Mar 8 2012, 07:02 PM
Post #1018


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 1573
Joined: 20-April 05
Member No.: 321



It's worth noting (a point I trimmed from the article) that the bin for earth-sized planets with periods of 64 to 128 days has zero observed candidates although in the 407 days of observations, any such world must have transited between three and seven times while Kepler was watching (discounting the possible lapses of downtime), and so we aren't actually waiting, as the mission goes on, to see any new transits there: As the mission goes on, any such planet will only repeat what it's already done (e.g., transit, and be missed in the noise, or not transit... or not exist).

That's a bin two slots to the left (two powers of two shorter) than the Earth itself, and Kepler found none. The prospects for the Earth's actual bin are distinctly poorer. Kepler did, however, find five candidates in the bin corresponding to periods of 64 to 128 days and sizes one notch larger than Earth: worlds with radii 1.2 to 1.4 Re. That corresponds to a 2% abundance of such worlds, and every trend indicating continued drop-off with smaller sizes and greater distance.

re: Brellis's question, the probability of a randomly-placed observer being situated for the geometry to allow them to witness the Earth transiting the Sun is 0.29%. For a world twice as far out, the probability is half that. For a world twice as close, the probability is double that. In our solar system, the easiest worlds for Kepler to detect would be, in descending order: Venus, Earth, Jupiter, Saturn. As of this release, an exact Venus analogue *could* have been detected, but wasn't.

Kepler could detect exact analogues of almost any of the planets in the solar system, given the right luck and an un-noisy enough star. At levels of noise in the present analyses, it now seems quite unlikely that the abundance of terrestrial worlds in the habitable zone will be high enough for us to get good statistics on the frequency function out that far. We could always luck into a single detection, but getting statistical significance seems very unlikely. This highlights the importance either of ways to find repeated transits buried deep in the noise or follow-up missions that monitor a yet-larger number of stars.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
hendric
post Mar 8 2012, 10:36 PM
Post #1019


Director of Galilean Photography
***

Group: Members
Posts: 714
Joined: 15-July 04
From: Austin, TX
Member No.: 93



John,
I was unsure in the article what you did to de-bias the frequency (or is that a reference to a pre-processed value provided by the Kepler team?). Are you modifying each frequency bin by the chance to detect an earth-like planet at that bin?

Edit:
I also repeat the question left on the article - Are these sun-like stars, or is there a bias in this dataset to stars of a different size than the sun? Many more small stars in the galaxy, larger stars are easier to see at a distance. Really needs a 3-d representation with star's mass or radius as another axis, and possibly a 4D representation with the star's metallicity or distance from Earth.


Edit^2: Nevermind, I see where you responded that the data is all stars lumped together, and that there isn't enough data to separate the stars into separate bins.


--------------------
Space Enthusiast Richard Hendricks
--
"The engineers, as usual, made a tremendous fuss. Again as usual, they did the job in half the time they had dismissed as being absolutely impossible." --Rescue Party, Arthur C Clarke
Mother Nature is the final inspector of all quality.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ngunn
post Mar 8 2012, 10:43 PM
Post #1020


Senior Member
****

Group: Members
Posts: 3192
Joined: 4-November 05
From: North Wales
Member No.: 542



Great to see you posting again JRehling. smile.gif Here's what I take from the Kepler release.
1/ 0.7% is plenty. I reckon that means about 100 within 100LY
2/ The estimate is premature. Let's wait for the full data set and the long analysis.
3/ I've heard it stated (in the infamous IAU debate on the definition of "planet") that the solar system is dynamically 'full' in the sense that the planets are packed together as closely as possible apart from the gap where the asteroid belt is located. The dense compact systems Kepler has found seem to contradict this hypothesis, unless in fact they are young systems that will in due course eject or swallow most of the objects now observed.
4/ I love all these planets and their extreme diversity, no doubt arising from peculiar histories yet to be elucidated. (Just look at the Iapetus 'fairy tale' for an example of reality exceeding imagination.)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

81 Pages V  « < 66 67 68 69 70 > » 
Reply to this topicStart new topic

 



RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 29th November 2014 - 01:10 AM
RULES AND GUIDELINES
Please read the Forum Rules and Guidelines before posting.

IMAGE COPYRIGHT
Images posted on UnmannedSpaceflight.com may be copyrighted. Do not reproduce without permission. Read here for further information on space images and copyright.

OPINIONS AND MODERATION
Opinions expressed on UnmannedSpaceflight.com are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of UnmannedSpaceflight.com or The Planetary Society. The all-volunteer UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderation team is wholly independent of The Planetary Society. The Planetary Society has no influence over decisions made by the UnmannedSpaceflight.com moderators.
SUPPORT THE FORUM
Unmannedspaceflight.com is a project of the Planetary Society and is funded by donations from visitors and members. Help keep this forum up and running by contributing here.