32 New Planets Found
 

Though not in our solar system :D

Source: 32 New Planets Found Outside Our Solar System

Re: 32 New Planets Found
 

That is.. good new i suppose?

Any life seen on that planet? :p

Re: 32 New Planets Found
 

I think if there was any life they'd stay the hell away from us- the planet that first of all spawned "2 girls 1 cup" and "1 Man 1 jar" and then charges people to watch them and there are people who pay...

Re: 32 New Planets Found
 

wouldn't any new life have to be pancake shaped? 7 to 8 times the mass of Jupiter is a lot of gravity.

Re: 32 New Planets Found
 

When you think "Earth" this is how you sum it up??

I prefer waffles...yum.

Re: 32 New Planets Found
 

revise the number of star systems?

I can do that right now.

A lot.

Re: 32 New Planets Found
 

It would also have to find a way of living on a gas giant...



We can't really detect life on these planets. The main method of detecting them is IIRC to look at the dimming of the star when the planet passes in front of it - this doesn't reveal much about the surface.

Re: 32 New Planets Found
 

We could always send a ship there and anxiously wait millions of years for the return.

Re: 32 New Planets Found
 

Not necessarily. In my mind, nothing we humans say is 100% right, maybe everything we have found out can be proven wrong. I know it sounds stupid, but hey, you never know.

Maybe some life can...

Re: 32 New Planets Found
 

Life on that planet could have been their for far longer then the earth. I'm pretty sure that life there has adapted to the extreme gravity.

Re: 32 New Planets Found
 

32 new space rocks to shoot missiles at. Wonderful.

Re: 32 New Planets Found
 

The problems with current extra-solar planet detection methods are numerous and significant, and tend to mean that only very large planets are likely to be discovered. If discovered by infrared emissions, that planet will also have to be reasonably distant from its star to avoid simply being washed out. It is highly unlikely that any planets spotted by scientists using current technology will be capable of supporting life.

However, given the vast distances involved, and the astronomical (pun intended) difficulties in finding such tiny objects as planets against a backdrop of billions of gargantuan balls of superheated plasma, the fact that they have discovered so many planets already, despite these difficulties, does seem to improve the odds of an Earth-like* planet existing somewhere.

* When I say 'Earth-like', I mean a planet roughly the same size, mass and composition as Earth, in the habitable zone of its star system as well as a habitable region of the galaxy it resides in, with a similar atmosphere (either to modern-day Earth, or to prehistoric Earth). When scientists in these articles mention 'Earth-like', however, they are more usually talking simply about rocky planets in general as opposed to gas giants. A planet five times the size and/or mass of Earth is most certainly not Earth-like. Venus is more akin to Earth than one of those, for crying out loud.

Re: 32 New Planets Found
 

That's not a revision. That was the guesstimate before.

With more stars in the heavens than grains of sand on all the beaches of the Earth it would be high unlikely that their would be no other habitable planets for humans. The first problem is finding them. The biggest problem is getting to them.

Re: 32 New Planets Found
 

No, it would simply adabt to the gravity.... I mean technically you should be crushed by all the air on top of you, but you have air inside yourself pushing out through breathing, thats why when you get stuff like used car batteries, take a decompression, plug it in then turn it on, you may have hit with a hammer for no result, but with the air decompressor, its crushed in seconds.

Re: 32 New Planets Found
 

Precisely - current methods aren't that effective at finding something as small as Earth.

Re: 32 New Planets Found
 

We're getting there. Only a few years ago we could only detect planets more than 10 Earth masses, now we're down to 5 or 6.

High atmospheric pressure is completely different from high gravity. High gravity is the sort of thing you feel when you lift off on a plane, it's the inertia of your body combating the force of acceleration on our body the mass of the planet exerts. Assuming that the 5-Earth-Mass planet is about the same density, the force of gravity would be about 1.7G's. Nothing too major, your life expectancy would go down if you lived your whole life on the planet, but nothing too life-threatening.

On an astronomical scale, those are remarkably Earth-like. I mean, what else can you say about them when you compare them to the likes of Rigel and Arcturus, which are about 2900 times the size of the Earth...

Re: 32 New Planets Found
 

when im a granpa, my sons are propably the inhabitats of mars, which i think is quite freaking awesome. altough note, i said propably.

Re: 32 New Planets Found
 

You think it's awesome that your children would suffer from severe problems with their muscles, skeletons, immune systems and cardiovascular systems, to say nothing of potentially being exposed to a deadly environment in the event of an emergency or being fried by ungodly amounts of solar radiation?

Re: 32 New Planets Found
 

We dont know about any live bearing planets yet.

All we know right now is we look for a similarly sized planet within a hospitable zone from its plant like how far Venus, Earth, and Mars are from the sun.

