<p><a href="https://www.paulanthonywilson.com/exoplanets/exoplanet-detection-techniques/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Here</a> is a brief explanation of the various techniques that can be used to detect exoplanets. The scatter plot suggests that for a planet to be detected by direct imaging, it has to have (roughly speaking) an orbit as large as Jupiter's, and a mass as great as Jupiter's. So Jupiter looks like the best candidate.</p>
<p>As for your second question, the declination of the Alpha Centauri system is <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpha_Centauri" rel="nofollow noreferrer">about -60°</a>, and the earth's axial tilt is <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axial_tilt" rel="nofollow noreferrer">only 23°</a>. So the Alpha Centauri system lies below the plane of the ecliptic by at least 37°, and none of the planets (which are all approximately in the plane of the ecliptic) can transit the sun from the viewpoint of Proxima Centauri b.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-07-18T13:20:28.707Z
Oh, I'm completely wrong, *never mind!* I always work in ecliptic coordinates because I'm playing with planets mostly.
uhoh
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-07-18T14:10:15.210Z
Thank you. But you mean "none of the 8 recognized planets", and where you define Mercury's orbital tilt depends on how liberal you mean "approximately". What about Eris at 44° inclination? Is it too small to be recognized against the background of the Sun? A dwarf planet was found around another star, after all.
John
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-07-18T14:14:36.970Z
@John, your question specifically says _planets_. Four times. This doesn't include dwarf planets! But yes, they would be too small to see. As for Mercury, its orbital inclination is about 7°, which is comfortably less than 37°.
TonyK
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-07-18T14:34:59.423Z
@TonyK I say planets, therefore I mean _all_ planets, including dwarf planets (and Mercury is a dwarf planet that is an IAU-recognized planet). You only mean the eight IAU-recognized planets but the arbitrary "clearing the neighbourhood" requirement is an invention by the IAU. The Sun is a yellow dwarf star, don't you consider it a star therefore? As for the dwarf planet Mercury, you said the planets lie approximately in the plane of the ecliptic, but Mercury's orbit is quite tilted.
John
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-07-18T11:51:15.360Z
2021-07-18T12:05:18.590Z
2021-07-18T12:05:18.590Z
TonyK
<p>How strong would a telescope (and what kind of telescope) on Proxima Centauri b have to magnify to discern any planets around Sol, and which planets would be easiest to spot? One might think the farther the better which would make Neptune observable most easily, but on the other hand farther-away planets are less illuminated, maybe too dark. This makes Jupiter an easier observable candidate, but it is 1/6 the distance of Neptune from the Sun which would make it harder to discern. I think no solid planet would be observable directly.</p>
<p>I also wonder which planets have the correct size and distance to Sun to be recognized by the transit method from Proxima b, rather than by direct imaging.</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-07-14T08:17:50.987Z
See https://astronomy.stackexchange.com/questions/8605/if-alpha-centauri-as-solar-system-exactly-mirrored-our-own-what-would-we-be-ab?noredirect=1&lq=1
ProfRob
CC BY-SA 4.0
2021-07-14T08:33:43.173Z
Clearly related to https://astronomy.stackexchange.com/questions/35513/which-of-the-planets-would-be-detected-if-they-were-exoplanets?noredirect=1&lq=1 but actually not a duplicate.
ProfRob
<observational-astronomy><solar-system><exoplanet><deep-sky-observing>
From Proxima b, could any planets around Sol be imaged directly by a strong telescope? If so, which ones would be easiest to spot?
John
# From Proxima b, could any planets around Sol be imaged directly by a strong telescope? If so, which ones would be easiest to spot?

(Asked by: username_0 on 2021-07-14)

How strong would a telescope (and what kind of telescope) on Proxima Centauri b have to magnify to discern any planets around Sol, and which planets would be easiest to spot? One might think the farther the better which would make Neptune observable most easily, but on the other hand farther-away planets are less illuminated, maybe too dark. This makes Jupiter an easier observable candidate, but it is 1/6 the distance of Neptune from the Sun which would make it harder to discern. I think no solid planet would be observable directly.

I also wonder which planets have the correct size and distance to Sun to be recognized by the transit method from Proxima b, rather than by direct imaging.

**Tags:** observational-astronomy, solar-system, exoplanet, deep-sky-observing

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: See https://astronomy.stackexchange.com/questions/8605/if-alpha-centauri-as-solar-system-exactly-mirrored-our-own-what-would-we-be-ab?noredirect=1&lq=1  
> **username_1**: Clearly related to https://astronomy.stackexchange.com/questions/35513/which-of-the-planets-would-be-detected-if-they-were-exoplanets?noredirect=1&lq=1 but actually not a duplicate.  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_2 on 2021-07-18. Score: 1

[Here](https://www.paulanthonywilson.com/exoplanets/exoplanet-detection-techniques/) is a brief explanation of the various techniques that can be used to detect exoplanets. The scatter plot suggests that for a planet to be detected by direct imaging, it has to have (roughly speaking) an orbit as large as Jupiter's, and a mass as great as Jupiter's. So Jupiter looks like the best candidate.

As for your second question, the declination of the Alpha Centauri system is [about -60°](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpha_Centauri), and the earth's axial tilt is [only 23°](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axial_tilt). So the Alpha Centauri system lies below the plane of the ecliptic by at least 37°, and none of the planets (which are all approximately in the plane of the ecliptic) can transit the sun from the viewpoint of Proxima Centauri b.

> **Comments:**
> **username_3**: Oh, I'm completely wrong, *never mind!* I always work in ecliptic coordinates because I'm playing with planets mostly.  
> **username_0**: Thank you. But you mean "none of the 8 recognized planets", and where you define Mercury's orbital tilt depends on how liberal you mean "approximately". What about Eris at 44° inclination? Is it too small to be recognized against the background of the Sun? A dwarf planet was found around another star, after all.  
> **username_2**: @username_0, your question specifically says _planets_. Four times. This doesn't include dwarf planets! But yes, they would be too small to see. As for Mercury, its orbital inclination is about 7°, which is comfortably less than 37°.  
> **username_0**: @username_2 I say planets, therefore I mean _all_ planets, including dwarf planets (and Mercury is a dwarf planet that is an IAU-recognized planet). You only mean the eight IAU-recognized planets but the arbitrary "clearing the neighbourhood" requirement is an invention by the IAU. The Sun is a yellow dwarf star, don't you consider it a star therefore? As for the dwarf planet Mercury, you said the planets lie approximately in the plane of the ecliptic, but Mercury's orbit is quite tilted.  

---

