9 ms·
A 1.55 R⊕ habitable-zone planet hosted by TOI-715
- FrustratedMonky 3y agoPlease, Please, Please, be it.
- swarnie 3y agoBe what?
- 1024core 3y agoBe have, as my daughter thinks I'm saying...
- yareal 3y ago[dead]
- optimalsolver 3y agoMagrathea
- somenameforme 3y agoNo idea when NASA put this up [1] but it's awesome. It's the basic data on the system as well as some pretty nicely done visualizations including the ability overlay our solar system for scale. Quite interesting actually seeing what a dramatic difference the star type makes on habitable distances. This planet is way closer to its star than Mercury is the Sun, for instance. They could do with a lot more advertising for stuff like this, and not quite so much for dronecopters. [1] - https://exoplanets.nasa.gov/exoplanet-catalog/8921/toi-715-b/ https://exoplanets.nasa.gov/exoplanet-catalog/8921/toi-715-b...
- mmastrac 3y agoThis was quite a bit more helpful than the paper itself, thanks.
- msk-lywenn 3y ago0.083 AU means that its sun would be huge in its sky? But it's also smaller so maybe not...
- MichaelZuo 3y agoThanks, there's so many resources tucked away in obscure places that there's probably a dozen more cool things like this that never get noticed.
- throwup238 3y agoIt looks quite a bit bigger than Earth. I don't think anyone will be leaving that atmosphere with chemical propulsion any time soon...
- callamdelaney 3y agoJust because it's bigger doesn't mean that the gravity is higher.
- dr_kiszonka 3y ago”Its mass is 3.02 Earths.”
- joombaga 3y agoRight, but you also have to account for density when calculating surface gravity. TOI-715 b has a log g value of 5.0 +/- 0.2. Earth is 2.992.
- dr_kiszonka 3y agoGood to know. Thanks!
- efitz 3y agoCorrect, but it’s mass (weight) is 3x higher than earth’s, and since gravity is proportional to mass, you’d likely be much heavier there. If the radius of the planet was the same as earth’s, the gravity would be 3x higher, but if it’s bigger than earth, it might not be as bad. The formula is g= m/r^2 , where m is the mass of the planet and r is the radius of the planet.
- wkat4242 3y agoDamn I'm gonna have to get serious about that diet before visiting :'(
- 3y ago
- sgt101 3y agoI like dronecopters!
- dr_kiszonka 3y agoThe retro graphics here are gorgeous: https://exoplanets.nasa.gov/alien-worlds/exoplanet-travel-bureau/ https://exoplanets.nasa.gov/alien-worlds/exoplanet-travel-bu... (Stellar, one could say.)
- dylan604 3y agoI think they are out of this world myself. The guided tours are interesting. I've mentioned this before, but I am very jealous of this kind of content available for school kids. We had the slide shows with a tape recording with the unforgettable tone to signal to switch to the next slide. We had crappy VHS copies instead of the 8mm film projector, but I'm not sure it was an improvement. All of this interactive material is just so much more immersive.
- int_19h 3y agoHave you seen the stuff that's available in VR these days? It's not just space, too; e.g. here's a pretty engaging game that happens to explain how biological cells work: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Exii5RPxMH8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Exii5RPxMH8
- jonhohle 3y agoWhen Costco still did printing we printed serval of those out as posters and hung them up in the kid’s bathroom. The designs are pretty timeless and are fun to daydream about.
- Log_out_ 3y agoThere was a awesome book filled to the brim with paintings of other worlds. Cycles of fire
- s1artibartfast 3y agoI dont know the intricacies of stellar physics, but my understand that smaller cooler stars are less stable. Despite an average temperature that is habitable, the variability and EM environment is not suitable for an atmosphere. Edit: 1) proximity also leads these planets to be tidally locked, which some argue is not conducive to habitability, though I don't find that especially compelling. 2) The local EM environment and solar flares would not preclude sub-surface habitability, but that is true for planets outside of what we consider the habitable zone as well. e.g. life on Europa has been hypothesized, but it is FAR outside the suns habitable zone.
- api 3y agoAt 138 light years any intelligence in this system would start potentially receiving our radio signals in the next two decades. They’d need a massive radio telescope to hear them though since at that distance even the strongest signals would be extremely weak.
