In a talk at the AAS meeting today, pulsar astronomer Scott Ransom took the time for a little payback by reminding everyone of the timing and masses of the planetary system around the millisecond pulsar 1257+12. He mentioned that the short periods allow timing accuracies so phenomenal that they can measure an orbital eccentricity of the pulsar under the influence of a companion in which the orbit departs from circular by a matter of centimeters. New techniques, computational and in concert with gamma-ray surveys, have led to an avalanche of newly-fond millisecond pulsars, which bodes well for finding out whether whatever bizarre pathway makes them happens often.
Geoff Marcy, in his talk yesterday, made a big deal of going though a bunch of predictions of orbital-migration theory, only to show us why data indicate that it works only for hot Jupiters and otherwise is not scoring very highly.
Full Version: Kepler Mission
Pages: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26
Which time period is covered by data currently being analysed and going to be released next february? In other words, which will be the longest possibile period of confirmed planets? 1 month? 1 year?
QUOTE (belleraphon1 @ Jan 10 2011, 08:07 PM) 
KEPLER-10b, 1.4 Earth radius, 4.6 Earth mass, 8.8 g/cm3 density, Orbit .01684 AU
SuperMercury? KEPLER Team dubs it Vulcan Craig
SuperMercury? KEPLER Team dubs it Vulcan Craig
...Well, a planet nearly fit for Hal Clement SF novel fans !
Click to view attachment
QUOTE (vikingmars @ Jan 12 2011, 04:23 AM)
... for Hal Clement SF novel fans ...
A quick calc gives 2.3 G's on the surface (if spherical). MOG had Mesklin at 3 G's at the equator and 235 G's at the pole (the novel states 700 G's, but subsequent calculations adjusted it). Still, a jog under 2.3 G's would give a heck of a workout
As I recall, Jupiter is about 3 G's at the cloud tops.
Kepler 10-b doesn't sound much like the fictional Mesklin, though.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesklin
Mesklin was 16 Jovian masses and had a 1600-day year, with an average temperature of -170 C. And it rotated in 17.5 minutes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesklin
Mesklin was 16 Jovian masses and had a 1600-day year, with an average temperature of -170 C. And it rotated in 17.5 minutes.
The Kepler RV follow-up team had a presentation at this past weekend's ExoPAG meeting. Some bullet points:
- >700 Kepler Objects of Interest (planet candidates)
-- Most smaller than 4 Earth-radii
-- Many multi-planet systems
- Approaching completion for the search of planets with periods <45 days
- Recently began auto search for periods >45 days --> picking up longer period and smaller candidates
- Collaboration on HARPS-N for 80 nights/year for RV follow, first light in April 2012
- With current (and expected) resources will only be able to do follow up for ~25 Earth size candidates (most in short orbits around small stars).
- >700 Kepler Objects of Interest (planet candidates)
-- Most smaller than 4 Earth-radii
-- Many multi-planet systems
- Approaching completion for the search of planets with periods <45 days
- Recently began auto search for periods >45 days --> picking up longer period and smaller candidates
- Collaboration on HARPS-N for 80 nights/year for RV follow, first light in April 2012
- With current (and expected) resources will only be able to do follow up for ~25 Earth size candidates (most in short orbits around small stars).
First, Kepler is an amazing mission and the right mission at the right time to give us some answers on distribution of extra-solar planets. Kepler has been observing now for ~21 months. Doing the math the longest regular transits that could have been detected 3 times within the 21 month period would have ~10 month orbits (assumes the initial transit occurred very near first light). Regular transiting planets with periods less than 7 months should have at least 3 transits. This has already been discussed, but I'm a bit disappointed the data is being released so slowly. More rapid confirmations would be possible with more timely release of the data. It took 13 months to get 43 days of data, and 8 months after that (Feb 2011), we will get the next ~47 days of data. Obviously, there needed to be a lot of software writing and tuning before the first release as well as the follow up radial velocity measurements for confirmation of some discoveries. The software should now be at the stage where minimal tuning is required. On the other hand follow on observations will be more difficult as the orbits increase.
Anyway the longest orbits with 3 transits with next data dump will be ~45 days. At this pace, it will be a very long time indeed before we will find out about earth size planets in the habitable zone. Of course given mankind has been asking this question for many centuries, what is another few years? Theoretically, with a 10 month orbit, such candidates may already be in the data. How will the Kepler team members contain themselves while holding onto data with such newsworthy and weighty impact (earth sized planets in habitable zones)? It will be interesting if the Kepler team will be able to tease out a few of these so that the confirmation process can be started sooner than later. I certainly hope it is no longer than another 2 years before one or more of these is revealed. I think at this point it would be highly unlikely that some of these haven't already had at least 2 transits in the data.
