Slashdot Mirror


Solar System Look-Alike Found

SpuriousLogic writes "Astronomers have discovered a planetary system orbiting a distant star which looks much like our own. They found two planets that were close matches for Jupiter and Saturn orbiting a star about half the size of our Sun. Martin Dominik, from St Andrews University in the UK, said the finding suggested systems like our own could be much more common than we thought."

114 comments

  1. Must be our evil mirror solar system counterpart by the_humeister · · Score: 4, Funny

    But wait! I'm the one with the goatee. Does that mean I'm the evil one???

  2. A bit of a reach by Bovius · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm sorry, I have trouble whenever whenever an astronomer suggests that something they found "may be much more common than we thought." One observation does not mean way more common. It jumps the gap from "purely theoretical" to "proven possible", and in the data set of the known universe really isn't enough to make any type of assertion about commonality.

    Yes, I know, our solar system makes it two.

    1. Re:A bit of a reach by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It certainly eliminates the "uniqueness" we thought our solar system was. So yes, 2 is more common than we previously thought.

    2. Re:A bit of a reach by Hannah+E.+Davis · · Score: 1

      Well, two is more common than one, so if we originally thought we were unique.... well...

    3. Re:A bit of a reach by Otter · · Score: 2, Informative

      I think the idea is that since we can only examine such a small fraction of the universe, anything we find must be reasonably "common". (Earth itself being exempt from that logic because of the anthropic principle.)

    4. Re:A bit of a reach by porkchop_d_clown · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So yes, 2 is more common than we previously thought.

      Because a star is "just like ours" if it has 50% of the mass?

      I'm sorry, this story is a ridiculous piece of over-reaching. A star half the size of ours will have, off the cuff, maybe 1/4th the light output. How big is that habitable zone going to be?

    5. Re:A bit of a reach by corgan517 · · Score: 1

      Agreed, though my trouble stems from the fact that I know relatively little (ok ...nothing) about the assumed frequency of planet-types within any system. It may be that they had predicted not to find a similar situation in this case... Can't say with out statistics to compare.

    6. Re:A bit of a reach by tirerim · · Score: 1

      We don't really have any previous data on how common they are, though, so "more common than we thought" is pretty much meaningless. We've only just started having the technology to potentially detect systems like our own (and we still can't detect terrestrial planets like ours). All we knew before was that systems quite unlike our own were common, which doesn't say much when they were the only kind we could detect. It will be awhile longer before we can even make an initial statement of whether they're rare or common.

    7. Re:A bit of a reach by History's+Coming+To · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry, I have trouble whenever whenever an astronomer suggests that something they found "may be much more common than we thought." One observation does not mean way more common. It jumps the gap from "purely theoretical" to "proven possible", and in the data set of the known universe really isn't enough to make any type of assertion about commonality.
      --
      Please consider this account deleted, I just can't be bothered with the spam anymore.
    8. Re:A bit of a reach by HeronBlademaster · · Score: 1

      The first thing I thought when I read the summary: "two gas planets + a half-size sun != similar to our solar system."

    9. Re:A bit of a reach by Toonol · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Right; we don't really have any data to confirm how common earthlike planets are. I expect they're very common, using the common-sense reasoning thusly: As soon as we gained the technology to detect big planets we found them all over. As soon as we develop the technology to detect small planets, the same thing will probably happen. I'm 99% positive I'm right.

      But scientists can't really reason that way; they may hypothesize smaller planets, but can't really make any factual statement about what lies beyond their ability to detect. I guess that the statement would be better phrased as we now have concrete evidence our solar system isn't unique, so the hypothesis that our type of system is relatively common has passed a hurdle of proof.

    10. Re:A bit of a reach by CorSci81 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually, considering the range of sizes stars can have, a factor of 2 is pretty damn close in the astronomical world.

    11. Re:A bit of a reach by pe1rxq · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Half the size is still very much alike....
      And because the configuration is alike (as far as gas giants and there place) it is likely that the evolution of our system is not unique.

      --
      Secure messaging: http://quickmsg.vreeken.net/
    12. Re:A bit of a reach by misleb · · Score: 1

      I'm sorry, I have trouble whenever whenever an astronomer suggests that something they found "may be much more common than we thought." One observation does not mean way more common. It jumps the gap from "purely theoretical" to "proven possible", and in the data set of the known universe really isn't enough to make any type of assertion about commonality.


