Habitable Exoplanets

[Spaceception]

Between Kepler, Spitzer, Hubble, and many ground based observatory's, we've found thousands of exoplanets, some of them (Potentially) habitable, and between Kepler 442b, 452b, 186f, and 62e/f, and many others found by the Kepler space telescope, as well as Tau ceti e, GJ 667cc/f/e, GJ 180b/c, and Kapteyn b, and many more, there are a lot of Habitable Exoplanets.

Here's a pretty cool website, with a bunch of Habitable Exoplanets data.

http://phl.upr.edu/projects/habitable-exoplanets-catalog

So lets begin a Habitable Exoplanets discussion!

Edited December 6, 2015 by Spaceception

[Bill Phil]

In astronomy, habitable generally means similar (astronomically) to Earth. In habitable zone, within a certain size range, certain mass range, certain values that contribute to Earth Similarity Index, etc.

[Spaceception]

6 minutes ago, Bill Phil said:

6 minutes ago, Bill Phil said:

In astronomy, habitable generally means similar (astronomically) to Earth. In habitable zone, within a certain size range, certain mass range, certain values that contribute to Earth Similarity Index, etc.

 

I just put up a poll Btw.

[cubinator]

For an exoplanet to be habitable to humans, it must have:
-About 1atm of pressure
-Almost exactly the same atmospheric components* (73%nitrogen or something that doesn't mess up our cells, 20ish% oxygen (O₂ of  course), a bit of the other stuff)
-It must be habitable to all the other (essential) little critters that live on/in us
-It must have water that is not full of salt and stuff
-It must have a good magnetosphere
-It must not have some kind of alien bacteria that is impossible for our carbon-based bodies to fight off
-It must be just the right temperature so we don't freeze/boil
-Other stuff I forgot but is still important

So for an exoplanet to be habitable, there are a lot of factors that will get us killed when we take off our space helmets. I'm sure we will find planets with some of the right conditions, and even some with life of their own, but I doubt we will find one with all the right conditions for us. I'm sure we'll find a Laythe sooner or later, but we won't find a Kerbin for a long time.

Also, shouldn't this be in Science and Spaceflight?

Edited December 6, 2015 by cubinator

[Spaceception]

3 hours ago, cubinator said:

For an exoplanet to be habitable to humans, it must have:
-About 1atm of pressure
-Almost exactly the same atmospheric components* (73%nitrogen or something that doesn't mess up our cells, 20ish% oxygen (O₂ of  course), a bit of the other stuff)
-It must be habitable to all the other (essential) little critters that live on/in us
-It must have water that is not full of salt and stuff
-It must have a good magnetosphere
-It must not have some kind of alien bacteria that is impossible for our carbon-based bodies to fight off
-It must be just the right temperature so we don't freeze/boil
-Other stuff I forgot but is still important

So for an exoplanet to be habitable, there are a lot of factors that will get us killed when we take off our space helmets. I'm sure we will find planets with some of the right conditions, and even some with life of their own, but I doubt we will find one with all the right conditions for us. I'm sure we'll find a Laythe sooner or later, but we won't find a Kerbin for a long time.

I agree, we won't be able to find stuff out like a breathable atmosphere, and warm temperatures on exoplanets, at least until we launch the JWST, but discovery's of planets inside the habitable zone are still pretty cool.

 

Also, I realized that it should've been in "Science and Spaceflight" after I posted it.

Edited December 6, 2015 by Spaceception

[ChrisSpace]

I'm placing my vote on the one with the highest ESI, but without any images of these planets it is really impossible to know how habitable they are.

[Spaceception]

15 minutes ago, ChrisSpace said:

I'm placing my vote on the one with the highest ESI, but without any images of these planets it is really impossible to know how habitable they are.

True, but in the near future, it won't be impossible.

[Kerbart]

14 hours ago, cubinator said:

For an exoplanet to be habitable to humans, it must have:
(...)
-It must have water that is not full of salt and stuff
(...)

Assuming that we gather information from far away—infinitely better than what we do now, but NOTcomparable to sending a probe like New Horizons—we would disregard an exact clone of Earth as uninhabitable. Yeah, there's water, it's even covering about 70% of the surface of the planet. Alas, the water is salty.

Edited December 6, 2015 by Kerbart
Added the word NOT as intended. Leaving it out makes my comment seem silly.

[cubinator]

10 hours ago, Kerbart said:

Assuming that we gather information from far away—infinitely better than what we do now, but NOTcomparable to sending a probe like New Horizons—we would disregard an exact clone of Earth as uninhabitable. Yeah, there's water, it's even covering about 70% of the surface of the planet. Alas, the water is salty.

I know the Earth has lots of salty water, but it also has water that is drinkable, and it has enough of it that it can support billions of us. Thus, we could disregard the presence of salty water if we also find fresh water.

[Kerbart]

52 minutes ago, cubinator said:

I know the Earth has lots of salty water, but it also has water that is drinkable, and it has enough of it that it can support billions of us. Thus, we could disregard the presence of salty water if we also find fresh water.

Yes, but my point is that you will not find that water with current technology. Unless you send a probe. If a long distance scan is going to reveal the presence of water on earth, it'll be the oceans. Not the 2.5% fresh water we have scattered all over the place in minute fractions.

[cubinator]

33 minutes ago, Kerbart said:

Yes, but my point is that you will not find that water with current technology. Unless you send a probe. If a long distance scan is going to reveal the presence of water on earth, it'll be the oceans. Not the 2.5% fresh water we have scattered all over the place in minute fractions.

I know. We won't be finding anyplace that can specifically support us until we manage to go there, and even then it's unlikely we'll be able to survive there unprotected, but we may find someplace that can support other lifeforms. Hoping for another Earth is futile, but a world with its own life may be closer than we think. It may just take a probe to the oceans of Enceladus or Europa.

[pincushionman]

Why woulld you think that

(a) we could tell any difference, from interstellar distances, between "we see evidence of water, and also evidence of salts" and "we see evidence of salty water"? My understanding of our science is that we can detect water, no further details.

(b) if we see salt water, we can't assume fresh water is present? If there are both seas and land, and the temperature and pressure ranges match ours well enough, we can safely assume there's a water cycle, meaning it's highly likely there's fresh water somewhere. If not, desalination is a relatively straightforward process. Expensive, but straightforward.

(c) if there is salt water, we can't expect habitanility? After all, our own seas are teeming with life of all types. I would imagine that incompatibilities with our physiology would be more likely due to the native ecosystems than the presence of salt.

[Spaceception]

Hey guys, a new potentially habitable exoplanet was discovered.

https://www.science.unsw.edu.au/news/discovery-nearby-star-hosts-closest-alien-planet-in-habitable-zone

[sal_vager]

Closed at @Spaceception's request