I will be excited about the next data release, but given the above numbers it will hard not to wonder what else is in the data that hasn't been released yet. It will have taken almost 2 years for 90 days of data, but I would project that in another year we will have a full year of data (oribital <= 6 months) , and in 2 years we might finally get the "grail" release of at least one earth sized planet in a habitable zone.
Anyway the longest orbits with 3 transits with next data dump will be ~45 days. At this pace, it will be a very long time indeed before we will find out about earth size planets in the habitable zone. Of course given mankind has been asking this question for many centuries, what is another few years? Theoretically, with a 10 month orbit, such candidates may already be in the data. How will the Kepler team members contain themselves while holding onto data with such newsworthy and weighty impact (earth sized planets in habitable zones)? It will be interesting if the Kepler team will be able to tease out a few of these so that the confirmation process can be started sooner than later. I certainly hope it is no longer than another 2 years before one or more of these is revealed. I think at this point it would be highly unlikely that some of these haven't already had at least 2 transits in the data.
I will be excited about the next data release, but given the above numbers it will hard not to wonder what else is in the data that hasn't been released yet. It will have taken almost 2 years for 90 days of data, but I would project that in another year we will have a full year of data (oribital <= 6 months) , and in 2 years we might finally get the "grail" release of at least one earth sized planet in a habitable zone.
Admin: Unnecessary quoting removed.
I echo your sentiments. But, being that I worked on the mission through last May, here's what I know and can say...
First, the science team is equally frustrated with the amount of time it's taking to release their results. There are several kinks in this chain, but two come to mind: wanting to hold on to it for proprietary/"we own this data so let us get to it first" reasons; and sheer processing power. They have stacks -- literal stacks! -- of light curves that they just can't pay any attention to. They are *far* from a stage where only minimum tuning is required. There's just too much data.
Second, they *have* seen planets with apparent periods greater than 100 days! Of course, they need more than 1 transit (3+) to statistically call it a candidate, as you well know. Just as we suspect, they have seen single transits that look very much like planets (not eclipsing binaries or other false positives) and should have periods on the order of several hundred days. As of last April, I'd say the number of these possible planets was still single-digit. They're out there, though. And, of course, there are several dozen (maybe?) that we could expect at the 45+ day period. Your suspicions are correct. But we have to wait.
The science folks told everyone, "It'll be a few years before we announce the important ones." And now people are still asking why it hasn't been sooner. Well... derrr. They told us.
Anywho. Yeah, the next few releases will be big. You've got your eyes in the right spot: We can expect that they have already seen planets closer to their respective HZs, and indeed they have. But they don't want to jump the gun before the real science is all said and done. *sigh* The wait will be worth it, though.
I echo your sentiments. But, being that I worked on the mission through last May, here's what I know and can say...
First, the science team is equally frustrated with the amount of time it's taking to release their results. There are several kinks in this chain, but two come to mind: wanting to hold on to it for proprietary/"we own this data so let us get to it first" reasons; and sheer processing power. They have stacks -- literal stacks! -- of light curves that they just can't pay any attention to. They are *far* from a stage where only minimum tuning is required. There's just too much data.
Second, they *have* seen planets with apparent periods greater than 100 days! Of course, they need more than 1 transit (3+) to statistically call it a candidate, as you well know. Just as we suspect, they have seen single transits that look very much like planets (not eclipsing binaries or other false positives) and should have periods on the order of several hundred days. As of last April, I'd say the number of these possible planets was still single-digit. They're out there, though. And, of course, there are several dozen (maybe?) that we could expect at the 45+ day period. Your suspicions are correct. But we have to wait.
The science folks told everyone, "It'll be a few years before we announce the important ones." And now people are still asking why it hasn't been sooner. Well... derrr. They told us.
Anywho. Yeah, the next few releases will be big. You've got your eyes in the right spot: We can expect that they have already seen planets closer to their respective HZs, and indeed they have. But they don't want to jump the gun before the real science is all said and done. *sigh* The wait will be worth it, though.
Not exactly Kepler related, but I've written an Android app for exoplanets. It's a reference catalog. The app's name is "Exoplanet Catalog". It can be found on the Android app market. It's completely free.
If you'd like to comment, request a feature, etc., you can find my email address in the app's "About" dialog.
If you'd like to comment, request a feature, etc., you can find my email address in the app's "About" dialog.
NASA To Announce New Planetary Discoveries on February 2nd
News briefing about the Kepler mission will be held that day at 1 PM, EST.
http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2011/jan/H...020_Kepler.html
News briefing about the Kepler mission will be held that day at 1 PM, EST.
http://www.nasa.gov/home/hqnews/2011/jan/H...020_Kepler.html
The announcement (or "media advisory" as it says) is a little confusing. I had to read it a few times.
Basically,
- On Feb 2, they'll be releasing information related to extrasolar planets. (Probably: new confirmed planets and related data; same drill as before.)
- The day before the press conference (Feb 1), they'll release data from May 2-Sept 17 of 2009. The data will include a list of extrasolar planet candidates.
