"Zarmina's World" -- Astronomer's Zeroing in On Habitable Extrasolars

[LittleFuzzy]

I've only read maybe two dozen books twice. And a handful at most 3x. But every 6 months? That's crazy. Obsessive even.

How is it different from having the same discussions on here again and again? Or watching the same recycled plots on TV? You know that going over things one time and one time alone is rarely sufficient to fully grasp or master something, why do you think that doesn't apply to reading text?

[agamemnus]

Does anyone know if anyone is pointing the SETI, etc. dishes towards that planet? IT MIGHT BE USEFUL.

Edit: with any luck at all, if we start communicating now, they will beam down to us (in 20 years) and enlighten us... or maybe they will enslave us all...

[EyeKhan]

There is something seriously wrong with you.

Many things, in fact.

You're weird too, fungi-poop-boy

[EyeKhan]

How is it different from having the same discussions on here again and again?

A lot different. The time investment is not comparable, unless its a damn short book.

Or watching the same recycled plots on TV?

I try to avoid this, but the effort involved with slack-jawed tv watching compared to reading a deep and challenging book...? Come on.

You know that going over things one time and one time alone is rarely sufficient to fully grasp or master something, why do you think that doesn't apply to reading text?

Maybe for you. But seriously, yes, I agree. Which means the book is of an importance to Nessie on par with the Bible to a monk or something. I'm curious to read it.

[Wraith]

Sorry, but at .5c you can't use Newtonian anymore.

Sigh. Okay.

v = c tanh(aT/c)
setting:
v = .5c
a = 9.8m/s^2

.5c = c tanh(9.8T/c)
.5 = tanh(9.8T/c)
atanh(.5) = 9.8T/c
(c*atanh(.5))/9.8 = T
164677839 seconds = T = 280064 minutes = 4667 hours = 194 days = ~.5 years.

Checking my work:

V = c tanh((164677839*9.8)/c) = 149896229 m/s = .5c


So about two and a half weeks difference. That wasn't worth it.

[']['ear]

And mechanical heart valves, replacement organs, faster computers, cleaner energy technologies, safer cars, the ability to feed billions of people, etc.

AHEM! I beg to differ.

Huh, I don't remember smokers in Niven scifi. Do you happen to recall the story? I've got more or less everything he wrote, I want to look it up...

Most obvious was Beowulf Shaeffer, smoking with his toes. But it's scattered elsewhere. It was near ubiquitous it Dick's stuff. As Ness points out, Asimov frequently had it. Basically, almost everybody in the SF heyday, which also corresponds with the smoking heyday, had smoking throughout most of their far-future SF. A remarkable blind spot, if you ask me. Many of these had NOT invoked miracle cures.

I guess its difficult to understand today how absolutely pervasive smoking must have been back then. In 50 years, who knows, maybe something as universal as eating meat from animals we actually killed will be unthinkable. Like if all our meat is vat grown, or artificial in some other way.

Great example, as it is fairly likely, and many writers have invoked exactly that.

Seems like it would make them less fun. Maybe. If you really wanted to be accurate, you could start out knowing how many and what kind of planets all the nearby stars have, but not know how habitable they are. Though I'd think in the next couple decades we'll be able to get a chemical signature from an extra solar planets atmosphere and be able to make some pretty good deductions about it's conditions....

Nah, just send ramrobots like Niven proposed. I deeply want there to be a Mount Lookitthat somewhere.

Well, now we see how they ruined it. But note, if we had absolute medical care - the ability to correct all disease including human aging - why not smoke? Yes its annoying, but I'm sure there's ways to correct that too.

Maybe, though many had not invoked super health care (and some futures explicitly don't, since they're tough and gritty.)

BTW, some (including me) think "curing" aging will never happen. A fair amount of longevity, yes, but I think there's a physical cap that we can't change while still remaining human. Get into Alber computer stuff and we're talking something else, but I'm pretty skeptical about true immortality. Reversing tons of molecular damage in 10 trillion cells? Mmm.

There is something seriously wrong with you.

Because he pointed out that reading a book that frequently is very odd? Well, it is. Though Choobs hit close to the truth without knowing it, I think. The Bible, that is. Maybe this book, His Master's Voice, functions as a sort of Bible for Ness.

Oh, and ever heard of a library, Choobs? FFS.

How is it different from having the same discussions on here again and again? Or watching the same recycled plots on TV? You know that going over things one time and one time alone is rarely sufficient to fully grasp or master something, why do you think that doesn't apply to reading text?

Confess! You regularly re-read al of those crappy Dragonlance books!

[littlelolligagged]

Because he pointed out that reading a book that frequently is very odd? Well, it is. Though Choobs hit close to the truth without knowing it, I think. The Bible, that is. Maybe this book, His Master's Voice, functions as a sort of Bible for Ness.

A couple of times a year is not that frequently, really. If she was reading it once a week, that would be odd.

What struck me as truly bizarre was Chacha saying that he rarely even reads a book twice, though.

[']['ear]

Yes it is. There is a world full of literature. To read one iota of it, say, 30 times is pretty crazy.

Things I've read more than thrice:
1) The LotR books, Hobbit and Silmarillion. I'm guessing about 8 times. Times after age 20? Twice: once at 30ish (movies coming out), once at 42 (organs removed).

2) John Carter of Mars books (only the good ones: 1-3, 5, 7) probably about 6 times. Once post 20.

3) A few other classic series: 3 or 4 times.

Of all the books I've read, I've read several twice post age 20. I need about a decade to forget the details enough to enjoy it.

Then there are what must be several hundred books I've read. And if I'd read books every 6 months, you could cut that list dramatically. I'd gladly erase the Wheel of Time from my mind, but most of the others I'm glad I had the time to read (oh, and erase the 1.5 Son of Dune sequels I read. Gaaah!)

No, reading anything that frequently is odd. Even the Bible, really.

Of course, we're all odd. Posting here is odd, in fact.

[Khendraja'aro]

Sigh. Okay.

v = c tanh(aT/c)
setting:
v = .5c
a = 9.8m/s^2

.5c = c tanh(9.8T/c)
.5 = tanh(9.8T/c)
atanh(.5) = 9.8T/c
(c*atanh(.5))/9.8 = T
164677839 seconds = T = 280064 minutes = 4667 hours = 194 days = ~.5 years.

Checking my work:

V = c tanh((164677839*9.8)/c) = 149896229 m/s = .5c


So about two and a half weeks difference. That wasn't worth it.

Hrmmph. Must've had miscalculated somewhere. Using my origininal formula, I now arrive at roughly the same number. Damn. Sorry.

[EyeKhan]

A couple of times a year is not that frequently, really. If she was reading it once a week, that would be odd.

What struck me as truly bizarre was Chacha saying that he rarely even reads a book twice, though.

You have a low threshold for bizarre little lady.

[LittleFuzzy]

Confess! You regularly re-read al of those crappy Dragonlance books!

I think the only D&D novels I kept beyond high school are Salvatore's.

[littlelolligagged]

You have a low threshold for bizarre little lady.

Do you just use all of your friends once and then cast them aside?

Hell, I couldn't stop myself from rereading while packing (and unpacking) books.

[Nessus]

I'll gladly own up to being very odd, but the people going harglebargle books are for libraries why would you read an atom thrice are pretty much on par with the book burners; I buy books because I intend to return to the work, there's just no fucking way I'll get everything on the first go, be it a fiction novel or a president's biography. A good book is one that invites one back.

[EyeKhan]

I'll gladly own up to being very odd, but the people going harglebargle books are for libraries why would you read an atom thrice are pretty much on par with the book burners; I buy books because I intend to return to the work, there's just no fucking way I'll get everything on the first go, be it a fiction novel or a president's biography. A good book is one that invites one back.

