Closest temperate world orbiting quiet star discovered

November 15, 2017
This artist's impression shows the temperate planet Ross 128 b, with its red dwarf parent star in the background. This planet, which lies only 11 light-years from Earth, was found by a team using ESO's unique planet-hunting HARPS instrument. The new world is now the second-closest temperate planet to be detected after Proxima b. It is also the closest planet to be discovered orbiting an inactive red dwarf star, which may increase the likelihood that this planet could potentially sustain life. Ross 128 b will be a prime target for ESO's Extremely Large Telescope, which will be able to search for biomarkers in the planet's atmosphere. Credit: ESO/M. Kornmesser

A team working with ESO's High Accuracy Radial velocity Planet Searcher (HARPS) at the La Silla Observatory in Chile has found that the red dwarf star Ross 128 is orbited by a low-mass exoplanet every 9.9 days. This Earth-sized world is expected to be temperate, with a surface temperature that may also be close to that of the Earth. Ross 128 is the "quietest" nearby star to host such a temperate exoplanet.

"This discovery is based on more than a decade of HARPS intensive monitoring together with state-of-the-art data reduction and analysis techniques. Only HARPS has demonstrated such a precision and it remains the best planet hunter of its kind, 15 years after it began operations," explains Nicola Astudillo-Defru (Geneva Observatory - University of Geneva, Switzerland), who co-authored the discovery paper.

Red dwarfs are some of the coolest, faintest—and most common— in the Universe. This makes them very good targets in the search for exoplanets and so they are increasingly being studied. In fact, lead author Xavier Bonfils (Institut de Planétologie et d'Astrophysique de Grenoble - Université Grenoble-Alpes/CNRS, Grenoble, France), named their HARPS programme The shortcut to happiness, as it is easier to detect small cool siblings of Earth around these stars, than around stars more similar to the Sun.

Many , including Proxima Centauri, are subject to flares that occasionally bathe their orbiting in deadly ultraviolet and X-ray radiation. However, it seems that Ross 128 is a much quieter star, and so its planets may be the closest known comfortable abode for possible life.

Although it is currently 11 light-years from Earth, Ross 128 is moving towards us and is expected to become our nearest stellar neighbour in just 79 000 years—a blink of the eye in cosmic terms. Ross 128 b will by then take the crown from Proxima b and become the closest exoplanet to Earth!

With the data from HARPS, the team found that Ross 128 b orbits 20 times closer than the Earth orbits the Sun. Despite this proximity, Ross 128 b receives only 1.38 times more irradiation than the Earth. As a result, Ross 128 b's equilibrium temperature is estimated to lie between -60 and 20°C, thanks to the cool and faint nature of its small red dwarf host star, which has just over half the surface temperature of the Sun. While the scientists involved in this discovery consider Ross 128b to be a temperate planet, uncertainty remains as to whether the planet lies inside, outside, or on the cusp of the habitable zone, where liquid water may exist on a planet's surface.

Astronomers are now detecting more and more temperate exoplanets, and the next stage will be to study their atmospheres, composition and chemistry in more detail. Vitally, the detection of biomarkers such as oxygen in the very closest exoplanet atmospheres will be a huge next step, which ESO's Extremely Large Telescope (ELT) is in prime position to take.

"New facilities at ESO will first play a critical role in building the census of Earth-mass planets amenable to characterisation. In particular, NIRPS, the infrared arm of HARPS, will boost our efficiency in observing , which emit most of their radiation in the infrared. And then, the ELT will provide the opportunity to observe and characterise a large fraction of these planets," concludes Xavier Bonfils.

This research was presented in a paper entitled "A temperate exo-Earth around a quiet M dwarf at 3.4 parsecs", by X. Bonfils et al., to appear in the journal Astronomy & Astrophysics.

Explore further: Newly discovered exoplanet may be best candidate in search for signs of life

More information: Paper: www.eso.org/public/archives/re … eso1736/eso1736a.pdf

Related Stories

ESO's La Silla Observatory will host new planet hunter

September 1, 2017

Developed and built by the University of Geneva (UNIGE), Switzerland, and the University of Montreal, NIRPS (Near Infra Red Planet Searcher) is an infrared spectrograph designed to detect Earth-like rocky planets around the ...

The space weather forecast for Proxima Centauri B

April 3, 2017

Proxima Centauri, the closest star to the Earth (only 4.28 light-years away) is getting a lot of attention these days. It hosts a planet, Proxima Cen b, whose mass is about 1.3 Earth-mass (though it could be larger, depending ...

Recommended for you

JPL deploys a CubeSat for astronomy

December 8, 2017

Tiny satellites called CubeSats have attracted a lot of attention in recent years. Besides allowing researchers to test new technologies, their relative simplicity also offers hands-on training to early-career engineers.

Galaxy orbits in the local supercluster

December 8, 2017

A team of astronomers from Maryland, Hawaii, Israel, and France has produced the most detailed map ever of the orbits of galaxies in our extended local neighborhood, showing the past motions of almost 1400 galaxies within ...

Black holes' magnetism surprisingly wimpy

December 7, 2017

Black holes are famous for their muscle: an intense gravitational pull known to gobble up entire stars and launch streams of matter into space at almost the speed of light.

NASA Mars rover team's tilted winter strategy works

December 7, 2017

NASA's senior Mars rover, Opportunity, has just passed the shortest-daylight weeks of the long Martian year with its solar panels in encouragingly clean condition for entering a potential dust-storm season in 2018.