- dylan604 3y agoNASA has provided some very compelling visualizations of data over the years. One of my favorites is the meteor showers showing where the debris fields for each one are located within the solar system. You can see the original orbit of the comet that left the debris, where it currently is, when the Earth's orbit crosses the debris field, and just the overall size of the debris so that you can see why some meteor showers are "better" than others. There's plenty of others where you can zoom in/out of the solar system to see the modeled view of the Oort cloud and get a sense of scale interactively of Sol's influence. There's also the interactive image viewers of Hubble and JWST data so we can see the differences between visible/IR spectrum. There are plenty of others as well. Oh, and the fact you can access so much of the raw data to make your own visualizations as you like. Overall, I think my tax dollars are performing nicely for my interests.
- echelon 3y ago> Overall, I think my tax dollars are performing nicely for my interests. And for the future scientists and engineers who get exposed to this at an early age!
- zamadatix 3y agoThe tool has been around in some form since 2007ish, though the latest update was probably within the last decade. The age probably being why it's not so heavily advertised anymore compared to new activities. I've always been more partial to exoplanet.eu though: https://exoplanet.eu/catalog/toi_715_b--8668/ https://exoplanet.eu/catalog/toi_715_b--8668/. It's not quite as prettied up but it's usually more practical in presentation.
- delta_p_delta_x 3y agoI personally prefer the Caltech Exoplanet Archive, which has downloadable datasets, APIs, and also presents everything in one shot: https://exoplanetarchive.ipac.caltech.edu/ https://exoplanetarchive.ipac.caltech.edu/
- zamadatix 3y agoexoplanet.eu also has downloadable datasets (from CSV to database exports) and an API. The Exoplanet Archive is great if you need the exact e.g. photometry data every time though.
- hypertexthero 3y agoSee also the Jet Propulsion Lab’s gorgeous Visions of the Future posters: https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/galleries/visions-of-the-future https://www.jpl.nasa.gov/galleries/visions-of-the-future
- mmastrac 3y agoThe domain-specific notation in this paper is inscrutable to me. I assume that this means a possible "Minshara class" planet (as Gene would say) around a star much different than our own, in that the distance from its sun and insolation received don't rule it out? EDIT: R⊕ appears to be something related to Earth. Perhaps a planetary radius?
- somenameforme 3y agoIt's a planet that has 1.55 Earth's radius orbiting a much cooler star. Planets in the habitable zone are those that are at a distance from their star, such that they have the reasonable potential for liquid water to exist on the planet.
- dwaltrip 3y ago"Earth radius (denoted as R🜨 or R_E) ..." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth_radius https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Earth_radius
- nullhole 3y ago⊕ is the symbol for earth. R⊕ is earth-radius, as you guessed. It is domain-specific, so it should probably be changed in the title. I will say that it is a very nice symbol - easy to write out by hand, makes for quick note-taking. Same for the symbol used for the sun (which isn't rendering for me, but is a circle with a dot in the middle). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planet_symbols https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planet_symbols
- chrsw 3y ago"The domain-specific notation in this paper is inscrutable to me." That's almost every paper to me.
- k__ 3y agoI always thought it to be funny if we would get faster than light travel in the future and other civilizations are just seeing dinosaurs roaming the earth the moment we visit them.
- 1024core 3y agoThat would be if they were 70M LY away from us. In order to see dinosaurs from that distance, they would need a telescope wider than our solar system.
- malfist 3y agoIf you can make a dyson sphere, a solar system sized telescope doesn't seem out of the question.
- bemmu 3y agoYes, once we're commanding autonomous little bots in space, capable of also autonomously creating their own factories, we can build anything on a whim as long as we can design it and have the energy and materials. (I may have played too much Factorio)
- Baeocystin 3y agoAll I want is logibots IRL, is that too much to ask
- awb 3y agoHarvesting that much material might be a challenge. I guess you’d also have to build it in interstellar space to avoid planets and asteroids.
- Projectiboga 3y agoThe Milkyway is 'only' 100 to 150,000 light years across, in total.
- redcobra762 3y ago
- rglullis 3y ago0.0 eccentricity means that it has no seasonal variation?
- mitthrowaway2 3y agoIt means its orbit is a circle. Seasonal variation is due to the tilt of the planet's axis of rotation relative to its orbit, not orbital eccentricity.
- rglullis 3y agoI know what causes seasonal variations, but for some reason I thought 0.0 eccentricity meant no tilt. Thanks
- wkat4242 3y agoWell on our planet that's the case. Another planet might well have seasons due to orbital eccentricity. Though it would have to be pretty serious eccentricity I think. If they would have no tilt then the seasons would be the same all over the planet unlike ours where they're opposite in each hemisphere.
- MadnessASAP 3y agoIt means the orbit is perfectly circular. Earth's seasons are driven almost exclusively by our axial tilt*, not our orbital eccentricity. Our eccentricity also being 0.0(167). * Astrometeorologists feel free to correct me on this.
- fbdab103 3y agoWikipedia says this The relative increase in solar irradiation at closest approach to the Sun (perihelion) compared to the irradiation at the furthest distance (aphelion) is slightly larger than four times the eccentricity. For Earth's current orbital eccentricity, incoming solar radiation varies by about 6.8%, while the distance from the Sun currently varies by only 3.4% (5.1 million km or 3.2 million mi or 0.034 au).[9] Perihelion presently occurs around 3 January, while aphelion is around 4 July. When the orbit is at its most eccentric, the amount of solar radiation at perihelion will be about 23% more than at aphelion. However, the Earth's eccentricity is so small (at least at present) that the variation in solar irradiation is a minor factor in seasonal climate variation, compared to axial tilt and even compared to the relative ease of heating the larger land masses of the northern hemisphere.[10] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milankovitch_cycles https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milankovitch_cycles
- at_a_remove 3y agoSo, surface gravity about twenty-five percent higher than that of Earth. We're looking at Antares-level of redness for color. Occupies a large portion of the sky. Good candidate for tidal lock, at which point a lot of the habitability issues become debatable.
- Projectiboga 3y agoI read somewhere, slightly higher than Earth gravity would actually be better for life. So on that metric this is interesting. Magnetic field is likely another need and our single large moon helps a lot here too.
- at_a_remove 3y agoI kind of despise these press releases because they almost never attempt to show anything other than what other astronomers might care about. Surface gravity? I just computed that. Color temp? Had to check the ole memory banks. They should be doing stuff like computing how much of the sky this sun occupies, so you could get a sense of it, with the color. Is it tidally locked? Or at least does it fit the criteria? The distance, eccentricity (which here leaves the distance a constant), and temperature of the associated star could be used to give some kind of insolation number, and from there a very casual steady-state blackbody temperature of the planet, which is a start and is better than nothing. At that point you can start looking up what gases would stay and which would go as kind of a maximum before you started thinking about stellar winds and the like.
- qayxc 3y agoThey don't know the mass of the planet yet, so surface gravity is an unknown as of yet. The paper suggests two scenarios: a rocky world (~7 earth masses) or a water world (~2 earth masses). Surface gravity would be 38m/s² for a rocky planet (~390% earth's surface gravity) and 8.2m/s² for a water world (~84% earth's surface gravity). I'm not an astronomer so I don't know if anything in between those values is a realistic scenario, but I wonder how you got your 125% of earth's surface gravity.
- 3y ago
- chrsw 3y agoIt doesn't seem like it would take much to make Earth inhabitable for us humans. Like if we wanted to we can do it pretty quickly using primitive methods. It's a very delicate system and we're completely reliant on it. So it is a stretch for me to think there are even a few planets in the galaxy that could host human life as we know it.
- Denvercoder9 3y ago> Like if we wanted to we can do it pretty quickly using primitive methods. It seems that even if we don't want it, we can't help but do it anyway.
- gomoboo 3y agoDid you mean to say “uninhabitable”? If so, then I agree. Nuclear weapons are the first thing that comes to mind.
- chrsw 3y agoYes, I meant to say “uninhabitable”
- rurban 3y ago46 parsec is nearby to them? Well, it's relative obviously. That means many, many generations away.
- qayxc 3y agoWhat's 1500 years (at 0.1c) between friends?
