:: wikimiki.org ::

Aurorae Sinus

Aurorae Sinus

Aurorae Sinus is a dark feature in the southern hemisphere of the planet Mars. Together with albedo features contributed by Aonius Sinus and Solis Lacus, it is part of a feature known as the "eye of Mars". Category:Mars

Planet

A planet is generally considered to be a relatively large mass of accreted matter in orbit around a star that is not a star itself. The name comes from the Greek term πλανήτης, planētēs, meaning "wanderer", as ancient astronomers noted how certain lights moved across the sky in relation to the other stars. Based on historical consensus, the International Astronomical Union (IAU) lists nine planets in our solar system. Since the term "planet" has no precise scientific definition, however, many astronomers contest that figure. Some say it should be lowered to eight by removing Pluto from the list, whilst others claim it should be raised to fifteen, twenty, or even higher.

Planetary formation

It is not known with certainty how planets are formed. The prevailing theory is that they are formed from those remnants of a nebula that don't condense under gravity to form a protostar. Instead, these remnants become a thin disc of dust and gas revolving around the protostar and begin to condense about local concentrations of mass within the disc. These concentrations become ever more dense until they collapse inward under gravity to form protoplanets. When the protostar has grown such that it ignites to form a star, its solar wind blows away most of the disc's remaining material. Thereafter there still may be many protoplanets orbiting the star or each other, but over time many will collide, either to form a single larger planet or release material for other larger protoplanets or planets to absorb. Meanwhile, protoplanets that have avoided collisions may become moons of larger planets. With the discovery and observation of planetary systems around stars other than our own, it is becoming possible to elaborate, revise or even replace this account.

Within our solar system

Main article: Solar system The process of naming planets and their features is known as planetary nomenclature. All the currently accepted planets in the solar system are named after Roman gods, except for Uranus (named after a Greek god) and the Earth, which was not seen as a planet by the ancients but rather the centre of the universe. The designated planetary names are near-universal in the Western world, but some non-European languages, such as Chinese, use their own. Moons are also named after gods and characters from classical mythology, or, in the case of Uranus, after Shakespearean characters. Asteroids can be named after anybody or anything at the discretion of their discoverers, subject to approval by the IAU's nomenclature panel.

Accepted planets

Asteroid According to the authority of the IAU, there are nine planets in our solar system. In increasing distance from the Sun they are: #Mercury (astronomical symbol ) #Venus () #Earth () with one confirmed natural satellite, Luna (the Moon) #Mars () with two confirmed natural satellites, Deimos and Phobos #Jupiter () with sixty-three confirmed natural satellites #Saturn () with forty-six confirmed natural satellites #Uranus (Uranus) with twenty-seven confirmed natural satellites #Neptune () with thirteen confirmed natural satellites #Pluto () with three confirmed natural satellites (Charon, S/2005 P 1, S/2005 P 2) However, there is some pressure for Pluto to be reclassified as a Kuiper Belt object, especially in light of the discovery of . This object, however, has not yet received a definitive classification from the IAU.

Other candidates

When Ceres was found orbiting between Mars and Jupiter in 1801, it was initially touted as a planet, but after many smaller objects were found with a similar orbit, it was classified as an asteroid. However, due to its large size (relative to the other asteroids), and its roughly spherical shape, Ceres would be considered a planet by some astronomers' definitions. Similarly, since 1992 many objects have been found in the predicted Kuiper Belt that exists beyond Neptune. Several of the largest of these have challenged the planetary status quo, as they are both spherical and larger than the bodies in the Mars-Jupiter asteroid belt, and are similar in size, orbit and composition to Pluto. However, as yet none have been accepted as planets by the IAU. The most significant of these are (in order of increasing distance from the Sun) 90482 Orcus, , 50000 Quaoar, , , 28978 Ixion, 20000 Varuna, 19521 Chaos, and 90377 Sedna. (However, it should be noted that Sedna is often considered to be beyond the Kuiper Belt; being either a member of the scattered disc or the inner Oort Cloud). Like Ceres before it, Sedna was widely touted as a planet when it was discovered in 2003, as it was the largest object found since Pluto. However, mainly due to its size still being smaller than Pluto's, it did not achieve planetary status from the IAU. However, the discovery in 2005 of (nicknamed Xena), with a size and mass larger than Pluto seems to have forced the issue. As of September 2005 it has not yet been accepted as a planet, but the IAU is expected to announce a definition of a planet by the end of the year, which will either see become a planet, or have Pluto stripped of its status.

