32 new planets discovered by the Europeans

Astronomers identify 32 new planets - Oddities - Charleston Daily Mail
- West Virginia News and Sports -
"What astronomers said is especially exciting is that about 40 percent
of sun-like stars have planets that are closer to being Earth-sized than
the size of Jupiter. Jupiter's mass is more than 300 times that of Earth's."
http://www.dailymail.com/News/oddities/200910190734

On Oct 21, 3:21*pm, Yousuf Khan wrote:
Astronomers identify 32 new planets *- Oddities - Charleston Daily Mail
- West Virginia News and Sports -
"What astronomers said is especially exciting is that about 40 percent
of sun-like stars have planets that are closer to being Earth-sized than
the size of Jupiter. Jupiter's mass is more than 300 times that of Earth's."http://www.dailymail.com/News/oddities/200910190734

Any scientific article on this?

Andrew Usher

Andrew Usher wrote:
On Oct 21, 3:21 pm, Yousuf Khan wrote:
Astronomers identify 32 new planets - Oddities - Charleston Daily Mail
- West Virginia News and Sports -
"What astronomers said is especially exciting is that about 40 percent
of sun-like stars have planets that are closer to being Earth-sized than
the size of Jupiter. Jupiter's mass is more than 300 times that of Earth's."http://www.dailymail.com/News/oddities/200910190734

Any scientific article on this?

Andrew Usher

You mean just something from a scientific website, or something that has
formulas and graphs and stuff?

If it's the former, then how about this one (video included):

32 New Exoplanets Discovered | International Space Fellowship
http://spacefellowship.com/2009/10/1...ts-discovered/

Yousuf Khan

On Tue, 27 Oct 2009 20:59:54 -0400, Yousuf Khan
wrote:

Andrew Usher wrote:
On Oct 21, 3:21 pm, Yousuf Khan wrote:
Astronomers identify 32 new planets - Oddities - Charleston Daily Mail
- West Virginia News and Sports -
"What astronomers said is especially exciting is that about 40 percent
of sun-like stars have planets that are closer to being Earth-sized than
the size of Jupiter. Jupiter's mass is more than 300 times that of Earth's."http://www.dailymail.com/News/oddities/200910190734

Any scientific article on this?

Andrew Usher

You mean just something from a scientific website, or something that has
formulas and graphs and stuff?

If it's the former, then how about this one (video included):

32 New Exoplanets Discovered | International Space Fellowship
http://spacefellowship.com/2009/10/1...ts-discovered/

Yousuf Khan
Space Fellowship makes it practically impossible to register. It's
amusing, what iron fences these websites choose to erect. Three or
four attempts is my limit. I was going to comment this about their
graphics:

"I think you owe the viewers an explanation as to the source of the
truly brilliant graphics, which, it seems, must be totally synthetic.
Is the large globe the earth? Even the best images of our nearest
neighbor alpha Centauri, 4 ly distant displays as smudgy discs (3).
There is a sickening amount of fakery as it is on the science
channels, I think the computer graphics artists should complain as
they do all the work but get no credit."
John Polasek

John Polasek wrote:
Space Fellowship makes it practically impossible to register. It's
amusing, what iron fences these websites choose to erect. Three or
four attempts is my limit. I was going to comment this about their
graphics:

"I think you owe the viewers an explanation as to the source of the
truly brilliant graphics, which, it seems, must be totally synthetic.
Is the large globe the earth? Even the best images of our nearest
neighbor alpha Centauri, 4 ly distant displays as smudgy discs (3).
There is a sickening amount of fakery as it is on the science
channels, I think the computer graphics artists should complain as
they do all the work but get no credit."
John Polasek

The video was provided by the European Southern Observatory (ESO), not
by Space Fellowship. I think thou dost protest too much. :-)

Yousuf Khan

On Wed, 28 Oct 2009 16:15:56 -0400, Yousuf Khan
wrote:

John Polasek wrote:
Space Fellowship makes it practically impossible to register. It's
amusing, what iron fences these websites choose to erect. Three or
four attempts is my limit. I was going to comment this about their
graphics:

"I think you owe the viewers an explanation as to the source of the
truly brilliant graphics, which, it seems, must be totally synthetic.
Is the large globe the earth? Even the best images of our nearest
neighbor alpha Centauri, 4 ly distant displays as smudgy discs (3).
There is a sickening amount of fakery as it is on the science
channels, I think the computer graphics artists should complain as
they do all the work but get no credit."
John Polasek

The video was provided by the European Southern Observatory (ESO), not
by Space Fellowship. I think thou dost protest too much. :-)

