B A terrestrial, temperate planet around Proxima Centauri

[|Glitch|]

Those Z numbers, are they ratios of metalicity compared to our sun?

Yes, Z = 10^dex

 

[|Glitch|]

Have all three stars been analyzed enough to say for sure whether there are planets around A and such?

Each of the three stars have been analyzed, but not the solar systems of these stars. There is a suspected planet orbiting Alpha Centauri B, but it has not yet been confirmed. One of the problems is that if there are planets orbiting any of these three stars they are not: A) Transiting their parent star; and/or B) Massive enough to create a noticeable wobble in their parent star. That certainly does not rule out the possibility of planets orbiting these stars, it just makes detecting them more difficult.

It should also be noted that Alpha Centauri A and B maintain an average distance of ~11 AU from each other, which puts a limit on the size of the solar system each star can have. The distance between Alpha Centauri AB and Proxima Centauri is 0.21 light years (13,280 AU) which gives Proxima Centauri much larger solar system possibilities.

Source:
An Earth-mass planet orbiting α Centauri B - Nature, Issue 491, November 8, 2012 (free preprint PDF)

 

[|Glitch|]

I am not so sure about this.
Look at this this way: if you shrink Earth to a 1 meter ball, oceans on it would be barely ~1mm deep in the deepest points! Our "vast" oceans are insignificant when you look at the whole planet. IOW: Earth actually has very little volatiles as a fraction of overall mass.

It's hard to imagine that having this little volatiles is some sort of typical thing. I expect that for planets around Earth mass, some will be much drier than Earth, and (importantly for this case) some will have much *more* water and other volatiles than Earth. With oceans, say, 4x deep as Earth, a planet can survive many billions of years of atmosphere loss and still not dry out.

We don't know where Proxima b is on the "water" scale. It may well be an "ocean world". We need more data. Spectroscopy would be great.

I was considering Proxima Centauri b's proximity (making it tidally locked) and the fact that its parent's star has the equivalent x-ray emissions as Sol, despite being 588 times less luminous. As of right now we just do not have enough information to make a determination either way. We can only infer possibilities based upon the information we have and that information is clearly incomplete. Hence, I would not rule anything out yet.

Source:
Stringent X-Ray Constraints on Mass Loss from Proxima Centauri - The Astrophysical Journal, Volume 578, Number 1, October 10, 2002. (free)
NASA Finds Planets of Red Dwarf Stars May Face Oxygen Loss in Habitable Zones - NASA Article, February 8, 2017

 

[stefan r]

Those Z numbers, are they ratios of metalicity compared to our sun?

Yes, Z = 10^dex

In that article I would read it as fractional mass of metals. The mass ratio of non metals to hydrogen in the Alpha Centauri at the time they formed is written (Z/X)_i. The ratio of metals to to hydrogen on the surface is written (Z/X)_s

As apposed to [Fe/H] which would be the logarithm of the ratio of the ratio of iron to hydrogen in alpha centauri to iron to hydrogen in the sun.
[Fe/H] = log₁₀((Z/X)/(Z_sun/X_sun))
or
[Fe/H] = log₁₀(Z/X) - log_{10(Zsun/Xsun)}

 

[Buzz Bloom]

We don't know where Proxima b is on the "water" scale. It may well be an "ocean world". We need more data. Spectroscopy would be great.

Hi nik:

I confess I have not been paying attention to exoplanet spectroscopy, so I did not know that the technology has advanced for this to begin to be an active aspect of current astronomy. Your remark prompted me to search for this topic and I found several interesting sources including:

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20140016974.pdf
http://spiff.rit.edu/classes/extrasol/lectures/spectra/spectra.html
http://hubblesite.org/hubble_discoveries/science_year_in_review/pdf/2008/probing_the_atmospheres_of_exoplanets.pdf .​

I am wondering is anyone knows about any efforts to use this technology for Proxima b.