Extrasolar planets

:Main article: Extrasolar planet. Of the 173 extrasolar planets (those outside our solar system) discovered to date (October 2005) most have masses which are about the same or larger than Jupiter's. Exceptions include a number of planets discovered orbiting burned-out star remnants called pulsars, such as PSR B1257+12, the planets orbiting the stars Mu Arae, 55 Cancri and GJ 436 which are approximately Neptune-sized [http://www.eso.org/outreach/press-rel/pr-2004/pr-22-04_pf.html], and a planet orbiting Gliese 876 that is estimated to be about 6 to 8 times as massive as the Earth and is probably rocky in origin. It is far from clear if the newly discovered large planets would resemble the gas giants in our solar system or if they are of an entirely different type as yet unknown, like ammonia giants or carbon planets. In particular, some of the newly discovered planets, known as hot Jupiters, orbit extremely close to their parent stars, in nearly circular orbits. They therefore receive much more stellar radiation than the gas giants in our solar system, which makes it questionable whether they are the same type of planet at all. There is also a class of hot Jupiters that orbit so close to their star that their atmospheres are slowly blown away in a comet-like tail: the Chthonian planets. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration of the United States has a program underway to develop a Terrestrial Planet Finder artificial satellite, which would be capable of detecting the planets with masses comparable to terrestrial planets. The frequency of occurrence of these planets is one of the variables in the Drake equation which estimates the number of intelligent, communicating civilizations that exist in our galaxy. Astronomers have recently [http://www.nature.com/news/2005/050711/full/050711-6.html] [http://www.jpl.nasa.gov/news/news.cfm?release=2005-115] detected a planet in a triple star system, a finding that challenges current theories of planetary formation. The planet, a gas giant slightly larger than Jupiter, orbits the main star of the HD 188753 system, in the constellation Cygnus, and is hence known as HD 188753 Ab. The stellar trio (yellow, orange, and red) is about 149 light-years from Earth. The planet, which is at least 14% larger than Jupiter, orbits the main star (HD 188753 A) once every 80 hours or so (3.3 days), at a distance of about 8 Gm, a twentieth of the distance between Earth and the Sun. The other two stars whirl tightly around each other in 156 days, and circle the main star every 25.7 years at a distance from the main star that would put them between Saturn and Uranus in our own Solar System. The latter stars invalidate the leading hot Jupiter formation theory, which holds these planets form at "normal" distances and then migrate inward through some debatable mechanism. This could not have occurred here, the outer star pair disrupting outer planet formation.

Brown dwarf "planets"

The discovery of a planet-sized satellite of a brown dwarf has blurred the distinction between "planet" and "moon." A brown dwarf, though a star in theory, in practice is often described as in between a planet and a star. It is formally defined by the IAU by its official statement that "Substellar objects with true masses above the limiting mass for thermonuclear fusion of deuterium are "brown dwarfs", no matter how they formed nor where they are located." To the IAU, the question of whether an object in orbit around a brown dwarf is a "planet" or a "moon" was simply not relevant, as it does not use the term "moon," only "satellite" and as yet has no official definition for "planet."

Interstellar planets

Interstellar planets are rogues in interstellar space, not gravitationally linked to any given solar system. No interstellar planet is known to date, but their existence is considered a likely hypothesis based on computer simulations of the origin and evolution of planetary systems, which often include the ejection of bodies of significant mass. Such objects are not formally called planets, however, since the IAU has not defined the term "planet".