Yousuf Khan
In the newspaper site below, the author took care to use the words
"artistic rendition."
http://www.dailymail.com/News/oddities/200910190734
But if you look at the ESO version there is no such clarification.
So I still say that these agencies need to be more forthright.
And, I repeat my question: Was that large sphere the earth, and if so,
where was the photographer standing? They owe us at least that.
John Polasek

"John Polasek" wrote in message
news
On Wed, 28 Oct 2009 16:15:56 -0400, Yousuf Khan
wrote:

John Polasek wrote:
Space Fellowship makes it practically impossible to register. It's
amusing, what iron fences these websites choose to erect. Three or
four attempts is my limit. I was going to comment this about their
graphics:

"I think you owe the viewers an explanation as to the source of the
truly brilliant graphics, which, it seems, must be totally synthetic.
Is the large globe the earth? Even the best images of our nearest
neighbor alpha Centauri, 4 ly distant displays as smudgy discs (3).
There is a sickening amount of fakery as it is on the science
channels, I think the computer graphics artists should complain as
they do all the work but get no credit."
John Polasek

The video was provided by the European Southern Observatory (ESO), not
by Space Fellowship. I think thou dost protest too much. :-)

Yousuf Khan
In the newspaper site below, the author took care to use the words
"artistic rendition."
http://www.dailymail.com/News/oddities/200910190734
But if you look at the ESO version there is no such clarification.
So I still say that these agencies need to be more forthright.
And, I repeat my question: Was that large sphere the earth, and if so,
where was the photographer standing? They owe us at least that.
John Polasek

So I'll repeat the answer, "This artist rendering provided by the European
South Observatory..."
So give a URL to the ESO version, you owe us at least that.

John Polasek wrote:
On Wed, 28 Oct 2009 16:15:56 -0400, Yousuf Khan
wrote:

John Polasek wrote:
"I think you owe the viewers an explanation as to the source of the
truly brilliant graphics, which, it seems, must be totally synthetic.
Is the large globe the earth? Even the best images of our nearest
neighbor alpha Centauri, 4 ly distant displays as smudgy discs (3).
There is a sickening amount of fakery as it is on the science
channels, I think the computer graphics artists should complain as
they do all the work but get no credit."
John Polasek
The video was provided by the European Southern Observatory (ESO), not
by Space Fellowship. I think thou dost protest too much. :-)

Yousuf Khan
In the newspaper site below, the author took care to use the words
"artistic rendition."
http://www.dailymail.com/News/oddities/200910190734
But if you look at the ESO version there is no such clarification.
So I still say that these agencies need to be more forthright.
And, I repeat my question: Was that large sphere the earth, and if so,
where was the photographer standing? They owe us at least that.
John Polasek

I think most people have figured out that it's just an animation, not
true photography. Most photographs of Earth are taken from the Space
Shuttle or the ISS, and from low-orbit, so the perspective is quite obvious.

Yousuf Khan

On Tue, 10 Nov 2009 09:16:12 -0500, Yousuf Khan
wrote:

John Polasek wrote:
On Wed, 28 Oct 2009 16:15:56 -0400, Yousuf Khan
wrote:

John Polasek wrote:
"I think you owe the viewers an explanation as to the source of the
truly brilliant graphics, which, it seems, must be totally synthetic.
Is the large globe the earth? Even the best images of our nearest
neighbor alpha Centauri, 4 ly distant displays as smudgy discs (3).
There is a sickening amount of fakery as it is on the science
channels, I think the computer graphics artists should complain as
they do all the work but get no credit."
John Polasek
The video was provided by the European Southern Observatory (ESO), not
by Space Fellowship. I think thou dost protest too much. :-)

Yousuf Khan
In the newspaper site below, the author took care to use the words
"artistic rendition."
http://www.dailymail.com/News/oddities/200910190734
But if you look at the ESO version there is no such clarification.
So I still say that these agencies need to be more forthright.
And, I repeat my question: Was that large sphere the earth, and if so,
where was the photographer standing? They owe us at least that.
John Polasek

I think most people have figured out that it's just an animation, not
true photography. Most photographs of Earth are taken from the Space
Shuttle or the ISS, and from low-orbit, so the perspective is quite obvious.

Yousuf Khan
On last night's Science Channel, regarding the search for other
planets, several optimistic remarks were heard, such as (IIRC) "it is
expected with further advances to get more detailed pictures of the
planets" knowing full well that even images of the closest star are
only approximate smudges. Their brilliant presentations boggle the
mind, but I still think they owe to the public to indicate directly
that these are all simulations, and copiously embellished ones.
John Polasek