What the minimum mass for a habitable exoplanet or moon?

AI Thread Summary
The minimum mass for a habitable exoplanet or moon is estimated to be slightly over half of Earth's mass, necessary to retain a sufficient atmosphere and liquid water. Super Earths, with masses between 2 to 10 times that of Earth, are considered capable of supporting thick atmospheres and plate tectonics. The exoplanet 5r7a4br-Xm7, significantly larger and more massive than Earth, shows potential for intelligent life, possibly due to its high rotational rate mitigating gravitational effects. Discussions also touch on the limitations of understanding life forms, as exemplified by the analogy of fish and their comprehension of water. Overall, the conversation highlights the complexities of defining habitability in the context of varying planetary conditions.
cosmicrock
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
So I've read that super Earth's masses 2-10 can be habitable hold thick atmosphere and generate plate tectonics. So I am wondering the absolute minimum mass an exoplanet or moon can be to stay habitable in the liquid H2O zone? I guess these would be called subEarth's.
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
It would probably take a little over 1/2 Earth mass to retain sufficient atmosphere and liquid water to support a biosystem.
 
Interesting question, considering the exoplanet 5r7a4br-Xm7 (Xavier-Levinson-7c), while approximately 40 times the diameter of Earth, and estimated to be 20~25 times more massive, shows strong evidence of supporting intelligent life. It's theorized the high rotational rate (approximately 32hr) offsets the strong gravitation enough to provide for what we could call "normal" life processes. Of course this data is being collected from Earth, and there is no way to know for certain if life exists on such a place.
 
The second quote concerning the fish is absurd. A fish cannot comprehend anything other than it's search for food. Even if it could comprehend 'water', there would be no way to detect if it were capable of comprehending such, as we have no process to communicate with fish. Therefore, the fish quote is ridiculous, and absurd.
 
Smashinz_1885 said:
The second quote concerning the fish is absurd. A fish cannot comprehend anything other than it's search for food. Even if it could comprehend 'water', there would be no way to detect if it were capable of comprehending such, as we have no process to communicate with fish. Therefore, the fish quote is ridiculous, and absurd.

That's his signature, it's in all his posts. Don't take it so seriously!
 
I'm still working on my 'glub glub' translation skills.
 
This thread is dedicated to the beauty and awesomeness of our Universe. If you feel like it, please share video clips and photos (or nice animations) of space and objects in space in this thread. Your posts, clips and photos may by all means include scientific information; that does not make it less beautiful to me (n.b. the posts must of course comply with the PF guidelines, i.e. regarding science, only mainstream science is allowed, fringe/pseudoscience is not allowed). n.b. I start this...
Today at about 4:30 am I saw the conjunction of Venus and Jupiter, where they were about the width of the full moon, or one half degree apart. Did anyone else see it? Edit: The moon is 2,200 miles in diameter and at a distance of 240,000 miles. Thereby it subtends an angle in radians of 2,200/240,000=.01 (approximately). With pi radians being 180 degrees, one radian is 57.3 degrees, so that .01 radians is about .50 degrees (angle subtended by the moon). (.57 to be more exact, but with...
Back
Top