IIRC a Interferometer is supposed to allow higher detail images to look for more clues of life supporting planets.

With that attitude we probably should have never built rockets and gone to the moon, for that matter why even build satellites.

Re: 32 New Planets Found
 

:lol:

"You must spread some reputation around before giving it to Mr. Matt again."

Re: 32 New Planets Found
 

Although the slight problems you state do sound discouraging... Im sorry, I have to say it...

My Bags Are Packed! When Do We Leave?!?!??!!?=p

Re: 32 New Planets Found
 

minor problems as such are irrelevant : D [/joke]

Re: 32 New Planets Found
 

Interesting, but I wouldn't worry about ever really getting to one of these planets in the next century or beyond. The US can't figure out how to get another rocket to the moon and the Mars Mission is under consideration by the Obama Administration to be scrapped because of budget constraints, and I don't see how the European Union is going to pick up the slack, as they could only scrape up 4 million for the Tsunami victims a year ago because of how their economies are set up. Maybe the Chinese...:beer:

Re: 32 New Planets Found
 

It's not an 'attitude', it's a fact - Mars' gravity is less than half that of Earth (closer to a third, in fact). Long-term human habitation would result in significant health problems.

Re: 32 New Planets Found
 

Worse than multiple years of weightlessness in Space Stations? Testing has shown that regular exercise prevented bone loss and helped prevent loss of muscle mass.

The only problems I am aware of was time needed for the bodies muscles to re acclimate themselves to to carrying their old weight in earths gravity.

One of the problems being worked on for extended space missions is how to deal with trying to keep the people in shape for two years before they even get to Mars.

As for radiation in space I assume any base on Mars or the moon would have to deal with radiation and thus require shielding or be underground.

One of the proposed projects for Mars was to use lichen which is similar to lichens found in Artic areas to terraform Mars.

EDIT: Found this link which explains many of the problems.

http://www.asc-csa.gc.ca/pdf/educato...cience_stu.pdf

In essence I dont think the problems are insurmountable. They may difficult to overcome or adapt to but so was trying to land a man on the moon 30 years ago.

Re: 32 New Planets Found
 

Agreed. Anyone living on Mars would have to go through aggressive strength training or they would suffer severe organ, muscle and bone damage upon return to Earth. NASA figured this out after the first few orbits into space when astronauts complained about muscle fatigue and other problems, hence why daily exercise is so important for astronauts on the ISP and Shuttle. I highly doubt any of us would qualify (save one or two) given we spend most of our time on our ass in front of a computer.

The only way to get around this is artificial gravity (which isn't too far off in real world application) that is set to Earth norms.

Re: 32 New Planets Found
 

You can look for the spectrum of a planet, to look for blues and greens - you know, plants and chlorophyll. Of course, there is no guarantee that any plants will be green (I think Sciam did a very good article on blue/red plants on other planets with parents stars of different spectra), but it's a good start.

Yes. Because you are not staying there for a few hundred days. You are staying there for decades on a planet with significantly lower/higher gravity than the Earth. You will get bone deformation because of the different stresses, muscle atrophy/hypertrophy, etc. Aside from the fact that being in a high gravity environment isn't that good for your organs anyway.

And Matty is right about the immune system as well; the physiological triggers to regulate the immune system are not fully understood, and it is entirely possible that the difference in bone composition/mass brought about by the change in gravity could have a profound, long-term effect on your immune system.

How about the radiation in interplanetary space? The Sun shields us from most interstellar radiation, but the sun itself puts out a lot of radiation, and with no Van Allen belts to protect us, you'll probably have either died or become terminally ill by the time you get to Mars.

Re: 32 New Planets Found
 

Nobody ever said any of these new planets were Gas Giants. Just because they are the size of Jupiter, this doesn't nessecerily mean they aren't Rocks. :)

:nodding:

If life evolved on that planet, it wouldn't have to 'adapt', as it would have evolved to cope with the conditions.

Surely we'd adapt? Granted it may take time, but if you look at points across the globe, those people living in various locations have adapted.

This!. :)


Also, just a thought, but these planets may not even be there anymore... Its no secret that when we look at light through space, we're seeing these suns / planets as they were, not as they are. I'm sure also, that by the time we've figured out how to get to these 'rocks' we'll have developed a way to teraform these rocks, and turn them into suitiable planets.

Re: 32 New Planets Found
 

I highly doubt that there is enough rocky matter in the entirety of our Solar System to make up a single body with 8 Jupiter masses. Most large bodies are gaseous because they contain leftover gas from the formation of the star; the negligible loss of mass from the star due to this process gives the gas giants. Whereas you'd be hard put to find a system with that much rocky matter, except from maybe a fifth, or even 6th generation star.

Hundreds, maybe thousands of years. I doubt many people would be happy living with a whole horde of physiological abnormalities brought about by the climate in the consolation that maybe a few hundred years down the track their descendants may be more suited to the climate. And in any case, that assumes that the ones unfit to survive just die. More likely, with medical technology, they'd survive, reproduce, and slow the whole process down.

That possibility is so infinitesimally small it may probably be more pertinent to figure out how to get there first before dwelling on the possibility that the planet may not be there when we get there. After all, even the shortest-lived stars have their lifetimes measured in the millions of years; for the yellow and brown dwarfs that we're ideally looking for, lifetimes are in the billions of years. It is so hugely improbable that we happen to travel there in the few thousand years when the star turns nova or something else happens to the planet, and we don't know about it, that I think it's kind of negligible.

Re: 32 New Planets Found
 

That's all science is. Man's best guess... to put it bluntly
If you manage to find enough fuel for a rocket to travel there, I'll be damned if you plan on using it for a missle.

Re: 32 New Planets Found
 

Humans have evolved to live in Earth's gravity. Their bones, muscles, and their entire cardiovascular systems are specifically tuned to function at 1g. Mammals are fully capable of adapting to different climates, within reason. But no species on Earth has ever been forced to evolve an ability to live in environments with entirely different gravitational forces before. It's not something we are naturally supposed to be doing - it's an unprecedented transition for the animal kingdom.

Newborns, native to Mars, never leaving its surface, might find it easier than migrants to the world. It would take a few generations for them to fully adapt, however, and once that adaptation took hold, it would be even more difficult for the Martians to return to Earth than it would be for Earthlings to visit Mars.



As for radiation concerns, there are only two words that forever condemn any thoughts of terraforming Mars to the annals of stupid ideas - magnetic field. Or rather, the absence of one. The sun will expand into a red giant before humans are ever walking the surface of Mars without some form of protection.

Re: 32 New Planets Found
 

Who says they have to be there for decades? Why cant people be rotated every couple of years? I think we can assume for the next probably hundred years any manned missions to Mars will be by hand picked and thoroughly tested individuals.

And at least there would be almost 4/10th of earth gravity as opposed to zero gravity in space. IMHO having a gravity present would reduce headaches and the disorentation experienced in weightlessness. Adding exercise would IMHO further reduce that.

Cosmonaut Sergei Krikalev reduced bone loss by running on a treadmill and it is thought that the impact of the running helped keep the bones cells active.

And it is entirely possible it wont, we dont know which is why its still being researched.

The Sun has its active periods and passive periods. NASA has been trying to develop a radiation proof compartment for its interstellar design projects that the crew could take shelter in if radiation storms get too bad. A base underground or shielded

Various probes sent to the inner and outer planets report back background and current radiation levels so NASA can get a idea of what goes on.

In effect the problems are being researched, its too early to say things cant be overcome.

Without a magnetic field I agree that there are slim to no chances Mars can ever hold in a atmosphere. What I picture happening on Mars are mostly mining colonies which would involve lots of underground activity. Any surface structures would be for scientific research, and greenhouses.

There has also been talks of terraforming Venus at some point in the future. Venus does have a magnetic field, does have closer to Earth normal gravity, and also has real acid rain (Sulfuric?) and IIRC 900deg heat. Obviously would not be habitable in our life time.

Also gravity at Mars surface is .38 percenty of earths. But what if we move closer to the core? Like at the bottom of Valles Marineris? Would be a good place to mine I would think.

Re: 32 New Planets Found
 

What he said.

Instead of looking at all the things that can go wrong, how about we look for the things that can go right and ways to turn the wrong to right.

wrong right wrong wrong right right right wrong. sorry.

this can go 2 ways. Man wises up and sees this problems and fixes it. or we wait for the hundreds of inhabitants die then discuss whether we should fix it or not.

screw healthcare. Fitness bill ftw.

as for artificial gravity. its a great idea but would probably be costly in the long run.

Re: 32 New Planets Found
 

:Puzzled:, So is going into space.

Re: 32 New Planets Found
 

Indeed. But this tangent was started by somebody saying that people will be living on Mars in a few decades. They won't, and they can't. Working on Mars for a few hundred days would be pushing it, considering the extensive trip both there and back.

Your opinion doesn't matter. Permanent habitation of Mars would result in significant health problems. Bone decalcification can't be solved with exercise.

And the research is rather damning.

Until you can alter the gravitational field of an entire planet, the problems are set in stone. There is no technology, either experimental or theoretical, which can do such a thing.

Venus doesn't have a magnetic field. The lack of such a thing is one of the theories behind why it no longer holds any water, in fact. Terraforming Venus would not only be extremely improbable, but extremely impractical - you would need to physically remove a significant portion of its atmosphere before even artificial colonies are possible, and such a thing would take so much energy as to prove infeasible. Though, some outlandish scientists have proposed 'floating cities' in the atmosphere, high enough so that the atmospheric pressure is roughly the same as our own.