Basically,
- On Feb 2, they'll be releasing information related to extrasolar planets. (Probably: new confirmed planets and related data; same drill as before.)
- The day before the press conference (Feb 1), they'll release data from May 2-Sept 17 of 2009. The data will include a list of extrasolar planet candidates.
Going. To be. Amazing.
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I've got 10 bucks on the number of known exoplanets doubling in the course of 1 hour.
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I've got 10 bucks on the number of known exoplanets doubling in the course of 1 hour.
Double!? Would one spring/summer observation season be enough time to confirm 500 planets?
Seems like a few dozen or maybe 50 at most. I would love to be wrong!
Seems like a few dozen or maybe 50 at most. I would love to be wrong!
Agreed. 500 planets is completely unrealistic. They would need to have confirmed all the previous candidates (none of them would have been false alarms) and discovery many more. RV follow-up just isn't that fast.
My personal guess is 20, but we'll see.
My personal guess is 20, but we'll see.
I don't want to speculate. But make no mistake, this is a major announcement. All the heavy hitters are there, including Bill Borucki. This won't just be esoteric info for professional astronomers. It'll be front page stuff.
I think the briefing will be about this old news:
http://news.discovery.com/space/kepler-sci...ke-planets.html
QUOTE
In a recent presentation, Kepler co-investigator Dimitar Sasselov preempted the official announcement that the exoplanet-hunting Kepler Space Telescope has discovered about 140 candidate worlds orbiting other stars that are "like Earth."
http://news.discovery.com/space/kepler-sci...ke-planets.html
Wouldn't it be too soon to announce conclusive evidence of that though? Unless the planets in question are orbiting close to their stars or have incredibly short orbital periods, it seems careless to make such an announcement without detecting the planet a second , independent time. Unless I'm behind, isn't that partly why the Gliese 581g announcement has been met with criticism?
Kepler detects planets in a method that doesn't apply for Gliese 581 g.
Kepler requires three transits to confirm a planet's orbital period, so yes, Earth-like planets are unlikely to be in the release unless they orbit rather dim stars.
Gliese 581 g was claimed to have been detected through radial velocity, which monitors the towards/away movement of the star and tries to model it with Keplerian orbits. For multi-planet systems such as Gliese 581, it can get complicated with multiple orbiting bodies.
Kepler requires three transits to confirm a planet's orbital period, so yes, Earth-like planets are unlikely to be in the release unless they orbit rather dim stars.
Gliese 581 g was claimed to have been detected through radial velocity, which monitors the towards/away movement of the star and tries to model it with Keplerian orbits. For multi-planet systems such as Gliese 581, it can get complicated with multiple orbiting bodies.
I wasn't intending to imply the methods were similar, rather the presentation of the data at a date too early for confirmation would result in similar criticism if the Kepler team was to announce 140 Earth-like exoplanets after such a short observation time.
QUOTE (Hungry4info @ Jan 27 2011, 05:55 PM)
Agreed. 500 planets is completely unrealistic. They would need to have confirmed all the previous candidates (none of them would have been false alarms) and discovery many more. RV follow-up just isn't that fast.
My personal guess is 20, but we'll see.
My personal guess is 20, but we'll see.
Haha, yeah, I was being overly optimistic. Only half-serious about that.
(That said, this is a good argument for the need to up the funding for other observatories... by a LOT.
)
QUOTE (ZLD @ Jan 28 2011, 08:01 PM)
if the Kepler team was to announce 140 Earth-like exoplanets after such a short observation time.
Why? It is exactly what they announced 6 months ago: they were going to analyze those data for 6 months and to release results in february... whatever the results would have been. (although the scientist at TED conference was quite too much optimist, indeed...)
The data was released at 1am this morning (Wednesday). To be clear: this is not the data that will be presented in the press conference today. This is the data from 2010 that has yet to be vetted by ground-based telescopes.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110202/ap_on_...i_alien_planets
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20110202/ap_on_...i_alien_planets
QUOTE
WASHINGTON – NASA's planet-hunting telescope is finding whole new worlds of possibilities in the search for alien life. An early report from a cosmic census indicates that relatively small planets and stable multi-planet systems are far more plentiful than previous searches showed.
NASA released new data Wednesday from its Kepler telescope on more than 1,000 possible new planets outside our solar system — more than doubling the count of what astronomers call exoplanets. They haven't been confirmed as planets yet, but some astronomers estimate that 90 percent of what Kepler has found will eventually be verified.
[...]
Some of these even approach Earth's size. That means they are better potential candidates for life than the behemoths that are more easily spotted, astronomers say.
NASA released new data Wednesday from its Kepler telescope on more than 1,000 possible new planets outside our solar system — more than doubling the count of what astronomers call exoplanets. They haven't been confirmed as planets yet, but some astronomers estimate that 90 percent of what Kepler has found will eventually be verified.
[...]
