Skip to comments.
Earth: no longer the lonely planet
SpaceRef ^
| 9/26/03
Posted on 09/27/2003 7:19:20 AM PDT by KevinDavis
The question of whether we're alone in the universe just got a lot bigger.
Two astronomers from the University of New South Wales, Australia - Dr Charles Lineweaver and Daniel Grether - have found that at least 25 per cent of Sun-like stars have planets.
"This means there are at least 100 billion stars with planets in our Galaxy," says Dr Lineweaver, a Senior Research Fellow at the University's School of Physics.
Until now, astronomers believed that only five to 15 per cent of Sun-like stars had orbiting planets, but Lineweaver and Grether's work shows that previous estimates under-reported the proportion of so-called extrasolar planets.
The Astrophysical Journal, the world's leading journal of astrophysics, has accepted their research for publication.
Astronomers have been carefully monitoring 2,000 nearby stars for the presence of orbiting extrasolar planets.
"To date, they've detected a hundred or so, meaning the fraction of stars with extrasolar planets was around five per cent," says Dr Lineweaver.
"But most planets are too small or take too long to orbit their host stars to be detected. For example, if the Sun were one of the stars being monitored, we still wouldn't have detected any planets around it.
"Using a new method to correct for this incompleteness, we found that at least 25 per cent of Sun-like stars have planets."
Dr Lineweaver believes that the figure of at least 100 billion stars with orbiting planets could be on the low side when it comes to cosmic counting. It could be that close to 100 per cent of stars have planets.
"Given that there are about 400 billion stars in our Galaxy alone, it means there could be up to 400 billion stars with planets," he says.
"With about 100 billion galaxies in the observable universe, our result suggests that there are at least 10 trillion planetary systems in the Universe."
'What Fraction of Sun-like Stars have Planets?' by Charles H Lineweaver and Daniel Grether will be published later this year. It is available online.
Dr Lineweaver is an ARC Senior Research Fellow and Senior Lecturer, School of Physics, UNSW. Daniel Grether is working on a PhD.
TOPICS: Culture/Society; Miscellaneous; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: crevolist; earth; nasa; space; xplanets
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-80, 81-100, 101-120, 121-127 next last
To: M-cubed
I dont know about ants. But I know the fish in my Aquarium do!
When its around feeding time. they line up along the glass and stare at you to feed them.
And they do know the difference between different people. If someone they dont know goes over. they go to the bottom. But if they know you. They come to the top and wait for you to drop a fly, ant ( they go nuts over them) or other food in!
To: Publius6961
Just ask Colonel Hammond. That Colonel O'Niell (two L's) who reports to General Hammond (of Texas).
And Major Carter is a BABE!
102
posted on
09/27/2003 3:21:56 PM PDT
by
AFreeBird
(your mileage may vary)
To: KevinDavis
"With about 100 billion galaxies in the observable universe, our result suggests that there are at least 10 trillion planetary systems in the Universe."
Way, way beyond my ability to comprehend!
103
posted on
09/27/2003 3:32:52 PM PDT
by
Paulie
To: Alamo-Girl; PatrickHenry; RadioAstronomer
Alamo-Girl,
Your thoughts on dark energy, gravity and planet formation are intriguing.
When considering the counter-action of dark energy and classical gravity, I think about other instances where two known forces are in play and counteract each other.
OK...Strong force vs electromagnetic in proton-proton fusion: The strong force is more powerful in shorter range, while electromagnetic is weaker but has longer legs, and would be more cosmic (unlimited) in its effective distance reach were it not so bi-polar.
AND...Millikan oil drop: gravity vs electric (long range and weak vs short range and stronger).
BUT...Dark Energy has longer legs than classical gravity. Because you are looking at gravity-repulsion effects in a shorter-than-cosmic range, I thought of the EÖTVÖS EXPERIMENT: One hundred and three years of repeated experiments investigating the un-proven evidence of a (proposed) weak repulsive force that acts in a distance range of a few meters to a few thousand.
Link:
http://www.kfki.hu/~tudtor/eotvos1/onehund.html Eotvos is serious classical science. The experiments repeated in the last few decades look at a different (lower force of gravity exhibited) based on the spin number, baryon number and other nuclear properties apart from the mass of the object itself.
The great difficulty here is the experimental apparatus and measuring gravity at very close ranges.
Anyway, the challenge will be to learn how Dark Energy really works.
To: edwin hubble
Thanks for the post. I should have pinged you also. Sorry.
