To: LibWhacker
Well being that they discovered that Jupiter sized/type planets can exists close to their star, there's probably a lot of earth type planets orbiting these Jupiters
You wouldn't need a moon in those cases.
2 posted on
05/28/2011 4:58:27 PM PDT by
qam1
(There's been a huge party. All plates and the bottles are empty, all that's left is the bill to pay)
To: LibWhacker
astronomers estimate that only 1% of all Earth-like planets in the universe might actually have such a hefty companion. That would mean that planets harboring complex life might be relatively rare.
An assumption based on our circumstances.
3 posted on
05/28/2011 4:59:21 PM PDT by
cripplecreek
(Remember the River Raisin! (look it up))
To: LibWhacker; KevinDavis
5 posted on
05/28/2011 5:00:27 PM PDT by
GeronL
(The Right to Life came before the Right to Happiness)
To: LibWhacker
The number of Earth-like extrasolar planets suitable for harboring advanced life could be 10 times higher than has been assumed until now, according to a new modeling study. Does this mean we have to start being sucked dry via taxation to save these planets from us for when we move there after destroying this planet as claimed?
6 posted on
05/28/2011 5:02:13 PM PDT by
EGPWS
(Trust in God, question everyone else)
To: LibWhacker
Slightly off topic:
"Ever since the beginning of time man has dreamed of destroying the sun." -Montgomery Burns
12 posted on
05/28/2011 5:28:09 PM PDT by
stevio
(God, guns, guts.)
To: LibWhacker
numerical simulations of “moon-less Earths,” which show that the consequences are less dire than is generally assumed.
ORLY?
15 posted on
05/28/2011 5:46:13 PM PDT by
BenLurkin
(This post is not a statement of fact. It is merely a personal opinion -- or humor -- or both)
To: LibWhacker
Call me back when the aliens land.
21 posted on
05/28/2011 7:37:49 PM PDT by
Venturer
To: LibWhacker
25 posted on
05/29/2011 6:05:22 AM PDT by
RoadTest
(Organized religion is no substitute for the relationship the living God wants with you.)
To: LibWhacker
26 posted on
05/29/2011 6:11:28 AM PDT by
Daffynition
("Don't just live your life, but witness it also.")
To: LibWhacker
Given the generally accepted idea of how Earth got its big moon—through an improbable, dramatic collision with a Mars-sized body that knocked a huge chunk of Earth loose—astronomers estimate that only 1% of all Earth-like planets in the universe might actually have such a hefty companion. I've seen recent estimates that there were several Mars sized bodies in the early Solar System, so a collision may not be as improbable as once thought. The bottom line is that it is better for the evolution of higher life to a have a moon.
27 posted on
05/29/2011 6:22:03 AM PDT by
Moonman62
(The US has become a government with a country, rather than a country with a government.)
To: LibWhacker
Not everybody is overwhelmed by the importance of the new results. “I don’t think [changes in a planet’s axial tilt] would be a problem for the development of advanced life,” as any type of life would adapt to changing circumstances anyway, says planetary scientist Sara Seager of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in Cambridge. I'd like to see her tell that to all the so called scientists trying to stir up massive panic over relatively minor and mostly naturally caused climate change.
28 posted on
05/29/2011 6:24:21 AM PDT by
Moonman62
(The US has become a government with a country, rather than a country with a government.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson
