E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSThe Weekly Space Hangout focuses on planets, dark matter, "Trek" tricorders and more.
Even the astronomers on the science team for NASA's Kepler planet-hunting mission are marveling at the new worlds they're finding.
There's certainly a lot to marvel at: Just this week, Kepler astronomers announced the discovery of not just one, but two binary-star systems that have at least one planet each, reviving visions of the double sunset on Luke Skywalker's home world in the "Star Wars" saga. Another group of scientists drew on data from Kepler to detect the three smallest exoplanets yet discovered, including one just about the size of Mars.
The revelations at the American Astronomical Society's winter meeting in Austin, Texas, demonstrated that the number and diversity of the planets being found beyond our own solar system is growing by leaps and bounds. An august group of space commentators, including yours truly, celebrated the diversity during today's Weekly Space Hangout. And astronomers were celebrating in Austin as well.
"Any kind of system you can think of, if it doesn't violate the laws of nature, it probably exists somewhere out there," Virginia Trimble, an astronomer at the University of California at Irvine, told reporters. "So as long as people think up new techniques, they will also find new types of planets. There will surely be lots of new, neat stuff in the coming years."
NASA
An artist's conception shows NASA's Kepler Space Telescope observing the transit of a planet across the disk of an alien star. In this artwork, the view of the star and its planet are magnified far beyond what's actually achievable.
In an email, Berkeley astronomer Geoffrey Marcy, who has been in on the planet quest for 20 years and is a member of the Kepler science team, went positively gushy over the latest findings ... but also pointed out that the quest has really just begun:
"The NASA Kepler space telescope has discovered well over 2,000 strong candidate planets around other stars. No exoplanet survey is even close to this coverage and statistical integrity.
"For each of those exoplanets Kepler finds, we have detailed knowledge of the planet's orbital period and the planet's orbital distance from its host star. More impressively, we know the planet's size (diameter) quite accurately. For some of the planets, we have also measured their mass and density, with some planets found to be definitively solid.
"With this wealth of information about over 2,000 planets, we continue to study the occurrence of planets around other stars. This work gives us a census of planets in the Milky Way galaxy. The 2,000 exoplanets is still too few to give an accurate answer. A useful census of humans on Earth requires that well over 2,000 people be surveyed. So it is with planets in the Milky Way galaxy. A useful census requires that thousands be sampled, and with accuracy. We desire integrity in our surveys of planets and people.
"Three weeks ago, the Kepler team announced the first two Earth-size planets. Only Kepler has sensitivity to Earth-size planets. [Now we have announced] the first Mars-size planet around another star. ... These discoveries by Kepler will mark an historic moment in the history of science, approaching the trans-oceanic voyages of the 15th century and the first steps on the moon. Kepler is indeed finding new worlds."
The Kepler mission identifies potential new worlds by looking for the telltale dips of starlight that occur when a planet passes over the disk of its parent sun. Other methods are used to confirm the mass of alien planets, including a method that checks for a characteristic gravitational wobble in stars that have planets. And yet another method, called microlensing, was used in another study released this week that estimated there could be 160 billion planets in the Milky Way. There's a chance that estimate will turn out to be too high. There's a better chance it'll turn out to be too low. But in either case, astronomers now recognize there could be tens of billions of new worlds out there.
Some of those worlds no doubt will have the conditions conducive to life as we know it. Studying such planets could help us one of the deepest questions we have about the universe: Are we alone?
But in order to do that, the quest has to continue. Right now, funding for the $600 million Kepler mission is due to run out in November, and discussions about an extension are under way. Theoretically, Kepler could gather enough data by November to detect Earth-size planets in Earth-scale orbits around sunlike stars, but an extension would provide scientists with more confidence about their existing candidates — and also give them the chance to cast a wider net.
Chances are the mission will be extended. "It would seem to me just nuts to have it out there and turn it off," one astronomer, Greg Laughlin of the University of California at Santa Cruz, told Space.com. But the success of Kepler (and its European counterpart, COROT) should get people talking about what to do for an encore. So brace yourself for an alphabet soup of exoplanet-mission acronyms ranging from EChO to MPF to PLATO to WFIRST.