Some of these even approach Earth's size. That means they are better potential candidates for life than the behemoths that are more easily spotted, astronomers say.
So the 1000+ planet candidates with the data revealed today...is that the 400 best candidates that they were keeping to themselves plus the 700+ already announced and released? Or is this 1000 new?
Hm, hard to tell. I was under the impression that those 300-400 "best candidates" were a part of that 700, not in addition to.
Either way, I'm expecting a big number to come out. They expect 90% of the candidates (per the linked article above) to be planets, too.
Of course, none of the truly Earth-like ones... need more time!
Either way, I'm expecting a big number to come out. They expect 90% of the candidates (per the linked article above) to be planets, too.
Of course, none of the truly Earth-like ones... need more time!
Re: the 400 unreleased planet candidates.
That's a good question for the Kepler team. I hope someone at the press conference asks them. We really need Emily there, otherwise there's just about a 0% chance for intelligent questions.
That's a good question for the Kepler team. I hope someone at the press conference asks them. We really need Emily there, otherwise there's just about a 0% chance for intelligent questions.
As I understand it, the 400 candidates that were withheld last year have been made public. There were ~750 planet candidates total in the last release, that number has grown to ~1,000 candidates. So these 1,000 aren't all new, but ~250 of them are.
Ok, that make sense. Thanks Hungry4info. T-4 minutes to the press conference!
1235 candidates now. The 400 planets ARE included and released. They clarified this in the question period.
1 system with 5 candidates. 8 with 4 candidates.
68 Earth sized candidates (some Mars sized)
288 Super-Earth
662 Neptune
165 Jupiter sized and bigger
54 candidates in the HZ of their stars
170 multiple planet systems.
Here's the money...Kepler-11. 6 transiting planets confirmed! Sounds like they used transit-timing variation to get the planet masses. Very flat and compact system. Masses 2-5 Earth masses. Surprisingly low density. Gaseous planets with rocky cores?
Link to the Nature paper http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v470/...anet-kepler-11g
1 system with 5 candidates. 8 with 4 candidates.
68 Earth sized candidates (some Mars sized)
288 Super-Earth
662 Neptune
165 Jupiter sized and bigger
54 candidates in the HZ of their stars
170 multiple planet systems.
Here's the money...Kepler-11. 6 transiting planets confirmed! Sounds like they used transit-timing variation to get the planet masses. Very flat and compact system. Masses 2-5 Earth masses. Surprisingly low density. Gaseous planets with rocky cores?
Link to the Nature paper http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v470/...anet-kepler-11g
Some screenshots from press conference:
http://technews.it/YXOUZ
http://technews.it/YXOUZ
Holy. Cow.
Great day.
What was depressing was the density of reporters in the conference room.
Great day.
What was depressing was the density of reporters in the conference room.
As Spock would say, FASCINATING!
I had some questions that weren't asked at the briefing.
What is the current understanding (upper/lower bounds) of the percentage of stars that have planets as determined by the Kepler data? This broken out by type of star would be excellent.
What percentage will be muli-planet systems? Can we start to build an extrapolation on the size/orbital distribution of planets based on the data released so far? What is the orbital period range for the mentioned smaller planets inside habitable zones. I'm assuming these must be <=45 days and are in the habitable zone of much smaller/cooler (as indicated) stars than our sun.
I had some questions that weren't asked at the briefing.
What is the current understanding (upper/lower bounds) of the percentage of stars that have planets as determined by the Kepler data? This broken out by type of star would be excellent.
What percentage will be muli-planet systems? Can we start to build an extrapolation on the size/orbital distribution of planets based on the data released so far? What is the orbital period range for the mentioned smaller planets inside habitable zones. I'm assuming these must be <=45 days and are in the habitable zone of much smaller/cooler (as indicated) stars than our sun.
QUOTE (FatSplenda @ Feb 2 2011, 08:24 PM)
What was depressing was the density of reporters in the conference room.
Do you think?
Here in italy the news just passed on TG:
8 seconds.
Some milliseconds per each slide.
The End.
