Earth Twin Found 600 light years away!

[Amphrax]

http://news.uk.msn.com/world/scientists-confirm-discovery-of-earth-twin

 

[ECA]

Put me in cryo sleep and send me on a spaceship! ( just check for strange alien stowaways that want to murder everyone first k? ).

 

[Nate]

I bet they have babes with 3 tits!

 

[Olgaline]

Twin is a little much it's 2,5 x earths size and rotates it's
sun in 290 days ....

 

[Gwadien]

This is the 3rd time I've seen this on the forum... What's going on.

 

[Raven]

It will be interesting to see what sort of atmosphere they can detect in future. We are starting to know a little more about the universe, as in planets and whatnot, it won't be long until we find the first (And this may be it) goldilocks planet. We can then start narrowing down the search for life, which we will find at some point in the future, whether its plant life or whatever.

I was reading that they hope to be able to detect the chemical process made by plants soon. Bbviously though. any alien species could have a massively different process!

 

[old.Tohtori]

Bah, too far away so i could get some alien poon in my lifetime

 

[Wij]

This is the shittest news since my aids test

 

[BloodOmen]

I bet they have babes with 3 tits!

and 4 pussies, it'll be like a fucking selection box for you guys! On a more serious note! how far is 600 Light Years? and how long until NASA has craft available for us to get there? these are questions that need answering, I fear its the normal "about 100,000,000 miles" and "we'll be able to get there in about 200 years! so basically finding these new planets is about as much use as a cock flavoured lolly pop?

 

[Nate]

View: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mk7VWcuVOf0&feature=related


It's already here.

LUDICROUS SPEED

 

[DaGaffer]

Twin is a little much it's 2,5 x earths size and rotates it's
sun in 290 days ....

Its actually worse than that; the radius is 2.5 that of Earth so by volume its way more massive; nearly 14 times the volume. If its a similar density to Earth, the gravity would smear you all over the landscape (like 6 gees plus). So, no, "twin" is hardly appropriate even if other factors like surface temperature are OK.

 

[Amphrax]

This is the shittest news since my aids test

If this is the shittiest news since your aids test... then dont reply... simple really

 

[Keitanz]

lol at everyone going crazy over this, weirdos.

 

[Tom]

It will be interesting to see what sort of atmosphere they can detect in future. We are starting to know a little more about the universe, as in planets and whatnot, it won't be long until we find the first (And this may be it) goldilocks planet. We can then start narrowing down the search for life, which we will find at some point in the future, whether its plant life or whatever.

I was reading that they hope to be able to detect the chemical process made by plants soon. Bbviously though. any alien species could have a massively different process!

This is something I await with excitement. It won't be more than a decade or two before we're able to discern the atmospheric makeup of extrasolar planets, and once we're able to do that, we'll be in a good position to say finally that life exists outside this solar system. Lots of oxygen in an atmosphere = good chance of life.

 

[Deebs]

and 4 pussies, it'll be like a fucking selection box for you guys! On a more serious note! how far is 600 Light Years? and how long until NASA has craft available for us to get there? these are questions that need answering, I fear its the normal "about 100,000,000 miles" and "we'll be able to get there in about 200 years! so basically finding these new planets is about as much use as a cock flavoured lolly pop?

600 light years away = the time required for light to reach that planet. Light travels at 186,282 miles per second. Which equates to around 5,878,625,340,009 miles per year. Multiply that by 600 and you get 3,527,175,204,005,760 miles. Our current fastest type of rocket does around 25,000 miles per hour or 6.9 miles per second. ie, it will take millions of years to get their if we started with the tech available today.

 

[Nate]

We could send Neutrinos!

 

[Gwadien]

Why don't we get like a couple of families to go in a space rocket, reproduce, eventually get there, then they can set up some Ryanair planes to pick up the rest of us.

Or, attach rockets to Russia and China, and blast the whole planet there.. no-one cares about the Russians and Chinese, so that doesn't matter, I don't even think they care about their selves.

 

[DaGaffer]

600 light years away = the time required for light to reach that planet. Light travels at 186,282 miles per second. Which equates to around 5,878,625,340,009 miles per year. Multiply that by 600 and you get 3,527,175,204,005,760 miles. Our current fastest type of rocket does around 25,000 miles per hour or 6.9 miles per second. ie, it will take millions of years to get their if we started with the tech available today.

Actually the fastest man-made object is currently doing about 38,000MPH, and that's nearly 40 year old technology. No-one would seriously suggest a chemical powered rocket is the answer for an interstellar journey (let alone one 600 light years away), but there's plenty of technology currently available that could get us to our nearest neighbour a lot faster than the 73,000 years it would take Voyager 1 to travel as far as Proxima Centuri (not that its going in the right direction to do that anyway). Beamed propulsion looks like the best bet because ships wouldn't have to carry their own fuel/reaction mass and you can accelerate pretty much constantly while the beam is switched on. Once we actually get our thumb out of our arses and get a permanent Moon colony the cost of building really powerful lasers to run such a project drops dramatically (and scales up really easily when you've got permanent unfiltered solar power). You're still talking centuries, but for a probe that's not necessarily so bad.

 

[BloodOmen]

600 light years away = the time required for light to reach that planet. Light travels at 186,282 miles per second. Which equates to around 5,878,625,340,009 miles per year. Multiply that by 600 and you get 3,527,175,204,005,760 miles. Our current fastest type of rocket does around 25,000 miles per hour or 6.9 miles per second. ie, it will take millions of years to get their if we started with the tech available today.

