Slashdot Mirror
Earth-Sized Planets Confirmed -- But They're Dead
tizo writes "Robert Britt wrote an interesting article about the discovery of three Earth-sized planets confirmed after ten years of controversy. They orbit a pulsar, a neutron stars spinning very rapidly. Researchers pinned down the masses by watching how the planets affect pulses of energy coming from the star.
All other known planets around other stars are much bigger (like Jupiter) and were found using other techniques (Doppler effect of main star moving in a close circle because of influence of the planet or direct transit over line of sight)."
It always amuses me when discoveries like this get made. I've had arguments with people who claim Earth is unique, and those arguments have gone from "extrasolar planets can't exist" to "earth-sized planets can't exist" - and now, they'll likely go to "earth-sized planets in the habitable zone can't exist" (which is bullshit, because the habitable zone only applies to our particular ecosystem)...
Sigh... I imagine these same people will claim that it's all a big illusion when we discover an earth-like planet.
at least at some point in time. For example, our solar system has been around for only a fraction of the life of the Universe. Whole ecosystems and, sometimes, civilizations can come and go in a moment's time (from the Universe's point of view...if it had a point of view...well, you understand).
It is actually very unlikely that we would witness a civilization in a state similar to our own. They would most likely be millions or billions of years behind or ahead of us. Would we even be able to recognize one even a million years ahead of us? It seems life forms like to do things exponentially...
Healthcare article at Kuro5hin
Based on the share number of galaxies and stars within each galaxy, mathematics would dictate that there are close to infinte numbger of earth like planets.
Will we ever find a planet similar to our Earth with life similar to our on it? Maybe, but the chances are extremly slim based on the the enormous distances we are talking about.
Based on this I would also say the chances are extremly slim that we will ever make contact with other intelligent beeings in the Universe. Maybe we ought to consider the possibility that intergalactic spacetravel is not physically possible hence we will never meet "aliens" from other planets?
If you mod me down, I *will* introduce you to my sister!
Actually, it depends on what you mean by "contact". If you mean two-way communication, I happen to agree. We'd have to get EXTREMLY lucky to be close enough in time and space to a sufficiently similar species to be able to hold an effective conversation.
However, we have a much better shot at hearing the echoes of long dead civiliations coming to us from other systems. Remember that each signal goes flying out in a sphere around the transmitter at the speed of light. Therefore, much of the statistical problems with time/space coincidence go away. We are currently being bathed in emissions from systems 4.5 light years to nearly 14 billion light-years away. That's a lot of history to be receiving at one time and there's a shot that some of those emissions will be coming from machines created by intelligent beings.
Of course, the idea of sitting in a radio observatory listening to the whispers of a race that's been dead longer than our planet has existed is a lot less exciting than coming out of hyperspace, engines audibly blazing in the vacuum as the crew realizes that "that's no moon." Still, it would be pretty exciting to me.
"Maybe we ought to consider the possibility that intergalactic spacetravel is not physically possible hence we will never meet "aliens" from other planets?"
Less than one hundred years ago, we didn't think atom bombs were possibly, much less even conceive of them. Less than thirty years ago, there was no idea of what we would be capable in 2003. I wouldn't dismiss the idea of FTL travel just because I can't conceive it yet. Nature seems to always leave some way to do something that we didn't think possible at first. Just wait and be patient (or spend money/effort in research).
"Light is faster than sound." - "Is that why people tend to look bright until you hear them speak?"
We didn't have theoretical reasons on the impossibility of certain things like atomic bombs or computers in every home or whatever else, only technical doubts whether it would have been feasible (or pratical enought) or not.
To say that strictly speaking FTL travel is possible would mean to throw away most things we consider true about life, the universe and everything. I'm not saying that this is impossible, only that it is not easy, not that likely in the next couple of centuries of so and extremely unpleasant for our scientists :)
Of course intergalactic space travel may still be possibile, be it through time-backward FDL travel, teleport, countless eons travel by a self-sufficient ship or whatever else the extreme and still unclear border of our current theory will allow.
"Given the capacity of an infinite occurance of infinite events, some monkeys could very well write Shakespear."
Correct, some monkeys could write shakespear. In fact it is true that in the span of the next 24 hours a monkey could write shakespear. The operative work is COULD, not would. It is a fallicy to believe that given an infinite amount of time something will happen.
Consider this, fractals are infinitly deep. That is, you can continue to zoom into fractals infinetely and you will always have more and moree detail to look at. Thus there are an infinite number of pictures present within a fractal. Does this mean that everyfractal HAS to have a picture of the mona lisa? Of course not. Also by the reasoning of "given infinite time anything will happen" ever fractal is exactly the same. That is, the each contain every fractal.
The problem lies in the fact that there are different types of infinities. Infinite time is a COUNTABLE infinity, while the number of things that a monkey could do in an infinite time is a much larget infinity. Thus, in an infinite amount of time, a monkey could not possible do everything that he COULD do. Thus, he is not garunteed to do anything.
Azav raises a great point, although rather crudely. I myself am still amazed that so many people that consider themselves intellegent can belive the "given and infinte time" argument. I guess that the success of this argument is soely based on the fact that people have a hard time comprehending large numbers (else, the lottery would not exist). Sadly this is the case, and as such this example of poor reasoning will continue to prevail.
Also compounding the problem is the almost religious belife people have that there MUST be life out there. These same people that can berate the religious for beliving in some powerfull being that is "just out there" themselves belive that there is life somewhere "just out there". But i suppose that hypocrisy is only human....sigh
well i didn't really mean for this post to be so cinical, sorrry about that. But the fact remains that the "infinite time" argument is not a very good one.