Tides Have Major Impact on Planet Habitability

Another nail in the coffin of the "we are nothing special" school of thought....

It's funny, the old 80's game Wing Commander had a hostile alien race called the Kilrathi. Their planet was well outside of the habitable zone but due to intense graviational pull from the binary system it was in the tectonics of the planet that kept it incredibly warm, making it capable of sustaining life.

80's video games become today's science.

That was an awsome game...played it till my trigger finger and thumbs bled.

Modernmystic: Well technically speaking we still are nothing special. The only ones who decided that living sentient matter is more special than unanimate one (also true for the terms) are us. The humans that is. Anyway.. There're still so many solar systems that the probability should be covered for at least two such planets as Earth. At least..

" There're still so many solar systems that the probability should be covered for at least two such planets as Earth. At least.."

Where do you get that from, SmartK8?

Lol @ the people who are constantly on the lookout for anything that can support their religiously weighted (i.e. not scientific or objective) perspective that we HAVE to be special.

Lol @ the people who are constantly on the lookout for anything that can support their religiously weighted (i.e. not scientific or objective) perspective that we HAVE to be special.

What's REALLY funny is that you don't realize you're doing the exact same thing. In fact all the SCIENTIFIC data we've collected so far shows us that the vast majority of other solar systems are not like ours at all, and probably not friendly to the development of complex life.

Guys,

Not enough data to say anything in either direction.

We don't even have a full understanding of what life is or can be beyond our philosophical views.

Put this discussion in the "not enough data" pile and call it a day.

Guys,

Not enough data to say anything in either direction.

We don't even have a full understanding of what life is or can be beyond our philosophical views.

Put this discussion in the "not enough data" pile and call it a day.

Ok point taken and conceded, however I will say that the data we have collected so far is pointing in an "non-Copernican" fashion.

Guys,

Not enough data to say anything in either direction.

We don't even have a full understanding of what life is or can be beyond our philosophical views.

Put this discussion in the "not enough data" pile and call it a day.

Ok point taken and conceded, however I will say that the data we have collected so far is pointing in an "non-Copernican" fashion.

So far the data we have points to fire being alive based off the loose definitions of life.

It's breathes, reproduces and consumes. The whole faith v faith debate is tired. You're both smart guys, tip your caps and wait it out.

The really funny part here is I'm a "convert". I used to think that there were at least several hundred thousand planets in the galaxy (everyone has their own estimates on the subject) with complex life and at least a few of those had intelligent life, and perhaps even technological civilizations.

After reading "Rare Earth" and seeing the data come in from our observations I became more and more beaten down by the data (with a dash of the Fermi paradox thrown in).

Hey, I don't want us to be alone. I'd like nothing better than an advanced civilization to swoop down (or us to "tune in") and have problems like war, poverty, etc solved overnight. Fact is I'm pretty pessimistic about it all now.

Who knows, maybe the terrestrial planet finder (why the heck that mission is having trouble getting funding when we're planning on sending an SUV to a planet we've ACTUALLY been to a dozen times before and not seen life I'll never know) will prove me wrong. If it does NO ONE will be more pleased than me.

The really funny part here is I'm a "convert". I used to think that there were at least several hundred thousand planets in the galaxy (everyone has their own estimates on the subject) with complex life and at least a few of those had intelligent life, and perhaps even technological civilizations.

After reading "Rare Earth" and seeing the data come in from our observations I became more and more beaten down by the data (with a dash of the Fermi paradox thrown in).

Hey, I don't want us to be alone. I'd like nothing better than an advanced civilization to swoop down (or us to "tune in") and have problems like war, poverty, etc solved overnight. Fact is I'm pretty pessimistic about it all now.

Who knows, maybe the terrestrial planet finder (why the heck that mission is having trouble getting funding when we're planning on sending an SUV to a planet we've ACTUALLY been to a dozen times before and not seen life I'll never know) will prove me wrong. If it does NO ONE will be more pleased than me.

you know, I think if we did tune into another society we'd find they're either facing the same problems we are or their solutions won't be able to fit our societies.

Physical evolution drove society and in turn society is driving physical evolution. It's an interesting dynamic.

If it does NO ONE will be more pleased than me.

I'd arm-wrestle you for that.

The thing is, no matter how much we argue, we're still basing it all on a sample of one. And even the exoplanetary discoveries are only the closest and biggest ones, which are all we can detect, which is going to produce *some* kind of sample bias.

There are 4 different scenarios that I can think of: 1) we are alone or nearly so, 2) There are lots of ETs but they communicate by hyperwave relay, 3) There are lots of ETs and they use radio, and 4) There are some ETs out there, but given the size of the galaxy, they're probably not close.

All are possible. Only #3 disagrees with observations. Therefore we can't settle this by logical analysis. More facts needed.

If it does NO ONE will be more pleased than me.

I'd arm-wrestle you for that.

The thing is, no matter how much we argue, we're still basing it all on a sample of one. And even the exoplanetary discoveries are only the closest and biggest ones, which are all we can detect, which is going to produce *some* kind of sample bias.

There are 4 different scenarios that I can think of: 1) we are alone or nearly so, 2) There are lots of ETs but they communicate by hyperwave relay, 3) There are lots of ETs and they use radio, and 4) There are some ETs out there, but given the size of the galaxy, they're probably not close.

All are possible. Only #3 disagrees with observations. Therefore we can't settle this by logical analysis. More facts needed.

Well don't forget Sagan's caveat:

We could be 1 of millions risen at the wrong time, too late or too early and we'd appear to be alone.

Well don't forget Sagan's caveat:

We could be 1 of millions risen at the wrong time, too late or too early and we'd appear to be alone.

Interesting take by Stephen Baxter in some of his books... His main character argues that humanity is about to bite it because either we're at the end of humanity's lifespan or we're not; if the former, we're in the largest group of currently living people; if the latter, then we're part of the very small fraction of the beginning of humanity's lifespan. Since we're more likely to be in the big group than in the littler group, humanity must be about to tank.

I have to keep reminding myself that this is fiction he's writing, so I can't hold this against him. But some of the pseudo-logical contortions that people go through when arguing one side or the other of this subject are just as awful.

Well don't forget Sagan's caveat:

We could be 1 of millions risen at the wrong time, too late or too early and we'd appear to be alone.

Interesting take by Stephen Baxter in some of his books... His main character argues that humanity is about to bite it because either we're at the end of humanity's lifespan or we're not; if the former, we're in the largest group of currently living people; if the latter, then we're part of the very small fraction of the beginning of humanity's lifespan. Since we're more likely to be in the big group than in the littler group, humanity must be about to tank.

I have to keep reminding myself that this is fiction he's writing, so I can't hold this against him. But some of the pseudo-logical contortions that people go through when arguing one side or the other of this subject are just as awful.

Agreed, Baxter has a very odd way of explaining his ideas.

I liked his novel, the name escapes me, where we encountered robotic sentience mining the Kuiper belt.

So what, the physics of planets is more complicated than we thought. Big surprise! I don't understand the implications of that study besides "it's not so simple to say whether a planet is or isn't habitable". Because it works in both directions.
I just would like to point out that in our Solar system, there aren't many "rocks" showing off signs of active volcanism. So I think it's kind of premature to judge for other systems so quickly.
http://tothefutur...spot.com