First habitable planet discovered - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Gekkosan;29896780]Looks like earth in the earlies if you ask me.[/QUOTE] Full of hippies

[QUOTE=Binladen34;29891093]It's 13 billion miles away. It can be done, within out lifetime even. Just as long as you have a fuck load of fuel.[/QUOTE] I don't think you would need that much fuel. You just need to get up to speed then shut the engines off. [editline]17th May 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Artyom;29896697][img_thumb]http://astroprofspage.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/06/gliese581planets.jpg[/img_thumb] Looks like Earth died[/QUOTE] It kinda looks like earth's grandpa!

[QUOTE=Skunky;29896841]Full of hippies[/QUOTE] I don't think hippies could live in a world so earlies it's full of methane gases and carbon dioxide. Unless you mean some weirdo alien hippies. Don't know about that to be honest.

Now if someone finds a way to travel 20 light years within a lifetime, that will be the greatest discovery ever. It seems I hear a lot about habitable planets every year or 2.

[QUOTE='Poesidan [GAG];29896917']Now if someone finds a way to travel 20 light years within a lifetime, that will be the greatest discovery ever. It seems I hear a lot about habitable planets every year or 2.[/QUOTE] Imagine it in a thousand years. That's how far you gotta think ahead!

2G's? Hmm, It would be interesting living on a world with gravity like that.

Wow imagine if there is life there. This would be fucking awesome.

[img]http://i1113.photobucket.com/albums/k513/Hazefyer/SHFAUIFHUIFALIEN.jpg?t=1305679021[/img] Just a guess, but hey you never know....

[QUOTE=Mr. Bleak;29891583]The really awful thing is if they spent years upon years to get there only to find out it was uninhabitable and had to fly back. Apollo 10 had a cruise speed of ~40.000 km/h, and if I did my math right it'd take 539.984 years to get to.[/QUOTE] We'd send an unmanned vessel

[QUOTE=Jager_57;29894699]This planet has over twice the gravity of earth. It may be tidally locked to it's star. It only gets 30% of the sunlight we enjoy on Earth, but we're hoping it has large bodies of water. :foxnews: New Earth discovered! :foxnews:[/QUOTE] Life evolved to suit Earth, on Earth. The same may not apply to a species on Gliese. Twice the gravity? More stagnant life, plants and the like. Tidal locking means...well, more plants with adaptations to survive prolonged UV exposure. Better yet, varied life along the terminator. 30% sunlight is still a decent amount of energy. It may not be even remotely as comfy as Earth is to us, but it could sustain lower end lifeforms, especially if it's tidally locked and if there's a powerful greenhouse affect at work. If there's large bodies of water, fantastic. If not, then a smaller quantity may harbor life. All it takes is just one spot on the planet to harbor some type of life. From there on out, evolution takes it's course.

[QUOTE=Arachnidus;29899343]Life evolved to suit Earth, on Earth. The same may not apply to a species on Gliese. Twice the gravity? More stagnant life, plants and the like. Tidal locking means...well, more plants with adaptations to survive prolonged UV exposure. Better yet, varied life along the terminator. 30% sunlight is still a decent amount of energy. It may not be even remotely as comfy as Earth is to us, but it could sustain lower end lifeforms, especially if it's tidally locked and if there's a powerful greenhouse affect at work. If there's large bodies of water, fantastic. If not, then a smaller quantity may harbor life. All it takes is just one spot on the planet to harbor some type of life. From there on out, evolution takes it's course.[/QUOTE] Why would life be more stagnant? That's still a projection of Earth life. Muscle fibers (or their analog) might be denser to support more weight (or, on the other hand, sparser to limit weight). Also, why would the planet be tidally locked? Is this common or are there things they are seeing that indicate that?

[QUOTE=Binladen34;29891093]It's 13 billion miles away. It can be done, within out lifetime even. Just as long as you have a fuck load of fuel.[/QUOTE] You dont need a lot of fuel since there is little friction against the spacecraft shell. Plus, scientists would slingshot around a planet to gain even more speed.

I thought Earth was the first one. [editline]17th May 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=chrishind10;29892083]Couldn't we just launch a probe powered by an ion or plasma rocket and take some orbital telemetry.[/QUOTE] Lol ion power. Good luck see you in a few billion years!

Only 20 light years? Lets pack our shit and terraform that fucker to make it more sustainable. Put some weight off, pack your bags and move to that planet.

How hot are the aliens?

[QUOTE=Fort83;29890990]too bad we can't live there, too much gas and crazy gravity[/QUOTE] We can get used to the double gravity, it's the gas that's the problem but nothing that a dome colony can't fix. Not to mention it's carbon dioxide, plant some trees and bam, oxygen. [QUOTE=Mr. Bleak;29891583]The really awful thing is if they spent years upon years to get there only to find out it was uninhabitable and had to fly back. Apollo 10 had a cruise speed of ~40.000 km/h, and if I did my math right it'd take 539.984 years to get to.[/QUOTE] Send a probe with solar sails.

[QUOTE=Binladen34;29891093]It's 13 billion miles away. It can be done, within out lifetime even. Just as long as you have a fuck load of fuel.[/QUOTE] I don't think there's going to be a good reason to travel there in our lifetime though.

Fuckin sweet. Now if they'd actually talk about it...Oh wait, more important stuff like the War, I mean police action, is on and that's way more interesting.

