5 ms·

15 day orbit, 170 day planetary rotation, that's an interesting one Sucks for the amount of radiation ofc Would be interesting to hypothesize of it being a la

15 day orbit, 170 day planetary rotation, that's an interesting one Sucks for the amount of radiation ofc Would be interesting to hypothesize of it being a larger mercury like planet than a earth like one Please some more up to date astro-duders out there, is the James Webb currently capable of direct spectrography of exoplanets? We can do spectrography during the transit I am aware, but direct spectrography, is that possible? Specially when we are talking of an infrared telescope

JumpCrisscross 4y ago
> is the James Webb currently capable of direct spectrography of exoplanets? Yes [1]. [1] https://www.sciencenews.org/article/james-webb-space-telescope-first-exoplanet-image https://www.sciencenews.org/article/james-webb-space-telesco...
- ethbr0 4y ago
  That's sheer insanity. It's mind boggling that at that distance (and therefore footprint on the optical elements) you can directly resolve something even as small as 7x Jupiter.
- nick889996544 4y ago
  Yes, but... Wolf 1069B is much smaller and closer to its star than this one, so we probably couldn't observe it with Webb.
nigerianbrince 4y ago
Could be a non problem depending on the atmosphere
- CyanBird 4y ago
  That's the thing, this rock wont have athmosphere, so close to the host star, it would have been blown away That's why I mentioned the hypothesized mercury situation, as mercury has got a very thin mantle and its core is VERY outsided, so it has got a very strong magnetic field. This is consequence of likely early solar system crash, Mercury might just be the core remnants of a planetary collision elsewhere But yeah, this rock wont have athmosphere
fernly 4y ago
The wording is a little ambiguous but I read the abstract as talking about the _stellar_ rotation period being ~170d. Not the planet. The star rotating adds a low-frequency signal that interfered with the effect of the planet.
ravel-bar-foo 4y ago
Anything in a 15 day orbit of its host star would be tidally locked, no?

JumpCrisscross 4y ago

> is the James Webb currently capable of direct spectrography of exoplanets? Yes [1]. [1] https://www.sciencenews.org/article/james-webb-space-telescope-first-exoplanet-image https://www.sciencenews.org/article/james-webb-space-telesco...

ethbr0 4y ago
That's sheer insanity. It's mind boggling that at that distance (and therefore footprint on the optical elements) you can directly resolve something even as small as 7x Jupiter.
nick889996544 4y ago
Yes, but... Wolf 1069B is much smaller and closer to its star than this one, so we probably couldn't observe it with Webb.

nigerianbrince 4y ago

Could be a non problem depending on the atmosphere

CyanBird 4y ago
That's the thing, this rock wont have athmosphere, so close to the host star, it would have been blown away That's why I mentioned the hypothesized mercury situation, as mercury has got a very thin mantle and its core is VERY outsided, so it has got a very strong magnetic field. This is consequence of likely early solar system crash, Mercury might just be the core remnants of a planetary collision elsewhere But yeah, this rock wont have athmosphere

fernly 4y ago

The wording is a little ambiguous but I read the abstract as talking about the _stellar_ rotation period being ~170d. Not the planet. The star rotating adds a low-frequency signal that interfered with the effect of the planet.

ravel-bar-foo 4y ago

Anything in a 15 day orbit of its host star would be tidally locked, no?