3 ms·

According to this [1] it's probably tidally locked, which means that despite being in the goldilocks zone, the environment is likely problematic for life. [1]

According to this [1] it's probably tidally locked, which means that despite being in the goldilocks zone, the environment is likely problematic for life. [1] https://www.sciencealert.com/nasa-found-a-tatooine-like-planet-and-an-earth-sized-word-in-the-habitable-zone https://www.sciencealert.com/nasa-found-a-tatooine-like-plan...

baxtr 7y ago
I imagine that there is a small area where life would be possible?
- Pfhreak 7y ago
  These types of planets are known as 'Eyeball planets'. [1] They are hypothesized to have a hot side and a cold side, and potentially a ring around the periphery that is 'just right' where liquid water could form and sustain life. Not sure if this particular planet would meet those criteria. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eyeball_planet https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eyeball_planet
  - ses1984 7y ago
    Even if the planet had a strong magnetosphere, wouldn't atmosphere on the hot side be blown away by heat or solar wind? Thus atmosphere from the whole planet would be depleted.
    - jerf 7y ago
      Astronomers & cosmologists like to play games where they try to sketch out how a tidally-locked world might, just might, be inhabitable. I tend to think it's balancing on a pretty high-dimensional knife's edge on cosmological time scales; there's all sorts of directions that various resources can fall out of the habitable zone and not be able to come back. For a terrestrial example of the sort of thing I mean, see things like https://www.astrobio.net/biosphere/earths-breathable-atmosphere-tied-plate-tectonics/; https://www.astrobio.net/biosphere/earths-breathable-atmosph... it is thought that a lot of resources vital to life on Earth would have left the biosphere before life could even get going if Earth, or before the biosphere could progress very far, were not tectonically active. Trying to put together a habitable eyeball-planet seems like it has that problem to the tenth power to me.
  - LeifCarrotson 7y ago
    Seems that it be more likely to produce habitable eyeball planets than habitable Earth-like rotating planets - an Earth that was 50 degrees warmer might only be habitable at the poles, while an Earth that was on average 50 degrees colder might be a frozen wasteland all the way the equator - not to mention that seasonal swings in climate for temperate latitudes further decrease your options. With an eyeball planet the acceptable distance from the star, heat flux, and other variables could produce a ring of acceptable climate even if the average global temperature was +/- 100C relative to Earth.
  - CWuestefeld 7y ago
    The problem is that around the margins where it's "just right", you'll probably have mega-winds and stuff, too.
- DenisM 7y ago
  The snow storms are pretty bad I imagine.
pushpop 7y ago
People keep saying that for extreme climates on Earth and are then constantly surprised by the variety and abundance of life - admittedly sometimes just microbiology - found in those locations. So I wouldn’t write off a planet just for tidal lock.
- giarc 7y ago
  Probably best to say "unlikely to contain multicellular life" or maybe even complex life. As we know from here on Earth, microorganisms exist in almost every extreme location on Earth.
  - gwbas1c 7y ago
    Given how fast the human race evolved (compared to how old the earth and life is,) I wouldn't make any assumptions about multicellular life.
    - wongarsu 7y ago
      However compared to how fast single-celled life formed it took a really long time for multicellular life to occur.
- nwallin 7y ago
  The problem is that the atmosphere and weather is global. Meaning that snow that falls on the cold side will never melt or evaporate. Therefore there's probably no liquid water. Liquid oxygen is dense enough for icebergs to float over to the warm side, but there won't be any oxygen before life can start photosynthesizing, and it would boil off long before ice could float close enough to the hot side to melt or evaporate. Liquid nitrogen is less dense than ice, so that doesn't help. Most other plausible liquids (methane, ammonia) are also less dense than ice. It's difficult to say life would be impossible on a tidally locked planet, but it's certainly very unlikely. Remember that it took Earth something like two billion years to develope life, and this place is downright cozy.
  - 7y ago

baxtr 7y ago

I imagine that there is a small area where life would be possible?

Pfhreak 7y ago
These types of planets are known as 'Eyeball planets'. [1] They are hypothesized to have a hot side and a cold side, and potentially a ring around the periphery that is 'just right' where liquid water could form and sustain life. Not sure if this particular planet would meet those criteria. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eyeball_planet https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eyeball_planet
- ses1984 7y ago
  Even if the planet had a strong magnetosphere, wouldn't atmosphere on the hot side be blown away by heat or solar wind? Thus atmosphere from the whole planet would be depleted.
  - jerf 7y ago
    Astronomers & cosmologists like to play games where they try to sketch out how a tidally-locked world might, just might, be inhabitable. I tend to think it's balancing on a pretty high-dimensional knife's edge on cosmological time scales; there's all sorts of directions that various resources can fall out of the habitable zone and not be able to come back. For a terrestrial example of the sort of thing I mean, see things like https://www.astrobio.net/biosphere/earths-breathable-atmosphere-tied-plate-tectonics/; https://www.astrobio.net/biosphere/earths-breathable-atmosph... it is thought that a lot of resources vital to life on Earth would have left the biosphere before life could even get going if Earth, or before the biosphere could progress very far, were not tectonically active. Trying to put together a habitable eyeball-planet seems like it has that problem to the tenth power to me.
- LeifCarrotson 7y ago
  Seems that it be more likely to produce habitable eyeball planets than habitable Earth-like rotating planets - an Earth that was 50 degrees warmer might only be habitable at the poles, while an Earth that was on average 50 degrees colder might be a frozen wasteland all the way the equator - not to mention that seasonal swings in climate for temperate latitudes further decrease your options. With an eyeball planet the acceptable distance from the star, heat flux, and other variables could produce a ring of acceptable climate even if the average global temperature was +/- 100C relative to Earth.
- CWuestefeld 7y ago
  The problem is that around the margins where it's "just right", you'll probably have mega-winds and stuff, too.
DenisM 7y ago
The snow storms are pretty bad I imagine.

pushpop 7y ago

People keep saying that for extreme climates on Earth and are then constantly surprised by the variety and abundance of life - admittedly sometimes just microbiology - found in those locations. So I wouldn’t write off a planet just for tidal lock.

giarc 7y ago
Probably best to say "unlikely to contain multicellular life" or maybe even complex life. As we know from here on Earth, microorganisms exist in almost every extreme location on Earth.
- gwbas1c 7y ago
  Given how fast the human race evolved (compared to how old the earth and life is,) I wouldn't make any assumptions about multicellular life.
  - wongarsu 7y ago
    However compared to how fast single-celled life formed it took a really long time for multicellular life to occur.
nwallin 7y ago
The problem is that the atmosphere and weather is global. Meaning that snow that falls on the cold side will never melt or evaporate. Therefore there's probably no liquid water. Liquid oxygen is dense enough for icebergs to float over to the warm side, but there won't be any oxygen before life can start photosynthesizing, and it would boil off long before ice could float close enough to the hot side to melt or evaporate. Liquid nitrogen is less dense than ice, so that doesn't help. Most other plausible liquids (methane, ammonia) are also less dense than ice. It's difficult to say life would be impossible on a tidally locked planet, but it's certainly very unlikely. Remember that it took Earth something like two billion years to develope life, and this place is downright cozy.
- 7y ago