×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Spectrum of Light Captured From Distant World

Soulskill posted more than 4 years ago | from the what-are-you-made-of dept.

Space 32

An anonymous reader writes with this excerpt from Cosmos: "Astronomers have made the first direct capture of a spectrum of light from a planet outside the Solar System and are deciphering its composition. The light was snared from a giant planet that orbits a bright young star called HR 8799 about 130 light-years from Earth, said the European Southern Observatory (ESO). ... The find is important, because hidden within a light spectrum are clues about the relative amounts of different elements in the planet's atmosphere. 'The features observed in the spectrum are not compatible with current theoretical models,' said co-author Wolfgang Brandner. 'We need to take into account a more detailed description of the atmospheric dust clouds, or accept that the atmosphere has a different chemical composition from that previously assumed.' The result represents a milestone in the search for life elsewhere in the universe, said the ESO. Until now, astronomers have been able to get only an indirect light sample from an exoplanet, as worlds beyond our Solar System are called. They do this by measuring the spectrum of a star twice — while an orbiting exoplanet passes near to the front of it, and again while the planet is directly behind it. The planet's spectrum is thus calculated by subtracting one light sample from another."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

32 comments

Digital Galactic Copyright Notice (1, Funny)

mrmeval (662166) | more than 4 years ago | (#30791040)

To Whom it May Concern:

Pursuant to Title II of the Digital Galactic Copyright Act ("DGCA"), namely, the Interstellar Copyright Infringement Liability Act, you are hereby notified that certain potential copyright infringing materials are currently hosted by you. This letter serves as written notification of claimed infringement. ...

Re:Digital Galactic Copyright Notice (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30791290)

Wow! You're a boring little twit.

Re:Digital Galactic Copyright Notice (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30791520)

so agreed! how does drivel like that make it to anything above -1 Redundant/Overrated?

Re:Digital Galactic Copyright Notice (1)

trapnest (1608791) | more than 4 years ago | (#30791720)

So nice of you to post twice showing you have no humour.

Re:Digital Galactic Copyright Notice (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30792072)

I fucked your daughter in the butt twice this morning...right before preschool.

Re:Digital Galactic Copyright Notice (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30794456)

If you're still attending preschool, you should leave his/her daughter alone.

That's not a spectrum... (1)

Yoozer (1055188) | more than 4 years ago | (#30791096)

That's not a spectrum. That's a hyperintelligent shade of blue! Quickly, grab a prism!

Amazing (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30791108)

From these readings with an accuracy of 1.23241e^-34 percent we can conclude we need to rethink the current standard model.

Reflected Light (2, Insightful)

ISoldat53 (977164) | more than 4 years ago | (#30791116)

The recap says that astronomers have until now only been able to get indirect light samples. Isn't all of the light from a planet indirect?

Re:Reflected Light (3, Informative)

Nadaka (224565) | more than 4 years ago | (#30791190)

To be a smart ass, no, not all light from a planet is indirect. For instance Jupiter is releasing light in the infra-red spectrum that is not reflected nor absorbed & re-radiated from the sun. Due to its size and mass it retains a great deal of heat from its gravitational contraction and any internal radioactive decay. Jupiter is currently emitting more energy that it is receiving form the sun.

Though in this case I believe they are refering to reflected | absorbed & re-radiated light instead of starlight filtering through the atmosphere. The first produces chemical emission lines while the later negates them from the stars emissions.

Re:Reflected Light (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30797438)

reflected | absorbed & re-radiated

Sorry, binary operators do not work on text..

Re:Reflected Light (1)

sznupi (719324) | more than 4 years ago | (#30803922)

More nitpicking, adding to what Nadaka said ;)

Planets do radiate direct light, as any body above 0 K would do, through black body radiation. It's just of rather low intensity and not in the visible spectrum...

NOT first spectrum of planet's atmosphere (4, Informative)

StupendousMan (69768) | more than 4 years ago | (#30791134)

Astronomers have measured transmission spectra of a planet circling the star HD 209458 and a planet circling the star HD 189733 (and probably others). The first successful measurements, which found sodium in the spectrum of HD 209458b, were published by Charbonneau et al. in 2002. See ApJ 568, 377 (2002) [harvard.edu] .

Re:NOT first spectrum of planet's atmosphere (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30791234)

The first successful measurements, which found sodium in the spectrum of HD 209458b, were published by Charbonneau et al. in 2002.

Great, a race of aliens with high blood pressure. You *know* that's going to add to the cost of universal health care.

Re:NOT first spectrum of planet's atmosphere (5, Informative)

floateyedumpi (187299) | more than 4 years ago | (#30791774)

The article is wrong on many levels. The key word here is "direct". The 2002 transmission spectra you mention (and others like it) consist of light from the host star, passing through the atmosphere of the planet as it passes in front of it, which imprints spectral signatures of the planetary atmosphere on that stellar spectrum. So in this sense, its not a direct spectrum of the planet's own light, but of the star, modified by the planet in front of it.

