NASA basically announced there's no doubt life exist on other planets Kepler 452-b

I see a tiny bit of irony with that old movie (name is aloof) with Kevin Spacey plays a dude from Kapax if i recall correctly. Keplar and Kapax sound similar in a way. anyone else ?

a reply to: scubagravy

Well, unless you've been living under a rock, you'd know that many exo-planets have been named Kepler-(insert number here). This is due to their discovery through the Kepler spacecraft, named after 17th century German mathematician and astronomer Johannes Kepler.

LOL, seems like someone is getting a bit over-excited.

The thread title is wrong though, should be:

Neoholographic announced there's no doubt life exist on other planets Kepler 452-b

originally posted by: YeahYea4

originally posted by: TinfoilTP
No life has been found, throw this into the HOAX bin for the way the title is worded.

The planet is supposedly larger, older, similar star, in the zone where liquid water is a possibility (but so is Mars but it is dry as a bone).

If it has life why haven't we been receiving their old I love Lucy broadcasts and other such activity across any spectrum of output? It is older than Earth and only has 1400 years for signals to reach here.

The standard internet meme applies here, pics or it didn't happen.

Great post Eeyore. Nothing to see here folks. Move along. No reason to be excited.



Seti HAS already listened to this. There is more here. Wait and watch Eeyores.

Well, that's it then, a two post anonymous new member comes in and says more to come as if they got super secret inside information that will blow everyone's socks off. Sell me your snake oil and that beachfront New Mexico property, I'll take it all without question and beg for more.

In the meantime, hoax bin this poorly worded thread title, it says there is no doubt when there is plenty of it to go around.

originally posted by: AdmireTheDistance

originally posted by: neoholographic
HAS BEEN IN IT'S HABITABLE ZONE FOR 6 BILLION YEARS
EARTH SIZE PLANET
AROUND G2 STAR LIKE THE SUN
385 DAYS PER YEAR ORBIT

No matter how many times you repeat that, it still doesn't make it anywhere near as big of a deal as you seem to think it is. Most astronomers (and educated people) have suspected that Earth-like worlds are rather common for many, many years. This discovery is nice in that it supports those assumptions, but that's about the end of it.

Just because a planet is in a "habitable zone", is rocky (like the Earth), and orbits a similar star to ours, does not, in any way, mean that it has life on it. It's within the realm of possibility, sure, but jumping to that conclusion without having definitive evidence only makes you look foolish.

Pure nonsense!

Yes, is a big deal and because you may have your own personal beliefs and blind biases doesn't other people don't have to stick their heads in the sand an ignore all of the evidence.

Like I said earlier, this is like finding a needle in a haystack early in the process and there wasn't all these Scientist who said we would find a planet that's earth size and has been in it's habitable zone for over 6 billion years. It's also around a G2 star like the sun and has an orbit of 385 days.

Like I said, this is huge news. The fact that we found a planet like this in the beginning of our exploration is amazing as the NASA Scientist pointed out in their news conference.

So no matter how much you want to ignore the evidence and try to make it look like it isn't a big deal, it really doesn't matter. You can live with your head in the sand all you want to.

Like I said Scientist have come to this conclusion before this evidence. Hawking said Aliens almost certainly exist. Kaku said this:

“Some scientists say that perhaps we are the only life forms in the universe. Give me a break! I mean, how many stars are there out there in the universe, anyway? The Hubble Space Telescope can see about a hundred billion galaxies — that’s the visible universe,” Kaku says on the alien TV special.

“Each galaxy consists of a hundred billion stars. Do the math. A hundred billion times a hundred billion is 10 sextillion. That’s one with 22 zeros after it. There definitely are aliens in outer space — they’re out there!”

Are they foolish because they don't agree with your blind belief?

There's nothing prohibiting stars, solar systems and LIFE forming on other planets. Earth doesn't have some special ingredient that can only occur on earth. The universe is fine tuned to produce stars, solar systems, moons and LIFE.

originally posted by: jonnywhite
a reply to: JadeStar
Thanks for the words.

No tidal lock in the new? I missed that. Interesting.

Yes.



This terrestrial planet orbits a star like our Sun at a distance similar to where our Earth orbits. It's the first planet we've found of it's kind. That's why it's kind of a big deal. If we found this one we now know a lot more of them are out there. In astronomy there's a kinda fun saying: "If you find one you've found at least a billion". This is due to how vast space is compared to how short a time we might look for something.

Planets like Earth on a very basic level (size, mass, distance from star, etc) are now the rule, not the exception. That was once speculated but now it is no longer speculation, it's fact.

As for tidal locking, tidal locking only becomes a problem for potentially habitable planets orbiting lower mass, dimmer stars than our Sun. These planets must circle closer to the stars they orbit to have temperatures like Earth the same way someone who is cold might huddle closer to a camp fire as its glow dims.

So tidal locking affects all habitable planets around M-stars and some low mass/luminosity K-stars but not G-stars like our Sun.

