Another Day, Another Exoplanet, and Scientists Just Can't Keep Up

[Admin]

As finding alien worlds has gotten easier, learning every single detail scientists can has become, perhaps surprisingly, a bit of a waste of the precious time of instruments and computers alike.

Another Day, Another Exoplanet, and Scientists Just Can't Keep Up : Read more

 

[rod]

As finding alien worlds has gotten easier, learning every single detail scientists can has become, perhaps surprisingly, a bit of a waste of the precious time of instruments and computers alike.

Another Day, Another Exoplanet, and Scientists Just Can't Keep Up : Read more

"To date, scientists have discovered 4,104 confirmed exoplanets." My comment - The system of record or canonical database used to cite this figure should be identified in the report. This site lists 4150 exoplanets as confirmed now, The Extrasolar Planets Encyclopaedia Some exoplanets considered habitable are now known to have real problems with this concept too, Researchers discover exoplanets can be made less habitable by stars' flares, some other reports Even 'Goldilocks' exoplanets need a well-behaved star, ["To most people, a 'habitable zone' planet traditionally means it has just the right temperature for liquid water," Farrish said. "But in these specific systems, the planets are so close to their stars that there are other considerations. In particular, the magnetic interaction becomes very important." These "Goldilocks" planets may enjoy temperatures and atmospheric pressures that allow life-giving water to exist, but likely orbit too close to their stars to escape the effects of the star's strong magnetic fields and the associated radiation.]

The exoplanet database I site showing 4150 exoplanets confirmed, these range in distance 4 light-years from earth to 35882 light-years away from earth. So far, none are confirmed as having life (any form) living on those exoplanets.

 

[Jason Roberts]

It's wonderful that we have to prioritise observation of exoplanets... Who would have thought it back in the 90s when the first planets outside of our solar system were discovered....

I think we are on the brink of finding life on exoplanets, certainly if it exists we will know if or if not very soon.

 

[arturner29]

"To date, scientists have discovered 4,104 confirmed exoplanets." My comment - The system of record or canonical database used to cite this figure should be identified in the report. This site lists 4150 exoplanets as confirmed now, The Extrasolar Planets Encyclopaedia Some exoplanets considered habitable are now known to have real problems with this concept too, Researchers discover exoplanets can be made less habitable by stars' flares, some other reports Even 'Goldilocks' exoplanets need a well-behaved star, ["To most people, a 'habitable zone' planet traditionally means it has just the right temperature for liquid water," Farrish said. "But in these specific systems, the planets are so close to their stars that there are other considerations. In particular, the magnetic interaction becomes very important." These "Goldilocks" planets may enjoy temperatures and atmospheric pressures that allow life-giving water to exist, but likely orbit too close to their stars to escape the effects of the star's strong magnetic fields and the associated radiation.]

The exoplanet database I site showing 4150 exoplanets confirmed, these range in distance 4 light-years from earth to 35882 light-years away from earth. So far, none are confirmed as having life (any form) living on those exoplanets.

We cannot yet confirm or deny any life on any exoplanet. We don't have the technology to do it. Why jump to conclusions before we know anything?

 

[arturner29]

It's wonderful that we have to prioritise observation of exoplanets... Who would have thought it back in the 90s when the first planets outside of our solar system were discovered....

I think we are on the brink of finding life on exoplanets, certainly if it exists we will know if or if not very soon.

We will never know it does not exist, unless we look at every single planet in the universe and find nothing. All we can do, once we have to tools (we don't have them yet, and it won't be soon), is start looking at planets we know about, and eliminate them, life or not, one by one. If we never find any life on 1000, or 1000000, or 1 billion planets, that still doesn't prove it doesn't exist somewhere else. All it proves is it doesn't exist on the ones we looked at. We do know it exists on 1 planet in the universe for sure, ours, at least for now. But since we are in the process of turning this one planet into another Venus, if this happens to be the only planet where life took hold in the entire universe, what a tragedy that would be for us to so greedily and callously wipe it and us out.

 

[rod]

We cannot yet confirm or deny any life on any exoplanet. We don't have the technology to do it. Why jump to conclusions before we know anything?

I am not jumping to conclusions. I am using the scientific method, the same method that *confirmed* the existence of 4150 exoplanets (measurable, verifiable and testable). By using the 4150 exoplanets as an example, the scientific method has not *confirmed* life on these exoplanets or anywhere else in the universe other than on Earth - at this time. That is an observation.

 

[rod]

A quick follow up to what I just said about not jumping to conclusions. The 4150 exoplanets I cited from the source, most are detected by the primary transit method, 2972, radial velocity method, 870 detected, imaging, 135 detected, etc. These methods of exoplanet detection are observable, verifiable, repeatable, and testable.

 

[arturner29]

A quick follow up to what I just said about not jumping to conclusions. The 4150 exoplanets I cited from the source, most are detected by the primary transit method, 2972, radial velocity method, 870 detected, imaging, 135 detected, etc. These methods of exoplanet detection are observable, verifiable, repeatable, and testable.

Ok got it, you were just stating a fact, not reaching a conclusion. If you had said "The scientific method has not confirmed 'or denied' the existence of life on any of these planets", I wouldn't have responded. I've seen and read too many comments leaning towards earth as having the only life in the universe, which I don't agree is a viable conclusion at this time, so I was reading my own bias, and assuming a you were making a conclusion (no life), in your statement. My apologies.