      I suppose it depends on what one considers "common."

      Lets put it this way. If you walked up to a haystack and looked down and quickly spotted a needle, wouldn't that suggest to you that needles might be pretty common in the haystack? I mean, what are the chances that you would just happen to observe the location of a single needle in a large haystack in a relatively short period of time? Certainly it is possible that you foudn the *only* one, but it is much more likely that there were many that you could have spotted first.

      --
      "THERE IS NO JUSTICE, THERE IS ONLY ME." -Death
    13. Re:A bit of a reach by Daimanta · · Score: 1

      "Yeah, I know this guy who looks just like me. The only difference is that he is half my size but besides that, we are like two drops of water."

      --
      Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power lost.
    14. Re:A bit of a reach by Tanktalus · · Score: 1

      local != common

    15. Re:A bit of a reach by interstellar_donkey · · Score: 1

      That's a darn good analogy, and it makes sense to suggest that solar systems like our own are likely to be more common than ever imagined.

      --
      The Internet is generally stupid
    16. Re:A bit of a reach by WaltBusterkeys · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Saying that "a factor of 2 is pretty damn close in the astronomical world" is right, but it proves how unlikely it is that we'll find another solar system "just like ours." If astronomers think that being off by 50% is a discovery worth announcing worldwide, then that shows just how unlikely they think it is that they'll discover something that's only off by 5-10%. As others have said, a sun that's half the size of ours will have a much smaller habitable zone (at least based on carbon/water life), and there are only gas giants circling this star.

    17. Re:A bit of a reach by porkchop_d_clown · · Score: 1

      "pretty damn close"?

      As I said, it's going to have a much lower light output and, thus, a much smaller habitable zone - hardly "just like our sun" and hardly likely to have an earth-like world.

    18. Re:A bit of a reach by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The uniqueness in question I think is the 2 gas giants that aren't in close orbits. We tend to see "hot" giants, almost skimming the surface of their stars, and usually only one. I think. Anyway, just about every new system we find broadens our experience of what is possible in some interesting way at this point because we've seen so few of them. Hell, we can't even really see rocky planets yet... certainly not on enough stars to be useful.

    19. Re:A bit of a reach by ScreamingCactus · · Score: 0

      We found a system with two planets that take the roles of Jupiter and Saturn in our Solar System Yes, just like Jupiter and Saturn are the only two planets in our solar system, so are these! Yes, I can see the similarities! And considering the range of sizes stars have, versus the number of stars, I have to say no, there are many many stars virtually indistinguishable from our sun. It's nice that they found some planets similar to our gas giants, but I don't think that gives them the right to call that system our twin. A "twin" of our system should have multiple small, rocky planets orbiting inside several large, gassy planets with maybe a sparse cloud of icy particles orbiting in the far reaches.
      --
      The path to enlightenment is truly through homemade drugs!
    20. Re:A bit of a reach by Repossessed · · Score: 1

      I don't think we necessarily know if their are smaller planets in this new system. I'm not sure the exact limitations, but while there have been small (smaller than earth even) objects detected, they seem to only be detected in systems with no significantly larger objects present. This suggests to me that having a big object interferes with detecting a nearby small one.

      --
      Liberte, Egalite, Fraternite (TM)
    21. Re:A bit of a reach by Nullav · · Score: 1

      Since when was the anthropic principle "Because we don't see it, it doesn't exist."?

      --
      I just read Slashdot for the articles.
    22. Re:A bit of a reach by niktemadur · · Score: 2, Insightful

      ...it proves how unlikely it is that we'll find another solar system "just like ours". If astronomers think that being off by 50% is a discovery worth announcing worldwide, then that shows just how unlikely they think it is that they'll discover something that's only off by 5-10%.

      Another way of looking at it, is that the technologies and techniques used to detect extrasolar planets are getting more sensitive and precise, we're inching closer the point in which we'll be able to detect solar systems much more similar to our own. The announcement is the equivalent of saying "We've attained a new milestone, we're getting there".

      Ten years ago, only super-Jupiters with orbital periods of a couple of days could tug at its' star strongly enough to be detected from Earth, while today much more subtle (and complex) influences can be inferred.

      Even though extrasolar planets are discovered so often now that it's almost become a mundane occurrence, we've yet to even begin the Golden Age Of Planet Discovery. Just you wait until the Kepler Mission, New Worlds Mission, Terrestrial Planet Finder Mission, or any other of an array of proposals, come to fruition. Then the fun will truly start. And let's be patient, as Hubble, COBE and WMAP took like what seemed forever to get off the ground, yet look at the results.

