![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I was listening to Radio 4 earlier this evening and they were talking
about NASA and their Kepler mission and locating planets around distant stars using the transit method where the light diminishes due to the passage of a planet in front of the star. I didn't hear all the program but it set me thinking, doesn't this depend on us, Earth, and the distant planet being in the same plane so that we see the transit? If the distant planet were orbiting so that from Earth we never saw it transit the star we wouldn't know it existed, would we? Am I missing something here? Isn't it statistically more likely that any such planet would orbit in a way that we wouldn't see it rather than be aligned correctly so that we can? -- Regards Nick |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Sedna, space probes?, colonies? what's next? | TKalbfus | Policy | 265 | July 13th 04 12:00 AM |
PDF (Planetary Distance Formula) explains DW 2004 / Quaoar and Kuiper Belt | hermesnines | Astronomy Misc | 10 | February 27th 04 02:14 AM |
New Solar System Model that explains DW 2004 / Quaoar / Kuiper Belt and Pluto | hermesnines | Misc | 0 | February 24th 04 08:49 PM |
Incontrovertible Evidence | Cash | Astronomy Misc | 1 | August 24th 03 07:22 PM |
Incontrovertible Evidence | Cash | Amateur Astronomy | 6 | August 24th 03 07:22 PM |