Talk:70 Virginis

Found this on the main page here:

Nice artist's conception [here|http://business.fortunecity.com/soros/98/70vir.html]

Unfortunately, all of the "Goldilocks" reports are based on

old data... If you read the 1996 paper by Geoff Marcy you

will find him using a parallax of ".112 (29 light years) &

a spectral type of G4V. This is where the often quoted

surface temperature of 80 degrees Celsius is derived. However,

that star is now known to be much farther away, & a subgiant.

[Hipparchos|http://astro.estec.esa.nl/Hipparcos/HIPcatalogueSearch.html] gives its

parallax as ".05522 (59 light years), which makes the

new planet far too hot to ever have liquid water, unless under

an atmosphere near the critical point of water.

Too bad for science fiction!

This isn't an encyclopedia article...I'm not sure what it is. Will we even want an article titled "70 Virginis"? --LMS

Yes, we probably will. It's an important player in the recent field of extrasolar planetary astronomy, which is what the entry above is actually kind of about. Tho' I agree it couldn't be phrased any worse this side of being done in mime. -- Paul Drye

Argh--wiki snobs!. Look, this information needs to be placed

somewhere, because there are now hundreds of wrong pages that

disregard it. I don't care if you want to rephrase it in fucking

Lojban, just don't remove something that is needed out of personal

prejudices of style! --graywyvern

Merry Christmas to you too. --Paul Drye

I removed it because it doesn't make sense to anyone who doesn't already know a fair bit about the subject (apparently). Why should Wikipedia tolerate nonsense? If you would like to rewrite it in a coherent paragraph or several, beginning with an explanation of what "70 Virginis" is, that would be grand. --LMS