backtop


Print 30 comment(s) - last by RandallMoore.. on May 14 at 2:15 PM

NASA scientists, using the Spitzer Space Telescope, announced the discovery of the hottest extrasolar planet found to date

The NASA Spitzer Space Telescope recently discovered gas planet HD 149026b, the hottest planet ever discovered. University of Central Florida astronomers, led by Joseph Harrington, found that the planet is 3,700F, a temperature higher than many low-mass stars.

The planet is a “hot Jupiter,” meaning that it is a large gas giant that rotates closely around its star. HD 149026b is located in constellation Hercules, up to 279 light-years away from Earth. While similar in size to Saturn, it has a core that is 70 to 90 times the mass of Earth, and the planet is able to complete a full revolution around its star in 2.9 days.

The telescope was able to estimate the temperature on the planet by monitoring the decrease of infrared after the planet dips around its star. It is likely that HD 149026b does not spread its heat around the planet. “The day side is very hot, and the night side is probably much colder,” said Harrington.

"This planet is off the temperature scale that we expect for planets," said Drake Deming, co-author for the paper, and a researcher at the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center.

Along with being the hottest planet ever discovered, the planet does not reflect a high amount of starlight, instead absorbing it – meaning HD 149026b is also the blackest planet known.

Scientists are trying to create a climate map of a “typical” gas giant. The recent discovery will help scientists learn about dense, gas giants that are not located in Earth's solar system.

The findings are available in the May 9 edition of Nature.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

I would be
By Regs on 5/10/2007 4:50:57 PM , Rating: 1
2,852-years-old on that planet...

Thank god I don't live there!!




RE: I would be
By dice1111 on 5/10/2007 5:08:41 PM , Rating: 5
No, you'd still be 12. We measure years in rotations of earth around our sun.


RE: I would be
By HrilL on 5/10/2007 5:33:04 PM , Rating: 2
No that would make him 15.6 years old. To do the math correctly you take his 2852 x 2 = 5704 days
5704/365.25 = 15.6 years
But you are right about the year part.
#1 definition from dictionary.com
Year: a period of 365 or 366 days, in the Gregorian calendar, divided into 12 calendar months, now reckoned as beginning Jan. 1 and ending Dec. 31 (calendar year or civil year).
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/year

If you are going to correct people at least do it correctly.


RE: I would be
By HrilL on 5/10/2007 5:59:20 PM , Rating: 2
Oops its not 2 days its 2.9 so that would really make him 22.6
Corrected math for myself LOL.
2852x2.9 = 8270.8 days and 8270.8/365.25 = 22.64 years old.

When are they going to add an edit button? But when you do make sure it says they edited their post.


RE: I would be
By bunnyfubbles on 5/10/2007 6:03:17 PM , Rating: 3
So should you, the math is 2852 x 2.9, not 2, making him 22+ years old.

And I think you are either missing a sarcasm detector or it is way out of calibration, because I'm pretty sure he was using the 12 years old comment to make fun of him rather than accurately correct his age.


RE: I would be
By HrilL on 5/10/2007 6:29:57 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah I had corrected that before... And he is actually still wrong look at #5 definition.
"5.the time in which any planet completes a revolution round the sun."

Yeah I understood the sarcasm but its not called for when he is just as wrong as the first guy. Says any planets revolution around the sun not just the earths. People do commonly convert those years to "Earth Years" to make it easier to understand and picture in your mind as a time frame. But it only takes any of our 8 planets 1 year to go around the sun. And He said
quote:
2,852-years-old on that planet...
He is wrong but only because that definition says "sun" If it said "star" then he would be correct. Maybe it should say star there and not sun.


RE: I would be
By osalcido on 5/10/2007 6:56:59 PM , Rating: 2
the sun is a star...

and year is a generic label given to the amount of time it takes a planet to go around its host star once. Usually qualifiers are given for non-Earth planets (e.g. Jovian year, Venusian year, Martian Year)


RE: I would be
By johnadams on 5/11/2007 12:11:00 PM , Rating: 3
This is good actually. I appreciate the amount of intellectual discussion and getting facts right. Gives me a good reason to read user comments on DailyTech.


