One year's (366 days) X-Planets topics:
Must be funding time at NASA. People who laugh at folks who believe in God, are breathless in their belief in aliens.
It’s only 25,000 light years away. We’ll just set spaceball 1 for ludicrous speed, and be there by supper.
Send Bernie Sanders...
Yet another unimaginably uninhabitable exoplanet.
Democrats scramble to send them ballots...
I can remember some of our school books had quotations from scientists who said that there were canals on Mars, they seen them in their telescopes, obvious proof of civilization. And when man can build a space ship that can travel that far he might find life forms similar to us.
And now that they have gotten there, the are silent as an oyster about the complete absence of any life forms. Not a word about the face that what they thought were canals was but the planet’s topography.
Here we go again, the atheists are at it again, this time they are seeing “planets just like earth.” At least they haven’t claimed seeing canals there...yet.
Atheists grasp at anything they think will disprove God and the Bible.
“It’s so distant, it’s close to — and might even be in — the galactic bulge, the densely populated region in the centre of the galaxy...”
Not a very nice neighborhood, outside the Galactic Habitable Zone.
“set by high energy events such as supernova and gamma ray bursts, higher metallicity leading to orbital decay of planets, and gravitational perturbations of Oort cloud comets sufficient to cause frequent comet impacts... These events cause mass extinctions and perturb complex life.”
https://arxiv.org/pdf/astro-ph/0103165.pdf
I prefer it here, thank you very much.
Great book filled with lots of hard science for those interested in this subject. I'm always open to recommendations.
How long is that at Warp 9?
Ok for posts further down. There is God, and the universe is 13,500,000,000 years old. But don’t let the thought dominate your day to day life.
Someone needs to lecture science reporters on “earth like”.
No true definition would say it can mean anything much different than where life on this earth as we know it could live, because anything less is not like earth enough to be called “earth like”.
Anything less is click bait using the term “earth like” for objects in space they know, in many ways cannot truly be “earth like” as well as objects they know far to little about to attribute “earth like” to them. The article in fact includes examples of both of those kinds of disqualifiers.
A planet with a lone attribute of being a distance from its sun (a very different sun) that is similar to earth’s distance from our sun, does not qualify it as “earth like”.
We need someone important to stand up and lecture the entire science reporting media on the use and misuse of a term like “earth like”.
Yes earth revolves within a certain mean distance around its sun. It also has a particular sun, and that particular sun contributes to what is this earth and its environment. If our rocky orb revolved around a very different sort of son, even at a similar distance as our earth does, we would not likely find it was “earth like”.
Our earth has its own magnetic field (not all planets do) and that field plays a prominent role in the evolution of things on this earth. A planet orbiting a sun at a similar distance to its sun, as our earth is to our sun, but that planet not having its own magnetic field would make it not “earth like” because how different it would be due to that difference alone.
Our earth has a certain mass and by that a certain gravity. A different gravity would have a different influence on what atmosphere, if any, stayed close to the planet. A planet revolving a distance from its sun similar to the distance earth revolves around our sun, but with very different mass and gravity, will likely have either a more dense (greater gravity) or less dense (less gravity) and more or less atmospheric pressure than earth, and that will not be “earth like”.
I could go on and on, but the point is that our earth has certain (many) attributes that go in to making it EARTH, and a mere one, or two or a few of such attributes will NEVER by themselves make a planet sufficiently “earth like” to be worthy of the title.
I hope you understand I am not ranting at you, just the so called “science writers” and the sloppy scientists who permit the use of sloppy terms to get news of their “discoveries” read.
Star Trek due to limited budgets was constantly finding remarkably earth like planets all over the galaxy.
Pack the camper, Jane; we’re going to another planet.
25,000 light year away
25,000 light years
You take one down, pass it around
24,999 light years away on the wall
It’s so very lonely,
You’re 2,000 Light Years From Home...
"around 3.96 times the mass of Earth""Earth-Like"?? Snort, snort.
"[Its sun is] just 0.12 times the mass of our Sun"
"[The planet's distance from its sun is] around the distance of Venus from the Sun"
"... its year is around 617 [Earth] days"