Are you able to perform 'moon jumps' at the tip of Everest?

You have a theory to increase the gravitational field strength of an entire planet?

It's also nonsensical outside of spaceflight.

Re: 32 New Planets Found
 

Any of these new planets habitable? We've already screwed up one. Might aswell start working on ships to get us to a new planet so that we can screw that one up aswell, lol. :lol:

Re: 32 New Planets Found
 

That would be pretty costly. The way it goes now, you'd have to either have a ship run non-stop between Earth and Mars, or have 2 such craft. Either way, that costs with maintenance, training, etc. It would be much more cost-efficient to only require one or 2 manned missions every decade.

Even in 'inactive' periods the radiation is quite dangerous.

Holding an atmosphere has nothing to do with the magnetic field. Rather, the gravitational field...or lack thereof. You see there are objects with little/no magnetic activity (e.g. Venus) with very strong atmospheres. It purely depends on gravity...or lack thereof. And with Mars, there is a lack thereof.

Venus would not be a good place to start. Aside from the fact that the atmosphere is kind of hot (450C average), there's a lot of atmospheric pressure, which would basically crush anything sent there, and we can't forget good old sulphuric acid.

Also, you can't forget the fact that Venus days are 243 Earth days long. In the absence of the cloud layer (which makes Venus completely isothermal) daytime would get unbearably hot and nighttime unbearably cold.

Of course, they would have taken into account the fact that at that altitude wind speeds are a roughly constant 200km/h?

I've done some calculations. The differences between gravity on the surface of Mars, and 10km down (roughly the depth of the Marineris trench) would be about 0.02m/s^2. That's 0.2% of a gee, people.

Re: 32 New Planets Found
 

What I picture happening on Mars is almost entirely automated industry. The costs of shipping folks up there to mine and so on are ridiculous even if the health problems weren't relevant.

Re: 32 New Planets Found
 

There's a reason they're considered 'outlandish'. The sorts of aerostat colonies they talk about would essentially be cities propped up in the sky with, essentially, balloons. Whether they are tethered to the ground via some kind of carbon nanotube cable, allowed to simply 'go with the flow', or equipped with some manner of propulsion, doesn't seem to matter so much considering the somewhat daft premise.

Re: 32 New Planets Found
 

8 times the size of Jupiter? Thats almost the size of the sun. Damn.

Re: 32 New Planets Found
 

Not really. While the sun is about 10 Jupiter radii, it's also about 1000 Jupiter masses, whereas this new planet is 8 Jupiter masses (not close by a long shot). And when astrophysicists talk about stars, it's the mass that counts in determining whether it's a star or not, because that the thing that counts when determining whether a body has the required conditions to initiate fusion. And the new planet is still just a planet, i.e. it's not large enough to constitute a brown dwarf.

Re: 32 New Planets Found
 

Well its roughly the size of, not the mass. And its probably all gas. I wonder what the pressure is.

I wonder how big the largest solid planet we have found is.

Re: 32 New Planets Found
 

They are vastly different concepts. 8 times the mass means, at exactly the same density, twice the size.

Re: 32 New Planets Found
 

Oh I read it wrong.

Re: 32 New Planets Found
 

Wasn't it said that in a few hundred years, Venus would be inhabitable due to the possible decline of the temperature and atmospheric toxins? I might be wrong, but I could of sworn I heard that somewhere. I could also be talking about the wrong planet as well.

Re: 32 New Planets Found
 

venus? its the second closest planet to the son. I doubt we would want to settle there if its so hot here.

Re: 32 New Planets Found
 

Hmm, then it might of been a different planet.

Re: 32 New Planets Found
 

Different planet, probably.

If (and it's a very big if) we could ever remove carbon dioxide and other significant greenhouse gases completely from the surface of Venus, and reduce its temperature, then its climate would be quite similar to that of Earth. Maybe slightly hotter, but not much.

Re: 32 New Planets Found
 

This calls for the powers of SCIENCE!!

But little hot? Isn't it suppose to be like a couple thousand miles closer to the son (I may be overshooting it but w/e) So I believe its suppose to be a lot hotter.

Re: 32 New Planets Found
 

Yes. I mean what I said. Remember the Earth is the subject of a fairly substantial greenhouse effect to, which is partly the reason why day/night temperatures are so close (for comparison, the moon has a range of well over 200C between day and night sides). So I figure that if you take away almost all that greenhouse gas, then you would be fairly close. Of course, you'd freeze to death during night, but since Venus days are 240-odd Earth days long, I don't think that'd be such a hassle as if you had to prepare for that every 12 hours. Kind of like living in Antarctica, but a bit warmer...

Of course, this is only an assumption, but plausible (I think).