Definition and classification of planets

Much like "continent", "planet" is a word without a precise definition, with history and culture playing as much of a role as geology and astrophysics. Recent definitions have been vague and imprecise; The American Heritage Dictionary, for instance, formerly defined a planet as: :A nonluminous celestial body larger than an asteroid or comet, illuminated by light from a star, such as the sun, around which it revolves. In the solar system there are nine known planets: Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune, and Pluto.' However, for some time that definition has been viewed by many as inadequate. The eight largest planets (which are also the eight nearest to the Sun) are universally recognised as such, and for this reason are often universally referred to as "major planets", but there is controversy over Pluto and other smaller objects.
Suggested wide definitions
Since the discoveries of many of the objects in the Kuiper belt and around other stars, there has been a concerted push amongst scientists to come up with a precise definition of what constitutes a planet. In 1999, the IAU set up a working group to develop a scientifically plausible recommendation, but as of August, 2005 they had not reached a conclusion. After the discovery of (informally called "Xena"), a member of the committee, Alan Stern, has said that the group wanted "to get something done, pronto". He also informed journalists that a "consensus" in the group was moving towards the following definition: :A planet is a body that directly orbits a star, is large enough to be round because of self gravity, and is not so large that it triggers nuclear fusion in its interior. Note that this definition also covers disputes at the upper end of a planet's size, which provides the extra benefit of forming a barrier between planets and brown dwarfs. Many consider this definition the best option as it sets up divisions based on physical characteristics rather than an arbitrary size limit. It is also somewhat universal in its application where other definitions have been crafted mainly to sort our own solar system into simple categories (such as placing the size limit as just under Mars, Mercury or Pluto). Depending how it is interpreted, objects counted as planets under such a new system would include some or all of the objects listed above, with potentially many more yet to be found. Gibor Basri, head of astronomy at the University of Berkeley, has suggested a similar definition and has also proposed the terms "fusor" (any object that achieves fusion in its core) and "planemo" (an object that is round from self-gravity but not a fusor) to help improve the astronomical nomenclature. Under Basri's definition: :A planet is a planemo orbiting a fusor These definitions have the advantage of creating a group including larger moons (which share many characteristics with the smaller planets) and also covering large free-roaming objects, which some astronomers think should be included in the definition of a planet. Basri has also suggested 'liberal use of adjectives' such as "major", "beltway", "dwarf", "giant", "super" and "historical".[http://astron.berkeley.edu/%7Ebasri/defineplanet/Mercury.htm] Others have suggested categories of planet/planemo based on composition such as "rock" (composed mainly of silicate), "gas" (composed mainly of hydrogen and helium), and "ice" (composed mainly of oxygen and carbon).
Suggested narrow definitions
There are alternate suggestions which would instead reduce the number of planets in the system. Upon his discovery of Sedna, Mike Brown of Caltech suggested a definition which would exclude both Sedna and Pluto from being classified as planets, proposing the following: :A planet is any body in the solar system that is more massive than the total mass of all of the other bodies in a similar orbit [http://www.gps.caltech.edu/~mbrown/sedna/#What%20is%20the%20definition%20of%20a%20planet?] This definition generally plays down the importance of size, but instead focuses on the formation of the proposed planet. Under this definition, no Kuiper Belt objects (including Pluto) would be considered planets. Brown's wish to "demote" Pluto prompted many to criticize him for setting out to create a purely scientific definition for a term which had an existing popular (albeit 'flawed') application. Upon his discovery of , Brown indicated he had become a convert to this way of thinking, and proposed that whatever definition of planet be adopted, it should include both Pluto and any Kuiper Belt object found to be larger than Pluto. [http://www.gps.caltech.edu/~mbrown/planetlila/index.html]
Further classification
Astronomers distinguish between minor planets, such as asteroids, comets, and trans-Neptunian objects; and major (or true) planets. Planets within Earth's solar system can be divided into categories according to composition.
- Terrestrial or rocky: Planets that are similar to Earth — with bodies largely composed of rock: Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars
- Jovian or gas giant: Those with a composition largely made up of gaseous material: Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, Neptune. Uranian planets, or ice giants, are a sub-class of gas giants, distinguished from true Jovians by their depletion in hydrogen and helium and a significant composition of rock and ice.
- Icy: Sometimes a third category is added to include bodies like Pluto, whose composition is primarily ice; this category of "icy" bodies also includes many non-planetary bodies such as the icy moons of the outer planets of our solar system (e.g. Triton). Many consider the Earth and its Moon to be a double planet, for several reasons:
- The Moon, as measured by its diameter, is 1.5 times larger than Pluto.
- The gravitational force of the Sun on the Moon is larger than the gravitational force of the Earth on the Moon by a factor of approx. 2.2. (This is not a unique situation in the solar system. The Sun's gravity is also stronger than the primary's on Jupiter's moon S/2003 J 2; Uranus' moon S/2001 U 2; Neptune's moons S/2002 N 4 and Psamathe; and several asteroid moons. However, Luna is the sole case of this phenomenon affecting an object of planetary mass.)
See also

- Definition of planet
- Planetary habitability
- Planetary science
- Planemo
- Planetoid
- Brown Dwarf
- Planets in science fiction
- Prograde and retrograde motion
- Skies of other planets
References

-
-
-
-
-
External links

- [http://www.nineplanets.org/ NinePlanets.org] - tour of the solar system
- [http://www.iau.org International Astronomical Union]
- [http://www.fourmilab.ch/cgi-bin/uncgi/Solar/ Solar System Live] (an interactive orrery)
- [http://janus.astro.umd.edu/javadir/orbits/ssv.html Solar System Viewer] (animation)
- [http://www.sky-pics.net/ Pictures of the solar system]
- [http://gw.marketingden.com/planets/sun.html Renderings of the planets]
- [http://planetquest.jpl.nasa.gov/ NASA Planet Quest]
- [http://www.ciw.edu/IAU/div3/wgesp/definition.html Working definition of "planet"] from IAU WGESP — the lower bound remained a matter of consensus in February 2003
- Dan Green's page on [http://cfa-www.harvard.edu/cfa/ps/icq/ICQPluto.html planet classification]
- [http://www.spacedaily.com/news/outerplanets-04b.html Gravity Rules: The Nature and Meaning of Planethood]; S. Alan Stern; March 22, 2004
- [http://www.iau.org/IAU/FAQ/PlutoPR.html On the status of Pluto]; IAU, February 3, 1999
- als:Planet ko:행성 ms:Planet ja:惑星 simple:Planet th:ดาวเคราะห์ zh-min-nan:He̍k-chheⁿ

Albedo

The albedo is a measure of reflectivity of a surface or body. It is the ratio of electromagnetic radiation (EM radiation) reflected to the amount incident upon it. The fraction, usually expressed as a percentage from 0% to 100%, is an important concept in climatology and astronomy. This ratio depends on the frequency of the radiation considered: unqualified, it refers to an average across the spectrum of visible light. It also depends on the angle of incidence of the radiation: unqualified, normal incidence. Fresh snow albedos are high: up to 90%. The ocean surface has a low albedo. Earth has an average albedo of 31% whereas the albedo of the Moon is about 12%. In astronomy, the albedo of satellites and asteroids can be used to infer surface composition, most notably ice content. Enceladus, a moon of Saturn, has the highest known albedo of any body in the solar system, with 99% of EM radiation reflected. Human activities have changed the albedo (via forest clearance and farming, for example) of various areas around the globe. However, quantification of this effect is difficult on the global scale: it is not clear whether the changes have tended to increase or decrease global warming. The "classical" example of albedo effect is the snow-temperature feedback. If a snow covered area warms and the snow melts, the albedo decreases, more sunlight is absorbed, and the temperature tends to increase. The converse is true: if snow forms, a cooling cycle happens. The intensity of the albedo effect depends on the size of the change in albedo and the amount of insolation; for this reason it can be potentially very large in the tropics.

Some examples of albedo effects

Fairbanks, Alaska

According to the National Climatic Data Center's GHCN 2 data, which is composed of 30-year smoothed climatic means for thousands of weather stations across the world, the college weather station at Fairbanks, Alaska, is about 3 °C (5 °F) warmer than the airport at Fairbanks, partly because of drainage patterns but also largely because of the lower albedo at the college resulting from a higher concentration of pine trees and therefore less open snowy ground to reflect the heat back into space. Neunke and Kukla have shown that this difference is especially marked during the late winter months, when solar radiation is greater.

The tropics

Although the albedo-temperature effect is most famous in colder regions of Earth, because more snow falls there, it is actually much stronger in tropical regions because in the tropics there is consistently more sunlight. When Brazilian ranchers cut down dark, tropical rainforest trees to replace them with even darker soil in order to grow crops, the average temperature of the area appears to increase by an average of about 3 °C (5 °F) year-round.

Small scale effects

Albedo works on a smaller scale, too. People who wear dark clothes in the summertime put themselves at a greater risk of heatstroke than those who wear white clothes.

Pine forests

The albedo of a pine forest at 45°N in the winter in which the trees cover the land surface completely is only about 9%, among the lowest of any naturally occurring land environment. This is partly due to the color of the pines, and partly due to multiple scattering of sunlight within the trees which lowers the overall reflected light level. Due to light penetration, the ocean's albedo is even lower at about 3.5%, though this depends strongly on the angle of the incident radiation. Dense swampland averages between 9% and 14%. Deciduous trees average about 13%. A grassy field usually comes in at about 20%. A barren field will depend on the color of the soil, and can be as low as 5% or as high as 40%, with 15% being about the average for farmland. A desert or large beach usually averages around 25% but varies depending on the color of the sand. [Reference: Edward Walker's study in the Great Plains in the winter around 45°N].

