3 ms·

I should apologize, I am probably, hopefully wrong. I'm still skeptical but clearly more work has been put into this than I realized and I shouldn't have been s

I should apologize, I am probably, hopefully wrong. I'm still skeptical but clearly more work has been put into this than I realized and I shouldn't have been so quick to condemn it.

anoncoward111 8y ago
Life is short. It's fun to have opinions if you are willing to be wrong :)
- dwaltrip 8y ago
  I'm glad this had a happy ending! :D Sometimes I feel bad piling on a downvote train -- especially considering the psychology research showing that people usually just dig in further in such situations...
  - phyller 8y ago
    To be honest, it would have been better to explain how they do the spectroscopy than to just say "you don't understand" and downvote. I should have raised a question instead of making a statement, the response should have been an explanation, instead of basically "you're an idiot" (which still no one has done as of this time). They are making the same error I did. The article posted didn't explain, the paper costs $9 to read. I wouldn't call this a productive discussion at this point. Edit: someone just attempted to explain the technology behind it, thanks amluto
    - dwaltrip 8y ago
      Respect for recognizing that you started things off on the wrong foot. Not everyone is willing to take ownership like that. You are totally right, the best response is a clear, calm explanation. Unfortunately, the time, energy, and expertise to do so is not always available. It's in moments like those where I hesitate between ignoring the comment entirely and downvoting. As for transit spectroscopy, I'm going off memory/rederivation/speculation here (not sure how much of each), but I believe it works by first taking the spectrum of the parent star by itself, then observing the spectrum of the starlight travelling through the transiting planet's atmosphere, and then diffing the two results to isolate the spectrum of the planet's atmosphere.
      - cgriswald 8y ago
        It works basically like that. The spectrum of the star will be an absorption spectrum. The star produces a continuous spectrum and then the atoms in its atmosphere absorb specific wavelengths. The light then travels through the planet's atmosphere where other atoms and molecules absorb other wavelengths; the signatures of which are known, telling scientists the makeup of the atmosphere.
        dwaltrip 8y ago
        Ah yeah, that makes sense. Thanks for clarifying!
    - somebadguy 8y ago
      Sure, you’re the victim here.
    - spacehome 8y ago
      Email the authors. There's a 50-50 chance they'll just give you the paper. Though I wouldn't lead with calling BS ...
  - anoncoward111 8y ago
    Totally agree with you anecdotally. When I am heavily downvoted on any site, I instantly believe my own dogma more, whether it is right or wrong, because now it is "mine" and it's under attack like a poor little defenseless puppy.
  - kyleperik 8y ago
    Honestly I feel like we shouldn't be down voting opposing opinions. Those should be the ones rising to the top, because that's the best way to cross reference, and get a different perspective. I think the only things that should sink to the bottom are distasteful or rude comments.

I should apologize, I am probably, hopefully wrong. I'm still skeptical but clearly more work has been put into this than I realized and I shouldn't have been so quick to condemn it.

anoncoward111 8y ago

Life is short. It's fun to have opinions if you are willing to be wrong :)

dwaltrip 8y ago
I'm glad this had a happy ending! :D Sometimes I feel bad piling on a downvote train -- especially considering the psychology research showing that people usually just dig in further in such situations...
- phyller 8y ago
  To be honest, it would have been better to explain how they do the spectroscopy than to just say "you don't understand" and downvote. I should have raised a question instead of making a statement, the response should have been an explanation, instead of basically "you're an idiot" (which still no one has done as of this time). They are making the same error I did. The article posted didn't explain, the paper costs $9 to read. I wouldn't call this a productive discussion at this point. Edit: someone just attempted to explain the technology behind it, thanks amluto
  - dwaltrip 8y ago
    Respect for recognizing that you started things off on the wrong foot. Not everyone is willing to take ownership like that. You are totally right, the best response is a clear, calm explanation. Unfortunately, the time, energy, and expertise to do so is not always available. It's in moments like those where I hesitate between ignoring the comment entirely and downvoting. As for transit spectroscopy, I'm going off memory/rederivation/speculation here (not sure how much of each), but I believe it works by first taking the spectrum of the parent star by itself, then observing the spectrum of the starlight travelling through the transiting planet's atmosphere, and then diffing the two results to isolate the spectrum of the planet's atmosphere.
    - cgriswald 8y ago
      It works basically like that. The spectrum of the star will be an absorption spectrum. The star produces a continuous spectrum and then the atoms in its atmosphere absorb specific wavelengths. The light then travels through the planet's atmosphere where other atoms and molecules absorb other wavelengths; the signatures of which are known, telling scientists the makeup of the atmosphere.
      - dwaltrip 8y ago
        Ah yeah, that makes sense. Thanks for clarifying!
  - somebadguy 8y ago
    Sure, you’re the victim here.
  - spacehome 8y ago
    Email the authors. There's a 50-50 chance they'll just give you the paper. Though I wouldn't lead with calling BS ...
- anoncoward111 8y ago
  Totally agree with you anecdotally. When I am heavily downvoted on any site, I instantly believe my own dogma more, whether it is right or wrong, because now it is "mine" and it's under attack like a poor little defenseless puppy.
- kyleperik 8y ago
  Honestly I feel like we shouldn't be down voting opposing opinions. Those should be the ones rising to the top, because that's the best way to cross reference, and get a different perspective. I think the only things that should sink to the bottom are distasteful or rude comments.