Earthlike planets may be common

[Boris_Badenov]

Earthlike planets may be common<br />Gassy planets may help encourage formation of Earthlike planets<br /> <br />WASHINGTON - Earthlike planets covered with deep oceans that could harbor life may be found in as many as a third of solar systems discovered outside of our own, U.S. researchers said Thursday.<br />These solar systems feature gas giants known as "Hot Jupiters," which orbit extremely close to their parent stars — even closer than Mercury to our sun, University of Colorado researcher Sean Raymond said.<br />The close-orbiting gassy planets may help encourage the formations of smaller, rocky, Earthlike planets, they reported in the journal Science.<br />"We now think there is a new class of ocean-covered, and possibly habitable, planets in solar systems unlike our own," Raymond said in a statement.<br />The team from Colorado, Penn State University and NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center Maryland ran computer simulations of various types of solar systems forming.<br />The gas giants may help rocky planets form close to the suns, and may help pull in icy bodies that deliver water to the young planets, they found.<br />"These gas giants cause quite a ruckus," Raymond said.<br />Water is key to life as humans define it.<br />"I think there are definitely habitable planets out there," Raymond said. "But any life on these planets could be very different from ours. There are a lot of evolutionary steps in between the formation of such planets in other systems and the presence of life forms looking back at us."<br />As many as 40 percent of the 200 or so known planets around other stars are Hot Jupiters, the researchers said.<br />Copyright 2006 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved. Republication or redistribution of Reuters content is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Reuters.<br />http://msnbc.msn.com/id/14723242/<br /><br /><br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font color="#993300"><span class="body"><font size="2" color="#3366ff"><div align="center">. </div><div align="center">Never roll in the mud with a pig. You'll both get dirty & the pig likes it.</div></font></span></font> </div>

 

[newtonian]

Boris1961 - That is certainly a different estimate from what I have heard in the past!<br /><br />Curious as to what the proposed chemical pathways to life in water would be? My understanding is that while water is necessary for the sustaining of life, nevertheless water is an enemy of many steps in various chemical pathways to life.<br /><br />One reason is that HCN and derivatives up the ladder (aka chemical pathways) react with water to end pathways as far as chemical evolution is concerned.<br /><br />That, nonetheless, leaves many possible worlds where life similar to as we know it could have been created and be sustained - especially considering extremophiles.<br /><br />Note, however, that the sustaining of life on earth is in part due to the protection of Jupiter - it is in good position to protect earth from asteroid and comet impacts.<br /><br />A Jupiter in a Mercury type orbit would draw in asteroids and comets to cross an earthlike orbital path, which would be disastrous to most forms of life.<br /><br />It is not just water which makes earth ideal, especially for our type of life (mammals, etc.) - notably rotation speed and a moon in position to stabilize earth's rotational plane, etc.<br /><br />To me earthlike means fine tuned to make human life enjoyable, in harmony with:<br /><br />(Psalm 115:16) . . .As regards the heavens, to Jehovah the heavens belong, But the earth he has given to the sons of men.<br /><br />In other words: the properties of earth are fine tuned to make life enjoyable for mankind.<br /><br />However, who knows what new (to us) forms of life may have been created in watery worlds like Europa, etc.!

 

[Boris_Badenov]

<font color="yellow"> To me earthlike means fine tuned to make human life enjoyable </font><br /><br /> I think it is pretty safe to say, we evolved here, we will never find another planet where we will be "fine tuned" to suvive. The only extrasolar, earthlike planets that we find will be just that, "earthlike", not like Earth. The Solar Systems they are found in will be just as different as the planets as well. But we must look before we find any at all. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font color="#993300"><span class="body"><font size="2" color="#3366ff"><div align="center">. </div><div align="center">Never roll in the mud with a pig. You'll both get dirty & the pig likes it.</div></font></span></font> </div>

 

[qso1]

