Talk:Gliese 682 c
Gliese 682 b and c major mix-up!
[edit]This article seems to be mixing up the data of Gliese 682 b and Gliese 832 b given in the paper 2014 paper, by Mikko Tuomi et al, referenced in this article as its main source. But, if you look at the paper it's definitely siding with a two planet model. For example quoting the paper it says, "...the k = 1 model fitted the data much more poorly than a k = 2 model. With the posterior samplings, however, detecting these signals was possible (Figs. A3 and A7)." Figure A7 in the paper does seem to be corroborating the data given in Table 3. Also, if you look at the section paragraph in the paper titled "5.2 GJ 682", it explains that a two planet solution is far more probable than just a one planet mix-up, in interpreting the radial velocity measured.