Zeta Retciculi - Photo and Discussion

reply to post by JadeStar

Thanks for this interesting post. With regard to Ufonauts being from Z. Ret... How could we know for sure? If the aliens said they are from there why would we believe them? They told one person they are from "a small galaxy near Neptune". You don't have to be an astronomer to see the absurdity in that!

It might be that they stopped off at Z. Ret. and have a base there. I find it hard to believe that the next inhabited planet would be just down the road from us in astronomical terms. I certainly don't believe it 'cos the aliens said so...

mirageman
reply to post by JadeStar

 

Fascinating, fascinating stuff JS. If only all posts on ATS were as well written and well presented as this. Duly awarded a S&F.

You did a great job of presenting the facts to the likes of me.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ---

Can I ask a question about the apparent lack of 'gas giants' in the ZT system?

Would this not make any earth like planets more susceptible to comet and asteroid impacts with no larger planets mopping up?

Thanks again for a wonderful thread MM

edit on 6/3/14 by mirageman because: (no reason given)

Thank you so much for the kind words.

Your question is an excellent one.

Here's the short answer: Yes. If there were no large gas giants then it is likely such planets would have more impacts than the Earth.

Now for the better answer:

We do not know if either star lacks Gas Giants. We just know that they lack ones which orbit close in. Our observations have constrained the range of orbits they could be in.

You see, the lack of detecting a Gas Giant around either star of Zeta Reticuli may be because Gas Giants around Zeta Ret have similar orbits to the ones in our own solar system.

Most Gas Giants were detected in close in orbits which would place them in our inner solar system. This is due to bias in the experiment. Radial Velocity searches for Gas Giants are more sensitive to massive ones with shorter orbits.

Jupiter on the other hand has a 12 year orbit around our Sun.

In order to detect Jupiter through a radial velocity search, alien astronomers would need to study our sun for at least 12 years and to be sure it was really a planet causing the tug, more like 24 years.

We have only been doing sensitive Radial Velocity searches of since the mid 1990s.

stormbringer1701

Ross 54

stormbringer1701

Ross 54
I now see that the triple alpha process involving helium and beryllium is not applicable to stars like Zeta 1 and Zeta 2 Reticuli, still on the main sequence. The deficiency of beryllium appears to have nothing to do with any supposed astro-engineering on those stars.

I do still maintain that the very gradual brightening of a main sequence star appears likely to make formerly habitable planets, unlivable, long before their star leaves the main sequence. Some technological means of rejuvenating a star, and preventing its further brightening beyond a certain point would seem to be very desirable, if it could me managed.
The contradictory age indicators in the stars Zeta 1 and Zeta 2 Reticuli seem to hint at such a rejuvenation. Indeed, given the expected evolutionary track of a G type star, it seems essential in such stars with a reputed age of 8 billion years, if they have inhabited planets that are to remain inhabited.

edit on 5-3-2014 by Ross 54 because: edited for clarity

well on the bright side even some of us primitive earthlings are thinking about how stellar scale engineering could work. like lots and lots and lots (etc) of micro scale wormholes could be used to diffuse stuff (like fresh hydrogen from molecular clouds) not only into stars but into the cores of tectonically and magnetically dead worlds. you could use them to diffuse thorium and uranium in a safe way into the core and mantle to melt the mantle and get a dead world jump started.

It isn't essential at this point that we understand the details of the process of stellar rejuvenation. Looking for the possible results of it in certain stars is quite challenging it itself, and perhaps quite illuminating.
We have good support for the advanced age of the Zeta Reticuli stars. Besides their association with a moving group of 8 billion year old stars, we have their slow rotation. Stars slow their rotation as they age, due to tidal and magnetic braking. The average rotation speed of G class stars is ~ 12 kilometers per second. That of the Sun, a little over 7. Those of the ZR twin stars are under 2 km/sec. They're pretty obviously quite old, and really slowing down.
We also have their youthful traits, which I mentioned above, to deal with. We will have to attend to all the data, contradictory though it is, in order to resolve this paradox.
I couldn't find another good explanation for the solid, yet contradictory age indications, hence my 'thinking outside the box' suggestion about astroengineering. It doesn't seem too unreasonable to suppose that a couple of sun-like stars that are probably three billion years older than our own could play host to a remarkably advanced and powerful civilization.
We already engineer the flow of some of our largest rivers to suit our ends. Given millions of years to learn how, why shouldn't it be possible to control a star?

