Kepler K2 Mission Results

The Kepler K2 mission is conducting a search for exoplanets closer to
Earth than was the case for the K1 mission (before technical
problems). This allows the mission to do a more careful census of
exoplanets around M-dwarf stars, as well as brighter stars.

http://www.nature.com/news/rebooted-...lanets-1.19126

One of the most surprising findings of the K2 results to date is the
recognition that M-dwarf stars have an anomalously low abundance of
exoplanets. This appears to confirm previous preliminary findings of
an unusually low incidence of exoplanets orbiting M-dwarf stars, and
that it is the lowest mass M-dwarfs that have the most anomalously low
exoplanet abundance.

While these findings were clearly not anticipated by conventional
astrophysics, they were specifically and definitively predicted by
Discrete Scale Relativity (also referred to as the Self-Similar
Cosmological Paradigm, or just Fractal Cosmology). In a paper
submitted to arxiv.org in 2001 (long before the Kepler mission or
other sufficient data for determining exoplanet abundances), it was
predicted that M-dwarf stars would have an anomalously low incidence
of exoplanets. It was also specifically predicted that it would be the
lowest mass M-dwarfs in the 0.10 solar mass to 0.25 solar mass range
that would manifest the most anomalously low exoplanet abundances.

The paper is available for free (24/7) at arxiv.org :
http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0102285
Title: "Critical Test of the Self-Similar Cosmological Paradigm: Anomalously Few Planets Orbiting Low-Mass Red Dwarf Stars"
Author: R.L. Oldershaw

RLO
(It's a fractal world)

In article , "Robert L.
Oldershaw" writes:

One of the most surprising findings of the K2 results to date is the
recognition that M-dwarf stars have an anomalously low abundance of
exoplanets. This appears to confirm previous preliminary findings of
an unusually low incidence of exoplanets orbiting M-dwarf stars, and
that it is the lowest mass M-dwarfs that have the most anomalously low
exoplanet abundance.

While these findings were clearly not anticipated by conventional
astrophysics, they were specifically and definitively predicted by
Discrete Scale Relativity (also referred to as the Self-Similar
Cosmological Paradigm, or just Fractal Cosmology). In a paper
submitted to arxiv.org in 2001 (long before the Kepler mission or
other sufficient data for determining exoplanet abundances), it was
predicted that M-dwarf stars would have an anomalously low incidence
of exoplanets. It was also specifically predicted that it would be the
lowest mass M-dwarfs in the 0.10 solar mass to 0.25 solar mass range
that would manifest the most anomalously low exoplanet abundances.

M stars cover a large range, about 0.075 to about 0.5 solar masses. The
Nature News piece says that there are fewer (than expected, presumably,
according to some model, but I don't know how firm this prediction is)
planets found by K2 around M stars, presumably including those between
0.4 and 0.5 solar masses. Your paper claims a strong cutoff at 0.4.
So, if K2 finds "too few" below 0.4 solar masses, but also too few
between 0.4 and 0.5, would this rule out DSR? In your conclusions, you
write that if no sharp cutoff at 0.4 is observed, it would place the
concept of cosmological self-similarity in considerable doubt.

Stay tuned.

I wrote the above in good faith. I now see that there are three
versions on arXiv, from 2001, 2008, and 2012. The abstract for the 2008
version says "extensively rewritten". I haven't done a full comparison
of all three versions. However, the 2001 version says that stars with
masses greater than or equal to 0.29 solar masses are predicted to have
a normal incidence of planets. So, the "definitive prediction" has
already been revised. This version also says "A related, but less
definitive, prediction is that the incidence (I) of planets in planetary
systems should be roughly proportional to parent star masses" above the
0.29 solar-mass cutoff. What do current data say? This (admittedly
less definitive) prediction was removed in the later revisions.

On Friday, January 8, 2016 at 2:35:10 PM UTC-5, Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) wrote:


Stay tuned.


The different versions (i.e., 2 and 3) involved adding additional
preliminary observational information relevant to the prediction, and
importantly, attempted to refine the prediction to make it more
specific, more diagnostic and less likely to run afoul of
uncertainties in mass estimates.

I am happy with version 3, which I think was submitted before Kepler
started taking data. There have not been subsequent changes.

I do expect that more massive stars definitely have the *potential*
for larger planetary retinues, based on simple self-similarity
arguments. On the other hand it critically depends on the state of the
systems sampled. For *very large samples* that fairly sample available
states in each unit mass range, I fully expect and predict that more
massive stars will have more numerous planetary retinues. However,
this could be explained in various other ways (than DSR) and so it
does not meet my criteria for definitive predictions.

The predicted unusually low incidence of planets orbiting M-dwarfs
with masses between roughly 0.10 and 0.25 sol mas does qualify as a
highly definitive prediction for Discrete Scale Relativity.

Note: the prediction does not say *zero* planets, but rather an
strongly anomalous deficit of planets in this mass range.

[Mod. note: of course we don't know what an 'anomalous' deficit of
planets is; the astrophysics of planet formation is complicated.
The nature article appears to be drawing attention to a difference in
the fraction of planets round M dwarfs in the K2 field and the
original Kepler observations, _not_ an 'anomalously low' planet
incidence in M dwarfs. In the original Kepler observations small planets were
significantly _more_ abundant in M-dwarfs than in solar-type stars,
see e.g. http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012ApJS..201...15H -- mjh]

RLO
Fractal Cosmology

On Saturday, January 9, 2016 at 5:03:24 AM UTC-5, Robert L. Oldershaw wrote:
On Friday, January 8, 2016 at 2:35:10 PM UTC-5, Phillip Helbig (undress to reply) wrote:


[Mod. note: of course we don't know what an 'anomalous' deficit of
planets is; the astrophysics of planet formation is complicated.
The nature article appears to be drawing attention to a difference in
the fraction of planets round M dwarfs in the K2 field and the
original Kepler observations, _not_ an 'anomalously low' planet
incidence in M dwarfs. In the original Kepler observations small planets were
significantly _more_ abundant in M-dwarfs than in solar-type stars,
see e.g. http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2012ApJS..201...15H -- mjh]

Probably we would both agree that predictions are best when the answer
is not already known.

There have been a number of publications on the incidence of planets
orbiting M-dwarf stars, and the conclusions present a diverse view on
this issue.

One study that I think is mentioned in version 3 found planets
orbiting M-dwarfs, but the authors noted the surprising finding that
if they divided the M-dwarf sample into a high-mass half and low-mass
half, then the planets were almost all orbiting stars in the high-mass
subset. They had no explanation for this, but that is what I am
predicting will eventually be fully confirmed. In case that paper did
not make it into version 3, here is a link to the paper:
http://arxiv.org/abs/1111.5019 , Bonfils et al, ASAP, 549, Jan 2013.

Nature will answer this question in due time.

RLO
http://www3.amherst.edu/~rloldershaw

Dne 10/01/2016 v 17:49 Robert L. Oldershaw napsal(a):

Probably we would both agree that predictions are best when the answer
is not already known.

Both predictions of known and unknown are important,
each for different reason.

--
Poutnik ( the Czech word for a wanderer )