Why is this announceworthy? The new exoplanet doesnt even reach no. 1 on the ESI scale:http://phl.upr.edu/projects/habitable-exoplanets-catalog
Quote from: _INTER_ on 07/23/2015 04:33 pmWhy is this announceworthy? The new exoplanet doesnt even reach no. 1 on the ESI scale:http://phl.upr.edu/projects/habitable-exoplanets-catalogThey made a point that this is the first earth-like planet in habitable zone around another G-type star.
Who said it was more earth-like than other discoveries?
They made a point that this is the first earth-like planet in habitable zone around another G-type star.
And because of the fact that it is so far from the star (orbital period of 300+ days) I find it much better place to live (in my imagination) than those other ESI Top-10 planets, which have orbital period of about 30 days. No matter if the star they orbit is small, it still might have harmful flares etc. scorching the nearby planets... Also tidal locking is guaranteed with those planets.
Maybe I missed it during the Q&A but are there plans to follow up with current technology to gather more info on this planet ??...I heard there is some thought of volcanos on this planet...does that make it more likely Venus like (covered in clouds. Too hot ) vs. Earth (some active volcanos but water, vegitation, etc)...
Kepler-442 b and Kepler-62 e orbit a K-Star in about 112 to 120 days and are smaller. Also those planets are probably older.
Maybe I missed it during the Q&A but are there plans to follow up with current technology to gather more info on this planet ??
So older dead world is less dead?
QuoteSo older dead world is less dead?Look I'm not disagreeing with the discovery worth of a G-Warm Superearth with about same period as Earth. What I'm disagreeing with is how this is communicated by Nasa (announcement type, choice and hype) and especially by the media. People associate "Earth 2.0" with "Alien life or colonialization potential". That's what infuriates me.
Quote from: _INTER_ on 07/23/2015 06:32 pmQuoteSo older dead world is less dead?Look I'm not disagreeing with the discovery worth of a G-Warm Superearth with about same period as Earth. What I'm disagreeing with is how this is communicated by Nasa (announcement type, choice and hype) and especially by the media. People associate "Earth 2.0" with "Alien life or colonialization potential". That's what infuriates me.Don't blame NASA for bad reporting.This doesn't have the highest ESI that's still Kepler-438b.
Quote from: _INTER_ on 07/23/2015 04:33 pmWhy is this announceworthy? The new exoplanet doesnt even reach no. 1 on the ESI scale:http://phl.upr.edu/projects/habitable-exoplanets-catalogThere's only one object that will have a 1.00 ESI, that's the Earth. This is a major find, although long expected, Kepler-452 is a G2V sequence star as our own is, and Kepler-452 b is the first rocky object found in the habitable zone of a G2V sequence star.
You should worry if we ever find a world with a higher ESI than Earth!
QuoteYou should worry if we ever find a world with a higher ESI than Earth! Yea because then, math has changed dramatically (False Vacuum bubble?).No, the way ESI is calculated with normalizing, its impossible to get values bigger than 1.---ESI calculation compared:habitable-exoplanets-catalog:Considers stellar flux, mass, and radiusWIKI ESI:Considers radius, bulk density, escape velocity and surface temperature.So does the lower value in the catalog come from high stellar radiation?