Slashdot Mirror
Planetary System Similar to Sol
sgtwilko writes "The BBC News site has an article about how astronomers have found several new planets including some that have a similar distribution to our own Solar System. They are finding planetary systems that are more and more like the one in which the Earth resides. It's only a matter of time until the Terrestrial Planet Finder program gets going and finds another Earth." There's another story on space.com. Update: 06/13 21:51 GMT by M : Space News and Wired have stories as well, with spiffy graphics and artists' renderings and so on.
Then we find the small planets
Then we find the ones with intelligent life
Then we communicate
Then...
Alien Pr0n!
The system also has a slightly smaller neighbor which whips around every 14.5 days. My guess is the tidal forces of these two planets would eventually rip anything in between to shreds.
Yes, TPF will be a nice box to have. However, I wouldn't plan on the longevity of HST since it will be located at one of the LaGrange points just outside earth orbit.
Brian
Flamebait
Serious inquiries only.
Some here pointed out how foolish it was to ASSume that anyone knows even the beginnings about planets in the galaxy simply from our very limited scope and time of research into it.
So, with that in mind, I ask... "Is such a mentality prevalent here? Or is this irrational behavior coupled with some neat sounding math equations?" The astronomical community is taking a beating because of stupid people within it, perhaps they are on the way back out of their hole.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
It is all just a hoax. As it turns out, a group of rival scientists went up into space and just put a REALLLY big mirror up there.
- Freed
"Coffee should be black as hell, strong as death, and sweet as love." -Turkish Proverb
Okay, so the planet 3-3.5 times the size of Jupiter, at NEAR the same orbit as Jupiter....
But that planet right near the star that's just a bit smaller than Jupiter is a BIG difference.
But hey, it's a start, and doesn't mean that there AREN'T planets geologically similar to Earth there.
Guess we might find out soon.
Dark Nexus
"Sanity is calming, but madness is more interesting."
Perhaps, in a few years, the belief that life exists on other plants wouldn't inspire sceptisim from your peers. Rather, would be doccumented fact. Where was the research when I was getting picked on in grade school? :p
"You sir, have just crossed my happy line..."
i don't get the thrust of the article focusing on finding earth-sized planets. is there some theory that necessitates a planet be our size to foster life? if so, why?
(here comes the (-1, Ignorant). bring it on.)
go get it
Maybe one day, ET will phone us?
They have also found the smallest exoplanet yet. It is only 40 times more massive than Earth.
The size of the planet isn't really the issue though,
Detecting Earth-sized planets is probably not possible using current ground-based techniques. That will have to wait for a new generation of satellite observatories, due in the next decade.
The important part is
Calculations made by Greg Laughlin of the University of California at Santa Cruz show that an Earth-sized planet could survive in a stable orbit between the two gas giants.
This of course doesn't mean that we found anything only that when we are able to look for earth-like planets this is our best bet for hitting the jackpot.
I stole this Sig
It's slow and full of pop-up ads..
----
A team of astronomers announced today the discovery of the first planet outside our solar system with an orbit similar to Jupiter's, a configuration that has the potential to support an Earth-like planet.
They also found the least massive world ever detected around another star, a planet just 40 times as heavy as Earth.
The primary discovery is a gas giant planet that circles a star called 55 Cancri every 13 years, comparable to Jupiter's 11.86-year orbit. The planet is between 3.5 and 5 times as heavy as Jupiter.
"It's the first extrasolar planet that reminds us of a planet in our solar system," lead researcher Geoffrey Marcy said in an interview with SPACE.com several days prior to the announcement.
Marcy, of the University of California, Berkeley, said he and colleague Paul Butler, of the Carnegie Institution of Washington, have dreamed of this discovery for 17 years as they compiled data using a technique that many scientists said would never work. The two astronomers, whose team has grown in recent years, also announced 11 other worlds today at a press conference at NASA headquarters, bringing the total of known extrasolar planets to 98.
Potential for Earth twin
The new planet orbits 55 Cancri at 5.5 astronomical units (AU). One AU is the distance from Earth to the Sun. Jupiter orbits at 5.2 AU. The same team had already spotted another planet around 55 Cancri, a place slightly less massive than Jupiter. It orbits so close to the star that it makes a complete orbit in just 14.6 days.
Marcy speculated that the two-planet system could harbor more intriguing worlds, possibly even rocky planets like Earth, known as terrestrials.
"A Jupiter at five Earth-Sun distance units might serve as the marquee of a planetary theater located within, where terrestrial bit players are racing around on smaller tracks," Marcy said. "We are left to imagine what geophysical and perhaps biological improvisation is taking place inside this planetary playhouse."
Armed with their new data, Marcy and Butler enlisted theoretician Gregory Laughlin of the University of California, Santa Cruz, to look into whether the 55 Cancri system could also retain an Earth-sized planet in a life-sustaining orbit. Such a region, called a habitable zone, would maintain moderate temperatures suitable to the retention of surface water and the possibility of life.
Laughlin ran the data through computer models of planet formation. The answer is "yes."
"We tried a hypothetical configuration of a terrestrial planet in the habitable zone around one AU from the central star and found it very stable," said Laughlin, who also is associated with Lick Observatory. "Just as the other planets in our solar system tug on the Earth and produce a chaotic but bounded orbit, so the planets around 55 Cancri would push and pull an Earth-like planet in a manner that would not cause any collisions or wild orbital variations."
Marcy and Butler caution, however, that there is no way to detect an Earth-sized planet with present technology. Meanwhile, their data does suggest a third planet in the system, a possible Saturn-sized object. Others could lurk there.
