On September 13 2011 06:37 Enox wrote: this one is pretty old already but it amazes me each time i see it again. seems fitting for this thread
This is amazing, it puts loads of stuff into persective. I love seeing stuff like this.
Cool series of pictures, but the artistic depictions of the large stars are not realistic. No way they have so well defined borders and are almost perfectly spherical, their atmospheres are very thin and their photospheres extended.
off topic: The most realistic first contact scene ever shown in a Hollywood movie!
Is this the movie where the contact was believed to be from like a Hitler speech?
{CC}StealthBlue United States. December 06 2011 08:31. Posts 15310
On September 13 2011 06:37 Enox wrote: this one is pretty old already but it amazes me each time i see it again. seems fitting for this thread
This is amazing, it puts loads of stuff into persective. I love seeing stuff like this.
Cool series of pictures, but the artistic depictions of the large stars are not realistic. No way they have so well defined borders and are almost perfectly spherical, their atmospheres are very thin and their photospheres extended.
off topic: The most realistic first contact scene ever shown in a Hollywood movie!
Is this the movie where the contact was believed to be from like a Hitler speech?
No the Contact sent the image back. If I remember correctly.
It'll take a lot more than words and guns ... The hands of many must join as one, and together we'll cross the river.
astronomers have found a planet smack in the middle of the habitable zone of its sunlike star, where temperatures are good for life. “If this planet has a surface, it would have a very nice temperature of some 70° Fahrenheit [21°C],” says William Borucki of NASA’s Ames Research Center
Well at least if this planet has a surface and if a lot of other conditions are there, the temperature might be warm enough.
ryanAnger United States. December 06 2011 10:45. Posts 822
On December 06 2011 08:02 Chocolate wrote: Wow that's pretty sweet. Since the star is smaller and cooler, that means it may last quite a bit longer than our own. I sure hope they can find its composition, but wouldn't that be pretty hard considering its distance? It would be cooler if we found one closer to Earth though, 600 light years is a long way away.
Although it can't technically be proven (yet), we can reasonably assume (within a certain margin of error) what the atmospheric and planetary composition of an exoplanet is. A variety of data has come back suggesting that most stars comparable in size/heat to our own also have a similar planetary system, composed of smaller, inner planets, and a few larger outer ones.
Similarly, in order to maintain certain orbits, planets must be of a certain mass or they wouldn't "fit" into the puzzle of a stellar system without messing up everything else. In order to meet that mass, they need to be of a certain composition. Of course, most of this is purely hypothetical, but it's a good step in the right direction. Until we either develop telescopes that can see that far in vivid detail, or the technology to send probes there, we probably won't know with 100% certainty.
Also, one of the closest "habitable candidates" is Gliese581d, which is ~8x larger than the Earth, surrounding a much smaller star, with a much smaller orbit, but it's right in the middle of Gliese581's "habitable zone". However, the existence of that planet hasn't been "confirmed" in the same way this one has. If I recall correctly, the Gliese system is ~20 light years away, so this would most likely be one of our first focuses in the search for confirmed habitable planets.
On September 13 2011 05:39 zimz wrote: i always knew there were thousand if not millions of planets like earth out there like over 10 years ago. i thought it was quite close minded for many people to assume earth is exceptionally rare and maybe the only one etc.
earth is exceptionally rare....
no respect is given for the planet we evolved on. jokES
hihihi
ryanAnger United States. December 06 2011 10:51. Posts 822
On September 13 2011 05:39 zimz wrote: i always knew there were thousand if not millions of planets like earth out there like over 10 years ago. i thought it was quite close minded for many people to assume earth is exceptionally rare and maybe the only one etc.
earth is exceptionally rare....
no respect is given for the planet we evolved on. jokES
While I agree with you that Earth is "exceptionally rare", given the size of the universe and the vast number of planetary systems in our galaxy alone (billions), even exceptional rarity is bound to produce a significant number of habitable planets.
On September 13 2011 05:39 zimz wrote: i always knew there were thousand if not millions of planets like earth out there like over 10 years ago. i thought it was quite close minded for many people to assume earth is exceptionally rare and maybe the only one etc.
earth is exceptionally rare....
no respect is given for the planet we evolved on. jokES
well, realistically, anything that's "exceptionally rare" in a universe of hundreds of billions of galaxies with hundreds of billions of stars in which each star may have its own solar system, even the "exceptionally rare" should be in numbers of millions.
