| Author |
Message |
|
sutz
|
Post subject: Sciency stuff-100 billion habitable planets in our galaxy?  Posted: Sun Mar 17, 2013 9:04 pm |
|
| USMC 1970-77 |
 |
 |
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 12:41 am
Posts: 9304
Location: Monroe, WA
|
Quote: Could There be 100 Billion Potentially Habitable Planets in the Galaxy?by NANCY ATKINSON on MARCH 15, 2013 Read more: http://www.universetoday.com/100767/could-there-be-100-billion-potentially-habitable-planets-in-the-galaxy/#ixzz2Nrdu0rhv A visualization of the “unseen” red dwarfs in the night sky. Credit: D. Aguilar & C. Pulliam (CfA)As we’ve reported recently, the likelihood of findings habitable Earth-sized worlds just seems to keep getting better and better. But now the latest calculations from a new paper out this week are almost mind-bending. Using what the authors call a “very careful extrapolation” of the rate of small planets observed around M dwarf stars by the Kepler spacecraft, they estimate there could be upwards of 100 billion Earth-sized worlds in the habitable zones of M dwarf or red dwarf stars in our galaxy. And since the population of these stars themselves are estimated to be around 100 billion in the Milky Way, that’s – on average – an Earth-sized world for every red dwarf star in our galaxy. Whoa. And since our solar system is surrounded by red dwarfs – very cool, very dim stars not visible to the naked eye (less than a thousandth the brightness of the Sun) — these worlds could be close by, perhaps as close as 7 light-years away. With the help of astronomer Darin Ragozzine, a postdoctoral associate at the University of Florida who works with the Kepler mission (see our Hangout interview with him last year), let’s take a look back at the recent findings that brought about this latest stunning projection. Read more
_________________
Talent can get you to the playoffs.
It takes character to win when you get there.
SUPER BOWL XLVIII CHAMPIONS
|
|
  |
|
 |
|
Aros
|
Post subject: Re: Sciency stuff-100 billion habitable planets in our galaxy? Posted: Sun Mar 17, 2013 9:51 pm |
|
| [[ .NET Godfather ]] |
 |
|
Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 12:58 am
Posts: 7466
Location: Maple Valley, WA
|
Naaah...We are all alone in the universe Steve. Didn't you get the memo?  _________________  "We have Dogs over here in Seattle. And when I mean Dogs, I mean passionate M. F'ers that go hard." - Doug Baldwin
|
|
| |
|
|
|
RolandDeschain
|
Post subject: Re: Sciency stuff-100 billion habitable planets in our galaxy? Posted: Sun Mar 17, 2013 10:32 pm |
|
| *NET FCC Liaison* |
 |
|
Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:39 am
Posts: 21444
Location: Kirkland, WA
|
Takes a bit more than a habitable planet to develop life, Aros.  This is pretty cool, I hope we find something.
_________________
Sam Bradford is a game changer.
*He can change a win into a loss.
*He can change a loss into a win by getting injured.
*RedAlice is right.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
OkieHawk
|
Post subject: Re: Sciency stuff-100 billion habitable planets in our galaxy? Posted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 4:59 am |
|
| NET Veteran |
 |
|
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2011 3:48 pm
Posts: 1619
Location: Oklahoma City
|
|
I've always thought that since we are on the outer arm of the galaxy that we would be considered the backwoods. As you got closer to the galactic hub the chances of sentient beings interacting would increase due to the relative closeness.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
MontanaHawk05
|
Post subject: Re: Sciency stuff-100 billion habitable planets in our galaxy? Posted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 8:14 am |
|
| * 17Power Blogger * |
 |
|
Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:46 am
Posts: 11136
|
|
But so would the radiation from the galactic center. Our position is actually considered the galactic version of the "Goldilocks zone"...far enough to avoid radiation,, close enough to enjoy high metallicity in our star.
