The Other Worlds Shrine

Your place for discussion about RPGs, gaming, music, movies, anime, computers, sports, and any other stuff we care to talk about... 

  • New planet discovered close by, could support life

  • Somehow, we still tolerate each other. Eventually this will be the only forum left.
Somehow, we still tolerate each other. Eventually this will be the only forum left.
 #149105  by Julius Seeker
 Thu Sep 30, 2010 7:26 am
Source

"This really is the first Goldilocks planet," said co-discoverer R. Paul Butler of the Carnegie Institution of Washington.

The new planet sits smack in the middle of what astronomers refer to as the habitable zone, unlike any of the nearly 500 other planets astronomers have found outside our solar system. And it is in our galactic neighborhood, suggesting that plenty of Earth-like planets circle other stars.

Finding a planet that could potentially support life is a major step toward answering the timeless question: Are we alone?

Scientists have jumped the gun before on proclaiming that planets outside our solar system were habitable only to have them turn out to be not quite so conducive to life. But this one is so clearly in the right zone that five outside astronomers told The Associated Press it seems to be the real thing.

"This is the first one I'm truly excited about," said Penn State University's Jim Kasting. He said this planet is a "pretty prime candidate" for harboring life.

Life on other planets doesn't mean E.T. Even a simple single-cell bacteria or the equivalent of shower mold would shake perceptions about the uniqueness of life on Earth.


But there are still many unanswered questions about this strange planet. It is about three times the mass of Earth, slightly larger in width and much closer to its star – 14 million miles away versus 93 million. It's so close to its version of the sun that it orbits every 37 days. And it doesn't rotate much, so one side is almost always bright, the other dark.

Temperatures can be as hot as 160 degrees or as frigid as 25 degrees below zero, but in between – in the land of constant sunrise – it would be "shirt-sleeve weather," said co-discoverer Steven Vogt of the University of California at Santa Cruz.

It's unknown whether water actually exists on the planet, and what kind of atmosphere it has. But because conditions are ideal for liquid water, and because there always seems to be life on Earth where there is water, Vogt believes "that chances for life on this planet are 100 percent."

The astronomers' findings are being published in Astrophysical Journal and were announced by the National Science Foundation on Wednesday.

The planet circles a star called Gliese 581. It's about 120 trillion miles away, so it would take several generations for a spaceship to get there. It may seem like a long distance, but in the scheme of the vast universe, this planet is "like right in our face, right next door to us," Vogt said in an interview.

That close proximity and the way it was found so early in astronomers' search for habitable planets hints to scientists that planets like Earth are probably not that rare.

Vogt and Butler ran some calculations, with giant fudge factors built in, and figured that as much as one out of five to 10 stars in the universe have planets that are Earth-sized and in the habitable zone.

With an estimated 200 billion stars in the universe, that means maybe 40 billion planets that have the potential for life, Vogt said. However, Ohio State University's Scott Gaudi cautioned that is too speculative about how common these planets are.

Vogt and Butler used ground-based telescopes to track the star's precise movements over 11 years and watch for wobbles that indicate planets are circling it. The newly discovered planet is actually the sixth found circling Gliese 581. Two looked promising for habitability for a while, another turned out to be too hot and the fifth is likely too cold. This sixth one bracketed right in the sweet spot in between, Vogt said.

With the star designated "a," its sixth planet is called Gliese 581g.

"It's not a very interesting name and it's a beautiful planet," Vogt said. Unofficially, he's named it after his wife: "I call it Zarmina's World."

The star Gliese 581 is a dwarf, about one-third the strength of our sun. Because of that, it can't be seen without a telescope from Earth, although it is in the Libra constellation, Vogt said.

But if you were standing on this new planet, you could easily see our sun, Butler said.

The low-energy dwarf star will live on for billions of years, much longer than our sun, he said. And that just increases the likelihood of life developing on the planet, the discoverers said.

"It's pretty hard to stop life once you give it the right conditions," Vogt said.
 #149108  by SineSwiper
 Thu Sep 30, 2010 7:54 am
A dwarf star? I dunno. You run into complications that you normally don't find with a standard star. For one, they don't put out any UV light, almost no visible light, and radiate mostly infrared light. Plus, tidal locking, and well, there's probably radiation problems with being that close to the sun.
 #149111  by Flip
 Thu Sep 30, 2010 10:03 am
I dont get why a planet has to be like our for us to think it sustains 'life'. It isnt unreasonable that there are completely different elements out there and organisms who arent carbon based and dont need oxygen to be alive.
 #149115  by Kupek
 Thu Sep 30, 2010 11:01 am
Flip wrote:I dont get why a planet has to be like our for us to think it sustains 'life'. It isnt unreasonable that there are completely different elements out there and organisms who arent carbon based and dont need oxygen to be alive.
That's the problem: we don't know if that's true. It may be possible that carbon based forms of life are the only possibility in our Universe - carbon is special in that it bonds with just about everything. It's also possible life can form with other elements as their base; we don't know. We can say with confidence, though, that life forms based on, say, argon are extremely unlikely. (Argon, being one of the nobel gases, does not react with much.)