The first spectrum of a planet [nature.com] , consisting only of planetary light, came from the Spitzer Space Telescope, which used a differencing technique:

planet + star [out of eclipse] - star [when planet eclipsed] = planet only

The star and planet could not be resolved (separated) by the telescope, but by using the known orbit of this eclipsing planetary system, and timing the observations carefully, a spectrum of the "planet's own light" was obtained.

The novelty of this latest result is that no differencing of this sort was required. Using adaptive optics to correct distortions due to Earth's atmosphere, the light from a star and the light from its associated giant planet where physically resolved, and a spectrum of the planet, all by itself, was obtained. Even with adaptive optics, however, very few systems have star-planet separations on the sky large enough to permit this technique.

Re:NOT first spectrum of planet's atmosphere (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30793626)

giant planet where physically resolved - > giant planet were physically resolved

No more science articles please (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#30791444)

Isn't there some news about the new Star Trek game you can post instead?

In our lifetime... (2, Interesting)

Hurricane78 (562437) | more than 4 years ago | (#30791658)

I always have to think, that it’s practically a sure thing, that we will see alien life forms doing their thing on their planet, in our lifetime.

With the current (as always exponential) rate of telescope development, we will get to a Google-maps-like resolution or even better. And meanwhile search as many of the previously in other ways detected planets an new planets for signs of life (e.g. non-natural structures and fast changes.)

Now if we narrow down to the right planets and spaces in the right solar systems, we will find life. Or what was once life. Maybe even life that is more advanced than ours.

Then it’s just a matter of setting up a video feed. Because I doubt that once life is found, anyone will dare to turn its eyes off of it for even a second, until we know very well what’s going on there.

I just wish that day would be today...

Re:In our lifetime... (1)

M4DP4RROT (1377075) | more than 4 years ago | (#30791828)

With the current (as always exponential) rate of telescope development, we will get to a Google-maps-like resolution or even better.

No need to go that far - all we need is to find a planet, using a somewhat higher resolution method than that in TFA, that has an atmosphere with the right temperature and composition for life, and then see if that atmosphere contains chemicals that do not occur in nature and are the byproduct of basic industrial processes. Essentially, find a planet with air pollution, and you've probably found a planet with intelligent life.

Re:In our lifetime... (1)

Hurricane78 (562437) | more than 4 years ago | (#30794602)

Sorry but that is making an awful lot of assumptions, based on the false belief, that aliens would have to be similar to us. They won’t. Because the only reason that makes us think they do, is an artifact of our knowledge being most detailed in our realm, and our thoughts revolving the most around it too.

Also: I want my quirky alien videos! And whatever their children want, when ours would want a pony! ;)
And rule 36! :D

Re:In our lifetime... (1)

mustafap (452510) | more than 4 years ago | (#30801156)

>Essentially, find a planet with air pollution, and you've probably found a planet with unintelligent life.

There, fixed that for you. Apart from the normal anthropomorphic assumption.

Re:In our lifetime... (1)

Urkki (668283) | more than 4 years ago | (#30800832)

With the current (as always exponential) rate of telescope development, we will get to a Google-maps-like resolution or even better.

Well... No. There's the small practical issue of number of actual rphotons arriving from the planet to the telescope. No amount of technology is going to change that (well, except using space travel technology to get closer...).

I'm not saying there isn't room for improvement for a long time yet, and ultimately, with enough photons collected, for many enough revolutions of the target planet, a very detailed map could be made (which would automatically be map of the entire surface). But not in our lifetime.

Just Wow. (2, Insightful)

shar303 (944843) | more than 4 years ago | (#30791688)

It's a definite milestone to be able to peer into the composition of an exoplanet. Huge congratulations to the guys and girls that pulled this off.

Developing the ability to do the same with stars was probably one of the most important steps in the history of astronomy. This may not seem to have the broad reaching implications and novelty of that discovery, but if it provides us with evidence for alien life then it will clearly be right up there.

Forgive my cynicism (2, Interesting)

BigBadBus (653823) | more than 4 years ago | (#30791840)

...but I recall the excited, breathless publicity that occurred after a science team announced that they had captured spectroscopic details of a planet's atmosphere and announced that it contained sufficient sodium to give it a yellowish tinge...then a second team, trying to verify the findings of the first, found nothing! We should wait and see....

Frustrating: How was it different (1)

syousef (465911) | more than 4 years ago | (#30793598)

I can't find information about the spectra in the links. How was it different? Were percentages different? Was something unexpected found? Is it composed of green dragons, fairies and teddybears? How about some substance to the news?

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...