Data about confirmed 6-planets System:
CODE
Name, earth masses, earth radius, orbital period in days
Kepler-11 b 4.3002399 1.969916 10.30375 0.091 0 88.5 R 2011 02/02/11
Kepler-11 c 13.507775 3.149965 13.02502 0.106 0 89 R 2011 02/02/11
Kepler-11 d 6.0991577 3.430024 22.68719 0.159 0 89.3 R 2011 02/02/11
Kepler-11 e 8.4002469 4.520074 31.9959 0.194 0 88.8 R 2011 02/02/11
Kepler-11 f 2.30013571 2.61053 46.68876 0.25 0 89.4 R 2011 02/02/11
Kepler-11 g < 301.9385 3.660332 118.37774 0.462 0 89.8 R 2011 02/02/11
Kepler-11 b 4.3002399 1.969916 10.30375 0.091 0 88.5 R 2011 02/02/11
Kepler-11 c 13.507775 3.149965 13.02502 0.106 0 89 R 2011 02/02/11
Kepler-11 d 6.0991577 3.430024 22.68719 0.159 0 89.3 R 2011 02/02/11
Kepler-11 e 8.4002469 4.520074 31.9959 0.194 0 88.8 R 2011 02/02/11
Kepler-11 f 2.30013571 2.61053 46.68876 0.25 0 89.4 R 2011 02/02/11
Kepler-11 g < 301.9385 3.660332 118.37774 0.462 0 89.8 R 2011 02/02/11
http://kepler.nasa.gov/Mission/discoveries/
http://exoplanet.eu/star.php?st=Kepler-11
QUOTE
What is the current understanding (upper/lower bounds) of the percentage of stars that have planets as determined by the Kepler data? This broken out by type of star would be excellent.
Only statistical data I got in the teleconference is that Kepler is observing a region which fits 500 times in the whole sky.
I.e., 500,000 candidate planets are out there, 27,000 habitable.
QUOTE (FatSplenda @ Feb 2 2011, 07:24 PM)
Holy. Cow.
Great day.
What was depressing was the density of reporters in the conference room.
Great day.
What was depressing was the density of reporters in the conference room.
Science journalism amongst the mainstream media is generally appalling.
QUOTE (cassioli @ Feb 2 2011, 11:39 AM)
27,000 habitable.
Careful. There is a world of difference between a planet being in the habitable zone, and a planet being habitable.
Moreover - your extrapolation presumes there are equal numbers of stars across the whole sky. There are not.
QUOTE (djellison @ Feb 2 2011, 10:32 PM)
Moreover - your extrapolation presumes there are equal numbers of stars across the whole sky. There are not.
There are more! Ok, stop kidding: what about the announce about 700 candidate planets discovered 6 months, to be analyzed and analysis result to be published today?!?
Only thing I can read is that currently confirmed Kepler planets are 15; but 15 out of 700? Or data are still being analyzed?!?
QUOTE
Kepler scientists are strict about calling candidate planets confirmed. Of the 700 candidate planets identified last year, only 15 of Kepler's discoveries have been confirmed — including a six-planet system that was reported on Wednesday in the journal Nature.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/41387915/
For those who missed the news conference
================
Play Video
NASA Science News Conference - Kepler Discovery
WindowsMedia Play Video
http://www.space-multimedia.nl.eu.org/inde...;catid=1:latest
===============
Download Video
NASA Science News Conference - Kepler Discovery
Description Right click and select "Save Target As..." for download video
http://www.space-multimedia.nl.eu.org/inde...102&Itemid=
================
Play Video
NASA Science News Conference - Kepler Discovery
WindowsMedia Play Video
http://www.space-multimedia.nl.eu.org/inde...;catid=1:latest
===============
Download Video
NASA Science News Conference - Kepler Discovery
Description Right click and select "Save Target As..." for download video
http://www.space-multimedia.nl.eu.org/inde...102&Itemid=
Re: The media. Seriously. There were ~10 members of the media present, and one of them seemed to be asleep (eyes shut). I'm just glad we've got the internet so we can exchange information and ideas with each other here on UMSF.
I've updated my Android app with the new planets. I've also added a graphing feature so you can plot "discovery year" vs. "mass", and so forth. Search for "Exoplanet Catalog" on the Android market. If you've already installed it, the update will occur when your smartphone realizes an update is available.
I've updated my Android app with the new planets. I've also added a graphing feature so you can plot "discovery year" vs. "mass", and so forth. Search for "Exoplanet Catalog" on the Android market. If you've already installed it, the update will occur when your smartphone realizes an update is available.
QUOTE (cassioli @ Feb 2 2011, 04:38 PM)
Only thing I can read is that currently confirmed Kepler planets are 15; but 15 out of 700? Or data are still being analyzed?!?
The confirmation process is the bottle-neck of all this. Kepler-9 and Kepler-11 were fairly straightforward to confirm via their transit timing variations. Those unfortunate enough to be alone will require RV confirmation, and that's hard to do for these dim, distant stars. So yes, data is still being analysed. As awesome as this announcement is, it is still the beginning.
QUOTE (cassioli @ Feb 2 2011, 01:38 PM)
Or data are still being analyzed?!? :
Yes, they are, and follow up observations being scheduled, conducted and analyzed as well.
People seem to be under the impression that Kepler is a fast results mission. It is not. This stuff takes time and careful analysis. I really do wish people would just calm down, there's almost a sense of panic about this stuff.
Wonderful news. It's a shame we can't have Kepler-like coverage of the entire sky. Think what we might discover!
Yes... patience is a necessity.
I read Dole's "Habitable Planets for Man" back in the sixties when that book was NEW! Back then there was not a hope or a prayor to actually find Earth sized worlds beyond our solar system.
