Not sure when these appeared, but I've only just found them. Here's a first try at the link:
http://www.abstractsonline.com/plan/Browse.aspx

That worked when I first tried it but now it doesn't. Here's another: http://dps.aas.org/meetings/2010/

From that one you need to go "science program" then "browse" to get to the sessions and abstracts.

Public outreach included demos inside the NASA Exhibit Area:
Along with Kevin Hussey & Doug Ellison, who will be demonstrating the interactive program "Eyes on the Solar System", scientists will be available to answer questions about planets, moons, comets, astrobiology, space exploration and much more.

Any videos of this event and/or the lectures?

Not that I know of... You'll be able to try it for yourself by the end of the month though

I had a question about the 20000 Varuna results presented, for those with access to the paper or who were there.

Do the results conclusively nail down the ellipsoidal shape?

(Also, if it doesn't, what will? Or is that a "done deal" already?)

It struck me the other day: Haumea is always presented visually as ellipsoidal, but you almost never see Varuna presented so. I'm guessing that's due to a difference in evidence?

I missed that talk. Why don't you try sending a brief email to the author asking them what they presented? They may actually reply. If they do, tell us what they said

And somebody was listening to the close report on Oct 08, 2010, 11:30 AM - 11:40 AM?
http://dps.aas.org/meetings/2010/sciprog.shtml
What was said there, even if the abstract is not available?

Via twitter:

intentionally embargoed title revealed: ground-based transmission spectrum of super-earth #dps2010

@broccamoli @elakdawalla bait-and-switch! Bean still won't talk about it, citing review. Printed sheet outside the room LIES!

http://twitter.com/david_choi

Thank you!

From searching the ESO database (here ya go http://archive.eso.org/wdb/wdb/eso/sched_r...d=284.C-5042(A) ), you could deduce that it was going to be transmission 'spectrum' of GJ 1214b. Just what conclusions they deduce from them is embargoed I guess. They could just have stated in the abstract that they have performed observations of GJ 1214b and they will discuss them, like everyone else does in this situation.
edit- besides, Nature and Science allow you to present your work at conferences, as long as the journalists keep quiet.

Yes, I saw it. (Such an application there for 85 ddt).

And they did not say when the embargo is lifted?

In addition, among the entries is a quote:
http://search.twitter.com/search?q=%23dps2010


Was named the found mass of the third planet? (Unless of course it does not violate the embargo)

Found this on twitter:



I thought those might actually be the major and minor axis as the abstract included this:

I sent Bruno Sicardy an email to determine which was the case and got this in reply:

Ah, thanks for overriding my bashfulness and doing that!

Very interesting, that 0.5 minor-to-major axis ratio. I'm looking forward to Sicardy et al's next paper.

http://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/0612237v1




The picture is from an article of 2006 year!

Yeah, I was working off that paper.

But everywhere you look, Varuna is presented as spherical. I guess the core question is: is there something wrong with that paper, is that not enough evidence to really say, or is it just that Varuna has a PR problem? I'm in no position to know.

Depends on where the 'everywhere you look' is. Often science articles are often rewritten press releases or just a copy-paste of the press release with an artists conception added. How do they get these illustrations? Often they just type a name into google images which can produce amusing results such as an image of Ganymede tinted blue used as Pluto.