Laurance Doyle, a researcher at the SETI Institute who was not involved in the discovery, told SPACE.com the new finding "is a strong encouragement" that our solar system "may not, after all, be totally unusual."
The Jupiter-like planet has another potential benefit, Doyle points out: Its gravity would lure comets, shielding inner planets from life-threatening bombardment. Jupiter plays this protective role in our solar system.
Pushing the limit
Marcy, Butler and their colleagues also announced today the lightest extrasolar planet ever found, one 40 times as massive as Earth.
This discovery pushes the lower limits of their wobble method, which spots movement in a star induced by the gravity of an orbiting planet. (No confirmed planet outside our solar system has ever actually been photographed.)
This relatively small planet, whose possible presence was first reported in May by SPACE.com, was detected around a star called HD 49674. It is just 15 percent the mass of Jupiter. Theory holds that it would be gaseous, not rocky. Previously, the lightest known extrasolar planet was more than 50 times heavier than Earth.
For comparison, Neptune is about 17 times as massive as Earth and Saturn is about 95 times as heavy.
Marcy has said the wobble method will not be able to find planets weighing less than 10 Earth-masses.
The SETI Institute's Doyle uses a different method for planet hunting, however. He looks for slight dips in a star's light that indicate the passage of a planet. The method has yet to discover a planet, but it has been used to detect the atmosphere of a known extrasolar planet.
This so-called transit method could spot a planet twice as big as Earth, Doyle says, if the planet's path is properly aligned so that it passes in front of the star as seen from Earth.
Such a planet would have roughly eight times the mass of our own. It would still be rocky and could, theoretically, harbor life.
Doyle said the existence of two planets bracketing the habitable zone around 55 Cancri "indicates that planet production may have taken place within the habitable zone of that system."
Next Page: A dream come true, plus what's next
~
Dream come true
The discovery of the Jovian twin caps 17 years of planet hunting by Marcy and Butler, who were not deterred by early skepticism in their technique.
"Way back in 1985, Paul Butler and I began sketching the idea for a new instrument, attached to a telescope, that might someday detect planets around other stars," Marcy told SPACE.com. "Some very smart people told us that we wouldn't succeed, that we would never detect the wobble of a star caused by its attendant planets."
They did, beginning in 1995 just months after a European team found the first planet around a star besides our Sun. Marcy and Butler confirmed that finding and went on to become the world's most prolific planet-hunting team.
"We always dreamed that maybe, with a wisp of phenomenal luck and dogged perseverance, we might capture evidence of a Jupiter-like planet," Marcy said.
Prior to today's announcement, all known extrasolar planets orbited more closely to their host stars, some as close as Mercury is to our Sun.
Because the planet around 55 Cancri takes 13 years to make a complete orbit, it took equally long for enough data to accumulate to definitively identify the object. Its orbit is elongated instead of being nearly circular like Jupiter's. "We haven't yet found an exact solar system analog," Butler said. "But this shows we are getting close."
Other recent discoveries have shown that circular orbits do exist around other stars.
Butler said more Jupiter-like planets will likely flow from the data they are collecting on 1,200 Sun-like stars.
What's next
While Doyle or someone else might find a planet twice the size of Earth, the discovery of a true Earth-sized planet won't come for at least a few years, most researchers agree.
But now there is a perfect place to look.
The 55 Cancri system "will be the best candidate for direct pictures" by a next-generation space-based observatory, said Debra Fischer, a UC Berkeley astronomer who is part of the Marcy-Butler team.
Two such missions are planned by NASA, first the Space Interferometry Mission and then the Terrestrial Planet Finder. The discovery of a solar system with elements similar to our own "adds urgency to missions capable of detecting Earth-sized planets," said Charles Beichman, NASA's Origins Program chief scientist at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena.
No firm launch dates are set for either of these satellites, however. Both would follow the less ambitious Kepler mission, set to launch in 2007. Kepler will use the transit method to detect and generate a census of Earth-like planets around other stars, assuming such planets exist, but it won't photograph any.
Details of the research
The star 55 Cancri is in the constellation Cancer. It is roughly 41 light-years from Earth and about 4.7 billion years old, comparable to our Sun.
The new discoveries were funded by NASA and the National Science Foundation. Observations of 55 Cancri were made at the Lick Observatory. The Anglo-Australian telescope was used to find two of the other planets announced today.
Other scientists who collaborated in the new findings: Steve Vogt, UC Santa Cruz; Greg Henry, Tennessee State University; Dimitri Pourbaix, Universite' Libre de Bruxelles; Hugh Jones, Liverpool John Moores University in the United Kingdom; Chris Tinney, Anglo-Australian Telescope; Chris McCarthy, Carnegie Institution of Washington; Brad Carter, University of Southern Queensland, Australia; and Alan Penny of the Rutherford Appleton Laboratory in the United Kingdom.
The wobble method, which is so far responsible for all extrasolar planet discoveries, is also known as the Doppler technique. The researchers employ special filters in a telescope to measure a change in the wavelength in light coming from a star. The change results from the star moving toward the telescope and compressing the waves, and then moving away from the telescope and lengthening the waves.
The effect is similar to the change in sound of a siren from an ambulance rushing toward you and then heading away.
A quote from the CNN article (which seems to be a bit more fleshed out) I didn't see in either of the ones listed at the top:
"We haven't found an exact solar system analog, which would have a circular orbit and a mass closer to that of Jupiter. But this shows we are getting close," said Paul Butler, another member of the planet-hunting team.
