They found an earth'like planet, but its a little far for us to get there in one life time.
Announcement
Collapse
Natural Science 301 Guidelines
This is an open forum area for all members for discussions on all issues of science and origins. This area will and does get volatile at times, but we ask that it be kept to a dull roar, and moderators will intervene to keep the peace if necessary. This means obvious trolling and flaming that becomes a problem will be dealt with, and you might find yourself in the doghouse.
As usual, Tweb rules apply. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.
Forum Rules: Here
As usual, Tweb rules apply. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.
Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less
The have found another Goldilocks world!
Collapse
X
-
The have found another Goldilocks world!
Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:
go with the flow the river knows . . .
Frank
I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.Tags: None
-
Originally posted by demi-conservative View Post"earthlike" " 5,600 degrees Fahrenheit"
So even though this planet is a lot closer to than star, than the Earth is to the sun, it might not have a wild temperature. It just means that red dwarf stars have a goldilock zone much closer to them.
The bigger problem is the amount of ionizing radiation it would be experiencing. That could be problematic, and might just keep those planets sterilized.
Update:
Here's the source article https://www.sciencedaily.com/release...0220130456.htm
The calculated temperature of the planet at that distance is 319K +/- 28KLast edited by Leonhard; 03-01-2020, 05:07 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Leonhard View PostThat's the temperature of the star the planet is orbiting. Which is significant because that's 56% the temperature of our own sun. The Stefan-Boltzmann law states that the heat irradiating from a blackbody is proportional to the temperature to the fourth power, so that means it gives off only 10% of the heat our own sun does. The star is also a lot smaller.
So even though this planet is a lot closer to than star, than the Earth is to the sun, it might not have a wild temperature. It just means that red dwarf stars have a goldilock zone much closer to them.
The bigger problem is the amount of ionizing radiation it would be experiencing. That could be problematic, and might just keep those planets sterilized.
Update:
Here's the source article https://www.sciencedaily.com/release...0220130456.htm
The calculated temperature of the planet at that distance is 319K +/- 28KGlendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:
go with the flow the river knows . . .
Frank
I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.
Comment
-
Originally posted by shunyadragon View PostThey found an earth'like planet, but its a little far for us to get there in one life time.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Leonhard View PostThat's the temperature of the star the planet is orbiting. Which is significant because that's 56% the temperature of our own sun. The Stefan-Boltzmann law states that the heat irradiating from a blackbody is proportional to the temperature to the fourth power, so that means it gives off only 10% of the heat our own sun does. The star is also a lot smaller.
So even though this planet is a lot closer to than star, than the Earth is to the sun, it might not have a wild temperature. It just means that red dwarf stars have a goldilock zone much closer to them.
The bigger problem is the amount of ionizing radiation it would be experiencing. That could be problematic, and might just keep those planets sterilized.
Update:
Here's the source article https://www.sciencedaily.com/release...0220130456.htm
The calculated temperature of the planet at that distance is 319K +/- 28KCuriosity never hurt anyone. It was stupidity that killed the cat.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by Leonhard View PostYes, That is a mistake. I always go directly to the sources, journalists usually get it wrong..
And yeah, I think they need to have journalists with at least some scientific training be the ones to cover stories like this.Curiosity never hurt anyone. It was stupidity that killed the cat.
Comment
-
Journalists rarely have any relevant training on any topic. Remember the Gell-Man effect:
You open the newspaper to an article on some subject you know well. In Murray's case, physics. In mine, show business. You read the article and see the journalist has absolutely no understanding of either the facts or the issues. Often, the article is so wrong it actually presents the story backward—reversing cause and effect. I call these the "wet streets cause rain" stories. Paper's full of them.
In any case, you read with exasperation or amusement the multiple errors in a story, and then turn the page to national or international affairs, and read as if the rest of the newspaper was somehow more accurate about Palestine than the baloney you just read. You turn the page, and forget what you know.Remember that you are dust and to dust you shall return.
Comment
-
I'm always still in trouble again
"You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
"Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
"Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman
Comment
-
Originally posted by Leonhard View PostYes, That is a mistake. I always go directly to the sources, journalists usually get it wrong..
If you can find the paper, the abstract is almost always better than the press release."Any sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from trolling."
Comment
-
Originally posted by JimL View PostEven at a speed of 300 miles per minute, or 18,000 MPH, it would take over 3 million years to get there, so, other than scientific curiosity, I don't see the point.
Comment
-
Originally posted by TheLurch View PostJust a further caution, Science Daily is an aggregator of press releases, not a scientific source. While most universities try to make sure their press releases are accurate, there have been some rather dramatic exceptions. Plus they are under no obligations to present the caveats, limitations, etc. of the underlying research.
If you can find the paper, the abstract is almost always better than the press release.
I'm always still in trouble again
"You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
"Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
"Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman
Comment
-
Originally posted by Leonhard View PostThings don't need to have a practical application to be interesting. Where's your sense of scientific curiosity?
Comment
-
Originally posted by rogue06 View PostUsually at the end of the Science Daily article they'll have a link to the University Press release or the Abstract (and sometimes, the full paper)."Any sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from trolling."
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-18-2024, 12:15 PM
|
48 responses
135 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Sparko
03-20-2024, 09:13 AM
|
||
Started by Sparko, 03-07-2024, 08:52 AM
|
16 responses
74 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by shunyadragon
03-08-2024, 03:12 PM
|
||
Started by rogue06, 02-28-2024, 11:06 AM
|
6 responses
47 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by shunyadragon
03-08-2024, 03:25 PM
|
Comment