Gliese 581 G
Gliese 581 G
its been recently announced that exoplanet Gliese 581 G is the first planet found in the 'goldilocks' habitable zone . Apparently comparable to earth and may harbor life . Is anyone working on a rendition ?
Re: Gliese 581 G
This is good idea, I'm sure someone will do this as add-on.
My addons for Celestia, Enjoy!
http://www.celestiamotherlode.net/catalog/show_creator_details.php?creator_id=172
http://www.celestiamotherlode.net/catalog/show_creator_details.php?creator_id=172
Re: Gliese 581 G
Planet is unconfirmed, the HARPS people don't see it. Having played around with the publically-available datasets using the Systemic console, I'm not convinced either.
- Hungry4info
- Posts: 1133
- Joined: 11.09.2005
- With us: 19 years 2 months
- Location: Indiana, United States
Re: Gliese 581 G
You used both the HARPS and Keck datasets?
Current Setup:
Windows 7 64 bit. Celestia 1.6.0.
AMD Athlon Processor, 1.6 Ghz, 3 Gb RAM
ATI Radeon HD 3200 Graphics
Windows 7 64 bit. Celestia 1.6.0.
AMD Athlon Processor, 1.6 Ghz, 3 Gb RAM
ATI Radeon HD 3200 Graphics
Re: Gliese 581 G
Used the HIRES data in the Vogt et al. (2010) paper, and the HARPS data from 2009. (The new HARPS data is not yet published, so I can't do anything with that.)
If I try to use the HIRES data alone, I can only find planets b and c. The sampling periodogram contains significant periods which seem to be associated with the lunar month, yearly, half-yearly and daily cycles, so the data is probably full of aliases.
The HARPS data alone clearly reveals planets b,c,d and e, but shows absolutely no sign of anything at the periods of f and g. Incorporating either makes the fit worse.
Given these planets (f and g) can only be found when the HIRES data is merged into the HARPS data, I suspect they may be artifacts of the data merging. Don't get me wrong, it'd be great if they exist, but I don't think the case is solid yet.
If I try to use the HIRES data alone, I can only find planets b and c. The sampling periodogram contains significant periods which seem to be associated with the lunar month, yearly, half-yearly and daily cycles, so the data is probably full of aliases.
The HARPS data alone clearly reveals planets b,c,d and e, but shows absolutely no sign of anything at the periods of f and g. Incorporating either makes the fit worse.
Given these planets (f and g) can only be found when the HIRES data is merged into the HARPS data, I suspect they may be artifacts of the data merging. Don't get me wrong, it'd be great if they exist, but I don't think the case is solid yet.