07-15-2015, 06:31 AM
Oh 
, serves me right for just checking article titles instead of looking inside. At least I can console myself that I had such a good idea that it's been already used... 
The big question still seems to be the position of the fifth star, which is associated with the detached binary. This site http://www.techtimes.com/articles/67225/...overed.htm says it was found about 1.2 billion miles away, which is about 13 AU, while this site http://phys.org/news/2015-07-star-doubly-eclipsing.html says up to 2 billion miles away. So even if we assume the closer separation, that leaves room for terrestrial planets... except that it doesn't take eccentricity into account. Considering that the articles don't mention significant eccentricity for the other orbits, maybe it's less likely that it is particularly eccentric. It is, apparently, an old system, so maybe they've had time to even out a bit. (Though a little eccentricity could have fun results on climate.)
, serves me right for just checking article titles instead of looking inside. At least I can console myself that I had such a good idea that it's been already used... The big question still seems to be the position of the fifth star, which is associated with the detached binary. This site http://www.techtimes.com/articles/67225/...overed.htm says it was found about 1.2 billion miles away, which is about 13 AU, while this site http://phys.org/news/2015-07-star-doubly-eclipsing.html says up to 2 billion miles away. So even if we assume the closer separation, that leaves room for terrestrial planets... except that it doesn't take eccentricity into account. Considering that the articles don't mention significant eccentricity for the other orbits, maybe it's less likely that it is particularly eccentric. It is, apparently, an old system, so maybe they've had time to even out a bit. (Though a little eccentricity could have fun results on climate.)