New planet "earth like"

  • To unlock all of features of Rams On Demand please take a brief moment to register. Registering is not only quick and easy, it also allows you access to additional features such as live chat, private messaging, and a host of other apps exclusive to Rams On Demand.

bluecoconuts

Legend
Joined
May 28, 2011
Messages
13,073
The odds of any of it are impossible.

Essentially yeah, but given that we don't know how life began on Earth, I would be a poor scientist if simply dismiss something as impossible simply because I don't believe it.;)

We know that it's possible for certain microscopic organisms to survive the vacuum of space, how long, we don't know, and if it could survive interstellar space where it can get near absolute zero (which is hard to imagine) we don't know. Perhaps microscopic life could possibly hitch a ride between star systems, but the chances that's how life came to Earth, are so low, and I personally don't see it being true.
 

fearsomefour

Legend
Joined
Jan 15, 2013
Messages
17,101
Essentially yeah, but given that we don't know how life began on Earth, I would be a poor scientist if simply dismiss something as impossible simply because I don't believe it.;)

We know that it's possible for certain microscopic organisms to survive the vacuum of space, how long, we don't know, and if it could survive interstellar space where it can get near absolute zero (which is hard to imagine) we don't know. Perhaps microscopic life could possibly hitch a ride between star systems, but the chances that's how life came to Earth, are so low, and I personally don't see it being true.
It is all fascinating, amazing stuff.
I envy your ability to spend your day delving into such things....I seem to be stuck in the cubicle farm.
At any rate a person can stare out into the void of space at night, perceive things that are beyond our understanding and either be terrified or amazed or maybe both. God. Science. Theology. Scientific theory.
All sort of still questing for the same thing. At this point, we are the goldfish in a fishbowl. We have perceived we are in a bowl and the bowl has "edges"....we know there is much more out there. But we don't even know where we are in the big picture. Don't know whys and hows.
We are still bumping our noses against the glass so to speak.
 

RamzFanz

Damnit
Joined
Jun 4, 2013
Messages
9,029
If I recall, they judge the distance based on the light spectrum, the colors change with distance.
 

RamzFanz

Damnit
Joined
Jun 4, 2013
Messages
9,029
The trip of it all for me is that we can never see the present from here, only the past. So, if I'm thinking correctly, if we were watching the planet and flying toward it at the speed of light, everything would have to go in fast forward visually so we arrived in the present.
 

bluecoconuts

Legend
Joined
May 28, 2011
Messages
13,073
If I recall, they judge the distance based on the light spectrum, the colors change with distance.

The colors don't change, but you'll see a red or blue shift in the spectrum based on if the planet/star/galaxy/object is moving towards you or away from you. If it's moving towards you, there's a blue shift, meaning the wavelength decreases due to it stacking on top of each other (Doppler effect), redshifts mean that it's moving away, and the wavelength is stretching. It's not really something we see with our naked eye because the shift is quite subtle. We use Doppler spectroscopy to help detect planets around stars, but in terms of finding their distance, we go off the host stars.

Typically we use a stars stellar parallax to find the distance to a star. How we do this is first measure the stars position, and then 6 months later (when we're on the opposite side of the sun) we measure it again. The star will have moved slightly from our position. We take the angle of that movement, which is measured in arcseconds and determine the distance with the formula of d=1/p (distance equals one divided by parallax). That gives us the distance in parsecs.

For example, Betelgeuse has a parallax of about .005, so 1/.005 = 200. Betelgeuse is roughly 200 parsecs away, or 652 lightyears. However in reality, when we make the number smaller, we get 197 parsecs (643 light years). The smaller you can get the parallax, the more accurate you can get that distance, however it's very difficult to do that. Even now, Betelgeuse is considered 643 light years, ± 146 light years, which is still pretty big range.

The other way we determine the distance is by measuring the brightness of a star (by the color of the star), and then measure the actual brightness to the apparent brightness we see from earth, but this is less accurate.

The trip of it all for me is that we can never see the present from here, only the past. So, if I'm thinking correctly, if we were watching the planet and flying toward it at the speed of light, everything would have to go in fast forward visually so we arrived in the present.

