Multi-planet System Found Through Crowdsourcing
A system of at least five exoplanets has been discovered by citizen scientists through a project called Exoplanet Explorers, part of the online platform Zooniverse, using data from NASA's Kepler space telescope. This is the first multi-planet system discovered entirely through crowdsourcing. A study describing the system has been accepted for publication in The Astronomical Journal.
Thousands of citizen scientists got to work on Kepler data in 2017 when Exoplanet Explorers launched. It was featured on a program called Stargazing Live on the Australia Broadcasting Corporation (ABC). On the final night of the three-day program, researchers announced the discovery of a four-planet system. Since then, they have named it K2-138 and determined that it has a fifth planet -- and perhaps even a sixth, according to the new paper.
Zooniverse. Also at Caltech and SpaceRef.
The K2-138 System: A Near-resonant Chain of Five Sub-Neptune Planets Discovered by Citizen Scientists (open, DOI: 10.3847/1538-3881/aa9be0) (DX) (arXiv)
(Score: 4, Insightful) by bob_super on Friday January 12 2018, @11:50PM (8 children)
I think it was a substitute for a journalist who didn't want to write "Amateur".
There are professional scientists (i.e. it's their job), and there are amateurs.
But don't let me get in the way of SN's outrage.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday January 12 2018, @11:55PM (7 children)
Sure, mentally substitute "Amateur" if you wish, but it's still the fact that someone chose to us the word "Citizen" as a synonym for "Amateur".
That's worth discussing.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 13 2018, @12:12AM (3 children)
Unfortunately that question remains answered. It is science done using excel spreadsheets that you email to a REAL™ scientist when you are done.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 13 2018, @12:27AM (2 children)
Einstein spent how long double checking relativity? Even if he had been wrong, it would still be science wouldn't it? Perhaps he should have passed his hypothesis to a REAL™ scientist and had figure them it out? Either way, you're a moron!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 13 2018, @01:25AM
If he were a REAL™ scientist I can't imagine that would be more than 10-15 minutes. That is all the time I've ever required before moving on to the next topic to master.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 13 2018, @01:30AM
Really I'm just parodying some people I've interacted with who didn't think it was "scientific" enough to input data into excel (if only they knew...).
Also, the "citizen" label is quite creepy. Once you've seen it from the inside you realize "pro" science is >99% BS at this point anyway though.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Saturday January 13 2018, @02:09AM (2 children)
There is clearly something different from discovering a planet using your backyard telescope to classifying millions of images with thousands of other people, handed to you by a research team and their algorithm.
If you don't like the branding, stay salty.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday January 13 2018, @03:24AM (1 child)
Why "CITIZEN"?
(Score: 3, Informative) by takyon on Saturday January 13 2018, @03:43AM
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Citizen_science [wikipedia.org]
https://www.citizensciencealliance.org [citizensciencealliance.org]
https://www.citizensciencealliance.org/philosophy.html [citizensciencealliance.org]
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]