Urban areas

Urban areas in particular have very unnatural values for albedo because of the many human-built structures which absorb light before the light can reach the surface. In the northern part of the world, cities are relatively dark, and Walker has shown that their average albedo is about 7%, with only a slight increase during the summer. In most tropical countries, cities average around 12%. This is similar to the values found in northern suburban transitional zones. Part of the reason for this is the different natural environment of cities in tropical regions, e.g., there are more very dark trees around; another reason is that portions of the tropics are very poor, and city buildings must be built with different materials. Warmer regions may also choose lighter colored building materials so the structures will remain cooler.

Trees

Because trees tend to have a low albedo, removing forests would tend to (increase albedo and thereby) cool (?) the planet. Cloud feedbacks further complicate the issue. In seasonally snow-covered zones, winter albedos of treeless areas are 10% to 50% higher than nearby forested areas because snow does not cover the trees as readily. Studies by the Hadley Centre have investigated the relative (generally warming) effect of albedo change and (cooling) effect of carbon sequestration on planting forests. They found that new forests in tropical and midlatitude areas tended to cool; new forests in high latitudes (e.g. Siberia) were neutral or perhaps warming [http://66.102.11.104/search?q=cache:o7LD-owSkNgJ:www.ulapland.fi/home/arktinen/feed_pdf/Betts_revised.pdf+hadley+albedo+forest&hl=en].

Snow

Snow albedos can be as high as 90%. This is for the ideal example, however: fresh deep snow over a featureless landscape. Over Antarctica they average a little more than 80%. If a marginally snow-covered area warms, snow tends to melt, lowering the albedo, and hence leading to more snowmelt (the ice-albedo feedback). This is the basis for predictions of enhanced warming in the polar and seasonally snow covered regions as a result of global warming.

Clouds

Clouds are another source of albedo that play into the global warming equation. Different types of clouds have different albedo values, theoretically ranging from a minimum of near 0% to a maximum in the high 70s. Climate models have shown that if the whole Earth were to be suddenly covered by white clouds, the surface temperatures would drop to a value of about -150 °C (-240 °F). This model, though it is far from perfect, also predicts that to offset a 5 °C (9 °F) temperature change due to an increase in the magnitude of the greenhouse effect, "all" we would need to do is increase the Earth's overall albedo by about 12% by adding more white clouds. Albedo and climate in some areas are already affected by artificial clouds, such as those created by the contrails of heavy commercial airliner traffic. A study following the September 11 attacks, after which all major airlines in the U.S. shut down for three days, showed a local 1 °C increase in the diurnal temperature range (the difference of day and night temperatures) (see: contrail).

Aerosol effects

Aerosol (very fine particles/droplets in the atmosphere) has two effects, direct and indirect. The direct (albedo) effect is generally to cool the planet; the indirect effect (the particles act as CCNs and thereby change cloud properties) is less certain [http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg1/231.htm#671].

Black carbon

Another albedo-related effect on the climate is from black carbon particles. The size of this effect is difficult to quantify: the IPCC say that their "estimate of the global mean radiative forcing for BC aerosols from fossil fuels is ... +0.2 W m^-2 (from +0.1 W m^-2 in the SAR)) with a range +0.1 to +0.4 W m^-2". [http://www.grida.no/climate/ipcc_tar/wg1/233.htm]. Category:Electromagnetic radiation Category:Climatology Category:Climate forcing Category:Astrophysics ko:반사율 ja:アルベド

Category:Mars

Category:Planets of the Solar System als:Kategorie:Mars (Planet) ko:분류:화성 ja:Category:火星

Joanne Brackeen

Brackeen, Joanne Brackeen, Joanne Joanne Grogan Brackeen est une pianiste de jazz, compositeur et enseignante au Berklee College of Music à Boston. Elle est née à Ventura dans le sud de la Californie le 26 Juillet 1938. Elle est considèrée comme l’une des pianiste les plus accomplies du Jazz. En effet, on la compare souvent à Jessica Williams, pour son jeu ou encore, Andrew Hill pour son style percussif et à la fois lyrique. Cela représente donc une très grande palette. Joanne joue et compose souvent une musique très complexe mais toujours mélodieuse. Son assurance et son contrôle de la musicalité lui permettent une très grande expressivité et une absolue liberté mises en évidence lors de ses associations en trio, particulièrement.