We do not yet know if these planets around M and some K stars can be habitable but we know ones around G-stars can be (because Earth exists) so while they are interesting the holy grail of planet hunting was something like today's discovery. Still much work is going on in studying the habitability of planets around M-stars because they make up over 80% of the stars in our galaxy.

I did not know our estimates of ESI for these exoplanets is as yet so unreliable. But I does make sense, since if we do not know much about their atmosphere yet, that'll having a corresponding bearing on the surface temperature. Take some wind out of my sails.

Yes because in order to know the planet we must have accurate information on the star. Sometimes we find that the star is lower or higher mass or temperature than we first thought. This changes the planet's ESI because it is suddenly either larger or smaller or colder or hotter than what we initially thought.

I also brought up the Planetary Habitability Index because ESI doesn't account for some things, like tidal lock or abundant amounts of water (or liquid solvents) or a suitable magnetic field or organics and so on. I used Titan as an example because there're many comparisons being made between it and the early earth. Yet its ESI is very low, giving a wrong impression about its striking similarities to Earth.

For those reading this, ESI only looks at these factors to determine the Earth Similarity Index:
a) Mass/radius of planet
b) Escape velocity
c) Surface temperature

The index is very sensitive to the surface temperature. These things are determined by looking at different contributing things. Like JadeStar mentions, atmosphere can affect the surface temperature. Distance from its star and the type of star can affect it too. Even the size of the planet is a factor. Larger planets tend to have bigger greenhouse effects. Note that this is probably only a factor if it has an atmosphere.

Great points all.

a reply to: neoholographic


It's good news no doubt but as I said a few posts back when you look at Galaxies you are looking a long way back in time our nearest large neighbour galaxy 2.5 million years ago, many of the ones referred to above millions to billions of years ago so all life COULD just as easily be extinct.

We have been on Earth a fraction of it's existence there are hundreds of natural events that could wipe us of the face of the Earth even if we don't manage it ourselves, that fact that we are even here arguing over the net about this was because of a whole load of flukes and accidents, think of the fact that dinosaurs were on the Earth for 100's of millions of years YET all they managed was to eat or run from each other.

Life is NO guarantee of intelligence / or the same technological developments as us.

originally posted by: wmd_2008
a reply to: neoholographic

Life is NO guarantee of intelligence / our the same technological developments as us.

I had to star this. You are absolutely right. There are no guarantees that life will always lead to intelligence but we have one data point: us.

At the same time if given 200 billion possibilities in terms of potentially habitable planets in our galaxy alone the idea that we are here by some 1 in 200 billion fluke is incredibly lucky.

My personal feeling/speculation (without data) is that while life may be common, intelligent life as you point out could be quite rare.

That said, I doubt we're the only ones home in the galaxy. 1 in 200 billion is just too lucky if you ask me.

Two of the big questions of this century which may be answered are:

1) how frequently does life arise on other planets given suitable conditions?
2) how frequently and under what conditions does life lead to intelligence?

originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People

originally posted by: neoholographic
YOU DON'T THINK IT CHANGES ANYTHING??

I think it provides some additional confirmation of what most astrobiologists already believed, based on the wealth of information they already had on exoplanets.

So, sure -- this provides a level of confirmation for what they already thought to be true, but it's not like this changes what they already thought to be true.

Based on the information astrobiologists already had in hand, they already felt quite certain that life exists elsewhere, even prior to this new information.

Exactly.

It's confirmation we're on the right track. But that confirmation is why Kepler was built so this proves that a) it was worth the money and b) we should probably fund other visionary concepts like Kepler once was when it was first proposed in the 1980s. Stuff like a starshade in front of a much larger version of Hubble to directly see planets like this one around nearby stars for example.

a reply to: JadeStar

I think that those two questions are hard to answer, and will remain so until we routinely discover and examine life from other worlds. Only then will we understand the correlation between things like gravity and pressure, and the way biological computational matrices form and perform, or put another way, only then will we understand enough about how various forms of brains can be constructed, and what the optimum environment for intelligence to develop is.

For example, too much gravity might make brains like ours difficult to manufacture for a lifeform, or it might just mean that there are a greater number of horizontal folds in the brain tissue than vertical ones, although I do not know how that would work out for the lifeform in question. Given that we only have the experience of ONE planets population to go on, working these things out until we have studied more planets up close, will be a thought exercise more than anything else!

a reply to: wmd_2008

You said:

Life is NO guarantee of intelligence / our the same technological developments as us.

Sure it does and that's why you're typing on your computer now. Life is guaranteed to produce intelligence for a few reasons.

1. We're here on earth.
2. There's no evidence that the earth has some special ingredient that can only produce intelligent life.
3. There's finite arrangements that matter can be in. One of those arrangements that we know of can produce intelligent life. This is why earth like planets are "quite common" as NASA said.

So intelligent life in the universe is like being dealt a full house in a game of Poker. It's a configuration of the cards that just doesn't occur as much as two pair.

Also, since the universe favors earth like planets we could find out that intelligent life is like being dealt two pair and is even more abundant.

So there's no doubt that intelligent life exists on other planets because the configuration of matter that produced life on earth will occur again and again the question is, is it a full house or two of a kind.