Oxygen we know isn't necessary, since early life did not breathe oxygen, and most of the life on this planet now does not breathe oxygen. Oxygen was, in fact, poisonous to most early life. We have so much in our atmosphere now because early organisms that used to be much more prevalent (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stromatolite) emitted so much.

It's hard to draw general conclusions from a sample size of one.

But the reason why we look for planets like ours with an eye towards life is simple: we know ours has life. We don't know, exactly, what were the necessary constituents (we have guesses, like water, but we can only know so much with, again, a sample size of one). So, when you don't know what causes something, you take the easy way out: find a state you are confident produces the result you're looking for, even if you don't know exactly why. Hence, look for planets like Earth.
 #149119  by Don
 Thu Sep 30, 2010 12:54 pm
I remember reading dwarf stars actually are better for life since they last a lot longer giving more time for evolution to take place. There's obviously more to getting life than just the amount of time you have, but I don't think having a Sun-like star is necessary or even ideal. If there's an answer to that, it's probably beyond the scope of our knowledge at this point.
 #149152  by Don
 Fri Oct 01, 2010 1:17 pm
It says the planet doesn't rotate so one side is always very hot while the other side is very cold and that'd not be a very good candidate for life to form.

I think they say it's Earth-like to mean 'it's made out of solid stuff and probably has water somewhere'.
 #149157  by Kupek
 Fri Oct 01, 2010 5:02 pm
Temperatures can be as hot as 160 degrees or as frigid as 25 degrees below zero, but in between – in the land of constant sunrise – it would be "shirt-sleeve weather," said co-discoverer Steven Vogt of the University of California at Santa Cruz.
Reading! It's not just for breakfast anymore.
 #149165  by SineSwiper
 Fri Oct 01, 2010 8:36 pm
Don wrote:It says the planet doesn't rotate so one side is always very hot while the other side is very cold and that'd not be a very good candidate for life to form.

I think they say it's Earth-like to mean 'it's made out of solid stuff and probably has water somewhere'.
Heh, what did I tell ya about dwarfs and tidal locks?
 #149167  by Don
 Fri Oct 01, 2010 9:08 pm
You're talking about stuff like moon and whatever that people believe was necessary to have a habitable environment? That's just conjecture and it might be founded on good science but it's not like we can be certain this is correct, or we'd never need to send probes to outer space in the first place. Clearly we have never been able to explore any planet outside of this solar system to verify that what we think is conditions necessary for life are indeed necessary. Yes you don't have to explore very far to verify a blue supergiant isn't likely to have planets that's suitable for life but it's hardly a concensus that you must have a Sun-like star.
 #149171  by SineSwiper
 Fri Oct 01, 2010 10:16 pm
Don wrote:You're talking about stuff like moon and whatever that people believe was necessary to have a habitable environment?
Tidal locking - (astronomy) The locking of the rotation of a satellite (moon or planet) to its orbit, such that one side always faces the body around which it is orbiting.

Just because it has the word "tidal" in it doesn't mean it applies only to moons. I was referring to the fact that it's always has one side facing the sun, which is common in dwarfs.
 #149175  by Don
 Fri Oct 01, 2010 11:10 pm
I was thinking of the fact that some people say if Earth didn't have a moon then something wouldn't happen and then complex life wouldn't form, so I assumed it was that. I looked it up briefly and while that kind of condition certainly isn't favorable to life (especially complex life) it certainly does not preclude life from forming.
 #149177  by SineSwiper
 Fri Oct 01, 2010 11:20 pm
Nah, while having a moon producing waves and subtle gravity forces would give you better variables towards life, I don't think it's a dealkiller. Tidal locking, on the other hand, means that you have no seasons and you would have to grow life on a very specific band (the temperate band they are talking about) around the planet. That's not exactly a dealkiller, either, but I think it's a big hurt to its successes.
 #149183  by Zeus
 Sat Oct 02, 2010 8:36 am
Kupek wrote:
Temperatures can be as hot as 160 degrees or as frigid as 25 degrees below zero, but in between – in the land of constant sunrise – it would be "shirt-sleeve weather," said co-discoverer Steven Vogt of the University of California at Santa Cruz.
Reading! It's not just for breakfast anymore.
No, reading goes pretty well with nighttime too :-)

"Shirt-sleeve" weather, huh? As opposed to "pants-sleeve" weather or "toque-sleeve" weather? Maybe university boy needs to get out of the school and interact with the real world a bit more (I mean Vogt) :-)