Superhabitable planets

[Admin]

Two dozen so-called superhabitable alien worlds may be as good as or better than Earth for life as we know it.

Superhabitable planets : Read more

 

[rod]

The article identifies two of these exoplanets by name. "All in all, Schulze-Makuch and team identified 24 potentially superhabitable planets. None of these worlds met all the criteria the researchers drew up for superhabitable planets, but one did meet at least two — KOI 5715.01. KOI (Kepler Object of Interest) 5725.01 is a planet about 5.5 billion years old and 1.8 to 2.4 times Earth's diameter orbiting an orange dwarf about 2,965 light-years away. It might have an average surface temperature about 4.3 degrees F (2.4 degrees C) cooler than that of Earth, but if it has more greenhouse gases than Earth to trap heat, it might be superhabitable, the researchers wrote. Schulze-Makuch's own favorite potentially superhabitable world from these 24 was KOI 5554.01. This planet is about 6.5 billion years old, with a diameter 0.72 to 1.29 times that of Earth, orbiting a yellow dwarf about 700 light-years from Earth. "I really liked the average surface temperature — about 27 degrees C [80 degrees F]," Schulze-Makuch said. "And it's probably about Earth's size, and a little bit older than Earth."

These two exoplanet sites do not list as confirmed, The Extrasolar Planets Encyclopaedia (exoplanet.eu) and NASA Exoplanet Archive (caltech.edu)

Perhaps more examination is required. I note what the 2020 paper says here. "In fact, only Kepler 1126 b (KOI 2162) and Kepler-69c (KOI 172.02) are statistically validated planets (Morton et al., 2016). The other objects are unconfirmed Kepler Objects of Interest (KOIs), some of which may turn out to be astrophysical false positives. Even Kepler-69c, whose planetary status has been statistically established, will likely not be the target of future follow-up observations with the James Webb Space Telescope or its successor, potentially LUVIOR. At a distance of almost 2000 light years, it is simply too far away. Our point here is not to identify potential targets for follow-up observations but to illustrate that superhabitable worlds may already be among the planets that have been detected.", ref - In Search for a Planet Better than Earth: Top Contenders for a Superhabitable World, https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/10.1089/ast.2019.2161, 14-Dec-2020.

 

[Helio]

These two exoplanet sites do not list as confirmed, The Extrasolar Planets Encyclopaedia (exoplanet.eu) and NASA Exoplanet Archive (caltech.edu)

Yes, and I've yet to find a site that lists the alternative names to find them.

The article stated: "In addition to looking at planetary systems with yellow dwarf stars like our sun, the scientists also looked at orange dwarf stars, which are cooler, dimmer and less massive than our sun."

I did find for KOI-5715 the Kepler-245 system listed that somewhat matches the distance and RA & Dec. data. And it's for a K-type star, though "orange" as their description doesn't say much other than some would think this as a cooler K-type, and some as an M-type.

But the two planets of Kepler-245 are hotter than Mercury!

KOI-5715 (caltech.edu)

Also, regarding the "yellow dwarf stars like our sun", have I mentioned that it's not a yellow star? At some point, I'd like to adress this issue.

 

[rod]

"The size and mass of a planet can also influence how well it can support life, the researchers wrote. A rocky planet that is larger than Earth would have more habitable surface area, and potentially a thicker, more stable atmosphere. A planet with about 1.5 times Earth's mass would likely retain its interior heat longer, which in turn would help keep its core molten and its protective magnetic field active for a greater timespan in which life might have the chance to arise and evolve."

This is in the article.

The Extrasolar Planets Encyclopaedia (exoplanet.eu), I selected masses 1.4 to 1.6 earth masses and found 7 exoplanets listed in this mass range. They all have very short orbital periods, ranging 0.446 day to 12.76 days. They also show high temperatures calculated, 508 K to 1683 K. Here is the list.

