> the wobble can only point to one (or very few)
> explanations. 

Could be other things, yes. It's a mystery what other
things it could be, but you are open to other
possibilities, it seems.

> No photo as yet, it's too far away but it will
> "transit the solar 
> disc" or cross in front of its sun sooner or later
> then by the 
> technique of spectroheliography we may even be able
> to find out if 
> there is life on board.

According to the wikipeda article, the planet is so
close to the star that it's 'year' is only 13 earth
days (huge red flag to me here), so there's been
plenty of time already to observe the planet "transit
the solar disc".

As for finding out if there is life on board, does
life require elements and temperatures similar to what
we have on earth to exist? I doubt it. The assumption
that that is necessary for life is yet another myopic
assumption by the same scientists who are just as
certain they have discovered a planet here.

> Maybe you'd better send the prize to these guys.

Still no proof as of yet.

--- hugheshugo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> --- In [email protected], gullible fool
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
> wrote:
> >
> > 
> > > I'll claim the prize
> > 
> > "The wobble induced on the star by each of these
> > planets is really tiny-it's just a few meters a
> > second."
> > 
> > Where's the photo of the planet? All I see in the
> > article is the usual theory that if the star
> wobbles
> > then there just must be a planet, along with an
> > artist's rendition of what the "planet" might
> possibly
> > look like, along with a photograph of the star
> that
> > clearly proves today's telescopes are not capable
> of
> > showing anything more than a diffraction pattern
> when
> > it comes to resolving a star disk.
> > 
> > --- hugheshugo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > 
> 
> You can tell a lot about how many planets/how big
> they are etc. by 
> how a star wobbles because the timing and frequency
> of variations of 
> the wobble can only point to one (or very few)
> explanations. 
> Otherwise you would have an unstable planetary
> system, which is 
> unlikely in a 4.5 billion year old star as they
> would sort out their 
> orbits very early. As with all science there is room
> for error but 
> it's pretty unlikely here.
> 
> No photo as yet, it's too far away but it will
> "transit the solar 
> disc" or cross in front of its sun sooner or later
> then by the 
> technique of spectroheliography we may even be able
> to find out if 
> there is life on board. Which would be one of, if
> not THE, the most 
> amazing discoveries ever.
> 
> The link I gave wasn't so good but the wikipedia
> entry explains a bit 
> about how they know it's there.
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gliese_581_c
> 
> Maybe you'd better send the prize to these guys.
 


       
____________________________________________________________________________________
Moody friends. Drama queens. Your life? Nope! - their life, your story. Play 
Sims Stories at Yahoo! Games.
http://sims.yahoo.com/  

Reply via email to