Odds and ends from the week in space:
- Hey, kids! Want to keep up with the lengthening list of exoplanets? Check out Hanno Rein's free Exoplanet app for iPhone, iPad and iPod Touch. There are planet catalogs for other mobile platforms as well, such as Exoplanet Catalog for Android and the Astronomy app for Windows Phone. Got more apps? Add your recommendations in a comment below.
- Speaking of apps, Powellware's newly released Mars Images app is getting some good reviews. The app for iPhone/iPad/iPod Touch/Android delivers the latest images from NASA's Opportunity rover on Mars.
- Remember the big radio-telescope array that Jodie Foster was plugged into when she heard the alien transmissions in the movie "Contact"? The real-life telescope complex in New Mexico where those scenes were filmed has been known as the Very Large Array, but during the AAS meeting, the National Radio Astronomy Observatory announced that it'll be renamed the Karl G. Jansky Very Large Array to honor Karl Jansky, the founder of radio astronomy. The name was selected from among 23,331 suggestions submitted by 17,023 people from more than 65 countries, the NRAO said. The new moniker will no doubt be shortened to the Jansky VLA, or the Jansky Array.
- If you've got an hour to spare, watch the Weekly Space Hangout video above, in which I and other Web-based worthies hold forth on a variety of out-of-this-world topics. And if you've got another hour to spare, perhaps while you're exercising at the gym, listen to last week's "Virtually Speaking Science" podcast, featuring my chat with Ig Nobel impresario Marc Abrahams. And stay tuned for the Feb. 1 installment of "Virtually Speaking Science," when we'll be talking about science policy and politics.
Alan Boyle is msnbc.com's science editor. Connect with the Cosmic Log community by "liking" the log's Facebook page, following @b0yle on Twitter and adding the Cosmic Log page to your Google+ presence. You can also check out "The Case for Pluto," my book about the controversial dwarf planet and the search for new worlds.
Leave a Comment:
The secret of our existance finally revealed:
Yes, there is a God and he created the universe with a big bang. And he said:
Let there be a trillion stars with 5 trillion planets and 50 billion civilizations with 10 billion people each. And I shall glee at all the diverse results. And when all energy in the universe ceases and everything is dark and cold, I shall start over and do something different. And I couldn't care less about the welfare of any of those civilizations so not to bias the natural path toward destruction of each one.
Hey Jack! Dude you better lay back down and have another beer.
LOL
Ok, so an uncaring god creates an uncaring universe populated to narrow-minded, ignorant and uncaring beings. Who cares?
Now a world with rings like Saturn, that's worth caring about.
Why would god need to create anyway? The very notion of god creating something. especially humans is moot. Why would god need to create humans to worship him? Creating humans to worship him sounds degrading for a god who can instantly whip up a Universe wouldn't you say?
If god created humans to monitor them to create better civilizations would that make god a scientist? Why would god need to study his creations to make them better? Shouldn't god know how to create the best species every time?
The notion of god is nothing more than a reason to be irresponsible. "So why did you get the girl pregnant and then leave her?"
"Because god told me too."
Not even wrong.
Don't think of it as God studying us. Think of it as God putting us through training. THIS is how screwed up sin can make the world, and THAT is what happens when people only care about their own pleasure and comfort. See these amazing things here? These happen when people come together and genuinely care about each other as much as they care about themselves. Here's what happens when this emotion is used wrong, but HERE is what happens when it's used right.
Now, final exam, how many of you are satisfied with that screwed up world, and how many are willing to follow My rules to maintain a perfect new world to live in?
Why doesn't God care when good people die but bad people live? Because death isn't the end. It's graduation from basic training. The people who live still need to study more. And some are just hopeless drop-outs.
Hey Jack...I am not truly convinced some of these replies to you from some of these people show they have an EyeQue above 70...For example: you said "
BUT, it was you saying that God was saying this in his mind...So, I am on bord with you and I get the sarcasim, irony of it all. You are truly a SAVANT and I am proud to see another one of us... Thank you Jack form Jack! This is not a joke...