I respect that and will reconsider aspects of my entire life. Briefly. Then go back to whatever bad habbits I've acquired in decades of bumbling.

[Nessus]

I don't expect to convert anyone, I just found the attitude a bit off

[EyeKhan]

I don't expect to convert anyone, I just found the attitude a bit off

Attitude? Call it surprise. (Call it impulsive, call it compulsive, call it in-sane). I wish I had the time or I could read faster. I'm not a fast reader. I think it has to do with my brain. I read because I like it, despite it not being quick or easy. I can't afford to read most anything over and over. And my time's all used up.

[Nessus]

You drive to work, right?

[EyeKhan]

You drive to work, right?

Usually. I have the ability to do 95% of my job from home, but I doubt a suggestion like that would ever be taken seriously.

[Nessus]

Usually. I have the ability to do 95% of my job from home, but I doubt a suggestion like that would ever be taken seriously.

Oh no no, I just meant that your commute is wasted driving. I do a lot of productive reading on the bus or trains. Of course public transportation is SOCIALISM HURGLE AUGH and unpossible in Murika :/

[EyeKhan]

Oh no no, I just meant that your commute is wasted driving. I do a lot of productive reading on the bus or trains. Of course public transportation is SOCIALISM HURGLE AUGH and unpossible in Murika :/

There is no public transit from my home to my place of work. I listen to public radio and get my news on the commute... It's usually no more than 25 minutes either way.

[EyeKhan]

Here's an article from Space.Com answering some of the questions we here have been kicking around about this new planet. Interestingly it calls the winds benign and they estimate the time to get there at .1 C (220 years). They also point out we have never made a space ship that could come anywhere near that speed. Not sure why you guys settled on the very optimistic .5 C.... (?)

Anyway, its a fun read in a borderline pop-sci kind of way:

A Million Questions About Habitable Planet Gliese 581g (Okay, 12)
By Jeremy Hsu
SPACE.com Senior Writer
posted: 01 October 2010
07:10 pm ET

A newfound Earth-sized planet discovered in the habitable zone of a nearby star looks very promising for the possibility of extraterrestrial life, but many unknowns remain.

The planet, Gliese 581g, is one of two new worlds discovered orbiting the red dwarf star Gliese 581, which now has a family of planets that totals six. [Tour the six Gliese 581 planets.]

Here is SPACE.com's look at what scientists know so far about the intriguing world, as well as a few questions that don't quite have answers yet. Consider it a new entry into Earth's own hitchhiker's guide to the galaxy:

How do I say the planet's name?
Gliese 581g may look like it should rhyme with "Grease," but it is actually pronounced as two-syllables as (Glee-zuh). The name comes from the German astronomer Wilhelm Gliese, who catalogued the planet's parent star Gleise 581 as part of a star survey first published in 1957.

Where is Gliese 581g?
The planet Gliese 581g orbits the red dwarf star Gliese 581, which sits 20 light-years from Earth in the constellation Libra. One light-year is about 6 trillion miles (10 trillion km).

How far is it from the parent star?
Early estimates suggest Gliese 581g is 0.15 astronomical units from its star. One astronomical unit is the average distance between the Earth and sun, which is approximately 93 million miles (150 million km). That distance means the planet is close enough to its star so that it can complete an orbit in a little less than 37 days.
One of its sibling planets was closer to the hot edge of the habitable zone around the star Gliese 581, and one was farther out the colder edge of the habitable zone. Gliese 581g is located just right between the two. [Graphic: Gliese 581 solar system orbits]

What is a habitable zone?
Think of a star's habitable zone as the swath of space surrounding a star where conditions for life as we know it are possible. Closer in, a planet roasts. Farther out, it freezes.
Planets within that habitable zone, also known as the Goldilocks zone, have a range of surface temperatures that allow for readily available liquid water and other conditions that may support the rise of life. This cosmic sweet spot can vary, because it depends upon the type of star and the point in time for any given star's lifespan.
For instance, our sun's current habitable zone is farther out than that of the star Gliese 581, a red dwarf about 50 times dimmer than our sun.

