Talk:Gliese 581d/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

New orbit estimates

The BBC reports that new estimates were announced at the 2009 JENAM conference. The orbit is now estimated to be 66.8 days. According to Stephane Udry, Geneva Observatory, it would be the first serious 'water world' candidate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jon kare (talk • contribs) 13:55, 21 April 2009 (UTC)

Temperature?

I noticed that the article states that the temperature of Gliese 581d is 3580*K, yet in the article, it states that liquid water probably exists on it's surface. Should the temperature say 358*K, and the '0' was a typo? 216.137.228.91 (talk) 01:32, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

3480K is the temp of the host star Gliese 581. -- Kheider (talk) 02:26, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

More unsourced facts

Under the "Messages from Earth" section, then entire first paragraph is not properly sourced. There is a link associated with it, but the link to a page which aggregates articles for Gliese 581 c, not d. Furthermore, this is merely a constantly-updating list of articles, not an article. Long story short, unless anybody can come up with some proper cites, this needs to go.11:24, 15 May 2010 (UTC)66.56.63.233 (talk)

Artist's conception image should be removed

The artist's conception image should be removed or at least taken out of the planet's infobox and placed as "decoration" in the text of the article. There's nothing encyclopedic (and a lot that's misleading or just fanciful) about this (and most "impression") images. — Aldaron • T/C 23:06, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

New temperature estimations

This paper has been released as a pre-print. It speculates that for most reasonable atmospheres the surface temperature will be above 0°C. It also gives the spectrographs expected, for other teams to look for. CS Miller (talk) 11:54, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

This paper has been picked up and reported on in the general press BBC News. Sawatts (talk) 13:16, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Comments

"The earliest possible arrival for a response, should there be one, would be in 2049." - so we got some time to improve our weapons. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 160.217.156.135 (talk) 13:21, 18 May 2011 (UTC)

Closest

The article says 'also the closest in proximity.' - given the discovery of a planet around Alpha Centauri B, this is no longer the case. I don't want to edit it though in case I've misinterpreted the sentence. Tom walker (talk) 21:29, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

Yeah. One thing Alpha Centauri Bb (and Epsilon Eridani b - everyone's forgotten that one) have in common with GJ 581 d: they're all probable planets. We should be limiting speculations here. So, I've killed that section except for the bare "similarity index". If planet d gets fully validated, something like that can be brought back. --Zimriel (talk) 20:28, 24 October 2012 (UTC)

Confirmation Process

The article mentions that it is the first confirmed exoplanet in the habitable zone. However the article only mentions its discovery by HARPS and not the process in which it was confirmed to be an exoplanet. For instance Gliese 581g article details quite extensively the process as it is in dispute. But this article does not. I'm interested in who confirmed it and how. And I don't mean the team that "confirmed" (media terminology) it to be "habitable". --EvenGreenerFish (talk) 01:12, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

This question has an answer - the planet "d" is NOT confirmed, or at least if it had been "confirmed" Roman Baluev has thrown it back between the 2nd and 3rd sigma's of doubt.--Zimriel (talk) 17:56, 12 October 2012 (UTC)
Oh yeah - the original topic is on the process. Hmm. Well, as it currently stands, Baluev is the last word. So, to confirm this planet, someone is going to have to refute Baluev's work specifically, in a peer-reviewed journal or at least an attempt at peer-review in the arXiv. (94.197.219.53, say, might be an astronomer or he might be the Pope himself; but his pronouncements are no use by themselves.) Once we get a reference for this, I'll be happy to consider this planet "confirmed" like b, c, and e. --Zimriel (talk) 15:37, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
Bayesian analysis gets 4 planets (b,c,d,e): [1] - also claims Baluev got a decreased significance for planet d because of inconsistencies in their periodogram analysis. 84.73.25.195 (talk) 21:05, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

Malware Link Removal

--Gary Dee 18:34, 21 July 2013 (UTC)

"Planet Dike"

I found this (Reverted) edit this morning, by one "Tcgriffin" -

The International Astronomical Union does not officially assign names to extrasolar planets, but W. Lyra of the Max Planck Institute for Astronomy has proposed the name Dike for Gliese 581 d based on the mythological associations of the constellation Libra.
ref:Lyra, W. (2009). "Naming the extrasolar planets". arXiv:0910.3989v3 [astro-ph.EP].

I agree that it is not appropriate to mention unofficial names especially not for possible phantoms. But I'll leave it here in the Talk page. --Zimriel (talk) 17:08, 15 October 2012 (UTC)

There's no end of unofficial planet naming schemes, and no end of planets. Such schemes are best discussed in the general article on planet naming, where it should be made clear that all (including the one cited) are simply made-up by individuals. You could even make up your own if you wanted. — Aldaron • T/C 21:49, 15 October 2012 (UTC)
I propose to call it Planet Aldaron. Especially if it Baluev has indeed exploded it --Zimriel (talk) 16:13, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Gliese 581d. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:58, 22 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Gliese 581d. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:22, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

External links modified (January 2018)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Gliese 581d. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:58, 25 January 2018 (UTC)

"Gliese 581 d"

The usage of Gliese 581 d is under discussion, see talk:Gliese 581 e -- 65.94.169.222 (talk) 07:21, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

Planet may indeed exist

According to this paper, the planet can really exist, and it is very likely to not be just a an artifact of stellar activity. Here's the link to the paper: http://www.sciencemag.org/content/347/6226/1080.2.abstract. --81.84.174.249 (talk) 17:07, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Gliese_581d/Archive_1&oldid=1213367214"