Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop


Forgot your password?
Space Science

Richest Planetary System Discovered With 7 Planets 245

eldavojohn writes "The European Southern Observatory has announced that with the aid of their 190 HARPS measurements they have found the solar system with the most planets yet. Furthermore they claim 'This remarkable discovery also highlights the fact that we are now entering a new era in exoplanet research: the study of complex planetary systems and not just of individual planets. Studies of planetary motions in the new system reveal complex gravitational interactions between the planets and give us insights into the long-term evolution of the system.' The star is HD 10180, located 127 light-years away in the southern constellation of Hydrus, that boasts at least five planets (with two more expected) that have the equivalent of our own Titius–Bode law (their orbits follow a regular pattern). Their survey of stars also helped reinforce the correlation 'between the mass of a planetary system and the mass and chemical content of its host star. All very massive planetary systems are found around massive and metal-rich stars, while the four lowest-mass systems are found around lower-mass and metal-poor stars.' While we won't be making a 127 light-year journey anytime soon, the list of candidates for systems of interest grows longer."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Richest Planetary System Discovered With 7 Planets

Comments Filter:
  • Richest? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Skyshadow ( 508 ) * on Tuesday August 24, 2010 @04:59PM (#33361416) Homepage

    At seven planets, I'm reasonably sure this qualifies as the *second* richest planetary system we're aware of.

  • GTFO (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Smelly Jeffrey ( 583520 ) on Tuesday August 24, 2010 @05:12PM (#33361662) Homepage

    "the solar system with the most planets yet"

    There is only one Sol. There can only be one System Sol. Anything else is a star system.

  • Re:Richest? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by DirePickle ( 796986 ) on Tuesday August 24, 2010 @05:28PM (#33361942)
    All of that stuff's actually still here, except for the couple tons of metal that we sent to other planets.
  • Master of Orion 2 (Score:5, Insightful)

    by DriedClexler ( 814907 ) on Tuesday August 24, 2010 @05:39PM (#33362124)

    Does anyone else remember playing Master of Orion, and finding a planet, where the info-box says "Ultra rich, heavy-G".

    I always thought that sounded like a nickname for a gangsta rapper.

  • by BobMcD ( 601576 ) on Tuesday August 24, 2010 @05:42PM (#33362152)

    Perhaps, however, we can start planning the date when they might come see us...

    My money's on 2057, personally...

  • Re:How funny (Score:3, Insightful)

    by sznupi ( 719324 ) on Tuesday August 24, 2010 @05:48PM (#33362234) Homepage

    How did EU suddenly get involved with European Southern Observatory?...

    (plus generally, healthy competition is nice & there's a lot of crossparticipation in many projects anyway)

  • by jonfr ( 888673 ) on Tuesday August 24, 2010 @06:13PM (#33362542) Homepage

    In reality, 127 light years is not that far away. The most distance objects that we see are close to 13.4 billion light years away from Earth.

    We are seeing the system as it was 127 years ago. So it is a stable system, with planets in stable orbits. The question if there is life there or any planet in size range of the Earth are different questions, and require a different method to figure out.

    This discovery however shows that out solar system is not the only solar system out there with more plants then two to three as have been discovered around other stars before this discovery.

  • by Bemopolis ( 698691 ) on Tuesday August 24, 2010 @07:36PM (#33363470)

    Theoretically though, if you could somehow make an engine constantly add thrust and never plateau due to relativity(where max speed would be the maximum exit speed of the particles being used for propulsion) you could exceed light speed.

    Except that it's not the plateau of the exit thrust that stops it, it's the increase in inertia of the rocket as it approaches light speed, which approaches infinity as the rocket speed approaches the speed of light.

    To take an optimistic view, time dilation does slow the clock on the ship relative to the Earth, so a passenger on board can get to, say, Alpha Centauri in one day of shipboard time. The guys back at NASA, though, still have to wait eight years to see if you made it (four years for your arrival, four years for your triumphant radio message). Physics is cruel, but it's not arbitrary.

  • hyperboling much? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by luis_a_espinal ( 1810296 ) on Tuesday August 24, 2010 @07:41PM (#33363516) Homepage

    We only have one more in our own, and we're killing the earth,

    What the hell does this has to do with what is being discussed?

    our planet don't even contain half of the ressources it took billions of year to produce.

    Source or citation for this please? And whoever voted this post as insightful, please go back to school and learn some analytical thinking (or to middle school if you have to.)

  • by sea4ever ( 1628181 ) on Tuesday August 24, 2010 @10:32PM (#33364844)
    Wait a second here, this sounds familiar.

    When A arrives, he/she quickly pulls out a telescope or some such device, turns around, and watches her own arrival. How can she already be there if she is just arriving?

    When the speed of sound is broken by a jet, they could actually fly for quite a while, stop, turn around, and then hear the sound of them arriving. Why should light be any different? I don't understand why light and time are seen together. I think it should be something more akin to a sort of faster version of sound..except it's light.

  • Re:Richest? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by yyxx ( 1812612 ) on Tuesday August 24, 2010 @11:25PM (#33365148)

    All of that stuff's actually still here, except for the couple tons of metal that we sent to other planets.

    The atoms are still here, but they aren't resources anymore because they have become too costly to exploit.

  • by sFurbo ( 1361249 ) on Wednesday August 25, 2010 @03:32AM (#33366278)
    You need to take into account relativity and its effect on the passing of time. "At the same time" is not well-defined. If two events A and B are outside of each others light cones, there is an observer* who will observe A happening before B, and another observer*, who will observe B happening before A.

    So, if you can affect something which is outside of your light cone, e.g. travel faster than light, some observers will observe you affecting something happening before you acted to affect them.

    *To be more exact, there is an inertial frame of reference, such that an observer in this frame of reference will observe...

How many NASA managers does it take to screw in a lightbulb? "That's a known problem... don't worry about it."