If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Slate)   Astronomers find exoplanet orbiting a nearby red dwarf, consider naming it Kryten   (slate.com) divider line 28
    More: Cool, Doppler shift, Philip C. Plait, multiple systems, Charon, types of stars, Neptune, light-years away, Death from the Skies  
•       •       •

1374 clicks; posted to Geek » on 29 Aug 2014 at 1:28 PM (2 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



28 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2014-08-29 11:42:36 AM
static.tvtropes.org

/Smug Mode
 
2014-08-29 11:52:59 AM
They smeggin' well should.
 
2014-08-29 01:33:14 PM
Does it come with a new squeezy mop?
 
2014-08-29 01:39:14 PM
Is there a white hole nearby?
 
2014-08-29 01:41:03 PM
It used to be Irish?

Oh, exoplanet.

nevermind
 
2014-08-29 01:46:15 PM
Oh, spin my nipple-nuts and send me to Alaska!
 
2014-08-29 01:47:43 PM
,,,  they found the planet to have 5.35 ±0.75 times the mass of Earth, and by measuring the period of the oscillation determined its year to be just 11.44 Earth days long. That's how they know it orbits the star so closely; that's a short year!

Okay, so I don't qualify as even a bad astronomer, so what does that mass translate to in terms of the gravitational pull at the nominal surface of said rock?

And what about radiation that close to the primary? Yeah, it's hotter'n hades on the surface. I got that, but would there also be accompanying deadly levels of radiation that might make travelling there to claim it for 'Murika a bad idea?
 
2014-08-29 01:49:03 PM
Does not approve of this post

www.reddwarf.co.uk
 
2014-08-29 01:58:49 PM
Please stand by while I switch to excited mode.
 
2014-08-29 01:59:11 PM
And that brings us to a newly found planet just announced:  Gliese 15Ab


15Ab?  Any officer caught sniffing the saddle of the exercise bicycle in the women's gym will be discharged without trial?  Hmm, I'm sorry sir but that doesn't quite get to the nub of the matter for me.
 
2014-08-29 02:01:58 PM

Stone Meadow: ,,,  they found the planet to have 5.35 ±0.75 times the mass of Earth, and by measuring the period of the oscillation determined its year to be just 11.44 Earth days long. That's how they know it orbits the star so closely; that's a short year!

Okay, so I don't qualify as even a bad astronomer, so what does that mass translate to in terms of the gravitational pull at the nominal surface of said rock?

And what about radiation that close to the primary? Yeah, it's hotter'n hades on the surface. I got that, but would there also be accompanying deadly levels of radiation that might make travelling there to claim it for 'Murika a bad idea?


It's been a long time since astronomy class, but if I remember correctly:

It largely depends on the planet's radius. In general, the gravitational force scales linearly with mass but inverse-squared with distance (which is the radius, in the case of a planet's surface gravity). Something twice as massive has twice the force at the same distance, but something the same mass but twice as far away only has one-quarter of the gravitational force.

A planet with 5x the mass of Earth and the same radius would exert 5x the gravitational force on the surface. However, if the planet's radius was doubled, it would only exert 1.2x the gravitational force of Earth at the surface.

I didn't see anything on the radius of the planet in the article (size is a lot harder to measure than mass) so we can't really say what the surface gravity might be.
 
2014-08-29 02:02:53 PM

Stone Meadow: And what about radiation that close to the primary? Yeah, it's hotter'n hades on the surface. I got that, but would there also be accompanying deadly levels of radiation that might make travelling there to claim it for 'Murika a bad idea?


The problems with Red Dwarf systems are that you generally need to be closer to get the same temperatures, which leads to tidal heating and locking, neither of which are particularly good for life.  Add to that a shift to the infrared, and that's not good for photosynthesis, which is generally where we get our plant and animal energy from.

That said, because there is additional tidal heating because of proximity, the 'goldilocks zone' around a red dwarf is otherwise greater than it would be for a sun like ours.
 
2014-08-29 02:03:28 PM
Stone Meadow: ,,,  they found the planet to have 5.35 ±0.75 times the mass of Earth, and by measuring the period of the oscillation determined its year to be just 11.44 Earth days long. That's how they know it orbits the star so closely; that's a short year!

Okay, so I don't qualify as even a bad astronomer, so what does that mass translate to in terms of the gravitational pull at the nominal surface of said rock?


Depends on the density.  Assume Earth density.  The mass is 5.35 larger, and therefore so is the volume.  Volume goes like R^3 and surface gravity goes like M/R^2.  M increases by 5.35, and R^2 increases by 5.35^(2/3), so surface gravity increases over Earth gravity by 5.35^(1/3), or 1.75.
 
2014-08-29 02:04:07 PM

Stone Meadow: ,,,  they found the planet to have 5.35 ±0.75 times the mass of Earth, and by measuring the period of the oscillation determined its year to be just 11.44 Earth days long. That's how they know it orbits the star so closely; that's a short year!

Okay, so I don't qualify as even a bad astronomer, so what does that mass translate to in terms of the gravitational pull at the nominal surface of said rock?


It doesn't translate, unless you know the volume or make some assumptions about composition or something.
 
2014-08-29 02:25:47 PM
Thanks Ambitwistor and qorkfiend!
 
2014-08-29 02:32:23 PM
meandbenbrowder.files.wordpress.com

You spelled my name wrong
 
2014-08-29 03:11:48 PM

Stone Meadow: ,,,  they found the planet to have 5.35 ±0.75 times the mass of Earth, and by measuring the period of the oscillation determined its year to be just 11.44 Earth days long. That's how they know it orbits the star so closely; that's a short year!

Okay, so I don't qualify as even a bad astronomer, so what does that mass translate to in terms of the gravitational pull at the nominal surface of said rock?

And what about radiation that close to the primary? Yeah, it's hotter'n hades on the surface. I got that, but would there also be accompanying deadly levels of radiation that might make travelling there to claim it for 'Murika a bad idea?


depends on the densitiy of said planet. jupiter is large enough to fit thousands of earths in the same volume but only has something like 6x the gravity, because it's not very dense.
 
2014-08-29 03:31:53 PM
Looks like they finally fired him out of the waste disposal unit.
 
2014-08-29 04:31:01 PM
SirDigbyChickenCaesar: You spelled my name wrong

Sorry, Crichton, not everything is about you.  This a Red Dwarf thread.

/So, How's Moya and Pilot these days?
 
2014-08-29 04:39:25 PM
24.media.tumblr.com
 
2014-08-29 04:56:19 PM
Ni....
 
2014-08-29 07:40:58 PM
Jinx?
 
2014-08-29 08:07:48 PM
i229.photobucket.com
 
2014-08-29 09:30:56 PM

SirDigbyChickenCaesar: [meandbenbrowder.files.wordpress.com image 521x276]

You spelled my name wrong


LOL, you win the internet today.
 
2014-08-29 09:35:26 PM
Do they have Jesus?
 
2014-08-30 09:26:44 AM
Thermos, sandwiches, corn plasters, telephone money, dandruff brush, animal footprint chart and... one triple thick condom. You never know.
 
2014-08-30 02:31:55 PM

enry: Is there a white hole nearby?


What is it?
 
2014-08-30 08:52:59 PM
But do they have a good curry there?
 
Displayed 28 of 28 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report