161–170 of 347 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That’s an interesting exoplanet, though not sure how someone would live on a gas giant.
I don't think it makes sense for a humanoid species, but silicon based, perhaps? Iain M Banks' The Algebraist [0] has a near immortal species called Dwellers that manage it somehow :) [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Algebraist#:~:text=Dweller... .
I think the authors do not understand how planetary resonances work and how precise (or imprecise) the orbits need to be for the resonance to hold. Resonances are very common. We have lots of resonances in our Solar system in all different places between bodies. For the resonance to be stable, two bodies do not need to have mathematically precise orbits in relation to each other. There is quite a wide margin for erro…
I don't think that's the implication though. Life on earth would not be the same without the moon's orbit to provide stable ocean current rides. I would imagine not having that would add extra complexities to establish long term growth of "life"?
I've often thought planet TrEs-2b [0], the darkest planet ever discovered orbiting a star, would be the best candidate for extra terrestrial life. My theory is that its darkness is down to the fact that the civilisation there has figured out a way to harness solar energy to near 100% capacity, along the lines of a Dyson sphere [1]. [0] https://exoplanets.nasa.gov/exoplanet-catalog/1716/tres-2-b [1] https://en.wikiped…
That’s an interesting exoplanet, though not sure how someone would live on a gas giant.
Note how far out from the planet's orbit NASA expects the habitable zone. We aren't very good yet at finding planets that aren't huge or nearly hugging their star, so there might be planets out there.
Reminds me of Titius–Bode law[1], where simple equation correctly gave orbits of all the known planets, while predicting one more in asteroid belt and correct distance to Uranus. Only was considered disproven when Neptune didn't work. I would not trust these relations even existing (other than by pure chance). Even less I'd trust any intelligent design behind it [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titius%E2%80%93Bode_l…
> other than by pure chance Barring intelligent design, there's an extremely good chance that at least one of these systems exist, and an equally good chance that only one exists, and we're just lucky enough to have observed it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Well, on an unrelated note, do you have any scifi author recommendations?
I have so many . In real life, this is where I get a very intense look in my eye, and about 50% of the time, I can see that the person I'm speaking with has realized that they're now trapped in an hour-long conversation with me. I'll make it a short list of recent authors I've liked: - Adrian Tchaikovsky. He's best known for his Children of Time series, but his other scifi books are also excellent; I haven't read the…
I'm working through The Final Architecture series right now, it's got some absolutely great SF.
I think the authors do not understand how planetary resonances work and how precise (or imprecise) the orbits need to be for the resonance to hold. Resonances are very common. We have lots of resonances in our Solar system in all different places between bodies. For the resonance to be stable, two bodies do not need to have mathematically precise orbits in relation to each other. There is quite a wide margin for erro…
> It would be like saying that because the period of our Moons rotation is so precisely the same as period of its orbit around Earth that it always faces Earth with one side, that somebody must have put the Moon on the orbit I don't think that's the implication though. Life on earth would not be the same without the moon's orbit to provide stable ocean current rides. I would imagine not having that would add extra co…
What is the "mathematically perfect" aspect of this system? I don't see it in the article.
As detailed in the companion article [1], for every 54 orbits of planet 1, planets 2..6 orbit 36, 24, 16, 12, and 8 times respectively, giving successive ratios of 2/3, 2/3, 2/3, 3/4 and 3/4. After those 54 planet 1 orbits, all planets are in the same relative position. [1] https://www.space.com/six-sub-neptunes-found-100-light-years...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Dyson spheres are probably really rare. It's just bad strategy, everyone within your galaxy knows you're there pretty much immediately when a star just up and disappears one day. Granted, the non-K2s just stare in awe maybe, but the other K2s will fuck your shit up. Can't exactly pack it up and run either, not with a medium-sized star in your suitcase.
>but the other K2s will fuck your shit up. [Citation Needed]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Holy cow. ChatGPT 4 actually decoded this. It went into analysis mode, wrote some python, ran it, and gave the correct answer.
Why are you surprised? Is base64 hard for chatgpt, or am I missing something?
I’m just surprised it hit all the steps properly rather than hallucinating a response.