Weird Exoplanet Orbits Could Screw Up Alien Life

astroengine writes "Life is good in the Solar System. We have Jupiter to thank for that. However, if the gas giant's orbit were a little more elliptical, there's every chance that Earth would become rather uncomfortable very quickly. Researchers looking at the zoo of exoplanets orbiting distant stars have simulated several scenarios of differing exoplanet orbits and find that many don't resemble our cozy Solar System. In fact, weird exoplanet orbits may be the deciding factor as to whether extraterrestrial life can form or not."

Comments

Save the aliens!

[Anonymous Coward]

Dear friends,

The aliens of our galaxy have had a hard life. Please send donations to the buy-a-Jupiter-for-the-aliens fund. Your help is greatly appreciated.

Re:Save the aliens!

[siloko]

In fact, weird exoplanet orbits may be the deciding factor as to whether extraterrestrial life can form or not.

Not sure the word 'fact' belongs in that sentence with the rest of the wild speculation. I do however want to donate to your fund but only when facts become the endpoint of extra-terrestrial flavoured cosmology and not the spark for futurology!

Re:Save the aliens!

[Anonymous Coward]

Sounds like another Gleisian subspace mail scam to me. Let me guess, your name is 'Reverend' Tsmünqtll e'Eiïgåk, and you represent the Space Pope and all the starving spawnlings left over from the Second Great Tri-Moon Conflict.

Re:Save the aliens!

[mcgrew]

Has anyone considered that to them, we are the aliens? The link is a story about how our own solar system is uninhabited, and why.

Re:Save the aliens!

[mr_gorkajuice]

Not sure the word 'fact' belongs in that sentence with the rest of the wild speculation.

It's a fact that it may be the deciding factor.

Re:Save the aliens!

[CaptainPatent]

Dear friends,

The aliens of our galaxy have had a hard life. Please send donations to the buy-a-Jupiter-for-the-aliens fund. Your help is greatly appreciated.

I hope everybody understands the gravity of the situation.

"Weird"?

[sznupi]

If anything, all of this could be mean that our system is quite weird; at least on average.

And probably still wouldn't be a problem for "life" in general, considering there are several places suspected of harboring life in our own system, all of them quite "hostile" at first sight.

Complex life is another thing, of course... (or - we're frakked, because the aliens will turn out to be total badasses; due to evolving in very harsh conditions ;p )

Re:"Weird"?

[Thanshin]

Complex life is another thing, of course... (or - we're frakked, because the aliens will turn out to be total badasses; due to evolving in very harsh conditions)

Or the opposite. Maybe they feel dizzy in stable orbits, like pirates in firm land.

Maybe their ships wobble on crazy trajectories, to keep them calm and at ease.

Re:"Weird"?

[Kjella]

Complex life is another thing, of course... (or - we're frakked, because the aliens will turn out to be total badasses; due to evolving in very harsh conditions ;p )

I'm guessing where they evolved will make precious little difference, we've built tools to let us survive far more than our bodies could take. What's a little bone exoskeleton against a kevlar vest? I'm fairly sure it's only in Avatar you can fire a machine gun all over a beast's face and not have it become a bloody pulp.

Re:"Weird"?

[mcvos]

For complex life to develop, you need conditions that do regularly provide evolutionary pressure, without completely wiping out all life.

Asteroid impacts are fine and even very useful for wiping out stagnant populations (like the dinosaurs) and giving room for new species to develop into, but they shouldn't be so big that they demolish the entire planet, or occur so often that no life is possible on the surface of the planet. Jupiter plays a huge role in that.

But there are also other factors. I'm pretty sure that our big moon and the tides it generates are a big factor in creating ever changing environments that provide a lot of opportunities and evolutionary pressure for populations, and that's all caused by a devastating Mars-sized impact. But another one like that would easily wipe out all life here.

Weather, seismic activity, it all plays a role. I definitely think our planet has a good chance of being reasonably unique.

Re:"Weird"?

[sznupi]

However, don't forget that the tools are also influenced by different circumstances.

If they, by using your example, would be naturally more armored (plus what's stopping them from also adding artificial armor, even to the point of modifying bone exoskeleton into a kind of composite armor that our modern tanks use?) - there could be pressure present to develop more effective weapons. If they would evolve in a place with 2g, they would be able to effortlessly carry a cargo equal to their mass when on Earth (that would be actually required for them to move comfortably - look at footage from the Moon ;p ). Who knows if their LEO figthers wouldn't tend to outclass ours in such case, meant to routinelly "fight" much deeper gravity well...

