Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Thursday August 18 2016, @09:52AM   Printer-friendly
from the that'd-take-18,000-years-at-Helios'-top-speed dept.

Astronomers have reportedly discovered an Earth-like exoplanet in the habitable zone of Proxima Centauri, one of the closest stars to our Sun. However, the claim is based on an anonymous source who is said to have leaked the news ahead of an announcement by the European Southern Observatory:

[In] what may prove to be the most exciting find to date, the German weekly Der Spiegel [translation] announced recently that astronomers have discovered an Earth-like planet orbiting Proxima Centauri, just 4.25 light-years away. Yes, in what is an apparent trifecta, this newly-discovered exoplanet is Earth-like, orbits within it's sun's habitable zone, and is within our reach. But is this too good to be true? [...] Citing anonymous sources, the magazine stated:

The still nameless planet is believed to be Earth-like and orbits at a distance to Proxima Centauri that could allow it to have liquid water on its surface — an important requirement for the emergence of life. Never before have scientists discovered a second Earth that is so close by.

In addition, they claim that the discovery was made by the European Southern Observatory (ESO) using the La Silla Observatory's reflecting telescope. Coincidentally, it was this same observatory that announced the discovery of Alpha Centauri Bb back in 2012, which was also declared to be "the closest exoplanet to Earth". Unfortunately, subsequent analysis cast doubt on its existence, claiming it was a spurious artifact of the data analysis.

However, according to Der Spiegel's unnamed source – whom they claim was involved with the La Silla team that made the find – this latest discovery is the real deal, and was the result of intensive work. "Finding small celestial bodies is a lot of hard work," the source was quoted as saying. "We were moving at the technically feasible limit of measurement." The article goes on to state that the European Southern Observatory (ESO) will be announcing the finding at the end of August. But according to numerous sources, in response to a request for comment by AFP, ESO spokesman Richard Hook refused to confirm or deny the discovery of an exoplanet around Proxima Centauri.

[Continues...]

Here's an article we ran about the possible discovery of Alpha Centauri Bb.

There is some debate about the habitability of red dwarf systems in general. Nevertheless, one of the minds behind Breakthrough Initiatives/Project Starshot is enthused about the possible discovery. It seems likely that at the very least, almost all stars have planets or dwarf planets orbiting them.

Proxima Centauri will move closer to the Earth over the next 26,700 years at a rate of 22.4 km/s, until its closest approach of 3.11 light years.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0, Disagree) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 18 2016, @08:18PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 18 2016, @08:18PM (#389728)

    But it happily ignores the blithering idiots who clearly have on idea what they're talking about.

    Look, I am making an honest effort to answer what I can. I even propose an experiment that I believe is easy to set up. Act up if it comforts you, but as I said do not shoot the messenger.

    If the Earth is 'flat'

    Well, it's not,

    Says who? "well established facts"? The passive voice? Wikipedia? "The fact that is clearly not flat"?

    How do I measure said curvature with a x200 telescope?

    Go at sea/lake level, or a canal. Set telescope 3 ft high. Train at target 5 miles away. Use trigonometry, derive what target height should be hidden (~5.5 ft), and see if it is actually hidden. Try with other numbers as well. Try during different visibility conditions, and different temperatures. The real question is, will you actually put your money where your mouth is and physically try it for yourself?

    Why can't I simply look with my eyes and see that I can't see the French alps?

    Because of atmospheric attenuation, I suppose.

    Or see the curvature of the Earth from a transatlantic flight?

    Because this is subjective, not objective, and prone to observing errors. The mind often sees what it expects to see. You say curve and I say something else, and there is the telescope experiment above being much closer to the scientific method and more able to settle this than the eyeballing method you suggest.

    Then where does it go at night?

    Anybody's guess: out of your perspective range? On the other side of the Earth? I don't know, I do not have all the information.

    Why can other parts of the Earth see when I can't?

    Again, I do not know. Magnetism has limited range, maybe light cannot travel arbitrarily far is a fair assumption, but I really do not know.

    Why does it's angular measurement not change as it passes overhead?

    Some say it does (an effect more pronounced the higher the altitude because of thinner air, hence less atmospheric diffraction), and some say it does not. I have not measured it for myself so I cannot really tell you, because I would only be quoting something I read or saw somewhere. When I measure it, I can report back without prejudice --or at least with as little prejudice as I can.

    Starting Score:    0  points
    Moderation   0  
       Disagree=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Disagree' Modifier   0  

    Total Score:   0  
  • (Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Thursday August 18 2016, @10:48PM

    by PartTimeZombie (4827) on Thursday August 18 2016, @10:48PM (#389773)

    Joining in the flamefest here.

    Go at sea/lake level, or a canal. Set telescope 3 ft high. Train at target 5 miles away. Use trigonometry, derive what target height should be hidden (~5.5 ft), and see if it is actually hidden.

