Posted on 03/23/2015 5:01:44 PM PDT by BenLurkin
The more planetary systems astronomers discovered, the more our own solar system looked like an oddball. Exoplanets – at least the ones big enough for us to see – tended to be bigger than Earth, with tight orbits that took them much closer to their host stars. In multi-planet systems, these orbits tended to be much closer together than they are in our solar system. For instance, the star known as Kepler-11 has six planets closer to it than Venus is to the sun.
Why does our solar system look so different? Astrophysicists Konstantin Batygin of Caltech and Greg Laughlin of UC Santa Cruz summed it up in one word: Jupiter.
(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...
Speculation. But interesting nonetheless.
The earth used to be flat so that must be what filled in the other side./s
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rare_Earth_hypothesis
The more they look, the more unique the Earth becomes.
Tweeeeeet! Fifteen yard penalty for observer's bias. We can see planets with orbits closer to their star much more easily, therefore we see more of them. It's like saying there are far more white cats out at night because you can't see the black ones.
Yes, this is the obvious alternative theory, and much more likely.
Observers bias cant be excluded until we have much better instruments, that can detect Jupiter type planets, or Earth type planets for that matter, across interstellar distances.
So even as a kid, Zeus was throwing his weight around, taking out the competition......
They might be onto something, by Jove!
We need more funding to Stop Orbital Bullying!
Bush’s fault
Thanks BenLurkin, and I quite agree, speculative -- also smacks of that ridiculous "Rare Earth" book, but of course that could just be the voice of the article author leaking in. A two list ping!
 |
||
| · join · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post new topic · subscribe · | ||
| Google news searches: exoplanet · exosolar · extrasolar · | ||
Thanks BenLurkin, and I quite agree, speculative -- also smacks of that ridiculous "Rare Earth" book, but of course that could just be the voice of the article author leaking in. A two list ping!
|
Fixed it
Yes, Earth is unique, just like all the other planets. One hundred years ago the existence of other planets was mere speculation. They had no compunctions about believing that our solar system was the only place in the universe that had planets. We look out into space and we are finding more and more planets out there. We still can't see all that far or all that well, so it stands to reason that we have barely scratched the surface as far as the actual number of planets even in this one of billions oh galaxies. The more planets we find, the less unique earth will turn out to be..
Care to elucidate that statement?
The book “Rare Earth” was and is ridiculous. The authors engage in a series of invalid straw man arguments, in order to ensure that their conclusions fit their original assumptions.
Nice. ;-)
Jupiter destroyed extrasolar planet in Earth's solar system | March 24, 2015Jupiter used to be the most dangerous planet in our solar system. It was the grand slayer of sorts and knocked off everything that came its way. Researchers claim that inside the inner solar system, there hasn't been anything as dangerous as Jupiter.
No other planet has ever behaved so dangerously as this 'baddest boy' of the solar system. The fifth planet from the Sun and the largest planet, it has always behaved dangerously. But now as it has aged, it seems to have sobered a bit.
Researchers following a statistical study based on Jupiter's wandering orbit reveal that had there not been those collisions and its bad boy behavior, the earth wouldn't have existed. They claim that our Earth actually owes its very existence to those collisions.While talking about the study's findings, lead author UCSC's Greg Laughlin says, "The innermost realm of our own solar system, by contrast, is completely, mysteriously empty...So it was the context provided by the extrasolar planets that gave us a clue that something is unusual in our own...Our theory predicts that there should be an anti-correlation between the presence of super-Earth planets with short orbital periods, and the presence of a giant planet with an orbital period of roughly a year or more," Laughlin said. "The validity of this anti-correlation should be testable with NASA's TESS Mission, currently planned for launch in 2017."
Findings of the study were published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.
Ah. I see it now. ;)
Did you notice that there’s no indication of any historical involvement. Perish the thought.
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.