The cooler red dwarf allows the Gliese 581 planets to orbit much closer and still remain in the habitable zone.
A planet within the habitable zone does not have a guaranteed chance of originating life, because biology also depends upon the planet's size and a host of conditions, including chemical makeup. But what little researchers know about Gliese 581g makes it a highly promising candidate.

How big is Gliese 581g in relation to Earth?
The planet is lumped into the "nearly Earth-sized" category. It is between three and four times the mass of our Earth — bigger, but small enough to be rocky rather than gaseous. Its radius is anywhere between 1.3 and two times the size of Earth.

How much would I weigh on Gliese 581g?
An Earth-sized planet with three times the mass of our planet would pull down on your body with three times the force of Earth's standard gravity. That means if you weighed 120 pounds on Earth, you would weigh about 120 x 3 pounds on an Earth-sized planet with three times the mass, or 360 pounds.
But Gliese 581g also has a somewhat larger radius, so that also factors into the equation. A 120 pound person would weigh about 213 pounds on Gliese 581g at the lower end of the size and mass estimates. This all remains theoretical until astronomers can pin down the actual size and mass.

What's it like on the surface?
There is no solid evidence at the moment that suggests what surface conditions might be like, or even if liquid water and an atmosphere are actually present.

What researchers know is that the planet exists at the right distance from its star to have liquid water. It's also at the right distance to have an atmosphere which can protect that water, if exists on the surface.

But one of the planet's discoverers, astronomer Steven Vogt of the University of California, Santa Cruz, pointed out that "it's pretty hard to imagine that water wouldn't be there."

He likened it to the examples of the Earth, its moon, Mars, and the moons of Jupiter and Saturn. He also noted that the Orion Nebula is making enough water every 24 seconds to fill all the oceans of the Earth.

Researchers also know that the planet is tidally locked to its star. That means one side experiences eternal daylight, and the other side experiences unending darkness. Such a locked configuration helps to stabilize the planet's surface climate, Vogt said.

3-D global circulation models have shown that the temperature differences on the day and night sides of the planet would not be enough for water to either freeze or boil off. They also suggest that the atmospheric circulation and wind patterns would be relatively benign.

Does it have moons?
There's one called Pandora ... just kidding! There's no info on any moons around Gliese 581g, or around any other planets in its solar system yet. But astronomers have long assumed that alien planets could have moons, and that some of the moons might harbor life.

How long would it take to get there?
This question depends upon how fast you travel. Given our current lack of Star Trek's warp drives, any interstellar expedition would have to travel far slower than the speed of light.

A spaceship traveling at a one-tenth of the speed of light would reach Gliese 581g within about 220 years, Vogt said. That would allow the spaceship to begin getting close-up pictures and a sense of the planet's atmosphere.

That time scale is not promising for existing human lifespans, but robotic explorers could more easily take up the challenge. However, the fastest spaceships built so far don't come anywhere near even that one-tenth light-speed mark.

What kind of life would we expect to find?
Any discussion about alien life on Gliese 581g is purely speculative at this point, according to co-discoverer Paul Butler of the Carnegie Institution of Washington, in Washington, D.C.

Butler took a more cautionary approach as opposed to Vogt, who said his gut feeling told him "the chances of life on this planet are 100 percent."

Still, even Butler noted that anywhere you find water on Earth, you find life. He suggested that a similar condition should hold for almost anywhere in the universe, including Gliese 581g if it does hold water.

Why doesn't the planet have a real name?
The planet is called Gliese 581g because its star, Gliese 581, is designated "a," and the four previously discovered planets in the system are called b, c, d and e.

But Vogt said that he has unofficially begun calling the planet "Zarmina's World," in honor of his wife.

