Talk:Methods of detecting exoplanets

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 27 August 2018 and 17 December 2018. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): TeamAsteroid.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 03:58, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

very few

"only a very few extrasolar planets have been observed directly" I don't think it is fair to say very few eoplanets have been observed directly. 11 have now been directly observed (out of a total 430 odd in total that have been detected). few maybe, but not very few. Georgeryall (talk) 21:23, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

11? Whatever the number is though, you're right: we should probably just cite that rather than using a vague phrase like "very few", as long as it's emphasized that the bulk of what we know about extrasolar planets has been gathered using indirect methods (since that addresses what seems to be a popular misconception about the state of our knowledge about them). — Aldaron • T/C 21:40, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

It has gotten more complicated. There are over 20 planets resolved directly and many more which are directly detected, but not resolved from the host star. --Artman40 (talk) 20:24, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Planet-star interactions

Although initial test were not successful, it may prove possible to detect star-planet interaction due to tidal effects or magnetic interactions from close-in (giant) planets.

Ref: S. H. Saar, M. Cuntz (2001). "A Search for Ca II Emission Enhancement in Stars resulting from Nearby Giant Planets". Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society. 325 (1): 55–59.

Fair use rationale for Image:GQLupi b.jpg

Image:GQLupi b.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 17:29, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

"The phase function of the giant planet may be constrained, which will lead to constraints on the actual particle size distribution of its atmospheric particles."

I have only the vaguest idea of what this sentence means. Can anyone rephrase it in more generally comprehensible terms?24.69.167.26 (talk) 04:18, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

I rewrote most of that paragraph. Let me know if it makes sense as it is now. James McBride (talk) 02:07, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Solar System Barycenter diagram

While reviewing this article, I noticed that the diagram "Motion of Barycenter of solar system relative to the Sun" was a relatively poor quality gif file, the source URL was to a PhotoBucket account that is now disabled, and it was for the years 1945-1996. Therefore I created two new diagrams and uploaded them to Wikimedia for you: 1) File:Solar System Barycenter 1944-1997.png is a complete recreation of the diagram in the article with the same years and path to verify validity of my algorithms, and 2) File:Solar System Barycenter 2000-2050.png which is a more "current" diagram for the years 2000-2050. Feel free to use one or both of these public domain png files if you want to replace the older diagram. Larry McNish, Calgary Centre of the Royal Astronomical Society of Canada. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Solar_System_Barycenter_2000-2050.png http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Solar_System_Barycenter_1944-1997.png 68.144.133.105 (talk) 12:52, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

"Perryman tree"

It might be informative if this article contained a representation of the so-called "Perryman tree" showing the planetary detection methods. See page 9 of Perryman 2000. Thanks. Regards, RJH (talk) 23:43, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

new method

So... a new method for planet discovery... the method used for discovering Neptune - perturbations to the orbit of a known planet. [1][2][3]

76.65.129.5 (talk) 06:47, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Need further explanation in directly observed section

It currently says that exoplanets cannot be directly observed because they're too faint. As a simpleton, I don't fully understand this. Is it due to a limitation in current-day optics? (We simply don't have telescopes big enough?) Or is it some other reason: no matter how big the telescopes are, we just can't observe because there isn't enough light photons coming our way? --Zybez (talk) 05:31, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Eclipsing binary minima timing

Can this method be moved to "Established methods" section yet or are planets around DP Leonis and NN Serpentis to be dynamically unstable like proposed planets around HW Virginis, NSVS 1425 and HU Aquarii? --Artman40 (talk) 23:51, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Table

I created a table to show what planetary attributes can easily be determined by different detection methods assuming that it's the only planet in the system and the system itself is a single-star system.

Attribute	Radial velocity	Transit	Microlensing	Direct imaging	Pulsar timing	Astrometry	Orbital phase reflected light variations
Orbital period	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Semi-major axis	Yes	Yes	Loose constraints	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Orbital eccentricity	Yes	With secondary eclipse	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No
Orbital inclination	No	Yes	No	Yes	No	Yes	Loose constraints
Mass	Minimum mass	No	Loose constraints	No	Yes	Yes	No
Size	No	Yes	No	No	No	No	Yes

Feel free to improve and correct it it. --Artman40 (talk) 00:55, 5 May 2013 (UTC)

Orbital phase reflected light variations

Should this section be renamed "Orbital phase light variations", "Orbital light variations" or "Direct detection" as it does not just encompass reflected light but also emitted light by high temperature? --Artman40 (talk) 20:35, 16 August 2013 (UTC)

Radial velocity

This article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ESPRESSO says that "our Earth induces a radial-velocity variation of 9 cm/s on our Sun". This should be fitted into this article as well. Kortoso (talk) 21:15, 6 October 2015 (UTC)

References

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Methods of detecting exoplanets. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20050915080856/http://www.star.ucl.ac.uk:80/~rhdt/diploma/lecture_2/ to http://www.star.ucl.ac.uk/~rhdt/diploma/lecture_2/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 20:51, 17 January 2016 (UTC)

Direct imaging

Are the exoplanets of closer stars easier to image than those of farther stars? I would imagine so, but is there a source that spells it out? Kortoso (talk) 17:33, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Methods of detecting exoplanets. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100630110925/http://cs.astronomy.com/asycs/blogs/astronomy/2010/06/22/astronomers-verify-directly-imaged-planet.aspx to http://cs.astronomy.com/asycs/blogs/astronomy/2010/06/22/astronomers-verify-directly-imaged-planet.aspx
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081217133217/http://exoplanet.eu/papers/exo_science.pdf to http://exoplanet.eu/papers/exo_science.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131126160805/http://www.keckobservatory.org/article.php?id=231 to http://www.keckobservatory.org/article.php?id=231
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.kis.uni-freiburg.de/~sveta/papers/exoplanet_hd189733b.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090604100620/http://steps.jpl.nasa.gov/links/docs/pravdoshaklan09vb10b.pdf to http://steps.jpl.nasa.gov/links/docs/pravdoshaklan09vb10b.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:21, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Methods of detecting exoplanets. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060927012051/http://www.obspm.fr/encycl/papers/nature03507.pdf to http://www.obspm.fr/encycl/papers/nature03507.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090904010715/http://planetquest.jpl.nasa.gov/news/firstFind.cfm to http://planetquest.jpl.nasa.gov/news/firstFind.cfm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:54, 20 September 2017 (UTC)