The gravity of Gl 436 b is given in the paper as 'log g= 5.0 dex';

what does that mean in Earth gravities again? (sorry, I have forgotten- must be getting old).

__________________
New Orion's Arm Site . The Starlark . Against a Diamond Sky (OA Novella Collection) . OA Flickr set

You have to be careful when talking about 'ice' because any substance which is fluid in normal experience can be called ice when it freezes; water, CO2, ammonia, even oxygen and nitrogen. (frozen nitrogen could be found on Triton, apparently). So 'water ice' is probably the most accurate description of the stuff under Gl 436b's hypothetical ocean.

__________________
New Orion's Arm Site . The Starlark . Against a Diamond Sky (OA Novella Collection) . OA Flickr set

Using an on-line calculator I find that the gravity is about 1.43 gees, by the way. Not that excessive...

__________________
New Orion's Arm Site . The Starlark . Against a Diamond Sky (OA Novella Collection) . OA Flickr set

McDonald Observatory news release: Astronomers Discover Multi-Planet System; May Alter Theories of Planet Formation

__________________
Science is a way of trying not to fool yourself. The first principle is that you must not fool yourself, and you are the easiest person to fool.
-- Richard Feynman

28 New Exoplanets and Four Multi-Planet Systems

So, the California/Carnegie Team hasn't been idle...

__________________
Science is a way of trying not to fool yourself. The first principle is that you must not fool yourself, and you are the easiest person to fool.
-- Richard Feynman

Some All of the planets were announced earlier...

__________________
Science is a way of trying not to fool yourself. The first principle is that you must not fool yourself, and you are the easiest person to fool.
-- Richard Feynman

Space.com: Oddball Planet Puzzles Astronomers

__________________
Science is a way of trying not to fool yourself. The first principle is that you must not fool yourself, and you are the easiest person to fool.
-- Richard Feynman

Lowell Observatory: Massive Transiting Planet with 31-hour Year Found Around Distant Star

__________________
Science is a way of trying not to fool yourself. The first principle is that you must not fool yourself, and you are the easiest person to fool.
-- Richard Feynman

Steinn Sigurdsson from the Dynamics of Cats blogs is attending on an extrasolar planet conference in Santorini, Greece and has some very interesting reports:

* First true Jupiter analog confirmed
* Strong evidence of planet around a white dwarf

__________________
Science is a way of trying not to fool yourself. The first principle is that you must not fool yourself, and you are the easiest person to fool.
-- Richard Feynman

One of the big XP questions is how common our freakish system layout is. If it turns out to be as common as one in three, then I'll have to eat serious crow.

__________________
There is a growing tendancy to think of Man as a rational, thinking being, which is absurd.- Marvin the Martian.

It's gotten to the point where careful investigation is needed just to tell parody from reality. I think that means reality is broken.- Noclevername.

No doubt, others have already done this, but in case they haven't....

Another how many approach to XPs is the use of mathematical extrapolation of the discovery rate.

Assuming discovery technology only maintains the rate and does not accelerate it - the easy ones, afterall, are limited in supply - then the following XP number is what might be awaiting us...

I used 50 for 2007 as a guess based on 31 so far for the year. I don't have the months of discovery for comparison. Are more announcements made earlier than the year. If, however, the latter part of the year is about the same as the first half, then 62 should could be a better number. Using 62 for 2007, then we have...

Interesting, but I don't intend to suggest it is likely, or unlikely, just interesting.

[Edit: I quickly realized I had an error and this is the corrected extrapolation]

[Added: Shoot!, it is wrong, too. It is stricly linear! Dang. I used linear interpolation (all I found on Quatro Pro).

It is now based on the Growth function. Hopefully, this is more mature.

Source is: http://vo.obspm.fr/exoplanetes/encyclo/catalog-all.php ]

__________________
Lighten up! This is a stellar board! Author: duh.

"The mean of five measures each of which is not worth a dang (sinc), has a maximum value of only five dangs (sinc)". Heber Curtis

"(sinc)" - spelling is not correct (in its orginal form) :)

Ooo, now THAT is very interesting. Because as they say, if it really is a Jupiter analogue then it might have rocky planets closer in.

The difference between reason and dogma is the ability to eat crow.

__________________
"Barbarism is the natural state of mankind. Civilization is unnatural. It is a whim of circumstance. And barbarism must always ultimately triumph" -- Conan

Nice. No doubt, crow will be a common exoplanet life form.

__________________
Lighten up! This is a stellar board! Author: duh.

"The mean of five measures each of which is not worth a dang (sinc), has a maximum value of only five dangs (sinc)". Heber Curtis

"(sinc)" - spelling is not correct (in its orginal form) :)

I wonder what basis you use when extrapolating the numbers. The increase of discoveries reached 34 in 2002 (the maximum so far) and has leveled since. This year may prove to be the most successful so far, but the predicted flood of transiting planets is yet to come.

PS. Regarding the Jupiter analog, it is told that the Europeans have detected similar candidates that they're going to publish in the coming months.

