A possible 'Goldilocks' planet?

[Bosco123]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100929/ap_on_sc/us_sci_new_earths

Take us forever to get there though, but it's a nice thing to think that they finally found something out there, maybe that planet is looking at us.

<S>

[Dichotomy]

cool 

[Treize69]

It is about three times the mass of Earth, slightly larger in width and much closer to its star — 14 million miles away versus 93 million. It's so close to its version of the sun that it orbits every 37 days. And it doesn't rotate much, so one side is almost always bright, the other dark.

Temperatures can be as hot as 160 degrees or as frigid as 25 degrees below zero, but in between — in the land of constant sunrise — it would be "shirt-sleeve weather," said co-discoverer Steven Vogt of the University of California at Santa Cruz.

Oh noes, they found Sunside/Starside!! (please tell me I'm not the only person who caught/understands that...)

[oakranger]

I need to get there to claim stake my land before manifest destiny kicks in. 
 

[321BAR]

Oh noes, they found Sunside/Starside!! (please tell me I'm not the only person who caught/understands that...)

right when they found it, the first things that came to my mind...
1) distance to sun (14 million)
2) rotation speed (very slow but not stationary... how does this sustain life? settlements would have to be constantly mobile. water would have to be also or it would evaporate)
3) atmosphere (honestly, with the speed of the rotation, there must not be much plant life or water, therefore an unsustainable atmosphere)
4) water (where is it?  )
5) size (3 times the mass of earth= approx 3 times the gravity, explorers/settlers will need to work out alot before even setting foot there)
then came the other questions
6) distance from us (yeah we arent getting there anytime soon)
7) animal life (land of constant sunrise could give us animal life or not. it depends on the answers to water and atmosphere in that area...)
8) diseases... (where theres plants and animals, there's bacteria and disease. we have no resistance to it at all.  TERRAFORM TIME!!!)
9) time for us to get there... (see number 6)


10) would it be worth it...? (would it be worth the mass millions of dollars possibly billions to bring a group of explorers (or even a probe) that far out just to find out that this planet wouldnt be worth our eyes?

[Tupac]

 

[Tac]

right when they found it, the first things that came to my mind...

2) rotation speed (very slow but not stationary... how does this sustain life? settlements would have to be constantly mobile. water would have to be also or it would evaporate)

as hot as 160 degrees. Thats close to temperatures recorded on some spots on our own planet. It doesnt mean its that hot all over the place (and its a much bigger world than ours). You can easily expect to find regions that have temperate or tropical temperatures.

3) atmosphere (honestly, with the speed of the rotation, there must not be much plant life or water, therefore an unsustainable atmosphere)
4) water (where is it?  )
5) size (3 times the mass of earth= approx 3 times the gravity, explorers/settlers will need to work out alot before even setting foot there)

rotation speed is not the same as centripetal speed. Aka, the outer ring of an old vynil disc spins faster than the center ring yet both cover the same distance in the same time. Rotation speed is not an issue.

water is almost guaranteed to exist in liquid form under that combination of temperature/mass. Of course thats if the planet followed something similar to earth's geologic processes and is not a sea of molten lava. 

Gravity can be an issue but thats applicable if/when we can send someone there. by the time who knows what tech will exist to counteract that.

then came the other questions
7) animal life (land of constant sunrise could give us animal life or not. it depends on the answers to water and atmosphere in that area...)

10) would it be worth it...? (would it be worth the mass millions of dollars possibly billions to bring a group of explorers (or even a probe) that far out just to find out that this planet wouldnt be worth our eyes?

If there's water there will be life. Guaranteed. If life sprung up to use that water that is. Would it be worth sending a probe? Hell yes. 20 light years means our fastest ship would not be able to reach it in 200+ years time..and the first signal would take 20 years to get to us after that. If anything they should be scrambling to send that probe this decade. By 2200+ chances are we'll have much better propulsion to send people out there and the probe could very well be sending them a signal telling them 'hey there really IS water here! (or not)" and save them a more costly, dangerous trip.

[Dichotomy]

I'll bet that's where the Aliens with the probes are coming from 

[ImADot]

20 light years means our fastest ship would not be able to reach it in 200+ years time..and the first signal would take 20 years to get to us after that. If anything they should be scrambling to send that probe this decade. By 2200+ chances are we'll have much better propulsion to send people out there and the probe could very well be sending a signal back to Earth saying 'hey there be humans here'.

Fixed for when we invent better propulsion and beat that original probe to the planet by a few decades.   

[Heater]

We need to Ask VOSS has he has been there already when he was working for NASA....
or was that the CIA....
or the Russians...

I forgot

[Dadsguns]

What if we are the Aliens?   

[jdbecks]

I'll bet that's where the Aliens with the probes are coming from 

I wonder if they have people on their planet that will blame us, for anal probe adoptions....naaa, we will just blame it on george micheal.

[Saxman]

By 2200+ chances are we'll have much better propulsion to send people out there and the probe could very well be sending them a signal telling them 'hey there really IS water here! (or not)" and save them a more costly, dangerous trip.

First thing we need to do is stop relying on exploratory vessels that HAVE to be launched from earth's surface. Develop spacecraft that are permanently based in space. Think of the massive amounts of fuel that are necessary JUST to get a rocket out of earth's atmosphere. You'll save a LOT of that weight with a spacecraft that just docks with the ISS for resupply before heading away from earth.

[Penguin]

First thing we need to do is stop relying on exploratory vessels that HAVE to be launched from earth's surface. Develop spacecraft that are permanently based in space. Think of the massive amounts of fuel that are necessary JUST to get a rocket out of earth's atmosphere. You'll save a LOT of that weight with a spacecraft that just docks with the ISS for resupply before heading away from earth.

One itsy bitsy teeny weeny problem: raw materials.

There's no steel, aluminum, or copper in space, so even the most basic of electronics will need to be imported.  Next, even if we could secure an massive asteroid filled with minerals, to achieve even simple alloys one needs heat and to achieve the nessecary heat and carbon atom freedom, one needs to burn carbonized coal.  Combustion requires life-giving oxygen, which in turn would need to be ferried in to the ship to give air to the foundries. 

No, without the ability to somehow use a railgun to shoot the stuff there, or Star Trek teleporters, the idea of a space shipyard doesn't add up practically or economically.

-Penguin

[rabbidrabbit]

or a space elevator...