But the orbit of the Jupiter-like planet is stable enough to foster a benign, life-friendly environment in the inner solar orbit, Fischer said.
Dark Nexus
"Sanity is calming, but madness is more interesting."
With the money and resources that would be required to move to a new planet in a distant solar system, wouldn't it be far easier and cheaper and quicker to set up a colony on a planet/moon in our own system? They would need some sort of enclosed structure to survive, but could possibly begin terraforming that new world. Given how long it would take to find and inhabit a new earth, we could probably create one here quicker.
As an added bonus, we could send much more people to mars much faster, since in the time it would take to reach even the closest star, let alone one with habitable worlds, we could make many many round-trip voyages to an in-system world. This would certainly help overcrowding here on earth, and also get us started on interplanetary colonization. Once we actually got experience moving to new worlds, each successive one could only get easier, and with people on more than one world, there would most likely be more motivation for development of new technologies to make the trip faster and more efficent, as well as improving communication times.
Maybe it's just me, but I'd rather be on a hostile new world now than a less hostile one in a few million years.
-Space for rent
The article doesn't give much information about this, so I figured I'd put in my 2 cents from what I learned in astronomy this year:
Currently, they have 2 ways (that I'm familiar with) to find an extra-solar planet. First, they can look for a "wobble" in the path the star takes. This wobble is caused by the gravitational pull of a large planet orbiting the star. Earth is so small that the tiny wobble caused by a planet similar in size would be impossible to view; or at least it would disappear with the systematical error.
The other way I've heard of to find extra-solar planets is similar to an eclipse. When the planet comes between the star and Earth, we can measure the changes in luminosity of the star. Obviously, with planets with small orbits, we can determine how quickly the planet orbits the star because of the pattern in the luminosity. Again, we can't detect earth size planets since earth is just too small.
mmm...physics...
All we can hope for is that eventually they'll come across a planet in a solar system similar to ours somewhere out there in the infinate reaches of the universe that is identical in every way to ours, except that there'd be no Hitler, no Stalan, and no Barney.
If the universe truly is infinite, then it's only a matter of finite time before something like this is found. And without the need for parallel universes!
Duris MUD - The best pkill MUD. Ever.
The problem is that these are gas giants, like Jupiter or larger and we do not at this time have the tech to discover anything else.
Only 'flamers' flame!
Planet only 40 times more massive than earth... orbiting at 1/20th the radius of Earth's orbit... I imagine lying on my back, getting a brief and fatal sunburn... It's ok, though, because the gravity has already stopped all respiration, etc.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Start building the fleet!
I recommend employing shiny white robots as our attack force.
-Rothfuss
On the other hand, my uncle said:
I completely agree with both, Spock and my uncle.
This sig is a true statement, but I cannot prove it.
Maybe we really will travel thousands of billions of miles away to 'Earth2' only to be stranded, live with 'terrestrials', and idiots that want to petrify the land for them selves. On the upside we'll have one really hot doctor ;-)
In college, really poor, need a flatscreen.
Yeah, but the problem is that it will be populated with grups and onlies.
- Sam
...of this class of system. Scientists will eventually call them "The Sooooooooooool Train."
i don't get the thrust of the article focusing on finding earth-sized planets. is there some theory that necessitates a planet be our size to foster life? if so, why?
:).
Planets smaller than Earth will tend to lose their atmospheres over time (e.g. Mars, Mercury).
Planets larger than Earth will tend to have super-thick atmospheres with very hostile environments (e.g. the smaller gas giants, and Venus). Notice Venus in this list - an Earth-sized planet has a gravity well deep enough to hold an inhospitably thick atmosphere. Only some quirks of Earth's formation and evolution (mainly the presence of the moon) give us an atmosphere thin enough to let our type of climate and our type of life exist.
Life could exist deep underground in a much wider range of planets, but this would be microbes and not much else.
Life could potentially exist in oceans under the frozen crust of smaller worlds (e.g. Europa), but would likely be less interesting than life on Earth-like worlds, due to a much smaller energy throughput. These worlds would also have to have a substantial source of heat (either radioactive, like Earth's, or tidal, from being a satellite of a larger planet) to avoid freezing solid. Larger worlds will probably have enough geothermal energy to churn up their oceans, making stable life-bearing layers less likely.
So, Earth-like planets do seem to be the best place to look for non-microbal life
Soon, environmentalists won't be able to tell us not to pour motor oil down the sink because "It's the only planet we have".
The astronomers said that an Earthlike planet _could_ survive in an orbit between the two large ones. Given a choice between your guess that it would get ripped to shreds, and the opinions of professional astronomers who've studied this specific solar system, and concluded that an Earthlike planet could be there, I'm going to side with the astronomers.
Arrr, it be the infamous pirate, No Beard Pete!
WTF, the article said this exactly. You did read it, didn't you? Or are you just egotistical enough to try tricking people into thinking you have more information than the article gives.
Bah, maybe I'm just being overly critical, but it really bugs me when people don't read the article.
...maybe it's a big mirror in space. Or maybe the universe is much smaller than we previously thought and we're observing ourselves via the curvature of space.
Hey, someone has to come up with these crackpot ideas!
STOP MISUSING APOSTROPHES, YOU MORONS!!!
There are other plans to examine the spectral properties of the light as the planets pass in front of their star. Theoretically, one should be able to determine by subtraction what atmospheric properties belong to the planet using this technique.
Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
Excuse me, but I read the BBC article which only said this:
Detecting Earth-sized planets is probably not possible using current ground-based techniques. That will have to wait for a new generation of satellite observatories, due in the next decade.
The space.com article does give more information.
mmm...physics...
