|
|
Post by Lone Wanderer on Mar 27, 2019 8:12:23 GMT
NASA's new Transiting Exoplanet Survey Satellite (TESS) is designed to ferret out habitable exoplanets, but with hundreds of thousands of sunlike and smaller stars in its camera views, which of those stars could host planets like our own? A team of astronomers has identified the most promising targets for this search. "Life could exist on all sorts of worlds, but the kind we know can support life is our own, so it makes sense to first look for Earth-like planets," Kaltenegger said. "This catalog is important for TESS because anyone working with the data wants to know around which stars we can find the closest Earth-analogs." Source and full articlewww.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/03/190326160505.htm |
|
|
|
Post by karl on Mar 27, 2019 10:47:56 GMT
What they need is equipment to detect planets with large moons. No civilization will ever develop without it.
|
|
|
|
Post by joustos on Mar 27, 2019 16:18:22 GMT
What they need is equipment to detect planets with large moons. No civilization will ever develop without it. Please define civilization and, if you can, show why a moon is a prerequisite of civilization. |
|
|
|
Post by karl on Mar 27, 2019 16:48:50 GMT
What they need is equipment to detect planets with large moons. No civilization will ever develop without it. Please define civilization and, if you can, show why a moon is a prerequisite of civilization.
Here, civilization is defined in the loosest sense, with agriculture, a population of at least a few thousand people, compartmentalised to fill different functions, from army to shopkeepers and builders. In fact, many of the so-called barbarian societies would be civilizations by these criteria.
The following are necessary conditions for civilization to emerge:
1. Life forms must first develop on the planet.
2. The planet must have an atmoshpere 3. Life, which originates in the sea, must at some point crawl up on land. 4. If land animals develop into becoming intelligent like humans, there must be weather conditions allowing for a larger, organised society to function.
As for the moon's role:
1&2. The moon was formed after a planet, at the size of Mars, crashed into the Earth, which caused a large chunk of matter to be hurled into space. This formied a belt around the Earth, which later clumped together to form the moon. If the planet had hit the Earth from a slightly different angle, the mass would either have fallen back on Earth, or exceeded the escape velocity of the Earth's gravitational field. The energy from the collision is probably why the Earth still has a molten core, creating an electromagnetic field, without which the atmosphere would have been eroded by solar radiation. The moon, after its formation, was 1/20 of the current distance from the Earth, which meant that its tidal forces were 400 times stronger. This pulled water from the sea far into land, dragged back into the sea a large amount of matter. This was part of creating the organic soup in which the first, primitive life forms emerged.
3. The tidal forces created an intermediate state between land and sea, at the shores and beaches, allowing life from the sea to slowly adapt to life on land, eventually becoming land animals.
4. The moon cancels out the gravitational influence of other planets, like Jupiter, stabilising the Earth's axis. Without the moon, the axis could have experienced sudden change of angle, leading to a region changing from summer to winter over the course of a few days. Not only would such conditions have made agriculture impossible; Sudden shifts in temperature would have lead to hurricanes much more destructive than anything we've experienced here on Earth. An organised, larger society, depends on environmental stability and predictability that the Earth, without the moon, would not have offered.
|
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on Mar 27, 2019 17:42:38 GMT
Aren't all stars promising? Discrimination against stars now :( they all have things to offer!
|
|
|
|
Post by jonbain on Apr 4, 2019 20:07:15 GMT
Please define civilization and, if you can, show why a moon is a prerequisite of civilization.
Here, civilization is defined in the loosest sense, with agriculture, a population of at least a few thousand people, compartmentalised to fill different functions, from army to shopkeepers and builders. In fact, many of the so-called barbarian societies would be civilizations by these criteria.
The following are necessary conditions for civilization to emerge:
1. Life forms must first develop on the planet.
2. The planet must have an atmoshpere 3. Life, which originates in the sea, must at some point crawl up on land. 4. If land animals develop into becoming intelligent like humans, there must be weather conditions allowing for a larger, organised society to function.
As for the moon's role:
1&2. The moon was formed after a planet, at the size of Mars, crashed into the Earth, which caused a large chunk of matter to be hurled into space. This formied a belt around the Earth, which later clumped together to form the moon. If the planet had hit the Earth from a slightly different angle, the mass would either have fallen back on Earth, or exceeded the escape velocity of the Earth's gravitational field. The energy from the collision is probably why the Earth still has a molten core, creating an electromagnetic field, without which the atmosphere would have been eroded by solar radiation. The moon, after its formation, was 1/20 of the current distance from the Earth, which meant that its tidal forces were 400 times stronger. This pulled water from the sea far into land, dragged back into the sea a large amount of matter. This was part of creating the organic soup in which the first, primitive life forms emerged.
