Planet Hunters Report Record-Breaking Discovery, Search for other habitable planets

Message boards : SETI@home Science : Planet Hunters Report Record-Breaking Discovery, Search for other habitable planets

To post messages, you must log in.

1 · 2 · 3 · 4 . . . 16 · Next

AuthorMessage
Profile LynnProject Donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 20 Nov 00
Posts: 10807
Credit: 20,670,195
RAC: 29,162
United States
Message 1384657 - Posted: 25 Jun 2013, 22:24:33 UTC


Super-Earths: Three Exoplanets Discovered Orbiting Star Gliese 667C, May Support Alien Life


The habitable zone of a nearby star is filled to the brim with planets that could support alien life, scientists announced today (June 25).

Lookin' good!

The universe wastes nothing, it's simply transferred.
Lynn
ID: 1384657 · Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Profile Bob DeWoody
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 9 May 10
Posts: 2698
Credit: 783,401
RAC: 2,403
United States
Message 1384717 - Posted: 26 Jun 2013, 5:11:03 UTC

I still think they are going way out on a limb with some of these claims. Heck we still can't confirm or deny whether there is some form of life on Mars which we have landed on (robotically).
Bob DeWoody

My motto: Never do today what you can put off until tomorrow as it may not be required. This no longer applies in light of current events.
ID: 1384717 · Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Profile LynnProject Donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 20 Nov 00
Posts: 10807
Credit: 20,670,195
RAC: 29,162
United States
Message 1384721 - Posted: 26 Jun 2013, 5:26:11 UTC - in response to Message 1384717.  

I still think they are going way out on a limb with some of these claims. Heck we still can't confirm or deny whether there is some form of life on Mars which we have landed on (robotically).


Well said Bob! These discovered new earths they call super-earths, in the galaxy that could support life. What kind of life?? Bugs, robot's, or still making life as we did long ago. They are just 22 light-years from our earth. Loads of luck we will ever get there.

The universe wastes nothing, it's simply transferred.
ID: 1384721 · Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Profile William Rothamel
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 25 Oct 06
Posts: 3226
Credit: 1,265,961
RAC: 293
United States
Message 1384789 - Posted: 26 Jun 2013, 9:51:19 UTC
Last modified: 26 Jun 2013, 9:54:14 UTC

In time we will come to realize that planets that actually are earth-like are extremely rare in the Universe. They will be too far away if they exist at all in the Galaxy. I postulate no more than a handful that mimic our planet in each galaxy.

Alien worlds that would be hostile to life on Earth might develop other forms of life but I doubt if it would be anything like what we have here on Earth.

These are the thoughts that I come to when I think of the delicate balance of so many things that are necessary for us to have started and evolved to sentience.

It would be thrilling to find another true "Earth" but I'm not expecting that to happen in my lifetime or ever. I'll keep listening but I don't expect a return call or anyone else at the other end of the phone line.
ID: 1384789 · Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Profile Michel448a
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 27 Oct 00
Posts: 1201
Credit: 2,891,635
RAC: 0
Canada
Message 1384955 - Posted: 26 Jun 2013, 22:39:24 UTC

i would rather think they are billions of earth-like in the universe
OC they all got their own form of life
ID: 1384955 · Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Profile SamuelProject Donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 13 Nov 07
Posts: 40
Credit: 449,688
RAC: 156
Austria
Message 1385353 - Posted: 28 Jun 2013, 10:40:34 UTC

i agree that there are billions of earth- like planets in the universe.
But the philosophers' stone will be to find a planet whose physical parameters are nearly exactly the same as we know them form earth.
For example: mass, rotation-period, the solar spectrum and the age of the star where the planet is orbiting, a moon (big moon), a jupiter like planet in the outer solarsystem, percentage of heavy metals (heavier than He), climate of the planet, axis dispositon, plate tectonic, spiral galaxy, habitable zone of this galaxy.... and so on..
all this parameters reduce the our opportunities to find such an planet.
the next big question is: is life omnipresent?
ID: 1385353 · Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Profile William Rothamel
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 25 Oct 06
Posts: 3226
Credit: 1,265,961
RAC: 293
United States
Message 1385535 - Posted: 28 Jun 2013, 20:40:16 UTC

i would rather think they are billions of earth-like in the universe


Yes that's what I think. Since there are 100 billion Galaxys--that's one earth-like planet for every ten Galaxies. I think that there are perhaps a half dozen per Galaxy. That means they are probably 30,000 light-years away from us in our own Galaxy.