_________________ GO HAWKS!!! Visit my Seahawks blog at 17power.blogspot.com!Follow me on Twitter at @17power
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Sarlacc83
|
Post subject: Re: Sciency stuff-100 billion habitable planets in our galaxy? Posted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 8:19 am |
|
| * NET Philistine * |
 |
|
Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:02 am
Posts: 14031
Location: Portland, OR
|
|
Interesting stuff, but I just have to laugh at the person who wrote: “very careful extrapolation” followed by "they estimate there could be upwards of 100 billion Earth-sized worlds". Don't get too specific there.
_________________
Super Bowl Champions XVLIII
|
|
| |
|
|
|
OkieHawk
|
Post subject: Re: Sciency stuff-100 billion habitable planets in our galaxy? Posted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 8:50 am |
|
| NET Veteran |
|
|
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2011 3:48 pm
Posts: 1619
Location: Oklahoma City
|
MontanaHawk05 wrote: But so would the radiation from the galactic center. Our position is actually considered the galactic version of the "Goldilocks zone"...far enough to avoid radiation,, close enough to enjoy high metallicity in our star. I would conjecture that life could adapt to that radiation and still thrive.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
MontanaHawk05
|
Post subject: Re: Sciency stuff-100 billion habitable planets in our galaxy? Posted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 2:13 pm |
|
| * 17Power Blogger * |
|
|
Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:46 am
Posts: 11136
|
|
Depends on the kind of radiation. I've seen articles that predict life around a red dwarf; its photosynthesis would turn leaves black to absorb the infrared light, but it could exist.
Certain kinds of radiation, though, are deadly to any kind of carbon-based life.
_________________ GO HAWKS!!! Visit my Seahawks blog at 17power.blogspot.com!Follow me on Twitter at @17power
|
|
| |
|
|
|
RolandDeschain
|
Post subject: Re: Sciency stuff-100 billion habitable planets in our galaxy? Posted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 2:23 pm |
|
| *NET FCC Liaison* |
|
|
Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:39 am
Posts: 21444
Location: Kirkland, WA
|
|
It's a big assumption to think life in another part of the galaxy is based on carbon, though.
_________________
Sam Bradford is a game changer.
*He can change a win into a loss.
*He can change a loss into a win by getting injured.
*RedAlice is right.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Seahawk Sailor
|
Post subject: Re: Sciency stuff-100 billion habitable planets in our galaxy? Posted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 2:31 pm |
|
| * Navy Badass * |
 |
|
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 9:23 am
Posts: 17321
Location: The beautiful PNW
|
RolandDeschain wrote: It's a big assumption to think life in another part of the galaxy is based on carbon, though. That's the most interesting part of the equation to me. Theoretically non-carbon based life forms are possible, but it would take a very carefully constructed balance to achieve anywhere close to what we see on Earth. Carbon is by far the preferred base for life, just based on all the surrounding and supporting chemicals and chemical constructs. And every time I think of this, it always reminds me of the movie Evolution. Their aliens used a base one up from our construct, thus the selenium used as arsenic.
_________________
World Champion Seattle Seahawks football. It's an addiction, and there is no cure.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
RolandDeschain
|
Post subject: Re: Sciency stuff-100 billion habitable planets in our galaxy? Posted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 2:41 pm |
|
| *NET FCC Liaison* |
|
|
Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:39 am
Posts: 21444
Location: Kirkland, WA
|
Based on how many planets we've found that have life thus far, I'd say it's incredibly rare that carbon-based life forms came about in the first place. Human beings are still too egotistical to realize how unique our planet is and its rise with life was, IMO. We can't conceive of an "easy" way for there to be life based on something besides carbon, so it must be impossible or exceedingly rare.  One of the biggest, and most ignored, lessons that the history of science has taught us is that at any present time, we think we know significantly more than we actually do, and that we're always just about to turn a corner that changes a lot of things. It's ignorant and egotistical to assume everything we know right now is fact. We used to think the speed of light was a constant, did we not? It's the whole "go back and show Christopher Columbus a television, and he'll think it's witchcraft" thing. Nobody around that time would have the first clue about how a TV operated or how to make another one, or figure it out by taking that one apart. It amazes me that ANYBODY thinks all of the things we can't explain right now, and half of the ones we THINK we can, are not in all likelihood incorrect assumptions on our part based on the limited knowledge we have right now. Wait until we've invented microscopes that are a thousand times more powerful than the best we currently have, and we'll probably discover a whole new level of sub-atomic particles or something that make up the smallest stuff we can see right now. 100 years from now, the human race will laugh at some of the ignorant stuff we believe to be fact right now, and those same people will be confident that all they know is correct, and that there is only a limited amount of information that we do not yet know at that point; and they'll be just as wrong then as we are now.
