How Many stars have Planets ?

Discussion in 'Astronomy, Exobiology, & Cosmology' started by johnahmed, Feb 6, 2006.

  1. draqon Banned Banned

    Thats debatable...I am talking of the 3rd planet...We just didnt find any there yet, but might, find psychrophiles methanogens, cold loving bacteria that breath or make methane. The bacteria might live in the Martian soil, close to Olympus Mon say.
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. draqon Banned Banned

    Sounds to me like all of you guys think of planets as the having the only potential to develop life, well what about moon Europa and moon Titan? The recent satellite-probe mission named Cassini-Huygens showed moon Titan to have an ocean of ethane, and a very possible scenario were bacteria can exist in the Titan's methane clouds. Think I am foolish to say so? Did you know there are bacteria living in Earth atmosphere just now?
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. c7ityi_ Registered Senior Member


    i mean that rotation, orbit and moons play a part too (for example). Venus has a very slow rotation and no moon, mars has two small moons. On earth, the sun and moon look like they are the same size, it means that their energy is wonderfully balanced. The Night and Day have the same power.

    Water was created when the other 3 elements combined. The heat of the sun allowed liquification of matter and complexity through dilation of atoms. Particles became able to form and revolve around another nucleus in their "atomic galaxies". Alchemy.
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. Nova1021 Registered Senior Member

    Sounds very lovely and mystical. Too bad this is a science board.

    I've always been interested in the use of "energy" in new age mysticism. You said that the energy of the sun and moon are balanced; what energy is that referring to exactly?

    Also, last I checked, there are 116 elements, and water is made of two of them.
  8. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    ... Oh no, not at all old man. I believe most around here would consider more than tenable the possibility of life existing outside the so called Goldilocks Zone - I mean, you could also add to the list of possibilities planets or planetoids orbiting binary star systems if you wanted, the notion wouldn't get poo-pooed in the slightest - it's just the conversation as it stood at the time was touching upon smaller planetary sized bodies such as those within the inner solar system. In practice, when it comes to detecting extra solar system bodies, I'm not all that certain we've managed to yet pick up anything under a Jupiter class Planet...

    Not that there probably aren't many types of smaller ones to be found, it's just our means of detecting such things remains in development.

    But in the main, indeed, orbiting bodies such as Europa, Titan, etcetera continue to remain intriguing with regards to the possibilities of life generating process.
  9. draqon Banned Banned


    Who u calling old? :bugeye: Mr. russian-no-making-sense-user-title ... The translation of your user title is: "during this time = vagina" wha????
  10. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    ... Well, with regards to that first, "old man" is just an expression, a manner of speaking pertinent to the way the British supposedly speak.

    As to that latter matter of my user title - oh, trust me. It makes perfect sense. Stick around, you'll probably end up coming to the same conclusion...

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  11. c7ityi_ Registered Senior Member

    There's nothing mystical about anything if you understand it. Today's science (physics) is not the right science for reality.

    There is only one kind of energy: the magnetic energy. Depending upon the circumstances, this one energy produces such and such a behavior, to which physicists give special names. But the source is the same.

    Depends on how many parts you want to divide infinity into.
  12. eburacum45 Valued Senior Member

    A magnetosphere is a useful accessory in the habitable (Goldilocks) zone of a Sun-like star; but it may not be necessary if we consider a slightly smaller K-class stars.
    The radiation from a K class star has less UV and other energetic types of radiation so a planet could be habitable with a minimal magnetic field.

    Other advantages of considering K class stars;
    There are more K class stars in the galaxy than G class, and they have a longer period on the main sequence. So there is more time and more opportunity for life to develop around these orange dwarfs.

    On the other hand the goldilocks zone around a K class star is smaller in extent, so it is unlikely that there is more than one planet in the zone around any particular star.
  13. What about Flare activity emanating from a K-Class star, is surface particulate ejection equally reduced or is that something astronomers are still trying to ascertain?
  14. Nova1021 Registered Senior Member

    Ok, just for fun: what is the correct science for understanding reality? And why is physics so good at it, if it's incorrect?

    So the sun and moon are magnetically bound to the earth, and that magnetic energy has to do with their apparent size in the sky? Could you explain that in more detail? And all other physical interactions are magnetic as well? That's very interesting.

    I believe in your previous post you said that there are three elements which came together to form water. Now they are infinite? Odd.
  15. Nova1021 Registered Senior Member

    It's difficult to tell what sort of particle ejection occurs in stellar flares, since all we have to go on are spectra. We can estimate temperature, electron density, and other properties of the star's surface, but not much about the ejections. Chances are, for a flare of equal strength, the amount of "stuff" thrown off the star is the same. It may even be more, since a K star will be less massive.
  16. c7ityi_ Registered Senior Member

    The correct science for reality would be a science of consciousness. Is physics good at explaning the world? I wouldn't say so. The "less scientific" like philosophy and religion explain it much better.

    I don't know what more to tell, it's just so simple. No complexification is necessary. People only complicate in order to not understand because they are afraid of the truth and themselves because they don't want to lose what they love.


    It's like with colors, they are infinite, still they can be divided into 7 main colors for example. It's often unnecessary to speak of so many as 116. The ancients spoke of only 4, and sometimes 2, and sometimes 12.

    Those people knew everything thousands of years ago. They knew all the laws of nature, so they could also manipulate them. They knew why the universe existed and they knew also their own mystery, the mystery of the sphinx.
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2006
  17. Nova1021 Registered Senior Member

    Until philosophy and religion can satisfactorily (that is, with verifiable, reproducable results and predictions) explain gravity, electricity, magnetism, the strong and weak interactions, I'll stick with physics.

    If it's so simple, explain it to me. I'm not asking for "complexification," I'm asking for the opposite: clarity. All I'm asking is for an explanation. Tell me how the moon and sun interact with earth through magnetic energy that depends on their perceived size in the sky, as you mentioned before, and I'll be satisfied. If you cannot explain it, I have no reason to think your beliefs have any value.

    There are shades of color, granted. There are not shades of water. It is water or it isn't. If it is, it is made of two hydrogen atoms and an oxygen. If it isn't, it isn't.

    Which people? If they could manipulate the laws of nature, why did they have gods? Why did they get sick and die, or have wars or famine? And what does the sphinx have to do with this?

    To everyone else reading this, thanks for bearing with this side discussion in the midst of the serious one going on about planets around other stars.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  18. Nova1021 Registered Senior Member

    It is important to consider that, although life on earth can be found in extreme environments, it probably did not originate there (deep sea vents aside). More likely, most extremophiles on earth have ancestors who lived in more hospitable areas, and only found their unpleasant niches later on.

    So, if the planet or moon you're considering has *only* extreme environments, it's possible that if life was already going strong, it could adapt to that environment. Its chances of originating there, however, are slim.
  19. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    ... My word, y'have been busy tonight. Many thanks for the info, much obliged. I was thinking as much but always does to check.

    Thank you once again. A

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  20. c7ityi_ Registered Senior Member

    I'm not trying to satisfy you. Everything I do, I do for myself. There is no one else. Everything is me. All planets are just big magnets, and magnetism causes movement and rotation which generates gravity. The sun is a big Rock like the earth, just under different circumstances. All things are magnets because they consist of bipolar particles.

    There are only one kind of particles. Bipolar ones. Protons, neutrons, electrons are the same particles under different circumstances.

    There are shades of elements. You've lost yourself in definitions.

    Ancient people. You don't remember them. They had no "gods". But among them, there were primitive people who had.

    They didn't get sick, they healed themselves using the staff of life/death. But often they chose to be sick because it was their destiny. They didn't have wars or famine (because they could manipulate weather. pyramid. thunder), but they did die, because they chose to. They went back to the primal state of paradisical oneness.

    This is fun. Are you happy too?

    not that stone statue, the meaning, what the sphinx represents.
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2006
  21. Nova1021 Registered Senior Member

    Man, I need to tell the physics faculty about this. It'll make their lives so much easier to have to deal with only one force. And the astronomy folks will be fascinated to hear about the sun being a rock. I always suspected that those solar specta were fishy, saying it was made of hydrogen with other trace elements.

    Again, I know some people who would love to have to deal with only one particle. Too bad they didn't know this before; could've saved a lot of money on all those supercolliders.

    My definitions are clear and consistant. You haven't yet defined anything that I asked you about.

    No, I only remember things that occurred during my lifetime, oddly enough. I mentioned gods because you seemed to be talking about the egyptians. They either had gods, or had friends with very strange looking heads.

    I'm amused, but am not happy. It makes me sad that there are people like you.

    Of course, how could I be so silly?

    It's been fun c7ityi_, but it appears that we aren't going to change each others' beliefs. I'll stop asking pesky questions about your magnetic sphinx of infinite elemental shades if you'll stop making nonsensical claims in the science forums.
  22. c7ityi_ Registered Senior Member

    You see, because of the magnetic relations the sun has to planets, it has to turn at a specific speed (24h/day), but since the sun is such a big rock, its surface can't turn so fast, it requires 25h (27h at latitude 45°, and 30 or 35h at the poles). Between the nucleus and the surface, a rubbing together of the different layers of the sun occurs, which increases the heat, and makes the matter fluid and the sun bright.

    Of course, the nucleus of the Sun spins in 24 hours (or an entire multiple or submultiple). If it did not, IT COULD NOT ATTRACT THE EARTH. Only synchronized spins produce gravitation between stars and planets.

    The heat of the sun is never caused by nuclear explosions: They are the consequence of heat and not the cause.

    Physicists never observed magnets to explain the universe. And now they don't want to hear about it. It's too simple. They spend too much money on discovering very few things. They generally refuse to imagine that they could answer the greatest questions in the world with only five dollars worth of magnets.

    Those gods are symbolic representations of various things. Speaking of strange heads, the ancients had elongated heads which gave them abilities which we don't even know we have.

    Don't be sad, I'm a part of you which you couldn't accept, that's why we became two different persons. Don't you see that we are the same?

    But that's the reason why the universe exists. Fear. Repulsion. The other half: Love. Attraction. Creation begins with the negative pole being expelled from unity and the two poles consequently drawing apart and becoming opposed to each other as force and resistance.

    But I never tried to change your beliefs.

    But I like when you ask questions..
  23. MariEmerald Registered Member

    Orbits and rotation

    So what you're saying is that the rotation of a planet has something to do with the amount of satellites it has?

    - Mari

Share This Page