The glow of distant worlds now in our field of vision
The Weekend Australian, 24th March 2005

I was really excited when I read this article. I think that it is great that we are now able to detect the planets directly rather than by observing the ‘wobbles’ their gravitational fields cause on the nearby sun. I suspect, however, that the emotive language used such as ‘awesome’, ‘ecstatic and really exciting’, enhances these feelings of excitement. The opening phrase ‘They’re hot, fast and far away’ is also very exciting sounding and is likely to draw the reader’s attention.

I thought that it was a very good article because it explains clearly what has been found. It explains where the planets were discovered (eg orbiting a star 489 light years away in the constellation Lyra) and how it was done previously (by observing the effect on the nearby star). They also give the name of the planets (as well as the journals that the results are published in) so that the reader can search for more information if they want to, and for the non-sciencey people they explain how far a light year is.

The author does a good job of answering the questions that the reader might have. For example I read the third paragraph I wondered why they call it a ‘hot Jupiter’ but then I read the next paragraph where they explain what they mean by a ‘hot Jupiter’ (a gas giant like Jupiter but much hotter). The only thing that I was left wondering about was why it was infrared light that was detected? It is because of their high temperature? Shouldn’t they be able to detect the visible light that they reflect from their suns?

I like the way the planets have been compared to a planet that most people know about because it helps to create a strong visual picture in the reader’s mind. I also found it reassuring that the discoveries were made by two different and independent teams. This gives the discoveries more credibility.

One thing that I didn’t like about the article was the quote in the second last paragraph. The states that “if we can directly detect planets only a few light years away, that increases the odds that we are not alone in the galaxy”. I don’t see how our ability to detect light from other planets is related to whether or not we are alone in the galaxy. It might be related to the odds of us finding other life in the galaxy but it won’t change the chances of other life being out there. I think that the statement is phrased badly.

Apart form that, I liked the article and found both interesting and informative.

Previous Page : Scientists battle ‘dark energy’ theory

Next Page : Russian, US spacewalk

Back to Contents