      --
      Lil' Thindime, lilting a lacrimose lament, krashes the kwaint konfines of Kokonino Kounty
    23. Re:A bit of a reach by HiThere · · Score: 1

      It all depends on how closely you define "earthlike". If you just mean something nearly the right size in close to the right position, then I expect that you're right. They're common. If, OTOH, you mean a place where we could live without space-suits...then it's a lot less likely.

      What most people don't internalize is just how special the moon has made Earth. That was a humongous collision back then, any it probably stripped off a large amount of atmosphere. Without that, it would require a much lighter world to be "earthlike". (Venus is too heavy.) But Venus is already light enough that it's techtonic plates have locked (though that might be due to dessication).

      Small worlds mean the core cools quickly. Large worlds mean deep atmospheres.

      Worlds suitable for SOME kind of life may be common. Worlds suitable for us are probably an extreme rarity.

      And I haven't even considered the allergenic possibilities of alien life. Plan on living in domes, space-suits, and space ships when you're off-planet.

      --

      I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
    24. Re:A bit of a reach by somersault · · Score: 1

      How big is that habitable zone going to be? Depends if those midgets have invented electricity. It would be pretty fun to watch a midget flying a kite in an electrical storm. Hmm.

      Anyway, roll on the discovery of other M class planets! Gas giants are fun because you can joke about gas and give them names like 'Uranus', but they're not much use for habitation.

      I propose that we call these gas giants Dupiter, and Dupiter.
      --
      which is totally what she said
    25. Re:A bit of a reach by somersault · · Score: 1

      I guess that should be 'discovered' rather than 'invented'. My bad.

      --
      which is totally what she said
    26. Re:A bit of a reach by Kjella · · Score: 1

      But scientists can't really reason that way; they may hypothesize smaller planets, but can't really make any factual statement about what lies beyond their ability to detect. Not conclusive proof no, but there are theories of planetary formation. We have observed big lumps of matter, and we can see from our own solar system that there's plenty smaller lumps of matter like earth and the other small planets, all the satellites around jupiter and saturn, asteroids and whatnot. It's like me observing you cutting a slice of bread from some distance, I may not be able to see anything but the slice but it requires a pretty funky theory to make me believe the process didn't create crumbled bread as well.
      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    27. Re:A bit of a reach by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually you are using common-NONsense reasoning in your first paragraph by stating:
      IF a THEN b THUS IF c THEN d

      There is no guarantee that just because we will have the technology that there is something to detect.
      I'm not saying that there aren't any planets to detect, just that your reasoning is flawed.

    28. Re:A bit of a reach by segwonk · · Score: 1

      I would love it if someone more knowledgeable than I could comment on this:

      I seem to remember hearing or reading years ago that it was expected that planets would
      naturally form roughly in parallel to a line in Pascal's Triangle. i.e., smaller planets really
      close and really far from their star, and larger planets in the middle distances.

      Has anyone else ever heard that? If it's true, I would assume that for all these giant
      planets they've been finding, there must be a whole complement of smaller planets to go along.

      --
      - ------ Go 'til ya know.
  3. Leap of imagination by SpiderClan · · Score: 1

    We found a solar system that is kinda, sorta like ours in two of the planets, and we are "on the brink" of discovering more. Get the space RVs warmed up!

  4. Real Estate Prices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I heard you can buy a two bedroom rancher on its earth-like planets for only $15000. Of course, the commute is killer.

    1. Re:Real Estate Prices by Abreu · · Score: 1

      Well, with the subprime mortage stuff going on in the US, I wouldnt be surprised that people start buying...

      --
      No sig for the moment.
    2. Re:Real Estate Prices by Snowmit · · Score: 3, Funny

      I heard you can buy a two bedroom rancher on its earth-like planets for only $15000. Of course, the commute is killer. Listen, I'll sell you one right now for only $4999. Act fast! The long term returns on this real estate investment are ASTRONOMICAL.
      --
      I have a lot of opinions about Cyborgs and Architects
  5. Might be somewhere interesting by lobiusmoop · · Score: 3, Insightful

    for the SETI crowd to point their antennas to.

    --
    "I bless every day that I continue to live, for every day is pure profit."
    1. Re:Might be somewhere interesting by HermDog · · Score: 1

      So this is where Starbuck ended up!

