Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2
Waspie_Dwarf

1st Earth-Size Exoplanet In 'Habitable Zone' [merged]

25 posts in this topic

NASA's Kepler Discovers First Earth-Size Planet In The 'Habitable Zone' of Another Star

Using NASA's Kepler Space Telescope, astronomers have discovered the first Earth-size planet orbiting a star in the "habitable zone" -- the range of distance from a star where liquid water might pool on the surface of an orbiting planet. The discovery of Kepler-186f confirms that planets the size of Earth exist in the habitable zone of stars other than our sun.

While planets have previously been found in the habitable zone, they are all at least 40 percent larger in size than Earth and understanding their makeup is challenging. Kepler-186f is more reminiscent of Earth.

arrow3.gifRead more...

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is remarkable, I wonder how long the day on this planet is and how many moons it has. These two factors alone could tell us how Earthlike they really are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These two factors alone could tell us how Earthlike they really are.

Why?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kepler Discovers First Earth size Planet in the Habitable Zone of Another Star

NASA's Kepler Space Telescope has discovered the first validated Earth-size planet orbiting in the habitable zone of a distant star, an area where liquid water might exist on its surface. The planet, Kepler-186f, is ten percent larger in size than Earth and orbits its parent star, Kepler-186, every 130 days. The star, located about 500 light-years from Earth, is classified as an M1 dwarf and is half the size and mass of our sun.

For more information about this discovery, please visit http://www.nasa.gov/kepler

For more information about NASA Ames, please visit http://www.nasa.gov/ames

Credit: NASA Ames Research Center

Source: NASA - Multimedia

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why?

Because of how day and night combine to influence and induce life. We already know from its sun that it has a day but what can we say of its night?

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because of how day and night combine to influence and induce life.

This is meaningless!

Would you like to give some details? Why is the length of day important? Do you realise that the length of Earth's day has not always been 24 hours?

Why is the number of Moons important?

We already know from its sun that it has a day but what can we say of its night?

This is not just meaningless, it's nonsense!!

Do you actually know what night is? Do you not realise that any planet in orbit around a star must have day AND night? Even a tidally locket planet will have one side in constant day and one side in constant night.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

This is meaningless!

Would you like to give some details? Why is the length of day important? Do you realise that the length of Earth's day has not always been 24 hours? Why is the number of Moons important?

If you are right and I suppose you are, then it is you who is supposing that life existed during those times. Cruicially I am meaning differences by hours of days and not merely seconds or minutes. Do you not suppose the moon has not always been there as well?

This is not just meaningless, it's nonsense!!

Do you actually know what night is? Do you not realise that any planet in orbit around a star must have day AND night? Even a tidally locket planet will have one side in constant day and one side in constant night.

The universe is full of suprises and if nothing suprises you then Maybe this will, there could be planets tidally locked in the shadow of giant planets, in essence being in a perpetual solar eclipse. These planets would of course be rare, maybe as rare as the Earth itself. In the case of the kepler 186f i dont think its day cycle has been measured.

Edited by taniwha
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

to have life, Earth really does not require the moon.. but life may not evolve without the moon

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Cool discovery, not like we'll be seeing it anytime soon.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

to have life, Earth really does not require the moon.. but life may not evolve without the moon

I think what they (NASA) is looking for in requirements to planets in the "Goldilocks" zone is simply distance from it's sun in relation to Earth's distance from our sun, "not too hot, not too cold" "just right" on temps. That sort of thing. Moons are shielding agents primarily (they do other things as well, tides,etc.,) for the planet against comets,meteors etc., but I would think they are not necessary for life to evolve. I have never read anything that supports the lunar influences on evolution. Edited by ancient astronaut
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I think what they (NASA) is looking for in requirements to planets in the "Goldilocks" zone is simply distance from it's sun in relation to Earth's distance from our sun, "not too hot, not too cold" "just right" on temps. That sort of thing. Moons are shielding agents primarily (they do other things as well, tides,etc.,) for the planet against comets,meteors etc., but I would think they are not necessary for life to evolve. I have never read anything that supports the lunar influences on evolution.

your take on this link, about our moon, and our evolution....just a speculation!!

http://www.sciencein...13/issue26/moon

Edited by SkeptcByMindBelievrByHeart
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Astonishing. When I was a young man we could only speculate about whether or not planets existed around other stars. There was no conceivable way to prove it. Now we have the ability to detect one the size of our little rock 500 light years away. Simply incredible.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

your take on this link, about our moon, and our evolution....just a speculation!!

http://www.sciencein...13/issue26/moon

Enjoyable read thanks.