(all of this of course assuming we're on roughly equal footing, discarding the required huge technological advancement to get to us)

Re:"Weird"?

[Wiarumas]

But perhaps a badass exoskeleton life form wouldn't be that smart. Think of the Alien movies... they were highly evolved, but not really intelligent. Probably because they became such efficient killers that they never had to outsmart other animals. Which, as a result, would mean that unless we had to conquer a planet, we would never encounter such beasts. And if we did, I would hope that science would have had made enough advances allow us to effectively kill them seeing that we were able to overcome intergalactic travel.

Re:"Weird"?

[camperdave]

Maybe they feel dizzy in stable orbits, like pirates in firm land.

Ah! That would explain why they drink copious amounts of rum; to keep the land "unsteady".

Re:"Weird"?

[Mindcontrolled]

True, but highly elliptical orbits pose not only the problem of harsh conditions, but of rapidly changing, oscillating conditions. This becomes a problem for the evolution of a biochemistry because every complex chemical system is only stable in a rather narrow interval. If the oscillation is large enough, there might just be no stable biochemistry possible.

Given that you need a reasonable amount of complexity to implement the basic necessities of life, in particular information storage, as well as a metabolism, I don't see much of an alternative to a carbon-based biochemistry. Carbon-based chemistry is the most versatile system, able to build a near infinite variations of molecules - this is a singular property among all the elements.

However, organic molecules tend to be not overly stable outside of a rather small temperature range. On the one hand, this is good for life, because it provides the necessary chemical reactivity and flexibility to make a living system possible. On the other hand, this severely limits possible habitats for extraterrestrial life. On the gripping hand, the conditions on Earth are not just favourable for any random biochemistry, they are favourable for the most complex class of chemical compounds possible. This does not exclude the possibility of other biochemistries adapted to other conditions, it does, however limit the set of possible conditions for life.

Re:"Weird"?

[PineHall]

This fits the Rare Earth hypothesis which argues that complex life is rare in the universe. So earth's situation is "weird" and unusual if the hypothesis is correct.

Re:"Weird"?

[corbettw]

I wonder if there's a way to handle creatures like that from far away? Like, in orbit. You know, just to be sure.

Re:"Weird"?

[wiredlogic]

If anything, all of this could be mean that our system is quite weird; at least on average.

Possibly, but not likely. Our current planet detection methods are skewed toward finding the oddballs with high mass and highly elliptical low orbital periods. They induce the most wobble and occlude the most light from their stars. As such, they are the easiest to find over short observation periods.

Re:"Weird"?

[cowscows]

I'm curious as to why you've referred to the dinosaur population pre-extinction as stagnant. I'm not suggesting that you're wrong, just interested in what that might mean.

Re:"Weird"?

[Mindcontrolled]

You need a working biochemistry before you can evolve anything. You are at best proposing a mechanism how life could move into a more extreme environment - and then there are still limitations. Thermodynamics is one unforgiving bitch.... There still has to be a somewhat stable environment to kickstart the process. And yes, you are of course right that this could be a local zone of beneficial conditions. That still lowers the probability of the process, though - and I have the suspicion that this probability is low enough even in a large scale decent environment.

Re:"Weird"?

[jd]

Absolutely true. When the Square Kilometer Array (eventually) comes online, it will be possible to directly observe any exoplanet Earth-size or larger at a distance of 1 AU or greater from its sun at a distance of 100 LY from Earth, provided it is not perfectly reflective or perfectly dark within the range of frequencies being looked at. (If there's even one absorption line, the planet will be visible.) With the current design, at the limits given above, the head of the SETI Institute has stated that such a planet would resolve to one pixel. (That particular talk was fascinating, BTW.)

However, consider that most radio telescope arrays have nothing like that collecting area, nor do they have anything like the effective dish radius. Most radio telescope arrays simply can't directly observe exoplanets at any significant distance. This is why indirect observation and indirect measurements remain the norm.

Re:"Weird"?

[mcvos]

If it were not that I were residing on the very same planet, I would find it unthinkable that such a planet could exist. Things with low probabilities do happen, especially during billions of years and as yet uncountable floating rocks.