What would aliens living on Gliese 581 see if they looked toward our sun?
You remember that we don't have evidence of alien life on the planet yet, right?
But assuming they exist, aliens could spot our own sun as star in their sky without requiring any telescopes or binoculars.
If the alien astronomers had our current level of technology, they would be also able to easily detect Neptune, and possibly Jupiter and Saturn.

[']['ear]

Do you just use all of your friends once and then cast them aside?

Hell, I couldn't stop myself from rereading while packing (and unpacking) books.

Please. A book is a physical item. I love the ideas in it, and they are represented elsewhere just as effectively (i.e. the next library). It's not like I close my dick between the pages, lube it up, and jack off with it. It's just a freakin book!

I own one shelf of books. About half of it is a nice bound editions of the core Tolkien books, and half are various paperbacks I got on eBay because no member library had it and it was cheaper that way. I'm thinking of getting rid of those that are gifts. Otherwise, I consider large numbers of books to be wasteful and self-indulgent. Then again, so are many features of American life.

I'll gladly own up to being very odd, but the people going harglebargle books are for libraries why would you read an atom thrice are pretty much on par with the book burners; I buy books because I intend to return to the work, there's just no fucking way I'll get everything on the first go, be it a fiction novel or a president's biography. A good book is one that invites one back.

Agreed, a good book invites you back. I'm guessing that this special case you talk about is unusual, though.

I will add that a book in the library can invite you back, as long as you don't take notes in it.

I respect that and will reconsider aspects of my entire life. Briefly. Then go back to whatever bad habbits I've acquired in decades of bumbling.

Oh no no, I just meant that your commute is wasted driving. I do a lot of productive reading on the bus or trains. Of course public transportation is SOCIALISM HURGLE AUGH and unpossible in Murika :/

True enough. I got all of my qualifying exam studying done on buses in Seattle (except of course the paper photocopying and list compiling.)

A wrinkle: I no longer take transit for fear of contagion. Any cold or flu I get is going to last twice as long now, and I'm careful where I put my hands. Taking the bus is like shaking hands wit a hundred people. Bums me out, though.

[Steely Glint]

Public transit is only more effectient than private in urban areas, in areas where things are more spread out they can't realistically get to all the places people need or want to go.

[EyeKhan]

Having spread out cities is inefficient, and not just because mass transit doesn't work as well... What's this got to do with the new planet again???

[Steely Glint]

Well, we need to know the best way to lay out the infrastructure for when we colonists there.

[EyeKhan]

Well, we need to know the best way to lay out the infrastructure for when we colonists there.

Arcologies. Domes. Arcologies inside domes. Big domed arcologies.

A few thoughts:
1. Lets first assume there's no life there at all - its too difficult to parse the ethical issues of colonization if life is already there.

2. It might have an atmosphere, but it's not going to have a breathable atmosphere. So everyone's going to have to live indoors.

3. Everyone's going to want to live indoors. The light is going to be sickly red and the sun's going to be huge in the sky because the planet is so close. So, for me at any rate, windows are out. Sounds like a nightmare.

4. The gravity's going to be hell too. Double to triple your weight here on Earth depending on the density of the planet. That's just going to suck. Joint replacement surgery's giong to be big business....

[LittleFuzzy]

Having spread out cities is inefficient, and not just because mass transit doesn't work as well... What's this got to do with the new planet again???

Hyperspatial express route.

[Illusions]

1. Lets first assume there's no life there at all - its too difficult to parse the ethical issues of colonization if life is already there.

The colonists who settled the Americas beg to differ with you.

[EyeKhan]

The colonists who settled the Americas beg to differ with you.

Crazy, isn't it? A time machine would be useful just to see what was in the America's before the Americans.... However, colonizing a livning world, as you already know, has a lot baggage and is a thread unto itself. Hmmm..... maybe.

[Illusions]

Crazy, isn't it? A time machine would be useful just to see what was in the America's before the Americans....

Native Americans were in the Americas before the arrival of European colonists...