The universe created an audience for itself.
Maenander Germany. December 06 2011 12:28. Posts 3751
For the first time, astronomers have found a planet smack in the middle of the habitable zone of its sunlike star, where temperatures are good for life. “If this planet has a surface, it would have a very nice temperature of some 70° Fahrenheit [21°C],” says William Borucki of NASA’s Ames Research Center here, who is the principal investigator of NASA’s Kepler space telescope. “[It's] another milestone on the journey of discovering Earth’s twin,” adds Ames director Simon “Pete” Worden.
Unfortunately, the true nature of the planet, named Kepler-22b, remains unknown. It is 2.4 times the size of Earth, but its mass, and hence its composition, has not yet been determined. “There’s a good chance it could be rocky,” Borucki says, although he adds that the planet would probably contain huge amounts of compressed ice, too. It might even have a global ocean. “We have no planets like this in our own solar system.”
Kepler-22b is 600 light-years away. Every 290 days, it orbits a star that is just a bit smaller and cooler than our own sun. The Kepler telescope, launched in 2009 to scan the skies for Earth-like worlds, found the planet because it sees the orbit edge on. That means that every 290 days, the world transits the surface of the star, blocking out a minute fraction of its light.
Borucki likes to call the new discovery the Christmas planet. “It’s a great gift,” he said at a press conference here this morning. “We were very fortunate to find it.” The first of the three observed transits occurred only days after Kepler started observing. The third one was seen just before Christmas 2010, shortly before the spacecraft was unable to carry out any observations because of a technical glitch. Says Borucki: “We could’ve easily missed it altogether.”
At 2.4 times the size of Earth it does seem unlikely that it is a rocky planet similar to Earth. It would be extremely massive otherwise. It should have a lot more light elements than Earth, most likely some weird ice planet or a mini-Neptune.
On December 06 2011 08:02 Chocolate wrote: Wow that's pretty sweet. Since the star is smaller and cooler, that means it may last quite a bit longer than our own. I sure hope they can find its composition, but wouldn't that be pretty hard considering its distance? It would be cooler if we found one closer to Earth though, 600 light years is a long way away.
Although it can't technically be proven (yet), we can reasonably assume (within a certain margin of error) what the atmospheric and planetary composition of an exoplanet is. A variety of data has come back suggesting that most stars comparable in size/heat to our own also have a similar planetary system, composed of smaller, inner planets, and a few larger outer ones.
Similarly, in order to maintain certain orbits, planets must be of a certain mass or they wouldn't "fit" into the puzzle of a stellar system without messing up everything else. In order to meet that mass, they need to be of a certain composition. Of course, most of this is purely hypothetical, but it's a good step in the right direction. Until we either develop telescopes that can see that far in vivid detail, or the technology to send probes there, we probably won't know with 100% certainty.
Also, one of the closest "habitable candidates" is Gliese581d, which is ~8x larger than the Earth, surrounding a much smaller star, with a much smaller orbit, but it's right in the middle of Gliese581's "habitable zone". However, the existence of that planet hasn't been "confirmed" in the same way this one has. If I recall correctly, the Gliese system is ~20 light years away, so this would most likely be one of our first focuses in the search for confirmed habitable planets.
To be honest i doubt the human race would exist at that point. Even if we had the technology, since nothing we know (currently) can travel faster than speed of light it takes 20 light years but could be more like 5000 years depending how quickly the "ship" was going
Plays against every MU with nexus first.
FrankWalls United States. December 06 2011 12:33. Posts 1073
What i don't understand is what a planet has to have in order for it to be capable of "supporting life." I get the feeling that scientists take abstract ideas from our own planet and apply them to other planets when for all they know beings could exist that function on completely different standards than our own.
Disciple....Top 3 control in Clarion County
{CC}StealthBlue United States. December 06 2011 12:36. Posts 15310
On December 06 2011 08:02 Chocolate wrote: Wow that's pretty sweet. Since the star is smaller and cooler, that means it may last quite a bit longer than our own. I sure hope they can find its composition, but wouldn't that be pretty hard considering its distance? It would be cooler if we found one closer to Earth though, 600 light years is a long way away.
Although it can't technically be proven (yet), we can reasonably assume (within a certain margin of error) what the atmospheric and planetary composition of an exoplanet is. A variety of data has come back suggesting that most stars comparable in size/heat to our own also have a similar planetary system, composed of smaller, inner planets, and a few larger outer ones.
Similarly, in order to maintain certain orbits, planets must be of a certain mass or they wouldn't "fit" into the puzzle of a stellar system without messing up everything else. In order to meet that mass, they need to be of a certain composition. Of course, most of this is purely hypothetical, but it's a good step in the right direction. Until we either develop telescopes that can see that far in vivid detail, or the technology to send probes there, we probably won't know with 100% certainty.
Also, one of the closest "habitable candidates" is Gliese581d, which is ~8x larger than the Earth, surrounding a much smaller star, with a much smaller orbit, but it's right in the middle of Gliese581's "habitable zone". However, the existence of that planet hasn't been "confirmed" in the same way this one has. If I recall correctly, the Gliese system is ~20 light years away, so this would most likely be one of our first focuses in the search for confirmed habitable planets.
To be honest i doubt the human race would exist at that point. Even if we had the technology, since nothing we know (currently) can travel faster than speed of light it takes 20 light years but could be more like 5000 years depending how quickly the "ship" was going
This may sound science fiction-y, but colony ships that go faster and faster as time goes by. Where humanity survives by spreading through solar systems rather than say being constantly in communication with each other. Has been brought up several times given that we can't go faster than light and are in no apparent engineering or technological reach of say using wormholes etc.
Last edit: 2011-12-06 12:39:00
It'll take a lot more than words and guns ... The hands of many must join as one, and together we'll cross the river.
CursOr United States. December 06 2011 12:37. Posts 5524
Think about how many star systems are out there. Planets like these... with all the billions of galaxy's...
my guess is that there is a whole shit load of life out there. Whether we ever get contact or not is another thing. But given how resilient life has been on this planet, if I HAD to bet on either "No life out there" vs "a ton of life out there"... I would certainly choose the latter. It is seeming more and more likely.
edit: 50 various typos and misspellings. Holyshit.
Last edit: 2011-12-06 12:40:24
Language Canada. December 06 2011 12:42. Posts 199
On December 06 2011 08:02 Chocolate wrote: Wow that's pretty sweet. Since the star is smaller and cooler, that means it may last quite a bit longer than our own. I sure hope they can find its composition, but wouldn't that be pretty hard considering its distance? It would be cooler if we found one closer to Earth though, 600 light years is a long way away.
Although it can't technically be proven (yet), we can reasonably assume (within a certain margin of error) what the atmospheric and planetary composition of an exoplanet is. A variety of data has come back suggesting that most stars comparable in size/heat to our own also have a similar planetary system, composed of smaller, inner planets, and a few larger outer ones.
Similarly, in order to maintain certain orbits, planets must be of a certain mass or they wouldn't "fit" into the puzzle of a stellar system without messing up everything else. In order to meet that mass, they need to be of a certain composition. Of course, most of this is purely hypothetical, but it's a good step in the right direction. Until we either develop telescopes that can see that far in vivid detail, or the technology to send probes there, we probably won't know with 100% certainty.
Also, one of the closest "habitable candidates" is Gliese581d, which is ~8x larger than the Earth, surrounding a much smaller star, with a much smaller orbit, but it's right in the middle of Gliese581's "habitable zone". However, the existence of that planet hasn't been "confirmed" in the same way this one has. If I recall correctly, the Gliese system is ~20 light years away, so this would most likely be one of our first focuses in the search for confirmed habitable planets.
To be honest i doubt the human race would exist at that point. Even if we had the technology, since nothing we know (currently) can travel faster than speed of light it takes 20 light years but could be more like 5000 years depending how quickly the "ship" was going
This may sound science fiction-y, but colony ships that go faster and faster as time goes by. Where humanity survives by spreading through solar systems rather than say being constantly in communication with each other. Has been brought up several times given that we can't go faster than light and are in no apparent engineering or technological reach of say using wormholes etc.
The most realistic way that we currently know of to travel close to the speed of light would just be constant acceleration. Physically speaking, if we constantly accelerated at a slightly less than exponential rate, our bodies would easily be able to withstand the force, and it could be done completely with the technology that we have currently. The only thing missing would be an "infinite" fuel source, or at least one efficient enough to sustain constant acceleration over long periods of time.