To: RadioAstronomer
Thanks I look forward to more real observations (data) in this area. So the posts #8, 11, 26, 29, 30, and 33 (by 'demlosers') are of real interest. Particularly neat is the Darwin infrared interferometer array in orbit. (post #26). .
To: edwin hubble
Indeed. I was looking at those also. Darwin Interferometer", cool name as well. :-)
To: Sabertooth; petuniasevan
Personally, I'm hoping that someday we can detect oxygen-rich atmospheres - IMO, a sure sign of life.
To: KevinDavis
I think we will find a Earth like planet in 20 - 30 years. Any takers?Any sooner? I'd like to move out of Calif.
109
posted on
09/27/2003 6:27:33 PM PDT
by
tophat9000
(I guess it 's now Free Republicans vs Vichy Republicans currently under Democrat occupation)
To: Sabertooth
I would call Earth-like surface livable with out pressure suit.. free standing liquid water ... farmable
110
posted on
09/27/2003 6:31:30 PM PDT
by
tophat9000
(I guess it 's now Free Republicans vs Vichy Republicans currently under Democrat occupation)
To: redheadtoo
Our television signals have been bombarding the stars since we first began broadcasting. Not nearly all of them, however... only the ones within a sphere of about a 65-light-year radius. That probably doesn't take in but so many Sol-like stars.
111
posted on
09/27/2003 6:37:50 PM PDT
by
Oberon
(What does it take to make government shrink?)
To: Tench_Coxe
Hate to quibble, but that Kzinti female's mammaries are too few in number, and in the wrong places!
112
posted on
09/27/2003 6:41:21 PM PDT
by
Oberon
(What does it take to make government shrink?)
To: RadioAstronomer
It's my understanding as well that Dark Energy has only been detected on a cosmological scale. Otherwise, we'd just consider it part of the usual gravity term. The weird thing is that we measure one effect (the usual 1/r^2 force) for nearby things, but some other effect (the dark energy term) for far away things.
What is dark energy? Beats the heck out of me. Is there a fifth force that only manifests at large distances? Is there another term in the gravitational force that only exerts itself at large distances? We don't know yet.
The more we learn, the more we realize we have yet to learn...
MD
113
posted on
09/27/2003 7:52:47 PM PDT
by
MikeD
(He lives! He walks! He conquers!)
To: PatrickHenry; Sabertooth
It could be that close to 100 per cent of stars have planets. "Given that there are about 400 billion stars in our Galaxy alone, it means there could be up to 400 billion stars with planets," he says.
"With about 100 billion galaxies in the observable universe, our result suggests that there are at least 10 trillion planetary systems in the Universe."
Wow! Thanks for the pings.
114
posted on
09/27/2003 8:27:45 PM PDT
by
Victoria Delsoul
(Arnold has the conviction and the fighting spirit to lead California into a new age of recovery)
To: MikeD
I thought so. Sure am glad you young whipper-snappers are on top of things. :-)
To: edwin hubble; RadioAstronomer; MikeD
Thank you so very much for that fascinating article, edwin hubble! Indeed, perhaps what we are calling "dark energy" will, in the end, be seen as the 5th field. I'm impressed with how many engaging concepts I've recently read from Hungarian science sources. Jeepers!
IMHO, the clarity that we seek in physics will be answered by geometry. IOW, I agree with Einstein's dream of transmuting the "base wood" of matter into the "pure marble" of geometry. To that end, I thought you guys might be interested in this article:
The Equivalence Principle as Symmetry (pdf)
I also want to thank you earnestly, Radio Astronomer, for that great website! The very first article I clicked was very helpful:
The Cosmological Constant and Dark Energy
To: Alamo-Girl
Big smiles. :-)
To: RadioAstronomer
Big, grateful hugs!!!
To: KevinDavis
Too easy to win that bet, Kevin. I'm suspecting any day now. Our telescopes are getting better and better, even terrestrially. Keck's interfermeter in Hawaii is proving to be astounding. And our orbital scopes are about to get an upgrade, IIRC.
119
posted on
09/29/2003 7:04:29 AM PDT
by
Frank_Discussion
(May the wings of Liberty never lose a feather!)
To: Frank_Discussion
Once we do find a Earth like planet, forget Mars, I want to go to that planet.
120
posted on
09/29/2003 7:30:37 AM PDT
by
KevinDavis
(Let the meek inherit the Earth, the rest of us will explore the stars!)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 61-80, 81-100, 101-120, 121-127 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson