| ABOUT US | ARCHIVES | LINKS | RSS FEED | MONDAYS | |

3quarksdaily

An Eclectic Digest of Science, Art and Literature

« put on your sunday clothes | Main | An Interview with Shilpa Ray »

December 20, 2009

Waterworld

WaterworldEvan Lerner in Seed Magazine:

The discovery of a new planet has always been exciting, but the bloom is starting to come off the rose now that we’ve done it more than 400 times. A University of California–Santa Cruz team announced the discovery of six new planets orbiting two stars earlier this week, but they weren’t even the toast of the exoplanetology world, much less international newsmakers. Those honors went to a team led by Harvard’s David Charbonneau.

Quality trumps quantity when it comes to such discoveries, and Charbonneau’s planet has a number of newsworthy traits. At more than six times our own planet’s mass, it’s a “super-Earth,” but this new world’s relatively low density means it’s likely made mostly of water. Though it orbits uncomfortably close to its star, the planet’s water may be kept liquid at 200° C by a dense, highly pressurized atmosphere. Not exactly a tropical paradise (though Dennis Overbye’s New York Times headline describes it as “sultry”), but easily the most Earthlike planet we’ve been able to characterize thus far.

Orbiting the red dwarf star GJ 1214 in the Ophiuchus constellation, the planet is also quite nearby by astronomical standards. At a distance of 42 light-years, it would still take several thousand lifetimes for us to get anything there, but its close proximity makes it an excellent target for ranged study by the James Webb Space Telescope scheduled to launch in 2014. In the meantime, the aging Hubble and Spitzer space telescopes may be used to study this bizarre waterworld.

Posted by Robin Varghese at 10:26 PM | Permalink

Comments

It is truly amazing, how much physical and chemical data can be collected at such a range.

Posted by: aguy109 | Dec 21, 2009 5:22:26 AM

I wonder if there is any planet that is nothing but water - a big sphere of pure water. You could dive down in one hemisphere and surface in the opposite one.

Posted by: J.H. | Dec 21, 2009 2:23:34 PM

J.H.: An interesting prospect! It might be possible to have a planet "mostly" water. However, as you dive deeper, the pressures would become extreme and the water would solidify into special forms of ice that would be impassable... (Not to mention that there would be no known material, from which you could construct a "submarine," to resist such pressures...any "submarine" would be crushed like a soft-drink tin.)

However, what you describe can be done here on Earth. Climb into a nuclear sub in NY, submerge and resurface in Tokyo Bay several weeks later!

Posted by: Bill | Dec 22, 2009 5:05:44 AM

Post a comment






Subscribe to this blog's feed  

3QD ADVERTISING

Find the best prices on Las Vegas Show Tickets at Best of Vegas and Orlando Theme Parks at Best of Orlando!

3QD on Facebook

3QD on Kindle

3QD by Daily Email

Receive all blogposts at the same time every day.

Enter your Email:


Preview 3QD Email

3QD on Twitter

Miscellany

Lijit Search

AddThis Social Bookmark Button

Add to Google

Recent Comments

Al on Franzen, Wallace and the Question of Realism

aguy109 on Reacting to Reactionary Muslims

aguy109 on The Pathology of Stabilisation in Complex Adaptive Systems

Ken Pidcock on How to win a fight against twenty children

Erich on How to win a fight against twenty children

reader on How to win a fight against twenty children

Carlos on Franzen, Wallace and the Question of Realism

Janet Kerr on Olivia Chaney -Aupres de ma Blonde

omar on Reacting to Reactionary Muslims

j_93 on Sanctions Don’t Promote Democratic Change

droog on How to win a fight against twenty children

Mike Cope on Sanctions Don’t Promote Democratic Change

Dredd on Sanctions Don’t Promote Democratic Change

Louise Gordon on How to win a fight against twenty children

Seyma on Snowboarding at Night

aguy109 on Whitney Houston: Didn't we almost have it all

aguy109 on Matzo ball memories

j_93 on Reacting to Reactionary Muslims

Mike H. on Whitney Houston: Didn't we almost have it all

Jim on the tyrant's wife

Evert Cilliers on Why Is the Amazing Movie Directed by Angelina Jolie not on the Oscar List?

modernguy(NeanderthalGuy) on Why Is the Amazing Movie Directed by Angelina Jolie not on the Oscar List?

aguy109 on Reacting to Reactionary Muslims

Orla Schantz on Bubbles: Spheres, Volume I: Microspherology

Kabir on Reacting to Reactionary Muslims

Acclaim For 3QD


"I couldn't tear myself away from 3 Quarks Daily, to the point of neglecting my work. Congratulations on this superb site."—Steven Pinker, Johnstone Professor of Psychology, Harvard University.

"I have placed 3 Quarks Daily at the head of my list of web bookmarks."—Richard Dawkins, Charles Simonyi Professor of the Public Understanding of Science at Oxford University.

"Just wanted you to know I’m one of many who reads and enjoys 3 Quarks....almost daily."—David Byrne, musician, former lead-singer of the Talking Heads, artist, intellectual.

Read more here.

The 3QD Prizes

Subscribe to this blog's feed