RE: I would be
By DeltaZero on 5/12/2007 7:19:24 AM , Rating: 2
+1 LOL))


RE: I would be
By bplewis24 on 5/10/2007 7:37:08 PM , Rating: 2
So how old would my dog be on that planet if 24x=72, if x=my dog's age in human years?

:)

Brandon


Guys, get real
By beechslap9 on 5/13/2007 3:20:22 AM , Rating: 2
Randall - you need to learn about the concept of empiricism, and particulary, the scientific method. If faith (alone) be your guide, then you and all your kind will be damned in the 21st century.

Lord - you need to do a better job of framing your arguments...run-on sentences and random discertations = bad.

Ohh...and my point...we look into the past, 280 light years away, and find some pretty cool shit. Why can't we just leave it at that?

The fact that we can study




RE: Guys, get real
By RandallMoore on 5/13/2007 12:27:17 PM , Rating: 2
Well...im sorry to hear that you are an atheist, I hope you come to a realization one day. God be with you. By the way, I strongly encourage you to watch all the videos you can find of Kent Hovind ( watch the debates too ) . See the other side of the story, then form your own opinion. Im not doing this to make you look bad, im trying to get you to see the other side. Just give it a chance. You might find something that you have never thought about before.


RE: Guys, get real
By PrimarchLion on 5/13/2007 4:28:10 PM , Rating: 2
Kent Hovind came to my school (Penn State) a couple years ago and debated with the faculty. I went to the debate. Mr. Hovind did not win in my opinion, which everyone is entitled to, but he acted like a jerk during the debate and everyone could agree to that.

I had to hurry up and look him up to make sure it was the same guy. Did you know he's going to jail in a month and a half for tax crimes?


RE: Guys, get real
By RandallMoore on 5/13/2007 7:33:47 PM , Rating: 2
Yep. Saw that debate, and I dont agree with you. Yes he's probably going to jail and I can tell you why. Some people want to shut him up because he's telling too much of the truth and putting the government in its place like someone should step up and do. His charges are bullcrap, I can promise you that...its a shame they would run after him, and in turn let tens of thousands cross our borders illegally and feed off our welfare system. I hope you dont trust this government to do anything just and fair. Anyways, all I want is for everyone to watch the movies and form their own opinion. Sound reasonable?


Now I need a 1000 GW power supply???!!!
By Captain Orgazmo on 5/11/2007 5:48:10 AM , Rating: 3
First the HD 2900 takes like 200W or something ridiculous, and now the HD 149026b runs at 3700 degrees?! I am gonna need a 30 foot radiator in the back yard to cool this thing. Not to mention my own power plant. And I thought my 650W power supply would be ok for at least 2 years...




By aguilpa1 on 5/11/2007 9:30:21 AM , Rating: 2
and the ATI fans still won't get an 8800.....


More man-made global warming
By hellokeith on 5/10/2007 5:19:46 PM , Rating: 3
Sheesh, we can't do anything right. We're causing global warming on planets hundreds of light years away. I know this for a fact because every scientist in consenus agrees that planets cannot warm on their own. As Al Gore put it: "The debate is over."

We're dooming the galaxy!




..Sigh...
By RandallMoore on 5/11/07, Rating: -1
RE: ..Sigh...
By Lord Evermore on 5/12/2007 2:36:15 AM , Rating: 2
So your post isn't a blatant flame of science believers? What's your point? Did anybody say "wow, God must not exist if this planet does"?

Science doesn't say they know for certain, it says the proponderance of evidence and the best research available shows that certain things appear to be true. It also acknowledges that at any time, new evidence could appear that alters the interpretation of previous evidence, or completely invalidates previous assumptions.

By definition, a calculation is not a best guess. It is a calculated estimate. It uses known quantities, things that aren't subject to interpretation like how far a meter is and how fast light travels and how powerful gravity is with a particular mass and distance, and builds on those to derive the most accurate result possible. Whenever possible, scientists also use a secondary method to verify their findings.

Religious zealots have no response to the simple statement that people who believe in science do so because there is evidence that they can see in front of their faces, that they can prove for themselves in unquestionable terms, which lends credence to science and to the theories which can't yet be proven conclusively but which have strong evidence behind them due to rigorous, long-term experimentation and research and observation, while religion has no concrete evidence of anything it purports to be Truth, and proposes that the very fact of certain things existing is evidence enough of divine power, and that such a leap of logic as "I don't understand it so God must have done it" is a rational statement.