      --
      JADBP
    2. Re:Might be somewhere interesting by interstellar_donkey · · Score: 1

      So . . . perhaps we shouldn't aim our antennas at it. Perhaps it's a Cylon base. Perhaps we are all doomed. DOOOOMED

      --
      The Internet is generally stupid
    3. Re:Might be somewhere interesting by 4D6963 · · Score: 1

      Of course it's not. It's 5,000 bloody light years away. There are stars 1,000 times closer to us than that. And 1,000 times closer to us would mean that we'd receive the same radio signals 1 million times better.

      --
      You just got troll'd!
    4. Re:Might be somewhere interesting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, that's not the antenna he was talking about.

      Next.

    5. Re:Might be somewhere interesting by Mikkeles · · Score: 1
      'Of course it's not. It's 5,000 bloody light years away. There are stars 1,000 times closer to us than that.'

      And here they are:

      Sun
      Proxima Centauri (V645 Cen) 4.2 ly
      Rigil Kentaurus (Alpha Cen A) 4.3 ly
                              (Alpha Cen B) 4.3 ly

      --
      Great minds think alike; fools seldom differ.
  6. 5,000 light years by mr_mischief · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ... "At least planetary systems like ours might be more common than previously thought over that direction, 5,000 years ago, at around the distance from us that light would take 5,000 years to get here. Or maybe somebody's holding up a distorted mirror 2,500 light years away. We're not really sure. Some scientist said we're discovering more than we used to, now that we're confident that we can detect them and bother looking. That must mean the spike in data is representative."

    I'm looking hopefully forward to giving people directions by system name and planet number just as much as the next /. geek. I doubt, though, that thinking in general about the number of multi-planet systems has changed drastically because of this one system. Like most science reporting in the mainstream press, this is oversimplified and overhyped.

  7. Impressive work by hattig · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I read the article earlier, and then it had that the star was 5 light years away. I investigated, and it is actually 4900 light years away.

    I'm impressed that they could resolve two planets going around a star that far away, gravitational lensing or not.

  8. Dupe by jdb2 · · Score: 3, Informative

    Here's the original from February 14 :

    http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/02/14/223241

    jdb2

    1. Re:Dupe by wanderingknight · · Score: 1

      You even duped the [website] tag!

    2. Re:Dupe by Nullav · · Score: 1
      --
      I just read Slashdot for the articles.
    3. Re:Dupe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Trip, actually. It's on the Slashdot frontpage twice today, besides the coverage in Feb.

  9. rocky planets by MyNymWasTaken · · Score: 1, Insightful

    I am impressed, but I'll be much more impressed when techniques are developed that can spot rocky Earth-type planets.

    1. Re:rocky planets by pe1rxq · · Score: 2, Informative

      Actually if you read the article (I know this is slashdot....) you would know that the current techniques are at the level that an earth like planet could be detected with gravitational lensing.
      Just not at the distance of this system.

      An earth size rock could be detected any day now.

      --
      Secure messaging: http://quickmsg.vreeken.net/
    2. Re:rocky planets by sconeu · · Score: 1

      They're the ones that are fighting Apollo Creed Earth Type planets.

      --
      General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    3. Re:rocky planets by MyNymWasTaken · · Score: 0

      I did read the article, and will be suitably impressed when microlensing, or another technique, does find an extrasolar Earth-like planet.

    4. Re:rocky planets by CastrTroy · · Score: 0

      A more likely method of finding a small extrasolar planet is by using the transit method. Using this method they are able to detect much smaller planets. There is also potential to see what is in it's atmosphere using this method. It works by detecting the light blocked as a planet crosses in front of the star from where we are observing it. When the happens the star dims. The more the star dims, the bigger the planet.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    5. Re:rocky planets by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good. Now all we need to do is build a robot army to destroy the current inhabitants. We may still have time to save ourselves!

    6. Re:rocky planets by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      I am impressed, but I'll be much more impressed when techniques are developed that can spot rocky Earth-type planets.

      Eh, it's just a matter of money. IIRC we could put a constellation of even old Hubble-type 'scopes at L3 and do this today. We just need to scrap together $40B or so. Presumably we can do it affordably with future technology.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    7. Re:rocky planets by thrillseeker · · Score: 0

      I'll be impressed when "they" can send me there ... with a six pack and Yeoman Rand.