If you were to travel at the speed of light, time would slow for those traveling, but would continue moving at normal speed for others. Traveling at light speed wouldn't let us arrive in the present (meaning how the planet actually is right now), but those who traveled at the speed, it would seem quicker than those who aren't going that fast.

Essentially if we were to travel at 99% of light speed, it would take just over 1400 years to get to the new planet. However for those on the ship, it would feel much quicker. Well rather, it would feel normal, but you would be moving quickly. If my math is correct those on the ship, it would feel like they've traveled for about 6 1/2 years on the ship (that's how much they would age), but Earth and Kepler 452B would age 1400 years. It would also take 1400 years (2800 years round trip) to relay messages back and forth. So essentially it would take NASA 2800 years to figure out if they survived the trip, and the travelers 2806.5 years to figure out if NASA still exists.
 
Last edited:

RamzFanz

Damnit
Joined
Jun 4, 2013
Messages
9,029
The colors don't change, but you'll see a red or blue shift in the spectrum based on if the planet/star/galaxy/object is moving towards you or away from you. If it's moving towards you, there's a blue shift, meaning the wavelength decreases due to it stacking on top of each other (Doppler effect), redshifts mean that it's moving away, and the wavelength is stretching. It's not really something we see with our naked eye because the shift is quite subtle. We use Doppler spectroscopy to help detect planets around stars, but in terms of finding their distance, we go off the host stars.

Typically we use a stars stellar parallax to find the distance to a star. How we do this is first measure the stars position, and then 6 months later (when we're on the opposite side of the sun) we measure it again. The star will have moved slightly from our position. We take the angle of that movement, which is measured in arcseconds and determine the distance with the formula of d=1/p (distance equals one divided by parallax). That gives us the distance in parsecs.

For example, Betelgeuse has a parallax of about .005, so 1/.005 = 200. Betelgeuse is roughly 200 parsecs away, or 652 lightyears. However in reality, when we make the number smaller, we get 197 parsecs (643 light years). The smaller you can get the parallax, the more accurate you can get that distance, however it's very difficult to do that. Even now, Betelgeuse is considered 643 light years, ± 146 light years, which is still pretty big range.

The other way we determine the distance is by measuring the brightness of a star (by the color of the star), and then measure the actual brightness to the apparent brightness we see from earth, but this is less accurate.



If you were to travel at the speed of light, time would slow for those traveling, but would continue moving at normal speed for others. Traveling at light speed wouldn't let us arrive in the present (meaning how the planet actually is right now), but those who traveled at the speed, it would seem quicker than those who aren't going that fast.

Essentially if we were to travel at 99% of light speed, it would take just over 1400 years to get to the new planet. However for those on the ship, it would feel much quicker. Well rather, it would feel normal, but you would be moving quickly. If my math is correct those on the ship, it would feel like they've traveled for about 6 1/2 years on the ship (that's how much they would age), but Earth and Kepler 452B would age 1400 years. It would also take 1400 years (2800 years round trip) to relay messages back and forth. So essentially it would take NASA 2800 years to figure out if they survived the trip, and the travelers 2806.5 years to figure out if NASA still exists.

So, from the perspective of the travelers, if they went there and came directly back, they would be 2787 years in the future on earth?

So I'm wondering if you were traveling near the speed of light and you could see the planet the whole trip through a lens of some type, wouldn't it have to move in fast forward visually? The light that is hitting the lens would be perceived as sped up because you are coming at it at near the speed of light, no?
 

bluecoconuts

Legend
Joined
May 28, 2011
Messages
13,073
So, from the perspective of the travelers, if they went there and came directly back, they would be 2787 years in the future on earth?

So I'm wondering if you were traveling near the speed of light and you could see the planet the whole trip through a lens of some type, wouldn't it have to move in fast forward visually? The light that is hitting the lens would be perceived as sped up because you are coming at it at near the speed of light, no?

It would be 2800 years in the future, they would age 13 years, and Earth would age 2800 (1400 years there and back).

If you were able to see the earth, and it wasn't a big blur (which it would be) then yeah, everything would look like it's going faster. Your perspective seems normal, time is all relative to your location in the universe. Astronauts on the space station age slower as well, because they're further away from the Earth's gravitational pull. It's only a few seconds, but it's still slower. That's why GPS satellites have to readjust their time every day, to reset, otherwise your coordinates would be off by a few miles, and that would increase daily.
 

