New earthlike planet discovered

[billvon 2,417]

Another earth-like planet has been discovered, this one only 22 light-years from Earth. It orbits a triple sun, so sunrises and sunsets would be interesting.

It's called GJ 667Cc, and it's a "super earth" - it masses at least 4 times what the Earth does, so you'd feel 4 times the pull of gravity if you lived there. It gets about 90% of the radiation the Earth does but it's redder, and redder light is absorbed more readily so the amount of radiation absorbed is about the same - hence a similar temperature. Its large size would tend to trap an atmosphere, and its "year" is 28 days long.

Of course we don't know what kind of atmosphere it has, how much water is there etc so it's not just like Earth - but there's at least a good chance people could live there wearing only oxygen masks. It would be hard to walk, though, with a typical guy weighing 720 pounds.

[SpeedRacer 1]

Do we know if it even has an aptmosphere? Is this atmosphere any more substantial than the Martian one?

Speed Racer
--------------------------------------------------

[billvon 2,417]

>Do we know if it even has an aptmosphere?

Not for sure - but it is extremely likely.

1) Larger planets capture and retain gas much more easily than smaller ones.

2) The system is metal-poor which means that it has a higher concentration of elements lighter than iron. Which means more oxygen, nitrogen, helium, argon, water, CO2 etc.

[lawrocket 3]

I find this to be really interesting. So much totally weird stuff going on. A ternary system of red dwarves that will be there long after our own sun burns out. Red dwarves emit a lot of infrared so any carbon-based atmosphere (methane is pretty popular in planetary atmospheres) would probably mean enough heat absorption, but there won’t be much UV light – red dwarves don’t make much UV.

Orbital period of 28 days? That’ll put it pretty close to the main star, which can cause problems as far as the maintenance and stability of conditions that would support life, but close enough to get the energy. As much as its large size would tend to trap an atmosphere, its proximity to the star would tend to leave the atmosphere subject to shocks. Since it’s a rocky planet, it may have a magnetic field, but since it’s also closely orbiting a red dwarf the atmosphere may get blown away by flares or eve a stellar wind if the planet isn’t magnetic. Add to that the unknown rotation of the planet and even with an atmosphere it could present some brutal conditions (picture if the rotational period was 28 days like our moon – you’d have a baked dry sunny side, a frozen dark side, and horrific weather and winds at the terminator. It’d be pretty awesome, actually, to observe that!)

A final question I have is – could we even navigate to it? We’re pretty good at the mechanics when dealing with things like planets around a star. But the gravitational interactions of two massive bodies are much more difficult. Still, we’ve worked out the math with gravitational interactions of two massive bodies (hence why we could navigate pretty well to the moon and use slingshot effect with deep space probes while still in the sun’s influence). But this system is n=3 plus a planet. The gravitational havoc played with three stars orbiting each other and a planet orbiting one of them just boggles the mind. That planet’s orbit is going to be such a shaky thing – influenced by three stars. (Note the effect it may have on habitability having its orbit constantly changed). The mechanics suggest the planet (or one of the stars) could get ejected from the system at some point.

Gad – I’m such a geek. But this is one of the coolest discoveries just for the sheer physical questions it raises.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[shah269 0]

Death by Snu Snu!
But no seriously that's amazing!

Life through good thoughts, good words, and good deeds is necessary to ensure happiness and to keep chaos at bay.

The only thing that falls from the sky is birdshit and fools!

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

The system is metal-poor which means that it has a higher concentration of elements lighter than iron. Which means more oxygen, nitrogen, helium, argon, water, CO2 etc.

As I wrote, this is a benefit with a cost. The planet is looking like it is rocky, but if heavier metallic elements aren’t there then it might not have magnetism. It’s also too small to have a metallic hydrogen core (like Jupiter) that could create a magnetic field.

We also don’t know the age of the planet. Since red dwarves can live for trillions of years, this may be an old system. Also considering the lack of heavy elements, it is probably an early generation star. That planet could be billions of years older than earth, which would allow it time to have cooled. Without heavy elements, no fission could be occurring in the core and mantle.

And no magnetic field means no protection from the solar wind.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[AggieDave 6]

Quote

Of course we don't know what kind of atmosphere it has, how much water is there etc so it's not just like Earth - but there's at least a good chance people could live there wearing only oxygen masks. It would be hard to walk, though, with a typical guy weighing 720 pounds.

I read an article once where a physicist took Superman's original abilities (leaping tall buildings, not actual flying, etc) and decided that he wasn't that special. It was just that he was from a planet that had evolved to survive with something like 40 times the gravity of Earth.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[quade 3]

Quote

I read an article once where a physicist took Superman's original abilities (leaping tall buildings, not actual flying, etc) and decided that he wasn't that special. It was just that he was from a planet that had evolved to survive with something like 40 times the gravity of Earth.

Then why the hell would he even vaguely resemble a human?

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[billvon 2,417]

>And no magnetic field means no protection from the solar wind.

Well, no magnetic protection. But our atmosphere does an excellent job of stopping charged particles as well. (Venus, for example, has no magnetic field, but a person on the surface would not be endangered by solar or cosmic radiation.)

[quade 3]

Quote

>And no magnetic field means no protection from the solar wind.

Well, no magnetic protection. But our atmosphere does an excellent job of stopping charged particles as well. (Venus, for example, has no magnetic field, but a person on the surface would not be endangered by solar or cosmic radiation.)

They'd be crushed by pressure and burned to a cinder . . . but they wouldn't have to worry about radiation.

What's the longest a robotic probe from earth has survived on Venus?

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[taylor.freefall 0]

Is this the same place, called Gliese?
http://www.space.com/9247-million-questions-habitable-planet-gliese-581g-12.html

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

(Venus, for example, has no magnetic field, but a person on the surface would not be endangered by solar or cosmic radiation.)

True. Perhaps this planet has the ionospheric capability that Venus does.

Edited to add: This is why I like billvon so much. He smacks a bit of reality into my pseudointellectual ramblings from lay ignorance..

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[billvon 2,417]

Gliese 581g is a different planet. It's a little closer and it orbits a single red dwarf.

So far we've found around 1200 planets outside our solar system. Of them around 50 might be habitable. 4 of them are very similar to Earth.

[jumpsalot-2 2]

Does it have a Moon of some kind, to influence water masses ( or future water masses ), like Earth does ? I thought I saw on Discovery Channel, that life would not exist on Earth if we did not have the Moon. Or that life would not have evolved from single-celled orginizms without the Moon's influence on the tides. Is there truth to that ?

Life is short ... jump often.

[billvon 2,417]

>Does it have a Moon of some kind, to influence water masses ( or future water masses
>like Earth does ?

We don't know yet; our telescopes aren't good enough to make out moons that far away.

>I thought I saw on Discovery Channel, that life would not exist on Earth if we did not
>have the Moon.

I've seen the theory that "tidal pools" were essential to the development of life (i.e. small pools that would get flooded, then isolated, then would dry out a little, then flood, and that was helpful in the development of life.) But if that's the case, keep in mind that we'd still have solar tides without the Moon - they'd just be a lot smaller and happen at the same time every day.

[AggieDave 6]

Quote

Quote

I read an article once where a physicist took Superman's original abilities (leaping tall buildings, not actual flying, etc) and decided that he wasn't that special. It was just that he was from a planet that had evolved to survive with something like 40 times the gravity of Earth.

Then why the hell would he even vaguely resemble a human?

You're a big frown sometimes...

I thought it was a neat take on a well known comic book character.

There's a theological response as to why he (or any other aliens) would look human that I've read and I thought was a neat take on things (if you align yourself with general creationism beliefs).

For me, I'll just keep with what we "learned" in the Star Trek TNG episode "The Chase."


(Ok, full discloser, I didn't have to google that TNG episode name...guess I need to get out more).

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

Does it have a Moon of some kind, to influence water masses ( or future water masses ), like Earth does ? I thought I saw on Discovery Channel, that life would not exist on Earth if we did not have the Moon. Or that life would not have evolved from single-celled orginizms without the Moon's influence on the tides. Is there truth to that ?

Of course it’s all conjecture about that, but the moon certainly has a number of positive effects for us. One of the foremost is that it stabilizes earth’s rotation, and creates procession of about 20k years (procession is a natural wobble). The moon (or the collision that is theorized to have created the moon) probably gave the earth its tilt, without which there would be no seasons.

I don’t necessarily agree with the whole tides thing. They’re nice, but the sun gives tides, too. We’d still have waves from weather patterns. Waves and tides would still be present but tides wouldn’t be nearly as large.

On the other hand, take a look at pictures of the far side of the moon. It’s a good bet that a large number of craters on the moon could have been targeted at earth. Just checking out the difference between the lunar surface facing the earth and the surface facing away gives an idea not just of how many impacts the moon has stopped from hitting the earth, but how many impacts the earth has prevented from hitting the moon.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[quade 3]

Quote

For me, I'll just keep with what we "learned" in the Star Trek TNG episode "The Chase."

You really have to get into the mind of a Producer in order to explain the retcon of that explanation. The real reason, it's way cheaper to make humanoid costumes.

Even if there was some sort of panspearmia DNA floating around the universe seeding every planet with copies of a prototype humanoid, whether by asteroid or intentional colonization, any life forms would rapidly evolve to better fit with their new surroundings.

A humanoid on a planet with 40 times the gravity of Earth, if they could even manage to stay assembled in one piece and somehow manage to have sex (I pity the person on the bottom), would rapidly evolve a completely different body shape. I'm not certain what the upper limit of bi-pedialism is, but humans seem to barely be able to do that as it is.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[AggieDave 6]

Quote

A humanoid on a planet with 40 times the gravity of Earth, if they could even manage to stay assembled in one piece and somehow manage to have sex (I pity the person on the bottom), would rapidly evolve a completely different body shape.

Yup. Probably saggy boobs...

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[billvon 2,417]

>I thought it was a neat take on a well known comic book character.

The problem might be that higher gravity would tend to make someone shorter and fatter. You'd need thicker legs, a lower center of gravity, less mass on top etc.

And that would mean you'd have to use Danny DeVito instead of Christopher Reeves when you made Superman movies. And that would just be wrong.

[AggieDave 6]

Quote

And that would mean you'd have to use Danny DeVito instead of Christopher Reeves when you made Superman movies. And that would just be wrong.

That-would-be-a-hilarious-movie!

Quade, we're looking at you here, think of a dark comedy of coming to terms with DeVito being the good-guy superhero.

--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."

[riddler 0]

Quote

Orbital period of 28 days?

On the plus side, women would only get their period once per year.

Trapped on the surface of a sphere. XKCD

[taylor.freefall 0]

Quote

Does it have a Moon of some kind, to influence water masses ( or future water masses ), like Earth does ? I thought I saw on Discovery Channel, that life would not exist on Earth if we did not have the Moon. Or that life would not have evolved from single-celled orginizms without the Moon's influence on the tides. Is there truth to that ?

I heard a similar thing and also that life wouldn't exist without magnetism - whether that's true or not I have no idea...

[lawrocket 3]

Quote

life wouldn't exist without magnetism

Yeah. Seeing as how the electromagnetic force is what keeps atoms together, life would certainly not exist (well, maybe life, Jim, but not as we know it) if only unbound particles were floating throughout the universe.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[jakee 1,257]

Quote

Seeing as how the electromagnetic force is what keeps atoms together,

The strong nuclear force keeps atoms together, electromagnetism is trying to blow them apart.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?