69 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

rini32
3.5 / 5 (4) Nov 15, 2017
Where do i sign up for a ride to this planet ? i mean only 11 ly, its spoonfed to us !
rrwillsj
1 / 5 (2) Nov 15, 2017
Huh, n3? You might want to wipe that gluttonous drool off your chin.

If there is a native biosphere to Ross 128 b? I'm guessing it's been around for a few billion more years than Earth's biosphere. Slower but more thorough evolutionary path.

Spoonfed? Yep. The indigenous might just find you a tasty treat.

Here, I'm such a nice guy. You can have my ticket!

No, no, please don't feel you owe me for it. I'll just stand over there with your women waving buh-bye. Consoling the poor dears. On your behalf of course. Cause, did I mention what a great guy I am?

Years ago there was a photo-cartoon. A picture of an elderly grouchy Amerindian on horseback, glaring at the ground. Walking behind him was an Amerindian woman looking up and waving at the sky. Where rocketships were blasting off for the stars. The caption read her yelling "Good Bye! Good Luck!"

And him muttering "Good Riddance!"
TrollBane
5 / 5 (2) Nov 15, 2017
"No, no, please don't feel you owe me for it. I'll just stand over there with your women waving buh-bye. Consoling the poor dears. On your behalf of course. Cause, did I mention what a great guy I am? " rrulllsj, Don't feel too smug. You haven't seen his women.
r2vettes
2.3 / 5 (3) Nov 15, 2017
Don't want to bring rain to the party, but for a planet to be in a red dwarfs habitable zone it must be very close. Certainly the planet would be tidal bound to the dwarf, regardless how well behaved the little star is. There's a host of other roadblocks, but I don't have time to mention.
Dr. Donald Hudson
holmes4
2 / 5 (2) Nov 16, 2017
Hmm, I thought Ross 128 sounded familiar.
6 months ago this same star was the subject of some excitement, when some very peculiar radio signals were received at Arecibo.

Google: Strange Signals from the Nearby Red Dwarf Star Ross 128

There were reports of both confirmation of this signal, and also failure to confirm by other radio telescopes, with some suggesting it might just be an intercept from a terrestrial comsat.
However, with the notion that an Earth-sized world with a surface temperature that may be close to that of the Earth, orbits Ross 128, and that it is the "quietest"* nearby star to host such a temperate exoplanet, well, it is an interesting coincidence, that it is also the source of "peculiar" radio signals.
*Quiet in this sense meaning a less threatening environment for a potentially habitable planet.
rrwillsj
1 / 5 (1) Nov 16, 2017
Well TB, to be honest, n2's women haven't seen me, either!

h4, if the 'coincidence' should arise, that you could serve on a jury at my trial? Please turn down the opportunity! Cause obviously you are unable to separate the concept of evidence from the concept of speculation.

holmes4
1 / 5 (1) Nov 16, 2017
(Sign above comments)

"Please Do Not Feed The Trolls"
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (7) Nov 16, 2017
Note the date of publication -- almost 20 years ago!

http://www.holosc...er-life/

Other stars, other worlds, other life?
Posted on December 15, 1999 by Wal Thornhill

"Red Giants are a more visible and scaled-up example of what an L-type Brown Dwarf star might look like close-up. The Red Giant Betelgeuse is so huge that if it were to replace our Sun then Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars and Jupiter would be engulfed by it. Astronomers recognize that such stars could swallow planets yet their plasma envelope is so tenuous that it would not impede the planetary orbits within the star's atmosphere. However, astronomers believe that any planet it swallowed would be gradually vaporized by intense heat from the star's core. But the standard stellar model has to be seriously fudged to explain Red Giants, their central temperature turns out to be so low that no known nuclear process can possibly supply the observed energy output ..."

(cont'd)
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (7) Nov 16, 2017
(cont'd)

"... The electric model, on the other hand, works seamlessly from Supergiant star to a planet-sized Brown Dwarf.

Since an electric star is heated externally a planet need not be destroyed by orbiting beneath its anode glow. In fact life is not only possible inside the glow of a small brown dwarf, it seems far more likely than on a planet orbiting outside a star! This is because the radiant energy arriving on a planet orbiting inside a glowing sphere is evenly distributed over the entire surface of the planet."

(cont'd)
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (7) Nov 16, 2017
(cont'd)

"There are no seasons, no tropics and no ice-caps. A planet does not have to rotate, its axis can point in any direction and its orbit can be eccentric. The radiant energy received by the planet will be strongest at the blue and red ends of the spectrum. Photosynthesis relies on red light. Sky light would be a pale purple (the classical 'purple dawn of creation'). L-type Brown Dwarfs have water as a dominant molecule in their spectra, along with many other biologically important molecules and elements. Its 'children' would accumulate atmospheres and water would mist down. It is therefore of particular interest that most of the extra-solar planets discovered are gas giants, several times the size of Jupiter, orbiting their star extremely closely. It is our system of distantly orbiting planets that seems the odd one out. In fact it argues in favor of a galactic traffic accident between the Sun and a sub-Brown Dwarf like Jupiter or Saturn."
holmes4
1 / 5 (1) Nov 16, 2017
Lively debate, and informed discussion, should never be stifled. But if a poster repeatedly resorts to abusive, ad hominem nonsense, this site offers an excellent remedy.

Hover over the text of the post in question, and in the lower right corner "Ignore user" appears.

Disagree, most certainly yes...but respond with a respectful, coherent point.
Chris_Reeve
1.5 / 5 (8) Nov 16, 2017
Notice that by adopting Wal Thornhill's additional claim that life can exist on planets inside of the visible solar envelope, we can then use the AM radio skywave phenomenon to suggest a pretty simple explanation for the Fermi Paradox:

(1) Not only would these lifeforms not see stars in their sky, but it is reasonable to suggest that radio frequencies from those planets would fail to escape the star's illuminated envelope.

(2) The last remaining question would then be: Well, how did WE somehow switch from a brown dwarf to the current Sun?

The question could have many answers, but this is why people study mythology. Some people would argue that it's not a coincidence that Jesus was said to "resurrect" when you understand that the Pagans (whose mythologies preceded the world's religions) likened the planets and stars to gods.

If true, the resurrection was indeed a "miracle" -- but not for the reason that people today believe (hint: The Pagans loved double meanings.)
leetennant
4.3 / 5 (6) Nov 16, 2017
I shouldn't ask @chris_reeve but...what?
Captain Stumpy
4.3 / 5 (6) Nov 16, 2017
I shouldn't ask @chris_reeve but...what?
@leetennant
you're right... you shouldn't ask

now we'll get more gish-gallop and nonsensical eu based dogma slathered in fanatical religious propaganda

just report the posts and move on
jonesdave
4.3 / 5 (6) Nov 16, 2017
I shouldn't ask @chris_reeve but...what?


Yep. That way lies lunacy. This is the madman Thornhill's take on science. Nobody takes it seriously. I'm not even sure that he does. It'll probably turn out that he's been on a decades long pisstake of epic proportions.
Chris_Reeve
1.5 / 5 (8) Nov 16, 2017
It is comical to watch you guys try so hard to disagree, because I am confident that the mainstream will eventually come to the same conclusion -- now that they are FINALLY onto these stars as the best theoretical source for life -- that planets can actually move around within the illuminated envelope of these stars.

You guys are not quite understanding -- yet -- that the illuminated atmospheres of these giant red and brown stars can actually be very tenuous. These are not at all dense plasmas in the outer areas. And the low power levels of these stars have to some degree confounded theorists -- hence the idea that they are at the end of their lifetime (which is not necessarily the case, what we see is just a low power plasma).

Crank the power and density down low enough, and at some point, it stands to reason that the illuminated portion of these stars is very much like the plasma in a neon tube.

Planets can go THROUGH that. What would stop them?
Chris_Reeve
1.5 / 5 (8) Nov 16, 2017
There has to be somebody here who actually uses science to THINK, rather than just RECALL.

Right?

You guys are getting VERY close to the truth of the matter of where life comes from in the universe. We're talking about a very important development for civilization here. Don't screw this up by just rejecting everything that Thornhill says. Take a clue from the fact that he was where you are right now 18 years ago.

And focus on just THINKING through the problem of the origin of life and the Fermi Paradox. Everything I've written here makes sense. You don't even have to believe in the EU to get to this point of believing that planets can move around inside of the illuminated envelopes of stars.
leetennant
4.5 / 5 (8) Nov 16, 2017
All the words are English. And yet...

I am sorry I asked. I won't do it again.
Chris_Reeve
1.5 / 5 (8) Nov 16, 2017
Plasmas come in three modes of illumination: dark (perhaps charge transfer, but no visible emission), glow (like a neon tube) and arc (like an arc welder). These states can be mapped out in the laboratory with an I-V curve.

You already realize that the Earth moves through a low density plasma known as the solar wind. The only difference is that the solar wind is basically a dark mode plasma.

But, think about a neon tube. It's not a very dense plasma, but it glows.

Which part of this is complicated?
Chris_Reeve
1.5 / 5 (8) Nov 16, 2017
It's a riot that somebody can go online and explain a completely workable hypothesis for the origin of life in the universe and a solution to the Fermi Paradox, to boot -- and yet, the person will still be downvoted.
jonesdave
4.4 / 5 (7) Nov 16, 2017
.....believing that planets can move around inside of the illuminated envelopes of stars.


Right, so given the surface temperature of a red giant can be around 5000K, how do you propose that life might arise? In fact, how do you propose that rock might survive? And only the very coolest of brown dwarves (Y-type) may have temperatures at which life might arise, and not all of them will be cool enough. And if the planet is circling within the gas atmosphere of the brown dwarf, where do you propose that the sunlight presumably needed for intelligent life might come from? Do you think an atmosphere primarily composed of H and He would be conducive to life arising? What would the pressures be? You don't have to penetrate Jupiter's atmosphere too deeply before that becomes a problem.
No, I really don't think we need to spend any more time on Thornhill's inane ramblings.
jonesdave
4.4 / 5 (7) Nov 16, 2017
How about T-class brown dwarves?

In 2014, astronomers were able to map features in the atmosphere of T-class brown dwarf Luhman-16B. The "clouds" are believed to be droplets of molten iron and minerals, floating in an atmosphere of hydrogen at 2,000 degrees Fahrenheit (1,100 degrees Celsius).


https://www.space...hic.html

Not my idea of fun!
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (7) Nov 16, 2017
Just don't forget that these comments are a form of public record, and while it may seem fun to pick on people in the heat of the moment, there have been other times where those who proved correct were publicly ridiculed.

The example of Robert Goddard comes to mind. The ridicule he endured led him to move to the desert, where he dropped nearly all communication with the people of the United States. It is not AT ALL a coincidence that the Germans and Russians would end up with ICBM programs at the same time as the United States:

They were the only two groups who took Goddard seriously. They kept up correspondences, and when scientists finally had a chance to dissect one of the 3,000 German V2's which rained down upon Europe -- surprise! -- Goddard's innovations in the V2.

There are consequences for these behaviors. You guys only take it all for granted as normal because you weren't taught the story of Goddard in a manner which taught the lesson of his ridicule.
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (6) Nov 16, 2017
Re: "How about T-class brown dwarves?"

You surely realize that some red and brown stars are going to be too dim for us to even have noticed them yet, no?

So, why are you talking about T-class brown dwarfs? You're trying too hard to disagree, and passing it off as some sort of pseudo-analysis.

Glowing plasmas do not HAVE to be inhospitable to life.
Captain Stumpy
4.2 / 5 (6) Nov 16, 2017
@chris/hannes the pseudoscience eu idiot cult member
It's a riot that somebody can go online and explain a completely workable hypothesis for the origin of life in the universe and a solution to the Fermi Paradox, to boot -- and yet, the person will still be downvoted.
you've been repeatedly presenting a known pseudoscience and continuing to lie while spamming the site with either thunderdolts bullsh*te or your own personal blog of eu dogma wrapped in dunning-kruger based delusion

that isn't a solution to anything other than a new religion, which is anti science, which is why you're downrated
Just don't forget that these comments are a form of public record
which is why you're typically ridiculed as the public record has repeatedly vindicated science and proven the eu is nothing but a scam of pseudoscience idiocy

if it were science it would adhere to the scientific method and have predictability, etc etc etc
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (7) Nov 16, 2017
That's a really dumb grade school bully response, Stumpy.
jonesdave
4.4 / 5 (7) Nov 16, 2017
You surely realize that some red and brown stars are going to be too dim for us to even have noticed them yet, no?


No red giant atmosphere is going to be at a temperature conducive to life! End of story. And like I say, only the coolest Y dwarves will be cool enough. Where would they get light for photosynthesis? In a H & He atmosphere? And what glowing plasma? Sorry, but this is fruitloop territory. I cannot think of a more unlikely place for life to arise. Which is why Thornhill is the only person to think of it. And then only on a woo site.

Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (7) Nov 16, 2017
Re: "I cannot think of a more unlikely place for life to arise."

Well, that's because you didn't see it in a textbook.
Captain Stumpy
3.4 / 5 (5) Nov 16, 2017
@chris/hannes the pseudoscience eu idiot cult member
There are consequences for these behaviors. You guys only take it all for granted as normal because you weren't taught the story of Goddard in a manner which taught the lesson of his ridicule
here is another story:
Newton said
The six primary Planets are revolv'd about the Sun, in circles concentric with the Sun, and with motions directed towards the same parts, and almost in the same plane. . . . But it is not to be conceived that mere mechanical causes could give birth to so many regular motions. . . . This most beautiful System of the Sun,

Planets, and Comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being
and yet we have proven this false (repeatedly)

perhaps it is you who should learn from history?
because apparently you never learned that science isn't about belief - which is all that the eu have ever presented

2Bcont'd
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (6) Nov 16, 2017
Like I said, you don't have to believe in the EU to think it ...

https://www.forbe...e7f26617

Could Life Exist In A Star's Atmosphere?
Starts With a Bang

"To stretch back to the original question about stellar atmospheres, the very lowest mass end of the spectrum of stars is composed of brown dwarfs - stars which missed the amount of mass you need in order to start fusion burning in their cores. The coldest of them are really quite cold; the most extreme surface temperature is somewhere between -54 and 9 degrees Fahrenheit, which is right about the limit of coldest survivable conditions for extremophiles on Earth."

(What Wal adds to this is the unexpected observation that plants seem almost designed to receive such brown dwarf spectra; horticulturalists also know that very high quality crops can be generated with just partial spectra)
jonesdave
4.3 / 5 (6) Nov 16, 2017
Re: "I cannot think of a more unlikely place for life to arise."

Well, that's because you didn't see it in a textbook.


No, it's because I am not fooled by utter crap from woo merchants, and have access to the data I need to see that it is utter crap.
Captain Stumpy
4.4 / 5 (7) Nov 16, 2017
@chris/hannes the pseudoscience eu idiot cult member
That's a really dumb grade school bully response, Stumpy
is it?

i've tried rational discourse with you and it lead to you continually making unsubstantiated claims based upon your belief (religion)

you have yet to be able to provide a factual evidence based response from reputable sources (pseudoscience)

you can't find any scientific means to refute the debunked eu cult dogma (delusion and faith)

you argue "history" when you should argue from the point of evidence (strawman and delusion)

you continually spam with known false claims while refusing to accept proven validated science (delusion, dunning-kruger and religious fanaticism)

what other response should there be when you refuse to deal with anything on any rational or objective level during discourse?

there is left the only method to deal with a troll ...

PS - forbes is not a science journal, and the eu is NOT SCIENCE
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (7) Nov 17, 2017
(Stumpy left his computer and flipped the bot back on.)
Captain Stumpy
4.3 / 5 (6) Nov 17, 2017
@chris/hannes the pseudoscience eu idiot cult member
(Stumpy left his computer and flipped the bot back on.)

so... what you're saying is that you're essentially apathetic to fact based science and you'll choose to spread your religion and denigrate facts and scientists who work hard to present objective results regardless?

thanks for validating my points above

and you wonder why you're ridiculed?

really?
jonesdave
4.2 / 5 (5) Nov 17, 2017
.....which is right about the limit of coldest survivable conditions for extremophiles on Earth."


And what have extremophiles got to do with the Fermi paradox? Hell, those things might be around on Mars. Who knows, even in the atmospheres of other planets, at a pinch. No way are you getting a technological civilization evolving in those circumstances!
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (5) Nov 17, 2017
Re: "No way are you getting a technological civilization evolving in those circumstances!"

Well, it stands to reason that something very dramatic must happen in order for life to transition from its original, ideal incubator to a situation where the inhabitants of the planet can actually see the stars and communicate with other civilizations.

Most scenarios would probably be violent. Only a small percentage of the inhabitants of a small percentage of the planets would survive. Genetics-wise, it would seem to those much further down the genealogy tree that certain ancient individuals were simply prolific procreators (similar to what we observe here on Earth, by coincidence).

The story of Adam and Eve carries forward a number of Pagan references -- the red apple, the snake and the tree, for example. These concepts trace back to the archetypes ... which should cause more thought about who Adam and Eve were really supposed to be.

One interpretation is survivors.
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (6) Nov 17, 2017
It might be worth thinking about why the stories of mythology are so strange. It is a sign of arrogance to simply write off the first 5,000 years of human storytelling as almost entirely gibberish. These stories were passed on for several thousand years VERBALLY. That suggests that they held great meaning.

Was the meaning lost because the sky changed?

Somehow, our own minds and culture evolved from those stories. To the extent that you WANT to just call them all crazy, you should also realize that WE COME FROM THEM. You dial the crazy up to 10 or 11, and at some point, you're also talking about US. It wasn't really that long ago. Our politics are not even that much different from Roman politics.

And why do the Pagans talk about planets as "gods"? Why would a tiny speck of light ever be a "god"? They behave as though they could actually see the planets as larger than tiny specks of light in the sky.
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (6) Nov 17, 2017
It makes sense that the textbook history for our solar system would start out as a set of principles -- extremely crude by any other standard of observing any other history.

But, what we can plainly see from observing other planetary systems is that many of these systems probably DO have interesting histories -- for the simple reason that many of the configurations would seem to violate our own models.

A lot of people look at these crude planetary history models and just accept it as some sort of fact that it all happened.

They only do so because they have no basis to judge it by; they've subjected themselves to the textbook theory. They know nothing else. So, it's reality to them.

Well, REAL history is usually not reducible to scientific principles. Just last week, some thing whizzed through the solar system. What scientific PRINCIPLE predicted that that would happen?!

What do you think would have happened if that thing had been another planet or star?
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (6) Nov 17, 2017
https://science.n...nplanets

Free-Floating Planets May Be More Common Than Stars

May 18, 2011: "Astronomers have discovered a new class of Jupiter-sized planets floating alone in the dark of space, away from the light of a star. The team believes these lone worlds are probably outcasts from developing planetary systems and, moreover, they could be twice as numerous as the stars themselves.

'Although free-floating planets have been predicted, they finally have been detected' ...

This could be just the tip of the iceberg. The team estimates there are about twice as many free-floating Jupiter-mass planets as stars. In addition, these worlds are thought to be at least as common as planets that orbit stars. This adds up to hundreds of billions of lone planets in our Milky Way galaxy alone.

'Our survey is like a population census,' said David Bennett ..."

(cont'd)
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (6) Nov 17, 2017
(cont'd)

"... a NASA and National Science Foundation-funded co-author of the study from the University of Notre Dame in South Bend, Ind. 'We sampled a portion of the galaxy, and based on these data, can estimate overall numbers in the galaxy' ...

Previous observations spotted a handful of free-floating planet-like objects within star-forming clusters, with masses three times that of Jupiter. But scientists suspect the gaseous bodies form more like stars than planets. These small, dim orbs, called brown dwarfs ... lack the mass to ignite their nuclear fuel and shine with starlight. It is thought the smallest brown dwarfs are approximately the size of large planets ...

'If free-floating planets formed like stars, then we would have expected to see only one or two of them in our survey instead of 10,' Bennett said. 'Our results suggest that planetary systems often become unstable, with planets being kicked out from their places of birth.'"
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (6) Nov 17, 2017
The whole reason that Lyell pitched uniformity over time was to undermine the authority of the monarchy. It was a political move from a quarter-millenium ago.

Horus Vol. 1 No. 2 (Summer 1985)
What is Uniformitarianism and how did it get here?

Alex Marton

"Paley's Natural Theology claimed that sovereignty descended from God to the King ... Paley's doctrine was required study in the universities, and was the received wisdom in society. There was only one way to reform Parliament, and that was to destroy Paley's Natural Theology - and the only way to do that was to discredit the catastrophist notions of its religious defenders who sought to reconcile the geological evidence with the story of Genesis.

If the scientific evidence denied the truth of the Bible, then it also denied any connection between God and the Monarchy, thus freeing Parliament and the people to redefine the political equations ..."

(cont'd)
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (5) Nov 17, 2017
(cont'd)

"So science, its methods and its scope, in the formative beginnings, was very much a creature of the times, unabashedly enlisted in the service of political causes by those who sought to affect political and social developments in their own favor. It is in this context that we must view the formation and growth of the London Geological Society and its vast influence on the parameters within which geology was to develop into a respectable science ... One member, a young whig lawyer named Charles Lyell, decided to take a novel approach: in his Principles of Geology, he argued against the catastrophists by saying that the diluvial theory was, in effect, mythological, and that it stood in the way of progress in geology. He concentrated on the gradual effects of erosion and volcanic uplift to rationalize the geological observations, completely ignoring all evidence of catastrophism ..."

(cont'd)
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (6) Nov 17, 2017
(cont'd)

"The liberals were delighted, and they elected him secretary, and later president of the Geological Society.

Catastrophism was dead, and the principle of Uniformitarianism was established: geological changes took place slowly, over extremely long period of time, free of widespread catastrophic changes. The Society grew powerful: it was able to prevent publication of material favorable to catastrophism, and to arrange evidence so as to satisfy a uniformitarian view. Similarly, the political battle was won by the liberals, and the power flow between the King, the Parliament, and the People changed direction ...

The political issues were settled long ago, but geology is still committed to a paradigm established primarily as part of a political front that is no longer relevant."
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (6) Nov 17, 2017
https://www.space...ula.html

"Earth and the other rocky planets aren't made out of the solar system's original starting material, two new studies reveal.

Scientists examined solar particles snagged in space by NASA's Genesis probe, whose return capsule crash-landed on Earth in 2004. These salvaged samples show that the sun's basic building blocks differ significantly from those of Earth, the moon and other denizens of the inner solar system, researchers said ...

McKeegan and his team measured the abundance of solar wind oxygen isotopes. Isotopes are versions of an element that have different numbers of neutrons in their atomic nuclei. Oxygen has three stable isotopes: oxygen-16 (eight neutrons), oxygen-17 (nine neutrons) and oxygen-18 (ten neutrons).

The researchers found that the sun has significantly more oxygen-16, relative to the other two isotopes, than Earth."
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (6) Nov 17, 2017
Stephen Brush, A History of Modern Planetary Physics, p.91

"Attempts to find a plausible naturalistic explanation of the origin of the solar system began about 350 years ago, but have not yet been quantitatively successful, making this one of the oldest unsolved problems in modern science."
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (6) Nov 17, 2017
http://www.nature...-1.15480

"Astronomy: Planets in chaos

The discovery of thousands of star systems wildly different from our own has demolished ideas about how planets form. Astronomers are searching for a whole new theory.

Ann Finkbeiner
02 July 2014

Not so long ago — as recently as the mid-1990s, in fact — there was a theory so beautiful that astronomers thought it simply had to be true ...

But in the mid-1990s, astronomers actually started finding those exoplanets — and they looked nothing like those in our Solar System ...

The findings have triggered controversy and confusion, as astronomers struggle to work out what the old theory was missing. They are trying ideas, but are still far from sure how the pieces fit together. The field in its current state 'doesn't make much sense', says Norm Murray of the Canadian Institute for Theoretical Astrophysics in Toronto. 'It's impossible right now to account for everything'"
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (6) Nov 17, 2017
What is disconcerting about all of this is the very serious possibility that mainstream science has lulled the public into a false sense of security about the stability of the solar system.

There are many suggestions that it's just not true.

And if that proves to be correct, we would really seem to be wasting valuable time. If the public had a more realistic view of what drove the popularity of uniformity in geology, we would probably have no trouble coming together to rapidly colonize space.

Oddly, in this case, it would seem to be the scientific community itself -- and forums like this one -- which are blocking a stronger motivation to rapidly colonize space.
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (6) Nov 17, 2017
Plato describing the gravitational capture of a debris field returning over time even though he has no idea what gravity is:

https://books.goo...;f=false

"Phaethon, the son of Helios, having yoked the steeds in his father's chariot, because he was not able to drive them in the path of his father, burned up all that was upon the earth, and was himself destroyed by a thunderbolt. Now, this has the form of a myth, but really signifies a declination of the bodies moving around the earth and in the heavens, and a great conflagration of things upon the earth recurring at long intervals of time"

... then further on ...

"All of these stories, and ten thousand others which are still more wonderful, have a common origin; many of them have been lost in the lapse of ages, or exist only as fragments; but the origin of them is what no one has told"
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (7) Nov 17, 2017
An example of reckless behavior. This is the kind of thinker that the current system generates:

https://www.forbe...650457e2

NASA Wakes Up: Saving Earth From Killer Asteroids Is A Waste

Starts With A Bang
Ethan Siegel
Oct 5, 2015

"So with all of this taken into account, what are your odds of dying in an asteroid strike in any given year? About 1-in-70,000,000. On average, that means approximately 100 people will die of an asteroid strike in a given year: less than die in earthquakes, tornadoes, volcanoes, hurricanes, floods or by lightning strike."
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (7) Nov 17, 2017
https://www.forbe...6474ccc3

No, Earth Is Not Overdue For A Massive Asteroid Strike

Starts With A Bang
Ethan Siegel
Dec 14, 2016

"... there's a myth going around -- propagated by scientists* at reputable agencies like Los Alamos National Laboratory, the American Geophysical Union and NASA's Planetary Defense Coordination Office -- that we're overdue for one, and so one is likelier-than-normal in our future. The scientific truth indicates otherwise ..."
Captain Stumpy
4 / 5 (4) Nov 17, 2017
@chris/hannes the pedo pseudoscience eu idiot cult member
The story of Adam and Eve carries forward a number of Pagan references ... who Adam and Eve were really supposed to be.
and there you have it!
when all else fails: baffle them with bullsh*t

today, reeve/hannes shows us how to completely derail any logical scientific discourse with a gish-gallop tactic using religion as a foundation to extrapolate delusional belief!

1- choose a random irrelevant religious belief that has been proven to be fabricated and plagiarized other religions

2- use the word "archetypes"

3- randomly copy/paste your personal religious beliefs while tangentially keeping a tenuous thread about survival

4- insert random personal complaints about how mainstream science is failing while not comprehending how it works

you must use so much random stupidity with occasional links that no one will read it unless they're bored or a true fanatic like chris/hannes

maybe we should mimic it?
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (5) Nov 17, 2017
Stumpy just cannot escape the current historical moment. Even his insults -- "pedo" -- are faddish.

Perhaps he understands that the entire world was once steeped in these Pagan traditions, but he refuses to ask why? The Egyptians have been pairing up red orbs with serpents in their symbols long before any religion had its turn with them. Why?

The tree of life is yet another foundational archetypal symbol which bears great meaning for the cultures before any religion even existed. That symbol comes from the 5,000 years of human storytelling that Stumpy hates so much.

There would seem to be a looming paradox for Stumpy, because the mainstream is finally on the right track with tracking down the origin for life. This line of investigation will likely produce results -- but it will also vindicate claims made 18 years ago by Wal Thornhill. This must be a worst-case scenario for Stumpy, who sounds like golem when the name comes up.

But, for the rest of us, it's progress.
jonesdave
4 / 5 (4) Nov 17, 2017
....but it will also vindicate claims made 18 years ago by Wal Thornhill.


Errr, no. His electric sun woo is still woo, with zero evidence to back it up (nor even a working model). Secondly, he is talking about planets orbiting within the atmosphere of a star!!! NASA, nor anybody else,are even looking there (how would they). And nobody in their right minds would believe that intelligent life could arise in such circumstances. The 'mainstream' are doing what they've been doing for a few decades - looking for exoplanets orbiting other stars. As opposed to being fried by them within their atmospheres.
So, no. Thornhill will still be ignored long after he's gone, and none of his woo will be any more accepted then than it is now. It's just silly Velikovskian woo. Nobody takes it seriously. Nor ever has.
Captain Stumpy
4 / 5 (4) Nov 17, 2017
@chris/hannes the pedo pseudoscience eu idiot cult member
Even his insults -- "pedo" -- are faddish
using the exact same tactic you are using

i've provided a point of fact
if you can refute it, then you should provide the evidence
Perhaps he understands that the entire world was once steeped in these Pagan traditions, but he refuses to ask why?
1- no religion is relevant to science or the scientific method

2- i know a whole lot more about "pagan" religions than you ever will

3- some religions are part of cultural identity and were established as a means to subjugate others in order to feed the growing power base

most importantly:
absolutely none of it is relevant to factual objective science using the scientific method

because it's subjective and irrelevant

as for your claims about the origin of life: i follow the evidence
i don't care what archetype is presented in religion because it is irrelevant to the science

PS - wal has proven false WRT eu woo
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (4) Nov 17, 2017
Re: "The 'mainstream' are doing what they've been doing for a few decades - looking for exoplanets orbiting other stars. As opposed to being fried by them within their atmospheres."

Just because something is glowing does not mean it is hot. Your neon light is a glowing plasma but it is not hot. A fluorescent bulb is not hot. These are the dimmest stars which we've seen to date, and it is likely that there are many stars which are too dim for us to even see them.

When your theory relies upon humans being able to create things as commercial products (glow-mode plasmas like neon and fluorescent bulbs) which you claim Nature could never reproduce, you're repeating a mistake that has been made many times before.

"Usually the universe has a way of being able to duplicate whatever is done in the laboratory."

- Hoyle, Burbidge & Narlikar, A Different Approach to Cosmology, p.315
rrwillsj
3.4 / 5 (5) Nov 17, 2017
The reason to ridicule those believers of the written mythology propagated the last five thousand years?

For the same reason you ridicule your teenagers with stories about when they were babies playing with the shit from their diapers.

It's just plain fun!
jonesdave
4 / 5 (4) Nov 17, 2017
Just because something is glowing does not mean it is hot. .....


Dear God, the ignorance of that remark! Hint: blackbody spectrum. It's not a frigging lightbulb!
https://spacemath...ge55.pdf

No doubt, according to Reeve, Planck will be wrong. Purely because it is yet more evidence that the evidence-free woo he believes in is wrong. Just like gravity must be wrong, because Velikovsky said Venus could do handbrake turns around the solar system. And comets don't have the density of rock, etc. Every piece of well arrested science that shows the EU nutty ideas to be wrong, must therefore be wrong itself, because EU nutty ideas MUST be right! Because the genius Thornhill said so! Great logic, that. Occam's razor? EU nutty ideas are wrong.
jonesdave
4 / 5 (4) Nov 17, 2017
And here's another way of measuring temperature for a brown dwarf:

BENCHMARK TRANSITING BROWN DWARF LHS 6343 C: SPITZER SECONDARY ECLIPSE
OBSERVATIONS YIELD BRIGHTNESS TEMPERATURE AND MID-T SPECTRAL CLASS
Montet, B. T. et al.
http://iopscience...1/L6/pdf

Yep, about 1100K. Toasty!
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (4) Nov 17, 2017
Black body physics is an entire controversy in its own right. See https://www.youtu...l8i0e-g.

The problem is that you want to rush to your preferred conclusions without taking in all of the numerous critiques which have been put forward, and you visibly invent reasons to dismiss large swaths of critique so that you can avoid the burden of having to think through the arguments.

And it's honestly just really dumb that you keep posting temperatures for stars which would cook life. Mainstream astronomers ALREADY ADMIT that there is a very wide spectrum of temperatures for dwarf-style stars, and the temperatures that they cite ALREADY ENCOMPASS the temperatures which life would require. You make yourself look desperate each time you do this.
jonesdave
4 / 5 (4) Nov 17, 2017
Black body physics is an entire controversy in its own right


No, it isn't. And you know when you have to post youtube links (which are broken) that you have lost the argument.
And I invented nothing. I posted links to well established science. Which you need to dismiss because it proves your woo wrong. You are the only one looking desperate, believing a civilization could develop on a planet within the atmosphere of a brown dwarf! Nobody in their right mind believes that. All you've got is an unqualified woo merchant on a crank site spouting this idiocy. No science. Zilch. It is pure woo. Which would be why nobody takes it seriously.
rrwillsj
3.4 / 5 (5) Nov 18, 2017
Well, C_R keeps shoveling the manure of EU superstition! In the desperate hope there is a unicorn hiding in there, somewhere.

Sorry C_R but the unicorns were too late trying to board the paperhat ark. You're going to have to settle for a pet rhinoceros. Cuddly, I'm sure!
torbjorn_b_g_larsson
not rated yet Nov 18, 2017
Don't want to bring rain to the party, but for a planet to be in a red dwarfs habitable zone it must be very close. Certainly the planet would be tidal bound to the dwarf, regardless how well behaved the little star is. There's a host of other roadblocks, but I don't have time to mention.
Dr. Donald Hudson


In what sense would tidal lock be a "roadblock"? Some planets will be inhabitable for it, others will have substantially less net primary productivity than they could have. But climate models have shown that it seldom makes a planet in the habitable zone inhabitable. (E.g. with global ice or desert cover.)
torbjorn_b_g_larsson
3.7 / 5 (3) Nov 18, 2017
Re the claim by the pseudoscientist here, of course astrobiologists have considered life potentials of other systems than cellular (hydrocarbon based) ones, But it is both problematic - what would be the template for life - and less likely . we know that life can emerge out of geology.

Those problems have nothing to do with "mainstream" research topics as such, any more than the here displayed Galileo defense has. (E.g. the pseudoscientist erroneous logic of 'they criticized Galileo, he was correct; they criticize me, therefore I must be correct'.)
TheGhostofOtto1923
3 / 5 (2) Nov 18, 2017
The example of Robert Goddard comes to mind
"I knew Robert Goddard and you sir are no Robert Goddard."

I paraphrase.
Chris_Reeve
1 / 5 (4) Nov 19, 2017
It's great to get people to go on record with their ridicule. When I run into important instances like this, I generally try to screen capture it.

Friendly reminder once again that this is a PUBLIC forum and your comments here will be picked apart by people from the future, who will have the benefit of hindsight. The people here should be more concerned about ridiculing things which they don't fully understand, for there is also a risk that you could become famous for all of the "wrong" reasons.
jonesdave
5 / 5 (3) Nov 19, 2017
It's great to get people to go on record with their ridicule. When I run into important instances like this, I generally try to screen capture it.

Friendly reminder once again that this is a PUBLIC forum and your comments here will be picked apart by people from the future, who will have the benefit of hindsight. The people here should be more concerned about ridiculing things which they don't fully understand, for there is also a risk that you could become famous for all of the "wrong" reasons.


Sorry, what has Thornhill's idiocy of planets giving birth to intelligent lifeforms, within the atmospheres of red giants and brown dwarfs, have to do with this story anyway? As you say, he wrote that tripe 18 years ago, and the people of the future are looking at it, and calling it impossible crap.
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (2) Nov 19, 2017
@chris/hannes the pedo pseudoscience eu idiot cult member
...will be picked apart by people from the future, who will have the benefit of hindsight
that threat runs both ways

and considering you're entire argument surrounds supporting a known pseudoscience that has been repeatedly debunked with evidence, it should tell you a lot about where your problem lies and how you will be viewed by "people from the future"

but then again, your comments are already being noticed by people now
- mostly it's psychiatrists and psychologists studying irrational delusional beliefs though
jonesdave
5 / 5 (2) Nov 20, 2017
As quoted by Capt. S.;
but then again, your comments are already being noticed by people now
- mostly it's psychiatrists and psychologists studying irrational delusional beliefs though


Lol. Made me laugh!
rrwillsj
not rated yet Dec 06, 2017
Ten years or so ago, I was taking a Prep Course for a degree in Clinical Psychology.

About that time, I was involved (on another site) with a string of rather nasty debates and fulminating commentaries.

I collected those postings and used them for my thesis project.

Our instructor was impressed enough with my analysis. He awarded me the second A he had given in his course in four years.

Of course now days, if I or anyone else was collecting such data? We would be required to post our intent. Even the mentally challenged and ideologically/theocratic driven and cult "True Believers" need to give whatever consent they are capable of.

And, bye the way. Over the years, one of the consistent delusions I have grappled with trying to understand. Is the cultists belief of vast conspiracies denying them their glorious ascension to the mastery of the scientific community.

Yet here you are, perpetrating infantile tantrums against empirical evidence all over the internet.

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.