Legatron4

Legend
Joined
Aug 10, 2013
Messages
9,427
Name
Wes
Maybe they hit a wormhole. There's no reason to think there are not tears throughout the dimensions. I could get on board with that theory. Literally anything is possible when it comes to space.
 

ChrisW

Stating the obvious
Joined
Sep 9, 2013
Messages
4,670
I saw one guy that said it's not even worth sending anything that way yet. It would take so long to get there, that something we could invent in that time-frame would get there first....so essentially a waste of money.
 

bluecoconuts

Legend
Joined
May 28, 2011
Messages
13,073
I saw one guy that said it's not even worth sending anything that way yet. It would take so long to get there, that something we could invent in that time-frame would get there first....so essentially a waste of money.

That's true, there are several different ideas of how to get to these speeds, we know that the upper limit is the speed of light for 'conventional' travel, but the hopes is that sometime soonish (few hundred years perhaps) we can develop something like a warp drive. Even still, traveling at the speed of light is a long ways away.

We would be a lot closer if the government actually gave a shit about space travel and gave decent funding to space programs. There's a lot of money out in space to be honest, we could use it to fund further exploration. If we were to lasso an asteroid and bring it to the moon (which is possible), we could mine trillions of dollars worth of metals and other raw materials, and then expand further. Instead we're too busy worrying about stupid shit, like what some fatass rich daddies girl is wearing or who she's doing.
 

Ramhusker

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jul 15, 2010
Messages
13,860
Name
Bo Bowen
All I want to know is if you are traveling at the speed of light in your car and you turn on the headlights, does anything happen?
 

bluecoconuts

Legend
Joined
May 28, 2011
Messages
13,073
All I want to know is if you are traveling at the speed of light in your car and you turn on the headlights, does anything happen?

The light would continue to go the speed of light. Since nothing with mass can go the speed of light, you wouldn't be able to go that fast, but if you were going close the speed of light and turn the headlights on, it would look normal to you.
 

Ramhusker

Rams On Demand Sponsor
Rams On Demand Sponsor
Joined
Jul 15, 2010
Messages
13,860
Name
Bo Bowen
The light would continue to go the speed of light. Since nothing with mass can go the speed of light, you wouldn't be able to go that fast, but if you were going close the speed of light and turn the headlights on, it would look normal to you.
Ah crap. I wanted to hear that the beams would bend around the car or something. Science is boring sometimes.:(
 

ChrisW

Stating the obvious
Joined
Sep 9, 2013
Messages
4,670
That's true, there are several different ideas of how to get to these speeds, we know that the upper limit is the speed of light for 'conventional' travel, but the hopes is that sometime soonish (few hundred years perhaps) we can develop something like a warp drive. Even still, traveling at the speed of light is a long ways away.

We would be a lot closer if the government actually gave a crap about space travel and gave decent funding to space programs. There's a lot of money out in space to be honest, we could use it to fund further exploration. If we were to lasso an asteroid and bring it to the moon (which is possible), we could mine trillions of dollars worth of metals and other raw materials, and then expand further. Instead we're too busy worrying about stupid crap, like what some fatass rich daddies girl is wearing or who she's doing.

I saw recently that NASA put in a patent for a fusion engine. Hopefully that leads somewhere. The next big innovation in propulsion is hopefully SSTO (Single-state to orbit.)
 

BonifayRam

Legend
Joined
Jan 14, 2013
Messages
13,435
Name
Vernon
Maybe they hit a wormhole. There's no reason to think there are not tears throughout the dimensions. I could get on board with that theory. Literally anything is possible when it comes to space.

OK

Who here @ ROD has one of these wormholes I could borrow?:rolleyes:
 

Legatron4

Legend
Joined
Aug 10, 2013
Messages
9,427
Name
Wes
OK

Who here @ ROD has one of these wormholes I could borrow?:rolleyes:
I know it seems farfetched. But there's too much of space we haven't discovered yet to rule anything out. And here's your wormhole buddy :jerkoff: :snicker: