I Do Red Dwarfs Favor Rocky Planets and Host Life?

  • I
  • Thread starter Thread starter virgil1612
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Planets
AI Thread Summary
Red dwarfs may favor the formation of rocky planets due to their low mass, which requires planets to orbit closely, making them more susceptible to stellar winds and radiation. This proximity raises concerns about the potential for life, as higher radiation levels could hinder the development of complex organisms. However, increased atmospheric pressure could mitigate some radiation effects, allowing life to adapt through enhanced repair mechanisms. The discovery of systems like TRAPPIST-1, which contains multiple rocky planets, suggests that rocky planets are indeed common around red dwarfs. Overall, while challenges exist, the possibility of life in such environments remains a topic of interest.
virgil1612
Messages
68
Reaction score
9
Hello,

1. Does the star type influence the type of planets forming around it? Specifically, could a red dwarf favour the formation of rocky planets around them, compared to gas giants?
2. Planets would be much closer to a red dwarf star than they are for a solar type star. Consequently, the radiations (stellar wind, UV) would, I presume, be much stronger than for Earth. Can we even conceive the possibility for life in such conditions, even inside the habitable zone?

Thanks for your insight,
Virgil.
 
Last edited:
Astronomy news on Phys.org
Here is my logic...
Red dwarfs have relatively low mass, and thus can only hold planets in their orbit when the planets are relatively close to the star. Since they are closer to to the star, they will be more susceptible to solar winds. This would be a problem for life to form. Also, if complex life were to form, it would most likely have to develop heat sensing organs (in the place of eyes).
As for types of planets, I'm not entirely sure. I would think they would be mostly rocky planets but don't have much logic to back it up (without google o0)). Maybe since they are closer to the sun, the solar winds would be more likely to blow away gaseous atmosphere.
 
virgil1612 said:
Consequently, the radiations (stellar wind, UV) would, I presume, be much stronger than for Earth. Can we even conceive the possibility for life in such conditions, even inside the habitable zone?

Higher radiation is not that big problem.

First, more atmosphere protects better. Say, a version of Earth but with 3 atm surface pressure (three times more massive atmosphere).

Second, evolution does not prefer the best possible resistance to radiation in living beings. Evolution _needs_ mutations to happen, it only needs to make sure that radiation damage is not causing organisms to not survive until they have offspring. It's quite likely that life in more radioactive environments will simply have enhanced mechanisms to repair that damage.

In Three Mile reactor cleanup effort, one of the difficulties encountered was the growth of cyanobacteria in the water. *In the reactor vessel*, whose walls were emitting several thousands roentgen per hour.
 
  • Like
Likes Rubidium_71 and Comeback City
@nikkkom that is very true. One thing that comes to mind, though... is there anything that prevents liquid water from collecting on these planets (i.e. the higher radiation)?

Also what do you think about the planet situation (rocky vs gaseous)?
 
I was thinking about red dwarfs possibly favouring rocky planet formation because of the recent discovery of the Trappist system... A red dwarf surrounded by 7 (!) rocky planets... seems quite extraordinary.
 
TL;DR Summary: In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect alien signals, it will further expand the radius of the so-called silence (or rather, radio silence) of the Universe. Is there any sense in this or is blissful ignorance better? In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect...
Thread 'Could gamma-ray bursts have an intragalactic origin?'
This is indirectly evidenced by a map of the distribution of gamma-ray bursts in the night sky, made in the form of an elongated globe. And also the weakening of gamma radiation by the disk and the center of the Milky Way, which leads to anisotropy in the possibilities of observing gamma-ray bursts. My line of reasoning is as follows: 1. Gamma radiation should be absorbed to some extent by dust and other components of the interstellar medium. As a result, with an extragalactic origin, fewer...
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...
Back
Top