Hello? Is there anyone out there?

[RW]

NASA Telescope Reveals Largest Batch of Earth-Size, Habitable-Zone Planets Around Single Star



NASA's Spitzer Space Telescope has revealed the first known system of seven Earth-size planets around a single star. Three of these planets are firmly located in the habitable zone, the area around the parent star where a rocky planet is most likely to have liquid water.



The discovery sets a new record for greatest number of habitable-zone planets found around a single star outside our solar system. All of these seven planets could have liquid water – key to life as we know it – under the right atmospheric conditions, but the chances are highest with the three in the habitable zone.



"This discovery could be a significant piece in the puzzle of finding habitable environments, places that are conducive to life," said Thomas Zurbuchen, associate administrator of the agency's Science Mission Directorate in Washington. "Answering the question 'are we alone' is a top science priority and finding so many planets like these for the first time in the habitable zone is a remarkable step forward toward that goal."

I have no doubt we are not the only life in this universe but I wonder if we will actually be able to find any in our lifetimes.

[Aryan]

You could try going beyond the ice wall in Antarctica but you probably wouldn't like it, too many Nordic, Aryan types live there.

[Anonymous]

NASA Telescope Reveals Largest Batch of Earth-Size, Habitable-Zone Planets Around Single Star



NASA's Spitzer Space Telescope has revealed the first known system of seven Earth-size planets around a single star. Three of these planets are firmly located in the habitable zone, the area around the parent star where a rocky planet is most likely to have liquid water.



The discovery sets a new record for greatest number of habitable-zone planets found around a single star outside our solar system. All of these seven planets could have liquid water – key to life as we know it – under the right atmospheric conditions, but the chances are highest with the three in the habitable zone.



"This discovery could be a significant piece in the puzzle of finding habitable environments, places that are conducive to life," said Thomas Zurbuchen, associate administrator of the agency's Science Mission Directorate in Washington. "Answering the question 'are we alone' is a top science priority and finding so many planets like these for the first time in the habitable zone is a remarkable step forward toward that goal."

I have no doubt we are not the only life in this universe but I wonder if we will actually be able to find any in our lifetimes.

I have no doubt there is other life in the universe too. Is it intelligent or primitive. Maybe we will find out.

[Anonymous]

NASA Telescope Reveals Largest Batch of Earth-Size, Habitable-Zone Planets Around Single Star



NASA's Spitzer Space Telescope has revealed the first known system of seven Earth-size planets around a single star. Three of these planets are firmly located in the habitable zone, the area around the parent star where a rocky planet is most likely to have liquid water.



The discovery sets a new record for greatest number of habitable-zone planets found around a single star outside our solar system. All of these seven planets could have liquid water – key to life as we know it – under the right atmospheric conditions, but the chances are highest with the three in the habitable zone.



"This discovery could be a significant piece in the puzzle of finding habitable environments, places that are conducive to life," said Thomas Zurbuchen, associate administrator of the agency's Science Mission Directorate in Washington. "Answering the question 'are we alone' is a top science priority and finding so many planets like these for the first time in the habitable zone is a remarkable step forward toward that goal."

I have no doubt we are not the only life in this universe but I wonder if we will actually be able to find any in our lifetimes.

I hope so. The entire West can send refugee claimants to these planets.

[RW]

NASA Telescope Reveals Largest Batch of Earth-Size, Habitable-Zone Planets Around Single Star



NASA's Spitzer Space Telescope has revealed the first known system of seven Earth-size planets around a single star. Three of these planets are firmly located in the habitable zone, the area around the parent star where a rocky planet is most likely to have liquid water.



The discovery sets a new record for greatest number of habitable-zone planets found around a single star outside our solar system. All of these seven planets could have liquid water – key to life as we know it – under the right atmospheric conditions, but the chances are highest with the three in the habitable zone.



"This discovery could be a significant piece in the puzzle of finding habitable environments, places that are conducive to life," said Thomas Zurbuchen, associate administrator of the agency's Science Mission Directorate in Washington. "Answering the question 'are we alone' is a top science priority and finding so many planets like these for the first time in the habitable zone is a remarkable step forward toward that goal."

I have no doubt we are not the only life in this universe but I wonder if we will actually be able to find any in our lifetimes.

I have no doubt there is other life in the universe too. Is it intelligent or primitive. Maybe we will find out.

I just wonder if our current space travel impediments will make answering that question impossible.  Like do you think we will ever possess the technology to truly find out?  I'm not so sure.

[Bricktop]

NASA Telescope Reveals Largest Batch of Earth-Size, Habitable-Zone Planets Around Single Star



NASA's Spitzer Space Telescope has revealed the first known system of seven Earth-size planets around a single star. Three of these planets are firmly located in the habitable zone, the area around the parent star where a rocky planet is most likely to have liquid water.



The discovery sets a new record for greatest number of habitable-zone planets found around a single star outside our solar system. All of these seven planets could have liquid water – key to life as we know it – under the right atmospheric conditions, but the chances are highest with the three in the habitable zone.



"This discovery could be a significant piece in the puzzle of finding habitable environments, places that are conducive to life," said Thomas Zurbuchen, associate administrator of the agency's Science Mission Directorate in Washington. "Answering the question 'are we alone' is a top science priority and finding so many planets like these for the first time in the habitable zone is a remarkable step forward toward that goal."

I have no doubt we are not the only life in this universe but I wonder if we will actually be able to find any in our lifetimes.

It is deceptive to consider that simply finding a planet that resembles our own assumes life exists on that planet.



It ignores the extremely high degree of chance that led to life being formed here on Earth.



