Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Sidewinders Bar & Grille' started by CalicoSkies, Aug 8, 2018.
I think we only care about Pluto because of Schoolhouse Rock and that cartoon dog. When they decided Pluto isn't a planet, it was because they had just discovered a bunch of other little frozen space rocks that are about as much candidates for being planets as Pluto is. They had to define the term, or else no way our elementary school students will remember them all.
So "planet" was defined to mean a round object (not an asteroid) that has cleared its orbital plane. Pluto hasn't.
Now that they've discovered a "rogue planet" that doesn't have a star, the definition is going to need some tweaking.
I saw an article about the rogue planet recently. But I don't think that's the first/only rogue planet that has ever been discovered.. I seem to remember reading about rogue planets several years ago, so I thought rogue planets were known about already.
In 4th or 5th grade I had to do a report on a planet...I chose Pluto. Being the furthest from the sun it had a mysterious quality that appealed to me.
Bummer it was demoted from planet status.
This close-up view shows the galaxy MACS0647-JD, the farthest object yet known, as it appears through a gravitational lens imaged by the Hubble Space Telescope. The galaxy is 13.3 billion light-years from Earth and formed 420 million years after the Big Bang.
Credit: NASA, ESA, M. Postman and D. Coe (STScI), and the CLASH Team
Like pollen in the wind...
I saw this yesterday - What the planets in our solar system would look like if they were as close as the moon:
This is what the moon looks like from our planet:
If Jupiter was as close as the moon:
And here's a video someone made that is similar:
Me too. In fact, we have (disputed) evidence there's been bacterial life on Mars. And then there's all the other life on Earth...
IMO it's highly likely there's other life around other stars. But Drake's estimation that there are 50,000 civilizations advanced enough to use radio in the Milky Way alone--I don't buy that one. Because, where is everybody? The Drake Equation sounds all sciencey, but it's really just speculation. In particular the assumption that a civilization that send out radio signals will keep doing so, on average, for 10,000 years.
With more modern numbers derived from the hunt for exoplanets, there are likely 11 billion rocky planets in the habitable zone of stars in our Milky Way. I personally believe life will find a way virtually everywhere there's liquid water for more than a few thousand years. But even if there's bacteria on 11 billion worlds, how often does life advance to multicellular? That took 3.5 billion years on Earth. From multicellular to intelligent? And BTW intelligence is pretty relative. There are a number of animals that are as smart as an average 3 or 4-year-old human: parrots, octopi, all of the primates, dolphins, elephants... All of which suggests intelligence will arise pretty frequently. But then, making the jump from intelligent to technological has only happened once on Earth that we know of. My guess is there's bacteria on 10 billion planets in our galaxy, animal-level intelligence that may well kick our asses if we ever go there on a billion planets in our galaxy, but radio-level technology on 3-5.
Yeah, if we were lucky our planet would tide-lock and orbit Jupiter, and we'd get a day/night cycle like what our moon gets. More likely our whole planet would just fall in.
The thing with the Drake Equation is that you can plug in whatever values you want into it for the probabilities and numbers, based on what estimates you think are good. You can use more conservative numbers and get a lower result, or more optimistic numbers and get a higher result. Astronomers keep discovering more and more planets and galaxies out there though (which I think we knew intuitively that they must exist, but haven't verified), so I'd think our estimated probability and possible number of intelligent civilizations out there may keep going up.
I agree that it does seem a bit odd that we haven't seen any (or much?) evidence, assuming other civilizations really are out there. That's the Fermi paradox - The lack of evidence of other civilizations, even though we estimate that there are others that should be out there. But there may be reasons for that.. Stars and galaxies are very far apart, and sometimes it takes millions of years just for the light of another star to reach us. Perhaps radio signals from some other civilizations just haven't reached us yet (and similarly, our radio signals might not have reached certain other civilizations yet). Or, perhaps they have used a different communications technology. Or, they may have died out long before humanity developed on earth. Or, we may have developed relatively early and there might not be very many other civilizations that have developed elsewhere in the universe yet.
The other thing about the Drake Equation is that any non-zero variables, no matter how small, still suggest there’s a lot out there.
What exists in the Milky Way and what exists in the whole universe are entirely different kettles of fish. I would expect that technological life comes into being at least once per galaxy. Not that they'll still be around by the time their radio gets to us, and nor will we still be around by the time our radio gets to them. And a radio signal from another galaxy is going to be way too faint to pick up.
The Milky Way is 100,000 light years across, and we're 26,400 light years from the center. We only started broadcasting in 1922, so our first broadcast has reached out to 96 light years. Most of the galaxy has no reason to know we're here, even if they happen to be intelligent. There are only 133 stars within 50 light years, so only 133 stars that could have sent an answer to our 1922 broadcast and had it arrive by now.
“Two possibilities exist: either we are alone in the Universe or we are not. Both are equally terrifying.”
Arthur C Clarke
Here's a fun bit of astronomy, and ties back to relative sizes.
I'm a life long astronomy fan as well. Every time (every time!) I look up at the stars, I see infinite possibilities and a longing to see just a handful of them come to fruition in person.
For those of you who have smart phones, if you dont have the "Skyview" app, you must get it. It uses your camera to show a live view of what the camera is pointed at, and layers all stars, planets and constellations on top of the view so you get a real time view of the heavens.
As for documentaries...
Does anyone else get annoyed when scientists spout out their theories like they are fact? Such as: life can not exist without water, etc...? It seems that scientific theories are being disproven every day.
The building blocks for life as we know it are perhaps not universal.
Scientists have built this cozy little box they live in with laws and rules of what it takes to start life, and can not wander into realms that are outside of their set rules.
Can life initiate in an acidic atmosphere with no water? There are an INFINITE combination of variables, and perhaps one of the trillion of heavenly bodies out there had the right combination of elements to start life in an atmosphere our scientists deemed "impossible".
Scientists limiting the physical conditions to support life, is in my opinion, narrow minded and self centered.
Scientists used to theorize that life couldnt exist in the deepest reaches of the ocean. I remember when scientists said that micro chips could only go so fast...
I hear that sometimes, and it sounds a little odd.. But other times, I hear them say "known life can't exist without water", which at least acknowledges that there might be a type of life we don't know of that could exist without water. And I hear the same about life and oxygen too.. And carbon..
I just wish one reputable scientist would give a clear nod to the possibility of life ouside of our known laws of life science. It may torpedo their credibility within their scientific circle, but it could also reward him/her with unknown opportunities and reap incredible rewards.
Yeah, I think an important part of science (and life in general) is to acknowledge that we don't know everything.. Scientists of all people should know that - Science is all about making a hypothesis and testing if it's right or wrong. Perhaps we tend to feel too confident when we learn something.
Pulverized and turned into a ring component ?
It all depends on just how the proximity was initiated, I guess; fast or slow.
I'd like to live near Saturn. It's quite beautiful, what with the rings and all.
NASA has just released this new image:
I'm more concerned about our species living long enough to explore beyond the solar system. Who knows what mysteries we will find when (if!) we travel beyond Earth!
Complete nonsense of course as having Saturn as close as the moon is would mean certain death for Earth very quickly. But fascinating nonsense! And truly beautiful too. Thanks for that - the idea had never occurred to me.