It is simple, we just need them damn Vulcans to give us their star charts and we will be all set. While were at it, we should snag their technology as well . . . . . WHAT! What do you mean Star Trek isn't real!?!?!?!?
If it won't boot, Fsck it!
One of the essential things for any materials-based culture is the ability to harness and control a simple energy source. Here on Earth, that's fire. For other environments, be it Gas Giant life or Underwater life, for it to advance past a certain point it needs these energy sources in great number.
This is not to say there is a X-Life out there that uses some tech that never needed this bootstrap, but if it's that radically different to Earth, how do you look for it ?
Wow, some dumbass moderator obviously didn't get the joke....
///It's only a matter of time until the Terrestrial Planet Finder program gets going and finds another Earth.///
That will never, ever, ever happen. The odds against there being another planet with the delicate ecosystem of Earth is simply incalculable, literally.
The place we live is unique among all other planets in the universe, it's time to accept that.
Palaces, barricades, threats, meet promises
Eloi are stupid, throw morlocks at them!
That gives us two things to look for. It tells us how far from a star to look (for the temperature and energy variables), and THAT gives us the likely type of planet to find in that region. From what we know of the physics of planetary formation, those planets would tend to be small and rocky, with the likely working fluid being water.
With a planet with aqueous water, the likely atmosphere would include some oxygen, but too much or too little would tend to work itself out over time (too much, and you tend to support a LOT of combustion, which would take up the excess oxygen. Low oxygen environments are thought to be similar to that in which life developed here on Earth. . . )
In a long and possibly too-technical explanation, that's why we look for "Earth-like" planets when we look for life. . .
We should then be told by the Galactic Community that we can't leave this planet until we clean it up. And that DOESN'T mean shoving everything into the closet (I tried it with Mom and it doesn't work).
IANAL, but I've seen actors play them on TV
This statement sounds like an assumption of a progression. IE, since we've found one that is close to some attractive specifications, we are soon going to find one more exactly meeting those specifications. As I understand it, the logic of this is quite elusive. Just because I went fishing and caught a large fish does not mean that I will catch an even bigger fish.
What we are doing is getting better and better looks at what is out there. This does not imply that we will eventually find another Earth. While the probability of there being other Earth like planets out there is quite high (potentially), the likelihood of us finding them, let alone communicating with them or visiting them, is very low given our current knowledge of the universe and physics. Of course, tomorrow someone may discover a way to travel vast distances in space and time in the blink of an eye, and thereby making it very likely.
It's good to know what is out there though, regardless of being able to interact or not, as it will get humanity looking outward and may lead to a peaceful and unified Earth.
Mind you, good answers to both questions are a long time coming, as we have the empirical evidence from only ONE solar system to base our estimates on. . .
Here apparently.
Space is big
Space is dark
It's hard to find
A place to park
Burma Shave
-- From Amiga Workbench Lander
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
You might want to look at Jean Schneider's Extrasolar Planetary Encylopedia for a lot more information, including accurate information that hasn't been put through the popular press. :D
After all, we ALL know how precise the media is, right?
55 Canri, btw, has been on the extrasolar planetary astronomy watch list for some time. Read the paper references at Jean's site. I wondered why it looked so familiar...
Do you know why the road less traveled by is littered with the bones of the unwary?
5-1 odds: We meet aliens with an excess of genetalia, and they trade with us for a bit. We then piss off some ancient race and get our arses kicked good.
10-1 odds: Microsoft beats the current legal problems and eventually comes to enslave us all. A few centuries later, we lead a jihad against them and free ourselves from horrible thinking machines.
100-1 odds: We find out that some guy's been creeping around for centuries. He founds an Imperium of Man, and millions of geeks sign up for genetic engineering and free extra organs. Double your money if some guy named Horus splits the Empire.
1000-1 odds: The UN survives to rule over the Earth for centuries to come. Some French guy with an English accent goes on to kick ass in the name of peace.
This is not a troll -- I'm genuinely very curious.
What do Christians think about stories like this? I ask becuase, in discussions with Christians, I've heard Christians tell me that there is no intelligent life on other planets. This was usually in response to my questions like, "Did Jesus die for aliens on other planets?" Perhaps a silly question for me to ask, but the "There is no intelligent life on other planets" was not an uncommon belief among the Christians I've met.
So I've often wondered what Christians (particularly Christian nerds, who are probably significantly more friendly to science than some of the Christians I've met) think when stories like thit surface and hint at the possibility of finding other "Earth-like" planets that may have intelligent life on them.
Thoughts?
I don't make the rules. I just make fun of them.
Only works if we're dead on with the plane of the ecliptic. How likely is that, for any given star?
It was a bad joke, so stfu
It's only a matter of time until the Terrestrial Planet Finder program gets going and finds another Earth
Yep. And when that happens, I'm leaving.
Universe created at same time with a mass shattering KABOOM! It would only go to reason that there would be many more solar systems roughly the same as ours. Geez, it's like saying only one snowflake ever looks like itself. That's extremely hard to believe as the exact conditions that produced the one snowflake undoutbedly created many more the same.
Besides, I hear the little buggers all the time...............;}
One can posit larger planets than Earth, IF they're significantly less dense. But that only goes so far, as does the opposite: you COULD have a decent atmosphere on a Mars-sized world IF it was significantly denser than Earth. The latter case is less likely, as Iron tends to be the end-point of any type of nuclear reaction. And a less-dense world would have problems developing a civilization: lower density implies less metal available. . . .
Wow, you fucked that up real good, code tag boy.
Now we have planets of roughly our size and solar position.
