Listen to this PodcastMore 60-Second Space
NASA's orbiting Kepler telescope has discovered its first planet in the habitable zone of another star. By "habitable," astronomers mean that a planet could harbor temperatures conducive to liquid water—and maybe life.
The new planet, Kepler 22b, orbits somewhat closer to its host star than Earth does to the sun. “The star is some 600 light-years away.” NASA's Bill Borucki, who leads the Kepler mission, in a December 5th teleconference.
That star is a bit cooler than the sun. "So if the greenhouse warming were similar on this planet, and it had a surface, its surface temperature would be something like 72 Fahrenheit—a very pleasant temperature here on Earth."
Kepler 22b is more than twice as large as Earth. One big caveat is that it may not be rocky, like Earth is. It could instead be a gas planet like Neptune. If that were the case, prospects for life there would be rather dim.
Kepler ought to find even better candidates for life in the near future. The satellite has now tentatively identified more than 2,300 possible planets—about 50 of them in the habitable zone—that await confirmation in the years to come.
—John Matson
[The above text is a transcript of this podcast.]
See what we're tweeting about
19 Comments
Add CommentWE ARE NOT ALONE!!!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisBacteria reproduce in Earth's clouds, so it is not true that a gas planet cannot support life.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThere is also possibility that the core of gas planet, under high pressure, has liquid-like, dense environment similar to Earth water. But I know too little about physics to be sure about it.
I am more interested how well can we exclude existence of Earth-like planets on closer stars. Which are the closest stars which have still open possibility of Earthlike plantets?
Now all we need is the means to communicate efficiently and a way to travel there of let 'them' travel here.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOr maybe just better to leave them alone in the first place? Before you know it we 'destroy' a second planet. Doesn't look good on Earth's resumé.. ;)
At merely twice the size of earth, Kepler 22b is very unlikely to have those kinds of pressures.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisAnd 600 light years is pretty damn close in astronomical terms.
As stated above- bacteria can live in clouds.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSeveral scientists believe that ice is a more likely place where life originated on earth- liquid water may not be needed.
Whether or not life originated there- life can survive there now.
The current life on earth, seems more or less linked to liquid water; however, on another planet that may not be necessary. We evolved to use water because water was abundant.
It may be easier for us to recognise water-using organisms- and it certainly does offer many chemical advantages... but it really need not be the only means to life- and probably isn't.
Well, if there's intelligent life there and they're more advanced than us, their radio transmissions from the 1400's should be getting here any day now.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisKepler has job security.It is billions of Earth years behind schedule now, should have started looking a few million years ago.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisConsidering how long light takes to travel from distant stars, in some cases it is "looking a few million years ago".
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIf Kepler could find oil on the planet we could get a real financial boost for exploration.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisKepler 22b could have a moon, even one of Earth size. It could even have several moons, and those could account for a percentage of the estimated size of the transit shadow detected. This would likely mean that the planet is smaller than first estimated, increasing the possibility of life. We will need to wait for more observations by newer telescopes to answer these questions.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIts pretty unlikely to be a 'gas giant' for a couple of reasons. The first reason is that being so close to its sun means that unless its orbit has shifted dramatically since it was formed, it came together in the stellar disk inside the water zone. Secondly, at only 2x the mass of the Earth, it doesn't have enough mass to collect a lot of gaseous mass to it, or hold onto a super thick atmosphere that close to its sun (solar wind erodes atmospheres).
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI suppose its possible, just pretty unlikely. Chances are, its a rocky type planet, with or without a very large moon.
Although there is a good chance of it being rocky, gaseous is still an entirely viable possiblity. There have been several "hot Jupiters" discovered that orbit very close to their suns. And Keppler 22b is 2x the diameter of the Earth, not 2x the mass. (Its mass hasn't been determined yet.) By comparison, Neptune is only 4x the Earth's diameter, but 17x its mass.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisActually Keppler 22b is estimated at 2.4 times the radius of Earth, meaning it could be up to ~36 times the mass. http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/kepler/news/kepscicon-briefing.html
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIf there are moons, their mass would likely be included, but, depending on the planet density, surface gravity could be considerable.
It only make since that we ventrue look at the U.S. during westward expansion we saw a period of growth in culture and populations, resources and industry like we have never before. We discovered new things like oil and huge gold mines. We may discover there what we need here.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisGas planets are obviously not all gas, or liquified under high pressure. We've seen solid matter falling into at least Jupiter, and there must have been plenty of that since the beginning of the solar system. I don't see why some are mostly gas.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this"Close" is very relative in astronomy. Everything is between 'here' and infinity. How many stars are less than 600 LY from us? That distance would mean a 'conversation' would have a 1200 year 'frequency'.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisI think in terms of eventual exo-colonization, we'd do better to look for nearby stars with asteroids that we could convert to living space, so that we might then colonize planets, and prepare by gaining some experience colonizing our own asteroids.
Is Keppler 22b thought to be a lone planet? That might say something about future discoveries. Other planets of similar size around one star must complicate determining orbital distances.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisYour report states that the newly-discovered planet "could be at temperatures allowing liquid water, a big hurdle for life." Surely the biggest hurdle is the transition from non-life to life? The late Dr Francis Crick (an atheist) wrote: “An honest man, armed with all the knowledge available to us now, could only state that in some sense, the origin of life appears at the moment to be almost a miracle, so many are the conditions, which would have had to have been satisfied to get it going.” (Life Itself, 1981, p. 88). Secular scientists can't even explain how life began on earth, let alone elsewhere in the universe.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thismmhaha,someone is coming~~~
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this