You do not just require a planet with water. Mars had water. So, I believe, does Europa. You need the ingredients and incredibly tight environment for life to initiate. Our life emerged from a chemical process that took place deep in the ocean, near volcanic outlets.



The odds of that occurring are mathematically astounding. Yet here we are.



The odds that this will happen TWICE in the universe contains so many zeroes you'd need a telescope to see the last from the first.

[GORDY GAMBINO]

What about oxygen ya need that for life as well as fucken trees who make the oxygen.



These scientist cunts know fuck all except to get govt grant for their bullshit.

[Anonymous]

What about oxygen ya need that for life as well as fucken trees who make the oxygen.



These scientist cunts know fuck all except to get govt grant for their bullshit.

If there is life there, we'll charge them a carbon tax.

[Renee]

It's kind of interesting to see that most people can only think in terms of intelligent life as carbon based earth bound biology.



Carl Sagan was of the opinion that it's very difficult to be certain of statements that apply to life on Earth will apply to all life in the universe. The concept that all life in the universe must be carbon based is called "carbon chauvinism". Various non carbon based biochemistries, which are indeed possible, will require a somewhat different set of rules and circumstances for existence. This increases however slightly the odds that we are not alone in the universe.

[Anonymous]

[Blurt]

It is deceptive to consider that simply finding a planet that resembles our own assumes life exists on that planet.



It ignores the extremely high degree of chance that led to life being formed here on Earth.



You do not just require a planet with water. Mars had water. So, I believe, does Europa. You need the ingredients and incredibly tight environment for life to initiate. Our life emerged from a chemical process that took place deep in the ocean, near volcanic outlets.



The odds of that occurring are mathematically astounding. Yet here we are.



The odds that this will happen TWICE in the universe contains so many zeroes you'd need a telescope to see the last from the first.

Source?

[Bricktop]

It is deceptive to consider that simply finding a planet that resembles our own assumes life exists on that planet.



It ignores the extremely high degree of chance that led to life being formed here on Earth.



You do not just require a planet with water. Mars had water. So, I believe, does Europa. You need the ingredients and incredibly tight environment for life to initiate. Our life emerged from a chemical process that took place deep in the ocean, near volcanic outlets.



The odds of that occurring are mathematically astounding. Yet here we are.



The odds that this will happen TWICE in the universe contains so many zeroes you'd need a telescope to see the last from the first.

Source?

http://www.space.com/33374-odds-of-life-emerging-new-equation.html">http://www.space.com/33374-odds-of-life ... ation.html">http://www.space.com/33374-odds-of-life-emerging-new-equation.html



Amongst many.



Your Google broken, cupcake?

[Blurt]

Interesting article, Leo.



But it in no way supports your claim (the claim I was referencing was this one: The odds that this will happen TWICE in the universe contains so many zeroes you'd need a telescope to see the last from the first.)



In fact, the article comes to a conclusion very much the opposite of yours.



The value Pa, which is the probability that life will assemble out of those particular building blocks [that are part of the planet's composition] over a given time, is murkier — and much more interesting. If the value of Pa is very low, it's extremely unlikely that life will form even when the ingredients are there — potentially explaining why humans haven't yet happened to create life in the lab, even if scientists have used the right ingredients, [Columbia University astrophysicist Caleb] Scharf said. But a planet-wide "lab" would increase the odds that life-creating events will occur.



"We might have to wait 100 million years for [a life-creating event] to fall into place just in a test tube," Scharf said. "Whereas on a planet scale, you've got a trillion test tubes — probably even more than that. It's conceivable that, using this equation, playing these games, is hinting at a possible explanation for why we haven't seen life miraculously appearing in our laboratories, that ... there's some subtle thing that has to happen that really doesn't happen often."



And if the scale is larger than planetary, Scharf said, that could further increase the likelihood of life forming.



I suggest you read it again.



Or bone up on abiogenesis.



I'll admit Scharf's equation is fascinating. I've been fascinated by Drake's Equation for decades. This new one is a welcome addition.

[Bricktop]

Interesting article, Leo.



But it in no way supports your claim (the claim I was referencing was this one: The odds that this will happen TWICE in the universe contains so many zeroes you'd need a telescope to see the last from the first.)



In fact, the article comes to a conclusion very much the opposite of yours.



The value Pa, which is the probability that life will assemble out of those particular building blocks [that are part of the planet's composition] over a given time, is murkier — and much more interesting. If the value of Pa is very low, it's extremely unlikely that life will form even when the ingredients are there — potentially explaining why humans haven't yet happened to create life in the lab, even if scientists have used the right ingredients, [Columbia University astrophysicist Caleb] Scharf said. But a planet-wide "lab" would increase the odds that life-creating events will occur.



"We might have to wait 100 million years for [a life-creating event] to fall into place just in a test tube," Scharf said. "Whereas on a planet scale, you've got a trillion test tubes — probably even more than that. It's conceivable that, using this equation, playing these games, is hinting at a possible explanation for why we haven't seen life miraculously appearing in our laboratories, that ... there's some subtle thing that has to happen that really doesn't happen often."



And if the scale is larger than planetary, Scharf said, that could further increase the likelihood of life forming.



I suggest you read it again.



Or bone up on abiogenesis.



I'll admit Scharf's equation is fascinating. I've been fascinated by Drake's Equation for decades. This new one is a welcome addition.

That is your reading.



The point contained therein maintains that the mathematical odds are STILL prodigious.

[shin]

I think extra-terrestrial sentient life, with or without emotional capacity would do good to avoid our increasingly self-polluted blue sphere like the plague.. if they know what's good for them. Seriously, we have a recorded tendency to destroy much of what's around us, move, and then do the same to our new habitat.



We probably wouldn't play well with others once we saw something to gain from taking their bounties and removing them from the equation.