The next steps are to look for water and chlorophyl on those planets.
The long shot is EM transmissions.
Umm, dude, this is the star trek thread, okay? Go take your SeaQuest shit someplace else, okay dolphin fucker?
toward that (and similar) planetary system so we can decode the alien version of I Love Lucy re-runs. Seti client might need a upgrade to do the video tranlsation.
"I have a kick ass machine, it did 42 Alien-Lucy-seti units in 24 hours"!
sadly (on a serious note), the place is so far that even if they have intelligent life right now, we are looking at their planet's past... sigh. no extraterrestrial sitcoms for us.
My life in the land of the rising sun.
And what is the chance that we'll find an earth like it is now, it has been very different in the past.
Cthulu > Allah
How long until we discover we're in a big mirrored sphere just looking at the same stuff from different angles?
I don't want to be there when a spacecraft runs into the wall.
What bothers me about this is that while there is a quick mention of "formation models," most of the discussion of the potential existence of a terrestrial planet seemed focused on the stability of an orbit in the present configuration. In fact, it isn't clear to me that they've even considered the formation processes at all. (To be honest, I get the opposite sense.)
Why does this bother me, you ask? Because an orbit at 1 AU might be stable NOW, but if you have a giant planet migrating in through the inner solar system to an 15-day orbit, it'll wreck jolly hell with any planets it passes. The migration is slow enough that you are almost guaranteed a close-enounter of some kind. Once a Earth-sized planet gets near a giant planet, the orbit is in the very least highly perturbed. Odds are fair that it could be ejected altogher or will collide with the giant planet and be effectly lost. But even if it isn't, the eccentricity is probably going to be increases substantially. A planet that changes its distance from its star radically over a year is unlikely to be habitable, if you believe current models.
wouldn't it be interesting... and yet frightening if they find a planet exactly like Earth... same continental shaping and everything.
How likely is that, for any given star?
It's more likely than you might think. It has to do with conservation of angular momentum and it's the planets and even the moons in our solar system are all within a few degrees of the same plane.
Sure there are exceptions, but the chances of seeing a solar system on edge is considerably better than whatever it would be if they were just randomly distributed.
Even though I'm still young, the one thing that I hope I live to see is the discovery of other life in the universe. If nothing else but to give a big Nelson "Ha ha." to all the people who believed otherwise. Billions and billions.
Send a lawyer. If he doesn't come back, the locals were probably intelligent enough to kill him.
As it turns out, a group of rival scientists went up into space and just put a REALLLY big mirror up there.
According to the Hitchiker's Guide to the Galaxy:
"A gigantic mirror in space is almost a sure sign of planetary intelligence. News of such hitherto unknown planets are highly sought after and exorbitant finder's fees are routinely paid out to space explorers who discover such planets on their travels. While some vocal critics insist that a huge mirror in space is in fact a rather strong hint to go look for intelligence elsewhere, these views are scoffed at by the cosmetics industry, who are enjoying from the proceeds of an extremely lucrative business of hauling massive quantities of cheap lip stick, mascara, and a variety of skin lotions professed to increase a healthy growth of foliage at the poles. Recently, though, the increased campaining of the Deep Peace activists has started to interfere with the image of the cosmetics industry, claiming that the exploitation of small defenseless planets and asteroids for testing new products is against basic planetary rights. A small but equally vociferous group of activists is complaining that the portrayal of planetary bodies in Galactic media is demeaning and gives a warped view of planethood to the young and impressionable."
The Guide then goes on to explain that "Incidentally, there is a small backwater planet called Earth, which was originally colonized by a group exiled telephone handset cleaners, insurance salesmen, and (you guessed it), hairdressers. While, in recent times, this particular planet has become known for its very own mirror in space", warns the Guide, "there is absolutely no reason to visit this seedy little planet. It is the most boring place in the Universe."
"I have opinions of my own, strong opinions, but I don't always agree with them." -- George H. W. Bush
Even if we found a planet as pleasant as our own it could be inhabited by a bunch of monkeys and that is it. Or, just birds, rats and snakes.
:-)
There are lots of planets out there. But, we just do not know how difficult it is for a planet to support the wide range of organisms (life) we have here.
Remember the days when we thought Martians might be green, 3 feet tall and have antlers? Well. Today we consider ourselves lucky to find out that Mars has water. Or once did.
There may be other planets with life. But, I would guess we find thousands if not millions of them with life (just not intelligent) before we find anything close to what we have. And, we have yet to find the first of those. Well, maybe some can claim that something was living on Mars at one time. But, there is a big difference between "something alive" and intelligent life. Yes, I know we sometime suggest that some individuals do not express that difference very well.
NexuSys - Linux support by the best
Okay, it's been a while since my last high school physics class, but, um, isn't this exactly what we would expect?
After all, there's an equation there for getting some body of mass a to orbit some body of mass b, at a distance of c apart, needing to do so at a speed of d.
So, yeah, we're probably going to see everything lining up and orbiting at speeds just about where the physics says they're going to be.
This is astonishing, why, exactly?
Ed R.Zahurak
You know, oblivion keeps looking better every day.
...that RMS tries to name the first Earth-like planet this projects finds GNU/Earth ("New Earth")?
as a follower of Christ who specializes in nerdiness/geekiness, i feel obligated to answer your questions.
while the bible does not specifically state that there is life on other planets, it never says that there isn't life on other planets. i, personally, believe that there isn't life, even though i know this is total flamebait. this is my belief and it is based on feelings, not facts. i would venture to believe that the feelings i have that lead me to believe this are probably similar to one's feelings that would lead one to believe that because there are other planets, there's a possibility that life exists on them. We currently have no evidence that really proves that extra-terrestrial life exists, but we have no evidence that really proves that extra-terrestrial life doesn't exist. Very similar to my faith, in that I have no rock-solid evidence that proves that my God exists but I have no rock-solid evidence against Him, either. That's why it's called faith..