_________________
Sam Bradford is a game changer.
*He can change a win into a loss.
*He can change a loss into a win by getting injured.
*RedAlice is right.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
OkieHawk
|
Post subject: Re: Sciency stuff-100 billion habitable planets in our galaxy? Posted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 2:45 pm |
|
| NET Veteran |
|
|
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2011 3:48 pm
Posts: 1619
Location: Oklahoma City
|
RolandDeschain wrote: Based on how many planets we've found that have life thus far, I'd say it's incredibly rare that carbon-based life forms came about in the first place. Human beings are still too egotistical to realize how unique our planet is and its rise with life was, IMO. We can't conceive of an "easy" way for there to be life based on something besides carbon, so it must be impossible or exceedingly rare. One of the biggest, and most ignored, lessons that the history of science has taught us is that at any present time, we think we know significantly more than we actually do, and that we're always just about to turn a corner that changes a lot of things. It's ignorant and egotistical to assume everything we know right now is fact. We used to think the speed of light was a constant, did we not? It's the whole "go back and show Christopher Columbus a television, and he'll think it's witchcraft" thing. Nobody around that time would have the first clue about how a TV operated or how to make another one, or figure it out by taking that one apart. It amazes me that ANYBODY thinks all of the things we can't explain right now, and half of the ones we THINK we can, are not in all likelihood incorrect assumptions on our part based on the limited knowledge we have right now. Wait until we've invented microscopes that are a thousand times more powerful than the best we currently have, and we'll probably discover a whole new level of sub-atomic particles or something that make up the smallest stuff we can see right now. 100 years from now, the human race will laugh at some of the ignorant stuff we believe to be fact right now, and those same people will be confident that all they know is correct, and that there is only a limited amount of information that we do not yet know at that point; and they'll be just as wrong then as we are now. What if you're wrong though? 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
CANHawk
|
Post subject: Re: Sciency stuff-100 billion habitable planets in our galaxy? Posted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 2:48 pm |
|
| * Gangnameister * |
 |
|
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 3:29 pm
Posts: 10824
Location: Gibsons, BC Canada
|
|
We need to find the Mass Effect relay!
_________________ Dr. Seuss wrote: From there to here, from here to there, EARL THOMAS is everywhere... #FREEBROWNER
|
|
| |
|
|
|
OkieHawk
|
Post subject: Re: Sciency stuff-100 billion habitable planets in our galaxy? Posted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 3:21 pm |
|
| NET Veteran |
|
|
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2011 3:48 pm
Posts: 1619
Location: Oklahoma City
|
CANHawk wrote: We need to find the Mass Effect relay! But then we'd have to fight off those Reapers eventually, no thanks.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Spokane
|
Post subject: Re: Sciency stuff-100 billion habitable planets in our galaxy? Posted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 4:01 pm |
|
| NET Veteran |
|
Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 7:35 am
Posts: 700
|
|
The old "Could Be" is what keeps NASA taking our money! The problem is (NASA's theory) that we can see dark items that move in front of stars, but what are those items?
It could be another plant, it could be a metor, it could be a black hole, it could be god, it could be anything...but lets spend some more cash to find out....nothing
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Tech Worlds
|
Post subject: Re: Sciency stuff-100 billion habitable planets in our galaxy? Posted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 4:25 pm |
|
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:40 am
Posts: 8715
Location: Granite Falls, WA
|
Spokane wrote: The old "Could Be" is what keeps NASA taking our money! The problem is (NASA's theory) that we can see dark items that move in front of stars, but what are those items?
It could be another plant, it could be a metor, it could be a black hole, it could be god, it could be anything...but lets spend some more cash to find out....nothing It could be Brett Farve! But we should still investigate. _________________ 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
MontanaHawk05
|
Post subject: Re: Sciency stuff-100 billion habitable planets in our galaxy? Posted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 4:34 pm |
|
| * 17Power Blogger * |
|
|
Joined: Fri May 01, 2009 8:46 am
Posts: 11136
|
OkieHawk wrote: CANHawk wrote: We need to find the Mass Effect relay! But then we'd have to fight off those Reapers eventually, no thanks. Why do we keep coming back to Firefly? _________________ GO HAWKS!!! Visit my Seahawks blog at 17power.blogspot.com!Follow me on Twitter at @17power
|
|
| |
|
|
|
OkieHawk
|
Post subject: Re: Sciency stuff-100 billion habitable planets in our galaxy? Posted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 4:49 pm |
|
| NET Veteran |
|
|
Joined: Sun Sep 18, 2011 3:48 pm
Posts: 1619
Location: Oklahoma City
|
MontanaHawk05 wrote: OkieHawk wrote: CANHawk wrote: We need to find the Mass Effect relay! But then we'd have to fight off those Reapers eventually, no thanks. Why do we keep coming back to Firefly? ...I do hope you aren't serious about that statement Montana or you're nerd card will be revoked and no more Star Trek for you!
|
|
| |
|
|
|
therealjohncarlson
|
Post subject: Re: Sciency stuff-100 billion habitable planets in our galaxy? Posted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 5:18 pm |
|
| NET Veteran |
 |
|
Joined: Sun May 10, 2009 2:09 pm
Posts: 3372
|
Spokane wrote: The old "Could Be" is what keeps NASA taking our money! The problem is (NASA's theory) that we can see dark items that move in front of stars, but what are those items?
It could be another plant, it could be a metor, it could be a black hole, it could be god, it could be anything...but lets spend some more cash to find out....nothing NASA is one of the most important things the US does and one of the only things the US gov has gotten right lately imo. There will always be a 1000 and 1 reasons to not "waste" money on space exploration. We need to spend money on war, on boosting the economy etc... But NASA is something we can always be proud of as citizens. That our gov is funding a program that is going towards humankind's curiosity and exploration of the unknown. But I guess you would rather see it turned into another dirty bomb for the middle east?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Seahawk Sailor
|
Post subject: Re: Sciency stuff-100 billion habitable planets in our galaxy? Posted: Mon Mar 18, 2013 6:09 pm |
|
| * Navy Badass * |
|
|
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 9:23 am
Posts: 17321
Location: The beautiful PNW
|
therealjohncarlson wrote: Spokane wrote: The old "Could Be" is what keeps NASA taking our money! The problem is (NASA's theory) that we can see dark items that move in front of stars, but what are those items?
It could be another plant, it could be a metor, it could be a black hole, it could be god, it could be anything...but lets spend some more cash to find out....nothing NASA is one of the most important things the US does and one of the only things the US gov has gotten right lately imo. There will always be a 1000 and 1 reasons to not "waste" money on space exploration. We need to spend money on war, on boosting the economy etc... But NASA is something we can always be proud of as citizens. That our gov is funding a program that is going towards humankind's curiosity and exploration of the unknown. But I guess you would rather see it turned into another dirty bomb for the middle east? Yep. NASA advances our knowledge of science. And it's a whole lot more than just finding out what's behind star number 1,000,000.
_________________
World Champion Seattle Seahawks football. It's an addiction, and there is no cure.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
|