The Kepler science team wants to get it right. They will. But it will take time.
The posiibilities (candidates) have blossomed and I can look at the night sky with renewed wonder and awe. The variety of worlds staggers me.
I have waited a LONG time for this.
I can wait a bit longer.
Craig
I read Dole's "Habitable Planets for Man" back in the sixties when that book was NEW! Back then there was not a hope or a prayor to actually find Earth sized worlds beyond our solar system.
The Kepler science team wants to get it right. They will. But it will take time.
The posiibilities (candidates) have blossomed and I can look at the night sky with renewed wonder and awe. The variety of worlds staggers me.
I have waited a LONG time for this.
I can wait a bit longer.
Craig
Re the press reaction: I'm not terribly surprised...but the much, much, MUCH bigger picture is still there, regardless.
And Doug is right: Patience. These are merely the first few drips from the firehose, and our younger members will doubtless learn a great many more marvels as the years unfold. For us old guys...this a moment many of us thought we'd never see. Even in my childhood, it was widely thought that human interstellar travel would be required to learn even a thousandth of the basic data Kepler just unveiled today.
This is a day of triumph & wonder...no need to begrudge or embellish it in any way whatsoever.
And Doug is right: Patience. These are merely the first few drips from the firehose, and our younger members will doubtless learn a great many more marvels as the years unfold. For us old guys...this a moment many of us thought we'd never see. Even in my childhood, it was widely thought that human interstellar travel would be required to learn even a thousandth of the basic data Kepler just unveiled today.
This is a day of triumph & wonder...no need to begrudge or embellish it in any way whatsoever.
Preprint of Kepler11 paper... link from the Extrasolar Planets Encyclopedia site
http://exoplanet.eu/papers/Kepler-11.pdf
Paper discussing the Feb data release with updated list of candidates..
http://kepler.nasa.gov/files/mws/FebDataRe...ised_020211.pdf
Glorious indeed.....
Craig
http://exoplanet.eu/papers/Kepler-11.pdf
Paper discussing the Feb data release with updated list of candidates..
http://kepler.nasa.gov/files/mws/FebDataRe...ised_020211.pdf
Glorious indeed.....
Craig
Well said, Nick. Patience is fine and, yes, needed, but the day I stop being excited and thrilled by news as big as this, by a discovery that literally changes the way we feel when we look up at a clear, starry sky is the day I put my telescope under the bed, leave UMSF, and take up fishing or embroidery. 
Dig it, Stu. I'm only advocating patience for more wonders to come; would never advise suppression of excitement & delight over the wonders we just learned!!!
I'm only advocating patience for more wonders to come; would never advise suppression of excitement & delight over the wonders we just learned!!!
Repeating a post I made at another board:
Here is a list of the stellar systems with at least 4 probable transiting planets detected by the Kepler team:
KOI number / radius (Earths) / semimajor axis (AU) / equilibrium temperature (Kelvin) / planetary likelyhood
70.02 1.6 0.05 919 Strong probability candidate, cleanly passes tests that were applied
70.04 0.6 0.06 779 Strong probability candidate, cleanly passes tests that were applied
70.01 2.3 0.09 643 Strong probability candidate, cleanly passes tests that were applied
70.03 2.0 0.35 333 Strong probability candidate, cleanly passes tests that were applied
117.03 1.3 0.04 1217 Moderate probability candidate, not all tests cleanly passed but no definite test failures
117.02 1.3 0.06 1048 Moderate probability candidate, not all tests cleanly passed but no definite test failures
117.04 0.7 0.08 892 Insufficient follow-up to perform full suite of vetting tests
117.01 2.4 0.12 729 Strong probability candidate, cleanly passes tests that were applied
157.06 1.7 0.10 811 Confirmed and published planet
157.01 3.0 0.11 751 Confirmed and published planet
157.02 3.5 0.16 625 Confirmed and published planet
157.03 4.2 0.20 558 Confirmed and published planet
157.04 2.2 0.26 491 Confirmed and published planet
157.05 3.2 0.48 361 Confirmed and published planet
191.03 1.4 0.02 1839 Strong probability candidate, cleanly passes tests that were applied
191.02 2.8 0.04 1226 Moderate probability candidate, not all tests cleanly passed but no definite test failures
191.01 11.6 0.12 666 Strong probability candidate, cleanly passes tests that were applied
191.04 1.5 0.14 617 Strong probability candidate, cleanly passes tests that were applied
500.05 1.2 0.02 1235 Insufficient follow-up to perform full suite of vetting tests
500.03 1.5 0.04 849 Insufficient follow-up to perform full suite of vetting tests
500.04 2.1 0.05 743 Insufficient follow-up to perform full suite of vetting tests
