Planetary system around two stars... HW Vir

http://exoplanet.eu/star.php?st=HW+Vir
http://www.upi.com/Science_News/2009...4531233941181/

Would this still be a "solar system"?

David A. Smith

On Tue, 10 Feb 2009 14:51:16 -0800 (PST), dlzc wrote:

http://exoplanet.eu/star.php?st=HW+Vir
http://www.upi.com/Science_News/2009...4531233941181/

Would this still be a "solar system"?

David A. Smith
More interestingly, how would you see the double star if it's 59
billion LY away as they claim? (Our age 13 BLY). We already know it's
nearly impossible to see other planets even within reasonable range.
What would z be?
John Polasek

"John Polasek" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 10 Feb 2009 14:51:16 -0800 (PST), dlzc wrote:

http://exoplanet.eu/star.php?st=HW+Vir
http://www.upi.com/Science_News/2009...4531233941181/

Would this still be a "solar system"?

David A. Smith
More interestingly, how would you see the double star if it's 59
billion LY away as they claim? (Our age 13 BLY). We already know it's
nearly impossible to see other planets even within reasonable range.
What would z be?
John Polasek

I just can't see how they could confuse 590 light years with 59 billion
light years.

Dear OG:

"OG" wrote in message
...

"John Polasek" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 10 Feb 2009 14:51:16 -0800 (PST), dlzc
wrote:

http://exoplanet.eu/star.php?st=HW+Vir
http://www.upi.com/Science_News/2009...4531233941181/

Would this still be a "solar system"?

More interestingly, how would you see the double
star if it's 59 billion LY away as they claim? (Our
age 13 BLY). We already know it's nearly impossible
to see other planets even within reasonable range.
What would z be?

It was a typo on the reporter's part.

I just can't see how they could confuse 590 light
years with 59 billion light years.

Bad reporting, no editorial support.

David A. Smith

"OG" wrote in message
...

"John Polasek" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 10 Feb 2009 14:51:16 -0800 (PST), dlzc wrote:

http://exoplanet.eu/star.php?st=HW+Vir
http://www.upi.com/Science_News/2009...4531233941181/

Would this still be a "solar system"?

David A. Smith
More interestingly, how would you see the double star if it's 59
billion LY away as they claim? (Our age 13 BLY). We already know it's
nearly impossible to see other planets even within reasonable range.
What would z be?
John Polasek

I just can't see

Should have gone to Specsavers.
http://www.specsavers.co.uk/

http://exoplanet.eu/star.php?st=HW+V...nd_in_distant_...

Would this still be a "solar system"?

David A. Smith

There are solar systems where a Sun the size of ours forms a planet
around a much bigger Sun, and that sub-Sun of course has planets.

There are no rules for entanglement, that is why Pluto is a planet.
Pluto simply forms
a system with Neptune because their orbits cross.

Anne's Clar Der Boss.

Dear John Polasek:

On Feb 10, 8:32*pm, John Polasek wrote:
On Tue, 10 Feb 2009 14:51:16 -0800 wrote:
http://exoplanet.eu/star.php?st=HW+Vir
snip link broken by Google Groups

Would this still be a "solar system"?

More interestingly, how would you see the double
star if it's *59 billion LY away as they claim? (Our
age 13 BLY). We already know it's nearly
impossible to see other planets even within
reasonable range.

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/au...archive_1.html
.... "10.31.08 - The Antarctic ozone hole reached its annual maximum on
Sept. 12, 2008, stretching over 27 million kilometers, or 10.5 square
miles."

Them kilometers must be pretty small (and are redefined to units of
area)! They correct the error by the time you click the link. Just
bad editing, John.

David A. Smith

"dlzc" wrote in message
...
Dear John Polasek:

On Feb 10, 8:32 pm, John Polasek wrote:
On Tue, 10 Feb 2009 14:51:16 -0800 wrote:
http://exoplanet.eu/star.php?st=HW+Vir
snip link broken by Google Groups

Would this still be a "solar system"?

More interestingly, how would you see the double
star if it's 59 billion LY away as they claim? (Our
age 13 BLY). We already know it's nearly
impossible to see other planets even within
reasonable range.

http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/au...archive_1.html
.... "10.31.08 - The Antarctic ozone hole reached its annual maximum on
Sept. 12, 2008, stretching over 27 million kilometers, or 10.5 square
miles."

Them kilometers must be pretty small (and are redefined to units of
area)! They correct the error by the time you click the link. Just
bad editing, John.

David A. Smith

We are to blame bad editing for Google-broken links?
No, it's bad programming.

Sirius at 8 light years is a double, period 50 years.
That's a star and a glowing "planet" because a 50 year period is
less than the outer planets of our own solar system.

If Sirius A has any other planets they'll be extremely hard to find
without getting closer because and of Sirius's motion due to a
lesser planet is swamped by Sirius B - which was detected long
ago but not seen until the 20th century.

dlzc wrote:
http://exoplanet.eu/star.php?st=HW+Vir
http://www.upi.com/Science_News/2009...4531233941181/

Would this still be a "solar system"?


Isn't the Alpha Centauri system speculated to be like this one too?

One question, is the planet supposed to be orbiting one of the stars or
both of them?

Yousuf Khan

Dear Yousuf Khan:

"Yousuf Khan" wrote in message
...
dlzc wrote:
http://exoplanet.eu/star.php?st=HW+Vir
http://www.upi.com/Science_News/2009...4531233941181/

Would this still be a "solar system"?


Isn't the Alpha Centauri system speculated to
be like this one too?

One question, is the planet supposed to be
orbiting one of the stars or both of them?

A "slightly" more massive Jupiter would do that. In fact Jupter
radiates more heat than the Sun delivers...

I don't know the answer to your question. Would a planetary
system around a binary star be stable, long term? Seems like
close-in planets would get shredded pretty good.

Ran across this one too...
http://www.cosmosmagazine.com/node/1878

David A. Smith