Comments on: A tiny wobble reveals a massive planet

By: our strange stellar neighbors… | weird things

our strange stellar neighbors… | weird things — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 05:35:22 +0000

[...] little circle around a common center of gravity. And interestingly enough, the planet and the star are probably the same size. When a planet gets as big as Jupiter, its size doesn’t increase with more mass. Instead, it [...]

By: Mike G

Mike G — Fri, 05 Jun 2009 00:51:06 +0000

Maybe a dumb question, but I’ve never seen it answered before, so I’ll ask it here. With this method of detection I always hear that the star has one planet, not 2 or 3 or 8… How can you distinguish? Is the resolution on the wobble really sharp enough to distinguish multiple forces acting on the star?

By: our strange stellar neighbors… « weird things

our strange stellar neighbors… « weird things — Thu, 04 Jun 2009 03:56:21 +0000

By: Thomas Kilgour

Thomas Kilgour — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 21:35:19 +0000

Question:
Could we use the transit method to look for a planet like this? Since its size is so close to the size of it’s star and it’s orbit is so small would it significantly change the amount of light we see? Do we even know if this planet transits its star from our perspective?

By: planetguy

planetguy — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 22:25:01 +0000

Here’s a couple of answers to various questions. Radial velocity measures the Doppler shifts of stars. That was the technique used in 1995 and for about 300 other planet finds. Astrometry measures the position of the star. That is completely different and that is why the inclination angle of the orbit is measured with astrometry but not radial velocity. Also a good separation between stars-brown dwarfs-and planets is mass. A star has to be at least 70 Jupiter masses. A planet has to be below 13 Jupiter masses.

By: tacitus

tacitus — Sat, 30 May 2009 11:12:42 +0000

George, of course you are correct. Thanks for the clarification.

By: MadScientist

MadScientist — Sat, 30 May 2009 07:03:02 +0000

@Gary: I’d say it’s an awful topic for a PhD – who wants to slave away for 12 years to get the data needed to publish? Although coming up with a clever experimental design might be worth a PhD, I wouldn’t want any students tackling jobs that would take so long to get results. I’d say find something which can be done in under 6 years (preferably under 4), get it done, and move on or expand the work after getting the degree.