If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Space.com)   New alien planets discovered, NASA reveals all   (space.com) divider line 39
    More: Interesting, planets, NASA, Institute for Astronomy, Center for Astrophysics, Environmental Research, Ames Research Center, NASA Headquarters, Kepler  
•       •       •

3767 clicks; posted to Geek » on 18 Apr 2013 at 11:49 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



39 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-04-18 10:51:35 AM
There's only one non-Alien planet um, because of Prometheus.
 
2013-04-18 11:41:32 AM
Could be some good stuff, observations have been going on long enough now to detect planets with longer orbits. The original data was so short that it was heavily biased towards close in planets with very short years that were generally too close for possible life.
 
2013-04-18 12:24:25 PM
What...after 800 exoplanets NASA needs to hold a press conference to announce a few more. Paahhhleeezzze.

Unless it's to say they're 'right next door' and spectrographic analysis shows one has water and O2 in its atmosphere.
 
2013-04-18 12:26:21 PM
Personally, I haven't been too impressed with the Kepler mission. Sure we now know for certain that there are other planets out there, but we were already pretty sure of that to begin with. And Kepler can't even really tell us anything of importance about these exoplanets except "they're there." While us who follow scientific accomplishments can appreciate what the Kepler has done, the majority of the population aren't going to care until we can say for sure we've found an Earth-analog planet. And those are the people who's votes and money you have to get to make this stuff easier to do in the future.
 
2013-04-18 01:05:09 PM

Stone Meadow: What...after 800 exoplanets NASA needs to hold a press conference to announce a few more. Paahhhleeezzze.

Unless it's to say they're 'right next door' and spectrographic analysis shows one has water and O2 in its atmosphere.


NASA should also say they've found evidence of fossil fuels to get their budget increased.
 
2013-04-18 01:12:31 PM
Ugh, NASA still believes planets have to be the exact same distance from a sun as Earth to support life. Why am i not surprised.

At least Frank Drake is keeping up with the times.

Basically the extremely small habitable zone they're using is a dinosaur from the 50's, and since then we've discovered atmosphere plays a significant role in surface temperature. With a thicker atmosphere a planet could have Earth-like surface conditions much further away from a sun.
 
2013-04-18 01:31:21 PM

Stone Meadow: What...after 800 exoplanets NASA needs to hold a press conference to announce a few more. Paahhhleeezzze.

Unless it's to say they're 'right next door' and spectrographic analysis shows one has water and O2 in its atmosphere.


Came here to say almost verbatim exactly this.

It's either mind-numbingly Not News, or they've discovered alien life.
 
2013-04-18 01:35:36 PM
So... they are saying it's aliens?
 
2013-04-18 01:47:52 PM
"While sources say the planet is reputed to be uninhabited, two starbucks have already been spotted.."
 
2013-04-18 01:52:30 PM

sure haven't: Stone Meadow: What...after 800 exoplanets NASA needs to hold a press conference to announce a few more. Paahhhleeezzze.

Unless it's to say they're 'right next door' and spectrographic analysis shows one has water and O2 in its atmosphere.

Came here to say almost verbatim exactly this.

It's either mind-numbingly Not News, or they've discovered alien life.


Going by my recollection of former "major news" from NASA, my guess is "mind-numbing not-news."  :(
 
2013-04-18 01:55:40 PM

Stone Meadow: What...after 800 exoplanets NASA needs to hold a press conference to announce a few more. Paahhhleeezzze.

Unless it's to say they're 'right next door' and spectrographic analysis shows one has water and O2 in its atmosphere.


They've found water everywhere they've looked so far. I'm getting a bit tired of it being treated like a big surprise each time. Especially with Mars, where they've found evidence of water several times already, and each time it's treated like a major revelation.

As for O2, they've already announced oxygen being in the atmosphere of both Rhea and Dione, which each have water as well. Those are right in our own neighborhood instead of 'next door', and the discoveries weren't treated like big deals. NASA went right back to pretending it's a universe of dead planets and moons out there, and treating the idea of life existing outside of Earth as highly unlikely or extremely rare.
 
2013-04-18 01:59:21 PM
Uranus?
 
2013-04-18 02:05:55 PM
 
2013-04-18 02:19:22 PM
Yup, looks like it's the announcement of 2 more planets in the habitable zone as it was understood in 1953.

Don't think i need to hear anymore.
 
2013-04-18 02:26:08 PM
Three planets in two systems.  In earth radii, one system with a 1.4 and 1.6 orbiting a colder star, the other a 1.7 in a system with a sun-like star.

All in or near the habitable zone.

/If this bores you, feel free to STFU
 
2013-04-18 02:31:45 PM
Short version: "Kepler 62e and 62f are the best candidates yet for habitable planets."

Kepler 62e is 1.6x earth diameter and may be a "water/ocean planet", but is too small to be a mini gas giant, and is at the very inner limit for liquid water. Think between Venus and Earth heat-wise...it's almost too hot.

Kepler 62f is 1.4x earth diameter and appears to be rocky with likely surface water. Think between Earth and Mars, relative to its sun, heat-wise.
 
2013-04-18 02:32:44 PM
People seem proud of being so jaded that the first discovery of earth-sized planets in the habitable zone somehow pisses them off.  I'd be amazed by their indifference if I wasn't so jaded.
 
2013-04-18 02:36:56 PM
If it's a type-M planet, it should at least have Roddenberries.
 
2013-04-18 02:46:26 PM

J. Frank Parnell: Ugh, NASA still believes planets have to be the exact same distance from a sun as Earth to support life. Why am i not surprised.

At least Frank Drake is keeping up with the times.

Basically the extremely small habitable zone they're using is a dinosaur from the 50's, and since then we've discovered atmosphere plays a significant role in surface temperature. With a thicker atmosphere a planet could have Earth-like surface conditions much further away from a sun.


They just talked about this on the press conference.  The reason they use the inner zone is because their models can't really predict habitability in the larger zone.  They KNOW that any planet in the inner zone is capable of holding water, so that's where they're concentrating.  They can only guess at whether a planet in the larger zone can.
 
2013-04-18 02:50:12 PM

sure haven't: Stone Meadow: What...after 800 exoplanets NASA needs to hold a press conference to announce a few more. Paahhhleeezzze.

Unless it's to say they're 'right next door' and spectrographic analysis shows one has water and O2 in its atmosphere.

Came here to say almost verbatim exactly this.

It's either mind-numbingly Not News, or they've discovered alien life.


Aw, cut them a break.  They've only been able to say these things exist in quantity for a few years now.  They're excited, and it's important to them.  Let them have their fun.
 
2013-04-18 02:57:19 PM
So what. Let's say a cure for cancer and millions of beautiful naked women are on these planets. I can't get there. And we probably won't in the next 100 years.
 
2013-04-18 02:58:46 PM

rugman11: J. Frank Parnell: Ugh, NASA still believes planets have to be the exact same distance from a sun as Earth to support life. Why am i not surprised.

At least Frank Drake is keeping up with the times.

Basically the extremely small habitable zone they're using is a dinosaur from the 50's, and since then we've discovered atmosphere plays a significant role in surface temperature. With a thicker atmosphere a planet could have Earth-like surface conditions much further away from a sun.

They just talked about this on the press conference.  The reason they use the inner zone is because their models can't really predict habitability in the larger zone.  They KNOW that any planet in the inner zone is capable of holding water, so that's where they're concentrating.  They can only guess at whether a planet in the larger zone can.


and of course, all of these assumptions are made mostly to restrict the search, otherwise it becomes a mind-bogglingly HUGE amount of data to sort through. huge enough that you CAN'T reliably sort through it.

granted if we find life on, say, titan, where not only is there fark-all for water but the primary fluid around is hydrocarbons and the temperatures are way outside what we think is 'acceptable'... well then they are gonna HAVE to sort through ALL the data.


drake's equation, however, can assume a far larger habitability zone than nasa can, because drake's equations focus on INTELLIGENT life(at least, sentient life that can hope to develop the ability to communicate beyond their local sphere of influence), which in the equations is assumed to be really low probability.

/honestly, an algae that survives at temperatures that liquefy methane, and eats hydrocarbons(and presumably farts hydrogen and poops carbon, or something like that), would be really fooking fascinating to study. we've made them here but they don't survive cold, and they still require water.
 
2013-04-18 03:09:29 PM
www.nasa.gov
 
2013-04-18 03:10:54 PM
www.nasa.gov
 
2013-04-18 03:40:12 PM
69!
 
2013-04-18 04:16:49 PM
Yet totally useless to us until the invention of FTL travel.
 
2013-04-18 04:22:46 PM
Has anyone looked on the other side of the Sun yet?
i37.photobucket.com
 
2013-04-18 04:25:10 PM
Do they have Jesus?
 
2013-04-18 04:36:44 PM

PsyLord: Yet totally useless to us until the invention of FTL travel.


Useless to you, yes.  And me.  But to the species, and life as a whole - it's very useful in the very long term.  Just as we have to stop thinking of issues on the timeline of a political administration, we also have to start thinking about timelines longer than our lives.
 
2013-04-18 04:59:47 PM

darkedgefan: So what. Let's say a cure for cancer and millions of beautiful naked women are on these planets. I can't get there. And we probably won't in the next 100 years.


It's 1600 light years away.  Might want to take a sack lunch and some extra underwear.
 
2013-04-18 05:21:53 PM

Khellendros: PsyLord: Yet totally useless to us until the invention of FTL travel.

Useless to you, yes.  And me.  But to the species, and life as a whole - it's very useful in the very long term.  Just as we have to stop thinking of issues on the timeline of a political administration, we also have to start thinking about timelines longer than our lives.


Yet still useless to future generations until FTL travel has been invented.
 
2013-04-18 05:34:49 PM

PsyLord: Khellendros: PsyLord: Yet totally useless to us until the invention of FTL travel.

Useless to you, yes.  And me.  But to the species, and life as a whole - it's very useful in the very long term.  Just as we have to stop thinking of issues on the timeline of a political administration, we also have to start thinking about timelines longer than our lives.

Yet still useless to future generations until FTL travel has been invented.


depends on how many generations you're talking about.

and who says we have to get there faster than light? time dialation at high fraction of C would mean that it could be done within a single generation of the crew of the ship.

but yes, the distance is so vast that during the voyage life here could end.


realistically speaking, if we could and did send a colony fleet to another world around another star, we would have to accept that they were going to have to be their own nation/civilization.
 
2013-04-18 05:40:50 PM
So those 2 planets are on the outside of their system? Doesn't bode well for asteroid impacts.
 
2013-04-18 05:47:33 PM

KungFuJunkie: So those 2 planets are on the outside of their system? Doesn't bode well for asteroid impacts.


Kepler has been looking for only two years, so there may well be outer planets we haven't yet seen. Even giant gas planets like Jupiter.
 
2013-04-18 06:17:36 PM
Service guarantees citizenship?
 
2013-04-18 08:08:21 PM

PsyLord: Khellendros: PsyLord: Yet totally useless to us until the invention of FTL travel.

Useless to you, yes.  And me.  But to the species, and life as a whole - it's very useful in the very long term.  Just as we have to stop thinking of issues on the timeline of a political administration, we also have to start thinking about timelines longer than our lives.

Yet still useless to future generations until FTL travel has been invented.


Why?  There are other substitutes - cryotechnologies, generational ship transport, etc.  Time doesn't have to be a barrier.
 
2013-04-19 02:03:35 PM

Khellendros: PsyLord: Khellendros: PsyLord: Yet totally useless to us until the invention of FTL travel.

Useless to you, yes.  And me.  But to the species, and life as a whole - it's very useful in the very long term.  Just as we have to stop thinking of issues on the timeline of a political administration, we also have to start thinking about timelines longer than our lives.

Yet still useless to future generations until FTL travel has been invented.

Why?  There are other substitutes - cryotechnologies, generational ship transport, etc.  Time doesn't have to be a barrier.


orion drive, or that new fusion-based version nasa's cooking up...

and hell orion was proven viable back in the 60s/70s... we could be building starships TODAY if we wanted.
 
2013-04-19 02:05:38 PM
Is anyone else absolutely amazed that in less than 500 years we've gone from being unable to see beyond our eyesight's range to "seeing" planets 1200 light years away?
 
2013-04-19 07:23:18 PM

AngryDragon: Is anyone else absolutely amazed that in less than 500 years we've gone from being unable to see beyond our eyesight's range to "seeing" planets 1200 light years away?


not to mention 'seeing' the stuff that matter is made from, and the parts that stuff is made from? (and probably see the bits the parts that make up the stuff that make up matter is made from, soon enough)

or hell, being able to REACH those things that are so far away. just have to be patient about getting there.
 
Displayed 39 of 39 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report