Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Seven-Planet System Detected

livasperiklis.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 78 posts

Re: Seven-Planet System Detected

#51

Post by deletes »

Debugreality wrote: post #45

I found this site interesting for more information: http://www.openexoplanetcatalogue.com/system.html?id=KOI-351... The star is about the same size as sol so it might be possible to live on some of the moons of the edge planet if we ever got there.

I think you found my new favorite website.

Some of the closest habitable neighbour stars.

tau Ceti: http://www.openexoplanetcatalogue.com/system.html?id=tau%20C...

Gliese 876: http://www.openexoplanetcatalogue.com/system.html?id=Gliese%...

HD 62509: http://www.openexoplanetcatalogue.com/system.html?id=HD%2062...

Gliese 581: http://www.openexoplanetcatalogue.com/system.html?id=Gliese%...

This is an interesting example, useless at first glance but you know there are a lot of smaller planets closer to the star. http://www.openexoplanetcatalogue.com/system.html?id=HR%2087...

Re: Seven-Planet System Detected

#52

Post by jlgreco »

lmm wrote: post #44
jlgreco wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This seems like yet another case of unnecessarily Earth/Sol-centric terminology, much like "apogee" being Earth specific such that you have to use "apoapsis" if you want to be generic. I mean, do we really need a new word for every planet, the sun, a star in general, a black hole specifically, and galaxies? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apsis#Terminology We should declare terminology bankruptcy to wipe out our existin…

When talking about orbits it's very useful to be able to make a distinction between apogee and lunar or solar apoapsis.

You inadvertently gave the solution: "lunar apoapsis", "solar apoapsis", "earth apoapsis".

Much easier than "aposelene/apocynthion/apolune", "aphelion", "apogee".

Re: Seven-Planet System Detected

#53

Post by nitrogen »

jlgreco wrote: post #32
doctoboggan wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just replace solar with stellar.

This seems like yet another case of unnecessarily Earth/Sol-centric terminology, much like "apogee" being Earth specific such that you have to use "apoapsis" if you want to be generic. I mean, do we really need a new word for every planet, the sun, a star in general, a black hole specifically, and galaxies? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apsis#Terminology We should declare terminology bankruptcy to wipe out our existin…

Shouldn't that be "milligrave" if you're using SI prefixes?

Re: Seven-Planet System Detected

#54

Post by vectorjohn »

ars wrote: post #43
vectorjohn wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What does that even mean? Of course it is reachable without FTL travel. Besides time dilation which could make it a subjectively short trip, there is also cryogenics and other life extension techniques that could get us there. If you accept any ship could get there, you might as well consider that space travel isn't the only technology that will advance.

> there is also cryogenics and other life extension techniques that could get us there. You are aware those don't actually exist? People assume they will exist, but we have nothing to base that assumption on except "it would be cool".

Besides the fact I think it's clear they will exist (assuming we don't destroy ourselves somehow), I already addressed that. We're already talking about things that don't currently exist. I can talk about a ship to Mars which doesn't currently exist. But both a Mars trip and cryogenics seem pretty reasonable to me.

Re: Seven-Planet System Detected

#55

Post by greeneggs »

mVChr wrote: post #50
devgutt wrote: post #10

Kepler 62 seems interesting

Agreed! What I found most interesting about this article is that our own solar system seems fairly unique (I know, small sample size). Kepler 62 is the only one that has an Earth-like planet at about the same distance from the central star, and even in that case that particular planet is the outermost one in that system. I guess I always assumed that due to various physical laws that other star systems would be prett…

You're not the only one; astronomers have also been surprised. But you have to keep in mind that our data right now is very incomplete. Kepler only operated for four years. You'd need a minimum of three years to detect a planet with a one-year-long orbit. (The first two years give two blinks when the planet crossed in front of the star, and then the third blink should be exactly a year later.) As they analyze the data in more detail, they'll probably find planets with longer-period orbits, but possibilities are limited.

Re: Seven-Planet System Detected

#56

Post by mVChr »

deletes wrote: post #51
Debugreality wrote: post #45

I found this site interesting for more information: http://www.openexoplanetcatalogue.com/system.html?id=KOI-351... The star is about the same size as sol so it might be possible to live on some of the moons of the edge planet if we ever got there.

I think you found my new favorite website. Some of the closest habitable neighbour stars. tau Ceti: http://www.openexoplanetcatalogue.com/system.html?id=tau%20C... Gliese 876: http://www.openexoplanetcatalogue.com/system.html?id=Gliese%... HD 62509: http://www.openexoplanetcatalogue.com/system.html?id=HD%2062... Gliese 581: http://www.openexoplanetcatalogue.com/system.html?id=Gliese%... This is an interesting example…

Seriously, the orbit visualizations are pretty cool: http://www.openexoplanetcatalogue.com/system.html?id=KOI-351...

Re: Seven-Planet System Detected

#59

Post by yo-mf »

samstave wrote: post #34
PhasmaFelis wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's bizarrely worded, yes. I think what they're trying to say is it's a planetary system very similar to the Solar system. Announcing it as a new "planetary system" would sound much less dramatic, since we've cataloged more than 700 of those.

Are we then not Solarians?

I see what you did there...

Re: Seven-Planet System Detected

#60

Post by yo-mf »

doctoboggan wrote: post #21
IbJacked wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not disagreeing, but genuinely curious: what do astronomers call the "solar wind" in other systems? Referring to every wind by the star's name would seem odd.

Just replace solar with stellar.

I once had a stellar wind, about near blew the doors out my house...

So you see, probably does not work so well.

Post reply on HN