Nearby star should harbor detectable, Earth-like planets (3/9/2008)

[Swede]

A rocky planet similar to Earth may be orbiting one of our nearest stellar neighbors and could be detected using existing techniques, according to a new study led by astronomers at the University of California, Santa Cruz.

The closest stars to our Sun are in the three-star system called Alpha Centauri, a popular destination for interstellar travel in works of science fiction. UCSC graduate student Javiera Guedes used computer simulations of planet formation to show that terrestrial planets are likely to have formed around the star Alpha Centauri B and to be orbiting in the "habitable zone" where liquid water can exist on the planet's surface. The researchers then showed that such planets could be observed using a dedicated telescope.

http://www.astronomyreport.com/research/Nearby_star_should_harbor_detectable_Earth-like_planets.asp

[Phoonzang]

1. Looks like Sid Meier had it right.

Hopefully we put some effort into searching for potential planets.

[TechBear_Seattle]

2. Keep in mind: "Earth-like" in no way means "human habitable"

One of my pet peeves with science fiction is the wide-spread availability of human habitable worlds. Remember that Earth has had oxygen in its atmosphere for only the last billion of its 4.65 billion years; even then, there are several stretches of tens of millions of years when oxygen levels were low and the amount of methane and carbon dioxide in the air would have asphyxiated humans in a matter of seconds.

Just because a planet is rocky with a lot of surface water does not mean it is immediately ready for human exploration and habitation. :hi:

[txaslftist]

3. Ah, but if life ever existed on one of these worlds,

and that life was "solar-powered" like ours via photosynthesis, then the O2 content should be very much higher than the primordial norm. So the notion of a lot of "earth like" planets would not be absurd unless the notion of an abundancy of life in the universe (or even this part of it) were also absurd. Aside from this, tailored life forms could take advantage of a methane or CO2 dominated atmosphere and rapidly oxygenate it.

So "Inhabitable" could mean either "presently inhabitable" in which case I agree with you that such worlds would be remarkably rare; or it could mean "terraformable"; in which case there could be lots and lots of them out there. Either way, we seem hell bent on destroying our economy, outsourcing our technology and spending any future earnings we might have on broken window things like wars.

Which means any inhabitable worlds out there will likely be terraformed and settled by the Chinese, not Americans. We've piddled away our childrens' interstellar inheritance so that present CEOs could get rich.