It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Earth Like Planets found!!!

page: 2
1
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 05:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Kenan
My life has now changed dramatically..there could be Earth-like planets out there..tell me something I didn't know.
I believe there MUST be other beings out there..but what I'm sceptical about is them visiting us..indications are indications..but I need one to land on the White House to get convinced..



So If it lands just next to the white house and aliens get out and tell us everything, you won't believe still because they have not landed ON the whitehouse?

Your ignorance is why many people in this world are so dumb.




posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 05:42 PM
link   
I am sure there are other Earths and life out there. What is not evident is weather other inteligent life is out there. Sure is possible but probably extemly rare as it is here on our Earth.

There really is no resaon to suspect that only one solar system spawned a planet like ours. Of all the billions of life forms here on Earth only one has become inteligent enough to communicate to the stars.

The odds are that it has happend out there somewhere besides our Earth but very unlikely for there to be inteligent life near us to talk too or even in our own Galaxy. The evidence for the extreem rarity of inteligent life is right here on our own planet.



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 05:49 PM
link   
reply to post by SLAYER69
 





Oh great that's all we need!


Haha relax. I'm sure the evil Klingons already know about us if they are more advanced.

Fortunately (for us) Klingons make zero sense from an evolutionary standpoint of survival. True Klingons would have lost their planet to nuclear war long before they developed spaceships. Barbarians and destructive technology doesn't mix well I imagine.



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 05:55 PM
link   
reply to post by atsbeliever
 

Gliese 581 d was found 2 years ago. It can hardly be considered Earthlike. It is eight times the size of Earth. But yes, it is possible that it could have liquid water. Just as it is possible that any planet with sufficient atmosphere and at the right distance from its star has liquid water.

There is no surprise that this kind of planet exists but to call it Earthlike is a stretch.

They also show that this planet, even much farther from the star than Gliese 581c, will still likely be tidally locked to its parent star. This will make the lit side of the planet likely unbearably hot. And, the night side would be punishingly cold.

astroprofspage.com...

The fact is, we don't have the means of determining if any exoplanet is "Earthlike". We can tell how big it is and how far from its star it is but that's about it. We have no way of finding out if it has water or an atmosphere.



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 06:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 




The fact is, we don't have the means of determining if any exoplanet is "Earthlike". We can tell how big it is and how far from its star it is but that's about it. We have no way of finding out if it has water or an atmosphere.


Hmmm this is what I was wondering when I read the article. How are they so sure these planets have water? To me it seems they only know the mass and distance from the parent star. I think you need volume to estimate density.



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 06:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Scramjet76
 


They are assumptions. Not certainties at all, but speculation. The assumption a planet below a certain mass would be rocky to some extent. The assumption that a rocky planet above a certain mass would be able to retain an atmosphere. String those together and you get the assumption that a rocky planet, with an atmosphere, within a certain distance of its star, could have liquid water. All perfectly valid assumptions, leading to another valid assumption...which cannot be proven.

[edit on 4/21/2009 by Phage]



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 06:21 PM
link   
Somebody explain to me how we know that the planet has to be in the "Habitable Zone" or "Earthlike" to harbor life. How is it, that we know for absolute certain, that a planet similar to say, Venus, can't harbor intelligent life? Why exactly, does it have to be in a specific size range?

And if you can honestly answer all of those, then you can tell me how you know for absolute certain that we on Earth know everything about life and how it works, and how our physics are the same throughout the entire universe.



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 06:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by atsbeliever
wow you already KNEW before the scientists found it? I believe you should tell them HOW you accomplish that
)


Well i knew too.

So he's not alone. How did i know? Well that answer is cannot be answered in logical terms, so i'll avoid doing so.



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 07:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by LucidDreamer85

Originally posted by DaMod
reply to post by atsbeliever
 


Gliese 581 d is in the habitable zone and could support life. So that particular solar system could still harbor life.


And there are billions of solar systems within the galaxy and billions of galaxies within the universe.

You do the math, but I would say a minimum of 1 billion earth like planets when there are probably hundreds of trillions of planets out there.

And that being conservative.


Ok lets do math....


So far they have found one planet out of about 700 that might be in the orbit where water might be in the liquid state. Most planets are actually very large as a common rule, so earth size is not very common.

Milky Way has about 200 billion stars and if we went with a high number of 10% had planets with an average of 7 planets per star with a 1 in 700 planets in the earth orbit zone that would be 20 million planets. If 80% were either too big or too small that would leave 4 million about the size of earth.

So far in 6 billion years (about 50% of the life of the universe with mature suns) the earth has made one intelligent life with the possibility to travel into space. That 4 million gets rather smaller in how many planets would do the same.

Now spread the small number across 100,000 LIGHT YEARS and we are most likely not alone, but still very lonely. Add in the next Galaxy is 60 MILLION LIGHT YEARS away I find it hard to even count it into the calculations.

Your calculations of a billion to 100 trillion earth like planets I do not find very conservative....

[edit on 21-4-2009 by Xtrozero]



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 07:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mekanic
Somebody explain to me how we know that the planet has to be in the "Habitable Zone" or "Earthlike" to harbor life. How is it, that we know for absolute certain, that a planet similar to say, Venus, can't harbor intelligent life? Why exactly, does it have to be in a specific size range?

And if you can honestly answer all of those, then you can tell me how you know for absolute certain that we on Earth know everything about life and how it works, and how our physics are the same throughout the entire universe.