    8. Re:rocky planets by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Unfortunately this technique is limited to systems with orbital planes that point directly at us.

    9. Re:rocky planets by MtViewGuy · · Score: 1

      I think with the rapid improvement in even ground-based telescope technology over the past 10 years (and with even bigger ground-based telescopes coming in the next 15 years), we may actually find a rocky-crust planet orbiting around another star within 100 light years of Earth. And by examining the atmosphere, we find gases such as nitrogen, oxygen and water vapor in substantial quantities, then chances are good that planet could have life on it.

  10. The James Webb Space Telescope will reveal... by Braintrust · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    ... that the inhabitants are all wearing sashes and goatees!!

    --
    Years later, a doctor will tell me that I have an I.Q. of 48, and am what some people call "mentally retarded".
  11. Re:Must be our evil mirror solar system counterpar by gdog05 · · Score: 1

    I really hope we're the evil ones, because if we're the nice ones.....whew! We're in trouble. Of course there's a chance that Kodos and Kang have enslaved all of them.

  12. Clever AI by Artuir · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    I am new 'round these parts, but in my short time of observation I've begun to think that slashdot editors are really a conglomeration of various AI designed to fool us all into thinking they are real people just posting dupes over and over and over again. It's like a very messed up Turing test!

    Bearing this in mind things become a little more bearable. :(

  13. Re:Must be our evil mirror solar system counterpar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Say nothing of the kind.
    In our post-modern universe, we're all morally equivalent for a while, and then we die.

  14. Could be a Chinese copy..... :) by truthful+cynic · · Score: 1
    And just wait until you can patent solar systems. Yes, the vogons will come not to build a hyperspace bypass, but rather for trademark/patent infringement...

    You laugh now....

  15. "Inhabited" or "Inhabitable?" by BeeBeard · · Score: 4, Insightful
    FTA:

    He said that the ultimate goal for exoplanet researchers was to find habitable Earth-like and Mars-like planets. (emphasis added)

    While we all crack wise about the bizarro planet of our science fiction dreams, it bears pointing out that the point of the program is ostensibly to find other inhabitable planets--that is, potential sites for future human expansion, rather than other inhabited planets. The difference between the two is not insignificant, and is a nod to the somewhat conservative view that while it may prove impossible to find another planet like the Earth where life has evolved concurrently with our own, it is nevertheless very realistic to search for another planet like the Earth where life could thrive.
    1. Re:"Inhabited" or "Inhabitable?" by ShadowFlair · · Score: 1

      That's a very good point. The way the human population grows in combination with the way we use the resources on Earth, it is theoretically possible that we run out of resources and need to colonize other planets. In that context, searching for a habitable planet is highly practical in the long run.

      Reminds me of how Q in StarTrek says that humans are like a virus and that we infect planets.

      --
      To iterate is human; to recurse, divine!
    2. Re:"Inhabited" or "Inhabitable?" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it is nevertheless very realistic to search for another planet like the Earth where life could thrive.

      At least what we recognize as the foundations of what we consider as living and aiding in the process to come to that point.

      I find it always fascinating how we're out to find planets with a potential to harbor life or has the right ingredients for what we believe has sprawn life on earth.

      Yet, as the current state of understanding tells us, we have evolved in this solar system and adjusted to the conditions here; We've evolved in close relation with our sun; without light the ability to see would not be so much of evolutionary advantage. We cannot function without sleeping, which is adjusted to the sun-cyclus. Our skin transforms sunlight into vitamins, it darkens to protect us from too much sunlight, ...

      It's not hard to follow this logic and see we're unable to conceptualize anything other then what we know from observation and are able to conceptualize in relation to our environment. It's so tightly related, it seems to me there might be alot of different lifeforms, that do not have the same evolution behind it, without the same base but with a whole other evolutionary process. With the possiblity we're unable to detect or observe it even if we were directly confronted with it. The same way you might be tuning into a wrong wavelength or lacking tools to visualize things that fall out of our ability to observe.

      But I understand one needs a base of recognizable requirements of to look out, and finding a recognizable lifeform with the same evolutionary process as ours or a planetset with the same conditions humans could settle on. It'd be the ultimate place to travel to; a virgin earth.