__________________
Science is a way of trying not to fool yourself. The first principle is that you must not fool yourself, and you are the easiest person to fool.
-- Richard Feynman

Yes, this still holds true, apparently. The current count seems to be 31 so far for 2007. [The ref. link was added to the bottom of my post. Clicking on the "Discovery" year will sort by year for easy counting.]

I took the liberty of assuming about 50 for the total for 2007 (19 more for the second half). This, I hope, is too modest. The second table simply doubles the number for the second half.

Of course, the variables affecting the future count are many, but I assume they will be even more favorable than the simple geometric growth table. Your thread spurred my interest in trying something like this (for grins, mainly).

Care to insert an annual prognostication? If so, I will be happy reshuffle the cards and offer the extrapolation table.

__________________
Lighten up! This is a stellar board! Author: duh.

"The mean of five measures each of which is not worth a dang (sinc), has a maximum value of only five dangs (sinc)". Heber Curtis

"(sinc)" - spelling is not correct (in its orginal form) :)

No, I can't make even a remotely reasonable guess.

I don't remember the original numbers but by now there should be over a hundred SuperWASP planets. In reality, there are two of them and maybe a few dozen interesting but yet to be checked candidates.

__________________
Science is a way of trying not to fool yourself. The first principle is that you must not fool yourself, and you are the easiest person to fool.
-- Richard Feynman

Interesting times ahead:

That's not all:

Barnard's Star is "clean" (poor van de Kamp!) but Proxima Centauri may have something...

__________________
Science is a way of trying not to fool yourself. The first principle is that you must not fool yourself, and you are the easiest person to fool.
-- Richard Feynman

What? There's nothing around Barnard? Are they sure? Absolutely sure? Because I'd hate all that hope to be for naught. At least Planet X gave us Pluto.

__________________
There is a growing tendancy to think of Man as a rational, thinking being, which is absurd.- Marvin the Martian.

It's gotten to the point where careful investigation is needed just to tell parody from reality. I think that means reality is broken.- Noclevername.

Yeah, Barnard is remarkable for its planetlessness. If it had any Jovian planets, they most likely would have been discovered by now.

But since Barnard's Star is an extremely old metal-deficient star, this is not surprising.

However... it seems that low-mass planets may be common around metal-deficient stars so there is still hope.

__________________
Science is a way of trying not to fool yourself. The first principle is that you must not fool yourself, and you are the easiest person to fool.
-- Richard Feynman

More planets around giant stars:

__________________
Science is a way of trying not to fool yourself. The first principle is that you must not fool yourself, and you are the easiest person to fool.
-- Richard Feynman

Hang on, I thought Barnard had a very big "wobble", I remember reading about it in the 80s at least. Or was that just instrument error? I know it's got a very high proper motion too, though that's nothing to do with planets.

No, it doesn't have any wobble. None whatsoever. That's why it is so ironic that it was once believed to have planets. van de Kamp's measurements were spurious.

__________________
Science is a way of trying not to fool yourself. The first principle is that you must not fool yourself, and you are the easiest person to fool.
-- Richard Feynman

More from the DoC: here, here, and here.

Stuff like new transiting planets (including a Neptunian), hot Jupiters are pitch black, there may have been another Neptune in the Solar System, new lensing planets (to be announced really soon), big announcements coming, and lots of hush-hush.

__________________
Science is a way of trying not to fool yourself. The first principle is that you must not fool yourself, and you are the easiest person to fool.
-- Richard Feynman

Seems that some here are fans of Steinn's blog here too, which by the way, has a couple more fascinating updates today. See http://scienceblogs.com/catdynamics/...s_v_the_sa.php which seems to live up to what he has promised with regards to reporting on those Planet X speculations raised at the Conference from this reply to a query here http://scienceblogs.com/catdynamics/...ot.php#c482651

Quote: "Looks like the outer solar system, with late heavy bombardment, would have come together nicely if there was another Neptune out there to begin with."

Now this could really be quite fascinating. I recall reading papers by the likes of Hal Levison where it was argued that the mass of all TNOs, SDOs, and LPCs added added up together cannot be more than a few Mearths at best. A far cry from the predicted 10-30 Mearths postulated to have existed in these nether regions i.e. the Edgeworth-Kuiper Belt (EKB), Scattered Disk in the beginning. Question is what happened to the missing mass (i.e. of these TNOs, SDOs, LPCs, etc)? And why do the solar system's outliers like dwarf planet Eris (ex Planet X), Sedna ala 2003 VB12 and CR 105 have such high orbital inclinations (i) of 44.187°, 11.934° and 22.770° respectively? Or why are their orbits so eccentric (e.g. e=0.44177, e=0.855, e=0.798)? Also why the abrupt sharp edge to the Classical EKB at 50 AU? What could have produce it? Could there have been numerous factors at play with regards to these abnormalies? Or could any or all of these abnormalies be the by-products of a stellar flyby, BD or planetary mass (i.e. planemos) interlopers maybe even a Planet X? Why not a distant substellar mass BD common proper motion Solar companion?

