This
level-5 vital article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
|
While the article is aimed at Extrasolar Moons, I think that the writer went a little off the target with this.
Hello, I just read this article and I attempted to insert some of the information about how to detect exomoons. I did not know how to insert a reference. Can someone do this?
http://www.centauri-dreams.org/?p=3856
72.141.173.208 ( talk) 20:11, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
Hello. I have added the reference as requested above.
I have expanded the section on detection methods to include a brief summary (one or two sentences) about each technique.
I have also added an image of an exomoon from Aurelia and Blue Moon article. This is the only image I could find of an exomoon within the Wikipedia Commons... 19:08, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
Two high profile sources cited in the Canup & Ward (2006) Nature article referenced in this article are below:
I think the concept of an earth sized moon existing within the habitable zone of a star is a very important one. It is clearly an established hypothesis. Certainly something that should be expanded. Polyamorph ( talk) 08:56, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
Is there any proposal for a system of naming exomoons? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.187.204.245 ( talk) 15:52, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
According to NASA, another possible exomoon has just been spotted. They're not sure yet (and not sure if or when they will be sure, as far as I can tell), so I'm not sure if this is worth adding or not. I'll just leave the link here: http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.php?release=2014-109 Xtifr tälk 01:10, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
Even if MOA-2011-BLG-262 is a planetary-mass object that doesn't necessarily mean its companion should be called a moon. Free floating planetary-mass objects can form from interstellar clouds just like stars and brown-dwarfs do. In which case they are sub-brown dwarfs. The satellites of sub-brown dwarfs could be considered planets just as the satellites of stars and brown dwarfs are planets. That MOA-2011-BLG-262 has a companion makes it unlikely to be a rogue planet that has been ejected from orbit around a star. Although The Survival Rate of Ejected Terrestrial Planets with Moons by J. H. Debes, S. Sigurdsson suggests it's not impossible for ejected planets to hold on to their moons, so the presence of a moon doesn't necessarily mean the main object is a sub-brown dwarf. Astredita ( talk) 14:20, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
Radio emission http://iopscience.iop.org/0004-637X/791/1/25 I tried to add this to the article, but I could not manage the programming. Sorry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.100.25.32 ( talk) 12:10, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Exomoon. 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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 05:30, 28 December 2016 (UTC)
Extrasolar planet are planets outside the Solar system, that is, planets that circle other stars than Sol.
This article, however, does not seem to be about ANY moon found outside the Solar system. Rather it seems to be about satellites of rogue planets, satellites of planet-sized objects that are not part of a Stellar system.
It is a bee in my bonnet. People sometimes refer to "other solar systems", when there is, and can be, only one Solar system.
The Solar system is the system of planets, comets, asteroids, etc, that orbit the Sun we call Sol. A system of planets, comets etc, that circle another star, would be a stellar system, not "another solar system".
This article was renamed from extrasolar moon in 2013. Yeah. I think it should never have had that name, maybe Extrastellar moon.
Note: This doesn't affect the exomoon article, but I'm using this talk page as a central place to propose two exomoon-related merges. The merge proposal can be moved elsewhere if necessary.
There are currently two articles on specific exomoon candidates, Kepler-1625b-i and Kepler-1708b-i. I would propose merging these into the articles on their planets, Kepler-1625b and Kepler-1708b - for one, these are candidate objects that are not confirmed, but also the existence of 1625b-i has been challenged, and this recent paper challenges both exomoons. Real or not, I don't think there's a need for articles on these exomoon candidates separate from those on their planets. SevenSpheres ( talk) 21:50, 7 January 2024 (UTC)
This
level-5 vital article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||
|
While the article is aimed at Extrasolar Moons, I think that the writer went a little off the target with this.
Hello, I just read this article and I attempted to insert some of the information about how to detect exomoons. I did not know how to insert a reference. Can someone do this?
http://www.centauri-dreams.org/?p=3856
72.141.173.208 ( talk) 20:11, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
Hello. I have added the reference as requested above.
I have expanded the section on detection methods to include a brief summary (one or two sentences) about each technique.
I have also added an image of an exomoon from Aurelia and Blue Moon article. This is the only image I could find of an exomoon within the Wikipedia Commons... 19:08, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
Two high profile sources cited in the Canup & Ward (2006) Nature article referenced in this article are below:
I think the concept of an earth sized moon existing within the habitable zone of a star is a very important one. It is clearly an established hypothesis. Certainly something that should be expanded. Polyamorph ( talk) 08:56, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
Is there any proposal for a system of naming exomoons? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.187.204.245 ( talk) 15:52, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
According to NASA, another possible exomoon has just been spotted. They're not sure yet (and not sure if or when they will be sure, as far as I can tell), so I'm not sure if this is worth adding or not. I'll just leave the link here: http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.php?release=2014-109 Xtifr tälk 01:10, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
Even if MOA-2011-BLG-262 is a planetary-mass object that doesn't necessarily mean its companion should be called a moon. Free floating planetary-mass objects can form from interstellar clouds just like stars and brown-dwarfs do. In which case they are sub-brown dwarfs. The satellites of sub-brown dwarfs could be considered planets just as the satellites of stars and brown dwarfs are planets. That MOA-2011-BLG-262 has a companion makes it unlikely to be a rogue planet that has been ejected from orbit around a star. Although The Survival Rate of Ejected Terrestrial Planets with Moons by J. H. Debes, S. Sigurdsson suggests it's not impossible for ejected planets to hold on to their moons, so the presence of a moon doesn't necessarily mean the main object is a sub-brown dwarf. Astredita ( talk) 14:20, 14 April 2014 (UTC)
Radio emission http://iopscience.iop.org/0004-637X/791/1/25 I tried to add this to the article, but I could not manage the programming. Sorry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.100.25.32 ( talk) 12:10, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Exomoon. 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: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 05:30, 28 December 2016 (UTC)
Extrasolar planet are planets outside the Solar system, that is, planets that circle other stars than Sol.
This article, however, does not seem to be about ANY moon found outside the Solar system. Rather it seems to be about satellites of rogue planets, satellites of planet-sized objects that are not part of a Stellar system.
It is a bee in my bonnet. People sometimes refer to "other solar systems", when there is, and can be, only one Solar system.
The Solar system is the system of planets, comets, asteroids, etc, that orbit the Sun we call Sol. A system of planets, comets etc, that circle another star, would be a stellar system, not "another solar system".
This article was renamed from extrasolar moon in 2013. Yeah. I think it should never have had that name, maybe Extrastellar moon.
Note: This doesn't affect the exomoon article, but I'm using this talk page as a central place to propose two exomoon-related merges. The merge proposal can be moved elsewhere if necessary.
There are currently two articles on specific exomoon candidates, Kepler-1625b-i and Kepler-1708b-i. I would propose merging these into the articles on their planets, Kepler-1625b and Kepler-1708b - for one, these are candidate objects that are not confirmed, but also the existence of 1625b-i has been challenged, and this recent paper challenges both exomoons. Real or not, I don't think there's a need for articles on these exomoon candidates separate from those on their planets. SevenSpheres ( talk) 21:50, 7 January 2024 (UTC)