edit on 6-3-2014 by Ross 54 because: Added information

very. i mean we haven't thought of everything even in the realm of wild speculation and fantasy. you could even have tech to make artificial stars out of jupiter class and higher planets by putting ultra-dense quasi matter into it to increase gravity, pressure and temperature or at least a equatorial band of fusion around them. you could posit worm hole diffusion techniques a sufficiently advanced civilization might be able to do something very like "Fiat Lux!" pulling virtual stuff into reality from the vacuum. or moving stars and planets about at will. or cannibalizing stars of unburnt hydrogen.

for a few illustrations of some of these wild fantastical ideas look at www.orionsarm.com...

Thanks for sharing the Orion's Arm site. Interesting ideas about making Jovian planets into short-term stars. As I recall, something like this was done to Jupiter in one of the sequels to '2001 A Space Odyssey'.
I see that the idea of prolonging the life of an existing star is called 'stellar husbandry' there. Mixing of outer stellar layers back into core is referred to without going into detail, apparently.

reply to post by Ross 54


the thing about the orion's arm site is with some exceptions all of the science they use tends to be taken from various peer reviewed papers or at least speculation based on such papers. in particular thier monopole stuff is well cited. there are about 6 links to papers or books that they use as justification for that branch of technology in their shared world. thier wormholes and stuff like that are set up so as to not violate physics or do things like create closed time-like loops and other physics "no-nos."

i actually learned a lot about possibilities on the extreme ends of science and the restrictions and physics involved from link surfing that site.

Project rho is a good one for that too. And I think JadeStar likes Centauri Dreams. it's not a fiction oriented site though. more of a central repository of gathered advanced space related articles, blogs and discussions.

The website of the Armagh planetarium, associated with the Armagh Observatory is confident enough to feature the observation that new data puts the age of the ZR stars at 1.5 to 3 billion years. This same data is presumably the basis of the same age, as given at the Wikipedia site.
It seems worth noting that it is consistently internally derived features of the ZR stars, such as lower than expected luminosity, or chromospheric activity that prompt these low age figures.
Ages derived from the motions of the stars just as consistently give ages in the range of 6 to 8 billion years. There are at least three independent lines of evidence of this latter sort: 1.) Membership in the Zeta Herculis moving group of stars, which have an average age in the range of 6 to 8 billion years. 2.) Conspicuously slow stelar rotation, suggesting a very long period of slowing. 3.) Scientist Jeffery Kretsch points out the high velocity of the ZR stars, with respect to the galactic plane, accompanied by a high degree of eccentricity of their orbits around the center of the galaxy. This confers 'Disk Population II' status on them, again supplying an age of 6 to 8 billion years.

Why should motional factors consistently point to a much older age than ones derived from stellar physics? It seems that something has interfered, either with various independent motions of the ZR stars as diverse as their rotations and course through the galaxy, or with their internal physical processes.
www.armaghplanet.com...
www.nicap.org...

