iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Seth Shostak

Seth Shostak

Posted: November 1, 2010 06:04 PM

Bye Bye to a Lovely Planet

What's Your Reaction:

The planet Gliese 581g might be a chimera.

This intriguing object has dominated science news for the last few weeks because it was the first world found in deep space that might sport an environment comparable to our own. Gliese 581g could be wrapped in oceans, a thick atmosphere and -- who knows? -- some biology. After discovering nearly 500 planets around other stars, it appeared that astronomers had finally tripped across one that might approximate the Earth.

Well, buck up and stand down. A new analysis by astronomer Michel Mayor and his Swiss team suggests that Gliese 581g is an apparition -- a planet conjured into existence by other researchers' faulty interpretation of noisy data. It now seems you can stop fantasizing about oddball Gliesians 20 light-years from your doorstep.

Disappointing, sure. But there's nothing either novel or disturbing in this. Astronomy is largely an exploratory science, heavily dominated by observation. Astronomers have mapped out the cosmos by using their telescopes first and their imaginations second. And since the really exciting discoveries are perforce made at the hairy frontier of telescope performance, mistakes happen.

The discovery of extrasolar planets -- one of the hardest things to do in astronomy -- has been especially replete with false alarms.

You probably don't remember (unless you're a connoisseur of arcane astronomy), but in the 1960s, Peter van de Kamp, using a telescope at the Sproul Observatory in Philadelphia, claimed to have uncovered two giant planets around Barnard's Star, a mere six light-years' away. That was a major, major first. Van de Kamp examined stellar photos made over the course of months and years, and detected slight changes in this star's position. He saw side-to-side wobbles, which he understandably ascribed to orbiting planets.

Alas, the wobbling was actually due to tiny changes in the optics of his telescope, caused by routine maintenance of the lenses. An honest, if disheartening, error. Van de Kamp's planets were vaporware.

Then there was the case of British researchers Andrew Lyne and Matthew Bailes, who in 1991 reported seeing slight variations in the repetition rate of pulsar 1829-10 which they said were caused by planet-induced wobbles. Again, this would be dramatic, as Lyne and Bailes would be the first to discover planets around someone else's star (admittedly, in the case of a pulsar, a dead star). But the scientists had incorrectly compensated for Earth's own motions, and stoically retracted their claim only months later.

The take-home lesson is clear: If you're hunting for planets, you'd best be prepared to occasionally shoot and miss. As any researcher knows, science is not a ratchet, a mechanism that relentlessly increases our knowledge. It's a deep and wide migration towards the truth, beset by wrong turns and cul-de-sacs. But that's OK, because mistakes are not an indictment of science, but an essential part of the process. Bummer.

Of course it's discouraging that Gliese 581g has seemingly evaporated. But there's also some good news for those eager to find worlds that could be cousins of Earth. Andrew Howard and his team at the University of California at Berkeley have just announced an analysis of a large data set taken with the mammoth Keck Telescope in Hawaii, and concluded that nearly one in four Sun-sized stars probably hosts terrestrial-size planets. If so, there are tens of billions of Earth analogs in the Milky Way. And that's just our galaxy.

So we may have lost one, but gained billions. Not a bad scorecard for the week.

 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 13
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
TaiJi2
11:55 AM on 11/03/2010
Planet? What Planet? Nothing to see here; move along. (Pssst! How's that ship coming?)
11:02 PM on 11/01/2010
An eerie and symbolic title / headline to be published here on Election Eve 2010.

Farewell to another lovely planet. Fascist juggernaut, here we come.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
myth buster
10:35 PM on 11/01/2010
I told you nothing can live around a red dwarf star.
10:32 PM on 11/01/2010
this is a great synopsis of how the scientific method works. 1,000 papers supporting a theory can all be trashed by 1 showing its flaws. it's the way science has always worked and the way it always will. moving forward on the shoulders of giants who came before us. nice article.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
R.W. Sanders
Numerous questions, too little expertise
10:07 PM on 11/01/2010
Seth, you seem to have cited one positive finding and one negative. Then you automatically assumed the negative finding was the correct one. I wish you could have backed up your assumption in some way.
Also, what about this new telescope that scientists are using to pier back in time to the oldest galaxies in existence? Can that be used for planet hunting? As you can see, I am a novice in astronomy, but I do know a little bit about writing.
11:59 PM on 11/01/2010
You may know less than you think, as witness your confusion of 'pier' (noun) and 'peer' (verb).
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
R.W. Sanders
Numerous questions, too little expertise
01:32 AM on 11/03/2010
First typo I have ever made. How about you? Don't know why you would assume ignorance rather than a simple mistake made in a hurry. No one is less welcome on blog than a grammar teacher. I said I knew a little bit about writing, not spelling. Though we could have a contest if that is what you are all about. Go back to your gorse and contemplate humility.
HUFFPOST COMMUNITY MODERATOR
Parvaneh Ferhad
04:10 AM on 11/02/2010
Here's a bit more background information.
http://www.astrobio.net/exclusive/3647/doubt-cast-on-existence-of-habitable-alien-world
I think the core of the problem is this (taken from the linked article):
"“The reason for that is that, despite the extreme accuracy of the instrument and the many data points, the signal amplitude of this potential fifth planet is very low and basically at the level of the measurement noise,” said Pepe."
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
R.W. Sanders
Numerous questions, too little expertise
01:44 AM on 11/03/2010
Mr.Ferhad. Thanks for the extra data. The article said much of what I said, and according to the linked piece, they agreed. I only stated that Seth jumped to the negative conclusion even in his title. Goodbye planet. This article said it cannot be confirmed. Not that it was not there. Therefore, Seth jumped the gun. At least, that is what I meant. I just didn't understand his quick acceptance of proof for his opinion. So nice to communicate with someone who is interested in real dialect rather than nitpicking. This planet, if there, would open intriguing vistas of study. I guess it is just a gliese half full or half empty.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
muck-raker
give me liberty or give me death
09:26 PM on 11/01/2010
I wonder if they have OIL there? I know the US Govt. has a few thousand drones that are not doing anything at the moment. And when the dust settles we could send Halliburton up there to see how much money we can all make.
08:35 PM on 11/01/2010
I was so looking forward to humans going there and setting a mass extinction into motion. Oh well, one world at a time.
07:59 PM on 11/01/2010
It's fascinating to watch the scientific world of publish and peers shootdown in action in our modern world. Hopefully it will lead toa greater understanding of the scientific process and the rigors to which scientific claims are subjected in order to become believed science.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Changeizgood
06:27 PM on 11/01/2010
Federal Galactic Force.

Don't believe the hype Seth, check this out.

Happened on March 22nd 2010. The press isn't doing their job or pressing on it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9fu-eo2TZT4&feature=related.

Thank God it's happening now.

NO TIME FOR HATE.
Al Gore was right.