It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Kepler Discoveries

page: 1
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 12:27 PM
link   
Why have we not heard of the Kepler telescope being pointed at the stars of interest from antiquity?

Arcturus?
Sirius?
Vega?
Aldebaran?

etc.

If there are civilizations/planets here, as suggested by ancient civilizations, you'd think just the want to know would lead to us at least LOOKING. Maybe we already have? Any information?




posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 12:30 PM
link   
I guess they'll get around to it if they haven't already. Space is unimaginable, so much to look at, so little time.



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 12:41 PM
link   
certain agencies pay for the "viewing time" of satellites and telescopes. it's most likely because it's already in use by an agency and their contract is not complete.



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 01:08 PM
link   
reply to post by ZeroUnlmtd
 


Oh ok, so they're specifically stalling before looking at certain systems and go "Oh, look at this, life inhabitable planets in systems that the ancients spoke of. 2012!"

Lol



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 01:12 PM
link   
reply to post by xacto
 


Interesting our closest stars have not been viewed...

Add Alpha Centari to that list...oh and here is what NASA had to say about that. Seems logical for a mission, yet they have not imaged this our closest neighbor, WHY?


www.nasa.gov...



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 01:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by xacto
reply to post by ZeroUnlmtd
 


Oh ok, so they're specifically stalling before looking at certain systems and go "Oh, look at this, life inhabitable planets in systems that the ancients spoke of. 2012!"

Lol




LoL .. There it is there. Thats why they havent done it yet.



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 01:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by abeverage
reply to post by xacto
 


Interesting our closest stars have not been viewed...

Add Alpha Centari to that list...oh and here is what NASA had to say about that. Seems logical for a mission, yet they have not imaged this our closest neighbor, WHY?


www.nasa.gov...


Very interesting why this hasn't been done.

I wonder what else we can dig up!



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 01:26 PM
link   
It could be those nearby stars will not be on an axis with Kepler to permit a transit opportunity, which is how they have all been discovered so far. But I have yet to find the evidence that supports this.
Not to mention every discovery and every candidate thus far has been well over 200 light years away!

Seems like a waste to investigate systems we have no real chance of reaching UNLESS…they are doing this to make a case that almost every star has a planet. Then start analyzing the systems closest to use only to announce they have found several that fit the earth-like size and goldilocks orbit!

en.wikipedia.org...
edit on 24-1-2012 by abeverage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 01:34 PM
link   
Kepler was designed to look at a vast number or main sequence stars that are not part of a binary system. Those are stars like our own sun. Arcturus and Aldebaran are red giants. Sirius and Alpha Centauri are multiple-star systems. And Vega is already the most-studied star outside our own sun.

Kepler was designed to look at a very small patch of the sky, at a part of the galaxy roughly the same distance from the galactic center as our solar system. And It's designed to look at that one spot for a long time. Why? Because Kepler discovers planets by measuring the drop in brightness of a star when a planet orbiting that star passes between the star and Kepler. If you're looking at a planet orbiting a star at the same speed Earth orbits the sun, then that drop in brightness only happens once a year. Thus, it's important to continuously monitor the same region for a long time.

Also, Kepler is looking at about 150,000 stars at once. A handful of individual stars can easily be looked at with other instruments (and they have been).



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 01:56 PM
link   
reply to post by nataylor
 


Um....they still have not imaged Alpha Centari which Geoff Marcy (Kepler Project Team member) even states,"If we find out from Kepler that Earth-like planets are common, it will be obvious to all people of the world that the nearest star, Alpha Centauri, which is in fact a triple star system will be a very logical place to image, to try to detect the planets directly, take spectra of them, learn any possible biological attributes of the planets around the Alpha Centauri stars."

And further more..."'And so Kepler will be the first step in informing us whether indeed Alpha Centauri is the logical next destination for humanity."
www.nasa.gov...

They are waiting to have a large list of proven earth like planets before turning toward closer systems as stated, plain and simple!

The question is why wait?

And my answer is to aclimate the general public into accepting there is a habitble planet inside 10 light years from earth.

Makes sense not to panic the public and keeps the torch bearing, pitchfork wielding commoners at bay...


edit on 24-1-2012 by abeverage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 02:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by abeverage
reply to post by nataylor
 


Um....they still have not imaged Alpha Centari which Geoff Marcy (Kepler Project Team member) even states,"If we find out from Kepler that Earth-like planets are common, it will be obvious to all people of the world that the nearest star, Alpha Centauri, which is in fact a triple star system will be a very logical place to image, to try to detect the planets directly, take spectra of them, learn any possible biological attributes of the planets around the Alpha Centauri stars."

And further more..."'And so Kepler will be the first step in informing us whether indeed Alpha Centauri is the logical next destination for humanity."
www.nasa.gov...