I have come across a paper by Morbadelli et al., where it was argued that a ~50 MJup rogue BD flyby can account for the perturbed orbits of some of these outer solar system bodies and they even suspect that Sedna could actually be but an extrasolar planetoid captured from this rogue BD. It begets the question i.e. let's assume that they are right, that indeed this BD interloper is the culprit responsible, but what if it wasn't simply just an interloper? What if it was of a lower mass and really but a highly eccentric (0.9 <= eBD <= 0.99), 13 MJup <= Mbd <=20 MJup coeval substellar mass BD companion to our Sun or maybe even a captured ultracool VLM substellar companion (given the likely birth of the Sun in an Orion like open cluster and the case of B1620-26c, this can't be entirely ruled out right?) with periastron at 100-200 AU instead? The Teff of such an object is likely to be only about ~360° K according to Burrows et al., and if it still around, could be near or at apastron at this moment i.e. almost a light year away. And if this is not enough, if we are still turning up more M Dwarfs from the RECONS project (e.g. http://www.noao.edu/outreach/press/pr06/pr0614.html) and elsewhere in this day and age, how very much more tedious is the task of locating objects with even lower masses and Teffs e.g. BDs with SpTs T and Y?

Gomes et al. (Gomes, R. S., Matese, J. J., Lissauer, J. J., 2006, Icarus, 184, pp. 589-601), likewise have also come to a rather similar conclusion like Levision et. al., albeit one involving even lower masses perturbers and maybe with particular interest and relevance here is that one of the possibilities involves having a Neptune mass planet out at semiminor axis 2000 AU or a Jovian with semiminor axis at 5000 AU could explain the perturbed natured of many of the TNOs.

References:
Morbidelli, A., Levison, H. F., 2004, Scenarios for the Origin of the Orbits of the Trans-Neptunian Objects 2000 CR105 and 2003 VB12 (Sedna), AJ, 128, pp. 2564-2576

Burrows, A., Marley, M., Hubbard, W. B., Lunine, J. I., Guillot, T., Saumon, D., Freedman, R.; Sudarsky, D., & Sharp, C., 1997, A Nongray Theory of Extrasolar Giant Planets and Brown Dwarfs, ApJ 491, p.856

Gomes, R. S., Matese, J. J., Lissauer, J. J., 2006, A distant planetary-mass solar companion may have produced distant detached objects, Icarus, 184, pp. 589-601

Links:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eris_(dwarf_planet)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/90377_Sedna

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000_CR105

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PSR_B1620-26c

http://www.noao.edu/outreach/press/pr06/pr0614.html

http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2004AJ....128.2564M

http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1997ApJ...491..856B

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science...714c059b13149d

I remember reading about it too. And while you are at it, I believed Kamp also saw a large wobble in the motions of several other stars e.g. Ross 128 (iirc). However observations by other astronomers did not reproduced Kamp's results. They were dismissed as instrumental errors at Sproule indeed.

Quote: "Looks like the outer solar system, with late heavy bombardment, would have come together nicely if there was another Neptune out there to begin with."

Now this could really be quite fascinating. I recall reading papers by the likes of Hal Levison where it was argued that the mass of all TNOs, SDOs, and LPCs added added up together cannot be more than a few Mearths at best. A far cry from the predicted 10-30 Mearths postulated to have existed in those nether regions i.e. the Edgeworth-Kuiper Belt (EKB), Scattered Disk in the beginning. Question is what happened to the missing mass (i.e. of these TNOs, SDOs, LPCs, etc)? And why do the solar system's outliers like dwarf planet Eris (ex Planet X), Sedna ala 2003 VB12 and CR 105 have such high orbital inclinations (i) of 44.187°, 11.934° and 22.770° respectively? Or why are their orbits so eccentric (e.g. e=0.44177, e=0.855, e=0.798)? Also why the abrupt sharp edge to the Classical EKB at 50 AU? What could have producedit? Could there have been numerous factors at play with regards to these abnormalies? Or could any or all of these anomalies be the by-products of a stellar flyby, BD or planetary mass (i.e. planemos) interlopers maybe even a Planet X? Why not a distant substellar mass BD common proper motion Solar companion?

Hubble could easily have detected any deviations on Barnard Star's path. But as I already said, it doesn't mean it couldn't have terrestrial companions.

__________________
Science is a way of trying not to fool yourself. The first principle is that you must not fool yourself, and you are the easiest person to fool.
-- Richard Feynman

New discoveries:

• HD 43691 b
• HD 132406 b
• GJ 317 b (a Jovian planet around a red dwarf); GJ 317 c, another Jovian planet in the same system (to be confirmed)
• NGC 2423 3 b, a planet in the open cluster NGC 2423

__________________
Science is a way of trying not to fool yourself. The first principle is that you must not fool yourself, and you are the easiest person to fool.
-- Richard Feynman