I tend to think fine tuned earthlike worlds are relatively rare. A range of planets called earthlike will eventually emerge from tomorrows astronomers. Worlds with atmospheres perhaps similar to ours in N2/O2 content but with maybe less pressure. Worlds with 71% land coverage as opposed to Earths 71% water coverage. Earths with significantly greater weather extremes.<br /><br />Most of these worlds having microbiological life forms, a smaller percentage having plant and animal life but maybe no human like beings. Then once in awhile you might stumble across a world with human level intelligence. But then, they may still be well behind us technologically. Human level intelligence may be pretty rare. All speculation at this point.<br /><br />Boris1961:<br />But we must look before we find any at all. <br /><br />Me:<br />You can bet the farm that there are plenty of eyes engaged in that search. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <p><strong>My borrowed quote for the time being:</strong></p><p><em>There are three kinds of people in life. Those who make it happen, those who watch it happen...and those who do not know what happened.</em></p> </div>

 

[newtonian]

Boris1961 - I see you believe opposite to me on the cause, but we agree on the effect.<br /><br />Again I ask, how does water help life to originate chemically - assuming you believe in chemical evolution rather than intelligent design?<br /><br />I will get more specific on why water is an enemy of chemical evolution scenarios - zeroing in on chemical pathways to proteins - which follow basically this path:<br /><br />HCN polymerization to amino acids to polypeptides with increasing complexity to proteins (not so easy, btw, or chemists would be creating proteins in this way).<br /><br />To be more specific, 4 main chemical pathways are likely starting with HCN:<br /><br />1. Via HCN tetramer to amino acids, purines, pyrimidines.<br /><br />2. Via nitriles to aminonitriles to amino acids to polypeptides.<br /><br />3. Via cyanamide to Dicyandiamide to amino acids, purines, pyrimidines, porphyrins, polymers, condensing agents.<br /><br />4. Via cyanoacetylene to amino acids, pyrimidines, cyanovinylphosphate.<br /><br />However, in the presence of water HCN often is stopped at the very first step, as follows:<br /><br />HCN + H2O (water) yields Formamide - H3CO<br /><br />Formamide- H3CO + H2O yields Formic acid-HCOOH + NH3 (ammonia).<br /><br />A small amount of HCN may pass this hurdle to one of the above 4 pathways to proteins - but then water is an enemy again. For example:<br /><br />1 HCN to Cyanomide:<br /><br />1A - Cyanomide isomerized (same atomic ingredients, different sequence and shape) to Carbodiimide + H2O to Urea (like ammonia, an evolutionary dead end).<br /><br />1B. HCN to Cyanamide + H2O yields Urea <br /><br />2. HCN +H2O to Formamide + H2O to Formic acid.<br /><br />3. HCN to cyanoacetylene + H2O to cyanoacetaldehide.<br /><br />There is much more - see "The Mystery of LIfe's Origen: Reassessing Current Theories," 1984, by Charles B. Thaxton (chemist [& molecular biology]); Walter L. Bradley (materials scientist {& mechanical engineering)}, and Roger L. Olsen (Geochemi

 

[Boris_Badenov]

<font color="orange">(Boris bangs his head on the desk to stop his eyes from spinning around so fast!!!</font><br /> Whoa, your chemistry skills are waaaaaay beyond mine<img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" />, while I find that level of technical expertise obsequious<img src="/images/icons/wink.gif" />, I could not hope to match it. <br /> What I am saying, is simply, there will be plenty of other Earths for us to explore once we reach the level of technology needed to reach them.<br /> <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font color="#993300"><span class="body"><font size="2" color="#3366ff"><div align="center">. </div><div align="center">Never roll in the mud with a pig. You'll both get dirty & the pig likes it.</div></font></span></font> </div>

 

[Boris_Badenov]

SDC finaly picked the story up<img src="/images/icons/smile.gif" /> <br /><br />http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/060912_earthling_planets.html <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> <font color="#993300"><span class="body"><font size="2" color="#3366ff"><div align="center">. </div><div align="center">Never roll in the mud with a pig. You'll both get dirty & the pig likes it.</div></font></span></font> </div>