They are waiting to have a large list of proven earth like planets before turning toward closer systems as stated, plain and simple!
He's not talking about using Kepler to look at Alpha Centauri (since he uses the words "detect the planets directly," as Kepler only detects planets indirectly and would be less than useful on a binary system). He's basically saying that if Kepler finds a lot of stars have Earth-like planets, then it's likely Alpha Centauri has Earth-like planets, so we should focus on looking for them.



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 02:37 PM
link   
reply to post by nataylor
 


I understand that the current field of view of Kepler does not contain Alpha Centari, but why would he state "'And so Kepler will be the first step in informing us whether indeed Alpha Centauri is the logical next destination for humanity."

To me this will be the "extended mission" for Kepler instead of just saying for a next gen telescope to verify this.

Why not image (Indirectly of course lol) Epsilon Eridani or any number of the stars known to have planets that are closer?

edit on 24-1-2012 by abeverage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 02:54 PM
link   
Mentioned was our space travel propulsion systems have a way to go to consider any star traveling. It really doesn't matter if a star is 5 or 8 light years away or 1,000 light years away at this point. All other stars are considerably out of reach. Voyager 1 has been traveling over 33 years and has only gone about 16 light days. So in about 800 years of traveling, Voyager will have finally reached a light year in distance from the sun.



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 02:54 PM
link   
reply to post by nataylor
 


All I am saying is the choice of stars chosen were made to give the public a taste of what is to come. They could have done any number of stars closer, close even to the area it is focused.

Why choose stars that are 600 - 3,000 light years away?

I guess we will wait for the James Webb Space Telescope www.jwst.nasa.gov...



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 03:01 PM
link   
reply to post by Illustronic
 


I agree but talk of new lands just over the horizon spurred ancient mariners to build bigger, better ships capable of traveling longer periods of time and great distances. Meanwhile we sit on our thumbs because we are told it is impossible, as if we would fall off the edge of the earth...

Imagine if we absolutely knew without a doubt that a star 10 light years away had a planet earth size and potentially habitable! Isnt that the basis of the so called "100 year mission'?



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 03:14 PM
link   
reply to post by abeverage
 


Your are talking about something more like 8,000 year mission, a hundred years of traveling won't even get you half the way to our sun's Oort cloud, even at the fastest speed we ever achieved with any space probe. You can't just wish something and poof it happens. Its not that big of a leap from the wheel to a car, from the Wright Brothers to flight to the moon as it is from rocket propulsion to any percentage of light travel. Using arbitrary historic comparisons are, well, arbitrary, they don't apply to suggest any kind of learning curve, or technology advancements. Shouldn't the production of steel happened centuries before it did after the bronze age? What took that so long?
edit on 24-1-2012 by Illustronic because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 03:24 PM
link   
reply to post by Illustronic
 


Please don't patronize me I know how long it would take given currently known technology to make it to the nearest star. (I say this with a smile and as no offense as it may educate someone else).


www.foxnews.com...

Oh and as for your analogy we went from horse drawn carriages to walking on the moon in less than 70...



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 03:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by abeverage
Why not image (Indirectly of course lol) Epsilon Eridani or any number of the stars known to have planets that are closer?

edit on 24-1-2012 by abeverage because: (no reason given)


Kepler is meant to find planets. There's not much use pointing it at stars that are already known to have planets.

Looking at Alpha Centuari definitely won't be part of Kepler's extended mission. On that same page you linked to:


Jack Lissauer: Kepler is key in this because if Kepler finds that planets like Earth, the right distance, the right size from their stars are common, that means some of the nearer stars are likely to have planets like Earth. And it’s worthwhile to build a coronographic telescope, which can look at the atmospheres and find out the compositions of the atmospheres of these planets.


So they're talking about Kepler being the first step in determining how common Earth-like planets are. Actually imaging these planets and learning more about them will be done with instruments yet to be built.



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 03:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by abeverage
reply to post by nataylor
 


All I am saying is the choice of stars chosen were made to give the public a taste of what is to come. They could have done any number of stars closer, close even to the area it is focused.

Why choose stars that are 600 - 3,000 light years away?

I guess we will wait for the James Webb Space Telescope www.jwst.nasa.gov...
The closer you get, the fewer stars there. And the more widely dispersed they are across the sky and the easier they are to use other instruments to look at.

James Webb and Kepler are two totally different instruments. And again, Kepler doesn't image anything. It measures light output. It doesn't make pictures, just graphs.



posted on Jan, 24 2012 @ 03:34 PM
link   
reply to post by abeverage
 


Exaggeration, steam propultion vehicles showed up in the late mid 1700's.



new topics

top topics



 
4
<<   2 >>

log in

join