Uhm...exactly what does God have to do with this article? You're like those idiots who attach politics to everything.
Uhm...to...Uhm...The point is: Jack fom Jack is saying if there is a God...What's the point of it all...He might need to clarify how he justifies his Birth, Death, Rebirth model but if one listens to Stephen Hawking...He said flat out...There is no God...or something like There is no time in the universe for a God, the universe does not have the time to be bothered with a GOD...If Hawking said it, put money on it...So, th re you have it Jack 2510943987532495792347592375......
Why why why why why why....forget WHY and start with ohhhhhhhhhhhhh...so thats why ..
and God ....pufff Gas baby Gasss ...so lets drill
i see stars beyond mars and saturn and i want to see more ...this is the information era and i wish we had internets like this in the 60s
Why would he anyway?
Fundi Christians who think that god made humans the center of creation are in for a rude awakening..
And you know everything so you can say this, right Dogbreath?
I hope the SETI folks are perhaps using the new this new found data, to perhaps point their ears toward some of these stars systems and give a listen.
Yup, they're doing that. Here's the story:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/45959510/
Perhaps.
It would seam to me the there would be a bell curve to the number of civilizations a few at first and then lots with an inevitable tapering off in numbers.
giving that it takes several billion years to build up enough chemicals to support life cupled with the statistical probability that we would be here at the top of the bell curve there is a very good chance there is some one out there,possibly looking for us to.
Thanks, Alan. Great article!
Alan,
If we had say $1 trillion to spend, could we in principle build a system that could unambiguously detect signs of civilizations on extoplanets such as radio or radar signals, or detailed analysis of their atmospheres, or image city lighting? Perhaps a very large array of satellite telescopes?
Dan - The James Webb telescope is suppose to be capable of chemical analysis of the exoplanets, which is set to launch in 2018.
Right now they are only finding the easy ones. The ones least likely to be blue marbles. Fast transiters and huge rocks or gas balls. Too close and too hot or too big.
It's the planets that take a year or so that will bear the fruits of life.
Okay,,, how do we get more funds for the amazing research being done and for the space program. There is life out there, just has to be.
How about if we stop concentrating our national riches on new ways to kill each other?
Think that would be enough funding to advance discoveries that actually move civilization along?
we can't spend money on helping poepls on because a regulated civilization control act....it's easier to wast money on things NASA on talks about but can't prove...some retired NASA people talk about the absolute waste of theroism rather than tealism..this called job security....that all this....corruption at it's finest.....obama will get reelected because of ease of manipulation to get easy funding for most anything.....our group has already proved a form anti gravity but wont say anything since the gov. seize the project only because of their real overpaid ignorance to solve something simple...this would end their input of financial glory ....corruption!!!!!!!!!
Jozef, what are you talking about..?
Yeah, that was pretty crazy.
Dang it looks like we have another one .hay JOZEF I'm sure there's a crazy people web site some where go find it this ones for science
Jozef I didnt understand what you are trying to convey, it might have something to do with the grammar and spelling errors (spell check is your friend) but that is only a small part of it. If you think NASA is a waste of time then you need to get rid of all the technology that you take for granted because most everything you enjoy in life technology wise has been touched by NASA's due to its Space exploration programs. If you dont believe me research it, just look up Space exploration spin offs.
Aside from the direct impacts on telecommunications (satellites), navigation (GPS), weather (numerous studies, many enabled by satellites), and the like, NASA's ventures also drove much of the miniaturization of computer technology (you know, like in your IPad and smart phone), medicine (plastics were a space-age technology before they were pollutants), mass transportation (look at all the groundwork NASA and NACA (NASA's predecessor) did in aerodynamics), and much more.
And that's just to name a few!
To all radio-astronomers:
I hope that when you folks find the first signs of life on similar “Goldilocks” planets,
since we won’t be able to go there or contact them for a few billion years, I
hope that they have better radio/television shows and personalities than we’ve
had during our first century at filling space with crap.
