There are hundreds of billions of stars in our galaxy that we can see. There are hundreds of billions of galaxies in the universe that we can see. What are the odds that one of them has a rock orbiting a star?
Two Potentially Habitable Earth-Like Planets Discovered Around a Star Near the Sun
near the sun??? WTF...
“not far” is one of those meanings that requires perspective to properly understand it.
16 light years makes them impossible to ever get to.
load up the liberals and ship them out, their utopia awaits.
Dumbest title to a science article ever.
Near should be in quotes because the enraged monkey that can’t even manage its affairs here ain’t getting there before we destroy ourselves.
2 places the Liberals can call home , please move now
Don’t get too excited - any Red Dwarf planets would not be prime real estate - from Wiki, FWIW:
Modern evidence suggests that planets in red dwarf systems are extremely unlikely to be habitable. In spite of their great numbers and long lifespans, there are several factors which may make life difficult on planets around a red dwarf.
First, planets in the habitable zone of a red dwarf would be so close to the parent star that they would likely be tidally locked. For a nearly circular orbit, this would mean that one side would be in perpetual daylight and the other in eternal night.
This could create enormous temperature variations from one side of the planet to the other. Such conditions would appear to make it difficult for forms of life similar to those on Earth to evolve.
And it appears there is a great problem with the atmosphere of such tidally locked planets: the perpetual night zone would be cold enough to freeze the main gases of their atmospheres, leaving the daylight zone bare and dry.
On the other hand though, a theory proposes that either a thick atmosphere or planetary ocean could potentially circulate heat around such a planet
Variability in stellar energy output may also have negative impacts on the development of life. Red dwarfs are often flare stars, which can emit gigantic flares, doubling their brightness in minutes. This variability makes it difficult for life to develop and persist near a red dwarf.
While it may be possible for a planet orbiting close to a red dwarf to keep its atmosphere even if the star flares, more-recent research suggests that these stars may be the source of constant high-energy flares and very large magnetic fields, diminishing the possibility of life as we know it.
A red dwarf star will not support life.
This attempt to scale down the Goldilocks Zone is a joke. 10 and 21 day years? Yikes.
Mass and orbits in an “habitable zone” alone do not define the necessities of being an “Earth like” planet. Even the addition of spectrum of reflected light and “thermal readings” do not provide anything near sufficient data to refer to the planets as “Earth like”.
Far too too many psuedo-science reports are becoming representatives of the non-science of mere wishful thinking.
“Nature seems bent on showing us that Earth-like planets are very common.”
This statement is entirely political which is to say not at all scientific.
It’s no surprise this claim is at the very top of the article.
The purpose of this article is to undermine Biblical faith and to promote communism and Satanism.
XO Planet Ping!................
The above image has a very misleading label in the article. It doesn't show relative distance, but instead where the various planets fall in the habitable zone around their respective stars.
The innermost of the two planets (b) is actually about 20x closer to the red dwarf than Earth is to the sun. The other is about 13x closer.
The problem is Red Dwarves give off massive amounts of radiation which means life is unlikely on any planet revolving around one.
"... a distance of less than 16 light years ....
Who the hell calls 16 light years (94 trillion miles) "near"?