Oh, it's this hoax again.

[QUOTE=Sourcream&onion;29896389]Can I ship all the people I don't like there in the name of science?[/QUOTE] [img]http://images.wikia.com/starcraft/images/b/bd/TerranSplash.jpg[/img] [editline]17th May 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Sled Dog;29896868]I don't think you would need that much fuel. You just need to get up to speed then shut the engines off. [/QUOTE] You need just as much fuel to stop. 50% of your fuel to get up to speed, and 50% to slow down so you don't just fly by. Assuming you have a source of fuel where you're going or don't plan on a return trip anyways. [b]Edit:[/b] Really simplified, but yeah. Something like that.

Who's to say that the life, if there is any, would not have evolved to use oxygen and to push out carbon dioxide. Earth's atmosphere changed to one filled with oxygen because the prokaryotes performed photosynthesis. The life on this new planet may do the same, but with carbon dioxide.

[QUOTE=Fort83;29900474]the carbon dioxide is what keeps the planet warm(er) without it it will freeze, it already cant support water that isnt frozen because of how cold it is[/QUOTE] Thankfully water vapour is an even BETTER greenhouse gas than CO2. If you could add more CO2 to the atmosphere to get it hot enough for water to become liquid and eventually begin to evaporate then the water evaporating would add to the greenhouse effect which would then allow for the replacement of most of the CO2 (provided there was near constant cloud cover) with O2 (because the H2O is compensating for the lost CO2). Earth's atmosphere is only 21% oxygen, so the levels don't really need to be too high to be breathable. Although because CO2 is much denser than O2 you really would need to replace most of the CO2 in the atmosphere, so, like I said, near constant cloud coverage would probably be needed to compensate for the lost CO2. You'd also have to introduce a lot of nitrogen (or some other gas, maybe a noble gas like Argon if, for some bizarre reason nitrogen wasn't available) into the atmosphere too, because having too MUCH O2 can be as bad as not having enough of it. Oxygen harms your body in very high concentrations (lungs start to fill with fluid, you start getting nauseous and dizzy, etc), and, obviously, it leads to the problem of HUGE fires starting from even a small spark.

[QUOTE=Raiskauskone V2;29890918]Only 20 lightyears? That's pretty fucking close. *edit* Okay, maybe not too close. But when comparing to other "earth-like" planets, this is really close. Hell, you can reach it within a span of a human time, it wouldn't take hundreds of years.[/QUOTE] So you can travel with the speed of light ?

All we have to do use a cry-no chamber and sleep for 100 years or so, and make it to a planet, and also somewhat have the food or water not dissolve somehow, or freeze it as well to make it last, but depending how food and water actually is on a another planet. First we have to calculate how the heck we need to get to the planet with autopilot without crashing into a moon, asteroids or comet, much.

Imagine this (assuming there are intelligent lifeforms there): We send a recorded message, it arrives 20 years later. 20 years later, a reply (probably would not make sense due to language, but still). Imagine how amazing and groundbreaking that would be.

Where are people getting within our lifetimes from? As pointed out 20 light years = 117569996000000 miles, our current fastest probe is voyager 1 I believe and that is travelling at 38000 mph; 20 light years at that speed is 353000 years. Unless my math fails me, that’s a tad longer than my lifetime. Do we have alternate power/ fuel sources that would allow faster travel?

[QUOTE=Fort83;29900474]the carbon dioxide is what keeps the planet warm(er) without it it will freeze, it already cant support water that isnt frozen because of how cold it is[/QUOTE] No, the by-product of aerobic respiration in the plants' cells is heat, and that is what keeps them 'warm'. In aerobic respiration, organic matter (matter which contains Carbon [c]) is decomposed (together with oxygen) into CO2 and water. The product of this decomposition are molecules called ATP. The cell uses ATP as an energy 'currency' - when the cell needs to perform activities which require energy, ATP molecules are decomposed, providing the cell the energy needed.

[QUOTE=TheHypnotoad;29906021]Where are people getting within our lifetimes from? As pointed out 20 light years = 117569996000000 miles, our current fastest probe is voyager 1 I believe and that is travelling at 38000 mph; 20 light years at that speed is 353000 years. Unless my math fails me, that’s a tad longer than my lifetime. Do we have alternate power/ fuel sources that would allow faster travel?[/QUOTE] Humanity is INCREDIBLY tenacious and stubborn. Once we have a clear goal in sight, and the funding to reach it, there's very little (if anything) that can prevent us from getting there. We've put men on the fucking moon. I mean... do you have any fucking idea just how crazy that is? We did it at the end of the 60s, too!

[QUOTE=sltlamina;29906257]Humanity is INCREDIBLY tenacious and stubborn. Once we have a clear goal in sight, and the funding to reach it, there's very little (if anything) that can prevent us from getting there. We've put men on the fucking moon. I mean... do you have any fucking idea just how crazy that is? We did it at the end of the 60s, too![/QUOTE] We can't break the laws of physics though.

[QUOTE=Thom12255;29906976]We can't break the laws of physics though.[/QUOTE] Well we probably could if we really wanted to in the future (blackholes and shit like that; the laws of physics get really weird around things like blackholes). But that's besides the point, I wasn't arguing that. I was merely pointing out that, given the funding, and the goal of getting a spaceship built capable of achieving relativistic velocities: I'm sure we could do it.