World, Writing, Wealth discussion

So has anyone been staying abreast of the news about Proxima Centauri? Weeks ago, there was a story leaked, apparently from the European Southern Observatory, that an extra-solar planet had been observed around Proxima Centauri - the closest star system to Earth. The ESO has since confirmed this, and indicated that its rocky (like Earth) and orbits within its star's habitable zone.

https://www.theguardian.com/science/2...

Yeah, I've read it with interest. Still frustrating that we are nowhere near having technologies to travel to the system closest to us in a viable time frame.
Read that exchange of light signals, if anyone's there, can take 'only' about 12 years.

Nik wrote: "Yeah, I've read it with interest. Still frustrating that we are nowhere near having technologies to travel to the system closest to us in a viable time frame.
Read that exchange of light signals, ..."

Well now that's where things get especially exciting (for me, anyway). I had the honor of writing about this story and one thing I kept harping on (and still do, as you can see) is Project Starshot. Ever heard of it?

Googled it now. Sounds nothing short of exciting!

Nik wrote: "Googled it now. Sounds nothing short of exciting!"

thx so much Matthew for reporting this momentous event!

whoa! that is totally exciting! only 4.2 ly away, which means that if SETI beamed some messages to it (assuming it hadn't yet), then it's only take 8.4 years round-trip for a return missive.

it is actually quite amazing since it's a binary star system and planets have a hard time surviving in them. maybe in this case the stars are far enough apart?

here's the original article in Nature:

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/...

"Dr. Anglada will discuss the new paper he is first author in reporting" at SETI on 30 August:

http://www.seti.org/weekly-lecture/te...

oh, it's in mountain view at microsoft. maybe i should go. i'll be in the office, which is there in the general vicinity.

https://www.eventbrite.com/e/a-terres...

Note: it will be recorded and released 1-2 days later.

This is the original press release. Though of course, the buggers leaked the story weeks in advance and then refused to talk about it. I should know! I found the chief author of the study and he just stonewalled (jerk!)

https://www.eso.org/public/news/eso16...

Probably just an uninhabited rock...

Graeme wrote: "Probably just an uninhabited rock..."

The question isn't if its uninhabited or not, if its habitable or not.

Graeme wrote: "Probably just an uninhabited rock..."

Almost certainly, but that's one of the awesome things about being human; we get to solve the mystery. I don't just mean whether or not there's life on Proxima B, but how we will get there and what we'll discover along the way.

A few centuries ago, physicists believed that humans would never be able to push an object to the necessary velocity needed to put that object into orbit around the Earth. But in the 1970's, we figured out how get the Voyager 1 spacecraft to the needed velocity to escape the gravitational force of the sun (151,476.4 kilometers an hour), and send it beyond the solar system.

It might be just a rock, but Proxima B is for sure an attractive stepping stone.

I'd also like to point out that the ESO research team has already determined with a degree of certitude that it has an atmosphere, liquid water on its surface, and has a temperature profile suitable for life.

The takeaway should be that if the closest star to Sol ALSO has a rocky body orbiting in or near the Goldilocks Zone, that is two out of a sample of two within the same volume of space. It is a huge boost for the theory that life is more common that presupposed.

It increases the chances that those small, Earthlike worlds that are really difficult to detect once you move out from our local region are not only there, but common! It is less likely that we will be required to terraform tidally locked planets with marginal habitable zones - instead we may find many stable bodies with established ecosystems! Those are easier to adapt ourselves to than to build up from microbes and algae.

100 million solar systems, and anything over a few percent of those habitable and we can leapfrog through the galaxy, finding one paradise after another. My hope is that there will be others to meet soon, and share PEACEFULLY with, since there is clearly so much to be found.

Kevin Kinnen

Matthew wrote: "I'd also like to point out that the ESO research team has already determined with a degree of certitude that it has an atmosphere, liquid water on its surface, and has a temperature profile suitabl..."

i didn't get that interpretation from the summary of the papers on the SEO link that you provided. they said that they can't rule out the possibility of the existence of those items that you mentioned. that exoplanet gets 60 times the amount of high energy radiation than we get. although it could have some atmospheric shielding--the ozone layer and a geomagnetic field.

Alex G wrote: "Matthew wrote: "I'd also like to point out that the ESO research team has already determined with a degree of certitude that it has an atmosphere, liquid water on its surface, and has a temperature..."

Ah, well then check out these articles:

http://www.ice.cat/personal/iribas/Pr...
https://www.eso.org/public/videos/eso...
https://www.eso.org/public/videos/eso...

