Timeline for Creating a realistic world(s) map - planetary systems
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
18 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 16, 2020 at 11:03 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
Commonmark migration
|
|
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:59 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://astronomy.stackexchange.com/ with https://astronomy.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:52 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/ with https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:50 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://earthscience.stackexchange.com/ with https://earthscience.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Apr 13, 2017 at 12:40 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://physics.stackexchange.com/ with https://physics.stackexchange.com/
|
|
| Mar 10, 2017 at 9:42 | history | edited | CommunityBot |
replaced http://upload.wikimedia.org/ with https://upload.wikimedia.org/
|
|
| Mar 1, 2017 at 14:49 | history | edited | HDE 226868♦ | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 46 characters in body
|
| Aug 16, 2015 at 12:04 | comment | added | user3652621 | Holy observation bias! Just because seeing giant planets in mercurial orbits around dwarf stars is easy, it does not mean it's the actual typical distribution of planets! | |
| Aug 8, 2015 at 5:06 | vote | accept | Samuel | ||
| Aug 6, 2015 at 1:09 | comment | added | Jim2B | One thing I would like to see is that Kepler and other planet search programs favors spotting large planets over small planets and short period planets over long period planets. Somewhere there should be a statistical treatment of this applied backwards to give us an idea of what the over all population of planets should look like based upon what we've seen so far. But I haven't seen any and I don't have the statistical background to do this for myself. :( | |
| Aug 5, 2015 at 17:39 | comment | added | HDE 226868♦ | @Jim2B Cool, thanks! Let me know how it goes. | |
| Aug 5, 2015 at 17:35 | comment | added | Jim2B | I had developed my own empirical suite of formula to calculate this stuff for me. But I wrote mine before Kepler started returning data. I'm going to use your answer to reprogram my own algorithms. I know this board frowns on "thanks" but "Thanks!" (also +1 for question and answer). | |
| Jul 28, 2015 at 22:41 | history | edited | HDE 226868♦ | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 110 characters in body
|
| Jul 28, 2015 at 22:30 | comment | added | HDE 226868♦ | @Samuel Thanks for #1, I didn't know that. #2 is very helpful. I understood #3, by the way, that didn't affect my answer. | |
| Jul 28, 2015 at 22:28 | comment | added | Samuel | Very nice work. I am impressed. Some notes: 1) From a desktop you can snip images from PDFs and upload them here. 2) The system doesn't need to have only one star, it just needs to be habitable. 3) The 'RxAxGx' notation was meant to demonstrate rocky planet(s), asteroid belt(s), and gas giant(s) not necessarily one of each. I'll make that more clear. | |
| Jul 28, 2015 at 22:08 | history | edited | HDE 226868♦ | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 1238 characters in body
|
| Jul 28, 2015 at 21:21 | history | edited | HDE 226868♦ | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
edited body
|
| Jul 28, 2015 at 21:16 | history | answered | HDE 226868♦ | CC BY-SA 3.0 |