Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Is it safe to assume that Earth-like planets are the best

  1. Mar 18, 2005 #1
    When it comes to producing life (as we know it), I know that currently we are the only planet that we know that has produced life and life flourished. But compared to Mars which they say had oxygen but lost it too quick, or Venus which is most likely dead, or Mercury which is burnt to a crisp. The gas giants is most likely life-as-we-know-it-less. Maybe Europa or Titan will someday match Earth? (but they're not planets :smile:)
  2. jcsd
  3. Mar 18, 2005 #2
    When the sun is a red giant, the moons you mentioned will probably have conditions of modern earth, although they are still quite far away for guarantee.

    The best bet is on mars (again red giant) but you have to relise the sun will KEEP getting hotter (i.e. bad for us) so again, jupiters moons look the best for us.
  4. Mar 18, 2005 #3
    I was thinking recently about the possibillitys of "inseminating" gas planets. I was reading about colonies of bacterias living in the abyssal plains and feeding on hydrogen and methane. What if we where to dump a bunch of those bacterias on say Neptune ? They would have food for ... hmm ever ?! and they are used to extreme pressures and temperature. Wouldn't that be interesting to try ?
    As for Europa, Titan and other moons, similar experience would be interesting. We should just realy make sure their is no litle bugs there already.
  5. Mar 18, 2005 #4


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    I don't think it's safe to assume that earth-like planets are the best place for life, but it's probably a good first guess.
  6. Mar 18, 2005 #5
    Would you guys agree that Earth-like planets may be common in the universe?
  7. Mar 18, 2005 #6
    It could happen, although singular stars with a planetary system is quite rare, as most starts tend to be born binary.

    But then again, we ARE talking about the universe here, where we are talking millions of stars. So, personally, i would say it is quite possible.
  8. Mar 18, 2005 #7
    I never knew that

    Anyways I would guess that there would be 10 billion Earth-like planets at any one time

    I thought that ours star (the sun) wasnt rare at all and nothing in our solar system makes it rare?...I'm confused
    Last edited: Mar 18, 2005
  9. Mar 18, 2005 #8


    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    I think it is safe to assume that Earth-like order of magnitude temperatures (adjusted for pressure variations) would be best for life. But, I think that you could find them in a variety of other contexts. For example, at some depth of a gas giant, in a clouds of Jupiter context, in subsurface microenvironments on Mars, in short, in lots of places.
  10. Mar 18, 2005 #9


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    We still aren't sure about the planetary system part, but single stars aren't that rare. They make up roughly half of all stellar systems (that is, one or more stars bound to one another).
  11. Mar 18, 2005 #10
    "single stars aren't that rare. They make up roughly half of all stellar systems"

    Yeah, thats why I was surprised by that statement
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?