    3. Re:"Inhabited" or "Inhabitable?" by teslar · · Score: 1

      the point of the program is ostensibly to find other inhabitable planets--that is, potential sites for future human expansion
      What's the point of that? I mean, yeah, sure, eventually we will need such sites, whether it's out of necessity or just because we can. However, I'm pretty sure that once we actually have the technology to travel to such planets within a reasonable timeframe, we will also have the technology to find them much more quickly, reliably and easily than at the moment. So - what's the point of looking for inhabitable planets in a time where technology barely allows us to reach neighbouring planets within our own solar system? What is the advantage/gain here? Inhabited planets, on the other hand, I could understand.
    4. Re:"Inhabited" or "Inhabitable?" by Peeteriz · · Score: 1

      Inhabitable (by our standards) planets are considered much more likely to be inhabited than, say, Jupiter-like planets.

      If we can learn to detect planets of such size, then at the very least it's a way to see in which directions should we look for signs of life.

    5. Re:"Inhabited" or "Inhabitable?" by idji · · Score: 1

      Does "Earthlike" (9.8m/s2, 20degC, H20) really mean inhabitable? You also want (80% N2, 18% O2, 200ppm CO2), and isn't the consensus that you only get that 18% O2 from organisms and lots of time. so it seems to me that "habitable"="inhabited", otherwise you're only gonna find a sandy desert/ocean with a NxOy/COx atmosphere at best.

  16. Re:Must be our evil mirror solar system counterpar by Belial6 · · Score: 4, Funny

    If your the one with goatse... Yes, you are the evil one.

    Ohhhh! goatEE. Never mind.

  17. I always love remarks like by WiglyWorm · · Score: 1

    "could be much more common than we thought". They come in every astronomy news feature in which scientists discover a new anything.

    How do we know scientists didn't just get lucky and find the only other solar system similar to ours in the entire universe?

    1. Re:I always love remarks like by kitsunewarlock · · Score: 1

      Reminds me of Archeology too. Find 1 pot with drawings of people bending down before a tree and suddenly "this civilization worshiped trees!"

      That's why I always paint pictures of modern celebrities bowing before programmers, so the future will look back and assume we were some type of utopia. At least the nerds will. And considering they'd be the ones who'd do the digging...

      --
      Ginga no Rekshiya Mata Each page.
    2. Re:I always love remarks like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The same way you 'know' that everyone else who played the lottery this week didn't play the exact same numbers as you...that is to say you don't! But you do know it's unlikely enough that you don't have to consider it.

    3. Re:I always love remarks like by aadvancedGIR · · Score: 1

      Because two is by far the least likely number in cosmology. In such a huge (we still don't know if it is finite) but apparently space-invariant universe, a kind of object is far more likely to be either totally unique or present in a certain percentage of stars or galaxies, but the thing is that, however low that percentage will be, the result will still be a good approximation of infinite.

  18. Earth2 by BlackSnake112 · · Score: 1

    If we do find a planet there that is earth like. If we could get there. Should we go there and take it over?

    1. Re:Earth2 by interstellar_donkey · · Score: 1

      Of course, lest they take us over first. You don't want to be a slave to an alien civilization, do you?

      --
      The Internet is generally stupid
    2. Re:Earth2 by charlesj68 · · Score: 1

      You don't want to be a slave to an alien civilization, do you? Do they look and act like Barbarella? If so, I might have to consider my answer carefully.
  19. Re:Must be our evil mirror solar system counterpar by c0p0n · · Score: 1

    No, as long as your counterpart has got a goatse on his face instead.

    --

    Your head a splode
  20. Hodgkin's Law by joebok · · Score: 1
  21. PETA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    I'm with PETA - People for the Ethical Treatment of Aliens - and you better not do ANYTHING to the inhabited planets or planets that may seem to be uninhabited!

    Thank you.

  22. Re:Must be our evil mirror solar system counterpar by BenSchuarmer · · Score: 5, Funny

    This solar system looks like ours, but it's only half our size.

    My theory is that we're both evil (like Doctor Evil and Mini-Me).

  23. Biz opportunity? by Linker3000 · · Score: 2, Funny

    A solar system with similar features to our own eh? Darl...?

    --
    AT&ROFLMAO
    1. Re:Biz opportunity? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I can imagine a world of love, peace, and no wars. Then I imagine myself attacking that place because they would never expect it." --Jack Handy

  24. I'd me more impressed... by Nick+Driver · · Score: 1

    ...when they can spot a planet that has an ocean of liquid water on it.