500.01 2.7 0.06 642 Strong probability candidate, cleanly passes tests that were applied
500.02 2.8 0.08 584 Strong probability candidate, cleanly passes tests that were applied
707.04 2.2 0.11 884 Insufficient follow-up to perform full suite of vetting tests
707.01 3.4 0.16 745 Strong probability candidate, cleanly passes tests that were applied
707.03 2.5 0.20 658 Insufficient follow-up to perform full suite of vetting tests
707.02 2.6 0.24 604 Strong probability candidate, cleanly passes tests that were applied
730.04 1.8 0.08 937 Insufficient follow-up to perform full suite of vetting tests
730.03 2.5 0.09 852 Insufficient follow-up to perform full suite of vetting tests
730.02 2.3 0.09 852 Insufficient follow-up to perform full suite of vetting tests
730.01 3.1 0.12 746 Strong probability candidate, cleanly passes tests that were applied
834.04 1.4 0.03 1273 Insufficient follow-up to perform full suite of vetting tests
834.03 1.4 0.07 886 Insufficient follow-up to perform full suite of vetting tests
834.02 1.9 0.11 683 Insufficient follow-up to perform full suite of vetting tests
834.01 4.9 0.16 564 Strong probability candidate, cleanly passes tests that were applied
880.04 2.0 0.04 1275 Insufficient follow-up to perform full suite of vetting tests
880.03 2.8 0.07 936 Insufficient follow-up to perform full suite of vetting tests
880.01 4.9 0.18 569 Strong probability candidate, cleanly passes tests that were applied
880.02 5.8 0.27 456 Strong probability candidate, cleanly passes tests that were applied
952.04 1.1 0.03 730 Insufficient follow-up to perform full suite of vetting tests
952.01 2.3 0.05 575 Strong probability candidate, cleanly passes tests that were applied
952.02 2.3 0.07 504 Strong probability candidate, cleanly passes tests that were applied
952.03 2.4 0.12 365 Insufficient follow-up to perform full suite of vetting tests
The KOI 730 system apparently contains the first known Trojan exoplanets. From Architecture and Dynamics of Kepler’s Candidate Multiple Transiting Planet Systems
5.3. KOI-730: A Multi-Resonant Candidate System
While few nearly exact mean motion resonances are evident in the sample of Kepler planetary candidates, one system stands out as exceptional: the periods of the four candidates in KOI-730 satisfy the ratio 6:4:4:3 to ~1 part in 1000 or better. This system is the first to show evidence for extrasolar “Trojan” or co-orbital planets, which have been suggested to be theoretically possible (Laughlin & Chambers 2002; Go´zdziewski & Konacki 2006; Smith & Lissauer 2010). In Kepler data, the two co-orbital candidates began separated by ~118 degrees, with the trailing candidate reducing the gap at the rate of ~1 degree per month. The numerical integration (section 4) matching the periods and phases in B11, circular orbits, and nominal masses went unstable at 25 Myr, precipitated by a close encounter between the coorbital planets.
This system will be difficult to study because of the faintness of the target star (Kepler magnitude 15.34) and its location within the field which implies that it cannot be observed by Kepler during winter quarters (Q4, Q8, ...). Nonetheless, the remarkably commensurate period ratios of these four candidates give us strong confidence that they all will eventually be confirmed as planets. The dynamics of this class of planetary systems are analyzed by Fabrycky et al. (2011; in preparation), whose results further strengthen our confidence in these candidates.
Here is a list of the stellar systems with at least 4 probable transiting planets detected by the Kepler team:
KOI number / radius (Earths) / semimajor axis (AU) / equilibrium temperature (Kelvin) / planetary likelyhood
70.02 1.6 0.05 919 Strong probability candidate, cleanly passes tests that were applied
70.04 0.6 0.06 779 Strong probability candidate, cleanly passes tests that were applied
70.01 2.3 0.09 643 Strong probability candidate, cleanly passes tests that were applied
70.03 2.0 0.35 333 Strong probability candidate, cleanly passes tests that were applied
117.03 1.3 0.04 1217 Moderate probability candidate, not all tests cleanly passed but no definite test failures
117.02 1.3 0.06 1048 Moderate probability candidate, not all tests cleanly passed but no definite test failures
117.04 0.7 0.08 892 Insufficient follow-up to perform full suite of vetting tests
117.01 2.4 0.12 729 Strong probability candidate, cleanly passes tests that were applied
157.06 1.7 0.10 811 Confirmed and published planet
157.01 3.0 0.11 751 Confirmed and published planet
157.02 3.5 0.16 625 Confirmed and published planet
157.03 4.2 0.20 558 Confirmed and published planet
157.04 2.2 0.26 491 Confirmed and published planet
157.05 3.2 0.48 361 Confirmed and published planet
191.03 1.4 0.02 1839 Strong probability candidate, cleanly passes tests that were applied
191.02 2.8 0.04 1226 Moderate probability candidate, not all tests cleanly passed but no definite test failures
