1
   

Potentially habitable planet found

 
 
Reply Wed 25 Apr, 2007 08:34 am
Potentially habitable planet found
By SETH BORENSTEIN, AP Science Writer
Tue Apr 24, 7:00 PM ET

For the first time astronomers have discovered a planet outside our solar system that is potentially habitable, with Earth-like temperatures, a find researchers described Tuesday as a big step in the search for "life in the universe."

The planet is just the right size, might have water in liquid form, and in galactic terms is relatively nearby at 120 trillion miles away. But the star it closely orbits, known as a "red dwarf," is much smaller, dimmer and cooler than our sun.

There's still a lot that is unknown about the new planet, which could be deemed inhospitable to life once more is known about it. And it's worth noting that scientists' requirements for habitability count Mars in that category: a size relatively similar to Earth's with temperatures that would permit liquid water. However, this is the first outside our solar system that meets those standards.

"It's a significant step on the way to finding possible life in the universe," said University of Geneva astronomer Michel Mayor, one of 11 European scientists on the team that found the planet. "It's a nice discovery. We still have a lot of questions."

The results of the discovery have not been published but have been submitted to the journal Astronomy and Astrophysics.

Alan Boss, who works at the Carnegie Institution of Washington where a U.S. team of astronomers competed in the hunt for an Earth-like planet, called it "a major milestone in this business."

The planet was discovered by the European Southern Observatory's telescope in La Silla, Chile, which has a special instrument that splits light to find wobbles in different wave lengths. Those wobbles can reveal the existence of other worlds.

What they revealed is a planet circling the red dwarf star, Gliese 581. Red dwarfs are low-energy, tiny stars that give off dim red light and last longer than stars like our sun. Until a few years ago, astronomers didn't consider these stars as possible hosts of planets that might sustain life.

The discovery of the new planet, named 581 c, is sure to fuel studies of planets circling similar dim stars. About 80 percent of the stars near Earth are red dwarfs.

The new planet is about five times heavier than Earth. Its discoverers aren't certain if it is rocky like Earth or if its a frozen ice ball with liquid water on the surface. If it is rocky like Earth, which is what the prevailing theory proposes, it has a diameter about 1 1/2 times bigger than our planet. If it is an iceball, as Mayor suggests, it would be even bigger.

Based on theory, 581 c should have an atmosphere, but what's in that atmosphere is still a mystery and if it's too thick that could make the planet's surface temperature too hot, Mayor said.

However, the research team believes the average temperature to be somewhere between 32 and 104 degrees and that set off celebrations among astronomers.

Until now, all 220 planets astronomers have found outside our solar system have had the "Goldilocks problem." They've been too hot, too cold or just plain too big and gaseous, like uninhabitable Jupiter.

The new planet seems just right ?- or at least that's what scientists think.

"This could be very important," said NASA astrobiology expert Chris McKay, who was not part of the discovery team. "It doesn't mean there is life, but it means it's an Earth-like planet in terms of potential habitability."

Eventually astronomers will rack up discoveries of dozens, maybe even hundreds of planets considered habitable, the astronomers said. But this one ?- simply called "c" by its discoverers when they talk among themselves ?- will go down in cosmic history as No. 1.

Besides having the right temperature, the new planet is probably full of liquid water, hypothesizes Stephane Udry, the discovery team's lead author and another Geneva astronomer. But that is based on theory about how planets form, not on any evidence, he said.

"Liquid water is critical to life as we know it," co-author Xavier Delfosse of Grenoble University in France, said in a statement. "Because of its temperature and relative proximity, this planet will most probably be a very important target of the future space missions dedicated to the search for extraterrestrial life. On the treasure map of the Universe, one would be tempted to mark this planet with an X."

Other astronomers cautioned it's too early to tell whether there is water.

"You need more work to say it's got water or it doesn't have water," said retired NASA astronomer Steve Maran, press officer for the American Astronomical Society. "You wouldn't send a crew there assuming that when you get there, they'll have enough water to get back."

The new planet's star system is a mere 20.5 light years away, making Gliese 581 one of the 100 closest stars to Earth. It's so dim, you can't see it without a telescope, but it's somewhere in the constellation Libra, which is low in the southeastern sky during the midevening in the Northern Hemisphere.

Before you book your extrastellar flight to 581 c, a few caveats about how alien that world probably is: Anyone sitting on the planet would get heavier quickly, and birthdays would add up fast since it orbits its star every 13 days.

Gravity is 1.6 times as strong as Earth's so a 150-pound person would feel like 240 pounds.

But oh, the view. The planet is 14 times closer to the star it orbits. Udry figures the red dwarf star would hang in the sky at a size 20 times larger than our moon. And it's likely, but still not known, that the planet doesn't rotate, so one side would always be sunlit and the other dark.

Distance is another problem. "We don't know how to get to those places in a human lifetime," Maran said.

Two teams of astronomers, one in Europe and one in the United States, have been racing to be the first to find a planet like 581 c outside the solar system.

The European team looked at 100 different stars using a tool called HARPS (High Accuracy Radial Velocity for Planetary Searcher) to find this one planet, said Xavier Bonfils of the Lisbon Observatory, one of the co-discoverers.

Much of the effort to find Earth-like planets has focused on stars like our sun with the challenge being to find a planet the right distance from the star it orbits. About 90 percent of the time, the European telescope focused its search more on sun-like stars, Udry said.

A few weeks before the European discovery earlier this month, a scientific paper in the journal Astrobiology theorized a few days that red dwarf stars were good candidates.

"Now we have the possibility to find many more," Bonfils said.
-----------------------------------------------------------------

On the Net:
The European Southern Observatory: http://www.eso.org

Slide show:
http://news.yahoo.com/photos/ss/events/sc/042507newplanetgl581;_ylt=AtHG.xfayH2SwEqM4a2e6GBxieAA
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 1,811 • Replies: 24
No top replies

 
jespah
 
  1  
Reply Wed 25 Apr, 2007 04:33 pm
These are very exciting times we live in. Smile
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  1  
Reply Wed 25 Apr, 2007 04:36 pm
Those headlines hyping "Earthlike Planet Discovered" kinda pissed me off after I read the accounts. It's more "Marslike" in reality, and as far as they can tell to this point, about as likely as Mars to have or support life as we understand it.
0 Replies
 
stuh505
 
  1  
Reply Wed 25 Apr, 2007 04:57 pm
Haven't we heard this headline at least 3-4 times in the past few years?
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Wed 25 Apr, 2007 05:28 pm
Sky News, the Rupert Murdoch channel, showed why it wins the News awards every year.

Imagine staff whose job it is to to give the viewers a giggle. They sit there watching the wires. They have no Uncle Geoffrey's daughters in there. These are picked for talent.

This story comes on the screen. One of them thought a bit, got out a piece of paper, calculated how long electromagnetic radiation would take to get to this fantastic discovery of the scientists and ended up with the stuff being broadcast in 1983.

Good idea said the producer picking up phone and asking Archives to dig out some 1983 footage. A little montage is stitched together, a copy and paste job, and Mr Murdoch's faithful followers are treated to a good laugh about how out of date it looks now to us who are actually here in 2007.

He included shots of Mrs Thatcher in order to explain why any intelligent life on this new planet has not bothered to try yet to reached our shores.
0 Replies
 
TheCorrectResponse
 
  1  
Reply Wed 25 Apr, 2007 11:23 pm
"Picked for Talent..."?
"Got out a sheet of paper and calculated..."?
"1983..."?

The star Gliese 851 also cataloged as:
HO Lib, Gl 581, Hip 74995, BD-07 4003, G 151-46, G 152-9, LHS 394, LTT 6112, LPM 564, LFT 1195, Vys/MCC 159, and Wolf 562.
is 20.4 light years away. So electromagnetic radiation would take...hmmm... 20.4 years to reach there from here...they needed to CALCULATE that...yes I could see where that would take real talent...especially since that would make the answer 1987 NOT 1983...but that's probably about as close as a Rupert Murdoch comany ever got to a correct piece of information. PRICELESS.

By the way one big problem with this planet containing any complex life forms is that it orbits a red dwarf star and so to have a temperate climate it would probably be close enough to be bathed in radiation that would not allow for any complex organisms to exist. According to current theory there are very few type of stars that could meet the dual conditions of being in a temperate zone and also be at a distance where radiation would be tolerable. These stars would mostly be G or K type stars.
0 Replies
 
dadpad
 
  1  
Reply Wed 25 Apr, 2007 11:44 pm
Quote:
Distance is another problem. "We don't know how to get to those places in a human lifetime," Maran said.


Thats at least a potential problem.
0 Replies
 
BumbleBeeBoogie
 
  1  
Reply Thu 26 Apr, 2007 08:41 am
TheCorrectResponse
Welcome to A2K, TheCorrectResponse; glad to have you here. You appear to have expertise re this topic. Care to share any more information?

BBB
0 Replies
 
TheCorrectResponse
 
  1  
Reply Fri 27 Apr, 2007 05:15 pm
BBB. Thank you for the welcome. But to tell the truth I've been viewing A2K for several years, occasionally. Really just for comic relief while waiting for a client meeting to start or for a client to send me info I needed to work on their project. I really miss Seinfeld. In my opinion many of the respondents on A2K ?'just leave the frogs standing.' And they call Michael Jackson Captain Ego! By the way that quote was from the late great Douglas Adams whose humor I also miss mightily. Spend's comment was just too funny to ignore.

As I hate the far right wing as badly as I hate the far left wing I think you'd have to agree I would be a man without a country on A2K. I think I'm the last moderate in America. At least I was told to, ?'turn the lights off when you leave.'

On the current subject here are a few things you might find interesting if you don't know them already. The vast majority of the stars that you can see in the night sky, especially the brighter one's that can even be seen from light polluted skies cannot support planets with life. The bright stars that appear white or blue, or blue-white could not ever had life supporting planets. The bright red stars (depending on their individual history) could have supported planets with some form of life earlier in the life of the star but not now as red super-giants.

Gleise 581 is not only a red dwarf but a variable star which makes life supporting planets even more unlikely. Most stars, >60%, are in multiple star systems, two or more stars revolving around a mutual center of gravity. It is verrry unlikely that these stars could have planets that support life. Adding to this the very hot, very cool, and vary variable stars and you are left with maybe 10% of all stars that could have planets on which complex life could evolve.

Of this 10% you would also have to subtract a significant portion because of their location. For example, near the center of our galaxy where radiation is extreme, from the galactic black hole, etc. even the correct type star would be living I an inhospitable location. Also in areas where the stars are packed too close together would be problematic for life evolving planets. While this is a small percentage it could still be a very large number none the less. If even 1% of the stars in our galaxy alone fell into the ?'possible' category it would mean anywhere from 1 to 5 BILLION possibilities.

Note: this is all based on the currently accepted standard theories.
0 Replies
 
TheCorrectResponse
 
  1  
Reply Fri 27 Apr, 2007 05:20 pm
In case you are wondering why scientists are so gaga over this discovery is because it is possible that this planet could support some primitive forms of life. Which would be the biggest thing since the big bang. Also if we could get there we might be able to survive there, it might take shielded structures, but that is a tiny problem compared to creating a breathable atmosphere or manufacturing water. The two big problems.
0 Replies
 
BumbleBeeBoogie
 
  1  
Reply Fri 27 Apr, 2007 05:35 pm
TheCorrectResponse
I'm surprised that you found A2K to be short on moderates. There are lots of us around even if they aren't as provacative as those on the wings of political thinking. I consider myself to be a pragmatic progressive. More of a social liberal and a moderate fiscal liberal. When I use the term pragmatic, I tend to work at the possible, not just the ideal.


TheCorrectResponse, thanks for the additional information. It's helpful to me as I'm not a scholar. Will earth folks being buying lots on the newly discovered planet soon?

Were you as happy for Stephen Hawkings as I was that he got to experience weightlessness, albeit for only a short time?

The following site is the first thing I go to each morning when I turn on my computer:

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/astropix.html

BBB
0 Replies
 
TheCorrectResponse
 
  1  
Reply Sat 28 Apr, 2007 05:53 pm
BBB
To me a moderate is one who can describe themselves in one word Moderate. If it takes more than that, let alone several sentences you aren't, in my opinion, a moderate. I would classify you with the left hand wing nuts, not to be confused with the right hand wing nuts. See what I mean about a man without a country. I really don't enjoy discussing politics. I would tend to stay on the science side of A2K. But even there most of the responses have an obvious rightwing/leftwing, religion loving/religion hating basis. The science seems to be tertiary at best and the value of the responses dubious to say the least. The judged correctness of the responses seems to have more to do with how the regular click of responders feel about the answers rather than if they are in touch with reality. But that is just me.