This is one of those cases where the Anthropic Principle is very relevant: had such a planet been impossible, there wouldn't be anyone around to consider such a planet would be unthinkable. The only universe that can be observed is one where such a planet is possible.

Re:"Weird"?

[Chris Burke]

Asteroid impacts are fine and even very useful for wiping out stagnant populations (like the dinosaurs) and giving room for new species to develop into

Um I'm not aware of any evidence that dinosaurs were "stagnant". They were continuously evolving to fill niches as environments changed, and exceptionally successful at doing so.

The K-T Event was obviously "useful" from the perspective of us mammals since it gave us a chance to shine and fill niches the dinosaurs previously had. It's conceivable mammals still would have out-competed dinosaurs eventually, but anything but guaranteed. So from our perspective it was a good thing.

But saying the mass extinctions of the past were "useful" from a neutral viewpoint because they got rid of "stagnant" groups like the dinosaurs sounds like an unjustified value judgment to me.

Weather, seismic activity, it all plays a role. I definitely think our planet has a good chance of being reasonably unique.

Unique, sure. Snowflakes are unique, but the differences rarely matter.

What I'm saying is, sure there will be plenty of planets with properties that make it difficult if not impossible for life to evolve. Sure our planet has a unique set of circumstances. In between, there's a wide variety of possible planets where life could hypothetically evolve, just with a different path than ours. And so far there's little evidence that this wide gray area is unpopulated (though sadly little evidence *for* these planets, but our ability to detect those planets if they exist is quite limited).

Re:"Weird"?

[Danse]

Here's the situation as I understand it (someone correct me if I get some of this wrong):

The line of organisms that we're descended from has changed quite a bit over time. Other lines have not changed much because they were sufficiently well-suited to their environment already. The theory of common ancestry says that we're all descended originally from one, or a small handful of the earliest forms of life. As life became more distributed, evolutionary forces shaped the populations in each environment into organisms suited to those environments. In cases where life wasn't suited to survive, it simply didn't.

So all life has been evolving for the same amount of time, but some exhibit more dramatic changes over time, while others continue to thrive in forms rather similar to their ancestors from a a couple billion years ago. Evolution has no ultimate goal, so their is no notion of "more" or "less" evolved. There's that which survives and that which does not. We're not "more evolved", we're just different, and adapted to our own environments.

Life adapts

[Fractal Dice]

If you lived on tropical shore where the climate was practically unchanging from day to day throughout the year, it would probably be hard to imagine life could exist in Canada.

Re:Life adapts

[Thanshin]

If you lived on tropical shore where the climate was practically unchanging from day to day throughout the year, it would probably be hard to imagine life could exist in Canada.

Have you been in Canada? It's pretty hard to imagine life can exist there, wherever you're from.

I'm pretty sure they all migrated to some warmer place as soon as I left the country, only to return and scare the next tourists with stories about actually living there.

Re:Life adapts

[TheRaven64]

The problem is expecting life to continue to adapt if it lives on a tropical shore for millions of years, then the next year the sea freezes. A lot of factors have contributed to the evolution of life on Earth. Jupiter is large enough that it captures most large chunks of rock that could cause mass extinctions. A few have it Earth, but not nearly as many as without a large gas giant. If these happen too frequently, it's hard for the ecosystem to recover. We needed one thought to split off the moon. Without the tidal forces, the surface radioactivity would be much lower and mutation rates would be very low, meaning that evolutionary changes would take longer. Intelligent life might still have evolved, but it would have taken a lot longer.

Re:Life adapts

[delinear]

I guess the tide serves a dual purpose, rising and falling tides will expose sea-dwelling life forms to the air, eventually a variant life form will evolve that can survive in both states, and that leads eventually to land dwelling organisms. On a world with no tide there'd be little opportunity for life forms to be stranded out of water in sufficient quantities for that mutation to take hold, or at least not in anywhere near the same timeframe.

Re:Life adapts

[Aurisor]

Wait, there's life in Canada?

Weird Exoplanets

[Thanshin]

"Captain. The orbit in this exoplanet is a bit weird. Summer might get be a bit warm"

"Let's surf in the beach, warm? Or Today we all stay in the fridge, warm."

"Sir, it'll be Hold your rifle with extended arms so the metal drops don't make holes in your boots, warm."

Re:Weird Exoplanets

[Shakrai]

Captain: Ok, let's beam down. I want the entire senior staff to join the party along with Ensign Smith.
Ensign Smith: Fuck.

Re:Weird Exoplanets

[Conspiracy_Of_Doves]

I would pay good money to see a scene from the Enterprise's security lounge. Everyone huddled, quivering in their chairs in a sort of vertical fetal position, waiting for the dreaded PA to sound:

"Ensigns Smith and Jones, report to the transporter room for away team duty"

There would be wails of anguish and much gnashing of teeth.

And probably posters on the wall reminding people to make sure their Last Will and Testament is in order.

Re:Weird Exoplanets

[bsDaemon]

which raises another question... is there not a single enlisted man in the entirety of star fleet? everyone seems to be a commissioned officer.

Hmmm,

[Anon-Admin]

First, Although the smaller inner planets would be hard pressed for life the moons of the gas giants orbiting closer to the sun could harbor life. There are only 8 (Or 9) planets in our solar system but there are over 300 moons.

Add to this that scientists seem to expect that life will only evolve on rocky earth like planets so it seems like a small chance. I know that the earth is the only example of life bearing planet that we have but to expect all life in the universe to exist in the same way that we do is narrow sighted. It would not surprise me to find out that there are fish swimming in a methane ocean on a distant planet in temperatures that would kill us.

Some day I fully expect to hear "It's Life, but not as we know it" and it not be a star trek reference. Well, Ok, how about only 1/2 a star trek reference. ;)

Re:Hmmm,

[thijsh]

Slashdot: it's Life, but not as we know it...

Um yeah.

[DaveV1.0]

Of course, the fact that we are finding these weird systems may simply be because they are the easiest to detect and all the stars with planetary systems like ours are thought to not have planets because we can't detect the planets using current methods and data.

Remember, Jupiter orbits the sun once every 12 years. So, if we were trying to detect our own solar system at 10 light years, how long would it take to detect Jupiter's effect on Sol's position?

Re:Um yeah.

[confused one]

You've hit the nail on the head. We're seeing these systems because either the gas giant is so close to the star that it obviously occludes the light and affects the radial acceleration of the star, or because their orbit extends far enough out from the star that it intersects with and modifies the surrounding debris cloud (think Oort).

Kepler and COROT are starting to return results. They'll need a decade or two to identify Jupiters and Kepler will need 4 or 5 years to identify an Earth or Mars.

Re:Um yeah.

[confused one]

No, it's not safe to assume that all stars have planets around them... Many stars are binaries and closely orbiting binary stars might tend to toss any planets out of the system. Having said that, our closest neighbor (a trinary system of Proxima, Alpha Centauri A and Alpha Centauri B) is calculated to have somewhat stable orbital zones.

The likelyhood is that there will be something orbiting every star, because, as you say, it's all formed out of condensed clouds of stuff. Knowing they're probably there... and actually seeing them. Worlds of difference.

Is it a surprise...

[Chrisq]

Is it really a surprise that Life on earth is ideally suited to the environment in which it has evolved for four billion years, but would find other environments difficult?

Re:Is it a surprise...

[noidentity]

Is it really any surprise that life on Earth has evolved to not bother considering whether its views are self-suited, or truely objective, and thus has trouble grasping that its way of life isn't the only one?

Re:Is it a surprise...

[camperdave]

Yes, who says life on other planets has to be similar to what we see on Earth?

Basic chemistry. You need to have chemical bonds which are stable, but not so strong that it takes vast quantities of energy to reform molecules. Carbon compounds and water soluble chemicals are where it's at, baby.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

canadians live underground in the winter

[circletimessquare]

seriously

in toronto and montreal, they started building malls underground, and linking them up, so now you can practically roam the entire downtowns of these cities, all underground

in the distant future, us heroic stoic freedom fighting american movie hero archetypes will have to face invasions of the evolutionary future: the fearsome greater northern Canadian Humanoid Underground Dwellers

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C.H.U.D.

The Blame Game

[theVP]

Sure, so now when the world ends, we'll just blame it on Jupiter! "Hey, Jupiter, why'd you lose weight?" "Hey, Jupiter, how come you eat so much?" "Hey, Jupiter, what happened to that cute red spot? Did you get it removed? Because I really thought it was sexy." Why don't we just leave Jupiter alone, and quit being so judgmental?