
Scientists discover potentially habitable planets - stillsut
http://news.mit.edu/2016/scientists-discover-potentially-habitable-planets-0502
======
CapitalistCartr
We won't go to the stars until we're actually _IN_ space. Not visiting, but
there permanently. When people are born, live and die without ever being
dirtside on Earth; when they live in habitats made from lunar and asteroidal
materials, we're there. When we've colonized this system we will be prepared
to reach out to another.

Now imagine these people, who've lived all their lives in wonderful space
habitats, worked in ships and on other planets and such. I don't think they'll
be looking for another Earth. Why would they? They'll think their space
habitat is far more comfortable.

As far as interstellar travel is concerned, I'm certain we will solve
longevity well before we travel to the stars. FTL won't be the big obstacle it
seems now. When your lifespan is several centuries, spending 30-50 years of it
traveling across the stars is as reasonable as our ancestors crossing Europe,
the Atlantic or Pacific oceans, or the American Continent to colonize a new
land.

Since their colony ship is a fine habitat, they won't be looking for an Earth-
like planet; they'll be looking for a Sun-like star. Of which there are many.
Humans can spread out at a sub-light speed across our arm of the Galaxy. But
most trips will be one-way. Each colony must be self-sustaining. The best find
would be an asteroid belt in the habitable zone. Cheap resources!

~~~
blhack
>They'll think their space habitat is far more comfortable.

I really, really, really doubt that. People who spend most of their time
living on oil rigs now, or people who lived large parts of their lives on
ships, did not end up losing the desire for dry land.

~~~
CapitalistCartr
I don't see them as comparable. A space habitat several kilometers in size
with plenty of interior enjoyable space, and managed, perfect weather is
nothing like an oil rig. And its better than a cruise ship, and there are
people who would love to live permanently on those, although not as crew.
Since they aren't down this deep gravity well, they are already more than
halfway to anywhere in the neighborhood. For them, visiting The Moon or Venus
is vastly more practical. An afternoon spent in Zero G games is always
available. Insect pests such as roaches and mosquitoes aren't a problem. Which
is why traveling from Earth to the habitat will be subject to such a strict
quarantine.

~~~
gnarbarian
Given the cost of every square foot of living space in a space habitat I
imagine the conditions would be closer to that of a nuclear submarine than a
oil rig.

~~~
tinco
The cost of living space in space is high now only because we have to propel
it into space from our big gravity well. As soon as we start mining on for
example the moon we will definitely see an exponential drop.

~~~
Retra
Just because you can bootstrap a computer to run arbitrary programs doesn't
mean you're significantly closer to general AI.

Similarly, it's easy to argue that there will be incremental improvements in
space technology, but it's very hard to argue that they will snowball into
large-scale luxury platforms that can sustain human life indefinitely.

~~~
simonh
On the contrary it's very easy to argue it. All you have to do is type some
words on a keyboard. Actually doing it however...

------
_kst_
It's odd that the article doesn't mention the phrase "brown dwarf", which is
what 2MASS J23062928-0502285 is. (See [http://simbad.u-strasbg.fr/simbad/sim-
id?Ident=2MASS+J230629...](http://simbad.u-strasbg.fr/simbad/sim-
id?Ident=2MASS+J23062928-0502285), linked from the article.)

The phrase "ultracool dwarf star" is descriptive, but both less familiar and
less precise than "brown dwarf". Perhaps the author assumed the audience
wouldn't know what a brown dwarf is, but a lot of us do (and the rest could
have it explained easily enough).

~~~
_kst_
Perhaps it _isn 't_ really a brown dwarf. According to
[http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy/2016/05/03/three_ea...](http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy/2016/05/03/three_earth_sized_exoplanets_found_around_nearby_red_dwarf_star.html)
:

> TRAPPIST-1 is an M8 dwarf, only 0.08 times the mass of the Sun; just barely
> massive enough to fuse hydrogen into helium in its core. If it were much
> lower mass we wouldn’t call it a star at all (we’d say it’s a brown dwarf).

And the Wikipedia article on brown dwarfs:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brown_dwarf](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brown_dwarf)

> Brown dwarfs are substellar objects not massive enough to sustain hydrogen-1
> fusion reactions in their cores, unlike main-sequence stars.

Apparently TRAPPIST-1 is an actual star, which makes it a (small, cool) red
dwarf, not a brown dwarf. But it is near the dividing line.

(A brown dwarf with planets would be interesting, but they probably wouldn't
be potentially habitable.)

------
rubidium
At a mere 40 light years away :) But seriously, that's a good find.

2 planets are orbit-locked. I've always thought those make the best for sci-fi
fiction, since they're effective halo's in terms of habitability.

source:
[http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/natu...](http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nature17448.html)
[paywalled]

Wikipedia already has some info on the telescope and findings:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TRAPPIST](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TRAPPIST)

