Talk:51 Pegasi b

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the 51 Pegasi b article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

This  level-5 vital article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Astronomy: Astronomical objects High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Astronomy, which collaborates on articles related to Astronomy on Wikipedia.AstronomyWikipedia:WikiProject AstronomyTemplate:WikiProject AstronomyAstronomy articles High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Astronomical objects, which collaborates on articles related to astronomical objects.

Daily pageviews of this article A graph should have been displayed here but graphs are temporarily disabled. Until they are enabled again, visit the interactive graph at pageviews.wmcloud.org

I've added some details from the German wiki article, but left out a paragraph on Dr. David Latham speculating on a second planet around 51 Peg. I do recall discussion on a second planet from detailed analysis of the doppler plots, but cannot now find believable references, and all reliable sources just list the one 51 Peg b.

Some intersting references:

• David Gray's comments, somewhat disappointed in not having more star data
• 1997 confirmation paper by GEOFFREY W. MARCY et al
• 1997 paper Artie P. Hatzes et al

- Wikibob

I am of the opinion that this article should be moved to

or similar. Bellerophon is an unofficial title, not endorsed by the IAU who are the arbiters of astronomical nomenclature. It is not used by scientists - a search of the literature reveals not a single use of the word, in contrast to hundreds of references to 51 Peg B, which is still the official name for this planet.

I will move this article in a few days time unless there are objections. Worldtraveller 15:26, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)

You're right, no unofficial names should be used as a article names. However, extrasolar planets are usually marked with shortcase letters. Several of the known extrasolar systems consist of binary stars, for example τ Boo. τ Boo b (or more correctly, τ Boo Ab) is the planet orbiting bright component A, but τ Boo B is a distant red dwarf companion. So this article should be named 51 Pegasi b. Jyril 12:54, Feb 23, 2005 (UTC)

Where does the value of 1295 K in the infobox come from? As far as I am aware the temperature of this planet has not been directly observed. Citations anyone? Chaos syndrome 01:24, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like it is copypasted from Extrasolar Visions.--Jyril 06:29, 16 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Seems like it's back in the article. I'm removing it for now (see comments on Talk:51 Pegasi). Chaos syndrome 11:58, 10 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I found the criteria which planetary speculators have been using to gauge the temperature (assumption of a pure grey 0.1 albedo surface with no atmosphere). This is quite obviously a stand-in for insolation and not a real temperature. However even that much is good enough to place it between two planets which have been measured, viz. HD 189733 b and HD 209458 b‎. I am reinstating the temperature alongside this information. --Zimriel (talk) 17:58, 15 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, let me get things straight. I am a big fan of artist's impressions of exosolar planets, and I like it when articles have them. However, although this article states that 51 Pegasi b is very close to its sun, I highly doubt that it actually comes that close to 51 Pegasi. Besides, it looks like it was drawn using a colored pencils. Fusion7 17:35, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The article states that the discovery of this planet was made by Mayor and Queloz using Observatoire de Haute-Provence. In the article legend the 'discovery site' is listed as California, United States. Unless I am missing something, should it not read Provence, France? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.124.16.33 (talk) 17:22, 24 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The article begins as follows:
"51 Pegasi b, also unofficially named Bellerophon and or abbreviated as 51 Peg b, is an extrasolar planet approximately 50 light-years away in the constellation of Pegasus. 51 Pegasi b was the first planet to be discovered orbiting a Sun-like star (namely 51 Pegasi)"

Assuming its main importance is being "the first", I would suggest changing these sentences to something like this:

"51 Pegasi b, also unofficially named Bellerophon and or abbreviated as 51 Peg b, was the first planet discovered outside our solar system. It's an extrasolar planet, orbiting a Sun-like star (namely 51 Pegasi) approximately 50 light-years away in the constellation of Pegasus."
What do you think? Thanks Kvsh5 (talk) 07:41, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It'd be incorrect because the first planet discovered outside our solar system was PSR B1257+12 B Jagger11 (talk) 01:46, 15 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This sentence is outdated: "Only two other extrasolar planets were given unofficial or informal names". There are now unofficial names for all exoplanets, listed in this url —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.243.230.54 (talk) 20:53, 29 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Upsilon Andromedae d which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 02:59, 17 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

On this page, and every other exoplanet page I have checked, there is a table which says "Discovered by" which links to the "list of minor planet discoverers" wikipedia page. Since minor planets are small bodies in our solar system, they have no relation to exoplanets, and this link should be removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ericagol (talk • contribs) 16:48, 6 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

bellerophon planet 2600:4040:A204:8400:81BC:77DE:1186:C88B (talk) 11:51, 15 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]