Date: 14/05/2013 13:58:18
From: CrazyNeutrino
ID: 310652
Subject: New Method of Finding Planets Scores Its First Discovery

New Method of Finding Planets Scores Its First Discovery
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/05/130513152840.htm

Detecting alien worlds presents a significant challenge since they are small, faint, and close to their stars. The two most prolific techniques for finding exoplanets are radial velocity (looking for wobbling stars) and transits (looking for dimming stars). A team at Tel Aviv University and the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics (CfA) has just discovered an exoplanet using a new method that relies on Einstein’s special theory of relativity.

more…

Reply Quote

Date: 22/05/2013 11:49:38
From: mollwollfumble
ID: 314956
Subject: re: New Method of Finding Planets Scores Its First Discovery

> Although Kepler was designed to find transiting planets, this planet was not identified using the transit method. Instead, it was discovered using a technique first proposed by Avi Loeb of the CfA and his colleague Scott Gaudi in 2003.

> The new method looks for three small effects that occur simultaneously as a planet orbits the star. Einstein’s “beaming” effect causes the star to brighten as it moves toward us, tugged by the planet, and dim as it moves away. The brightening results from photons “piling up” in energy, as well as light getting focused in the direction of the star’s motion due to relativistic effects. “This is the first time that this aspect of Einstein’s theory of relativity has been used to discover a planet,” said co-author Tsevi Mazeh of Tel Aviv University.

I’ve personally found new planets in transit data from Kepler. The effect mentioned would be absolutely tiny. I hesitate to say impossible to detect, but to get any significant brightening the star would have to be moving radially at some percentage of the speed of light which, given that the planet has a small mass then the star is exceedingly unlikely.

> The team also looked for signs that the star was stretched into a football shape by gravitational tides from the orbiting planet. The star would appear brighter when we observe the “football” from the side, due to more visible surface area, and fainter when viewed end-on. The third small effect was due to starlight reflected by the planet itself.

These two would operate together. There are thousands of regular periodic variable stars in the Kepler data. Such a variation would just look like a normal variable star.

> Once the new planet was identified, it was confirmed by Latham using radial velocity observations gathered by the TRES spectrograph at Whipple Observatory in Arizona, and by Lev Tal-Or (Tel Aviv University) using the SOPHIE spectrograph at the Haute-Provence Observatory in France.

That’s very interesting. I was told that there was no star in the Kepler dataset that was bright enough to check for planets by spectral methods. Looks like I was told wrongly.

> A closer look at the Kepler data also showed that the planet transits its star, providing additional confirmation.

Why not look for that first, it would have been easier. Pity though. It would have been better if they had succeeded in using Kepler data to find a planet that did not transit its star, confirmed by spectral methods.

> “Einstein’s planet,” formally known as Kepler-76b, is a “hot Jupiter” that orbits its star every 1.5 days. Its diameter is about 25 percent larger than Jupiter and it weighs twice as much. It orbits a type F star located about 2,000 light-years from Earth in the constellation Cygnus. The planet is tidally locked to its star, always showing the same face to it, just as the Moon is tidally locked to Earth.

Reply Quote

Date: 22/05/2013 11:58:32
From: Divine Angel
ID: 314959
Subject: re: New Method of Finding Planets Scores Its First Discovery

Would there be a noticeable bulge in a hot planet tidally locked to its star?

Reply Quote

Date: 22/05/2013 13:21:49
From: mollwollfumble
ID: 314994
Subject: re: New Method of Finding Planets Scores Its First Discovery

> Would there be a noticeable bulge in a hot planet tidally locked to its star?

Um. Let me think.

If I’m reading the mathematics correctly (http://mb-soft.com/public/tides.html) the height of the tidal bulge on a sufficiently large planet rotating sufficiently slowly is proportional to the distance between sun and planet raised to the power 1.5. This planet is sufficiently large and rotating sufficiently slowly.

Also, the height of the tidal bulge on the planet divided by the radius of the planet is identical to the height of the tidal bulge on the star divided by the radius of the star. I did not expect that, the tidal bulge doesn’t care what the density distribution of mass inside the planet is.

Since the star has an observable tidal bulge, the planet must also have an equally significant tidal bulge. That does not mean that the tidal bulge on the planet would be observable from Earth, it wouldn’t be observable because the light from the planet is so much less bright than that from the star.

Reply Quote

Date: 22/05/2013 13:28:29
From: Divine Angel
ID: 314998
Subject: re: New Method of Finding Planets Scores Its First Discovery

mollwollfumble said:

I did not expect that, the tidal bulge doesn’t care what the density distribution of mass inside the planet is.

Since the star has an observable tidal bulge, the planet must also have an equally significant tidal bulge. That does not mean that the tidal bulge on the planet would be observable from Earth, it wouldn’t be observable because the light from the planet is so much less bright than that from the star.

Hmm, that’s interesting that a bulge ignores the planetary density.

Oh, I knew it wouldn’t be observable from here, just if I was wandering around the general vicinity, would I notice the bulge.

Reply Quote

Date: 22/05/2013 13:43:31
From: Riff-in-Thyme
ID: 315010
Subject: re: New Method of Finding Planets Scores Its First Discovery

mollwollfumble said:


> Would there be a noticeable bulge in a hot planet tidally locked to its star?

Also, the height of the tidal bulge on the planet divided by the radius of the planet is identical to the height of the tidal bulge on the star divided by the radius of the star. I did not expect that, the tidal bulge doesn’t care what the density distribution of mass inside the planet is.

Does that suggest that gravity is defined at the surface of a mass?

Reply Quote

Date: 22/05/2013 13:52:10
From: mollwollfumble
ID: 315015
Subject: re: New Method of Finding Planets Scores Its First Discovery

> Does that suggest that gravity is defined at the surface of a mass?

It’s related to Newton’s finding that if all the mass of a spherical body were concentrated at the centre of mass, the gravity outside that body would be exactly the same. But more appropriately, if I read the maths correctly, the surface of the body in equilibrium is defined as a surface of constant acceleration.

Reply Quote

Date: 22/05/2013 14:26:40
From: Riff-in-Thyme
ID: 315051
Subject: re: New Method of Finding Planets Scores Its First Discovery

mollwollfumble said:

But more appropriately, if I read the maths correctly, the surface of the body in equilibrium is defined as a surface of constant acceleration.

Does that translate as a body containing mascons is not in equilibrium?

Reply Quote