  25. Re:Must be our evil mirror solar system counterpar by kris.montpetit · · Score: 1

    good or evil, they will be our midget mirror counterparts-their solar system being approximately half the size and all

  26. To your calculators! by 4D6963 · · Score: 1

    Using that microlensing technique, and knowing that we can detect a Saturn in a twin solar system 5,000 light years away, how close would a star have to be for us to be able to detect an Earth?

    --
    You just got troll'd!
  27. Is one of the planets named by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Caprica? Because if so I am going to be crapping out Rubiks cubes.

  28. what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    so the odds of finding another solar system like ours is now what, 2 in a billion, instead of 1? finding two similar features does not constitute a pattern...

  29. 1st Strike by ezwip · · Score: 0

    This solar system being much like our own could develop nuclear weapons within the next 3-5 years. I think the only answer is a Illudium PU-36 Explosive Space Modulator. Production must begin immiedately.

    --
    "I guess I'm gonna fade into Bolivian."
  30. Giant Mirror? by Whom99 · · Score: 1

    Won't they be embarassed when they discover the giant flat mirror floating halfway between us and the "similar-looking" system.

    1. Re:Giant Mirror? by aadvancedGIR · · Score: 1

      Embarassement? No, discovering what initially looked like a normal star system that looked quite similar to our was a large specter mirror billions of km wide with an efficient orientation mechanism would be worth a lifetime of Nobel Prices, ...all of them.

    2. Re:Giant Mirror? by RayHs · · Score: 1

      And then developing the optics to observe the past history of the earth in real time...

  31. Paging Dr. Drake by dpilot · · Score: 2, Funny

    Your equation is waiting... ...for some coefficients.

    --
    The living have better things to do than to continue hating the dead.
  32. Re:Must be our evil mirror solar system counterpar by philspear · · Score: 1

    Awesome, I was starting to worry I might not be able to tell them apart if I got drunk and wandered into the wrong one. How awkward would that be? "Sorry, I thought you were the evil version of my neighbor's wife, my mistake."

  33. Earth scientists find Sol-like system, by mjwx · · Score: 1

    Earth lawyers sue for copying the "look and feel" of the solar system.

    --
    Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
  34. We should sue by wildzeke · · Score: 1

    We should sue for copyright infringement.

  35. If the sun is half the size... by __aagmrb7289 · · Score: 1

    then the system isn't all that like ours. It may be better than any other one so far... but that's far from okay. Let's hope they'll be able to stop with the B.S. press releases and give us some real good news one of these days.

  36. Re:Must be our evil mirror solar system counterpar by Oldav · · Score: 2, Funny

    Nah, a goatee used to make you look evil, but now only makes you look like a disaffected member of generation X.

  37. 50% mass, like our own? by skeptictank · · Score: 1
    It's a freaking red subdwarf with 50% of the mass of Sol. The luminosity is probably 1/400th of our star. Any planet close enough to have liquid water would probably get slammed by massive flares on a regular basis - it might even be tidally locked to the star.

    Until we can detect planets in the mass range of Earth, I don't think there is any point in speculating about the prevailance of systems that might support life in a carbon-based, water-saturated ecology like Earth.

  38. yay for that by DarkProphet · · Score: 1

    This is sort of offtopic, but I have a different perspective on any of these reports of Sol-like systems.

    Given our current detection technology, how far away could an alien observer be and still be able to
    1) Detect Sol

    2) Detect rocky planets within Sol's habitable zone, specifically at least one of Earth's dimensions.

    3) Determine the composition of one of those planets to be composed of organic chemistry requisite for life as we know it?

    My layman's guess is that that alien observer would have to be absurdly close to us in order to measure these 3 things, even the first two for that matter.

    I've wondered about this for quite some time, but don't know enough about the limits of our current detection methods to determine how far away an outside observer could theoretically be and still detect earth at all, much less its chemical composition. Anyone care to enlighten me. I am really curious about this.

    My point being, that my layman's guess suggests that by a large margin, there are more points within our galaxy that earth is completely invisible, in respect to our current observation technology. If that is truly the case, then would it be foolish to suggest that the Sol system isn't particularly rare at all? If not, then why is it so special that we've found something that "sort-of" resembles Sol? Big whoop. Get back to me when they've found a place we can actually emigrate to ;-)

    --
    What could possibly hurt the security of the American people more than giving our own government the ability to hide its
  39. Overlords... by interactive_civilian · · Score: 2, Funny

    Of course, lest they take us over first. You don't want to be a slave to an alien civilization, do you? With all of the overlord welcoming that goes on around here, I wouldn't be surprised if the answer to that question is "Yes".
    --
    "Empathise with stupidity, and you're halfway to thinking like an idiot." - Iain M. Banks
  40. UPDATE by lordfoul · · Score: 2, Funny

    It turns out we were looking into the wrong end of the telescope. Sorry for any inconvenience this may have caused.