Regards,
Buzz

 

[|Glitch|]

In that article I would read it as fractional mass of metals. The mass ratio of non metals to hydrogen in the Alpha Centauri at the time they formed is written (Z/X)_i. The ratio of metals to to hydrogen on the surface is written (Z/X)_s

As apposed to [Fe/H] which would be the logarithm of the ratio of the ratio of iron to hydrogen in alpha centauri to iron to hydrogen in the sun.
[Fe/H] = log₁₀((Z/X)/(Z_sun/X_sun))
or
[Fe/H] = log₁₀(Z/X) - log_{10(Zsun/Xsun)}

I agree. Metalicity is not the same as the iron to hydrogen ratio. Metalicity encompasses everything that is not hydrogen or helium. That includes iron, but also oxygen, carbon, silicon and everything else on the periodic table. Nevertheless, a star with a 0.21 dex is going to have 1.621 Z⊙. Which means that the star has a 62.1% higher ratio of non-hydrogen and non-helium elements than our sun. However, it should not be taken to mean that Proxima Centauri has a 62.1% higher Fe/H ratio.

 

[stefan r]

Hi nik:

I confess I have not been paying attention to exoplanet spectroscopy, so I did not know that the technology has advanced for this to begin to be an active aspect of current astronomy. Your remark prompted me to search for this topic and I found several interesting sources including:

https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/20140016974.pdf
http://spiff.rit.edu/classes/extrasol/lectures/spectra/spectra.html
http://hubblesite.org/hubble_discoveries/science_year_in_review/pdf/2008/probing_the_atmospheres_of_exoplanets.pdf .​

I am wondering is anyone knows about any efforts to use this technology for Proxima b.

Regards,
Buzz

Like this? linked to this paper.

I suspect people are already spending a lot of energy fighting about where to aim JWST. Choose between 1) beautiful awe inspiring pictures of nebula and other fireworks, 2) images of distant galaxies and details of the creation of the universe, 3) some debatable evidence that a rock which we thought was dead could really be dead.

 

[stefan r]

I agree. Metalicity is not the same as the iron to hydrogen ratio. Metalicity encompasses everything that is not hydrogen or helium. That includes iron, but also oxygen, carbon, silicon and everything else on the periodic table. Nevertheless, a star with a 0.21 dex is going to have 1.621 Z⊙. Which means that the star has a 62.1% higher ratio of non-hydrogen and non-helium elements than our sun. However, it should not be taken to mean that Proxima Centauri has a 62.1% higher Fe/H ratio.

Check this paper. Are they saying Alpha Centuari A currently has surface composition 71.5% Hydrogen, 25.8% Helium and 2.7%"metals"? They list (Z/X)_i as 0.0384 which can work if you adjust the rounding.

 

[|Glitch|]

Check this paper. Are they saying Alpha Centuari A currently has surface composition 71.5% Hydrogen, 25.8% Helium and 2.7%"metals"? They list (Z/X)_i as 0.0384 which can work if you adjust the rounding.

The paper gives Alpha Centauri AB the initial helium mass fraction (Y) of 30% ± 0.8% and an (Z/X)_i of 0.0459 ± 0.0019. Given that X + Y + Z = 1, that would make Alpha Centauri A's surface composition 66.93% hydrogen, 30% helium, and 3.07% other metals. Using the Skylab data from 1979, the sun is composed of 73.46% hydrogen, 24.85% helium, and 1.69% other metals. Which should have given Alpha Centauri A a Z⊙ = 1.817 or 0.259 dex instead of the 0.20 dex I posted above. Or they were using a different composition for our sun than the one I listed.

Source:
The Sun's Vital Statistics - Stanford Solar Center

 

[stefan r]

...the 0.20 dex I posted above. Or they were using a different composition for our sun than the one I listed.

The "i" is for initial. To me that would mean the gas cloud that formed both stars. Nothing we could see now.

On table 1 they list [Fe/H] as 0.20 under Alpha Centuari A.

 

[rootone]

Wikipedia has a good article on Proxima Centauri.

In my opinion Wikipedia is a good place to start with any new enquiry.
Some people criticize it for being not guaranteed accurate, but then what is?: