11 ms·
Sounds like a normal day in the science journalism. The same case was with the ""earth-like planets"" headlines even though some were unconfirmed and the only d
by Exendroinient 5y ago
Sounds like a normal day in the science journalism. The same case was with the ""earth-like planets"" headlines even though some were unconfirmed and the only data known about them was their orbit, mass to a certain degree and star, which in most cases was small and very active. In the media outlets there weren't any information about the host star and the fact that most of those planets were tidally locked. Besides all of that, they were still calling them earth-like planets.
- koheripbal 5y agoThe reality is that Earth like planets probably exist in great numbers, but we lack the technology to see them since they are small and relatively far from their host star.
- tsimionescu 5y agoWhy do you think this is 'probable'? It's certainly possible, no doubts about that, but why do you believe there is a greater than 0.5 probability of it?
- Sohcahtoa82 5y agoA quick Google says that there are an estimated two trillion galaxies, each with an estimated 100 billion stars on average, with an average of 1 planet per star. That means there's an estimated 200 trillion billion planets. Don't you think it's incredibly improbable that our Earth is the only one?
- tsimionescu 5y agoI think that's impossible to estimate, at least for some definitions of "Earth-like".
- Sohcahtoa82 5y agoIt's impossible to estimate a total number, for sure, but I think it's perfectly reasonable to believe that there's at least 1 other Earth-like planet in the universe.