3. The tidal forces created an intermediate state between land and sea, at the shores and beaches, allowing life from the sea to slowly adapt to life on land, eventually becoming land animals.
4. The moon cancels out the gravitational influence of other planets, like Jupiter, stabilising the Earth's axis. Without the moon, the axis could have experienced sudden change of angle, leading to a region changing from summer to winter over the course of a few days. Not only would such conditions have made agriculture impossible; Sudden shifts in temperature would have lead to hurricanes much more destructive than anything we've experienced here on Earth. An organised, larger society, depends on environmental stability and predictability that the Earth, without the moon, would not have offered.
The points 3 & 4 are fine. And I agree, that a large moon is essential. But the contemporary understanding of how the moon formed is incorrect. Any collision that ejected the moon from the Earth, would result in either escape velocity, or the Moon returning to its point of origin. That is a fact of gravity and the elliptical nature of orbits. The moon's orbit would require (at least) the interaction with another (4th) body to either slow it down or speed it up at a critical point, to eventually reach an orbit similar to what it has. This is a very remote coincidence, but not impossible. What makes it impossible is that all the other moons in the solar system would have to also undergo a whole series of such coincidental collisions and interactions with a 4th object to form uniform orbits that are mostly circular, mostly on the ecliptic plane, and ALSO mostly orbiting in the same direction. There are a few minor exceptions. If all the moons formed from coincidental collisions, they should mostly have very eccentric orbits at various angles to the ecliptic plane. Thus the random-collision theory fails because it looks at the situation in isolation from the rest of the moons in the solar system. Never mind the planets orbits themselves! More to the point, is that the only viable path to probing stars is to use the conceptual device called the "Astrosling". Details here: As for solar system formation, consider these algorithms: www.flight-light-and-spin.com/videos/astrophysics.htm(And a shout out to you too Elizabeth) |
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on Apr 5, 2019 5:02:31 GMT
Here, civilization is defined in the loosest sense, with agriculture, a population of at least a few thousand people, compartmentalised to fill different functions, from army to shopkeepers and builders. In fact, many of the so-called barbarian societies would be civilizations by these criteria.
The following are necessary conditions for civilization to emerge: 1. Life forms must first develop on the planet.
2. The planet must have an atmoshpere 3. Life, which originates in the sea, must at some point crawl up on land. 4. If land animals develop into becoming intelligent like humans, there must be weather conditions allowing for a larger, organised society to function.
As for the moon's role:
1&2. The moon was formed after a planet, at the size of Mars, crashed into the Earth, which caused a large chunk of matter to be hurled into space. This formied a belt around the Earth, which later clumped together to form the moon. If the planet had hit the Earth from a slightly different angle, the mass would either have fallen back on Earth, or exceeded the escape velocity of the Earth's gravitational field. The energy from the collision is probably why the Earth still has a molten core, creating an electromagnetic field, without which the atmosphere would have been eroded by solar radiation. The moon, after its formation, was 1/20 of the current distance from the Earth, which meant that its tidal forces were 400 times stronger. This pulled water from the sea far into land, dragged back into the sea a large amount of matter. This was part of creating the organic soup in which the first, primitive life forms emerged.
3. The tidal forces created an intermediate state between land and sea, at the shores and beaches, allowing life from the sea to slowly adapt to life on land, eventually becoming land animals.
4. The moon cancels out the gravitational influence of other planets, like Jupiter, stabilising the Earth's axis. Without the moon, the axis could have experienced sudden change of angle, leading to a region changing from summer to winter over the course of a few days. Not only would such conditions have made agriculture impossible; Sudden shifts in temperature would have lead to hurricanes much more destructive than anything we've experienced here on Earth. An organised, larger society, depends on environmental stability and predictability that the Earth, without the moon, would not have offered.
The points 3 & 4 are fine. And I agree, that a large moon is essential. But the contemporary understanding of how the moon formed is incorrect. Any collision that ejected the moon from the Earth, would result in either escape velocity, or the Moon returning to its point of origin. That is a fact of gravity and the elliptical nature of orbits. The moon's orbit would require (at least) the interaction with another (4th) body to either slow it down or speed it up at a critical point, to eventually reach an orbit similar to what it has. This is a very remote coincidence, but not impossible. What makes it impossible is that all the other moons in the solar system would have to also undergo a whole series of such coincidental collisions and interactions with a 4th object to form uniform orbits that are mostly circular, mostly on the ecliptic plane, and ALSO mostly orbiting in the same direction. There are a few minor exceptions. If all the moons formed from coincidental collisions, they should mostly have very eccentric orbits at various angles to the ecliptic plane. Thus the random-collision theory fails because it looks at the situation in isolation from the rest of the moons in the solar system. Never mind the planets orbits themselves! More to the point, is that the only viable path to probing stars is to use the conceptual device called the "Astrosling". Details here: As for solar system formation, consider these algorithms: www.flight-light-and-spin.com/videos/astrophysics.htm(And a shout out to you too Elizabeth) Hiya! Always nice seeing you here  By the way since you mentioned the moon..did you know that earth technically has 2 moons at times? |
|
|
|
Post by jonbain on Apr 9, 2019 21:02:18 GMT
The points 3 & 4 are fine. And I agree, that a large moon is essential. But the contemporary understanding of how the moon formed is incorrect. Any collision that ejected the moon from the Earth, would result in either escape velocity, or the Moon returning to its point of origin. That is a fact of gravity and the elliptical nature of orbits. The moon's orbit would require (at least) the interaction with another (4th) body to either slow it down or speed it up at a critical point, to eventually reach an orbit similar to what it has. This is a very remote coincidence, but not impossible. What makes it impossible is that all the other moons in the solar system would have to also undergo a whole series of such coincidental collisions and interactions with a 4th object to form uniform orbits that are mostly circular, mostly on the ecliptic plane, and ALSO mostly orbiting in the same direction. There are a few minor exceptions. If all the moons formed from coincidental collisions, they should mostly have very eccentric orbits at various angles to the ecliptic plane. Thus the random-collision theory fails because it looks at the situation in isolation from the rest of the moons in the solar system. Never mind the planets orbits themselves! More to the point, is that the only viable path to probing stars is to use the conceptual device called the "Astrosling". Details here: As for solar system formation, consider these algorithms: www.flight-light-and-spin.com/videos/astrophysics.htm(And a shout out to you too Elizabeth ) Hiya! Always nice seeing you here By the way since you mentioned the moon..did you know that earth technically has 2 moons at times? Well ya gonna have to give a wee bit more detail than that, lassie assuming you're trying to get me argumentative, of course, which I ken ye arrre, eh? ;-j |
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on Apr 9, 2019 22:16:38 GMT
Hiya! Always nice seeing you here By the way since you mentioned the moon..did you know that earth technically has 2 moons at times? Well ya gonna have to give a wee bit more detail than that, lassie assuming you're trying to get me argumentative, of course, which I ken ye arrre, eh? ;-j Just this  wondered if you knew about it. www.sciencealert.com/earth-might-actually-have-a-second-moon |
|
|
|
Post by jonbain on Apr 11, 2019 19:33:00 GMT
Thanks for that. Funny I had done quite a deep search years ago into trying to find the ideal launch pad for my Astrosling spacecraft, and had somehow managed not to find this, even though I had heard rumors of it before. But the only such links I found back then were so full of illogical claims that I had to dismiss them. This is dated 2016, so likely had not been ranked in the searches at that point. 2016 H03. Must remember that! I had defaulted to asteroid Cruithne instead as a launch-pad. Oh will our society ever grow out of its "black-hole" phase and just give me that ruddy Nobel prize so we can get cracking de-colonising this little world? I swear, Zabe, sometimes I wonder. I just bloody wonder to what extent this society is rotten to the core, and what it will take to being humanity back onto the path of reason. |
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on Apr 11, 2019 19:38:55 GMT
Thanks for that. Funny I had done quite a deep search years ago into trying to find the ideal launch pad for my Astrosling spacecraft, and had somehow managed not to find this, even though I had heard rumors of it before. But the only such links I found back then were so full of illogical claims that I had to dismiss them. This is dated 2016, so likely had not been ranked in the searches at that point. 2016 H03. Must remember that! I had defaulted to asteroid Cruithne instead as a launch-pad. Oh will our society ever grow out of its "black-hole" phase and just give me that ruddy Nobel prize so we can get cracking de-colonising this little world? I swear, Zabe, sometimes I wonder. I just bloody wonder to what extent this society is rotten to the core, and what it will take to being humanity back onto the path of reason. Yeah I like looking for things too in my own astrologing. And did you know our solar system has another planet beyond Pluto? We know its size and rotation around the sun. |
|
|
|
Post by jonbain on Apr 11, 2019 19:52:46 GMT
Thanks for that. Funny I had done quite a deep search years ago into trying to find the ideal launch pad for my Astrosling spacecraft, and had somehow managed not to find this, even though I had heard rumors of it before. But the only such links I found back then were so full of illogical claims that I had to dismiss them. This is dated 2016, so likely had not been ranked in the searches at that point. 2016 H03. Must remember that! I had defaulted to asteroid Cruithne instead as a launch-pad. Oh will our society ever grow out of its "black-hole" phase and just give me that ruddy Nobel prize so we can get cracking de-colonising this little world? I swear, Zabe, sometimes I wonder. I just bloody wonder to what extent this society is rotten to the core, and what it will take to being humanity back onto the path of reason. Yeah I like looking for things too in my own astrologing. And did you know our solar system has another planet beyond Pluto? We know its size and rotation around the sun. Actually they have found literally thousands of distant "planets" beyond Pluto around our Sun. That is what led them to re-classify Pluto as not being a real planet. They are now simply called "trans-Neptunian" objects. But the definition as to what is a planet and what is a real moon is fairly arbitrary. I tried to emphasize that having an atmosphere should be the main criterion as that represents opportunities for life. But then Mercury would lose out! |
|
|
|
Post by Elizabeth on Apr 11, 2019 20:34:08 GMT
Yeah I like looking for things too in my own astrologing. And did you know our solar system has another planet beyond Pluto? We know its size and rotation around the sun. Actually they have found literally thousands of distant "planets" beyond Pluto around our Sun. That is what led them to re-classify Pluto as not being a real planet. They are now simply called "trans-Neptunian" objects. But the definition as to what is a planet and what is a real moon is fairly arbitrary. I tried to emphasize that having an atmosphere should be the main criterion as that represents opportunities for life. But then Mercury would lose out! No I'm referring to the one's circling our sun. Pluto was thought to be the last one but evidence in the asteriod belt showed things from another planet that's larger than Earth and think Jupiter even. But they have not found it's location yet but it's rotation around the sun is different than mercury, venus, earth, mars, jupiter, uranus, neptune, and pluto. It's often called planet X or planet 9. We should locate it by 2025 is the guess. |
|
|
|
Post by jonbain on Apr 11, 2019 20:56:26 GMT
Actually they have found literally thousands of distant "planets" beyond Pluto around our Sun. That is what led them to re-classify Pluto as not being a real planet. They are now simply called "trans-Neptunian" objects. But the definition as to what is a planet and what is a real moon is fairly arbitrary. I tried to emphasize that having an atmosphere should be the main criterion as that represents opportunities for life. But then Mercury would lose out! No I'm referring to the one's circling our sun. Pluto was thought to be the last one but evidence in the asteriod belt showed things from another planet that's larger than Earth and think Jupiter even. But they have not found it's location yet but it's rotation around the sun is different than mercury, venus, earth, mars, jupiter, uranus, neptune, and pluto. It's often called planet X or planet 9. We should locate it by 2025 is the guess. Yes, I know you mean around our sun. Seriously there are thousands of them around our Sun, much further than Pluto. Exoplanets around other suns too, but that is not what you mean.  www.planetary.org/multimedia/space-images/small-bodies/eight-trans-neptunian-objects.htmlThese are all a bit further than Pluto, Sedna was the first one discovered if I recall it correctly. Depending on where you read, there are various accounts. Some say that if the object must be properly spherical as a criteria, then its 1200 of them, others say as many as 70 000 have been recorded. The data can be very vague, and "scientists" never like to admit uncertainty. Of course its impossible to be certain, as so many "findings" are all about "funding" and there really is so much deliberate misinformation out there too. But my understanding of how the solar system formed from the Sun's twin going nova would certainly result in many such objects, and seeing as my account is the only one that is logical, I tend to believe the observations claiming that there are many of them. |
|
wondered if you knew about it.