ABOUT COSMIC LOG

Quantum fluctuations in space, science, exploration and other cosmic fields... served up regularly by MSNBC.com science editor Alan Boyle since 2002.

Alan Boyle covers the physical sciences, anthropology, technological innovation and space science and exploration for MSNBC.com. He is a winner of the AAAS Science Journalism Award, the NASW Science-in-Society Award and other honors; a contributor to "A Field Guide for Science Writers"; and a member of the board of the Council for the Advancement of Science Writing.

Check out Boyle's biography or send a message to Cosmic Log via cosmiclog@msnbc.com.



Planet quest gets small

Posted: Wednesday, January 21, 2009 7:15 PM by Alan Boyle


David A. Aguilar / CfA
This artwork shows the "super-Neptune" planet.
Normally blue in color, its
red hue is caused by the
illumination from the
nearby dwarf star.

A network of small telescopes has bagged its smallest prize yet - and that's great news for astronomers.

HATNet's discovery of an extrasolar world only slightly bigger than Neptune helps prepare the way for an even more capable planet-hunter that could find alien Earths.

To date, more than 300 planets have been found orbiting other stars. Most of them were detected by measuring the gravitational wobble that the planet induces in its parent star. That method works great for huge planets, but not as well for smaller worlds.

The Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics' HATNet uses a different method: Six automated 4.3-inch telescopes in Hawaii and Arizona work together to watch for the ever-so-slight dimming of a star's light as a planet crosses in front of it.

By analyzing how the light pattern changes during the transit, astronomers can figure out how big the planet is. The wobble method can then be used to follow up on the detection and calculate the planet's mass. This interactive presentation explains the workings of the transit method as well as the wobble method.

A couple of years ago, HATNet found the most massive planet ever detected using the transit method. Its latest discovery, designated HAT-P-11b, is the smallest planet on its list. It is not, however, the smallest extrasolar planet known to orbit a normal star: That distinction belongs to a team of researchers who used a different method, called microlensing, to detect a planet just three times as massive as Earth.

HAT-P-11b is a "super-Neptune": It's 25 times as massive as Earth, and 4.7 times Earth's size. In comparison, the Neptune we all know and love is equal to 17 times Earth's mass and 3.8 times Earth's size. The planet orbits a dwarf star 120 light-years away in the constellation Cygnus, at a distance so close that it's baked to a temperature of 1,100 degrees Fahrenheit (600 degrees Celsius). One orbit takes just 4.88 days, according to a news release issued last week by the Center for Astrophysics.

The center reported that there are signs of a second planet in the same star system, but more gravitational-wobble readings are required to confirm the observation and nail down the second planet's properties.

Another "hot Neptune," known as GJ 436b, was found using the wobble method and then studied by a different team using the transit method. Now the scientists will be able to compare notes.

"Having two such objects to compare helps astronomers to test theories of planetary structure and formation," said Harvard astronomer Gaspar Bakos, who led the discovery team and has submitted a paper on the find to the Astrophysical Journal.

Hundreds of small worlds, including planets the size of Earth, might be found using the transit method once NASA's Kepler mission goes to work. The one-ton Kepler spacecraft is due for launch in March, and the HAT-P-11 star system should be in its field of view.

"We expect Kepler to measure the detailed properties of HAT-P-11 with the extraordinary precision possible only from space," said Harvard's Robert Noyes, another member of the discovery team.

Update for 7:20 p.m. ET Jan. 22: New Scientist quotes researchers as saying that the smallest known extrasolar planet orbiting a normal star may be even smaller than they originally thought. Their latest estimate suggests that the planet is only 1.4 times as massive as Earth. Even though the mass is Earthlike, the planet's environment probably isn't. "Because its host is a very dim red dwarf, the planet is likely to be frozen - even though it orbits at about the same distance as Venus from our sun," New Scientist reports.

MAIN PAGE

Email this EMAIL THIS

Comments

When does the Kepler mission look at the Alpha Centauri system?

[ALAN ADDS: Unfortunately, the Kepler detectors have a limited field of view and won't be able to watch that area of the sky. It will be focusing on a region of the constellation Cygnus. Here's an explanation for why Kepler is being targeted the way it is:]

http://kepler.nasa.gov/sci/basis/fov.html

Era of Secrecy is over? We shall see!
If Obama is sincere and the "Era of Secrecy" is over. He should immediately release all information on UFOs and alien contact.

Even our astronauts have said UFOs and Aliens are real... so why lie to the American people? OBAMA - TELL US THE TRUTH and help bring this world together...

