Top
Best
New

Posted by mariuz 11 hours ago

A 12-year sequence of telescope images of a star and four planets orbiting(bsky.app)
134 points | 28 comments
ortusdux 6 minutes ago|
I'm excited for the leap in this tech that the Nancy Grace Roman telescope's new chronograph promises.

https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/missions/the-roman-coronagraph-inst...

The Roman Coronagraph is designed to detect planets 100 million times fainter than their stars, which is 100 to 1,000 times better than existing space-based coronagraphs. The Roman Coronagraph will be capable of directly imaging reflected starlight from a planet akin to Jupiter in size, temperature, and distance from its parent star.

wthomp 54 minutes ago||
Not to self-plug, but here's my video of the same four planets:

https://sefffal.github.io/images/orbital-animation.mp4

The creator of the GIF above used a data from a range of different telescopes and wavelengths, whereas I made this with using data only from same telescope (Keck), instrument, and wavelength (3.5 microns; near infrared).

hatthew 22 minutes ago||
Worth being very clear that this is not a real video of the system, it's 10 static images with a few hundred interpolated "fake" frames.
arlattimore 1 hour ago||
Space and the enormity of it breaks your mind when you start thinking about it.

The star in the middle of the animation, is approximately 20AU (Astronomical Units) in size looking at the scale line. 20AU is approximately 1.8b miles/3b kilometres or approximately the distance from the Sun to Uranus.

If Google's correct, if everyone on Earth lived on that star - each and every one of us could have a backyard larger than the surface area of Earth ;p

kridsdale3 1 hour ago|
I don't think you should infer the radius of the star from the blacked out region. I think they just do that because the luminosity of the star is so intense it would blow away the sensitivity needed to see the planets. So they set everything to zero for a certain zone on the lens/sensor. It's not the physical surface of the star.
Quinner 25 minutes ago||
There are a handful of known red supergiant stars around 15 AU in diameter, 20 AU would be pushing past the boundaries of what we believe would be possible.

The star in the video, HR 8799, is about 50% larger than the sun.

7373737373 1 hour ago||
Also check out the Simulated Observation of the Solar System by the Habitable Worlds Observatory (under "Videos"), expected to be launched in the 2040s, the first to be able to detect Earth-like planets around Sun-like stars! https://habitableworldsobservatory.org/multimedia

DrBecky's video on it: https://youtube.com/watch?v=z2JIkAPcdnU

tocs3 8 hours ago||
Amazing. Scrolling down one of the comments has an animation of starts around the center of the Milky Way. I have seen a few short ones of nebulae. There should be much much more of this sort of thing.

I appreciate that scientist are not always after the pretty pictures. They can be expensive, do not always give the data needed, and the experiments do not always produce data that has obvious pretty picture potential. Still, for the average non professional scientist (me) the pictures are about all I will ever get out of the science.

turtletontine 2 hours ago||
The galactic center data actually proved there was a supermassive black hole at the center of the Milky Way, and weighed it precisely from those stars motions. The name of the account that posted that animation (Sagittarius A*) is the name of that supermassive black hole.

This work earned the 2020 Nobel Prize in Physics: https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/physics/2020/summary/

ccozan 17 minutes ago||
Can you explain the past tense "there was" ? Is there a reason for a black hole to dissapear?
swiftcoder 2 hours ago||
A good chunk of science communication centres around how one conveys the wow factor to folks who aren't already obsessed with the particular field. Images like this really help sell it to the rest of us
desireco42 5 minutes ago||
I will just say that this short movie is something most beautiful I've seen in last several years. To be able to see this, for real, not as a side-effect to the star is absolutely mind blowing.
bananzamba 1 hour ago||
There are many more of these : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_directly_imaged_exopla...
317070 3 hours ago||
Wow, in terms of angle, how far are these planets separated from the star?

I always thought we would never be able to image something like that. The distances would be too small and the contrast too large to figure something at the resolution we can get on earth. I'll need to read up on how this was done.

turtletontine 2 hours ago||
The scale bar (20 AU) represents 20 time the distance between the Earth and the sun. This star is about 41 parsecs away, so the angular size of that scale bar is about half an arcsec. (One degree is split into 60 arcminutes, one arcminute into 60 arcseconds. Just like a clock).

That angle is about the diameter of a US quarter coin seen from 11km (7mi) away.

ceejayoz 3 hours ago||
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HR_8799
ryandrake 2 hours ago|||
Yea, the planets are gigantic, and in distant orbits from their star. I don't think we even have the ability yet to directly image exoplanets much smaller than, say, Saturn, or closer to their stars than Saturn.
jcims 2 hours ago|||
TL;DR - Two inside (16, 26AU) and two outside (43, 69AU) Pluto's orbit (39AU). They are all estimated to be a bit bigger than Jupiter.
Kaxo 2 hours ago|
The noise from the blocked-out star noticably decreases in 2017. Is that due to changes in the stars' activity cycle, or is that due to better processing/capture technology?
rietta 2 hours ago||
I do not know, but my best guess would be an improved post processing algorithm was introduced.
teekert 20 minutes ago||
Wouldn't you just post-process all images again at that point?
ajcp 1 hour ago||
I believe it's because the star's brightness does fluctuate, so activity cycle based?
More comments...