~~~
welterde
Preprint of the paper:
[http://www.eso.org/public/archives/releases/sciencepapers/es...](http://www.eso.org/public/archives/releases/sciencepapers/eso1615/eso1615a.pdf)

Via the ESO press release:
[http://www.eso.org/public/news/eso1615/](http://www.eso.org/public/news/eso1615/)

------
kafkaesq
_The sizes and temperatures of these worlds are comparable to those of Earth
and Venus, and are the best targets found so far for the search for life
outside the solar system._

That's quite a variation in temperature. Especially since Venus generally
isn't considered to be "habitable."

~~~
s_q_b
Venus could well have been habitable, but the runaway greenhouse effect
stopped that. I'm sure there's thousands of types of planets out there "just
like Earth, but..."

~~~
gboss
There are altitudes within Venus' thick atmosphere that are actually quite
reasonable, with it being proposed that humans would only need a simple oxygen
mask to survive. The idea of setting up a "floating" colony in Venus'
atmosphere has been proposed a few times:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colonization_of_Venus#Aerostat...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colonization_of_Venus#Aerostat_habitats_and_floating_cities)

~~~
akita-ken
I've always been intrigued by the idea of aerostats on Venus. Certainly the
idea seems sound (at least in theory), and the fact that an oxygen/nitrogen
atmosphere mix would be a lifting gas on Venus greatly reduces the launch cost
of bringing a dedicated lifting gas from Earth.

But gosh, imagine going to bed on such a habitat knowing that all that's
keeping you from a hot and fiery end are your gas balloons and a couple of
steel cables!

------
hanniabu
If we're going to make it to another planet that far away, we're going to
either need to put our astronauts in some type of suspended state or be able
to give birth and raise children on ships.

I wonder what the effects would be of a child forming in a womb, being born,
and growing up in zero gravity conditions.

~~~
s_q_b
Build a 1g spinning section, if that's what's needed for a generational ship.
Such "slowboats" are going to need to be:

1\. Incredibly expensive.

2\. Massive beyond the scale of anything ever assembled in orbit.

3\. Big enough to carry a self-sustaining colony, above minimum population
size for genetic issues.

So, newborns in zero-g, not necessarily needed, if we're really going to the
stars the old fashioned way.

~~~
siquick
Is #2 because we don't have rockets powerful enough to launch these ships into
space?

~~~
perilunar
The won't be launched from earth or assembled in orbit from parts launched
from earth - they'll be built from materials mined from asteroids

~~~
s_q_b
I wonder where the optimal location is to construct the first ship yard.
Vesta, maybe?

------
rajandatta
Brilliant. Love the approach of using Trappist to search for candidates and
then be able to turn to instruments like the Hubble and other land based big
guys. It'll be amazing to see what the Hubble can see at 40 light years.

------
cowardlydragon
I thought planets in dwarf star habitable zones would be tidally locked / not
rotating?

~~~
ccallebs
They mention that in the article -- they postulate that there may be "sweet
spots" with the correct temperature to be habitable. These would be located
close to where the planet transitions from light to dark.

~~~
civilian
And unfortunately, these spots would be very windy. There'd be a constant
barrage of cold wind as the air in the hot side rose.

------
stuff4ben
Curious what an ultracool dwarf star would like like from an orbiting planet
considering it emits radiation in the infrared band? What would the
flora/fauna look like? How do they evolve in an infrared environment?

------
mrfusion
Don't forget they might have habitable moons too!

------
ultrasandwich
Trying to figure out a great Belgian Trappist beer goggle joke and just
dropping the ball...

------
known
80% of beneath the Oceans are NOT explored on Earth;

------
eddiecalzone
Awesome! Let's strip-mine it!

~~~
Bluestrike2
Lots of options a lot closer to home :).

------
0xmohit
Make habitable planets great again -- Trump for habitable planets.

