Inside The 24/7 Search For Another Habitable Planet Within 100 Ly

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter alberto91
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Planet Search
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the Habitable Exoplanet Hunting Project, focusing on the search for potentially habitable planets within 100 light-years of Earth. Participants explore the feasibility of ground-based amateur photometry for discovering exoplanets, the challenges posed by M-class stars, and the implications of the Forbes article on the project's approach.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants question the accuracy of the Forbes article, particularly regarding the claim that M-class stars do not flare.
  • Concerns are raised about the oversimplification of physics in media reports, with a suggestion that such articles often lack depth.
  • There is a discussion on the suitability of ground-based amateur photometry for discovering exoplanets, with some participants expressing skepticism about its effectiveness for initial discoveries.
  • One participant notes that achieving the necessary photometric precision for detecting transits requires significant observational coverage and efficiency, particularly with smaller telescopes.
  • Participants highlight the challenges of observing faint stars and the need for high-quality data to distinguish transits from noise caused by stellar activity.
  • There is a mention of specific telescopes and their capabilities, with references to previous observations and the expected performance needed for successful photometry.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the effectiveness of amateur photometry for discovery, with some supporting the idea while others remain skeptical. There is no consensus on the validity of claims made in the Forbes article or the overall approach of the project.

Contextual Notes

Participants note limitations related to the assumptions about star behavior, the definitions of habitable zones, and the specific requirements for successful photometric observations. The discussion reflects a range of perspectives on the project's methodology and the challenges of exoplanet detection.

Astronomy news on Phys.org
1574813770752.png
 
M class stars don't flare? News to me.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Likes   Reactions: Dragrath and davenn
Vanadium 50 said:
M class stars don't flare? News to me.

hahaha yup, not a very good article

D
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Dragrath and Nik_2213
A newspaper report that over-simplifies the physics and lacks a one-touch 'global' cookie opt-out ?
Sadly, that's not news...
:frown::frown::frown:
 
"We’ve chosen observatories in deserts or high regions or mountains because weather is always the main problem with projects like this "

You know, like Indiana. Elevation 866 feet, rainfall 36 inches.
 
I'd be interested in what people like @Andy Resnick and @russ_watters think abut the idea of discovery by ground-based amateur photometry. Follow-up, sure. But discovery?

PS It takes photometry good to better than a part in a thousand over the course of several hours, with an individual exposure time in the minutes, for a meter-class telescope.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Dragrath and trurle
Vanadium 50 said:
I'd be interested in what people like @Andy Resnick and @russ_watters think abut the idea of discovery by ground-based amateur photometry. Follow-up, sure. But discovery?

PS It takes photometry good to better than a part in a thousand over the course of several hours, with an individual exposure time in the minutes, for a meter-class telescope.
From the project webpage
https://exoplanetschannel.wixsite.com/home/project
seems the project is a sort of searching for "low hanging fruits" - trying to detect large, long-period planets around small stars with at least one already discovered transiting hot Jupiter.
For this sort of discovery, coverage of observations would be much more important than sensitivity of observation. After all, candidate planets in habitable zone would have roughly 1 hour eclipse per thousands hours of observation time, although dip depth may be as high as 10000 ppm. It would also likely necessary to record several transits before these will stand out from flare/spots noise of small stars.
The parametric space (star magnitude and transit depth) overlaps more with WASP rather than TrES or KELT - therefore large telescopes are expected to participate.
 
The Forbes article specifically says that Jupiter-sized objects are bad, and in any event, searching for uninhabitable planets in the habitable zone is kind of strange, no? Especially considering the thread title.

The 16" telescope in the high-mountain desert of northeast Indiana has posted some of their (very nice) data on follow-ups. They have looked at Tres-3 (magnitude 12.4) and HD80606 (magnitude 9) and some others earlier on. They have what looks like 0.1% photometric resolution.

Our friends at Exoplanetschannel are currently looking at Gliese 1214. Magnitude 14.6. That's 7.5x dimmer than Tres-3. That's why I asked our astrophotography experts what they think of it. As someone who hasbn't done photometry in ages, it looks kind of marginal to me - that's why I called out for experts.

A one hour transit requires exposure times of a few minutes to get a good light curve. A 16" scope can probably collect enough photons to do this, but it has to be very efficient, and there's not a large margin of error. It cannot be systematics limited.
 
Last edited:
  • #10
Vanadium 50 said:
I'd be interested in what people like @Andy Resnick and @russ_watters think abut the idea of discovery by ground-based amateur photometry. Follow-up, sure. But discovery?

PS It takes photometry good to better than a part in a thousand over the course of several hours, with an individual exposure time in the minutes, for a meter-class telescope.

Based on their guidelines (1% 'depth', at least 2 data points/minute, etc), I'd be surprised if some random goofing around in their yard (ahem...) could find anything.
 
  • #11
Thanks. Unfortunate, but sadly not surprising.
 

Similar threads

Graduate The Habitable Exoplanet Hunting Project
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Undergrad New Developments In The Search For Planet X
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K