Start with Roswell and Kleckburg, PA incidents.

Sometimes you have to fight to have the truth and then be strong enough to live with what was discovered. This is one of those issues.
Kepler is very exciting.  Has anyone done a study to see if it is feasible, with current technology, to send a spacecraft to a nearby Earth-like planet?  Assuming such a planet is found within the next 5 years, and it is within 20 light years, we should send a nuclear-powered craft to investigate.  At a constant acceleration of 20,000 MPH, what percent of the speed of light could the craft reach after a year (175.2 M mph / 671M mph = 26%), and how long would it take to reach a planet 20 light years away?  
What was discovered was nothing.Mike, your last line..."Sometimes you have to fight to have the truth and then be strong enough to live with what was discovered. This is one of those issues."

I think you also need to believe that.  Chances are what has been discovered is nothing.  But, folks like you refuse to believe that.
Well i hate to think that we are the only ones in this great big universe becasuse if we are..that woud be very disapointing.
If we are alone in the universe, We can expand into it. Lets strip of one those gas giants for its hydrogen content, ship the hydrogen back here, use the suns own sunspots to invert a hole into its core.

We can then extract the helium (ash), and replace it with enough hydrogen to refuel it for another 2 billion years.
Talk about finding planets, I noticed this last summer, If you look at the stars (you don't even need a telescope) you can see a little dot under every star in the sky, even on a clear starry night EVERY star in the sky has a little dot(99 percent of the time it's at the bottom of the star)underneath the star. some stars have several satelites. The North Star has more than one, visible with the naked eye, you can see these things "plain as day". Is there a name for this phenomenon?
Isn't it kind of egotistical to think we are the only intelligence in the entire universe?  Do you know how absolutely absurd that sounds?  There are literally billions of stars out there - then to take our solar system's model times that by 9 for the planets.
Our only example of life is what we find on this planet.  That would be like looking at water and saying it only exists in liquid form (there's also ice-solid and clouds-vapor).
Not to say that we are being visited by little green men, but you have to at least acknowledge the possibility and not dismiss it.  All stories in some form are based on truth.
I agree, Steven!  It is difficult to imagine that a singular primitive species exists in our universe.  To hear that people are still pushing the boundaries on astronomy discoveries is truly amazing!  In due time, we  will find new habitable locations to venture to and possible begin habitation.  
i hope the new president does "come clean" on alleged ufo and/or alien visitations. i for one am a little skeptical that we have been, but that doesn't mean i don't believe we're alone in the universe. the known universe is simply too immense in size and full of galaxies that chances are very good for extraterrestrial life, intelligent or not. we are a very curious species and strive to know the truth. kepler is another important tool in discovering and understanding these mysteries. hopefully very soon we will make the discovery of earth's "twin" and make a monumental effort to safely journey there. i envy those future pioneers...
I find it pretty odd that almost all the extrasolar planets we are detecting are so close to their parent star and have such extreme orbital periods.  Anyone else find this strange?  If these types of systems, with massive planets close in to the primary and orbital periods measured in hours, are so common, isn't it bizarre that our system doesn't have any planets with similar characteristics?  Could it be that what is actually being detected are several smaller, less massive bodies, with longer orbital periods - similar to our system - and the data is being misinterpreted?  
Inspiring article Alan!  I am so enjoying watching the astronomers come up with slick ways to find extrasolar planets.  I sure am looking forward to seeing bigger and better space telescopes getting put into space.  After the success of Hubble we can see how well spent the money is on space exploration.

I am so glad that Barack Obama is bringing real science back to the White House, along with honesty and integrity.
No, it is not feasible to send a spacecraft with today's technology to a planet 20 light years away.

Even if you could reach half the speed of light, then including acceleration and deceleration it would still take significantly more than 40 years to reach said planet.  The other problem, it's currently not feasible to carry enough fuel for constant acceleration and deceleration for that long.

Then it would still take another 20 years for any communication to reach earth.  So all in all, it could take 100 years until we received any data, even if it were feasible.  Then the craft has to actually remain functional for that long.
"Six automated 4.3-inch telescopes in Hawaii and Arizona"

WOW!  The scopes they're using are really that small?  That's amazing.  Shoot, I own 3 telescopes that are bigger than that!  Of course, I don't have the ability to do interferometry, so I can't obtain the resolution they're obviously achieving.

But to think they can do that with scopes that small is truly amazing.  I wonder if it cuts down on the atmospheric distortion that larger telescopes experience?
"Has anyone done a study to see if it is feasible, with current technology, to send a spacecraft to a nearby Earth-like planet? "

With current technology it would take us several hundred years to reach the nearest star system Alpha Centauri. Alpha Centauri is about 5 lightyears away, that means we would have to travel at the speed of light to reach it in 5 years, any percentage of the speed of light would that that same percentange of time added on. In otherwords 100% x c = 5 Lightyears, then 50% x c = 10 Lightyears. The space shuttle can travel at about 17,000 mph, and Alpha Centauri is 2.94 x 10^13 miles away. So it would take like 200,000 years to get there with our current technology level.

Additionally we can't communicate with anything at that distance since radio and optical systems can only travel at lightspeed, meaning a laser transmission would reach Alpha Centauri in 5 years, which is not enough time to be feesible for a communication system.

So until methods of FTL is discovered it is impossible for us to travel outside the Sol System.
Going at 20,000mph, it would take somewhat over 30,000 years to cover 20 light years.
For some reason this blog seems to attract folks more likely to buy a tabloid in the check-out line than read Scientific American. That's probably unfair, but some responses could use a little more thought.

Dave, mph measures velocity, not acceleration.

Rick, you might want to have your astigmatism checked.

Caleb, we're finding more close-in planets because their gravity induces more of a wobble in the star, and because short-period wobbles and transits are much easier to see. Until Kepler can patiently look at one area of space for a long time, we're measuring with biased instruments.

Ross, you might need a refresher in physics. The energy density in the interior of the sun is such that a photon takes about a million years of bouncing around (actually absorption and re-emission) to reach the sun's surface. Not a place to dig holes or run pipes.

And any of us "lucky" enough to crew an interstellar mission will be recycled for water and fertilizer long before any of our progeny get where they're going.





Rick P. - You should get your eyes checked by an opthalmologist. It sounds like you've got some serious astigmatism (or something else) going on.
@Caleb

The reason we are finding so many large planets in tight oribts is very simple.

The more massive the planet is the more wobble it creates, the closer a planet is to its star the more wobble it creates.

A gas giant in an orbit as tight as Mercury's is a best case scenario for detection purposes. Nothing says these planets are particulary common, or even normal, only that they are the easiest to find.
Rick - I, too, have seen the seond "dot" near almost all stars in the sky ... until I finally got prescription glasses.
I would like to see something be sent on its way to these exo-planets.  It might take a while, but it would be a start to exploring outside our star system.  

I would also like to have a system of satelites around Mars and other possible colonizable planets in this star system.  When we are ready, to have the first people land there for even a short period of time, then they can have planetary communications from the get go.
@ All

Thanks for the responses!  I certainly do understand that larger mass and tight orbits makes for larger "wobbles" and easier detection.  

Nonetheless, I would assume that several smaller mass planets with more "normal" orbits could be causing the same "wobble."  Just seems odd to me that we are detecting so very many "strange" planets...  

I predict that someday someone will go back and do a survey with upgraded technology (maybe just a few years from now, even) of these systems where "strange" planets have been located and laugh at the scientists who interpreted all these extreme "wobbles" as indicative of a system with one or two large planets orbiting freakishly close to their parent stars.  Much more likely, I think, that some of these signatures are generated by the compound affect of multiple smaller bodies orbiting in their parent stars in variations on what we would consider to be a more "normal" system.
To think that we are the only "intelligent" beings in thew universe is quite naive. Sheer probability dictates there is other life out there...

Now if we were the only one's to win the cosmic lottery, why is that sad or dissapointing? If we're a "fluke" we should try that much harder to care for our planet, we are the stewards of our world.

P.S.
If we were to launch a craft 20 some odd light years like some have suggested, we will have better technology and materials before it even gets there.
"I would like to see something be sent on its way to these exo-planets.  It might take a while, but it would be a start to exploring outside our star system."

and:

"Has anyone done a study to see if it is feasible, with current technology, to send a spacecraft to a nearby Earth-like planet?"

The short answer is: No,it can't be done. Not with existing technology, even as close as the 4.5 light years to Alpha Centauri, unless you're prepared for a mission time of a thousand years or so:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstellar_travel

...But ask again a century from now, and there might well be some reasonable options through propulsion advances. (After all, the answer to 'too far away' is, as always, 'go faster.' It's just that we can't. Yet.)


"I find it pretty odd that almost all the extrasolar planets we are detecting are so close to their parent star and have such extreme orbital periods.  Anyone else find this strange?"

No, it's simply that the stellar 'wobble' technique we use is most sensitive to detecting planets with high mass and short orbital periods. The less of either one, the less its star detectably moves around their common center of mass.

And finding them by the slight change in starlight only works if the planet's orbit happens to be such that it *does* move exactly between its star and us. That positioning happens for only a fraction of stars.

It's like asking why no one 'detects' snow when the temperature is at 80F. It's simply part of the physics of what you're looking for...

Thank you, Mathteacher.  You stole almost all of my comments except one.  Please stop refering to Obama as the alien truth savior.  Study your history a little more.  Even Gerald Ford campaigned to have information released on so called UFOs from the time he was a senator through his presidency.  Nothing much came of it.  Why?  U.S. presidents do not have the power as so many of us seem to believe.  Also do not believe that presidents know the whole truth.  Please don't forget the security classification above all others.  NEED TO KNOW.
1.4 Earth Masses????  Now that's news!  Last I kept track there were 264 exoplanets...  I'm glad to hear the pace is going well but slower than I initially thought I guess as they look for smaller and further objects.  Would love to know the status of the VLT...  The LBT seems to be going slow but everything is in place.  OWEL anyone??  :)  a 100-meter diameter tellescope sure wouldn't hurt.  Sorta is sad how such good science hasn't really made leaps-and-bounds changes..  Reading the history of the solar system and developing spaced based interferometers that could see the cloud tops of other earth like worlds would seem to be the Holy Grail of humanity's space sciences and to be honest... don't seem any closer than they were 10 years ago.  I could probably say that about fusion too.  Now flying cars :)!  ha-ha!  Is Paul Moller still putts'en around?  Chris
"I predict that someday someone will go back and do a survey with upgraded technology (maybe just a few years from now, even) of these systems where "strange" planets have been located and laugh at the scientists who interpreted all these extreme "wobbles" as indicative of a system with one or two large planets orbiting freakishly close to their parent stars.  Much more likely, I think, that some of these signatures are generated by the compound affect of multiple smaller bodies"

Caleb, my understanding is that the fingerprint of the wobble is pretty easy to point to one or "multiple" planets.  I've seen the graffs and even though there is one major signwave, some have wobbles within wobbes and after a long time, they can indeed separate out wobbles from several boddies.  Not sure what the largest known solar system is but I remember it as having at least three semi-large bodies...
"So until methods of FTL is discovered it is impossible for us to travel outside the Sol System. "

Micobe which can hibernate for over 500 million years are speculated to travel between the stars after having been blasted off of habitated worlds.  Sending a mother ship with DNA to be mixed after the destination is reached is a go-around if sending humans.  I'd much rather see powerful telescopes that can see "clearly" (as if in orbit) what we can't get to.
The energy required to reach the nearest star Alpha Centauri is so huge,it would require an antimatter reactor to produce the energy required to make the trip. To reach velocities a good fraction of the speed of light is difficult. The reason is as the ship accelerates it's mass increases according to Einstein's theory of relativity. Therefore requiring more energy to move it at the same rate of acceleration. If an object could reach light speed it would have infinite mass requiring infinite amount of energy to move it to light speed. I don't believe you can reach the stars with conventional propulsion systems. Instead of moving the ship through space you will move space around the ship. Basically folding space to open up a worm hole to your destination.
"Nonetheless, I would assume that several smaller mass planets with more "normal" orbits could be causing the same "wobble."  Just seems odd to me that we are detecting so very many "strange" planets..."

No, more massive planets cause more of a wobble. Simple as that (think about the ratio of mass between the two objects). What's 'strange' is that up until the first such detection of a planet this way, a 'hot Jupiter' orbiting 51 Pegasi, it wasn't thought that gas giant planets *could* ever be close to its star, and started a lot of re-thinking of planetary formation dynamics. We haven't seen enough of the Universe to allow ourselves to be overly certain of what 'normal' is, before we can consider something 'strange.'

As J.B.S. Haldane said (and Arthur Clarke was fond of quoting); "The Universe is not only queerer than we imagine, it is queerer than we *can* imagine."

Or more simply, expect the unexpected.

