Earlier quoted context omitted.
> are there...hazards simply due to the proximity of a dim star Tidal locking [1]. Similar to how our moon shines at us ass first all the time, the planets around TRAPIST-1 would be expected to have one face locked to their star. Instead of an equatorial belt bookended with loops of temperate zones, as we have on Earth, we should expect, climatically, an "equatorial" face and a "polar" face separated by a tropic-to-t…
Fascinating! Also – off topic, but – this description reminded me of Twinsun[1], the planet in the game Little Big Adventure. It remains one of my fondest game memories of that era, despite all its weird bugs. I've thought about finding a copy and playing it again at some point, but I fear it might spoil my good memories of it.. [1]: http://lba.wikia.com/wiki/Twinsun
Seven earth-sized planets discovered circling a star 39 light years from Earth
501–510 of 754 posts
Re: Seven earth-sized planets discovered circling a star 39 light years from Earth
#502Earlier quoted context omitted.
That actually sounds... more plausible than I would have expected. Like, doable with technology I can imagine being within reach in the next 50 years even if we don't achieve any currently-unforseen breakthroughs.
EDIT: My math was totally wrong. 10 trillion dollars, 0.1x world GDP. (Still a lot of money though) Leaving the old text below so the replies make sense. --- To move 6,000,000 megatons of fuel into low earth orbit would take 111,111 Falcon Heavy launches, at a total cost of $10,000,000,000,000 dollars. (10 quadrillion dollars, 93x world GDP) Something that takes the total global economic output of the planet a centur…
I'm not sure if your error is in the number or in the words, but the number you wrote down is 10 trillion dollars.
Re: Seven earth-sized planets discovered circling a star 39 light years from Earth
#503Earlier quoted context omitted.
That actually sounds... more plausible than I would have expected. Like, doable with technology I can imagine being within reach in the next 50 years even if we don't achieve any currently-unforseen breakthroughs.
EDIT: My math was totally wrong. 10 trillion dollars, 0.1x world GDP. (Still a lot of money though) Leaving the old text below so the replies make sense. --- To move 6,000,000 megatons of fuel into low earth orbit would take 111,111 Falcon Heavy launches, at a total cost of $10,000,000,000,000 dollars. (10 quadrillion dollars, 93x world GDP) Something that takes the total global economic output of the planet a centur…
[deleted]
Re: Seven earth-sized planets discovered circling a star 39 light years from Earth
#504My favourite part of the press release: > The planets also are very close to each other. If a person was standing on one of the planet’s surface, they could gaze up and potentially see geological features or clouds of neighboring worlds, which would sometimes appear larger than the moon in Earth's sky. > In contrast to our sun, the TRAPPIST-1 star – classified as an ultra-cool dwarf – is so cool that liquid water cou…
[deleted]
Re: Seven earth-sized planets discovered circling a star 39 light years from Earth
#505I wonder if SETI are going to point at it, you know, just incase :)
Re: Seven earth-sized planets discovered circling a star 39 light years from Earth
#506Earlier quoted context omitted.
EDIT: My math was totally wrong. 10 trillion dollars, 0.1x world GDP. (Still a lot of money though) Leaving the old text below so the replies make sense. --- To move 6,000,000 megatons of fuel into low earth orbit would take 111,111 Falcon Heavy launches, at a total cost of $10,000,000,000,000 dollars. (10 quadrillion dollars, 93x world GDP) Something that takes the total global economic output of the planet a centur…
I'm not sure if your error is in the number or in the words, but the number you wrote down is 10 trillion dollars.
Note to mention that Falcon Launches would get significantly cheaper if we have to do 100,000 of them.
Re: Seven earth-sized planets discovered circling a star 39 light years from Earth
#507Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah I'm to be honest just trying to awaken people to the priority being that we need to establish a self-sufficient colony somewhere other than Earth.
Well, HN is not the most optimal place to do that. There are not many of us on here and we all already know these things. 1600 Pennsylvania Pl. is a better bang for your buck.
I think you probably mean 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. (not Pl.), Washington, D.C.
Though I don't share your assessment that that is a productive place to direct citizen input on this (or any other) issue.
Re: Seven earth-sized planets discovered circling a star 39 light years from Earth
#508Earlier quoted context omitted.
An excellent, incredibly beautiful film, beyond the topical plot point.
Beautiful, but super, super, boring -- with an extra helping of boring on top.
The challenging thing about Melancholia isn't "boredom" but the shaky camera work in the first half of the movie. I turned it off in disgust after 30 minutes or so. No idea why I went back and watched the rest of it, but I'm glad I did. One of those films that sticks with you.
Re: Seven earth-sized planets discovered circling a star 39 light years from Earth
#509My favourite part of the press release: > The planets also are very close to each other. If a person was standing on one of the planet’s surface, they could gaze up and potentially see geological features or clouds of neighboring worlds, which would sometimes appear larger than the moon in Earth's sky. > In contrast to our sun, the TRAPPIST-1 star – classified as an ultra-cool dwarf – is so cool that liquid water cou…
> The planets also are very close to each other. If a person was standing on one of the planet’s surface, they could gaze up and potentially see geological features or clouds of neighboring worlds, which would sometimes appear larger than the moon in Earth's sky. this reminds me of one my favorite films ever. it is just four minutes long http://www.erikwernquist.com/wanderers/
Thank you for this. Awesome.
Re: Seven earth-sized planets discovered circling a star 39 light years from Earth
#510Earlier quoted context omitted.
All about funding. NASA, for example, is about 35 years behind schedule by my math, solely from funding. Now whether throwing money at a public agency would have made advancements in lensing, transistor along with propulsion technology happen quicker. Thats a tougher question that leans towards the "unlikely".
Funding is not the only issue. Their planning was also a disaster. The Space Shuttle wasted so much money with very little return. If NASA continued with Project Orion and NERVA a Mars colony would have been well established by now.
The Space Shuttle was fundamentally flawed because NASA compromised with DoD to get it funded. Had NASA been fully funded for space exploration alone they would have made better choices.