Difference between revisions of "Talk:1231: Habitable Zone"
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
| − | Since when do we have terrestrial telescopes that can directly resolve exoplanets? I think we're still at the stage where we get excited by troughs in light curves. [[Special:Contributions/220.224.246.97|220.224.246.97]] 09:14, 28 June 2013 (UTC) | + | Since when do we have terrestrial telescopes that can directly resolve exoplanets? I think we're still at the stage where we get excited by troughs in light curves EDIT: TIL that there are specific techniques for exactly that: {{w|Nulling interferometry}} and {{w|Vortex coronagraphs}}. Still, they may work for hot Jupiters, but don't think we can detect Goldilocks exoplanets from the ground yet.[[Special:Contributions/220.224.246.97|220.224.246.97]] 09:14, 28 June 2013 (UTC) |
Revision as of 09:53, 28 June 2013
Even if you placed the mirror in Space, it would be incredibly obvious what is going on. I don't think this would work. 96.251.85.48 06:56, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
- For this trick to work, the mirror would need to be placed AT LEAST two light years away and be at least 1AU big. Somehow I don't think this is worth it. Alternatively, you need more complicated optical system which would not only mirror Earth, but also create illusion it's further away. I still think such system would be more costly to build that ISS. Or ... well ... you could put an LCD display directly over the telescope. That's doable, cheap and as a bonus you can display planets from sci-fi there. -- Hkmaly (talk) 08:44, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
Since when do we have terrestrial telescopes that can directly resolve exoplanets? I think we're still at the stage where we get excited by troughs in light curves EDIT: TIL that there are specific techniques for exactly that: Nulling interferometry and Vortex coronagraphs. Still, they may work for hot Jupiters, but don't think we can detect Goldilocks exoplanets from the ground yet.220.224.246.97 09:14, 28 June 2013 (UTC)
