posted
Another new one discovered, this time, it's the first one seen orbiting a trinary star. We SF writers are treading thin ice. It won't be long before most science fiction novels will require a disclaimer that it was written before all the extra-solar planets were discovered.
Posts: 2 | Registered: Aug 2010
|
posted
any details on the orbit? does it probably have several orbits? i wonder if chaos theory would apply to orbit switching?
Posts: 2710 | Registered: Jul 2004
|
posted
The system, HD 188753, is a triple system with central star A being orbited by stars B and C, extremely close binary, at about 9 or 10 au. The planet, dubbed A b, is a gas giant slightly larger than Jupiter, and is extremely close to star A, which it orbits every few days. The other two stars, on the other hand, orbit about every 25 years, so the lights in the sky are going to be random. Every few days, there will be a time when there is no night on the planet, anywhere.
What makes this system special is the fact that all three stars are extremely close to each other. The current evolution model of gas giants requires a lot more space than is offered here, and yet the gas giant exists, so scientists are having to rethink their theories on how it came to be.
"Atlas of the Universe" by the British genius, Patrick Moore. History, charts, and simple explanation of complex scientific theories: it started me on the path to enlightenment.
posted
This reminds me of reading an Asmiov science book from the mid-fifties. It was so off it might as well have said the moon was made of cheese. Good sci-fi isn't dependent on the technology or the accurcy. It's about the story and the people. Proof? "The Martian Chronicles" by Ray Bradbury
Posts: 3 | Registered: Jul 2005
|
posted
Ransom, thanks for saving me the trouble of posting the details. I can imagine a number of ways this planet could have formed. If you consider a gas giant to be a tiny star with insufficient mass for fusion, it is explained in the same way a close binary is explained. It could also be captured, or formed at a distance to one of the companion stars and was captured by the primary. The more we learn about real planets, the more source material we have for new milieu.
here are some interesting links on exoplanets in general.
hopekeeper: If you can find a copy of the three-volume Burnham's celestial handbook at a used book store, buy it. It's old, but still a fabulous reference on literally thousands of stars, including spectral class, anomolous behaviour,and other features. Just keep in mind that it was written for observers, so there are a lot of omissions of interesting objects because they are too faint to see with a small telescope. For example, there is a 10-1/2 page essay on Betelgeuse.
[This message has been edited by Spaceman (edited July 14, 2005).]
At work I saw a website with a robot lawnmower. Somehow, the vision of a robot running around mindlessly cutting a swathe of grass until it bumps into something and turns in another direction is slightly disturbing. Make sure your dog and kid are out of the way. And don't hold out too much hope of keeping those flowerbeds in good shape once Robo-mower has been over them.
But the piece of science fiction I want in MY life is the robot that is programmed to CATCH FLIES AND CONSUME THEM, thus using the organic matter to generate its own power. Now THAT is something I'm waiting to own!!!
posted
You'd have to be careful with that programming--you wouldn't want a pet canary ending up as robot-fodder. You'd also have to let it hibernate in the winter, unless you're one of the (un)lucky few who have great weather year round.
posted
If you call 115-degrees in July great weather. It's great fun cutting the grass in Phoenix in the summer. The only thing that grows here in the heat is bermuda grass. Everyone else in the world treats it as a weed. The stuff grows with runners and thrives everywhere except where you want it to grow, and not even nuclear weapons can kill it.
Posts: 2 | Registered: Aug 2010
|
posted
No, pretty much any plant my mother has ever tended belongs to the "completely unkillable" catagory.
After all, "Thou canst not kill that which dost not live"
Also, any plant ever tended by my dad seems to be unkillable as well, for completely opposite and really rather frightening reasons. "Thou canst not kill that which has been infused with supernatural vitality such that it becometh utterly unkillable."
Plants I tend have a bit of a strange varient, you can kill them, but it shortens your life or something like that.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