191.01 11.6 0.12 666 Strong probability candidate, cleanly passes tests that were applied
191.04 1.5 0.14 617 Strong probability candidate, cleanly passes tests that were applied
500.05 1.2 0.02 1235 Insufficient follow-up to perform full suite of vetting tests
500.03 1.5 0.04 849 Insufficient follow-up to perform full suite of vetting tests
500.04 2.1 0.05 743 Insufficient follow-up to perform full suite of vetting tests
500.01 2.7 0.06 642 Strong probability candidate, cleanly passes tests that were applied
500.02 2.8 0.08 584 Strong probability candidate, cleanly passes tests that were applied
707.04 2.2 0.11 884 Insufficient follow-up to perform full suite of vetting tests
707.01 3.4 0.16 745 Strong probability candidate, cleanly passes tests that were applied
707.03 2.5 0.20 658 Insufficient follow-up to perform full suite of vetting tests
707.02 2.6 0.24 604 Strong probability candidate, cleanly passes tests that were applied
730.04 1.8 0.08 937 Insufficient follow-up to perform full suite of vetting tests
730.03 2.5 0.09 852 Insufficient follow-up to perform full suite of vetting tests
730.02 2.3 0.09 852 Insufficient follow-up to perform full suite of vetting tests
730.01 3.1 0.12 746 Strong probability candidate, cleanly passes tests that were applied
834.04 1.4 0.03 1273 Insufficient follow-up to perform full suite of vetting tests
834.03 1.4 0.07 886 Insufficient follow-up to perform full suite of vetting tests
834.02 1.9 0.11 683 Insufficient follow-up to perform full suite of vetting tests
834.01 4.9 0.16 564 Strong probability candidate, cleanly passes tests that were applied
880.04 2.0 0.04 1275 Insufficient follow-up to perform full suite of vetting tests
880.03 2.8 0.07 936 Insufficient follow-up to perform full suite of vetting tests
880.01 4.9 0.18 569 Strong probability candidate, cleanly passes tests that were applied
880.02 5.8 0.27 456 Strong probability candidate, cleanly passes tests that were applied
952.04 1.1 0.03 730 Insufficient follow-up to perform full suite of vetting tests
952.01 2.3 0.05 575 Strong probability candidate, cleanly passes tests that were applied
952.02 2.3 0.07 504 Strong probability candidate, cleanly passes tests that were applied
952.03 2.4 0.12 365 Insufficient follow-up to perform full suite of vetting tests
The KOI 730 system apparently contains the first known Trojan exoplanets. From Architecture and Dynamics of Kepler’s Candidate Multiple Transiting Planet Systems
5.3. KOI-730: A Multi-Resonant Candidate System
While few nearly exact mean motion resonances are evident in the sample of Kepler planetary candidates, one system stands out as exceptional: the periods of the four candidates in KOI-730 satisfy the ratio 6:4:4:3 to ~1 part in 1000 or better. This system is the first to show evidence for extrasolar “Trojan” or co-orbital planets, which have been suggested to be theoretically possible (Laughlin & Chambers 2002; Go´zdziewski & Konacki 2006; Smith & Lissauer 2010). In Kepler data, the two co-orbital candidates began separated by ~118 degrees, with the trailing candidate reducing the gap at the rate of ~1 degree per month. The numerical integration (section 4) matching the periods and phases in B11, circular orbits, and nominal masses went unstable at 25 Myr, precipitated by a close encounter between the coorbital planets.
This system will be difficult to study because of the faintness of the target star (Kepler magnitude 15.34) and its location within the field which implies that it cannot be observed by Kepler during winter quarters (Q4, Q8, ...). Nonetheless, the remarkably commensurate period ratios of these four candidates give us strong confidence that they all will eventually be confirmed as planets. The dynamics of this class of planetary systems are analyzed by Fabrycky et al. (2011; in preparation), whose results further strengthen our confidence in these candidates.
QUOTE (Mongo @ Feb 2 2011, 10:08 PM)
KOI number / radius (Earths) / semimajor axis (AU) / equilibrium temperature (Kelvin) / planetary likelyhood
70.03 2.0 0.35 333 Strong probability candidate, cleanly passes tests that were applied
157.05 3.2 0.48 361 Confirmed and published planet
952.03 2.4 0.12 365 Insufficient follow-up to perform full suite of vetting tests
70.03 2.0 0.35 333 Strong probability candidate, cleanly passes tests that were applied
157.05 3.2 0.48 361 Confirmed and published planet
952.03 2.4 0.12 365 Insufficient follow-up to perform full suite of vetting tests
These three, for those like me too slow to subtract 273K in their heads, have equilibrium temperatures between 0 and 100 C. Two are close to water-boiling, makes me wonder if water is keeping their temperature stable-ish across the planet with a liquid/gas cycle. One is 60C, or about 140F. Hot enough to seriously burn skin in seconds, but comfortable to a wide range of single-celled life.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.