As far as Jesus dying for the sins of aliens on other planets..hmm..it really depends on a couple of things. First of all, if we are to believe that the fall of man was confined only to earth, then I would probably say that yes, Jesus did only die for the sins of those who live on earth..e.g. "For God so loved the WORLD" -- However, I believe that man's fall was universal, and therefore I would have to say that the universe, in turn, was entirely effected.
Many questions remain, even though none have really been answered.. if aliens exist, why do we assume that it would be intelligent life and not like a martian dog or rat or something? if the life is intelligent, does it have a soul that is saveable, according to Christian theology? hmmm..much meditation and critical thinking is required here..
What do you think about this?
Those who can, do. Those who can't, go into business for themselves.
Are you wearing those pink panties today, speck?
Yes!
Can we see them?
Sure!
ROAD TRIP!!!
To-do List: Receive telemarketing call during a tornado warning. Check.
I always thought it was called the Solar System because it was the system of planets that revolved around the star named Sol. Shouldn't the proper generic term be stellar systems then and not planetary systems?
what the subject says :)
Just because he made fun of telephone handset cleaners doesn't mean you should be ashamed of your job. It just means you would be better off dead. Why do I think that is your ideal career? Because you're obviously too stupid to be a hairdresser and plainly lack the vocal skills of a salesman.
Those are indeed the two methods.
However, I have some info to add about the second method. *begin Karma whoring* The technique looks for the changes in the light coming from a star as a planet passes in between the star and us. While this sounds like a more practical method, it actually has never discovered any planets. Theoretically however, this technique is capable of finding stars that are about 2 times the size of Earth.... so at least we're close!
The likelihood is large enough that it is a virtual certainty, given the BILL-yuns and BILL-yuns of stars we can observe.
50 bucks says you're catholic.
Huh? What's that got to do with life on other planets? I'm Catholic, and I think there are probably lots of planets with life...
I think you must be your own punchline...
Will my StarBand work there? I can imagine playing Quake with a 41-year ping time...
"Amazon Bondage Planet"
See pr0n posts above for details.
Eve Fairbanks says I drive a hybrid!LOL
The important part is
Calculations made by Greg Laughlin of the University of California at Santa Cruz show that an Earth-sized planet could survive in a stable orbit between the two gas giants.
This of course doesn't mean that we found anything only that when we are able to look for earth-like planets this is our best bet for hitting the jackpot.
--
/me does a double-take..
Just because it is possible for a frog to survive on a patch of grass dividing a 6 lane highway, does not mean that this is the best place to look for frogs.
Currently, we are using radar guns to observe speeding tractor-trailers, and speculating that due to the theoretical possibility of frogs living in the adjacent grass, that's where we should focus our efforts.
If you want to look for frogs, you go to a swamp, marsh or pond. Now, where are equivalent environments for finding Earth-sized planets? And what do we need to find them?
The REAL jabber has the user id: 13196
What you do today will cost you a day of your life
They have yet to find, and in my opinion, never will find a plant "just like earth". To find a planet with just the right mix of "stuff"...tilt, atmosphere, distance from sun, distance from other planets, satellites (moons) etc, etc, is a statistical improbability.
I was wondering what Christians on /. thought. I find websites like christiananswers.net to be arrogant, since the implication is that they have "THE Christian answer" for various questions, when, in fact, truth is not quite so cut-and-dry. Even amoung Christians, there is quite a bit of disagreement and dialog on many different subjects.
If you are a Christian, then what do YOU think about my questions?
I don't make the rules. I just make fun of them.
To me at least, the significance is not life ittself existing, but similar life.
You can't judge a book by the way it wears its hair.
When will we get pictures of Earth-sized planets with enough resolution to see the general geography of the planet?
Quote from the Yahoo article about the same thing:
55 Cancri is located 41 million light-years from the Earth, in the constellation of Cancer. The star, believed to be around five billion years old, is visible to the naked eye, astronomers said.
HA! I don't think so. That's about 20 times the distance to the Andromeda Galaxy. Nice how the people they have writing these things up have a good grasp on the fundamentals of the subject matter.
When are we going to find the planet that is inhabited by beautiful women who love scientists, engineers, and computer geeks?
Yes, it's extremely unlikely that we'll ever find a planet that's an exact, ecological match for our own. But it doesn't have to have the same complex ecosystem that we have -- it just has to have SOME ecosystem. It will likely be complex, just like ours is, but it can be completely different. There's no problem with that. Is it only earth-like if platypusses, cardinals, sloths, and small-pox have evolved on it? No. I think we'll be sending colonists (someday) just as long as we could set up an environment there that we could survive in -- much better if it even has a breathable atmosphere. (Size and composition of the planet will largely account for that.)
Any sufficiently simple magic can be passed off as mere advanced technology.
Someone should put this in celestia!
(audio version)
Krótko: kady Erotomek
W pimiennictwie ma swój domek.
Just rocks floating in space, the planets are not. I shenshe a deep disturbance in the force - aah a planet!
By now, I am readily convinced that there is other life in the universe. In fact, it seems that odds are greater that there isn't life in the universe.
But if I'm like most anyone else, the possibility of life on the western spiral of the Andromeda Galaxy just isn't useful. Its simply too far. We would never recieve a radio transmission from there and its too far to travel.