Well I can't debate the infinite “what ifs” out there about other life in the universe, but what I can do is use earth as an example, and just the fact that it would take just minute changes on earth or our solar system to wipe life on earth back to very simple life forms shows just how perfect the environment needs to be.

The more advance life becomes the more delicate the balance is needed.



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 08:07 PM
link   
Why did topic writer pick the worst planet? He picked the one too hot for life, did anybody notice that?



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 08:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by mr-lizard

Originally posted by atsbeliever
wow you already KNEW before the scientists found it? I believe you should tell them HOW you accomplish that
)


Well i knew too.

So he's not alone. How did i know? Well that answer is cannot be answered in logical terms, so i'll avoid doing so.

I knew too. I'm sure everyone here has been talking about it for the last year or so at least..

I read through this whole thread trying to find a post where a person says "Wtf, but this has been known already" But could only find two and Phages post.




posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 09:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Xtrozero
 


No, Xtro....Andromeda, the nearest 'Spiral' galaxy is much, much closer than than 60 Million LY. More like 2-3 Million LY. What's more, within our 'Local Group' there are other, smaller 'globular' clusters of stars even closer. Of course, to us, one LY is as far away as 100,000 LY....but that's only if you think in terms of Einsteinian 'rules' of time/space constructs.



posted on Apr, 21 2009 @ 09:18 PM
link   
reply to post by Chovy
 


Chovy....the search for extra-solar planets the approximate size of Earth, at the distances we're talking about (the 'habitable zone') is daunting, because of the limitations of the tools we currently have.

Let's turn the tables....Imagine WE are 30 LY away, looking at the Sol system. We can detect the 'wobble' on the star (Sol) because of the influence of Jupiter (we call it Jupiter, they don't know this yet...)

BUT, from our imaginary vantage point, we determine that there is a gas giant affecting the star, due to the measured 'wobble'.

To be able to detect a small rocky planet, suitable to what we consider conducive to Human life, is extremely difficult from such a distance.

Now, slew back here....WE, the 'third rock' know we are here, 'cuz' we're talking about it. Venus is just slightly smaller than Earth. Technically, it could be within the 'habitable zone'....IF it had an atmosphere that was habitable, to Humans. Venus, though, is an anomaly. It's rotation rate about its axis is only slightly longer than it's orbit around the Sun. So, something messed it up, a long time ago.

Mars....still, out farther, but possibly in the 'habitable zone'....but, about 2/3rd the size of Earth (in mass) yet, it is dead, as we know. Doesn't mean that a million years ago (or two, three....100?) it wasn't alive. Could have been.

See? It's all about the timing. For hundreds of millions of years large dinosaurs roamed our planet....they were in a niche, didn't evolve intelligence (except, perhaps, for Velociraptor was getting close)....

In the time-span of Stars and star systems, and their development....when you look at Billions of years involved, the timing becomes more apparent. On the giant 'clock' of our Solar System and its development, we puny Humans have only existed for a few seconds, in comparison.



posted on Apr, 22 2009 @ 01:25 AM
link   
reply to post by atsbeliever
 


6.7 billion people, let's not fight no more, I am giving everyone, I repeat EVERYONE one planet, go take one each now.



posted on Apr, 22 2009 @ 06:04 AM
link   
reply to post by Xtrozero
 


So based on Earth, there's now way life can be created on a hot or cold planet. There's no way that life can exist that doesn't breathe oxygen?

Not saying your wrong, I just think that there's no way every possible planet with life on it is exactly like Earth.



posted on Apr, 22 2009 @ 08:23 AM
link   
reply to post by Chovy
 



congrats on completely missing the point of the entire article and what finding gliese 581 e means



posted on Apr, 22 2009 @ 04:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mekanic
reply to post by Xtrozero
 


So based on Earth, there's now way life can be created on a hot or cold planet. There's no way that life can exist that doesn't breathe oxygen?

Not saying your wrong, I just think that there's no way every possible planet with life on it is exactly like Earth.


When you say life you could be saying mold....

What I'm saying is the more complex life becomes the more susceptible it is to natural influences. I agree there is most likely a large amount of “life” thoughout the galaxy. This I will never argue against, but it seems that people associate the general term for life to also mean space faring capable intelligent life.

When we start to specify what kind of life then the odds start to shoot up as the number of requirements for that life takes on. If I just say there is life on a planet within 100 light years of earth I might have very good odds that it is there.



posted on Apr, 22 2009 @ 06:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Scramjet76
reply to post by SLAYER69
 





Oh great that's all we need!


Haha relax. I'm sure the evil Klingons already know about us if they are more advanced.

Fortunately (for us) Klingons make zero sense from an evolutionary standpoint of survival. True Klingons would have lost their planet to nuclear war long before they developed spaceships. Barbarians and destructive technology doesn't mix well I imagine.


Why do you need to imagine? We have barbarians and destructive technology right here on earth. look what good that did....none.



posted on Apr, 22 2009 @ 09:29 PM
link   
I doubt there would be any earth life around Gliese 581 d. However it is one of the more massive red dwarf stars with little light variation, but at that short distance all planets are probably tidally locked, and as the star puts out about less the 1 percent of our sun's luminosity, you're not going to see any tropical paradise. If organisms cannot receive enough energy from the sun, they feed on by other means, (hydrothermal vents, etc.) I would put my money on Alpha Centauri A and B, both are rich in metals. There is a theory that that is where the infamous Grey aliens come from and not Zeta Reticuli which makes more sense.



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join