There's also growing evidence to support panspermia which would make life even more abundant. Life will not produce intelligence all of the time but the universe is so vast it doesn't have to in order for intelligent life to be abundant.

Sorry my friend there is no life on other Planets. Humans are the first creation, the other planets are for us to inhabit when we "get right." If you think I am wrong, prove there is life on other Planets lol.

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: JadeStar

I think that those two questions are hard to answer, and will remain so until we routinely discover and examine life from other worlds. Only then will we understand the correlation between things like gravity and pressure, and the way biological computational matrices form and perform, or put another way, only then will we understand enough about how various forms of brains can be constructed, and what the optimum environment for intelligence to develop is.

For example, too much gravity might make brains like ours difficult to manufacture for a lifeform, or it might just mean that there are a greater number of horizontal folds in the brain tissue than vertical ones, although I do not know how that would work out for the lifeform in question. Given that we only have the experience of ONE planets population to go on, working these things out until we have studied more planets up close, will be a thought exercise more than anything else!

Great points Truebrit.

The thing is most in the field feel that we will probably discover at least simple extraterrestrial life within the next 20-30 years because of the new telescope, instruments and space missions which are due to be completed, built or launched

If life is as common a process as biochemistry and our early Earth's history would suggest (Life appeared on Earth almost immediately after it cooled) then we should be able to find evidence of its effects on the atmospheres of nearby terrestrial planets with the new stuff which is coming online in the next decade.

originally posted by: TheChrome
Sorry my friend there is no life on other Planets. Humans are the first creation, the other planets are for us to inhabit when we "get right." If you think I am wrong, prove there is life on other Planets lol.

20 years ago there were people who said the same thing about planets around other stars like our Sun. In october of that year (same year i was born) the first one was discovered.

originally posted by: neoholographic
a reply to: wmd_2008

You said:

Life is NO guarantee of intelligence / our the same technological developments as us.

Sure it does and that's why you're typing on your computer now. Life is guaranteed to produce intelligence for a few reasons.

1. We're here on earth.
2. There's no evidence that the earth has some special ingredient that can only produce intelligent life.
3. There's finite arrangements that matter can be in. One of those arrangements that we know of can produce intelligent life. This is why earth like planets are "quite common" as NASA said.

So intelligent life in the universe is like being dealt a full house in a game of Poker. It's a configuration of the cards that just doesn't occur as much as two pair.

Also, since the universe favors earth like planets we could find out that intelligent life is like being dealt two pair and is even more abundant.

So there's no doubt that intelligent life exists on other planets because the configuration of matter that produced life on earth will occur again and again the question is, is it a full house or two of a kind.

There's a leap of faith your making not based on data.

While we now know (thanks to data) that the universe favors planets like Earth.

We do not know that planets like Earth favor life (we strongly suspect they do but to know for sure will require data).

And now the big one...

We do not know that life favors intelligence (as many have mentioned, the dinosaurs were around a long time, far longer than we've been around yet they never evolved intelligence)

a reply to: JadeStar

I love the new discoveries, they are very interesting. Beyond that science has zero evidence of life other than our own. As a believer in the Bible, there is evidence within it that Humans are the only life in the universe. Unless science finds anything to the contrary, the bible stands to tell us the truth. Anything else is conjecture.

originally posted by: neoholographic
Life is guaranteed to produce intelligence for a few reasons.

We have absolutely no way of knowing that at the present time, as we currently only know of one planet in the entire universe on which life has arisen, and intelligence has only been 'produced' once out of the billions of species that have lived on that planet.

Perhaps you're correct, perhaps you're not, but making such definitive statements based solely on conjecture is utterly foolish. Not quite as foolish as your earlier assertion that the universe is "fine-tuned" for life, though, so I guess it's an improvement.

originally posted by: neoholographic
a reply to: wmd_2008

You said:

Life is NO guarantee of intelligence / or the same technological developments as us.

. Life is guaranteed to produce intelligence for a few reasons.

1. We're here on earth.
2. There's no evidence that the earth has some special ingredient that can only produce intelligent life.
3. There's finite arrangements that matter can be in. One of those arrangements that we know of can produce intelligent life. This is why earth like planets are "quite common" as NASA said.

NO IT ISN'T like I said we are here due to a lot of flukes and accidents the dinosaurs were around for 100's of millions of years did they have the NET or CARS or ANY TECHNOLOGY if they they hadn't got wiped out by A FLUKE/ACCIDENT we probably wouldn't have been here.

originally posted by: TheChrome
a reply to: JadeStar

I love the new discoveries, they are very interesting. Beyond that science has zero evidence of life other than our own. As a believer in the Bible, there is evidence within it that Humans are the only life in the universe. Unless science finds anything to the contrary, the bible stands to tell us the truth. Anything else is conjecture.

The Bible is a STORY BOOK written by man.

a reply to: JadeStar

James Webb for the win?

I am looking forward to getting the first images back from that bad boy, let me tell you! I can feel my saliva glands wiggle in anticipation!