Hi Steve,
I remember in the 70's (maybe before that) when the star Aldeberan was one
of the first stars suspected if having planets because of it's wobble effect
across the sky. My choice of the word observation in my earlier post was
probably a poor one...
It is this wobble method of detection that I was referring to, that 20 years
ago was only strong enough to be considered possible evidence, but today is
headlined as proof. So, I don't doubt that the wobble method is
scientifically based. I am just perplexed by the strength of the conclusion
that are drawn now versus then.
>
> Granted, extra solar planets can not be resolved with the telescopes we
> have, but when a star wobbles on its axis, something has to cause it.
> Luminosity is achieved only with a mass large enough for atomic
> conversion, so if there is no luminous mass visibly close enough to
> make a solar disk wobble, chances are high that it is of planetary origin
> causing a gravitational wobble.
>
>
> That`s the wonderful thing about science, if you make a discovery,
> they are going to try so very hard to prove you wrong.
>
That's the other wonderful thing about this kind of science. It's very hard
to prove something is wrong when you cannot as yet prove it as right. <g>
Tom C.
-
This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe,
go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to
visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
