Talk:2M1207b

Planet versus Moon

2M1207b is an interesting astronomical object that seems to test the definition of various classification schemes. If a brown dwarf is a star, then 2M1207b is a planet. If a brown dwarf is a planet, then 2M1207b would be a moon. 2M1207 does not orbit a larger object than itself, however.

I believe "brown drawfs" are neither a star or a planet, just as "dwarf planets" are not really a planet or an asteroid. The question then becomes: "Will astronomers adopt the approach that "brown dwarfs" can have planet(s) orbiting them?" Kheider 06:36, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This would of course, introduce the question as to what to call an object that could not produce any form of fusion at any time in its formation, of sub brown-dwarf mass, but independent and not orbiting another body, if such bodies exist and if they could be detected.

These are currently called "rogue planets". At least until we understand more about these systems and how they form. Kheider 06:36, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't seem obvious that brown dwarfs are necessarily universally called stars in all circumstances yet either. 66.248.122.173 01:24, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kind of reminds me of how once they realized that Pluto was smaller than predicted, Pluto was not called a planet by all. I see no problem with defining a middle group. But it will take understanding to accurately define such classification systems. Kheider 06:36, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Since the mass of 2M1207 is 25 M_J and 2M1207b is 3.3 M_J, these objects would be a star and planet respectively. BlueEarth 17:22, 30 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

True stars have a mass of at least 75 Jupiters and 2M1207 is no where near that. According to the discussion page at Brown Drawfs, Brown Dwarfs have not yet officially been declared as either. Kheider 16:40, 1 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Orbital period

The orbital period is a highly misleading quantity to put in the article. All we have is a projected separation, which is a minimum value of the true separation: basically we do not know the relative position in the radial direction: the companion could easily be several tens or hundreds of AU closer to or further away from us than the primary, and we would not know). Secondly we do not know the orbital eccentricity: it could be near periastron or apastron of a much wider/closer orbit. E.g. from this paper:

Depending on
projection effects, even the semi-major axis of 2M1207b might
be much larger than 46 AU.

All this means that the orbital period is an unknown quantity, presenting a value here overstates the current knowledge of the 2M1207 system. Icalanise (talk) 22:33, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on 2M1207b. 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).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:57, 22 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on 2M1207b. 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:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111109002803/http://exoplanet.eu/planet.php?p1=2M1207&p2=b to http://exoplanet.eu/planet.php?p1=2M1207&p2=b

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).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:14, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]