First, lets assume Einstein is correct and we can not travel faster than the speed of light. In addition, lets rid our minds of all this science-fiction crap like wormholes and warp-drive. While I am naive, I'm not *that* naive.
Lets take the nearest star. I've heard it is 4.3 light years away. That means a radio transmission originating their takes 4.3 years to travel here. Honestly, we could live with that. Of course that is not only assuming that that civilization has developed technology, but it also assumes that they haven't been exinct by some means.
But, we're pretty sure there isn't a planetary system around proxima centauri. So we have to look farther out. But how long are we willing to wait for a round of communication from us to them? One hundred years? One thousand years? A hundred-thousand years?
Okay, as a second consideration, how long does a civilization last once it discovers radio? We've only had radio technology for a relatively little time. How much longer will we continue to exist? Take HG Wells Time Machine. Will we unlearn our technology and instead progress towards a native happiness? What about other civilizations?
In all, what are the odds that not only life exists in the universe, but that it is close enough and that it is in their technological prime?
I'd fashion that the odds are astronomical against us.
People of the Internet, heed the words of our God, the almighty Jesus|Mohamed|Buddah|Bush Christ, for the lord speakth from the seventh heaven and all is not lost.
Seek not the second earth, for such a creation is beyond probability, the ability to create such permutations is even lost to your Lord.
Seek not others of your kind, for you art unique and made just like me(tm). A patent has been granted on my suprime design thus, any conterfitting of your Genome would result in utter devestation and massive calamity.
Oh people of slashdot, have you lost your ability to think? Why did hast thy lord given you fingers and ear wax? Do you not heed the words of thy lord. Beware the yarn of the dark lord, for he is Tyrannaus and the most vile. Let not thyself be decided by his seduction for in that way lies doom.
Since I am thy god, and with my infintie paitence, I once again tell thee.. There is no one like you created in any other place, we never even thought of making a planet like earth and everthing that came after thee were based on something else that we cant really discuss about (NDA).
My Children, seek not that which clouds thy mind and loose thy heart. There are matters of much more importance, seek the destruction of the hands of the Evil, of the terrible terror that lurks behind ever dual boot. My Children, love thy god and vanquish the demons within thee, reep the seeds of success and virty and rejoince in the arms of St. Stallman.
And for those of you who steal, my children, steal not from thy neighbor, let thy neighbor know the virtues of being helpful. Wipe the creed the breweed from the hell face of Redmond, wipe the seeds of BSA and the RIAA and the MPAA. Let your neighbor never have to steal from thee, make whatever you have... belong to thy neighbor.
On the matter of Microsoft, I say.. I shall strike thee with great vengence..........
Well, if they have assholes, we could do anal sex with them.
All the answers from Christians of one sort or another are always prefaced with "The Bible says..."
Can you forget the Bible for a moment?
What? Can't do that? Can't use any other source of information than the Bible? Because the Bible is the True Word of God?
Why don't we use the Qur'an instead? Lots of people believe THAT is the True Word of God. No?
How about using your own brain? Your own sense of reason? What? You can't reason because those who taught you said you don't need to reason because all the answers are In The Bible.
What if the Bible had the following passage:
"... and the Lord says unto thee 'kick the wall of thine enemy and thou shalt feel no pain.'"
So you go and kick a wall and you find out a basic truth; IT FUCKING HURTS!!!.
Now, supposedly your Bible is telling you the Truth because it is the True Word of God. But your experience in the real world contradicts the Bible.
You can do three things:
1) Justify away by saying the Bible is allegory.
2) Justify away by saying the bible is just moral guidance.
3) Realize that the Bible is just a book which shouldn't get in the way of your discovery of the universe.
Yeh, it's virtually guaranteed that a few out there are perfect (maybe more? can someone do the math for this, I don't know how). But what if it's our luck that they happen to be the least interesting stellar systems? Or so far away it doesn't matter?
It's simply not a viable way to detect planets, by itself. In conjunction with other methods, it's somewhat useful, or so it would seem to me.
Then again, I am kindaa dumb, is it possible that you can determine the plane of ecl. by observing the "wobble" they see?
For the clueless, one might posit the following factors as being part of the picture:
Just some rambling going on in my mind as I read your comment, which is a pretty accurate synopsis of out current position.
Consider that while we haven't seen anything faster than light, we have seen phenomenom capable of stopping it. I would be curious as to whether photons can obtain higher velocities on an approach to a Black Hole or can slingshot around one in a shallow tragectory (just above the event horizon) and obtain a FTL speed boost. It works with satillites and all that gravity is obviously affecting light in some way. So without any equations or links to back me up, I tend to believe that FTL speeds can be achieved. That's not to say we're anywhere near dreaming of doing it ourselves in reality, but I'm optimistic. But until that point, which is a long, long, long, long way off, we'd be better off spending the money we're using to search for these planets colonzing our own backyard and clearing it of potentially annoying rocks. On a side note, optics seem to be coming along nicely. Just imagine what a kick in the ass space funding would get if one of these giant space telescopes were to actually SEE something to indicate life...
You need a FREE iPod Nano
Revelations. Is it just me, or could this very well fit into an alien attack? Orbital bombardment, bio/chemical weapons, the whole nine yards.
Anyway, I'm Christian, and it's a tough question to answer. I saw somebody had a link addressing the issue, but I can't say I was too impressed by it. I'm under the personal opinion the Bible is a biography on what we need to know, not what we want to know. It tells about the things revelant to us. Creation relative to us.