Ross 54
The website of the Armagh planetarium, associated with the Armagh Observatory is confident enough to feature the observation that new data puts the age of the ZR stars at 1.5 to 3 billion years. This same data is presumably the basis of the same age, as given at the Wikipedia site.
It seems worth noting that it is consistently internally derived features of the ZR stars, such as lower than expected luminosity, or chromospheric activity that prompt these low age figures.
Ages derived from the motions of the stars just as consistently give ages in the range of 6 to 8 billion years. There are at least three independent lines of evidence of this latter sort: 1.) Membership in the Zeta Herculis moving group of stars, which have an average age in the range of 6 to 8 billion years. 2.) Conspicuously slow stelar rotation, suggesting a very long period of slowing. 3.) Scientist Jeffery Kretsch points out the high velocity of the ZR stars, with respect to the galactic plane, accompanied by a high degree of eccentricity of their orbits around the center of the galaxy. This confers 'Disk Population II' status on them, again supplying an age of 6 to 8 billion years.

Why should motional factors consistently point to a much older age than ones derived from stellar physics? It seems that something has interfered, either with various independent motions of the ZR stars as diverse as their rotations and course through the galaxy, or with their internal physical processes.
www.armaghplanet.com...
www.nicap.org...

edit on 8-3-2014 by Ross 54 because: added link

edit on 8-3-2014 by Ross 54 because: added link

thats very interesting and well thought out. So i think the only rational natural explanation i could see that might prematurely slow down a star's spin would be some sort of near pass by a stellar or greater mass object. i am not an astronomer. and we should ask one for other ideas. stellar husbandry is a neat idea. it's barely possible. but it is an extraordinary explanation. before going to those one should eliminate any available less extraordinary hypothesis. mind you a hidden stellar companion or a black hole is almost as extraordinary as intelligent intervention. maybe there are less extraordinary explanations available. I cannot think of any. but maybe there are. over millions of years a planet moves in an orbit around the galactic core. in billions of years even galaxies may pass through each other.

If it's the motions of the stars that have been affected, rather than their internal processes, the spin, relative galactic velocity and orbital eccentricity would all have to be involved. Each would have to be affected in a particular way, so as to present a consistent picture of old, Disk Population II stars. Possible, of course, but a number of coincidences would seem to be involved. I'm always suspicious of an explanation requiring too many of these.
I suspect that a natural explanation bearing on the internal processes of the stars would be likelier than the above. So far, nobody has suggested one. I have done a good deal of background reading on the ZR stars. So far, I have encountered no proposed natural process accounting for the data. Given the usual tendency to provide at least tentative natural explanations for something that seems mysterious, this is surprising.
I'm not certain how 'extraordinary' an explanation involving astro-engineering really is. It's an old galaxy with lots of time for civilizations to have arisen and matured to the point of doing things that, to us, would be impossible. It might be more extraordinary if we didn't eventually recognize or encounter something of this sort, than if we did.

We see that a star, even while still on the main sequence, will very slowly brighten over time, eventually doubling its luminosity. This is caused by depletion of the hydrogen needed for fusion in the core of the star.
A responsive increase in pressure due to the bulk of the star pressing down on the core causes pressure and temperature to rise there, enabling a more energetic fusion process. After a million years or so this radiation reaches the surface of the star, causing it to brighten.

Technological mixing of the ample supplies of hydrogen, still available in the outer layers of the star, back into the core, will make them available for fusion, reducing the luminosity, or preventing the star from becoming more luminous, if done proactively.

Zeta 1 Reticuli is 99 % as hot as the Sun and 96 % as massive, yet is only 69 percent as luminous. Zeta 2 Reticuli is 101 % as hot as the Sun and 99 % as massive, yet is only 82 % as luminous. These two stars seem to lead subdued lives, indeed!

Is the zeta star system in the Orion constellation?

No, these Zeta 1 and Zeta 2 stars are in the Southern sky constellation of Reticulum, the net. Hence the names Zeta 1, and Zeta 2 Reticulum . They should be the sixth brightest stars in this constellation, as Zeta is the sixth letter of the Greek alphabet.

Unfortunately for anyone living in the Northern parts of the Northern hemisphere, these stars are too fat South to ever be visible. Even for those who are in a position to view them, they are very dim-- 5th magnitude, which is nearly as faint as a star can be and still be visible under typical circumstances.

