Two new planets have been discovered.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Trace568

Trace568

Member
Okay, I was watching the news this morning, when they say that some Astronomers have recently discovered 2 new planets orbiting around 2 giant stars. They say that these new planets are Earth-like, and maybe, they can support life. NASA has launched a satellite to examine these new planets.
I don't know, but sometime in the future, people might actually be able to live on them.
 
That might be, but the most important thing is to know if those planets they discovered can really support life and if that if so, if there is already life, so we don´t affect the system there is on that planet.

There is a thing i´ve been thinking on ¨If there are already animals on Earth that obtain the small quantities of oxigen through water, woudn´t be there animals on space that can live without it?¨ also, there might even be much smaller animals on space that have a similar way to exist as the animals on Earth but they do it in much smaller proportions (I´m talking about the size of a cell).
 
See, I'm pretty sure that when they say they could support life, they mean they haven't ruled it out. I mean, if it was a gas planet, they automatically know life as we know it is impossible. It's important to remember that, given what we know right now, these planets are only Earthlike in the sense that Venus and Mars are Earthlike, which is to say, similar basic size and composition. For all we know, we've just discovered another two Venuses or Marses.

Sonnarkku, if an animal needs to live in space, breathing is actually the easiest of MANY problems to overcome. It would need to get round the massive radiation, for instance, and also the fact that any fluids inside it will all be attempting to rush out of it at once.
 
Sure. These planets are earth-like and can potentially be livable.

But do consider how earth made it's inhabitants. Looking at the scientific point of view for a few minutes, our earth that we lived on was also once a planet covered in carbon dioxide. Fortunately enough, microorganisms lived and thrived off of the carbon dioxide, turning it into oxygen for us to breath later on in life, they eventually died out due to the lack of oxygen, we then emerged and started to thrive on the earth. I assume this took several hundred, if not thousands or millions of years to happen.

My conclusion?
Unless scientists are able to discover that microorganisms exist on the two earth-like structures and are able to convert carbon dioxide into oxygen, these earth-like structures might not be livable.

Then again, I'm completely leaving out the Ozone layer on my statement.
 
There are also several other factors that make our planet livable and the absence of which make a planet unliveable. Do these planets have a liquid core and magnetism? Do they have precession-stabilizing sister planets, like the Moon is to the Earth? Above all, as you said before, has history on these planets played out in such a way as to allow for life like us?
 
Flame said:
Sure. These planets are earth-like and can potentially be livable.

But do consider how earth made it's inhabitants. Looking at the scientific point of view for a few minutes, our earth that we lived on was also once a planet covered in carbon dioxide. Fortunately enough, microorganisms lived and thrived off of the carbon dioxide, turning it into oxygen for us to breath later on in life, they eventually died out due to the lack of oxygen, we then emerged and started to thrive on the earth. I assume this took several hundred, if not thousands or millions of years to happen.

My conclusion?
Unless scientists are able to discover that microorganisms exist on the two earth-like structures and are able to convert carbon dioxide into oxygen, these earth-like structures might not be livable.

Then again, I'm completely leaving out the Ozone layer on my statement.
Click to expand...

This info can also be used against the arguement of Global warming, but that's another topic.
 
"Argument"? What "argument"? Global Warming is FACT, and it has been PROVEN. The only reason people still think there's a debate is because big corporations are influencing people in high places to dispute it.
 
The "argument" about global warming fawfulfan, regards to what may have caused it and what the potential consequences are. I'm not sure if Glaber was talking about this specifically, but this issue is pretty much the central debate around global warming. Not necessarily the fact weather it exists or not.
 
Even if those planets don't support life at the moment, they did say that one is perfect for housing life. So maybe if we're ever in an apocalypse situation and he need to get off earth, we could always go there.
 
You'd better hope that the Apocalypse is WAAAAY in the future, because we're going to need a LOT more technology than what we've got to even REACH those planets, let alone terraform them.
 
fawfulfan said:
"Argument"? What "argument"? Global Warming is FACT, and it has been PROVEN. The only reason people still think there's a debate is because big corporations are influencing people in high places to dispute it.
Click to expand...
You do realize that a few years ago environmentalists were going insane over pollution causing global cooling, right? Also that "global warming" is happening on Mars as well and that it used to be warm enough in England to grow grape vines? I'd love to see this supposed study which proves global warming and the evidence that the pure evil no-good villainous corporations which are no doubt the source of all of the world's problems are influencing people against global warming, especially when a lot of them use it as a marketing ploy. Really, what do they have to lose?

Not to say you shouldn't try to save electricity and lower emissions and the like, but still.

Anyways... When astronomers say something may be inhabitable, they have very, VERY loose terms of the word.
 
Yes, I know about the existence of localized global cooling in high latitudes. However, that global cooling is an indirect result of global warming. The problem is that rising temperatures cause more cloud cover and thus more precipitation, leading to more snow closer to the poles.

Nonetheless, it is foolish to think that global cooling and global warming will cancel each other out. The fact is that, no matter the nature of the changes, the Earth's thermostat is getting fiddled with. Even if the average temperature of the Earth remains constant, the average of individual areas is getting shifted, and that can trigger a chain reaction that leads either to an ice age or a hothouse.

I don't deny that there may just as likely be an ice age looming, but we're still in the "global warming" stage. And if there's a chance we can stop (or, more realistically, reduce) these effects, we can lessen the chances of a chain reaction that cripples or dooms humanity.

But back to the main topic...whether or not the planets are inhabitable, this still represents a leap forward. This is the first time we've found anything like this.
 
A few years ago, everybody was freaking out about global cooling. I never said anything about warming and cooling canceling each other out, you may want to take a gander at my post past the first sentence.
 
I interpret Orangelink's statement to show that the people tend to too freely emphasize and too forcibly publicize any matter into a catastrophic concern. It is easier for the group to talk rather than think (though no such judgment can be made on the individual), so word gets around quick, and grows. This is the basis for the gossip and the drama that is so overwhelmingly present in the world.

Regardless, the discovery of new planets and systems is always interesting, but I personally have a greater curiosity toward the planets/satellites closer to home, such as the supposed planets beyond Pluto and the moons of Saturn and Jupiter.

EDIT: Yeah, yeah... typo fixed
 
Not to nitpick, but technically those planets were already there. We only just recently discovered them. Not quite the same as "appearance."
 
I really do hate it when people think "we're too perfect, it can't happen twice!". Earth is hardly a perfect planet, it could well happen again, it probably did happen again. >_>
 
I know...there's gotta be more life out there. I'd even bet good money that there are thousands or even millions of life-supporting planets in our galaxy. But finding it is far easier than statistically confirming its likelihood.
 
fawfulfan said:
You'd better hope that the Apocalypse is WAAAAY in the future, because we're going to need a LOT more technology than what we've got to even REACH those planets, let alone terraform them.
Click to expand...

I am pretty sure that with enough nukes, we could terraform Mars or Venus, if not both since we have a total arsenal to destroy the world four times over.
 
Yes, because terraforming is just about blowing pieces of landmass to bits, and irradiating it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Who is viewing this thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)

Back
Top