Earth 2 Anyone?

[holmec]

It seems fun, but its disturbing when thats all they can come up with. Can't we use something for a lens??? Gravitational field out there or something? People aslso talk about nano tech but in this areana of space we are the nano tech, istnt there some technique we in nano tech that we could apply here?? Dont we know more things about light than to be resorted to a pin hole camera?<br /><br />I think there should be a smarter way. <br /><br />In fact Ill give you one. How about a string of telescopes for 100yards working together and orbiting the earth or sun. In one orbit you will get a high resolution picture and more managable than a gigantic pin hole camera. The basic problem with pinholes is that the amount of light you get is very small. I would think some type of array of telescopes would work better and be more managable. <br /><br />Here is another one. How about one telescope on a track on which it can move. The track in turn rotates (like a baton for a cheerleader) with a the help of a counter weight. You can make the track as big as you like, or if need be arc it so the telescope will get as much of the sky as possible. This will use a raster (like on your CRT, though this one will be in a radial pattern) to collect as much sky as possible. It also uses two things that are very common in space, rotation and time. As opposed to using as much material as possible to produce a pin hole camera. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#0000ff"><em>"SCE to AUX" - John Aaron, curiosity pays off</em></font></p> </div>

 

[toymaker]

Well Kepler mission will be launched in 2008.<br />http://planetquest.jpl.nasa.gov/Kepler/kepler_index.html

 

[mrmorris]

<font color="yellow">"...all the others have had a 'hot Jupiter' in an eccentric orbit..."</font><br /><br />That should be 'many of...', not 'all'. Numerous of the systems had a hot jupiter in a <b>close</b> orbit, but not necessarily an eccentric one. One of the SDC articles a while back was about a study of the known extra-solar planetary systems and their models indicated that about 50% of them could have a planet in a stable orbit in the water zone.

 

[holmec]

Good. With any luck we will have an earth like planet detected by 2010. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#0000ff"><em>"SCE to AUX" - John Aaron, curiosity pays off</em></font></p> </div>

 

[holmec]

what is the relationship between an astroid belt and a Jupiter like planet??<br /><br />Do we fully understand the anatomy of a solar system and the rules of the creation of one? <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p> </p><p><font color="#0000ff"><em>"SCE to AUX" - John Aaron, curiosity pays off</em></font></p> </div>

 

[najab]

True. Though given the fact that close in Jupiter-like planets have been detected by the 'wobble' they induce in their host star, I wonder what effect that would have on any Earth-like planets?<br /><br />I'm guessing that those systems are not likely to have habitable planets: if there's a Jupiter-mass planet close in, I'm guessing that any Earth-mass planet would either be swallowed by or ejected from the system by the larger one(s). Although one interesting idea is that the hot Jupiter's might have habitable moons.

 

[larper]

What najab is saying is that you cannot (probably not) have both an asteroid belt and a Jupiter sized planet in a highly eccentric orbit.<br /><br />We have an asteroid belt and a Jupiter, but our Jupiter is in a nearly circular orbit, and so the asteroid belt is preserved.<br /><br />The existence of an asteroid belt around another star indicates that there is no "eccentric Jupiter", and so the chances of terrestial planets in earth-like orbits are improved. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong><font color="#ff0000">Vote </font><font color="#3366ff">Libertarian</font></strong></p> </div>

 

[mrmorris]

<font color="yellow">" I wonder what effect that would have on any Earth-like planets?"</font><br /><br />The wobble is minute. The reason it's detectable isn't because it's big, but because it occurs often enough that scientists are able to see multiple repetitions of it.<br /><br /><font color="yellow">"I'm guessing that those systems are not likely to have habitable planets"</font><br /><br />I'm not guessing at all. Admittedly I'm <b>assuming</b> that the scientists who created the modele in this article know what they're doing. That may or may not be a <b>good</b> assumption, but it's either that or assume that they are ignorant without having sufficient knowledge to make that particular call.<br /><br /><font color="yellow">"I'm guessing that any Earth-mass planet would either be swallowed by or ejected from the system by the larger one(s). "</font><br /><br />From the article:<br /><br /><i>"In the new work, researchers created hypothetical giant planets and found that each creates two disaster zones -- one inside its orbit (closer to the star) and one outside. A fledgling Earth in either zone will either be lured into a collision with the larger planet, will hit the star, or will be tossed out to the cold, dead, far suburbs of the system.<br /><br />...<br /><br />The scientists then applied these rules to real planetary systems. Several of the known extrasolar setups involve a "hot Jupiter," a planet roughly the mass of Jupiter in a very tight orbit around its star. These worlds see a year go by in less than a week.<br /><br />The computer-generated disaster zones, particular to each actual star and its giant planet, were compared to that star's habitable zone to see if there were any safe havens -- stable orbital routes within habitable zones.<br /><br />When the computer model was run, about half of the known systems allowed a safe haven over a long en</i>

 

[yurkin]

<font color="yellow">such that it is in lockstep with the hot Jupiter around the sun such that it is always on the side of the planet opposite the sun.</font><br /><br />What you’re describing there is a halo orbit of the quasi-moon around the Sun-Planet L2 point. It’s certainly possible, Mars has one.<br /><br />But I don’t think it’s needed. The orbital period for a moon of gas giant is around a 10 days. So if it’s tidally locked the day night cycle is only that long. So the temperature should be evenly distributed provided there’s a thick enough atmosphere. The poles of Earth are in darkness for longer then that and life still lives there.<br />

 

[toymaker]

But wouldn't a moon around Jupiter-like planet be subject to constant bombardment by meteorites and asteroids making highly organised life impossible to exist ?

 

[alokmohan]

Moot question is whether you can have moon of jupitor and asteroid belt together.

 

[toymaker]

For those interested about "Earth 2" :<br />http://dsc.discovery.com/convergence/alienplanet/splash.html

 

[R1]

how is the pinhole project doing? I haven't heard any updates.<br /><br />It seems to me like they should combine Kepler with the pinhole project,<br />(and get the results for less $$ and quicker, maybe reassign the saved dollars<br /> and put them to use into getting the pinhole camera sooner, in the event<br /> that Kepler can be retired before it even launches)<br /><br /><br />it seems like we're trying to schedule an expensive launch of a Kepler bicycle, when we already have plans to launch a turbo motorcycle pinhole camera.<br /><br />Its reminds me of developing an expensive shuttle STS program to delay building the earth-moon-mars CEV.<br /><br /><br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>