Solar System Similar to ours found

PLATO · July 4, 2003, 11:19

Only 90 light years away. With the Terrestrial Planet finder misson starting in 2009, we may find a whole new world here!

http://www.msnbc.com/news/934038.asp

Kuciwalker · July 4, 2003, 11:21

Only Jupiter-like. No guarantee of earth-like planets

The diplomat · July 4, 2003, 11:21

AFAIK, they only found a gas giant similar to our Jupiter. They are a very long way from discovering a solar system like ours with terrestrial planets. A gas planet does not automatically mean that the system also has terrestrial planets.

Kuciwalker · July 4, 2003, 11:22

Plus, it would take at least half a millenium (probably over a thousand years) for a report to get back to us (half a millenium assuming the probe goes at one/fourth the speed of light, not likely). The things 90 light-years away.

Az · July 4, 2003, 11:25

Those are encouraging news. Now let's build that super-telescope!

Whaleboy · July 4, 2003, 11:28

Skywalker, it is theoretically possible to communicate with superlumial tachyons, but thats way way off, iirc we dont know how to manipulate them yet.

If there is an earth-like planet, its possible there is life, but whether it is beyond the single-celled is a different matter.

In general, it could well be possible to find intelligence alien life, but unlike Star Trek, dont expect them to have humanoid form.

Lets not get too over optimistic, I once calculated that there should be around 200 civilisations in the universe at our level (350-500 until they hit their equivalent of 1962).

PLATO · July 4, 2003, 11:30

The part that inspired hope of a terrestrial like planet was the configuration of the gas giant's orbit. It appears to be the first one found that has the circular orbit that would be needed for it to be possible that there would be interior planets. No guarantee's obviously, but it is the first hopeful opportunity. The Terrestrial planet finder mission is designed to detect these smaller, Earth ike, planets from Earth Orbit. They don't actually plan on sending a probe there. Also, with ion drive technology that has been proposed a generational colony ship could make the trip in about 300-400 years. If the international co-operation on space accelerates, we could probably build such a ship within the next hundred years IMHO.

Kuciwalker · July 4, 2003, 11:30

Elijah, the travel time for the light is only 90 years. Cutting that off would help much, because we still have to get the probe there.

Maniac · July 4, 2003, 11:43

Quote:

Lets not get too over optimistic, I once calculated that there should be around 200 civilisations in the universe at our level (350-500 until they hit their equivalent of 1962).

And on what did you base that calculation?

Immortal Wombat · July 4, 2003, 11:46

Same way everyone does.

R*A₁*A₂ = number of alien civs

Where
R = Rough number of stars in galaxy
A₁ = Arbitrary proportion chosen to approximate number of stars capable of harbouring life.
A₂ = Arbitrary proportion chosen to approximate number of life forms that develop advanced civs

Kuciwalker · July 4, 2003, 11:48

That's number of civs in galaxy, not universe, for one thing.

The other is, you can have no idea was A1 and A2 are.

C0ckney · July 4, 2003, 11:53

exactly, so it's a rough number mixed with two numbers pulled from your backside, result, bollocks

Maniac · July 4, 2003, 12:02

That's what I thought too!

reds4ever · July 4, 2003, 12:13

Quote:

Originally posted by Immortal Wombat
Same way everyone does.

R*A₁*A₂ = number of alien civs

Where
R = Rough number of stars in galaxy
A₁ = Arbitrary proportion chosen to approximate number of stars capable of harbouring life.
A₂ = Arbitrary proportion chosen to approximate number of life forms that develop advanced civs

It's not even the correct bollocks, this is, its called Drakes Equation

N = R x fp x ne x fl x fi x fc x L

R is the rate at which stars have been born in the Milky Way per year, fp is the fraction of these stars that have solar systems of planets, ne is the average number of "Earthlike" planets (potentially suitable for life) in the typical solar system, fl is the fraction of those planets on which life actually forms, fi is the fraction of life-bearing planets where biological evolution produces an intelligent species, fc is the fraction of intelligent species that become capable of interstellar radio communication, and L is the average lifetime of a communicating civilization in years.

A much more impressive load of bollocks, I'm sure you'll agree

BTW where the hell did you pluck 1962 from Elijah?

PLATO · July 4, 2003, 12:15

Quote:

Originally posted by Maniac
That's what I thought too!

Me too. I person's guess is as good as anothers. But to think that our existence is totally unique defies the odds. There obviously is some number that is accurate. The trick is to find it out.

With this news, of a solar system similar to ours being so close (astronomically speaking), I think the odds of finding an Earthlike world go up. Weather or not there is life is a totally different question.

Immortal Wombat · July 4, 2003, 12:21

Quote:

Originally posted by reds4ever
A much more impressive load of bollocks, I'm sure you'll agree

My As incorporate all the bullshit, but I thought you didn't need the details, as it just makes it more wildly inaccurate. :snooty:

Eli · July 4, 2003, 12:23

Quote:

Skywalker, it is theoretically possible to communicate with superlumial tachyons, but thats way way off, iirc we dont know how to manipulate them yet.

Eh?

reds4ever · July 4, 2003, 12:28

Quote:

Originally posted by Immortal Wombat

My As incorporate all the bullshit, but I thought you didn't need the details, as it just makes it more wildly inaccurate. :snooty:

But , the guesses in my nonsense are split into smaller variables allowing fine tuning to produce slightly less random numbers than your method!

reds4ever · July 4, 2003, 12:29

Any who

A2 does not equal fl x fi x fc x L

It is just a very crude approximation!

DanS · July 4, 2003, 12:33

This is good news. At least we'll have something at which to point our new ground-based telescopes with adaptive optics.

MichaeltheGreat · July 4, 2003, 12:36

Quote:

Originally posted by PLATO1003
The part that inspired hope of a terrestrial like planet was the configuration of the gas giant's orbit. It appears to be the first one found that has the circular orbit that would be needed for it to be possible that there would be interior planets. No guarantee's obviously, but it is the first hopeful opportunity. The Terrestrial planet finder mission is designed to detect these smaller, Earth ike, planets from Earth Orbit. They don't actually plan on sending a probe there. Also, with ion drive technology that has been proposed a generational colony ship could make the trip in about 300-400 years. If the international co-operation on space accelerates, we could probably build such a ship within the next hundred years IMHO.

The problem is it's twice Jupiter's mass. Mercury and Mars are in unstable orbits as a result of sun-Jupiter interactions, the asteroid belts aren't too happy looking places, and the earth's moon was created by a large body ejection which resulted in a glancing collision with earth.

A planet in a Jovian orbit around a star, but with twice the mass, would make it really hard for small planets to exist in stable orbits within the range of distances where life is most likely.

reds4ever · July 4, 2003, 12:42

Twice as big AND nearer it's star, it's pretty much impossible that there is a habitable zone in that system.

On the plus side, at 90 LY away its only 'just down the road', covert it to parsecs and it sounds even closer! ;O) (Don't bother with Kilometers!)

Spiffor · July 4, 2003, 12:43

Quote:

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
A planet in a Jovian orbit around a star, but with twice the mass, would make it really hard for small planets to exist in stable orbits within the range of distances where life is most likely.

Why don't we send our battleships there to break Jupiter II in half ?

Spiffor · July 4, 2003, 12:46

Quote:

Originally posted by reds4ever
On the plus side, at 90 LY away its only 'just down the road', covert it to parsecs and it sounds even closer! ;O) (Don't bother with Kilometers!)

A quick'n' dirty conversion tells it is a mere
851,472,000,000,000 km away. Down the road indeed

reds4ever · July 4, 2003, 13:13

Quote:

Originally posted by Spiffor

A quick'n' dirty conversion tells it is a mere
851,472,000,000,000 km away. Down the road indeed

In astronomical terms

I told you it looked better expressed in parsecs!

Maniac · July 4, 2003, 13:14

Quote:

Originally posted by Eli
Eh?

From what I've read from him, Elijah has an open mind about physics. Some probably would say too open.

*End Is Forever* · July 4, 2003, 13:47

"The problem with travelling faster than the speed of light is that by the time you see something, you've already gone through it..."

Spiffor · July 4, 2003, 13:53

Quote:

Originally posted by *End Is Forever*
"The problem with travelling faster than the speed of light is that by the time you see something, you've already gone through it..."

How is that a problem if you have precalculated your travel, and if you use faster ways to get information than sight ?

The diplomat · July 4, 2003, 14:28

Quote:

Originally posted by reds4ever

N = R x fp x ne x fl x fi x fc x L

R is the rate at which stars have been born in the Milky Way per year, fp is the fraction of these stars that have solar systems of planets, ne is the average number of "Earthlike" planets (potentially suitable for life) in the typical solar system, fl is the fraction of those planets on which life actually forms, fi is the fraction of life-bearing planets where biological evolution produces an intelligent species, fc is the fraction of intelligent species that become capable of interstellar radio communication, and L is the average lifetime of a communicating civilization in years.

The problem with Drakes' equation is that we only have very vague values for most of the variables. As a result, N can be almost any number you want. Some estimate it at 1 or 2, others at thousands.

Personally, I think it is very likely that we are the only intelligent species in the universe.

Whaleboy · July 4, 2003, 15:40

Skywalker, I used a more advanced version of Drakes equation to roughly calculate it, considering the distribution, and types of galaxies, size, longevity of each civilisation (had to make an educated guess), stars, orbits, as well as number of galaxies that are too close to produce stable stellar orbits ... etc etc.