"Did Jesus die for Aliens on other planets?" That really depend on how broadly you want to define a gentile. in the Bible, it pretty much refered to any man not a Jew. Again, the Bible was mainly skewed to Earth. I would think that if God did create other races, that something similar might have happened with them. After all, free choice seems to be a reoccuring theme with his creations (Men, Angels). Unless those other races were perfect, I'd think they may have (or will) be given the same opportunity. Somehow. Not meaning this in any demeaning fasion, but a Jesus on every alien world? Why not, he can obviously transend our physical limitations. Or maybe one every 5 races, the rest being a galactic form of Gentile. Beats the heck out of me. It makes for interesting musings, but not something I'll lose sleep over. My Jesus was more than enough for me.
And here's an interesting bone to pick... If we are the only intelligent life in creation, is it really a terrible waste of space, considering the Lord saw fit to make us unique amoung entire Galaxies? I'd consider it an honor. Of course, I'm saved, so I consider it an honor ET's or no.
Serious discussion is welcome as are trolls... After all, I need a good laugh every now and then.
You need a FREE iPod Nano
Will the fleet include a Super Dimentional Fortress? I'll take five of them...
You need a FREE iPod Nano
That's where Aliens live at.
No joke.
Look it up.
Isn't the possibility of seeing a planet as it eclipses the star pretty darn slim because for the vast majority of stars, the planetary orbital plane is going to *not* be across the star from our point of view?
In the beginning of this year I read that the chief astronomer of the Vatican's Observatory said, that it would be stupid to say, that there is no alien life.
Doing a Google-search on this, I found this.
My personal point of view as a Roman Catholic: We do not know whether there is extraterrestrial life, and we need neither the existence nor the absence of it for our believe system, so we should leave it open. Especially this keeps us away from those ugly things that happened to Bruno and Galilei. But we admitted (although 500 years to late) that they were right.
use Bielefeld.pm
It might be that giving typewriters to a bunch of monkeys would make them more intelligent. Maybe some university could try that in their monkey labs. They could pass out typewriters to one bunch, laptops to another and of course a few old or broken ones to a control group. Of course, the laptops would have to have a word processor or maybe and old copy of Turbo Pascal for a fair test.
...
The real problem is that we have no idea what really caused the human species to become intelligent. One can assume that between a dumb ape and a smart ape, the smart one figured out how to survive. But, what made him smarter in the first place?
And, of course the real problem is that on this planet we have thousands if not millions of animal species. And, only one of them became aware of their own existence. What is that term that Star Trek shows always use? You know. That status they were not even sure Data the android achieved?
I think we just assume that if some life can exist that intelligent life would follow. I doubt that is true. How long do you think it would take on this planet for "another" species to be become sufficiently intelligent to get even close to the human race? There are some that we consider to be very intelligent. Some even have forms of communication among themselves. Perhaps they are even fairly sophisticated. But, do they know who we are? Do they know who they are?
One can even imagine finding a planet someone else that has an ocean and even has a population of whales. But, we can not talk to our own whales. So how we are going to talk to "their" whales is beyond me. And, "their" whales are not like to be sending out any signals that SETI will pick up either.
I like Carl Sagan's theory about billions and billions of other suns and worlds. But, we simply have no idea how rare we may be. The SETI project has been listening for radio messages for some time now. And, to date nothing has been announced that would suggest anyone else exists anywhere. Now, maybe we are listening in the wrong place. And, for the most part we only listen although all of those radio signals that get picked up by satellite continue on out into space. So, if they are listening they could pick up a run of the "I love Lucy" show. Or, "All in the Family". Or, perhaps a speech by Bin Laden? Or, maybe a re-run of "Star Trek IV". Now, that would really confuse them. But, SETI hears nothing.
The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. But, after awhile
Maybe no one is out there. Or, maybe those monkeys have not figured out how to use their typewriters yet.
NexuSys - Linux support by the best
And I think it's exceedingly cool. I strongly suspect that there is life in many different places and some of that life is probably intelligent and self-aware.
Do I think that Jesus died for intelligent life on other planets? No, I do not.
If God has plans for these beings, God is going to reveal it to them in a way appropriate to their nature.
I have discovered a truly marvelous sig, unfortunately the sig limit is too small to contain i
Forgot all about that. You are right.
:-)
And, since the monkey got smart we upgraded the monolith to an ATM kit.
NexuSys - Linux support by the best
I would be curious as to whether photons can obtain higher velocities on an approach to a Black Hole or can slingshot around one in a shallow tragectory (just above the event horizon) and obtain a FTL speed boost. It works with satillites and all that gravity is obviously affecting light in some way.
The whole notion of black hole is predicated on General Relativity, which carries the explicit assumption that light in a vacuum travels at the same speed relative to all frames, and we have yet to find reproducible experiments which contradict this. The slingshot effect from orbital mechanics only works because we take angular momentum from other orbiting bodies (i.e. planets), and while there is a theoretical technique for extracting angular momentum from a rotating black hole, it does not yield anything faster than light. Furthermore, a light ray is unable to pass very close to the event horizon without falling in, unless the hole is rotating extremely rapidly in the same direction (to the point where its angular momentum is comparable to its rest-mass energy). In the non-rotating case, it can only approach 3/2 the event-horizon radius, which is an unstable photon orbit.
Stanislaw Lem in "Fiasco" already answered that
question. In short, because we want contact, and we could not contact with something with don't recognize.
Actually, many believe that if there was intelligent life, that Since MAN is made in Gods' image, and aliens probably will not look like men, and so would be demons, "fallen Angels", if you will
"It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"