Microlensing Uncovers Earth-Like Planet

smooth wombat writes "Using a new technique called gravitational microlensing, a team of astronomers have discovered the smallest Earth-like planet circling a star 20,000 light years away in the constellation Sagittarius. Unfortunately the planet takes ten years to circle the red dwarf and has a surface temperature estimated at -220 C which means it's just a larger version of Pluto so the chance of finding life on this planet is essentially zero."

Comments

Because it's small and rocky.

[Anonymous Coward]

Unlike all the gas-giant, Jupiter-like planets we've seen so far. It's very difficult to spot tiny, Earth-sized objects from so far away. We may not find this new planet very hospitable but it's still an important discovery.

Re:Earthlike?

[scheming daemons]

By "earth-like" they meant that it is terrestrial, not a gas giant (a la Jupiter or Saturn).

Until now.. they hadn't found a planet in another star system that was

A) terrestrial (solid, with a rocky surface) B) farther than 0.15 AU from its star.

This planet is 2.5 AU from it's star and it is not a gas giant. That's what makes it "earth-like".. in the way that mercury, venus, mars, and pluto are "earth-like".

Until now.. no such planet had been observed in another star system.

All of this is in TFA.

Official ESO Press Release

[Oink]

Since I am related to the guy interviewed for the ESO Press Release I feel obliged to link to it.

http://www.eso.org/outreach/press-rel/pr-2006/pr-0 3-06.html

I have not read the BBC article. But this is the official PR document. It's nice having relatives in the field. I had this news days ago. :)

Re:Basic thermodynamics

[Jim_Callahan]

Uh, melting point varies with pressure and a couple other factors that depend on your PVT model. You can melt pretty much any material if you set the conditions correctly, regardless of wether the decomposition temperature is below the MP at 1 atm or not. The liquid phase may not be very accessible, but it's always there.
 
Also, you need a better example, since Sucrose (the molecule people mean when they say 'sugar' without a qualifier) has a MP of 191 degrees centigrade at 1 atm, i.e. it has a viable liquid phase pre-decomposition. Perhaps you're thinking of Glucose or Ribose?
 
You could make an argument that 'frozen liquid' would refer to an amorphous (non-crystalline/glassy) structured solid only, as these result from a skipping of the phase formation bit of solidification to just lock the structure of the liquid into solid form. However, I think it's more likely that the writers of the article just skipped the materials phase of their education, locking the structure of their brains into a void-filled physics-oriented glass. Or they just, you know, made the intellectual equivalent of a typo. Whichever.

Re:Wait...

[DerekLyons]

Who is to say that there isn't intelligent life in the form of a vapor, or a thinking rock somewhere in the universe? [...] I hate to use a middle manager term, but what we need is a paradigm shift. To assume intelligent life would warm blooded and bipedal may be a mistake. Who knows what forms are out there?

Nobody is assuming that intelligent life would be warmblooded and bipedal. In fact, nobody said anything about intelligent life in the first place, just that there was little likelihood of this planet harboring life.

That being said, life depends on a certain level of chemical activity (I.E no thinking rocks) and a large degree of predictable organization (I.E. no intelligent vapor). Anything else requires repealing the laws of physics and chemistry as they currently understood. (The former is possible on the cosmic and subatomic scale, I.E. outside the realms of life. The latter is unlikely in the extreme.)