    We did exactly this in the 5th form at school. Of course we used metres not feet and inches, because I'm not 200 years old and the civilised world uses the metric system.
    The results we got confirmed that the planet is actually a sphere (more or less).
    Seriously? Flat Earth? Too easily disproven to be credible.

  • (Score: 2) by wonkey_monkey on Thursday August 18 2016, @11:16PM

    by wonkey_monkey (279) on Thursday August 18 2016, @11:16PM (#389784) Homepage

    but as I said do not shoot the messenger.

    You're not the messenger, you're the claimant. You made the claim, but now you seem to abdicating all responsibility for it.

    Go at sea/lake level, or a canal. Set telescope 3 ft high. Train at target 5 miles away. Use trigonometry, derive what target height should be hidden (~5.5 ft), and see if it is actually hidden. Try with other numbers as well. Try during different visibility conditions, and different temperatures. The real question is, will you actually put your money where your mouth is and physically try it for yourself?

    If you knew anything about the history of such tests, you'd know they are rife with difficulties. Refraction, for example - you can't simply "use trigonemtry" to determine what should or should not be hidden. But then you did mention temperature, so perhaps you already do know. In which case why did you suggest just using trigonometry?

    Because of atmospheric attenuation, I suppose.

    You suppose? Wow, that really sounds like the word of someone who knows what they're talking about, doesn't it?

    Or see the curvature of the Earth from a transatlantic flight?

    Because this is subjective, not objective, and prone to observing errors. The mind often sees what it expects to see.

    I wasn't expecting to see the curvature of the Earth. I didn't take a photo, but there's plenty of video and photographic evidence of the curvature of the Earth. Not a problem for you, though; you can just dismiss it as part of the conspiracy, or some hitherto unknown artefact of photography that as gone undiscovered for centuries.

    You say curve and I say something else

    You have to say something else, because you've already closed your mind and chosen to disregard the bountiful evidence that supports the consensus. [i]Because[/i] it supports the consensus, probably.

    and there is the telescope experiment above being much closer to the scientific method and more able to settle this than the eyeballing method you suggest.

    I'm not suggesting a method; I'm telling you what I saw. Have you looked at the Earth from a height of 40,000 feet? I have. It was curved.

    Anybody's guess: out of your perspective range? On the other side of the Earth? I don't know

    Perhaps you should try watching a sunset. It would be instantly obvious that "out of your perspective range" makes no sense.

    So you're not even going to [i]try[/i] to explain time zones? Is 75+% of the population of the planet in on the conspiracy?

    If you have a PhD then you should understand the scientific method. You are making an extraordinary claim; if the best response you have to my hastily-thought-up question is "I don't know" then you're on incredibly shaky ground and should know better than to be making such claims.

    Magnetism has limited range

    Oh, so you're happy to accept that as a fact, but you suggest that science can't be trusted when it comes to the behaviour of light? Because the behaviour of light is pretty well established and understood by science. Suggesting it "cannot travel arbitrarily far" is not a fair assumption, because you're implying a massive and untenable conspiracy.

    I have not measured it for myself so I cannot really tell you

    Jesus Christ. Have you actually done anything to verify your ridiculous beliefs, or have you just latched on to it because it gives you a (false) certainty and security, by allowing you to dismiss anyone who disagrees with you as a fool or a member of a conspiracy?

    Let me sum up your post:

    do not shoot the messenger.
    I suppose.
    Anybody's guess:
    I don't know, I do not have all the information.
    Again, I do not know.
    I really do not know.
    I cannot really tell you

    --
    systemd is Roko's Basilisk
    • (Score: 2) by edIII on Friday August 19 2016, @06:49AM

      by edIII (791) on Friday August 19 2016, @06:49AM (#389961)

      Are you trying to make troll foie-gras here? ;)

      Why engage him on the science when we can "skip to the end"? There is something even more fundamental, and definitive, in nature that you're missing! The BEST experiment possible. Put one front in front of the other.... repeat. Keep repeating till finding an edge, peer over, and wave high to the Great Turtle we ride upon :)

      The ultimate destination of Flat Earth is a wonderful conspiracy in which the elites of the world are not conspiring to keep us in crushing poverty and under their control. Oh no, nothing so banal in the annals of evil. It's all a ploy to fund NASA so they have the resources to guard the edge from the idiots that would fall off like rushing Lemmings.

      That's the part that mystifies me. Couldn't they just as effectively harsh our mellows, while luxuriating in the corrupt crapulence with a flat world just as well? It seems like an awful lot of waste to prevent people from learning a truth that really changes nothing. The Earth... she is a flat. If it is so science can lie to us, that seems like putting the cart before the horse. We could have a flat Earth and science would be just as compromised by junk science as this one, and there would be conspiracy theorists talking about how the Earth is really triangular and the governments came together to falsely create the square, rhombus depending on group. Why? So the MIB can have some fucking office space god dammit. Nobody sees the Turtle. Nobody.

      --
      Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.