Skip to comments.NASA's Kepler Mission Confirms Its First Planet in Habitable Zone of Sun-like Star
Posted on 12/05/2011 10:46:16 AM PST by Dallas59
The newly confirmed planet, Kepler-22b, is the smallest yet found to orbit in the middle of the habitable zone of a star similar to our sun. The planet is about 2.4 times the radius of Earth. Scientists don't yet know if Kepler-22b has a predominantly rocky, gaseous or liquid composition, but its discovery is a step closer to finding Earth-like planets.
We need interstellar travel NOW, it is needed to escape the Earth while the Liberal, Socialists and Caliphate destroy each other....
Only 600 light years away!
Gravity would be a serious problem.
Not really, even a really large planet like that would only have gravity that is 1.5X to 2X the gravity on earth due to how gravity works via the square of distance.
2X gravity is not all that bad, it would be like being overweight when fit and for someone who is fit you would get used to it.
We need to send all SEIU employees, Communists, leftists and lawyers to this planet immediately in order to establish a utopian society. The survival of Personkind is at stake!
They’re looking for planets around stars like ours. It could easily be that most habitable planets orbit red dwarf stars, and orbit them very close in.
Even if Proxima Centauri, at 4.27 light years distance, had a habitable planet it wouldn’t really matter since we don’t have the technology to get there in any decent amount of time.
I will proudly lead a scouting expedition made up of myself and a able crew of 1000 Swedish bikini models.
I will send for the rest of humanity once we get there and make sure it is safe.....maybe.
Underwire bras required!
An obscure kpax reference.
Also depends on how dense it is, right?
If mass goes as R-cube, gravity goes as R-squared, so surface gravity would be proportional to R, for equal denisity. All other things are rarely, equal, however. The earth is the densiest planet in the solar system, having an iron core. The Moon’s diameter, for instance, is about 3.67 times smaller than earth’s, but it’s surface gravity is about 6.05 times smaller because it is that much less dense.
If this planet has an iron core the size of earth’s and a lot of rock plied on top, it could have surface gravity much lower than earth’s. Either way, just as elephants and spiders exist on earth, complex life could exist on this planet. Even snakes.
Kepler measures light dips from transiting planets, a technique that gives the size, but not the mass of the planet. Doppler studies of its host star should reveal its mass as well.
This is what I was thinking also.
2G’s would not be too bad. 3 G’s would be sucky.
|· join · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post new topic · subscribe ·|
|Google news searches: exoplanet · exosolar · extrasolar ·|
Hmmm. The diameter of Jupiter is more than 22 times earth's and a Jovian day is about 10 hours long. The moon otoh has a diameter 3.66 time smaller than earth's and a solar day of about 29.53 days. The earth was "despun" by the moon over the past several billion years, in fact, even today, the length of day increases by about 0.0015-0.0020 seconds per century.
F = Mm/r^2
(Force of gravity = Mass (planet) x mass (person)/radius squared)
So until NASA figures out the composition of Kepler 22b, i.e. density, then we can’t know how much more a person would weigh.
[ If this planet has an iron core the size of earths and a lot of rock plied on top, it could have surface gravity much lower than earths ]
That would be awesome, a whole lot more landmass and less gravity to boot!!!! Awesome Holiday planet!
Actually a larger planet may have a higher differentiation during formation, making more of the heavy stuff sink into the core so your scenario is plausible!
2/3 the gravity with 2x the surface area, Let’s call it Earth II and find a way to get there NOW! :)
Before we spend any money actually getting to one of them, we need to determine if that planet has any chocolate. So far the earth is the only planet known to have chocolate.
Maybe you can explain to me the connection between planetary radius and period of rotation, because I just don't get it.
i)plate tectonics (avoids the full globe resurfacing problem seen on Venus and an important part of magnetic field sustainability);
ii) low eccentricity orbit (i.e. mostly round);
iii) a Jupiter mass or larger companion to suck up rocks that would otherwise perpetually bombard the inner solar system;
iv) low variability in solar output; and
v) a quiet neighborhood where nothing big has gone supernova in the last billion years.
Saw a T-shirt once:
SAVE the EARTH!
It’s the only planet with chocolate!
Probably more but the line of sight is off if your just looking for planets that transit the host star.
It’s still Minshara-class.
Everyone that is cool knows that the Starfleet nomenclature for human habitable planets are called class M planets.
Serious actual work on really advanced drives should be going on, not just theoretical work and damn sure no more crap like the ISS.
Most likely with one hemisphere in eternal daylight. I don't buy the usual arguments against such worlds as habitable worlds (flares and atmosphere freeze-out). They probably offer a more stable environment for life than worlds like ours.
Those are very good points. However, I have also imagined that there could be planets in which the conditions are even more favorable than here. Less asteroids in the system, for example. Or a star that has been ejected from its host galaxy by a merger. So although an extinction event occurs once every hundred million years or so here, and restarts evolution again almost from scratch, there are others that take much longer. Rare of course by a huge factor, but with more stars in the universe than there are grains of sand on the earth, it’s possible.
All excellent points.
I stand corrected. The article does not mention how quickly this planet rotates on it’s axis.
[ Serious actual work on really advanced drives should be going on, not just theoretical work and damn sure no more crap like the ISS. ]
Yes need to work on Heim Drives and gravity manipulation type devices.
Anything that can decouple an object from inertia will be a goo thing to research.
Yep, agree on that.
No matter how fast the drive, if you can't accelerate at a decent speed, you ain't going nowhere fast :^)
But maybe THEY do to get here. :-)
I have this fantasy that, just as people muddled along without electricity even though it was all around them, we stumble through space at liquid propellent speed until somebody says, "Hey, look what I discovered!"
Who is THEY you mention?
Maybe the cloaked ship orbiting Mercury that was revealed by a CME in this video posted on GoogTube?
The Roswellians - or those folks mentioned on "Ancient Aliens". :-)
They could be in that cloaked ship checking out our Messenger satellite that’s in orbit around Mercury!
They prefer to be called Czechoslovakians...
Depends on if your knees are in good shape or not.
What vantage point was that viewed from?
I could be the SOHO satellite or STEREO A or B satellites that watch the Sun.
Hey, that's not all bad. Why should we white guys mess up the rest of the galaxy with European-style socialism since America seems to be gleefully going down the same path?
After all, it's the Chinese who need more space to put people, anyway, and they seem to be doing a better job of learning capitalist principles than we white guys are in remembering them.
(Sarcasm alert intended... but not entirely tongue-in-cheek, unfortunately.)