It would be fun to listen to some other life forms do their version of Amos and Andy or
Gleason or Skelton, if they’re funnier. If they’re not, we should just direct
the receiver beam elsewhere and scratch them off the list like clicking the
remote here on earth, only in this case, it would be a very remote. According
to you folks, there are plenty of likely places for intelligent life, which I
would hope would prove at the same time to mean funnier, more entertaining
life. Why waste time listening to more crap? There’s enough of that here. We
should hold out for the real cream of the exoplanetary crop, the belly-busting
guffawers of interstellar comedy, the real Tear-Jerkers of the Milky Way.
Nothing less, please.
Imagine the horror of going from the 500 bad channels we have presently on earth’s
televisions to millions of bad offerings, simply because we locate life and
thus more bad radio/TV elsewhere? And how would the present cable suppliers
charge us for all that crap? Knowing corporate America, I already worry about my upcoming
bills.
In short, which I know to be a point that has already been passed and seems like light
years ago and I’m sorry for that, please focus all future energies at the
collector sites towards quality alien program collection, not just more
run-of-the-mill local solar system kind of stuff. And I’d like to think that if
you folks discover some Voyager like ship coming at us from some other life
form sniffing around our solar system, that you will first test the quality of
their offerings and if not up to speed talent-wise, maybe all of earth’s
inhabitants can be very quiet until it slips by without noticing us. We’ll
probably all be happier in the long run, kind of like when Bewitched was
finally cancelled, thank you God for that. Thank you.
Frank
I wouldn't panic over the "junk" on our airwaves polluting interstellar space. Most of our signals are so weak, they're garbage data from interference before they leave the solar system.
A few billion years? Why do people think it's going to take us that long to come up with drive systems to reach new stars? All these types of doubters need to remember: we went from steam-powered tech to landing on the moon within 100 years. Never doubt the power of human ingenuity.
there is a problem with listening for a broadcast from other plaints .
assuming they progress's at the same speed we do,the signal will be short lived .
as we have gone to digital transmissions are radio volume or signal strength has decreased ten fold,so we will be hard to find.
Awsome point Brokinarrow!!
All we have to do is convince the politicians we are building something to kill people and they will fund it... then, once we're all set, we tell them the truth, and then high-tail it out of here before they use their PAC to make attack ads against us ;)
blog ReadingThinkingAndWriting com
I, for one, look foreward to the days of turning on the tube and watching "Everybody Loves Kleeborg"
Brokinarrow, don't knock steam power! Remember the 2nd and 3rd stages of the Saturn rockets used to go to the moon burned liquid hydrogen and oxygen to create a jet of steam for thrust!
I agree 100% with you though, if there is a way to do it we will have figured it out in the next couple hundred years. My guess is sometime in the near future we will launch a few hundred year missions that will end up being intercepted by later FTL ships before they complete their journeys.
there's a difference between the types of technology in an engine, a rocket, and the kind of drive system that could take us anywhere in the universe. Based on our current understanding of the universe, it is impossible to travel faster than C.We have theoretical work a rounds (worm holes) that would allow us to travel faster, but we are no where near designing something capable of taking advantage of those work a rounds. It would take far more energy than we have available at present and into the foreseeable future.
In a 1000 years we may have the kind of knowledge and technology to journey among the stars. I wouldn't bet on anything sooner and My estimate could be very overconfident. We may never have the technology to travel to different galaxies.
Actually, Harlan, we've (preliminarily) detected a few neutrinos that can go faster than the speed of light. That may pave the way (a very long road, mind you, but paved) for FTL travel and actually reaching other star systems in a single lifetime!
At the very least it puts a big crack in the theoretical speed limit of C.
Kepler running out of money. KICKSTARTER PROJECT !!
just sitting here looking back.....I really do recall a day not all that long ago when science pundits said we would never confirm the existance of an exoplanet from here because they would be too small to detect....I know they were only thinking of direct observation but I can't help thinking that we have only JUST begun to detect planets.....this discovery (exoplanets) is going to go on for a LONG, LONG, LONG time now.....er, more to the point, ya all better get some bigger catalog holders cause ye is gonna need em!!!
"Beyond what's actually achievable???"
Achievable? Certainly beyond our current abilities, but come on.