What use is NASA then! "Great news! we've found a planet with hot babes, made of solid gold and diamond and there are alcohol waterfalls and natural pizza growth!" "GREAT! whats the catch?" "We can't get there without 40,000 years worth of technology" "You prick."

 

[Zarjazz]

Our current fastest type of rocket does around 25,000 miles per hour or 6.9 miles per second. ie, it will take millions of years to get their if we started with the tech available today.

No one would use rockets for interstellar travel. They are far too inefficient, good for getting stuff into orbit but that's about it, but there is plenty of tech available today that would reduce the travel time to more the magnitude of 100000 years.

The simplest we could actually build today would be a light sail, while the acceleration is incredibly slow it's also constant which is the crucial difference over a rocket. Depending on sail size and additional laser power, after a few hundred years you could have reached up to a decent percentage of the speed of light.

 

[Jeros]

I personally still think there is a chance to find basic level life somewhere in our solar system, we still have a lot of exploring to do closer to home.

 

[Deebs]

Actually the fastest man-made object is currently doing about 38,000MPH, and that's nearly 40 year old technology. No-one would seriously suggest a chemical powered rocket is the answer for an interstellar journey (let alone one 600 light years away), but there's plenty of technology currently available that could get us to our nearest neighbour a lot faster than the 73,000 years it would take Voyager 1 to travel as far as Proxima Centuri (not that its going in the right direction to do that anyway). Beamed propulsion looks like the best bet because ships wouldn't have to carry their own fuel/reaction mass and you can accelerate pretty much constantly while the beam is switched on. Once we actually get our thumb out of our arses and get a permanent Moon colony the cost of building really powerful lasers to run such a project drops dramatically (and scales up really easily when you've got permanent unfiltered solar power). You're still talking centuries, but for a probe that's not necessarily so bad.

Are you saying that Voyager I is now doing 38,000 mph?

No one would use rockets for interstellar travel. They are far too inefficient, good for getting stuff into orbit but that's about it, but there is plenty of tech available today that would reduce the travel time to more the magnitude of 100000 years.

The simplest we could actually build today would be a light sail, while the acceleration is incredibly slow it's also constant which is the crucial difference over a rocket. Depending on sail size and additional laser power, after a few hundred years you could have reached up to a decent percentage of the speed of light.

To the both of you, if this tech is available now why are the probes we are sending out not using it?

 

[DaGaffer]

Yep. As of November 11th - there's a status update on Wikipedia that gives you Voyager's location and speed etc.

We're not doing interstellar probes for the same reason we're not doing manned exploration of the planets; its too expensive for a government to pay for and private enterprise can't see a benefit. Thing is, as I said, if we can sustainably get off Earth, the cost of getting to everywhere else drops dramatically; its the first 200 miles straight up that's the problem.

 

[Wazzerphuk]

I'm more interested in finding mental forms of life that live outside of our sphere of life knowledge.

We all know that planets similar to ours are likely to hold life.

We also know that some lifeforms even on this planet are capable of surviving and thriving in seriously extreme conditions.

It's likely that there's life on other types of planetary atmospheres - there's nothing stopping life existing in our solar system, just in conditions we aren't familiar with. I believe the boards favourite lovey Mr. B Cox has also stated this is a big possibility, particularly in methane-based atmospheres. I believe one of Jupiter's moons is a suitable environment like this?

 

[Aoami]

did some scientists not discover arsenic based lifeforms recently? Surely, if life does not have to be carbon based, it all but confirms the theory that life exists outside of earth?

 

[Raven]

I think there were several flaws with it in the end, I remember them making a big song and dance about it and most in the science community making "meh" noises.

Will look when i get it later.

 

[Zarjazz]

To the both of you, if this tech is available now why are the probes we are sending out not using it?

Because for the short distances involved (our solar system) current tech, rockets & sling shot effects, are faster and cheaper. For example a light sail to say the moons of Jupiter could take several decades. That's slightly longer than most scientists are prepared to wait.

 

[Scouse]

Bbviously though. any alien species could have a massively different process!

Actually, it's highly likely that it'll be the same process.

This is the shittest news since my aids test

What, you're clear??!

Actually the fastest man-made object is currently doing about 38,000MPH, and that's nearly 40 year old technology. No-one would seriously suggest a chemical powered rocket is the answer for an interstellar journey (let alone one 600 light years away), but there's plenty of technology currently available that could get us to our nearest neighbour a lot faster than the 73,000 years it would take Voyager 1 to travel as far as Proxima Centuri (not that its going in the right direction to do that anyway). Beamed propulsion looks like the best bet because ships wouldn't have to carry their own fuel/reaction mass and you can accelerate pretty much constantly while the beam is switched on. Once we actually get our thumb out of our arses and get a permanent Moon colony the cost of building really powerful lasers to run such a project drops dramatically (and scales up really easily when you've got permanent unfiltered solar power). You're still talking centuries, but for a probe that's not necessarily so bad.

Hur. You said "probe"

 

[Scouse]

We're not doing interstellar probes for the same reason we're not doing manned exploration of the planets; its too expensive for a government to pay for and private enterprise can't see a benefit.

Apparently, a repeat of the moon landing missions* would cost ~$750bn in todays money. So, a lot lot less than it's taken to bail out the banks.

The reason we're not going is political choice. And a poor one at that IMO.


*i.e. repeated landings and retrievals.

 

[DaGaffer]

You wouldn't do the Moon landings the same way though; you'd build facilities with robots first and try to go for a sustainable colony, so you can't really look at the costs of the 1960s as a template.