As scientists discover other planets outside our solar system, called exoplanets, which can plan life, planets like Earth may not be the best answer.
In the new study, Schulz-Makuch and his colleagues identified 24 exoplanets and exoplanet candidates (planets that have not been positively confirmed as exoplanets). They may be contenders for sublime planets with more suitable conditions for life than Earth.
However, the authors warn that this does not mean that they have confirmed that there is life on these planets. Instead, it means that the conditions of these planets may be favorable for life.
“We’re careful that when we search for superfatable planets, it doesn’t mean they contain the necessary life (or even complex life),” Schulz-Makuch said. “A planet can be habitable or portable, but desolate. This has to do with the planet’s natural history. Disaster can strike (like a nearby supernova explosion).”
Schulz-Makuch refers to a superhubble planet as “any planet that has more biomass and biodiversity than our current Earth.” Essentially, it will be a little older, bigger, warmer and wetter than Earth, he said.
“Our planet’s habitat has also changed in our natural history,” he said. “For example, with all the swamps and rain forests (which have produced most of our current gas and oil) in the Carboniferous time period the Earth is currently more likely than the Earth itself – using our definition.”
Longevity stars
One factor of superhibitability could actually be the type of planetary orbit. Researchers have identified the dwarf star as the most ideal of the study. These stars have a longer lifespan than our Sun, so life can potentially survive and evolve on planets in orbit around it.
That dwarf stars are colder, wider and less bright than us The sun, but they can last from 20 billion to 70 billion years. The planets orbiting these stars will age and give time for life to reach the difficulties on Earth.
Earth is about 4.5 billion years old. But in the study, researchers have suggested that five to eight billion years is really the “sweet spot” for life to form and evolve.
Our Sun’s life span is less than 10 billion years, and it took about four billion years before any kind of complex life evolved on Earth. Stars like our Sun can actually die before they can become complex life on orbiting planets.
Another criterion was used to determine superhubility from 4,500 known explanations.
The planets were probably ter terrestrial, or Earth-like rocks, orbiting in the habitable zone of their star – meaning the distance from the star where liquid water remains stationary on the surface of the eclipse.
They looked at shape and mass and estimated that about 1.5 times the mass of Earth would be able to retain internal heat longer than Earth and would have more gravity which would enable it to retain its atmosphere longer.
At about 8 degrees Fahrenheit more than Earth, the amount of water on a warmer planet may be even more suitable for life. The study authors compared this choice for warmth and humidity to the biodiversity of the Earth’s tropical rainforests – especially when compared to colder and drier areas.
From these criteria, Schulz-Makuch thinks that the most important thing is to plan the planet by a dwarf star, and to be a little older than Earth.
While a planet may be superhuble and it meets certain criteria without checking all the boxes, the authors warn that there is a lot of information that cannot be evaluated just about these planets.
“Slightly higher temperatures can make matters worse in atmospheric times,” Schulz-Makuch warned.
Looking for a more livable world
It is located about 3,000 light-years from Earth in the constellation Cygnus. The star is 76% of the radius of our sun and its solar mass, only 34% of the brightness of our sun. And the star is about 5.5 billion years old, or a billion years older than our Sun.
The authors provide a few report cards for Tara that are based on the circulation they make in the study, not much more than what they know, what they accept.
“The point is that these early candidates will probably be selected to be habitable or superfatable and should be preferred for further investigation,” Schulz-Makuch said. “Also, we need to better understand how the planet is habitable and how the biosphere interacts with their natural environment.”
But to fully evaluate these candidates, Schulz-Makuch sees the need for an investigation or landing on Earth – but all this is far from over, it is unlikely. However, better remote observations with future space telescopes could help focus more on the details of these planets.
“This theory of soluble planets is sometimes difficult to convey because we think we have the best planet,” Schulz-Makuch said. “We have a lot of complex and diverse lifeforms, and a lot of people who can survive in extreme environments. It’s good to have an adaptive life, but that doesn’t mean we have the best of everything.”
Astronomer and planetary scientist Sara Caesar sees this study as “an excellent tool for all to use as a reference.” Cager, a professor of technology at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, was also not involved in the study.
“It’s a really nice description of all the elements for the habitable world,” Sieger said in an email to CNN. “I like the concept of superhighble exoplanets. The concept is a good one, just like the Olympic athletes in the men among us.”
And CJR agrees with what the authors say in the conclusion of their paper.
“Habitatable or super-habitable exoplanet observations are still so challenging that nature will ultimately determine what targets we can follow with our next-generation telescopes.”
“To see if the planet is really habitable, if there is water vapor in its atmosphere (an indicator of surface water on a rocky planet), it probably measures the Earth and detects biosynthetic gases.
“So the list of exoplanet specimens is quite long, though not in 100 light-years. Nothing is suitable for observations with our next pay generation telescope. “
.