That being said, damn that's a hot planet. How does it even still have any atmosphere?


RE: ..Sigh...
By DeltaZero on 5/12/2007 7:29:41 AM , Rating: 2
Regardless of that guy's remarks on science in general, I would not give too much credit to the numbers they give.
You know how physicists are, they build a theoretic model based on something they have never directly seen, under assumption that this behaves as a point mass and that has homogeneous inner structure, make more approximations and here you go - an exact estimate!


RE: ..Sigh...
By RandallMoore on 5/12/2007 1:08:56 PM , Rating: 1
Im not saying that all science is a bunch of crap. My point is we ( as in the human population ) have gotten so arrogant in our studies and brain power that we have to assume that we will one day know everything. Nothing on this world is 100% certain. If you think so, then you dont have a brain or pulse. Also we have seemed to come to the conclusion that if we study something and get enough positive results, we can go ahead and say that we have mastered that question. If a lot of people come together and say the same thing, it doesn't automatically make it right. That is why we wont be here much longer, and I can promise you at the end of the day, I dont have to have answers to explain why things are the way that they are. I trust that things will be restored back to perfect one day. Trust is another word for faith. All I can tell you is that we are doing a horrible job living on this planet. If you will take the time to notice, things are getting worse every day. Look back at the 1950's and compare it to today.


RE: ..Sigh...
By bubbacub616 on 5/13/2007 6:52:35 PM , Rating: 2
ahh - i love that "it was better in the old days" crutch. seriously are you trying to be a troll or are you being serious?


RE: ..Sigh...
By RandallMoore on 5/13/2007 7:42:50 PM , Rating: 2
You are blind beyond all reason if you think that things are not getting worse. And yes im being dead serious. You ask around about this. Before the late 70's, people didn't have to lock the doors on their homes and cars. People didn't come to school and cowardly murder 30 unarmed students.


RE: ..Sigh...
By rykerabel on 5/14/2007 1:00:43 PM , Rating: 2
Charles Manson, Al Capone, the Harp boys.

Yeah, insanity is a result of modern science.

NOT.

Some people didn't lock doors back then because they were naive and had "faith". They still died.

School shootings have happened ever since both guns and public schools have existed.

Just because you don't know doesn't make it not true.


RE: ..Sigh...
By RipperRoo on 5/13/2007 10:21:38 PM , Rating: 2
Ahh yes, religous conservatives always miss the 1950s. Back when minorities were neither seen nor heard, and you could beat your wife without reproach. Miss those days, do ya?


RE: ..Sigh...
By RandallMoore on 5/14/2007 7:24:24 AM , Rating: 2
It's more than obvious that you cant be a christian on this site. I feel sorry for you all, i really do.


RE: ..Sigh...
By upenn123 on 5/14/2007 10:53:59 AM , Rating: 2
Please save us your condescension. It's Christians like you that give Catholics like me a bad name. Keep your faith in your heart where it belongs. No one needs to know how depressing your life is that the only thing you have going for you is waiting for the rapture to come and whisk you away. You can spend your time hating science and the world you live in. I on the other hand, have an organic chemistry exam to go study for. Good Luck.


RE: ..Sigh...
By RandallMoore on 5/14/2007 11:11:36 AM , Rating: 2
The job of a Christian is to obey God and bring others to him. You need to read the bible. Like I said above, go watch the Kent Hovind movies and you will see where I am coming from. Until then, dont tell me to do anything. If you are a true Christian you will see what I am trying to say. Go watch the movies, then come back and comment. Until then, you are just trying to start an argument.


RE: ..Sigh...
By LatinMessiah on 5/14/2007 1:49:25 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Go watch the movies


That sounds like a lazy man's religion.


RE: ..Sigh...
By RandallMoore on 5/14/2007 2:15:37 PM , Rating: 2
Well excuse me sir if the bible and a preacher are more knowledgeable and resourceful than myself. I am so embarrassed. ( sarcasm disengaged ) It is not a surprise at all that no one is speaking in my defense. I am not here to argue, im just here to inform. I've done my job. Good day and good life to all.


"When an individual makes a copy of a song for himself, I suppose we can say he stole a song." -- Sony BMG attorney Jennifer Pariser











botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki