Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Alien life deemed impossible by analysis of 500 planets
The Daily Telegraph ^ | January 23, 2011 | Heidi Blake

Posted on 01/23/2011 9:38:58 AM PST by Cincinatus' Wife

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 201-204 next last
To: clamper1797
Yes, but:

"And finally, did you know that only a miraculous set of
circumstances makes life here on Earth possible? For instance,
the planet's size is just exactly right to hold our atmosphere.
The atmosphere contains just enough oxygen to support life.
And our distance from the sun is just perfect for the right
temperature. Should there be even a trivial change in any of
these conditions, all life here on Earth would certainly be
obliterated in a matter of milliseconds. This is Les Nessman
saying good day, and may the good news be yours.

Apparently, the Harvard guy doesn't think any other planet can meet
and sustain these conditions.

41 posted on 01/23/2011 10:09:58 AM PST by Calvin Locke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

Bad, bad logic and science.

The technology so far MIGHT detect Jupiter, if it were in a highly elliptical orbit, but completely miss Earth.

This is the equivalent of saying your car keys are not nearby on the ground, because it is night and you only looked in the area under the street lamp.


42 posted on 01/23/2011 10:10:55 AM PST by FormerACLUmember (Character is defined by how we treat those who society says have no value.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife
The universe is so vast and the stars so innumerable that no matter how many planets we look at, it will still be an unrepresentative sample.

Hubble Deep Field images are a tiny dot of sky in the Orion Nebula magnified millions of times.

Those aren't stars, those are galaxies, each containing hundreds of millions of stars.

And that's just one dot of sky.

Just imagine how big the universe really is.

43 posted on 01/23/2011 10:15:41 AM PST by E. Pluribus Unum ("If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun." -- Barry Soetoro, June 11, 2008)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CodeToad
Pinheads like him have been making false conclusions since the beginning of time. He hasn’t seen but 0.0000000000001% of all planets, yet, he thinks that’s a good enough sample.

Exactly. Hence my confidence that there's a planet out there shaped just like Alfred E. Newman's head. I mean, there are so many planets out there that it's a virtual certainty. Only a pinhead would deny it.

44 posted on 01/23/2011 10:18:29 AM PST by Yardstick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: BenKenobi
Anything over 50 light years away we could be out by a light year from the true distance. Lots of work still to do.

Agreed. Like null and void said upthread, our current technology can just barely detect super-massive planets that orbit close to their parent star. By definition, none of those are earthlike.

Our sensing technology has to evolve to a higher level before we can easily detect small rocky planets like ours in other solar systems.

45 posted on 01/23/2011 10:20:37 AM PST by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: BenKenobi
Since telescope resolution is tied to overall size,we will need new telescopes that are to the MMT and Keck scopes as they are to the scopes found in the science toys for children,before we can see the details necessary.And those scope will have to be space or Moon based to avoid the limits imposed by Earth's atmosphere.

Even sending a probe to the nearest star system would require a huge investment using current propulsion methods and the results might only be seen by our great-great-grandchildren.The data could be beamed back to us at the speed of light,getting the dat-gathering platform there will take a long time.And it would almost certainly have to incorporate a foolproof nuclear power reactor .Someone care to calculate the transmitter power required and antenna size to send the probe's data back at even "dial-up" rates?

46 posted on 01/23/2011 10:23:01 AM PST by hoosierham (Waddaya mean Freedom isn't free ?;will you take a credit card?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife
Howard Smith, a senior astrophysicist at Harvard, made the claim that we are alone in the universe after an analysis of the 500 planets discovered so far showed all were hostile to life.

What an idiot. We can't even be sure there's no life in our own solar system even after having been to some other planets. Most of the planets we've been able to detect are hot jupiters and are easiest to detect. We've only been able to detect a couple of rocky planets that are too close to their suns to support life.

The sample size he's relying on is akin to pulling an electron out of the human body and declaring there there is no life anywhere. This clown should take up climatology, sounds like he's just the kind of man they're looking for.
47 posted on 01/23/2011 10:23:08 AM PST by cripplecreek (Remember the River Raisin! (look it up))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife
“If an elderly but distinguished scientist says that something is possible he is almost certainly right, but if he says that it is impossible he is very probably wrong.”
-- Arthur C. Clarke
48 posted on 01/23/2011 10:23:08 AM PST by dread78645 (Evolution. A doomed theory since 1859.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LOC1

“Let’s see, we have found earth like life on one out of 501 planets (earth itself). That is a success rate of 0.2%. Now how many planets are there? Multiply that by 0.2% and the number of potential life supporting planets is very, very large.”

So, let’s carry this logic further...you exist on planet earth where life itself exists. So, there is a great chance that you exist on another planet as well, do you like it there I wonder?


49 posted on 01/23/2011 10:27:22 AM PST by Wpin ("I Have Sworn Upon the Altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny...")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

Is this guy serious? He must have a credibility ‘death-wish’.

Scientists are still up in the air about life on local planets. Fossil evidence seems to point to at the very least, former life on one local planet. I don’t buy into it, but some scientists do.

If we can’t be positively certain concerning life on local planets, how can we be so bold as to make a blanket statement about 500 other planets?

What may seem like an inhospitable climate on other planets, may in fact be a fantastic climate for life of another form there.

Again, we find ourselves in a situation where we just don’t know, cannot know, and yet definitive statements are being made.

I expect a number of hilarious pronouncements to be aired over the next few decades, as fools feel compelled to turn their brains inside out for public observation.


50 posted on 01/23/2011 10:27:52 AM PST by DoughtyOne (All hail the Kenyan Prince Obama, Lord of the Skid-mark, constantly soiling himself and our nation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife

There are several important variables. The most discriminatory of these is the location of the Sun, about 3/4ths of the way to the edge from the center of the Milky Way galaxy. Much further in could be too violent, and further out too exposed to tidal forces.

The second discriminator is time. The galaxy is about 15 billion years old. The Earth has existed about one third of that time, or 4.5 billion years. 3.8 billion of simple celled life. Only 200 million years of mammals.

Only 2.5 million years of the genus Homo. 200,000 years of looking more like we do today. Only perhaps 10,000 of mankind being intelligent.

So how many inhabited planets could have come and gone in that time? Remember that Earth’s life form clock has been reset several times, wiping out hundreds of millions of years in evolution.


51 posted on 01/23/2011 10:32:41 AM PST by yefragetuwrabrumuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BenKenobi
More likely we are alone than first.

People once believed that if you traveled too far out to sea, that you'd fall off the edge of the world, and that the sun revolved around the earth.

The mind-boggling numbers involved with this question argue in favor of a universe that is teeming with life. The Milky Way is but one of billions of galaxies in the universe, each possessing billions of stars, and trillions of planets.

We don't yet have the technology to fully see all of the planetary systems in our own galaxy, let alone the billions of others out there.

52 posted on 01/23/2011 10:33:05 AM PST by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Windflier

The comment argues that being B+1 in a string is much more unlikely than being 1+B+1, somewhere in the middle. The larger the string the more likely this is true.


53 posted on 01/23/2011 10:36:20 AM PST by BenKenobi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife; All
Yet another example of the mental rot in American academia, and the death of real scientific thinking in the West.

Global Warming mania is a symptom of a collapsed rational thought ethos.

This sort of over-reaching generalization with no data to back it up from someone who should bloody well know better is worse than embarrassing, it's terrifying.


Frowning takes 68 muscles.
Smiling takes 6.
Pulling this trigger takes 2.
I'm lazy.

54 posted on 01/23/2011 10:37:32 AM PST by The Comedian ("Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice" - B. Goldwater)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cincinatus' Wife
Actually, our sample of 500 planets is a very good one, IF Two of those conditions are false and one is very possibly false.

Note the title says life is impossible, but Smith didn't say that, only that conditions on Earth might be unique (which we knew all along).

55 posted on 01/23/2011 10:37:36 AM PST by LibWhacker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Soothesayer

sort of like running a national opinion poll and drawing a conclusion after only calling 1 person somewhere in East LA.


56 posted on 01/23/2011 10:38:41 AM PST by FunkyZero ("It's not about duck hunting !")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: hoosierham; BenKenobi
I wish they'd revive the TAU program.

TAU, Thousands of Astronomical Units, was intended to fly -wait for it- thousands of astronomical units up out of the dusty galactic plain to give us a clear view of the core and extent of our home galaxy and a very good baseline for a stereo view of local stars and systems.

This would not only provide us accurate distances to all the visible stars but a superb dust-free view of our own galaxy as well.

If you think the Hubble images are grand, you ain't seen nuthin'!

57 posted on 01/23/2011 10:38:47 AM PST by null and void (We are now in day 733 of our national holiday from reality. - 0bama really isn't one of US.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: denydenydeny
...the 500 planets studied are the rule. Too cold, too hot, too irradiated, too something. Study 500 million planets and you’ll find the same thing

As long as we're using our current technology which can only infer the presence of super-massive giants that are tugging on their parent planets, then yes, what you say is correct.

Give our technology a couple of generations to improve, and we'll be directly sensing small rocky planets like our own.

The chances of finding earthlike planets will then increase exponentially, as will the chances of discovering evidence for life on them.

58 posted on 01/23/2011 10:39:30 AM PST by Windflier (To anger a conservative, tell him a lie. To anger a liberal, tell him the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Windflier; BenKenobi
The mind-boggling numbers involved with this question argue in favor of a universe that is teeming with life.

If you calculate the odds that we have arrived where we have by chance, you'll arrive at number that virtually guarantees its impossibility. But let's assume it happened anyway. To find, then, what the odds are that this has happened twice, you have to multiply the first set of odds by itself and so on for each different occurrence you posit. So the likelihood, as likelihood is actually figured in real science, militates against anything like we've seen on this planet ever happening again, much less in such a way that results in a "universe that is teeming with life."
59 posted on 01/23/2011 10:41:14 AM PST by aruanan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: paulycy
What if we're first?

Dibs on the Virgo supercluster!


Frowning takes 68 muscles.
Smiling takes 6.
Pulling this trigger takes 2.
I'm lazy.

60 posted on 01/23/2011 10:41:41 AM PST by The Comedian ("Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice" - B. Goldwater)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 201-204 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson