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

Skip to comments.

Looking for other Earths? Here’s a list
msnbc.com ^ | 02/19/06 | Alan Boyle

Posted on 02/19/2006 12:10:25 PM PST by KevinDavis

ST. LOUIS - An astronomer involved in a NASA mission to look for Earthlike planets beyond our solar system has winnowed through thousands of stars to come up with a top-10 list that includes some of the favorite haunts for science-fiction aliens.

Actually, the lineup from Margaret Turnbull at the Carnegie Institute of Washington is broken down into two top-five lists: one for the radio-based search for extraterrestrial intelligence, or SETI, and the other for the NASA mission, known as the Terrestrial Planet Finder.

The SETI stars will be on the list of targets for the privately funded Allen Telescope Array in California, which is due to begin limited operation with 42 linked radio dishes this spring. But the top prospects for the Terrestrial Planet Finder are currently in limbo, because NASA has put the mission on indefinite hold.

(Excerpt) Read more at msnbc.msn.com ...


TOPICS: Miscellaneous; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: artbell; earth; earth2; exoplanets; space; tauceti; xplanets
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-117 next last
To: andy58-in-nh

Beagles are like that, aren't they?

They are basically the canine equivalent of hobbits. :P


41 posted on 02/20/2006 8:35:15 AM PST by Constantine XIII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: RockinRight; All

I have a feeling that there is habitale planet in either Alpha Centauri A or Alpha Centuari B... Alpha Centauri has always interest me to..


42 posted on 02/20/2006 8:42:53 AM PST by KevinDavis (http://www.cafepress.com/spacefuture)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: longshadow
Since you refuse to click on the link and read the tutorial, the astute reader will conclude that your ignorance is self-induced. Ignorance is to be overcome, not celebrated. If you wish to live your life with your head in the sand, no one can force to you to learn anything.

Apparently, no one can force YOU to learn some manners.

And if you're brazenly going to assume that the sum total of human knowledge in any way represents a significant fraction of the number of things still left to discover and know, I could introduce you to a number of great thinkers in the centuries and millenia gone by that all made exactly the same ignorant mistake. Learn from THEM.
43 posted on 02/20/2006 8:52:08 AM PST by beezdotcom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: longshadow
I suppose it is appropriate under the circumstances to trot out my essay about the anti-knowledge Luddite

No, it's really NOT appropriate, at least not with the apparent target you've chosen. For some reason, you're so embittered over this topic that you launch on a hair-trigger at someone who made a mild (if weak) philosophical observation. Get over it.
44 posted on 02/20/2006 8:55:51 AM PST by beezdotcom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: longshadow
Young Bobby Dear Gods of Science.

How many planets have your awesome majesties discovered?

Signed,
Young Bobby

Longshadow To Our Most-Respectful and Loving Little Ignorant Peon Bobby,

The number of planets? What a question! Surely there will be billions and trillions, each with thriving extraterrestrial civilizations far more advanced then yours. Where Scientists, such as We, your Gods, rule!

However because Luddite politicians in YOUR puny backward culture have not opened the entire treasury of your nation to us, young Bobby, so far our efforts over ten years plus have only turned up 150 ir so! All because of the backwards religious anti-science bias of your mud-pit culture, young man.

Sincerely,
The Gods of Science
45 posted on 02/20/2006 10:12:52 AM PST by bvw (This is an Image and spelling enhanced re-posting)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry

"Festival of Unknowledge" placemarker


46 posted on 02/20/2006 10:13:30 AM PST by longshadow (FReeper #405, entering his ninth year of ignoring nitwits, nutcases, and recycled newbies)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry; RadioAstronomer
Gee, if we know so little about how the Universe works as the anti-knowledge trolls suggest, how do they explain the following:

For the benefit of the lurkers, the graph depicted above represents the black-body radiation curve for Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation (CMBR), which was predicted by the Big Bang Theory. Overlayed on the graph are the ACTUAL data of the measured CMBR. The error bars you see on the data points are exaggerated by a factor of 400 just to make them visible. IOW, for those who are brain dead, the actual data is such a close fit to the predicted values, it is virtually impossible to see any deviation from the predicted value AT ALL.

The challenge for the purveyors of unknowledge to whom I referred previously is to explain how the theory was able to make such a stunningly accurate prediction, if we know so little about how the Universe works. But I'm not holding my breath for an answer....

47 posted on 02/20/2006 10:34:48 AM PST by longshadow (FReeper #405, entering his ninth year of ignoring nitwits, nutcases, and recycled newbies)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: NCC-1701

*THIS* IS SETI ALPHA 5!!!!!!


48 posted on 02/20/2006 10:37:13 AM PST by relictele
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: relictele

Ok Khan, calm down.

ROTFLMAO!


49 posted on 02/20/2006 10:43:59 AM PST by NCC-1701 (RADICAL ISLAM IS A CULT. IT MUST BE ELIMINATED FROM THE FACE OF THE EARTH.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: longshadow
The challenge for the purveyors of unknowledge to whom I referred previously is to explain how the theory was able to make such a stunningly accurate prediction, if we know so little about how the Universe works. But I'm not holding my breath for an answer....

How do you walk around with such a friggin' big chip on your shoulder? Your strawman doesn't make much sense - we may still know so little, but we obviously know ENOUGH about enough things to make some accurate predictions. In mechanics alone, Newton's laws were stunningly accurate to the level of precision achievable by the science of the day...until finally, science achieved a level of precision that exposed quantum effects at one extreme, and relativistic effects at the other. In retrospect, it sure seems like there was an AWFUL LOT more to know than just Newton's laws.

To carry your rant to its extreme, we must already be so close to knowing everything that we should really defund most science, and just leave one or two scientists funded to "close up shop" - you know, dot the occasional 'i' or cross the occasional 't'. Which, of course, is poppycock.

At best, it's a draw. Until you actually know EVERYTHING, you really can't quite know how much you still don't know. If you want to heavily fund science, you had best make the case that there's still an awful lot left to discover. Or, you could just continue to finish working out Ptolemy's epicycles - I'm sure the equations are very nearly finished.
50 posted on 02/20/2006 10:56:09 AM PST by beezdotcom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: longshadow
When I contemplate how little we know, my brain goes slack, I get a great feeling, and I wet my pants.
</luddite mode>
51 posted on 02/20/2006 11:30:05 AM PST by PatrickHenry (Virtual Ignore for trolls, lunatics, dotards, scolds, & incurable ignoramuses.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: andy58-in-nh
By the way, would you happen to know which of these planets is the one Al Gore is on?

Uranus.

52 posted on 02/20/2006 11:34:34 AM PST by OB1kNOb ("All you get from our media is controversy, crap and confusion.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: longshadow

I like my rant better. :-)

hehe


53 posted on 02/20/2006 11:38:00 AM PST by RadioAstronomer (Senior member of Darwin Central)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: billbears

Why waste money on any astronomy programs? Lets shut it all down. /sarc.


54 posted on 02/20/2006 11:39:24 AM PST by RadioAstronomer (Senior member of Darwin Central)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: OB1kNOb
Uranus.

Ah: it's always the last place you look. ;-)

55 posted on 02/20/2006 11:40:47 AM PST by andy58-in-nh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: RadioAstronomer
Why waste money on any astronomy programs? Lets shut it all down. /sarc.

If people keep bristling at (and rejecting) the idea that there's a large percentage of knowledge left to learn, it MAY get shut down.

(Thus completing the sentence "WE NOW KNOW EVERYTHING...that we're ever going to have the chance to learn, since we talked ourselves out of our funding.")
56 posted on 02/20/2006 11:47:57 AM PST by beezdotcom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: andy58-in-nh

Sorry. I just couldn't resist letting an algore/Uranus opportunity slip by. :-)


57 posted on 02/20/2006 11:48:37 AM PST by OB1kNOb ("All you get from our media is controversy, crap and confusion.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: beezdotcom

Where did I say such a thing?


58 posted on 02/20/2006 11:49:41 AM PST by RadioAstronomer (Senior member of Darwin Central)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: RadioAstronomer

You may have added /sarc but I have no problem with it whatsoever. If there are advances to be made at it and it is profitable to do so, then private industry will take it over. In fact I would hope they do so. Either way, shut down federal funding of it.


59 posted on 02/20/2006 11:49:48 AM PST by billbears (Deo Vindice)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
When I contemplate how little we know, my brain goes slack, I get a great feeling, and I wet my pants.

Improper use of the word "luddite" will soil your diapers every time. Opining about how little or how much we know has little to do with how aggressively we pursue and embrace new knowledge.

Wait, scratch that - someone who is already convinced that we know nearly everything might be more easily tempted to resist spending more money on new science to gain new knowledge that simply may NOT be out there (why spend 90% of your money on that last 10% of knowledge?). Maybe there IS a valid use of that word to be found in this thread...to describe those who find "dangerous" the concept that there might be even MORE knowledge awaiting science than has already been discovered.
60 posted on 02/20/2006 11:57:46 AM PST by beezdotcom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-117 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