Life-friendly characteristics of Solar System objects

[Findthepin1]

So I decided to make a statistics post of the Solar System bodies that have certain life-friendly characteristics.

---------------------------

Liquids

Surface liquid water: Earth, Mars

Surface liquid methane: Titan

Subsurface liquid water: Ceres?, Europa, Ganymede, Callisto?, Titan, Enceladus, Titania?, Oberon?, Triton? Pluto?

Subsurface liquid magma: Mercury?, Venus, Earth, Mars?, Io

----------------------------

Place where temperature is between 0 and 50 degrees

Earth surface equatorial, sometimes temperate

Mars surface equatorial (occasionally)

Venus atmosphere ~52.5km-58km equatorial, temperate, sometimes? polar

Mercury surface at terminator

----------------------------

Atmosphere at closest temperature to 20°C

Titan: 1.45 atm, -179°C

Mars: 0.006 atm, 20°C

Earth: 1 atm, 20°C

Venus: 0.48 atm, 20°C

-----------------------------

To find the most habitable things let's choose the ones that have atmospheres and can be at 20°C somewhere on or above them, that's Earth, Venus, and Mars. Now we want to rule out atmospheres that are too thin to keep something alive. That takes out Mars, with half the planet's surface being below the triple point of water. We're left with Earth and Venus. Now water. Venus has no liquid water but Earth does. So, Earth wins.

I suppose this serves as a list of things with water as well.

[cubinator]

So you're saying Earth is the most habitable planet in the Solar System? I'm surprised NASA hasn't landed any rovers there, it would be very interesting. I think there's a good chance we'd find life, better than any other place we can go.

[Gaarst]

I wouldn't say Earth is the most "life-friendly" planet in our solar system. Quite the opposite, you'll find that it is the deadliest planet of all, by far!

[cubinator]

2 hours ago, Gaarst said:

I wouldn't say Earth is the most "life-friendly" planet in our solar system. Quite the opposite, you'll find that it is the deadliest planet of all, by far!

You'd die a lot slower on Earth than you would on it's moon if you didn't have any protection whatsoever. 

[Gaarst]

18 hours ago, cubinator said:

You'd die a lot slower on Earth than you would on it's moon if you didn't have any protection whatsoever. 

I'd like to see the statistical data confirming this statement, you'll find that deaths on the Moon are so rare, no stats have ever been made about it.

[cubinator]

8 minutes ago, Gaarst said:

I'd like to see the statistical data confirming this statement, you'll find that deaths on the Moon are so rare, no stats have ever been made about it.

I didn't say more people have died on the Moon than on Earth, I said it's a lot easier to die on the Moon than on Earth. The few who have been up there had to take enormous precautions to get home safely. You wouldn't even need a pressure suit on Earth, and it's atmosphere is not corrosive unlike Venus so basically you'd only need an air mask and protection from the cold depending on where you landed. The surface is chock full of organics, you could probably mine fuel for the return pretty easily, and there's plenty of oxygen right there in the atmosphere.

[MircoMars]

21 hours ago, cubinator said:

NASA hasn't landed any rovers [on earth]

I bet they have!

 

but they never told us what it found there, I guess it was too scary. 

[cubinator]

17 minutes ago, MircoMars said:

I bet they have!

 

but they never told us what it found there, I guess it was too scary. 

It's impossible, many thousands of engineers and scientists would have to be in on the conspiracy. Someone would have spilled the beans, especially if it's as scary as you say. And besides, they don't have the budget to go that far away. 

[DDE]

Your post is being pretty damned chauvinist by assuming that "life" necessarily exists in Earth-like conditions.