While radiation is an undeniable issue, its temperature profiles and the likelihood of a viable atmosphere and liquid water have all been signed off on.

I suspect that given that life has occurred on at least one planet, it will likely crop up where ever conditions are suitable.

I.e. That life is hard coded into the rules of the universe.

(My earlier comment about it being an uninhabited rock was an oblique reference to the corporate interview scene in Aliens where some executive stooge pooh poohs the idea of Alien life on LV 426 - and we all know how that ended...)

Graeme wrote: I.e. That life is hard coded into the rules of the universe.

agree completely, Graeme. Only the other day I was in discussion with someone who insisted a virus is not a life form because it cannot sustain itself independently, or words to that effect. I argued humans cannot sustain themselves independently of Earth or any other rock hurtling through space without a specific atmosphere. I argued we are simply atoms processing a linear reality through a set of 5 senses...

And didn't I read something awhile back about NASA developing a warp engine? Something to do with bending time?

It's great news. One thing interesting is the 3 sun system. Anyone read The Three-Body Problem, first contact with Trisolarans.

Graeme wrote: "I suspect that given that life has occurred on at least one planet, it will likely crop up where ever conditions are suitable.

I.e. That life is hard coded into the rules of the universe.

(My ear..."

No kidding? How did I miss that reference?

M.L. wrote: "It's great news. One thing interesting is the 3 sun system. Anyone read The Three-Body Problem, first contact with Trisolarans."

Not yet, but I have heard great things, and it usually comes up in conversations like these :)

Matthew wrote: "M.L. wrote: "It's great news. One thing interesting is the 3 sun system. Anyone read The Three-Body Problem, first contact with Trisolarans."

Not yet, but I have heard great things..."

The similarity as far as planet description is uncanny. The 3d in the series is out in Sept, I believe.

Just a what if. If there was sentient life on the planet, and if they detected a Project Starshot probe what might their reaction be? I think Project Starshot sounds great and makes sense. But what about their (exoplanet life form) view? Three-Body prompts such questions. :)

M.L. wrote: "Matthew wrote: "M.L. wrote: "It's great news. One thing interesting is the 3 sun system. Anyone read The Three-Body Problem, first contact with Trisolarans."

Not yet, but I have he..."

excellent literary reference, M.L.!

Great news. Any moons? This particularly interests me because my book Moirae, is set on a similar world, in the shadow of our world, if you like a parallel world except that it has two moons.

Mehreen wrote: "Great news. Any moons? This particularly interests me because my book Moirae, is set on a similar world, in the shadow of our world, if you like a parallel world except that it has two moons."

None that we know of yet, but there's so much information that we have yet to learn. The guy who runs the Cool Worlds project at Columbia University (whom I just spoke to the other day about this) is likely to be looking for exomoons in the coming years since that's his specialty. We also need to learn more about the planet's atmosphere.

We are certainly living in exciting times; these extra solar planets seem to keep being discovered with such regularity. The notion of one day being able to travel there (while presently far-fetched) is exciting and awe-inspiring.

So how does a light year work anyway? Does it mean that if we could travel at light speed it would still take us over four years to reach this planet?

Eldon wrote: "We are certainly living in exciting times; these extra solar planets seem to keep being discovered with such regularity. The notion of one day being able to travel there (while presently far-fetche..."

It does indeed. Well, 4.25 to be exact ;) So even if we could break the "light-barrier" getting from one location to the next in our galaxy would still take a very long time.

Matthew wrote: "So even if we could break the "light-barrier" getting from one location to the next in our galaxy would still take a very long time...."

So maybe we should invite them rather than go? -:)

Nik wrote: "Matthew wrote: "So even if we could break the "light-barrier" getting from one location to the next in our galaxy would still take a very long time...."

So maybe we should invite them rather than ..."

Where's your sense of adventure? Think of the books you could read on that flight? :)

Good point, but still a bit chancy in case they are not hospitable -:)

Eldon wrote: "So how does a light year work anyway? Does it mean that if we could travel at light speed it would still take us over four years to reach this planet?"

Light speed is actually really interesting stuff. I highly recommend the documentary "Albert Einstein's Big Idea" by NOVA. Very accessible in how they present information, extremely entertaining, and currently free on YouTube.

Re Eldon's comment about light. If you travelled at light speed, anyone on Earth would spend 4.25 years before you got there, but thanks to the time dilation effect of Einstein's relativity, for you it would be instantaneous!