- dvh 3y agoOver and over and over again planets are reported in habitable zones around flare stars just because they are easy to detect, not because they are actually habitable.
- qayxc 3y agoTrue. It's tiresome that a technical definition is so often misinterpreted as actual habitability. The authors are also overly optimistic when they point out that the M4 class host star is relatively calm due to its age. That fact wouldn't matter much, though, if the first billion years of the star's existence have sterilized the planet and stripped off its atmosphere...
- samstave 3y agoMaybe just come up with a better/different label for planets who share a similar ratio of planet-to-star characteristics with Earth, which is a sample size of known_to_support_life=1. "Orbital Cousins to Earth" OCEs. Find the # of OCEs, and maybe we have finer granulation, Second Cousins have an atmosphere, Step-sisters have water and an OnlyPlanets account... (which seems to be making the rounds at Nasa)
- weard_beard 3y agohttps://youtu.be/ErpU_tMoV0E https://youtu.be/ErpU_tMoV0E
- samstave 3y agoHoly crap! I've never watched that show, but thats funny as heck that this was a thing. (and they even say "I don't have HydroStatic Equillibrium yet...) too funny is the Akashic Zeitgeist...
- davedx 3y agoThe entire notion of a 'habitable zone' is also very over-simplistic. Europa is quite probably 'habitable'.
- makeworld 3y agoWhat is notable about this specific exoplanet?
- yellow_lead 3y agoMaybe this > Should this second planet be confirmed, it would represent the smallest habitable zone planet discovered by TESS to date.
- aendruk 3y agoNovelty
- credit_guy 3y agoIt is 42.46 parsecs away, or about 140 light years. If the Founding Fathers had beamed to those guys the Declaration of Independence, we'd get their congratulations in about 30 years from now. Hopefully. Maybe they decide to side with the King, and they'll send an invasion force to help general Cornwallis.
- xyst 3y agoThis is an interesting read but I can’t help to wonder… We can hardly take care of this planet. Why are we bothering with finding another planet that is habitable if we are only going to destroy it as well?
- EasyMark 3y agoBecause some people's glass is half full and aren't waiting for the death of the human race? We can study exoplanets and work on saving our own at the same time; which we have the capacity for right now with nuclear fission power. the powers that be haven't been forced to be responsible yet. they eventually will have to deal with it long before humans go extinct.
- konart 3y ago>Why are we bothering with finding This is like asking why should one try getting a better job while some people live in hunger. Civilization has to work in many directions in order to progress. While some people are trying to find a way to deal with local issues (climate change, production, goverenance etc.) other people search a new potential home or a colony.
- foreverobama 3y ago[dead]
- blackhaz 3y agoThe mention of planet's "installation," in the abstract and repeatedly throughout the article, I have found very confusing. The reference to Kopparapu et al. (2013) has no mention of the term whatsoever. I have found a mention of "instellation" from one of the authors working with Kopparapu [1]. Instellation, indeed, is, according to Wiki, "a generalization of insolation to stars other than the sun," which makes sense in this context. I wonder if I am missing anything - given it's in MNRAS already - or this is likely an artifact of auto-correction. [1] https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011AGUFM.P21C1675D/abstract https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2011AGUFM.P21C1675D/abstra...
- rdslw 3y agoI don't have necessary knowledge to explain this, yet while using gpt4 to help me parse the abstract, gpt4 without missing a heartbeat, changed it to "Insolation refers to the amount of stellar energy a planet receives on its surface. The value "0.67s" indicates that TOI-715 b receives 67% of the solar energy Earth receives from the Sun. " Wiki ref check: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_irradiance https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_irradiance
- wellthisisgreat 3y agoApologies for an extremely layman question, but what relatively accessible book could one read to understand all the formulas and acronyms in this paragraph? I mean to take them in as tools, if that makes sense? In this context, we report on the discovery and validation of TOI-715 b, a planet orbiting its nearby (42 pc) M4 host (TOI-715/TIC 271971130) with a period d. TOI-715 b was first identified by TESS and validated using ground-based photometry, high-resolution imaging and statistical validation. The planet’s orbital period combined with the stellar effective temperature give this planet an installation , placing it within the most conservative definitions of the habitable zone for rocky planets.