Talk:Kepler space telescope: Difference between revisions
Line 45: | Line 45: | ||
Is there something that could or should still be added into the article? Or is there anything else that could be improved? The launch is getting near and the article will soon get a billion hits, so it would be nice make all possible improvements before that. [[User:Offliner|Offliner]] ([[User talk:Offliner|talk]]) 21:29, 28 February 2009 (UTC) |
Is there something that could or should still be added into the article? Or is there anything else that could be improved? The launch is getting near and the article will soon get a billion hits, so it would be nice make all possible improvements before that. [[User:Offliner|Offliner]] ([[User talk:Offliner|talk]]) 21:29, 28 February 2009 (UTC) |
||
:I've added a field of view picture, feel free to move if needed. [[User:Noonehasthisnameithink|Noonehasthisnameithink]] ([[User talk:Noonehasthisnameithink|talk]]) 23:29, 28 February 2009 (UTC) |
:I've added a field of view picture, feel free to move if needed. [[User:Noonehasthisnameithink|Noonehasthisnameithink]] ([[User talk:Noonehasthisnameithink|talk]]) 23:29, 28 February 2009 (UTC) |
||
:I think that the structure of the article could be improved. The "Objectives"-section includes much information that doesn't have anything to do with the missions objectives. Also, the "Kepler mission in a nutshell"-section should be rewritten, and maybe have a different headline. Just my two cents. 19:50, 5 March 2009 (UTC) |
Revision as of 19:50, 5 March 2009
Astronomy B‑class High‑importance | ||||||||||
|
I got information that it will be delayed here.
http://www.spaceflightnow.com/news/n0602/06nasabudget/
Kepler name change
First of all, thanks to all those who created and contributed to this page.
I would like all those concerned to consider changing of the name (moving) this page. Speaking for the Kepler project, the official project name is the Kepler Mission. The project does use either the name Kepler Space Observatory or Kepler Space Telescope.
Let me explain. The term space observatory is often used to describe multiple user facilities. Kepler is not a facility, but rather a principal investigator led mission supported by a science team or science working group. Unlike a facility, which can and is used for many kinds of investigations, Kepler has a singular purpose, to detect Earth-size and smaller planets.
Likewise, it is not a space telescope. We have been very careful not to use this term, since it conjures up the image of the Hubble Space Telescope, both in cost and capability. The HST is an entirely separate class of instrument. Kepler cannot do any of the things HST is capable of doing. Rather Kepler does one very unique thing. Precision photometry. In addition, we never use the term telescope primarily because we don't want people and espically the media to think that we will be producing pictures or images of any planets we detect. Thus we have always and only referred to the instrument as the photometer or Kepler photometer.
Being a novice at Wikipedia, I would like to ask one of the Kepler authors/supporters out there to conduct a poll if appropriate and then do whatever it takes to rename (move) the page to Kepler Mission.
Thank you Dave Koch Kepler Mission, Deputy Principal Investiagtor
Finding planets and life
I think that Kepler should find hundreds of planets in a four year period. Kepler is probably the first technique to search for subterrestrial planets around normal stars. Kepler is more promising mission than Corot since it will find more, frequenter, and sooner planets. If Kepler finds the Earth-like planet, it will study the atmosphere and surface chemistry to look for presence of life; taking place for Terrestrial Planet Finder mission, which it was canceled due to budget cuts. BlueEarth 19:33, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
- Until we find alot more, We have alredy found an earth-size planet arround another star. Kepler may especially study the atmosphere of the planet too. – Fbs. 13 17:35, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
- No, Gliese 581c is NOT earth-sized (it is at least 50% larger, and probably much more). Read article that yourself linked. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.77.65.166 (talk) 22:14, 16 December 2008 (UTC)
Extrasolar moons
I think that Kepler should search for moons around extrasolar planets. For example, I hope that Kepler should find a Earth-like moon around HD 28185 b and look for presence of life on this moon. BlueEarth 19:33, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
- I agree that it's probably much more likely for life to be found on a gas giant moon, because these types planets seem to be (with our limited evidence) more common in habitable zones. But the current detection methods probably don't allow us to find these moons (yet?) because the parent planets are far smaller and far dimmer than stars. Wouter Lievens (talk) 11:20, 15 February 2008 (UTC)
- In theory, Kepler could spot a sufficiently large moon (if near Earth-sized gas giant moons exist) when it transits the star rather than when it transits the gas giant. In practice, I guess that data mining for the blip in the light curve would be considerably harder since the transits would not be separated by a uniform period, and for moon-planet distances of a few hundred thousand km there would be substantial overlap between the much stronger planet-sun transit and the moon-sun transit. Willhsmit (talk) 22:28, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
Kepler will stare at a single field (in Cygnus/Lyra). It will not observe HD 28185 b. Timb66 (talk) 12:45, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
Budget cut and fiscal problem
How and what is budget cut and fiscal problem for Kepler Mission? BlueEarth 02:37, 5 May 2007 (UTC)
What could be improved before launch?
Is there something that could or should still be added into the article? Or is there anything else that could be improved? The launch is getting near and the article will soon get a billion hits, so it would be nice make all possible improvements before that. Offliner (talk) 21:29, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
- I've added a field of view picture, feel free to move if needed. Noonehasthisnameithink (talk) 23:29, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
- I think that the structure of the article could be improved. The "Objectives"-section includes much information that doesn't have anything to do with the missions objectives. Also, the "Kepler mission in a nutshell"-section should be rewritten, and maybe have a different headline. Just my two cents. 19:50, 5 March 2009 (UTC)