It isnt unreasonable to assume that a moon is essential to being Earthlike or even lifelike.

We do know for certain that life doesnt exist on the two only moonless planets in our solar system, Mercury and Venus.

Atmospherically and geologically Venus is alive and kicking but we know the chances of biological life are next to zero.

Interestingly to consider also the Venus day is actually longer than its year! By a matter of moments. There is a theory that perhaps Mercury was the Venus moon, taken as an infant by the Sun. Just how might a moon change Venus? Could a moon be the pendulum for life?

http://curiosity.discovery.com/question/venus-day-longer-year

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The goldilocks zone? Couldn't they have come up with a better name that.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

The goldilocks zone? Couldn't they have come up with a better name that.

Lol maybe the three bears zone ( sorry couldnt resist) lol

I agree with you though goldilocks zone has no appeal to me either.

Edited by taniwha

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

your take on this link, about our moon, and our evolution....just a speculation!!

http://www.sciencein...13/issue26/moon

I never said Humans. I said I didn't think that it was necessary for "life" to evolve, it was a good read though, I knew about the collision, didn't know about some of the other stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Amazing discovery. I just wish we could take a closer look

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's cool :D I wonder what it's like.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

490 Light years ? I better Load up the "Nitro" And Stuff a Few extra B.B.Q sandwich`s !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Scientists say a world that's 490 light-years away qualifies as the first confirmed Earth-sized exoplanet that could sustain life as we know it — but in an environment like nothing we've ever seen.

The planet, known as Kepler-186f, is "more of an Earth cousin than an Earth twin," Elisa Quintana, an astronomer at the SETI Institute at NASA Ames Research Center, told the journal Science. Quintana is the lead author of a report on the planet published by Science this week.

"This discovery does confirm that Earth-sized planets do exist in the habitable zones of other stars," Quintana said during a Thursday news briefing at NASA Headquarters.

Kepler-186f goes around an M-type dwarf star that's smaller and cooler than our sun. But it orbits much closer to its parent star than Earth does, within what would be Mercury's orbit in our own solar system. Those two factors combine to produce an environment that could allow for liquid water on the surface, assuming that the planet had a heat-trapping atmosphere.

"The star, to our eyes, would look slightly orange-y," about a third again as big as our sun but only a third as bright, said co-author Thomas Barclay, a staff scientist for NASA's Kepler mission who is also affiliated with NASA and the Bay Area Environmental Research Institute. At midday, Kepler-186f's landscape might look similar to what we see on Earth an hour before sunset, he told NBC News.

MUCH MORE ON THE LINK... wanted to give a brief description..

http://www.nbcnews.com/science/space/earths-cousin-scientists-find-alien-planet-thats-most-home-n83131

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yea I think it is a bit much referring to it as an earth twin when it's sun is a red dwarf, and it therefore has a much smaller orbit and shorter year.

The ones orbiting closer in are bound to be found first as it takes several orbits to make a confirmation.

There are problems (not that they can't be rationalized, but the problems of almost anything can be rationalized) about saying a planet orbiting a red dwarf is a good candidate. The only example we have in our statistical base of actual live is a yellow dwarf (class G) and this is class M.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Amazing discovery. I just wish we could take a closer look

I bet NASA already has, but I thank them for telling us about how it looks

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mankind has a habit of solving the different problems and various challenges life puts in front of him. If he has the technology to reach this star in a normal human lifespan he'll probably in time be able to move a planet. Therefore towing a body of the right size and composition to the right position would be an option. I mean what would happen on Venus if it got moved to Mars's orbit and you gave it a rotation? A lot i think. Next job dump the atmosphere and tap into Jupiter's. As for finding advanced life on moons of Jupiter sized worlds, that I'm not so sure about. If memory serves me right the planet has a very powerful radiation belt and I'm wondering how the belts belonging to the smaller Earth like moon would react with it. Would they combine? Would they oppose? Also what would the particle levels be like when that body goes behind the larger one and goes through its magnetic tail? I mean its going to suck up all the particles like a hoover. Mind you the Northern lights would look nice i suppose from within your radiation suit. However i do know one species of bacteria can live in the cooling systems of atomic reactors so i could be wrong.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know the US has the Nazis Vortex engine system in there space crafts already so I strongly believe they have most likely already explored that planet. This may seem outrageous but its true. Meanwhile society is 100 years behind in technology thanks to the US.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know the US has the Nazis Vortex engine system in there space crafts already so I strongly believe they have most likely already explored that planet. This may seem outrageous but its true. Meanwhile society is 100 years behind in technology thanks to the US.

Do you have any sources to base that outrageous statement on?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 2

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.