The debris disk now known to surround Zeta 2 Reticuli indicates the possible presence of one or more planets in this system. The disk is asymmetrical or lopsided. A planet is one way for this lopsidedness to be maintained over time. This could also happen if the star is interacting with the interstellar medium in a particular way. A good hint that this was happening would apparently be if the proper motion of the star aligned itself with the long axis of the disk.
The proper motion of Zeta 2 Reticuli is quite rapid, and is oriented about 64 degrees from North. The long axis of the debris disk is apparently roughly East - West or about 90 degrees from North. This seems to tentatively weaken the hypothesis that the star's interaction with the interstellar medium is responsible for the lopsidedness of the disk. It also strengthens the possibility that there is a least one planet orbiting Zeta 2 Reticuli.
I have looked for more precise information about the orientation of the debris disk, to confirm that it is well away from the direction of proper motion of the star. So far this has not been found. A good infrared photograph of the ZR system might settle this point.

The paper, linked below, discusses the range of possibilities of planets in the ZR star system, based on the asymmetry of the debris disk. What I found especially interesting was a series of infrared images of this disk. These show the disk with an East-south-east by West-north-west elongation. This corresponds to about 113 degrees from North.
The minimum angle from the the direction of proper motion of the star appears , then, to be about 49 degrees. This seems sufficient to to rule out interaction with the interstellar medium as the cause of the disk asymmetry. One or more planets orbiting Zeta 2 Reticuli seems much more likely.
arxiv.org...

For comparison here is a Near-IR photo taken by the Hubble. It is inverted here:



And here was mine:



Clearly you can see the superior optics of the Hubble at work in the first one.

Ross 54
The paper, linked below, discusses the range of possibilities of planets in the ZR star system, based on the asymmetry of the debris disk. What I found especially interesting was a series of infrared images of this disk. These show the disk with an East-south-east by West-north-west elongation. This corresponds to about 113 degrees from North.
The minimum angle from the the direction of proper motion of the star appears , then, to be about 49 degrees. This seems sufficient to to rule out interaction with the interstellar medium as the cause of the disk asymmetry. One or more planets orbiting Zeta 2 Reticuli seems much more likely.
arxiv.org...

edit on 11-3-2014 by Ross 54 because: improved paragraph structure

Excellent find Ross!

I'll have to read this.

I still can't get over the fact that someone called LordNosferatu discovered a planet... Yeah, no i think i should just leave now before I lose it for good... I'm really losing it now...I'm doing the "yeah, no" thing. Before you know it I'll be doing the "No, yeah" thing, which is a little more rare, but, it happens.

By the way, I know You were the one who was there taking the photo and seeing with your own eyes and all, but I'd just like to take this opportunity to explain to you that I believe what you really took a photo of is not the zeta reticuli system, or any star system at all. No, I think that what is in that image is a UFO. An alien one with living occupants inside. Well, one of those lights is a UFO, the other is actually just a lensflare, in my opinion. Prove to me that they are really stars and not alien flown craft. Your photo is too blurry how can you say for sure what that is. I say flying saucer. With accompanying lens flare. And I'm still more reasonable than the average skeptic because I used "my opinion" where applicable.

But seriously, I can't believe you come to ATS with this remarkable story and bring such flimsy evidence!? Sheesh... prepare to get thrown into the Lions pit!

3n19m470
I still can't get over the fact that someone called LordNosferatu discovered a planet... Yeah, no i think i should just leave now before I lose it for good... I'm really losing it now...I'm doing the "yeah, no" thing. Before you know it I'll be doing the "No, yeah" thing, which is a little more rare, but, it happens.

Well someone called 3n19m470 might just find the next one

Have you signed up over at PlanetHunters.org yet?

By the way, I know You were the one who was there taking the photo and seeing with your own eyes and all, but I'd just like to take this opportunity to explain to you that I believe what you really took a photo of is not the zeta reticuli system, or any star system at all.

Really?

