Ok … this is pretty cool. But …

[BeAChooser]

https://www.sciencealert.com/incredible ... years-away

Incredible Footage Shows Planets Circling a Star Light-Years Away

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x9EG3gbQ5P0&t=1s

The star is HR 8799 and it’s 133 light years away. The planets are gas giants, bigger than Jupiter. The closest one take 45 years to complete an orbit.

Now how this is useful to know is your guess. Even the astronomer who has been taking the images from which the video was made is quoted saying “There’s nothing to be gained scientifically from watching the orbiting systems in a time lapse video, but it helps other appreciate what were studying.”

In other words, it’s a sell job, like much of what we hear from astrophysicists and the mainstream media these days. We're being manipulated.

[nick c]

In other words, it’s a sell job, like much of what we hear from astrophysicists and the mainstream media these days. We're being manipulated.

Is it your position that the linked video, which is a portrayal of another solar system, is not a real representation? If so what are your reasons for that?
It seems to me that these researchers have managed to portray a star with the orbits of 3 of its planets (there are probably other planets that are undetectable given the present technology). Why is that a bad thing?

[BeAChooser]

Is it your position that the linked video, which is a portrayal of another solar system, is not a real representation?

Not at all. I didn't say anything to suggest that, nick. In fact, I indicated the video was made from IMAGES recorded over a period of time. I simply asked what value spending taxpayer money to produce the video has ... and quoted the astronomer who created it admitting that it has no scientific value. So are we paying him to entertain us? Or was it ... like he also admitted ... created to sell the idea of astrophysicists spending our money on his work ... which ... frankly ... isn't any more likely to impact our lives in any significant way than ... well ... dark matter.

[Cargo]

I think things like this, looking at least at as much as we can see, are important. Views like this remind me of our attempts at making a video of what an atom looks like. We're getting there.

Beyond that, everything else about what we are looking at is a complete mystery until we send a probe.

[BeAChooser]

I think things like this, looking at least at as much as we can see, are important.

Why? We already know that planets circle other stars. We don't have to see it to know it is happening. We can watch the planets in the solar system do that. We're not going to learn anything more in terms of physics about why and how the planets circle our sun by viewing them doing so around distant stars. So why is this important enough to forcibly extract money from taxpayers and turn it over to the priests of astrophysics, Cargo?

Views like this remind me of our attempts at making a video of what an atom looks like.

Discovering how atoms work has a direct impact on our lives. It will allow engineers to make better products and new ones never seen before, for example. But astronomical observations like this won't do that. it will have little to no impact on anyone's live for the foreseeable future.

Beyond that, everything else about what we are looking at is a complete mystery until we send a probe.

And what's the point of that, other than it putting more billions in the pockets of the astrophysics community and those who depend on it for their livelihood? Mind you, I have no objection if some billionaire or group of billionaires want to use his/her/their money for that purpose, but what right do they have to take money from me and countless other much less wealthy taxpayers and put it in the pockets of the astrophysics community? What service do they perform? What product do they create? How will seeing these videos improve the living standard of the world?

[Cargo]

I certainly can not argue against your point. I just think of it a little differently, ignore the overall budget policy for DM searches. If we have scopes doing nothing beyond their function to stare into space and gather light from a nearby System, I'm just glad we finally have some pictures of another Solar System that's not a Time Life Artists Conception. This is a semi-historic thing right, seeing planets in another solar system, for the first time. Other then actually going there.

[BeAChooser]

Yeah, like I said ... this is pretty cool.

[Brigit]

BeAChooser says »
Tue Jan 31, 2023 "The star is HR 8799 and it’s 133 light years away. The planets are gas giants, bigger than Jupiter. The closest one take 45 years to complete an orbit.

Now how this is useful to know is your guess."

The first question is "What type of star is HR 8799?"

And what instruments and what wavelengths were used to observe it?

What is that global stellar emission, and what is triggering it?

Are these orbiting companions, or are they gas giants , or have there been corrections to the images, to obtain a modelled result of circular movement around the central star ? Or any other modifications that have been incorporated into the images ?

Are there faint indications of nested shells in the image ?

Do the planetary orbits have resonances ?

All sincere questions, btw. I miss Stephen Smith.

[Brigit]

Cargo says »
Jan 31, 2023 "If we have scopes doing nothing beyond their function to stare into space and gather light from a nearby System, I'm just glad we finally have some pictures of another Solar System that's not a Time Life Artist's Conception. This is a semi-historic thing right, seeing planets in another solar system, for the first time."

This is a great historic find, as Cargo has said -- HR 8799 is the first ever stellar system to be directly observed.

I know the Electric Universe has never gone out of its way to criticize the Kepler mission to find exoplanets. Perhaps once or twice they have pointed out that looking for planets using light curves from other stars may also simply be observing variations in light that are intrinsic to those stars.

There are some assumptions involved with all the searches for exoplanets. But this star, HR 8799, has gone down in history as the star with the first planets ever found by being directly observed in the sky. That is quite exciting.

Credit: Christian Marois announced the find on Nov 13, 2008, using Hawaii-based telescopes Keck and Gemini, in visible and infrared.

And because it has been directly tracked, there is an objective long-running observation of an exoplanetary system, in real life.

From an Electric Universe perspective, the question becomes, "How well will this system conform to the Nebular Hypothesis of star and planetary formation?"

[Brigit]

Brigit says »
Feb 03, 2023
"The first question is "What type of star is HR 8799?"
Well let me help you Paulina. "The star's spectral type is...written as kA5 hF0 mA5 V; λ Boo."

"And what instruments and what wavelengths were used to observe it?"

After it was discovered using the Keck and Gemini in 2008, some of Hubble's old images from 1998 were re-examined and earlier positions of the planets were affirmed.
In 2009 the Spitzer space telescope looked at it in IR and reported debris disks inside and outside the orbits of the planets.
In 2010 the Hale Telescope was used to show that the system could be observed using a much smaller visible light telescope.
The Palomar Observatory looked at it in 2012 and determined that the planets, all four, were of quite different compositions.
Chandra X-ray observations showed "weak magnetic activity" and also higher X-ray readings than an A-type star.
ALMA looked at HR 8799 in 2016 and 2018 and gave a much more detailed description of the inner dust belt and the outer debris belt.
And the JWST observed it as well.

"What is that global stellar emission, and what is triggering it?"
That variability of the star and the brightening of the surrounding materials is a mystery.

"Are these orbiting companions, or are they gas giants "
The objects orbiting this very young star are uncooperative in their enormous sizes, varied compositions, and seemingly stable orbits. JWST claimed to have ruled out that they are brown dwarfs but there is some question.

"or have there been corrections to the images, to obtain a modelled result of circular movement around the central star ? Or any other modifications that have been incorporated into the images ?"
These are directly observed in the visible frequencies. Sound as a pound!

"Are there faint indications of nested shells in the image ?"
SAFIRE might like to know that too.

"Do the planetary orbits have resonances ?"
That can be found on Wikipedia. It is not my thing, but some of the resonances are looking slightly questionable.

"All sincere questions, btw. I miss Stephen Smith."
I miss Wal Thornhill so much, who went to the next life right after this post, and I miss Stephen Smith. It's been a real journey and privilege learning from Dave and Stuart Talbott, R V D Sluijs, Mel Acheson, Don Scott, Cj Ransom, Michael Armstrong, and David Drew, along with so many others.