One other point. If the theory I outlined in "Planetary Formation and Biogenesis" is right, there will be no earth-like planets around red dwarfs. On Thursday, for anyone interested, I shall post on my blog my view on what Proxima b is about. (That should also be available from Goodreads.) Basically, if I am right, it will be a water world, which is not what you would want if you went there. Also, it may not be tidally locked as most seem to think - they overlook a thermal effect.

Ian wrote: "Re Eldon's comment about light. If you travelled at light speed, anyone on Earth would spend 4.25 years before you got there, but thanks to the time dilation effect of Einstein's relativity, for yo..."

That theory is not supported by current research or evidence, which shows that Earth-like planets are actually relatively common around red dwarfs. Not only have terrestrial planet candidates been found around Barnard’s Star, Kepler 42, and now Proxima Centauri, but Avi Loeb of the CfA has calculated that red dwarfs are statistically more likely to host planets where life will arise.

Hold on Ian; you mean 4.25 years would be gone like that at light speed? Could Einstein have found the fountain of youth? And more importantly what about all those books that were going to be read on the trip ;)

Eldon wrote: "Hold on Ian; you mean 4.25 years would be gone like that at light speed? Could Einstein have found the fountain of youth? And more importantly what about all those books that were going to be read ..."

Well lucky for all of us that light-speed is physically impossible. However, 20% the speed of light may be conceivable, which would make the trip in about 20 years. But this involves wafer-craft, not something something that could transport people. So if you're looking for a ride to Proxima, you better start investing in some life-extension technology now.

Matthew wrote: Well lucky for all of us that light-speed is physically impossible.

Whoa! Impossible? I was enjoying you guys bantering until the word impossible was used. Impossible states it can never happen, whilst history tells us the seemingly impossible is possible... One theory to beat light speed is to bend time. Time is a side effect of the movement of matter and the movement of matter is predictable due to consistent repeated patterns... But, of course, this is all theoretical until someone makes it fact... As a novelist (fictionalist) it is a fun playing field... :D

Tim wrote: "Matthew wrote: Well lucky for all of us that light-speed is physically impossible.

Whoa! Impossible? I was enjoying you guys bantering until the word impossible was used. Impossible states it can ..."

OK Tim, honestly I'd like to agree with whatever you said there but I'm just a humble accountant and part time scribe who never was much at science and now we're talking about bending time? Waaay over my head lol

I'll just say I like your enthusiasm and that many impossible things have been made possible by the march of time :)

Tim wrote: "Matthew wrote: Well lucky for all of us that light-speed is physically impossible.

Whoa! Impossible? I was enjoying you guys bantering until the word impossible was used. Impossible states it can ..."

Well, physically it is impossible. The only reason light is able to travel as fast as it does is because it has no mass. For normal matter to accelerate to this speed, it would have to become energy - i.e. fly apart. I don't mean we will never be able to do it, but if we find a way, it will involve circumventing the laws of Relativity, not breaking them.

Also, bending time? I think you mean folding space. Space and time are unified, and therefore manipulating the fabric of space-time could result in faster-than-light travel from one point to another.

Okay, bending, folding? To discern a difference is nit-picking... But I do like the theory that time is malleable. All energy travels in waves. The idea of repeated patterns connecting at repeated junctures is not too radical - remember, I'm not too concerned with what is probable. I write fiction, so if it stands up as a possibility rather than an impossibility, it's an area I explore... I would suggest, theoretically, that time is an energy we will one day be able to measure more accurately than the in days, weeks, months, and, theoretically, if the Higgs Boson is proven to be the particle that switches matter to non-matter, then once in the state of non-matter time would cease to exist... if that were the case then the door is opened to infinite possibilities...

Tim wrote: "Okay, bending, folding? To discern a difference is nit-picking... But I do like the theory that time is malleable. All energy travels in waves. The idea of repeated patterns connecting at repeated ..."

*eyes shift nervously back and forth*

*slowly backs away knowing I'm in wrong thread* lol

Hey, just making sure we're talking about the same thing. And it's not nitpicking, its key to understanding how such a concept would work. But that's because my aim is on the probable, hard sci-fi that looks at what is foreseeable in the future. I focus on what is just outlandish enough to be speculative, but still grounded.

In that respect, wormholes could be a thing if we can ever figure out entanglements and quantum gravity. Warp could also be possible if NASA's research into the Alcubierre Drive bears fruit. But this is all stuff that belongs in another thread, one which I started in fact! :)

https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...

Eldon wrote: "Hold on Ian; you mean 4.25 years would be gone like that at light speed? Could Einstein have found the fountain of youth? And more importantly what about all those books that were going to be read ..."

