Posted on 10/13/2009 8:14:47 PM PDT by Michael Barnes
I scanned the article to see if it talked about the additional necessary additional elements, including placement in the "life zone" and a nearby moon.
Placement in the life zone means the planet is neither too hot nor too cold for life, or some carbon based form of life as we know it, to exist.
But a key element for a stabilized rotation on axis would be the presence of an orbiting moon. Otherwise, it would make the planet's atmosphere and shifting magnetic poles fairly unhospitable to any form of life. We tend, in these hypothesis, to discount the impact of the moon on Earth's rotation, and how the grativtational fields between the two come into play, but look at Venus! It's swirling, churning soup!
The planets must have moons to stabilize them on their axis. Even the grossly inhospitable giant, Jupiter, maintains axis consistency because of it's moons.
Factoring in those drops the probability numbers just slightly. This is not to discount the possibility of life on other planets, but would provide a more accurate estimation of how many are able to sustain carbon-based life forms such as those found here on Earth.
Excellent article. Thanks so much for posting it!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.