Purely a guess--be happy to find one nearby --say in Alpha Centuri
ID: 1385535 · Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Profile Michel448a
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 27 Oct 00
Posts: 1201
Credit: 2,891,635
RAC: 0
Canada
Message 1385548 - Posted: 28 Jun 2013, 21:11:07 UTC - in response to Message 1385535.  

i would rather think they are billions of earth-like in the universe


Yes that's what I think. Since there are 100 billion Galaxys--that's one earth-like planet for every ten Galaxies. I think that there are perhaps a half dozen per Galaxy. That means they are probably 30,000 light-years away from us in our own Galaxy.

Purely a guess--be happy to find one nearby --say in Alpha Centuri



oh i mean only in our galaxy ^^

but we will never get there, its impossible, it s sci-fi
ID: 1385548 · Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Profile William Rothamel
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 25 Oct 06
Posts: 3226
Credit: 1,265,961
RAC: 293
United States
Message 1393800 - Posted: 23 Jul 2013, 2:59:27 UTC - in response to Message 1385548.  

This is a thread that needs a boost. To further my belief that we have a very few Habitable (Earth-like planets ) in our Galaxy I present the following.

The habitable zone for our solar system is roughly 1+ or minus .1 astronomical unit. This range allows surface water which is essential for intelligent life to form. This is a very narrow range . Other stars would have different lengths to describe their habitable range depending on the luminosity of the Star.

I am currently adding to my list of essentials for intelligent life to exist. So far I have one dozen parameters that must be in a narrow range. I suspect that there are several more.

What do you all think is an essential parameter and it's range for intelligent life to form.
ID: 1393800 · Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Profile Bob DeWoody
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 9 May 10
Posts: 2698
Credit: 783,401
RAC: 2,403
United States
Message 1393826 - Posted: 23 Jul 2013, 4:46:39 UTC

It was also mentioned on the Science channel that a typical galaxy most likely has a narrow habitable zone where the stars are not too close together as to create intolerable radiation levels or where the stars are too far apart and the cycle of star birth and death wouldn't provide sufficient heavy elements to enable life.
Bob DeWoody

My motto: Never do today what you can put off until tomorrow as it may not be required. This no longer applies in light of current events.
ID: 1393826 · Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Profile Chris SCrowdfunding Project Donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 38190
Credit: 21,436,489
RAC: 27,620
United Kingdom
Message 1393874 - Posted: 23 Jul 2013, 7:51:15 UTC

Everyone talks about these habitable zones, but they would mainly support life as we know it. What about life as we don't know it? All sci fi films and TV have hunmanoid lifeforms with two arms and two legs, mainly because human actors have to play them, so they go OTT with the headwear. Why shouldn't ET be giant slugs living in methane oceans?
ID: 1393874 · Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Profile tullioProject Donor
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 04
Posts: 5719
Credit: 975,869
RAC: 2,514
Italy
Message 1393902 - Posted: 23 Jul 2013, 10:50:39 UTC

Fred Hoyle imagined a living gas cloud (The Black Cloud, 1958).
ID: 1393902 · Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Profile Bob DeWoody
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 9 May 10
Posts: 2698
Credit: 783,401
RAC: 2,403
United States
Message 1393906 - Posted: 23 Jul 2013, 11:49:42 UTC

I agree that the conditions for life of any sort are most likely broader than most biologists have anticipated but in locations where the radiation levels are extreme it doesn't seem likely that biological life could survive. Also it doesn't seem likely that near the edges of a galaxy that enough raw material in the form of heavy elements would exist to support even simple forms of life. Only time will tell.
Bob DeWoody

My motto: Never do today what you can put off until tomorrow as it may not be required. This no longer applies in light of current events.
ID: 1393906 · Report as offensive    Reply Quote
William Roeder
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 19 May 99
Posts: 69
Credit: 523,414
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1394004 - Posted: 23 Jul 2013, 20:55:30 UTC - in response to Message 1393800.  
Last modified: 23 Jul 2013, 20:57:18 UTC


The habitable zone for our solar system is roughly 1+ or minus .1 astronomical unit.

