Astronomers find first planet with a high potential for life.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100929/ap_on_sc/us_sci_new_earths

I only worry about its slow rotation which could be a indication of a its core possibly being cold and have no magnetic feild to protect its atmoshpere.

but still! pretty neat!

 

One of the most interesting things to me about this is the implication that there must be an astronomical number of these minimal Goldilocks planets in the galaxy even at a rate of 1 such planet per 500.

 

This is the thing that got me, too. Sure, the rotation's a bit slow on this planet, and the temperature's a bit low for life as we know it too (although ~220K is certainly not entirely inhospitable), but the fact that there could be such a high incident rate of planets with conditions rather close to earth's means that at least a few planets in the vast number of galaxies out there are also supporting life.

 

'Invisible' Planet Discovered...

'Invisible' planet discovered with new technique
9/8/2011 - Kepler probe detects alien world by its gravitational influence on a neighbor

 

Are our telescopes not powerful enough to see planets in other star systems? Do we need a super hubble type telescope to see them?

 

They're inherently too dim. Only planets around red/brown dwarfs can be directly imaged; otherwise they're too close to the far brighter star to directly image.

 

Venus too could support life............. if it didn't have a runaway greenhouse effect.

 

Do we need deep space type telescopes? Like on the dark side of the moon, or behind jupitor?

 

How's that going to change how bright a star is and how dim a planet is?

 

By being able to focus on tiny spots in space without other light interfering. I don't really know. Just interested in the topic

 

The issue isn't on our side, it's on the other side. The planet that would be imaged is closely orbiting a very bright star, but the planet only reflects a small portion of that star's light back at us. It's like trying to see a car maker's symbol on the front grill of a car at night with the other car's high beams on. You can't because the high beams are on.

This is a fundamental problem that can't be solved by preset day optics. There might be some solution possible someday in the future, but right now we have no way to overcome the problem, even with space telescopes.

 

The technology isn't available to do that. Not yet, anyway.

 

Always knew we can't be alone in the universe (or universes). But I figure we're mostly lost in the vastness of it all.

 

universe = 1, everything in existance All "universes" so to speak, exist in 1 ultimate "universe". Atleast thats my thought on it

 

With each of these new planet discoveries, do we believe the SETI people are focusing their efforts on these locations?

At the rate we are going on Earth, with wars and disease and weapons of mass destruction, not to mention catastrophic natural disaster potential, it seems like an 'intelligent' civilization might only exist for a few hundred or thousand years?? If so, and deep space research is looking at multiple light-year distances, seems that the odds of detecting an intelligent marker are slim to none? If life comes and goes, we would need to detect it during that tiny moment of their existence.

Lastly, is all that is needed on another planet for life as we know it, as simple as the right temperature, a friendly atmosphere, H2O, and some DNA? And do we yet know if DNA is transported by asteroids?

 

Another good question is does life need an earth-like temperature and atmosphere. Does life need water? Or can life develop without these things.

 

It's poor science to proclaim merely because a distant observation of and "Earth-like" planet
may contain life, when estimates of the prevalence of life in the universe suffer from a severe lack of data. They only have one data point...

Earth.

These folks are just looking for funding....

There is only evidence of one planet that can sustain life and has ever sustained life...

Earth.

Show me some evidence of extraterrestrial life, not mere speculation because the conditions
may be right.

The same folks who delegitimize religion for lack of evidence, proclaim the high probablility
of complex life elsewhere...with no evidence of same...merely probability and
probability based upon one data point. Our planet.

It's bad methodology.

The exact same conditions elsewhere in the Universe may still not produce complex life,
and these conditions may not exist long enough in order for complex life to evolve.

Life may indeed exist elsewhere...life may be abundant...but currently there is no concrete
evidence of same...it's mere conjecture based upon probability using a very narrow data point.

News like this gets sent out for the hype value and to sustain government funding....

 

YAWN.


Do you ever know wtf you're on about?

 

More than an unemployed Aussie like yourself I'm sure....

Feel free to post your curriculum vitae of your vastly superior
knowledge of Astrophysics.....

I actually initiated another thread on this Science sub-forum in a similar vain as this...only
more contrary.

http://www.politicalforum.com/scien...traterrestrial-life-could-extremely-rare.html


and adding

NASA Budget Cuts Threaten Two New Telescopes
Flagship missions at risk as astrophysics funding shrinks.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=nasa-budget-cuts-threaten-two-telescopes

as I was saying...it's hype to garner more public awareness and sustain government funding...

Paraphrasing...
"We found LIFE on another distant...well maybe...it's just like Earth, we promise...now give us more money to prove it"

meanwhile waiing on that brilliant science filled CV of yours...though I'm doubtful you even know what a curriculum vitae is...

Impress me....
or can I expect more of that droll Aussie humor of yours....and little else.

 

They are trying to find similarities to the one data point we know supports life. I don't know how that is bad methology. Maybe we have many more planets that support life than even the most optimistic predictions because maybe life doesn't even need water, an atmosphere, or an earth like temperature to survive.

 

Sorry to burst your bubble...

NASA has messsed up before....another example..

"This Paper Should Not Have Been Published"
Scientists see fatal flaws in the NASA study of arsenic-based life

http://www.slate.com/id/2276919/

 

Pretty cool! As far as telescopes in space go, if any of you have not heard:

Russian radio-telescope 1000 times more powerful than hubble:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qz2i7uaV7JM"]Sky Eye: Russian Hubble 1,000 times sharper - YouTube[/ame]

RadioAstron will be able to resolve celestial objects separated by an angle of 7 microarcseconds, which is 10,000 times the resolution of the Hubble Space Telescope, New Scientist notes. Scientists hope it will be able to peer at the event horizon of a black hole at the center of the galaxy M87; study radio waves emitted by water masers, which are clouds of water molecules found in galaxy discs; and study pulsars, among other missions.


Can't wait to see pictures.....

 

In terms of the current SETI research, I suspect we are only searching for something very similar to Earth's characteristics.

Before we can look for other types of life, we would need to define those types of life.

We do know for a fact that life as we know it on Earth can happen! So this should increase the odds of finding more Earth-like life elsewhere. But this does not exclude the possibility of other types of life...

 

I think SETI is worthless.

 

So you probably believe that Magellan and Columbus and others didn't gain anything for mankind when they embarked on their adventures?

Or that Copernicus, Galileo, Cassini, Kepler, Newton, Einstein, Hawking, etc. were and are just wasting theirs and everyone else's time and money?

As trivial and meaningless as it might sound to you...confirmation of intelligent life elsewhere in our Universe will literally captivate the attention of all citizens of Earth.

Seems to me something this potentially powerful has some merit for exploration...