# name
K2-138 f
LTT 1445A c
OGLE-2016-BLG-1195L b
TOI-1442 b
TOI-178 b
TOI-500 b
TOI-561 b

I examined this site, NASA Exoplanet Archive (caltech.edu)

6 fall into this mass range selected. Very short periods too, 1.9 to 9.87 day.

pl_name
GJ 9827 c
LHS 1678 c
LTT 1445 A c
Ross 128 b
TOI-178 b
TOI-270 b

 

[sam85geo]

IMO. The last half billion years, the random, blind workings of Evolution, and five mass extinctions have produced H. Sapiens. Given the variabilities, our species won't be able to independently survive on another planet without an evolutionary change. (That is provided we can get "there" from here). Nonetheless, is nice to know "what's out there" that might be like Earth, our home.

 

[rod]

So far, superhabitable earths or exoplanets remain not confirmed. So far, life on other worlds remains not confirmed. Planet building using gas clouds collapsing is a very destructive process as many reports today show, example. https://forums.space.com/threads/ro...pace-ended-up-on-their-own.54131/#post-564870

 

[Helio]

I selected masses 1.4 to 1.6 earth masses and found 7 exoplanets listed in this mass range. They all have very short orbital periods, ranging 0.446 day to 12.76 days. They also show high temperatures calculated, 508 K to 1683 K. Here is the list.

# name
K2-138 f
LTT 1445A c
OGLE-2016-BLG-1195L b
TOI-1442 b
TOI-178 b
TOI-500 b
TOI-561 b

Using a range between 0.9 and 1.9 (Earth masses), I found only 2 that seem to be in the HZ:
Kepler-22 b [Midway in HZ using std. meth., Teq = 205K. Temp. method puts it 40% beyond outer HZ.]

Kepler-62 f [Just past midway in HZ and Teq = 261K]

I noticed that there are more than 2x as many that have a known radius than have a known mass (3651 and 1604, respectively). So, I'm converting my Exoplanet program to look at radii, not mass.

 

[Helio]

So far, superhabitable earths or exoplanets remain not confirmed.

What do you mean by "not confirmed"?

So far, life on other worlds remains not confirmed. Planet building using gas clouds collapsing is a very destructive process as many reports today show, example.

Yes, but eating a banana is very destructive for the banana but good for you.

 

[rod]

What do you mean by "not confirmed"?

Yes, but eating a banana is very destructive for the banana but good for you.

*What do you mean by "not confirmed"?*

The same standard of confirmation that does not confirm life on any other worlds presently. The same standard of confirmation required to demonstrate that the Earth moves around the Sun and not the Sun moving around the Earth

 

[Helio]

*What do you mean by "not confirmed"?*

The same standard of confirmation that does not confirm life on any other worlds presently. The same standard of confirmation required to demonstrate that the Earth moves around the Sun and not the Sun moving around the Earth

So confirmation of life on exoplanets, not confirmation of exoplanets, Just wanted to be sure.

 

[rod]

So confirmation of life on exoplanets, not confirmation of exoplanets, Just wanted to be sure.

Correct Helio. What I was pointing to is that superhabitable exoplanets, remain to be confirmed and shown as true in nature like Earth can be shown moving around the Sun. We have many examples of exoplanets but confirming and showing any have life on them or can be described as superhabitable is a work in progress

 

[Helio]

Correct Helio. What I was pointing to is that superhabitable exoplanets, remain to be confirmed and shown as true in nature like Earth can be shown moving around the Sun. We have many examples of exoplanets but confirming and showing any have life on them or can be described as superhabitable is a work in progress

Yes, you make a very fair point. We can argue what is habitable and what is not, but what we are really saying is that there is at least a fighting chance for life if the planet is in the zone where liquid water is a sure bet.

But even this last inconclusive claim assumes that the conditions for the planet are indeed right for liquid water. You like to use equilibrium temperatures, and now that I've added to the HZ methods, I had to learn why the range was so cold. They are assuming (requiring?) that the planet will have enough blanket effect to be similar to Earth. Earth's Teq = 255K (13C -1F).

The future advanced studies will likley change all three of the equations used for the HZ.

It may be that there will be several HZs if other compounds other than water prove to offer life, if but microbial life.