False. If Venus and Mars were in opposite orders (because of their sizes) - both could have been habitable (human standards.)

Just don't remember the source
ID: 1394004 · Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Profile William Rothamel
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 25 Oct 06
Posts: 3226
Credit: 1,265,961
RAC: 293
United States
Message 1394017 - Posted: 23 Jul 2013, 22:48:15 UTC - in response to Message 1394004.  

Mars would have insufficient pressure to keep water from sublimating and drying out at the surface, There is no water on Venus either--it escaped a long time ago.
ID: 1394017 · Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Profile Michel448a
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 27 Oct 00
Posts: 1201
Credit: 2,891,635
RAC: 0
Canada
Message 1394024 - Posted: 23 Jul 2013, 23:40:21 UTC - in response to Message 1393906.  

I agree that the conditions for life of any sort are most likely broader than most biologists have anticipated but in locations where the radiation levels are extreme it doesn't seem likely that biological life could survive. Also it doesn't seem likely that near the edges of a galaxy that enough raw material in the form of heavy elements would exist to support even simple forms of life. Only time will tell.


without counting dangerous center zone of the galaxy (radiations) we have billons of suns and planets in the arms of the galaxy.
ID: 1394024 · Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Profile Davissimo
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 28 Jul 08
Posts: 27
Credit: 1,053,397
RAC: 630
United States
Message 1394626 - Posted: 25 Jul 2013, 8:54:22 UTC

WOW! This is a real wow. When the famous "wow" signal of 1977 was received we couldn't verify or duplicate it. Our robot probes are doing a thousand times more than the "man to Mars" mission that I was in favor of in 1980. There's more to come and I'm gritting my teeth. Will SETI be directed to point their radio telescopes at probable Earths to increase the chance of a signal? How many new planets per month is it now? God has rolled the cosmic dice. Dare we guess at the odds!?
All computers idle at the same speed.
ID: 1394626 · Report as offensive    Reply Quote
rob smithProject Donor
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 7 Mar 03
Posts: 13338
Credit: 155,053,932
RAC: 118,610
United Kingdom
Message 1394759 - Posted: 25 Jul 2013, 16:33:11 UTC

S@H will only get data from those stars if someone buys them telescope time :-(
There was an exercise a while ago to use another telescope, but as yet the data from that hasn't been released to us - as far as I can gather the release was dependant upon some quite significant coding changes, of which S@H v7 is part.
Bob Smith
Member of Seti PIPPS (Pluto is a Planet Protest Society)
Somewhere in the (un)known Universe?
ID: 1394759 · Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Profile Chris SCrowdfunding Project Donor
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 19 Nov 00
Posts: 38190
Credit: 21,436,489
RAC: 27,620
United Kingdom
Message 1395097 - Posted: 26 Jul 2013, 8:08:53 UTC

Will SETI be directed to point their radio telescopes at probable Earths

Davissimo, Rob is correct Seti&Home does not have or operate its own radio telescopes. Seti currently gets its data from the Arecibo scope at Puerto Rico.

The Arecibo Observatory is a radio telescope in the municipality of Arecibo, Puerto Rico, USA. This observatory is operated by SRI International, USRA and UMET, under co-operative agreement with the National Science Foundation (NSF). This observatory is also called the National Astronomy and Ionosphere Center, although "NAIC" refers to both the observatory and the staff that operates it.

The data we get will be from the particular portion of the sky that the scope is pointing in at that time. As far as I know Seti does not have a say in where it points.

ID: 1395097 · Report as offensive    Reply Quote
Profile ignorance is no excuse
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 4 Oct 00
Posts: 9529
Credit: 44,433,321
RAC: 0
Korea, North
Message 1395206 - Posted: 26 Jul 2013, 16:36:37 UTC

S@H piggybacks data when others are using the telescope. However, we now have a beam that looks at multiple sites in the sky when observations are being made. this enables S@H to get much more data from the same observational direction.
In a rich man's house there is no place to spit but his face.
Diogenes Of Sinope

End terrorism by building a school

ID: 1395206 · Report as offensive    Reply Quote
1 · 2 · 3 · 4 . . . 16 · Next

Message boards : SETI@home Science : Planet Hunters Report Record-Breaking Discovery, Search for other habitable planets


 
©2016 University of California
 
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.