I know it was semi-off topic to your post, but I thought it was slightly related.
On my way...
eXigent. Canada. December 06 2011 12:47. Posts 2398
On December 06 2011 12:33 FrankWalls wrote: What i don't understand is what a planet has to have in order for it to be capable of "supporting life." I get the feeling that scientists take abstract ideas from our own planet and apply them to other planets when for all they know beings could exist that function on completely different standards than our own.
You are right. An example of this recently was when scientists found bacteria that eat and grow off of arsenic. Before this discovery scientists assumed the 6 essential elements for life (phosphorus, oxygen, hydrogen, nitrogen, carbon, sulfur) were always needed.
CursOr United States. December 06 2011 13:01. Posts 5524
This is the main problem with Deep-space travel and I don't see it discussed enough:
Radiation.
Interplanetary is already prohibitive, Interstellar space is just retarded, who can only guess how hot Intergalactic space is. The further you get out of the solar system it starts to go nuts. There are pulsar and nebula flares with Gamma rays that would travel right through metal and turn you into bacon inside of a second.
I heard that we wouldn't be safe if we traveled in a ball of water or lead that was 50 feet thick. Here are a couple articles on the subject:
On December 06 2011 12:33 FrankWalls wrote: What i don't understand is what a planet has to have in order for it to be capable of "supporting life." I get the feeling that scientists take abstract ideas from our own planet and apply them to other planets when for all they know beings could exist that function on completely different standards than our own.
You are right. An example of this recently was when scientists found bacteria that eat and grow off of arsenic. Before this discovery scientists assumed the 6 essential elements for life (phosphorus, oxygen, hydrogen, nitrogen, carbon, sulfur) were always needed.
Well to be fair it makes sense to start with what you know. How else are you going to narrow down the possibilities? Given the size of observable space and the potential number of planets that space can include it would be senseless to give every planet an equal probability of life based on the idea that we don't know all forms of life. It may be more accurate but it hardly helps you answer any question. Life could have evloved in a myriad of ways, however so far we only know of one way that it did evolve. Makes sense to use that as a basis of your search.
"Dude has some really interesting midgame switches that I wouldn't have expected. "I violated your house" into "HIHO THE DAIRY OH!" really threw me. You don't usually expect children's poetry harass as a follow up " - AmericanUmlaut
DanceSC United States. December 06 2011 14:57. Posts 585
I'm more curious how long the days and years are, the gravity pull and temperature variations. Very interesting find.
This is the main problem with Deep-space travel and I don't see it discussed enough:
Radiation.
Interplanetary is already prohibitive, Interstellar space is just retarded, who can only guess how hot Intergalactic space is. The further you get out of the solar system it starts to go nuts. There are pulsar and nebula flares with Gamma rays that would travel right through metal and turn you into bacon inside of a second.
I heard that we wouldn't be safe if we traveled in a ball of water or lead that was 50 feet thick. Here are a couple articles on the subject:
This isn't even considering the possibility of hitting small debris at near the speed of light. A pebble would make a gunshot look like a pin prick.
Yes yes, technology, but these are very real and hard to circumvent realities.
And this person is a step ahead of me, xD interesting find yes, realistic? not atm.
Dance.943 || "I think he's just going to lose. There's only so many ways you can lose. And he's going to make some kind of units. And I'm going to attack him, and then all his stuff is going to die. That's about the best prediction that I can make" - NonY
ryanAnger United States. December 06 2011 15:04. Posts 822
On December 06 2011 14:57 DanceSC wrote: I'm more curious how long the days and years are, the gravity pull and temperature variations. Very interesting find.
This is the main problem with Deep-space travel and I don't see it discussed enough:
Radiation.
Interplanetary is already prohibitive, Interstellar space is just retarded, who can only guess how hot Intergalactic space is. The further you get out of the solar system it starts to go nuts. There are pulsar and nebula flares with Gamma rays that would travel right through metal and turn you into bacon inside of a second.
I heard that we wouldn't be safe if we traveled in a ball of water or lead that was 50 feet thick. Here are a couple articles on the subject:
Store
![[image loading]](http://h2.abload.de/img/planetenyan.gif)
{CC}StealthBlue United States. December 06 2011 08:31. Posts 15310![[image loading]](http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/wiredscience/2011/12/kepler22-b.jpg)
CursOr United States. December 06 2011 12:37. Posts 5524
