NASA’s Kepler Mission: Announces discovery of 715 new planets

Posted: February 27, 2014 by tallbloke in Astronomy, Astrophysics, Dataset, solar system dynamics

This’ll keep Oldbrew and me busy with the calculators  for a while. 🙂

multi_transits

The artist concept depicts multiple-transiting planet systems, which are stars with more than one planet. The planets eclipse or transit their host star from the vantage point of the observer. This angle is called edge-on.
Image Credit: NASA

NASA’s Kepler mission announced Wednesday the discovery of 715 new planets. These newly-verified worlds orbit 305 stars, revealing multiple-planet systems much like our own solar system.

Nearly 95 percent of these planets are smaller than Neptune, which is almost four times the size of Earth. This discovery marks a significant increase in the number of known small-sized planets more akin to Earth than previously identified exoplanets, which are planets outside our solar system.

The Kepler team continues to amaze and excite us with their planet hunting results. That these new planets and solar systems look somewhat like our own, portends a great future when we have the James Webb Space Telescope in space to characterize the new worlds.

said John Grunsfeld, associate administrator for NASA’s Science Mission Directorate in Washington.

Since the discovery of the first planets outside our solar system roughly two decades ago, verification has been a laborious planet-by-planet process. Now, scientists have a statistical technique that can be applied to many planets at once when they are found in systems that harbor more than one planet around the same star.

To verify this bounty of planets, a research team co-led by Jack Lissauer, planetary scientist at NASA’s Ames Research Center in Moffett Field, Calif., analyzed stars with more than one potential planet, all of which were detected in the first two years of Kepler’s observations — May 2009 to March 2011.

The research team used a technique called verification by multiplicity, which relies in part on the logic of probability. Kepler observes 150,000 stars, and has found a few thousand of those to have planet candidates. If the candidates were randomly distributed among Kepler’s stars, only a handful would have more than one planet candidate. However, Kepler observed hundreds of stars that have multiple planet candidates. Through a careful study of this sample, these 715 new planets were verified.

This method can be likened to the behavior we know of lions and lionesses. In our imaginary savannah, the lions are the Kepler stars and the lionesses are the planet candidates. The lionesses would sometimes be observed grouped together whereas lions tend to roam on their own. If you see two lions it could be a lion and a lioness or it could be two lions. But if more than two large felines are gathered, then it is very likely to be a lion and his pride. Thus, through multiplicity the lioness can be reliably identified in much the same way multiple planet candidates can be found around the same star.

“Four years ago, Kepler began a string of announcements of first hundreds, then thousands, of planet candidates –but they were only candidate worlds,” said Lissauer. “We’ve now developed a process to verify multiple planet candidates in bulk to deliver planets wholesale, and have used it to unveil a veritable bonanza of new worlds.”

These multiple-planet systems are fertile grounds for studying individual planets and the configuration of planetary neighborhoods. This provides clues to planet formation.

Four of these new planets are less than 2.5 times the size of Earth and orbit in their sun’s habitable zone, defined as the range of distance from a star where the surface temperature of an orbiting planet may be suitable for life-giving liquid water.

One of these new habitable zone planets, called Kepler-296f, orbits a star half the size and 5 percent as bright as our sun. Kepler-296f is twice the size of Earth, but scientists do not know whether the planet is a gaseous world, with a thick hydrogen-helium envelope, or it is a water world surrounded by a deep ocean.

“From this study we learn planets in these multi-systems are small and their orbits are flat and circular — resembling pancakes — not your classical view of an atom,” said Jason Rowe, research scientist at the SETI Institute in Mountain View, Calif., and co-leader of the research. “The more we explore the more we find familiar traces of ourselves amongst the stars that remind us of home.”

This latest discovery brings the confirmed count of planets outside our solar system to nearly 1,700. As we continue to reach toward the stars, each discovery brings us one step closer to a more accurate understanding of our place in the galaxy.

Launched in March 2009, Kepler is the first NASA mission to find potentially habitable Earth-size planets. Discoveries include more than 3,600 planet candidates, of which 961 have been verified as bona-fide worlds.

The findings papers will be published March 10 in The Astrophysical Journal and are available for download at:

http://www.nasa.gov/ames/kepler/digital-press-kit-kepler-planet-bonanza

Ames is responsible for the Kepler mission concept, ground system development, mission operations and science data analysis. NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, Calif., managed Kepler mission development. Ball Aerospace & Technologies Corp. in Boulder, Colo., developed the Kepler flight system and supports mission operations with the Laboratory for Atmospheric and Space Physics at the University of Colorado in Boulder. The Space Telescope Science Institute in Baltimore archives, hosts and distributes Kepler science data. Kepler is NASA’s 10th Discovery Mission and was funded by the agency’s Science Mission Directorate.

For more information about the Kepler space telescope, visit:

http://www.nasa.gov/kepler

Michele Johnson
Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, Calif.
650-604-6982
michele.johnson@nasa.gov

J.D. Harrington
Headquarters, Washington
202-358-5241
j.d.harrington@nasa.gov

Comments
  1. tallbloke says:

    715 planets orbiting 305 stars. Not toooo many 3 or more body systems then…

  2. ed2ferreira says:

    For sure, there are more artists working for NASA than scientists and engineers. Dark matter and energy: artist concept. Black holes, new planets, Betelgeuse, Pluto, big bang, etc etc: artist’s concept!