This is a wonderful discovery but, I've always wondered about the science. I understand being able to locate planets based on a transit across the disk of a distant star and the perceptible decrease in the light received from that star. However that requires the planet/star position be in the same visual plane as the observer. If the observer is looking at the system from any other perspective the planet would never be observed to be in transit.
To me this seems to indicate there are probably far more planets in the universe than the ones we are finding. Or is it assumed that since we are looking within the Milky Way all planetary system will be in the same plane as our own? The orbit of our own moon and Pluto seems, to me, to indicate this is not necessarily the case.
The first sign is the wobble of the star from the gravitational pull of the planets, than the closer observation will take place. The slight blink of a satellite orbiting the star will draw further observation. When you say "plane", I assume you're speaking about degrees and angles? If that's the case, regardless of the angle of observation, I would think the planet would still "blink" across the light of the star eventually.
No, the star would never blink. Assume for example you were observing our own solar system from the top down, the orientation commonly used to portray the orbits of the planets. No matter how long you viewed the system you would never see the light of the star vary.
While I agree you could detect a wobble in the star, with our current technology, that's not enough to detect Earth sized planets much less Mars sized. I'm just wondering what the scientific thought is of systems being oriented towards us "edge on" so a star transit could be observed. Seems to me there may be many more systems that are not necessarily in an edge on orientation to us, meaning there are many more planets in systems we cannot detect by the transit method. Many of those planets could very well be earth sized.
An excellent point, and I do hope that we will come up with some telescopes powerful enough to find even those types of systems at some point, as I have no doubt they exist. Using what data we are able to gather now with our limited systems though, we're getting a good sampling of the number and types of planets that we can find. I think this will give us a better idea of the typical star system. Personally, I think whichever satellite/scope we come up with next needs to be pointed at say 50 of our closest stellar neighbors to see what kind of planets are orbiting them, as these will be our first targets for inter-stellar travel.
Lup - Detection of a slight drop in luminosity, star blinks, is how Kepler finds the exoplanet candidates. Ground based telescopes then verify the candidate.
Lup, your analysis of the problem is quite right, and a commonly recognized limitation of the current system. Using star wobbles doesn't have this limitation, as the wobble would be visible in SOME way from any angle, but it has a different limitation of only being noticeable for large, close masses (like Jupiter with Earth's orbit). All our tools to date have strengths and weaknesses, but the quest continues for better tools, as well as more planets.
For stars we can identify a wobble in, we can also identify a plane of orbit for most planets in the system (though, as you pointed out, that's not 100%). We can then run some statistics on how probable it is that any given star will be edge-on to us. We can then use data from how many stars we've identified planets around with the blink method, and run a (very rough) extrapolation to identify how many stars MAY have planets in total, including ones who aren't edge on. It doesn't help with actually FINDING them, but we can still make educated guesses with only the tools we have.
I can't imagine a discovery that will ever mean less to mankind than discovering a new planet we will never see.
Funny, I seem to recall an ancient Greek saying something similar about 'atoms'.
Good job there gregB, Mic is the type that probably thought that fire was too dangerous to have in the cave.....;-) --S--
Mic, finding all of these planets and the evidence for billions more planets is, for mankind, one of the greatest astronomical discoveries of all time for a whole host of reasons. The truth is that it wont make as much of a difference to the individual today.
Mic- Mankind went from using steam powered tech to landing on the moon within 100 years. Are you really so naive to think our current level of technology is as high as we're going to get? So while you and I may certainly not get the chance to set foot on these new planets, I think we may yet get some pictures of them from inter-stellar probes before the century is up.
Micfrom Cleveland
apparently you are confusing your self with mankind they are not the same thing.perhaps you find no usefull point to the discovery but as a hole mankind dose
Mic You cant imagine because for you the pursuit of knowledge isnt a priority. Your statement is proof of that. If people thought like you then people would never have left Europe to explore the world.
You need to expand your mind because itsn makinds ability to try to achieve the "impossible" that enables mankind to accomplish the seemingly impossible.
You people are all deluded. Mankind will be extinct before we ever develop technology to colonize outside the solar system. I'm not against discovery, let's just do it where it will POSITIVELY impact our lives. All this space exploration stuff is a cover for military applications. Think about it.
