Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

NASA live: Astronomers discover Earth-like planets believed to have oceans

page: 4
38
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join

posted on Apr, 20 2013 @ 09:07 AM
link   
reply to post by pacifier2012
 

Yeah, I can't believe they are wasting my tax money on this sort of crap. We need to clean up our own mess and not worry about some star system we'll never reach or know the true conditions there on. Pure speculative B.S.

I suppose Astronomical researchers have to have some reason for their existence.

Right now with this runaway inflation and I know it's going to get much worse. I'm having a hard time feeding my family and keeping a roof over our head. So much for a salary, six years ago was excellent and now can only get by.




posted on Apr, 20 2013 @ 09:42 AM
link   
reply to post by elfrog
 





Yeah, I can't believe they are wasting my tax money on this sort of crap. We need to clean up our own mess and not worry about some star system we'll never reach or know the true conditions there on. Pure speculative B.S.

Kepler cost $550 million which in the scale of things isn't a lot , the science it provides is invaluable .
If your worried about cost its best you don't see what the new James Webb Space Telescope costs ...
James Webb Space Telescope to Now Cost $8.7 Billion
Ooops


It will however give us better quality speculative B.S.



posted on Apr, 20 2013 @ 12:15 PM
link   
reply to post by goou111
 


For a water world a large moon is needed, and the planet needs to be at just the right distance, tilt, angle and wobble, or at best you only get liquid water over part of the planet. I wonder what evidence they have that it's a water world or on what basis such a claim is being made..



posted on Apr, 21 2013 @ 07:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by 0bserver1
reply to post by AndyMayhew
 



Kepler-62f is only 40 percent larger than Earth


I wonder if the mass of this planet is bigger than ours,because of it's size? And if so would life be smaller or shorter then we are, if life exists there that is..?
edit on 18-4-2013 by 0bserver1 because: (no reason given)


The mass depends more on the density and distribution of elements. If you compare the weight of heavy elements, you'll find that gold is 19.3 times more dense than water; 1 cubic metre of water= 1 tonne, 1 cubic meter of iron = 7.83 tonnes, 1 cubic meter of gold = 19.3 tonnes. So for a planet that has a large core made of heavy elements yet a smaller radius than the earth, gravity would still be heavier.

The most pronounced effect of increasing gravity is that the atmosphere would be at a higher pressure. If oxygen is present at levels over 10% but not inert gases like nitrogen, neon, , then that has all sorts implications for spontaneous combustion and oxidisation (as in a car engine). Anything made from carbon and hydrogen would spontaneously ignite unless protected by shells or oils. There's also theory that the higher levels of oxygen and heat in the past allowed plants, insects and animals to grow much larger than they are now. Of course, if you have oceans, then that is the perfect solution. But higher air pressures would make winged flight much easier. It might even be possible for land creatures to have their own "buoyancy tanks" like fish do.

Life could adapt in many other ways, giraffes have a complex system of blood vessels in their necks to regulate the blood supply to their brains. There is a theoretical limit on the height of humans being around 2 meters due to fatal brain injuries from falling. For higher levels of gravity, being shorter and more muscular would be the safer option.





new topics

top topics
 
38
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join