Son parcours

Ses débuts

Joanne étudie la musique dès l’age de 5 ans. Mais, elle ne jouera véritablement du piano qu’à partir de 9 ans. Elle prend alors des cours, mais très vite s’ennuie et ne s’entraîne pas. Vers l’age de douze ans, Joanne s’essaye à l’improvisation en imitant son idole : Frankie Carle (pianiste et co-leader d’un groupe de jazz). Pour cela, après avoir recopié en autodidacte, les notes des différents solos de Frankie Carle, Joanne se fait accompagner d’une de ses amies à l’accordéon. Elle va alors être acceptée au Los Angeles Conservatory of Music. Mais, cet enseignement ne va pas non plus lui être très profitable. Les cours se révèlent ennuyeux et on ne fait qu’y parler de musique sans pratiquer. Joanne délaisse ses cours, mais se passionne pour les sessions jams qui ont lieu dans certains cabarets à Los Angeles.

New York

Alors que Joanne n’a que 20 ans, lors d’une de ces sessions jams, où elle participe avec nul autre que Dexter Gordon, et Harold Land ; elle va également rencontrer Charles Lloyd, Billy Higgins et Bobby Hutcherson. Cela sonne le début de sa carrière en tant que pianiste. Par ailleurs, dans les années 60, elle va rencontrer aussi son futur mari : le saxophoniste Charles Brackeen. Ils vont se marier et avoir quatre enfants. Mais, contrairement à beaucoup de femmes de l’époque, Joanne n’a pas arrêté sa carrière pour autant. C’est vers 1964-1965 que le couple Brackeen déménage pour New York. La même année, Joanne joue de l’orgue en compagnie du vibraphoniste Freddie McCoy. Son talent va alors être connu des hautes spères du jazz. Ainsi, en 1969, elle joue avec Dave Liebman et Woodie Shaw. Les années suivantes (de 1970 à 1972), elle va travailler avec les Jazz messengers conduits par Art Blakey. Suit alors une période de trois ans (de 1972 à 1975), pendants lesquels Joanne accompagne le saxophoniste Joe Henderson. Ensuite, de 1976 à 1977 elle va accompagner Stan Getz, Joe Farell et Sonny Stitt.

Son premier groupe

Depuis le milieu des années 70, Joanne se produit sous propre nom avec son groupe. Toutes les voies sont explorées :
- en duo avec Clint Houston ou Red Mitchell,
- en trio, avec entre autres Eddie Gomez, Cecil McBee ou Jack Dejohnette,
- ou encore en quintette avec Terence Blanchard, Brandford Marsalis, Cecil McBee et Al Foster.

L’enseignement

Depuis ses représentations solos au Carnegie Hall et Kennedy Center, le département d’état à financé les tournées européennes de Joanne Brackeen. Son talent devient alors connu du monde entier. On va alors lui proposer d’enseigner en tant que membre de la faculté de la New School of New York city. Par ailleurs, le poste d’enseignant va aussi lui être proposé au Berklee College of Boston. Elle va également présenter une émission de télévision : « Joanne brackeen presents Jazz ».

La composition

De nombreuses formations demandent à Joanne de réaliser des compositions. Parmi celles-ci on peut compter des institutions telles que la Rutgers University ou encore le Dickinson College. Mais, Joanne compose aussi pour des quartets ou quintets à cordes.

Discographie

Leader

- 2000 : Popsicle illusion (Arkadia jazz)
- 2000 : Aft (Timeless Holland)
- 1999 : Pink elephant magic (Arkadia jazz)
- 1996 : Invitation (Black lion)
- 1995 : Turn around (Evidence)
- 1994 : Take a chance (Concord records)
- 1991 : Where legend dwell (Direct artist)
- 1991 : Breath of Brazil (Concord records)
- 1990 : Live at Maybeck recital hall (Concord records)
- 1990 : Having fun (Concord records)
- 1990 : Fi-fi goes to heaven (Concord records)
- 2000 : New true illusion (Timeless Holland)
- 1995 : Power talk (Turnipseed)
- 1996 : Six ate (Candid records)
- 1981 : Special identity (Artist direct)
- 1979 : Keyed in (Tappan zee))
- 19?? : Is it really true (Konnex)

Accompagnatrice

- 2005 : Live at the Town hall NYC (1201 music)
- 1996 : Live in Budapest Tony Lakatos (Laïka records)

Liens externes

- http://joannebrackeenjazz.com/
- http://www.view.com/brackeen-bio.html

spalanie kalorii zak�ady sportowe szkolne praca w anglii download sitemap

:: RELATED NEWS ::

William Harper (South Carolina)
William Harper was a US Senator from South Carolina in the 1800's. In 1837 he spoke out in favor of slavery, saying it was an evil that was pushed on the South for the growth of the country, but that it was neccessary for the US to continue down the path of economic stability. One of his main defenses of slavery was that slaves are saved from ever having to be out of work, and that whipping was not harmful to