  41. I wonder... by MrCreosote · · Score: 3, Interesting

    if they have the same gods as we do?

    --
    MrCreosote Meow!Thump!Meow!Thump!Meow!Thump! "You're right! There isn't enough room to swing a cat in here!"
    1. Re:I wonder... by aadvancedGIR · · Score: 1

      If they were intelligently designed, probably not.

  42. I feel a lawsuit coming on by Gevaudansbeast · · Score: 1

    Sue them for all they've got, if we let ONE solar system get away with copying our design then soon ALL the solar systems will.

  43. Re:Must be our evil mirror solar system counterpar by niktemadur · · Score: 1

    Nah, a goatee used to make you look evil, but now only makes you look like a disaffected member of generation X. Old lady - OMG, here comes another Gen X'er with a goatee and a Soundgarden tat on his arm! Run for your lives!
    Gen X'er - But ma'am, wouldn't you like to buy some of my homemade cookies for charity to the blind?
    Old lady - Shoo! Go away, you filthy slacker, or I'm yelling "rape"!

    When will this cruel, pointless discrimination end? And who's the evil mutant in this little parable, eh?
    --
    Lil' Thindime, lilting a lacrimose lament, krashes the kwaint konfines of Kokonino Kounty
  44. Common "god"s, religion, and ethics by CarpetShark · · Score: 1

    Same gods "we" do? There are thousands of religions on earth, some of which have no gods at all. Even the ones that have "a god" often mostly just share the word due to word importation into other languages.

    Most religions DO seem to share a common sense of decency though (see the golden rule, for instance) -- at least amongst practitioners who really study that religion (as opposed to sunday-go-to-churchers who just grow up religion and think they know it because their father/grandmother did).

    So that would be one of my first questions regarding an alien species -- do they (or any of them) share that same idea of ethics, compassion, selflessness, humility, or reverence for life and the wold around them that we often have? Because if not, and their tech is superior, we're really, really screwed.

    1. Re:Common "god"s, religion, and ethics by MrCreosote · · Score: 1

      Hey, give me my point back!!

      --
      MrCreosote Meow!Thump!Meow!Thump!Meow!Thump! "You're right! There isn't enough room to swing a cat in here!"
    2. Re:Common "god"s, religion, and ethics by CarpetShark · · Score: 1

      It's not your point if you leave it for someone else do all the work ;)

    3. Re:Common "god"s, religion, and ethics by MrCreosote · · Score: 1

      "Brevity is the soul of wit"

      --
      MrCreosote Meow!Thump!Meow!Thump!Meow!Thump! "You're right! There isn't enough room to swing a cat in here!"
  45. Re:Must be our evil mirror solar system counterpar by Teufelsmuhle · · Score: 1

    midget

    Um... little person.
  46. It could be us by fropenn · · Score: 1

    If you, as some researchers do, believe that space is finite and only appears infinite because of a repeating "wrap-around" effect, then you would realize that could be seeing ourselves.

    In fact, if this "wrap-around" effect is true, then we should be able to find ourselves an infinite number of times!

    http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1200/is_19_164/ai_110737294

  47. Re:Must be our evil mirror solar system counterpar by Johnny5000 · · Score: 3, Funny

    Old lady - OMG, here comes another Gen X'er with a goatee and a Soundgarden tat on his arm! Run for your lives!
    Gen X'er - But ma'am, wouldn't you like to buy some of my homemade cookies for charity to the blind?
    Old lady - Shoo! Go away, you filthy slacker, or I'm yelling "rape"!

    When will this cruel, pointless discrimination end? And who's the evil mutant in this little parable, eh?


    Ooh, ooh, I know this one.

    A. March 5th, 2015
    B. It's the old lady, right?
    --
    The libertarian solution to the failures of capitalism is to apply more capitalism til the failures are fixed.
  48. Re:Must be our evil mirror solar system counterpar by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    midget

    Um... little person.
    Yeah, that's what he said, only in not so man words.
  49. Uranus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wonder if they have plant named Urectum and if they constantly make jokes about changing its name to Uranus.