Science
Related: About this forum'Impossible' Alien World is Impossible. Yet There It Is
Source: Discovery News
'Impossible' Alien World is Impossible. Yet There It Is
DEC 6, 2013 12:12 PM ET // BY IAN O'NEIL
A giant extrasolar planet, or exoplanet, has been discovered orbiting a distant star. But this is no "ordinary" alien planet -- it shouldn't exist. To put it bluntly, it's an affront to current planet formation theories.
HD 106906b is a gas giant exoplanet with a mass 11 times that of Jupiter. So far, this may not seem too strange; hundreds of massive explanets have been spotted in our galaxy. But this one is peculiar in that it orbits its star 650 times the distance the Earth orbits the sun. It's this 650 AU (astronomical unit) distance that is causing some serious astronomical confusion.
"This system is especially fascinating because no model of either planet or star formation fully explains what we see," said Vanessa Bailey, fifth-year graduate student in the University of Arizona's Department of Astronomy and lead researcher of this study.
The exoplanet was discovered using the Magellan Telescopes' Adaptive Optics (MagAO) system, based in Chile. Adaptive optics are sophisticated laser systems used by ground based observatories to remove the atmospheric "wobble" when observing the night sky. This is the same effect as removing the "twinkle" from stars when viewed with the naked eye -- upper atmospheric turbulence causes the twinkle, the same effect that obscures the view for ground based observatories.
[font size=1]-snip-[/font]
Read more: http://news.discovery.com/space/alien-life-exoplanets/impossible-alien-world-is-impossible-yet-there-it-is-131206.htm
PrestonLocke
(217 posts)Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)tridim
(45,358 posts)Probably just an oversight by the humans who wrote it.
PrestonLocke
(217 posts)but ink was expensive back in the day?
Ghost Dog
(16,881 posts)knows limits, in the biblical sense, you know...
PrestonLocke
(217 posts)infallible!
exboyfil
(17,863 posts)and picked up in the obit of this star.??? It did not have to form in its current orbit.
Of errant celestial bodies, I've seen it written that we calculate, ie. those currrently uncaptured by any particular star, out there 'drifting' in inter-stellar galactic space (of this particular galaxy), there ought to be legion. And, from our point of view, quite concretely indiscernable.
Hmmm. I really need to read Don Quixote again.
WillyT
(72,631 posts)An artist's conception of a young planet in a distant orbit around its host star. The star still harbors a debris disk, remnant material from star and planet formation, interior to the planet's orbit.
Credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech
From: http://www.space.com/23858-most-distant-alien-planet-discovery-hd106906b.html
HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)I realize this seems outside the province of the article, but at the same time it addresses credibility of the reporter
Clearly a long time overdue for a masters, sort of at the limit of the 95% confidence interval for most PHDs.
Why not say which degree is being pursued?
Vashta Nerada
(3,922 posts)Without getting the Master's. I know a Bioanthropologist at the U of MN who is doing just that.
HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)Vashta Nerada
(3,922 posts)Going for a PhD = grad school.
Igel
(35,320 posts)year 1-2 master's. Some would insist on it. Some wouldn't. Usually awarded because it increased their stipend.
Year 3-4 coursework for PhD. End of year 4, beginning of year 5 you get your publishable/qualifying paper(s) ready and take orals or written exam.
Year 5-6, diss.
Have known astro students dragging things out to year 7 or even 8. "You won't get any of the jobs this year, slow down." "So-and-so's retiring in a couple of years, time your dissertation so you can apply for his job."
Perturbations: You transfer in with a master's from another school. You get to be year 3 taking courses before you get into the PhD program. Or you may take 2 years, and when you get into the PhD program immediately you're ready with your qualifying paper. Or not.
Mostly they referred to each other by years. 1st-years, 2nd-years, 3rd-years, 4-years. "Hank's a 4th-year but really he's a 3rd year."
It took me 6.5 yrs to get the PhD after going straight from the BS.
Shit happens always, and the myth of a "4-yr" program remains. I was asked to take a year off from research in order to help my physics dept teach classes due to a shortage of physics profs. And, I took another year to work for the US Naval Observatory to help build one of their observatories in AZ, doing little research, but I got some awesome experience in science management.
There is no "straight path"... you do what you need to do, all the while thinking ahead as to what will benefit you in the future.
my 2 cents,
-g
Ghost Dog
(16,881 posts)Indeed. Mine was/is so tortured/tortuous I'm still thinking about somehow completing it nearly 40 years later... Philosophy, sociology and politics of Science in the context of 'Environmentalist' Movements...
Finance can be an issue, as well as academic and governmental politics and, well, love affairs and general lifestyle issues.
I did get the MSc, later, though, although in a completely different subject... (Computer Science).
Posteritatis
(18,807 posts)I know more people who completed theirs in that timeframe than who did in four.
Or it could just be a master's-to-doctoral progression in the same school, which is also pretty common these days.
HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)The med and vet schools I was around did all their referencing by years and even had different dress codes to distinguish the categories.
Posteritatis
(18,807 posts)HereSince1628
(36,063 posts)then going tie-less was for 2nd years, the fourth-years walked around in jump suits.
In med school, the length of one's white coat is the semiotic of status. Short is less, longer is more.
Ghost Dog
(16,881 posts)in my experience.
They do tend to have/use the best drugs (and contraceptives, etc.) and throw the best parties, though...
muriel_volestrangler
(101,322 posts)Warpy
(111,277 posts)There are a lot of explanations.
Soylent Brice
(8,308 posts)there's considerably more explanations we aren't aware of if our models suggest "impossibility", which in astronomy "impossible" is only until we realize it's not.
first thought i had was perhaps a collision with another planet, tiny one eaten up, big one got a bit of an orbital adjustment.
if the planet it collided with was large enough, and depending on the angle and trajectory of the planet during collision, it could easily send it zipping out.