That is exactly what I mean. Of course you can't just get to light speed instantaneously (unless you are a photon) and you can't get to light speed anyway without infinite energy input, but you can get (in theory) to very close to it. Then you will age slightly - the time dilation is given by the relativistic equations. In such travelling, you will feel exactly normal, because everything else is slowing down too.

Matthew wrote: "Ian wrote: "Re Eldon's comment about light. If you travelled at light speed, anyone on Earth would spend 4.25 years before you got there, but thanks to the time dilation effect of Einstein's relati..."

Exactly how do you know what the planet is? Have you found anyone who has determined the composition of any? There have been the odd star-burner that is probably silicate based, but with temperatures of about 800 degrees C I don't call them "Earth-like". Just finding a planet in the right zone and about the right size does not make it Earth-like.

As an example, two planets were found around Kapteyn's star that were claimed to be in the habitable zone - but they matched very closely my predictions for Jupiter and Saturn cores. The cores are objects like the large satellites. So a Jupiter core would be of the composition of, say, Ganymede or Callisto. Until we get compositional data, we can't tell. As for someone calculating the probability of planets where life will arise, the calculation depends critically on the premises on which biogenesis depends. Thus I am very sure there will be no life under the ice of Europa. The reason is simple: the Jovian satellites are very deficient in nitrogen and carbon. Why do you think Europa is so white? Any carbonaceous material would be photolysed to soot. Europa has more sodium in its tenuous atmosphere than nitrogen! And even if you get over that, how do phosphate esters form?

Ian wrote: "Matthew wrote: "Ian wrote: "Re Eldon's comment about light. If you travelled at light speed, anyone on Earth would spend 4.25 years before you got there, but thanks to the time dilation effect of E..."

I don't know, I am stating what has been advanced by experts in the field. And I prefer to go with what they have to say than someone else's personal theory. No offense, just how I roll.

As for "Earth-like" that refers to a planet being terrestrial. And yes, it's used far too often. But when a planet is likely to be terrestrial based on mass constraints, and orbits within the star's habitable zone and shows evidence of an atmosphere, the term Earth-like is not misguided.

As for your other questions, not sure I see what the Jovian moons have to do with the issue of exoplanets. And here too, I prefer to stick with what planetary scientists from institutions like NASA the ESA and countless research institutes have to say - which is that Europa, Enceladus and even TItan very well could support life. While we're entirely open discussing this subject, this really isn't a forum to be advancing your own theories, sorry to say.

As I noted on the other post, all objects have the same response to a gravitational field. To be Earth-like, it has to have a density of something like 5 and an atmosphere, water, and in my opinion, continents.

Ian wrote: "As I noted on the other post, all objects have the same response to a gravitational field. To be Earth-like, it has to have a density of something like 5 and an atmosphere, water, and in my opinion..."
Yes, as well as moon. It is an earth-like fantasy.

I think it's okay if Ian talks about his own theories.

Or by "this forum", do you mean this particular thread? Or the entire group?

Ian wrote: "As I noted on the other post, all objects have the same response to a gravitational field. To be Earth-like, it has to have a density of something like 5 and an atmosphere, water, and in my opinion..."

And as I said, Ian, this is not about your theories. And it would behoove you to read up on the findings of those researchers who discovered this world and identified the exoplanet candidates around the aforementioned red dwarf stars. While the burden of proof is hardly on me, and I don't know why you are tasking me with it, here is reading from some of the experts I cited:

https://www.eso.org/public/archives/r...
http://arxiv.org/abs/1608.00620
http://arxiv.org/pdf/1606.08448v2.pdf
http://arxiv.org/abs/1201.2189
http://www.nasa.gov/topics/universe/f...
http://www.trappist.one/
http://www.eso.org/public/archives/re...

Alex G wrote: "Or by "this forum", do you mean this particular thread? Or the entire group?"

I was referring to this thread, since Ian seems to be solely interested in his own theories on exoplanets.

Well in that case, I'll let you two go at it.

Reading now with interest what happened here during my night, I think it's interesting to have a multi-angle discussion. It's only natural to have enthusiastic and pessimistic approaches. Ian announced that he'd explain his vision on the blog on Sept 1, so I guess whoever's interested may have a read....
The intergalactic exploration is in its infancy and a lot of theories will probably change, strengthen or be refuted in the future...

Waiting for Branson to launch space travel and hope to have as many accumulated miles on credit card as possible to cover the 100K travel fee of Virgin, as I see that proceeds from books might not suffice -:)