That is a wonderful web sight to which you provided the link. When I went to it M81 was the photo of the day. I have been an amateur astronomer all my life. I specialize in galaxies and globular clusters so M81 is verrrry familiar to me. M82, another galaxy is in the same low power field of view with M81 so it is always a fun area to observe.

A few more facts that you may find interesting if you don't already know them: The M stands for Messier, after a French observer who cataloged about 100 of the most spectacular deep sky objects in the northern sky a couple of centuries ago. The funny thing is Messier didn't want to observe these objects and didn't intend for his catalog to be used for deep sky observing. He was a comet hunter. Before a comet develops a tail (and actually not all do) they look like diffuse blobs of various sizes and shapes, a lot like deep sky objects do. He got tired of being fooled by miss identifying the same objects over and over as possible new comets. So he set out to create a catalog of objects to AVOID when searching for comets. Not stuff to look for. Today his catalog is used by novice observers as a list of the easiest deep sky objects to try to observe! Too funny.

Deep sky objects viewed even through the largest professional telescopes look NOTHNG like they do in photographs. These photos gather light for long periods, sometime 100's of hours over many nights, although usually just several hours in one evening. Since you are using your visual cons to observe at low light levels colors can generally not be seen, certainly not the rich colors in the photos, for example. Also many photos are processed to give false colors to help differentiate different regions or chemical constituents.

This doesn't mean that the sights aren't stunning. Saturn, although small, is BREATHTAKING visually and NO photo is even close to a view of the real thing in a telescope. Many globular clusters look like 4th of July sparklers frozen in time.

Just understanding what it is you are looking at can keep you staring at a misty blob for a long time. Using my 171/2 inch Dobsonian (just think BIG honkin' scope) I can spot 3C273, the brightest quasar whose light we see tonight stared out over 2 billion years ago. What do I actually see? I very dim slightly blue star looking object. Still it's well worth the trouble. While I think people in general aren't much to speak of, the universe is too cool to be believed!
0 Replies
 
BumbleBeeBoogie
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 Apr, 2007 09:45 am
TheCorrectResponse
We owe to Hubble all the wonder we non-scholars can see---and they wanted to let it die. I know the new telescope will be even better, but I love the dear old Hubble and hope it can be returned to Earth and retired to the Smithsonian Space Museum, my favorite D.C. visit.

Another science I'm interested in, as a non-scholar, is mano-technology. I've been trying to learn more about how mano sun energy collection will replace current solar panels to make it affordable and universal. Finally, we may find a way to end our dependence on oil.

Mano-technology will open the door to new science, medicine, energy, etc. This wasn't even dreamed when I was in high school in the 1940s.

BBB
0 Replies
 
stuh505
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 Apr, 2007 09:56 am
Mano-technology?
0 Replies
 
BumbleBeeBoogie
 
  1  
Reply Sun 29 Apr, 2007 09:59 am
Stuh505
stuh505 wrote:
Mano-technology?


Oops, you caught me. I must have been horny when I wrote Mano instead of Nano.

BBB Embarrassed

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanotechnology
0 Replies
 
Chumly
 
  1  
Reply Tue 1 May, 2007 01:36 pm
TheCorrectResponse,
I am very impressed with your posts few though they may be, I do hope you stick around as your clarity and insight are most welcome!
0 Replies
 
BumbleBeeBoogie
 
  1  
Reply Wed 2 May, 2007 08:34 am
Sunrise from the Surface of Gliese 581c
Sunrise from the Surface of Gliese 581c

Illustration by Karen Wehrstein
http://i65.photobucket.com/albums/h229/KarenWehrstein/gliese58104blog-1.jpg

Explanation: How might a sunrise appear on Gliese 581c? One artistic guess is shown above. Gliese 581c is the most Earth-like planet yet discovered and lies a mere 20 light-years distant. The central red dwarf is small and redder than our Sun but one of the orbiting planets has recently been discovered to be in the habitable zone where liquid water could exist on its surface.

Although this planet is much different from Earth, orbiting much closer than Mercury and containing five times the mass of Earth, it is now a candidate to hold not only oceans but life enabled by the oceans. Were future observations to confirm liquid water, Gliese 581c might become a worthy destination or way station for future interstellar travelers from Earth. Drawn above in the hypothetical, the red dwarf star Gliese 581 rises through clouds above a calm ocean of its planet Gliese 581c.
0 Replies
 
TheCorrectResponse
 
  1  
Reply Wed 2 May, 2007 06:57 pm
Chumly
Thank you for the compliment and not just because it's nice to have one's ego stroked. In my most recent professional reincarnation I design and develop training for corporations, government, and the military. So focus and clarity are probably good things when you are teaching: pharmaceutical research teams how to do a drug study, engineers and mechanics how to troubleshoot and maintain cockpit avionics, banks how to make international monetary transfers, and fire control officers how to use the Navy's AGIS platform.

Also I can also tell you from experience if someone from the DIA (the military equivalent of the CIA) asks how you feel about secrets, the response: "Secrets are great! I love hearing them and I love telling them" is not exactly what they are looking for. Go figure. Talk about taking yourself too seriously! And nothing makes you feel as important as having a "bird" colonel escort you wherever you go. I went to the bathroom a lot while I was there Smile .


BBB
Don't hold your breath waiting for Man to get to Gleise 581. If the world's resources were turned to the problem of getting a robot ship there in a reasonable timeframe, say a voyage of 50-100 years, we could probably launch the ship 100 or so years from now. A manned flight, if possible, would take the same effort and probably be more in the 1000 year launch frame.

Remember manned flight is not just constrained by available technology but by the physiology of man himself. It is currently possible to create jets that have much better performance characteristics than the fighters now in use. The problem is the pilots could not withstand the forces involved.

However if you are looking for land on the new planet don't go to strangers. I can fix you up with some beautiful ocean side property.

I my humble opinion Jupiter's moon Europa is our first best chance of finding some form of life and it's a LOT closer. P.S. I can fix you up with some property there too.
0 Replies
 
TheCorrectResponse
 
  1  
Reply Wed 2 May, 2007 07:18 pm
BBB

Since you have an interest in so many things I have a couple of books that you might like to read, if you haven't already. They are: "The Brain" and "The Mind", both by Dr. Richard. Restak. The first is now about twenty years old the second about 15, but both are still very relevant. They are also fascinating beyond belief (I read each in one sitting; I just couldn't tear myself away, even if that is an old cliché. Both are also written at a conversational level and Restak is a wonderful author. Amazon probably has copies; the paperback versions are probably dirt cheap too.
0 Replies
 
BumbleBeeBoogie
 
  1  
Reply Thu 3 May, 2007 11:23 am
TheCorrectResponse wrote:
BBB

Since you have an interest in so many things I have a couple of books that you might like to read, if you haven't already. They are: "The Brain" and "The Mind", both by Dr. Richard. Restak. The first is now about twenty years old the second about 15, but both are still very relevant. They are also fascinating beyond belief (I read each in one sitting; I just couldn't tear myself away, even if that is an old cliché. Both are also written at a conversational level and Restak is a wonderful author. Amazon probably has copies; the paperback versions are probably dirt cheap too.


Books by Richard Restak:
http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_b/103-4224379-0395026?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=Richard.+Restak&Go.x=7&Go.y=5

Did you ever read The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind by Julian Jaynes? I read it when first published decades ago and was fascinated by it. I wondered if schizophrenics have a recessive ancient gene from the bicameral brain?

BBB
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Evolution 101 - Discussion by gungasnake
Typing Equations on a PC - Discussion by Brandon9000
The Future of Artificial Intelligence - Discussion by Brandon9000
The well known Mind vs Brain. - Discussion by crayon851
Scientists Offer Proof of 'Dark Matter' - Discussion by oralloy
Blue Saturn - Discussion by oralloy
Bald Eagle-DDT Myth Still Flying High - Discussion by gungasnake
DDT: A Weapon of Mass Survival - Discussion by gungasnake
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Potentially habitable planet found
Copyright © 2026 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.06 seconds on 03/05/2026 at 01:52:02