  3. Gerry says:

    For stars as big as our dwarf-star sun, Kepler is only able to detect planets larger than Earth, so the systems in which transits of three giant planets have been detected are likely to have five or more smaller planets that Kepler is unable to detect. Also, I find the characterization of all these exoplanet orbits as “circular” amusing. That is tantamount to saying all the planetary orbits in our solar system are circular, rather than near-circular ellipses. Ironically, it was of course Johannes Kepler who discovered that planetary orbits are elliptical. It was only because of the ability of Kepler’s mentor, Tycho Brahe, to precisely enough measure the non-circularity of the orbit of Mars that Kepler was able to determine that Mars’s orbit is actually an ellipse. The NASA Kepler satellite is not able to determine the eccentricity of exoplanet orbits with that degree of precision, hence the announcement that all these planets have “circular” orbits (my quotation marks, not NASA’s).

    -Gerry Pease

  4. tallbloke says:

    Thanks Gerry.
    We’ve found a couple of systems with Laplace type resonance between 3 bodies. The middle Galilean Moon has higher eccentricity, because it is in 2:1 resonance with both neighbours.

  5. alexjc38 says:

    I think it’s very good news – once we start to launch generation starships, we’ll be spoilt for choice!

  6. Ray Tomes says:

    Some clarification. It says “Nearly 95 percent of these planets are smaller than Neptune, which is almost four times the size of Earth”. That 4 times is true of its diameter, but the diameters of these objects is not measured. Rather the mass of bodies is measured and Neptune is 17 times Earth.

  7. Gerry says:

    Ray,

    You are correct that the exoplanet masses are far more accurately determined (from the period between transits and the estimated mass of the star) than are the exoplanet diameters. A very rough estimate of the exoplanet diameters is obtained from an arcane procedure described in http://kepler.nasa.gov/science/ForScientists/papersAndDocumentation/SOCpapers/dv-fitter-copyright.pdf :

    “The ratio of the planet radius to the star radius is given by the product of the square root of the transit depth and a correction for limb-darkening, and therefore the planet radius can in principle be deduced from the transit depth, limb darkening parameters, and the star radius. Unfortunately the transit depth is not returned as part of the TCE, but the single event statistic can be converted to an estimate of the transit depth:
    D ~= SES · sigma1 · SQRT(Nmeas), (2)
    where sigma1 is the typical relative noise in a single 30 minute measurement of the flux of the target star (typically in PPM) and Nmeas is the number of 30-minute measurements in the transit duration used in the search (i.e., Nmeas = 12 for a 6 hour transit duration).

    The depth estimate which is thus obtained from the SES is only approximately correct, but it is sufficiently accurate to use as the starting point for the fit. A minor improvement in accuracy is obtained by requiring the depth to be the minimum of D, as estimated above, and the full range of variation of the flux time series.”

  8. w.w.wygart says:

    TB,

    I’m not sure I’m understanding your description of ” verification by multiplicity,” method, a problem which probably originates at my end of the transmission.

    My understanding of your ‘savanna’ analogy:

    On the savanna we can see the lions easily, they are usually large, brightly colored, and sit on tall rocks. Lionesses are always found in the companionship of Lions, never alone, but are very hard to see. Some Lions *may* be solitary or have only one or two mates in his pride, but we suspect that there may be many more lionesses around than we are able to observe, especially in the case of the more distant Lions and smaller lionesses. We have reason to believe that there may also be lion cubs hanging around the lionesses [orbiting in Laplace ratios!], but we are so far completely unable to see them because they are very small and well camouflaged.

    So the question is, is there a probabilistic approach to confirm if a Lion has hidden mates if it takes a great deal of tedious observation to spot the hidden Lionesses in the grass?

    My first problem has to do with not understanding how the Kepler people determine if a solar system is an exo-planet “candidate” or not. Is it that Kepler has observed a couple of possible occultations, but haven’t yet gathered enough data to calculate an orbit? If so, then how do you “confirm” the existence of something that you haven’t actually observed – except as a statement of probability?

    Any further help for the slow witted here?

    W^3

  9. Chaeremon says:

    @w.w.wygart: the observation method is practiced and refined on Tenerife Island [nature.com, paywalled], the role model is lunar eclipses.
    A free accessible paper on in-transit aspects is here.

  10. tallbloke says:

    W^3: There likely are hidden planets. We can only use the data we have to check ratios of determined orbits. We have found that some ratios indicate extra bodies. So we can make predictions fir when better instruments recheck these systems later.

  11. tallbloke says:

    Ray T: Very good point, thanks.

  12. oldbrew says:

    The Kepler-20 system doesn’t have planets with circular orbits.

    http://exoplanet.eu/catalog/?f=%27Kepler-20%27+in+name

    The known eccentricities are 0.32, 0.4 and 0.6 (on a scale of 0 to 1 – column ‘e’).
    Maybe it’s an exception to the ‘rule’?

  13. Brian H says:

    Good stuff, indeed. But it would be better to say “715 More Planets” than “715 New Planets”! They clearly didn’t just lately spring into existence.