No, I think that what is in that image is a UFO. An alien one with living occupants inside. Well, one of those lights is a UFO, the other is actually just a lensflare, in my opinion. Prove to me that they are really stars and not alien flown craft. Your photo is too blurry how can you say for sure what that is. I say flying saucer. With accompanying lens flare. And I'm still more reasonable than the average skeptic because I used "my opinion" where applicable.

I see what you did there!

Luckily, unlike just about every UFO photos it would be very easy to answer a skeptic on this one since the same observation, and photograph of those two stars can be taken over and over again. Scientific instruments can measure it's light and further analysis can be done later.

One of the things I and some other people have been calling on UFOlogy to do is to set up monitoring stations in supposed UFO hotspots similar to Project Hessdalen.

Before anyone says, "yeah but the cost of that is enormous", I can tell you, from what I know about the large scale UFO/Para conferences, the profits from just one of them could fund the equipment necessary and the expertise at setting it all up is probably within MUFON.

Random reports of UFOs which will never be observed again with any scientific instruments provide for good stories but poor evidence.

Being able to automatically, detect, photograph, video, radar track and measure objects in real time for future analysis is so much better than a simple MUFON report for example.

But seriously, I can't believe you come to ATS with this remarkable story and bring such flimsy evidence!? Sheesh... prepare to get thrown into the Lions pit!

I -think- i can handle it.

The only lions an astronomer should have to be concerned about are Leo, and his cub, Leo Minor.

V. Faramaz, et al. seem certain that the asymmetry of the debris disk is due to dynamical factors. They don't even mention the ISM, I believe.

A planet with an eccentric orbit of 0.1 to 2 times Jupiter's mass at 150 to 250 AU and/or one of 0.1 to 1 times Jupiter's mass at 58 to 63 AU seem to fit with the structure of the debris disk. That it is created by the other half of the binary, Zeta 1 Reticuli, or by a brown dwarf seem to have been rendered improabable.

I see that these researchers take it as given that Zeta 1, and by extension Zeta 2 Reticuli are only 2 to 3 billion years old. Hmmm. . . There seems to be a tendency to accept these more recently derived figures, apparently based on stellar physics, and to discount the older work which includes greater ages, based on stellar motions.

A supposed planet of Zeta 2 Reticuli was detected by the European Southern Observatory, by the radial velocity method, some years ago. It was thought to be a 0.27 Jupiter mass planet, 0.14 AU from the star, with an orbital period of 18.9 days.

The announcement was apparently withdrawn within 48 hours. It's reported that regular pulsations of the star mislead the astronomers into thinking they'd found a new planet.
That may well be, but I find no other indications that even slight variability has been discerned in Zeta 2 Reticuli. I looked through a very long list of the types of variable stars. I found none that would apply to this star.

reply to post by JadeStar


Hehe yeah I was just messin around with ya a little there. On the serious side this is pretty dang cool and I'm happy you will get to become a "real" astronomer someday. I hope you'll still pop in here from time to time!

Ross 54

Thanks for sharing the Orion's Arm site. Interesting ideas about making Jovian planets into short-term stars. As I recall, something like this was done to Jupiter in one of the sequels to '2001 A Space Odyssey'.
I see that the idea of prolonging the life of an existing star is called 'stellar husbandry' there. Mixing of outer stellar layers back into core is referred to without going into detail, apparently.

Hey! look what i found!

this is about rejuvenating stars as you were talking about earlier. thought you might like it

phys.org...

Sound crazy? Interestingly, this already happens in our Universe. For red dwarf stars with less than 35% the mass of the sun, their convective zones connect directly to the core of the star. This is why these stars can last for hundreds of billions and even trillions of years. They will efficiently use up all the hydrogen in the entire star thanks to the mixing of the convective zone. If we could create a method to break through the radiative zone and get that fresh hydrogen into the core of the sun, we could keep basking in its golden tanning rays for well past its current expiration date.