"expect the unexpected"

Frank, ontop of everything else, I'd guess that many solar systems have captured free-floating planets not just a few AU away but 50,000 AU distant.  One study of commet trajectories speculated the existance of a jovian sized world orbiting at such a distance in our own solar system!  That I GOTA SEE! :)
why is mars brighting in the night
Life on Earth is indicative of Life in general throughout the Universe.  The Universe is made up of the same elements and laws which we humans have discovered.  There is nothing new under the Sun.  There is nothing new in the Universe. Only phenomenons we haven't discovered yet.
Look at the unique Lifeforms that survive on this planet in places one would never have dreamed.  In the most alkaline water, the hottest water, the coldest water, the darkest caves, the deepest ocean.  Water (Hydrogen, Oxygen) elements are found throughout the Universe, starting with our Solar System. Check out our Mars rovers and the moons of Saturn and Jupiter.  
Mathmatically life will be found in water and will look and act very similar to life here on Earth.
Unfortunately, life on other planets in other Solar Systems, in other Galaxies may already be dying or dead due to the long periods of time it takes for light to travel and for life to begin and become.  We may only be seeing some vestige of life when we look a million light years away.  Even at 4.5 light years away, we humans or perhaps the inhabitants of Andromeda may only be able to say "good bye" to one another as we pass slowly out of existence.  The appendix of life.
Delmar, your writing is similar to some episodes of Cosmos...  Sagan talks about how the potentially narrow window of between the times life becomes inteligent enough to communicate and the potential of dying out may indeed be only a few thousand years.  I'd definitely like to believe in other intelligent life and I'm sure there are those that have survived...  I just don't believe in UFO's as why would any advanced race/culture wish to interfear with the natural process of events until there truly becomes a race that has passed the threshhold of self-eniolation and has become certain enough in it's existance not to die out to desease, war, or impact events.  When I race does become that advanced and that progressive, they essentially become those who speak for earth... It is only then when sharing information and technology between two inteligent species would not alter natural evolution and therefore I believe the ONLY time that contact would ever be made.  Even without any new technology, we have all we need to know to become such a self-sustaining race without any chance of being devestated by economics, disasters, or pandemics.  Yet, much like you speak of, our chance of surviving this very century is only said to be 50/50 odds.  We are a "haphazard" race... who often doesn't take things seriously until its too late.  To get beyond that, we need solutions that are good for all potential downfalls, not just specific measure that are only good for one problem specifically like carbon sequestering.  Local, regional, and household self-sufficiency is the key... something our global economy just doesn't have as there are SO MANY places like silicon valley, microsoft HQ, Boeing and Airbus that are the only places on earth where such specialties exist.  Maybe for airliners it's okay to build them in only two locations, but each region should be capable of making thier own cars, farm implements, power grid infrastructure, food, power, and so on.  Until that point is reached, we will continue to be very vulnerable to events that happen regardless of how much we hope they wont.  An 8.0 earthquake under LA or Tokyo might be all it takes in such a financially challenging time to collapse the US or Japanese economy and perhaps much of the world along with it!  Being prepared does not at all have to mean living in caves with a ton of food supplies, but it does require proper planning and solutions that would serve us well for other reasons to boot!
Caleb (1/22, 1512) wrote, "Much more likely, I think, that some of these signatures are generated by the compound affect of multiple smaller bodies orbiting in their parent stars ..."

Orbital speed decreases with distance from the star.  A dark star orbiting a star we track at Oort cloud distances would create quite a wobble but the period is so long that we may not notice it in several human lifetimes.  Multiple small planets won't, can't, align in such a way that they create a regular wobble.  Any time we see a regular wobble we can be sure it's from a single body.  Several bodies can combine to make an irregular wobble, which may be detectable, but until our abilities improve we'll continue to find the kind of planets we've been finding to the near exclusion of others.
They are here already not sure how but they are. Until a week ago the thought of aliens yeah ok possible maybe but when you see them with your own eyes they can only. Be seen thru reflection there hundreds of different types but the morph and blend in and most don't see them at all there are. These. Small lizard like creatures they can be seen in the dark in bushes and trees the eyes light up any one see these have more details. I think my house is a portayl


SEND A COMMENT

PLEASE READ: All comments must be approved before appearing in the thread; time and space constraints prevent all comments from appearing. We will only approve comments that are directly related to the blog, use appropriate language and are not attacking the comments of others.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):

TRACKBACKS

Trackbacks are links to weblogs that reference this post. Like comments, trackbacks do not appear until approved by us. The trackback URL for this post is: http://cosmiclog.msnbc.msn.com/trackback.aspx?PostID=1755242

Latest Tech & Science News

Syndicate This Site

Add Cosmic Log to your news reader:
live.com xml
myyahoo msn
bloglines newsgator
google