And special note to Wade. Your comment might carry more weight if you could spell.
I find it funny that people are still asking "are we alone?" Of course we're not alone. The universe is bigger than any of us can fathom, and the laws of nature are constant throughout. If there's life in one place, well, it's going to be someplace else too.
Will we ever encounter said life? No. Everything is too far away from each other. But to say we're alone in the universe is sheer arrogance.
We may encounter alien life if it exists in our solar system or when we figure out how to cross large portions of space and time quickly which I believe we will eventually.
@ Alan,
What's on the horizon in terms of equipment/tech that can begin dissecting the potential atmospheric compositions of some of these worlds? Im sure it would've been done if feasible, but it would've been nice to "upgrade" Kepler with the ability to detect oxygen/carbon rich atmospheres. Ive heard chatter that we're still a couple years away from this ability?
With the discovery of all these exoplanets, its even more torturous knowing that we have no way of actually getting there. Imagine having the ability to teleport to these planets in the blink of an eye. That would truly be a trip of a lifetime.
Telescopes like the James Webb Space Telescope and WFIRST could conceivably check exoplanet atmospheres:
http://www.paulanthonywilson.com/blog/what-will-the-james-webb-space-telescope-do-for-exoplanet-research/
There's a proposed mission called FINESSE that would look at exo-atmospheres:
http://www.thespacereview.com/article/2003/1
I've already mentioned the EChO mission, which also would be focused on exo-atmospheres.
Ground-based telescopes could also do it under the right conditions. And in fact they're already doing it:
http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2010/08/potassium-exo-atmospheres/
There are some really huge telescopes due to come online in the next 10 years. So even though the Terrestrial Planet Finder has not yet been put back on the agenda, there's lots of hope that we'll learn much more in the next decade.
The interesting thing about SETI, is that they have stated publicly, that, in the case where they were to detect a signal that indicated a probability for intelligent life, they would not announce it to the public. But, rather, they would alert the government and ask the government to direct the communications, if any, about the detection. So, SETI may have already detected such a signal. Who knows.
Also, referring to comments above about the limitations of the speed of light, indicating that extraterrestrial, intelligent life, could not possible visit our planet, because of the huge distances...what about bending space? Or synthesized worm holes? Also, it looks as though the CERN collider has detected that some particle "might" be able to travel faster than the speed of light. In all these cases, the limitations posed by the speed of light, go right out the window.
Public letter:
Dear Friends.
No too big secret that NASA has gotten toughest question to fund future & current projects. I’d like to offer you game-changing strategy: One & First among the Key Factors is to become financially independent, space tourism has really great potential to be first having extra incomes, but common mistake of start-ups like SpaceX is the way to excite customers. Ticket to Space is too expensive even for far not poor personas, but fortunately this obstacle can be broken through with lottery schemes to sell tickets + that way makes possible to get many times more income to advance than Just to search wealthy ones.
Aforesaid text is only smallest part of the strategy to turn Space Industry from ugly duck to blossoming Swan.
My the best wishes.
P. S.
+ one wonderful & useful moment must be mentioned: the more NASA will be self-funded, the more money from government will be given to NASA.
Does anyone else see the beauty in the symmetry? Commercial space programs are the first step into space, in physical terms, for mankind as a whole. Kepler is finding the places we might want to reach for.
The people who sold, gave away, or just abandoned everything they had to climb aboard a small wooden ship and travel weeks away from food to reach a new world and try to make a life sometimes failed (Roanoke) and sometimes succeeded and returned the investment to the "Ultra Wealthy" who bought and provisioned the ships.
Space travel is not impossible, it just can't be done on horseback. Supra-light speed may not be an issue if the current work in theoretical physics bears the fruit it suggests. I trust that the knee-jerk reaction-aries mantra of; Can't happen-Waste of money-Spend it on programs for the here and now will fade away as the steps to a moonbase and Mars travel come and go. Private involvement in space will speed things up.
Start looking at the planetary catalogs to book your youngest daughters honeymoon now.
And God created geek central.