Talk:Iota Horologii b

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Astronomy This article is within the scope of WikiProject Astronomy, which collaborates on articles related to astronomy, and WikiProject Astronomical Objects, which collaborates on articles related to astronomical objects.
Stub This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the assessment scale.

This article has been rated but has no comments. If appropriate, please review the article and leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

Contents

[edit] Evidence required

The following claims need backing up:

  • The concept of "sulfur giants". A google search basically turns up references to the popular site Extrasolar Visions, and this paper suggests that sulfur forms compounds other than sulfuric acid on such planets. This suggests that sulfur giants are a concept invented by the author of the Extrasolar Visions site.
  • Even if sulfur giants exist, a reference to the yellow/green color is needed.
  • The term "Horologid planet" does not seem to be in use anywhere.
  • The temperature and radius values appear to be taken from Extrasolar Visions which uses simple calculations and models to get these parameters, which may be inaccurate (see here). Presenting them in the infobox implies these parameters have been measured, which is NOT the case.
    • It is slightly ridiculous to assume we can give the radius to 4 significant figures when we only have a lower limit on the mass, and not a particularly good one at that (see the error value!). Chaos syndrome 10:09, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
  • The albedo has not been measured but seems to depend on a theoretical model which may or may not be appropriate. In addition, the theoretical model assumes water clouds which contradicts the assertion of sulfuric acid clouds earlier in the article.
  • The comments about maximum moon mass and outermost prograde orbits are difficult to verify, but appear to have been taken from Extrasolar Visions, which uses a very basic model when detailed numerical simulations are necessary to determine such parameters.

The reason I am sceptical of Extrasolar Visions values is that they are highly speculative and often rely on unsourced data (especially stellar parameters). Also that site uses its own calculated values for properties which should require measurement. Chaos syndrome 11:04, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

I've fixed the artical the best I could. But I know it's not the way you wanted! — HurricaneDevon @ 13:43, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
I realise that Extrasolar Visions states the planet is a sulfur giant, but it does not provide any references for the concept at all, and it doesn't seem to exist outside Extrasolar Visions apart from sites mirroring EV. I've also linked a paper in this talk page which implies that gas giants won't form layers of sulfuric acid clouds at any temperature. I still feel this issue needs outside attention (i.e. someone other than you or myself), so I'm replacing the notice for now. Chaos syndrome 13:54, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Plagiarism

Some of the material in this article is a direct copy of [1], so I'm reverting per WP:CP. Chaos syndrome 22:57, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Insolation

Can anyone explain what is meant by 'insolation similar to Venus'? I followed the link to insolation, which was fine as an explanation of insolation, but it doesn't shed any light on why the insolation is similar to Venus. Do they mean it receives the same energy as Venus? Do they mean it seems to reflect similar energy? Venus is both very reflective and super-insulated - what is the insight given by the comparison. Mostly just curious. Stevebritgimp 20:05, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Mass

on the planetbox says that the planet's mass is 2.24 MJ, and on the article says 1.94 MJ as minimum. one of this most be the Mcos(i) of the planet, but the other cames from...? comu_nacho, from spanish wikipedia 16:29, 22 April 2008 (UTC)