Habitable Moons? Maybe!

[orin stepanek]

Kepler may have found something. http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 064925.htm

Orin

[neufer]

Kepler may have found something.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 064925.htm

I think they are saying that Kepler is POTENTIALLY, at least
as likely to find habitable moons as to find habitable planets.

[orin stepanek]

Kepler may have found something.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 064925.htm

I think they are saying that Kepler is POTENTIALLY, at least
as likely to find habitable moons as to find habitable planets.

True! I guess I worded it wrong. My bad; should have said may be able to find something. however;

The new results will appear in a paper in Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society.

Orin

[northstar]

Habitable by what? Creatures certainly inhabit some moons already, like those moons composed of water and covered by layers of ice, that ice cracking and spraying geysers. Where there is liquid water, there will be life. I think we have to remember that humans are not the only habitants of this universe.

"the tapeworm is an inhabitant of the intestine" - from an online dictionary.

[rstevenson]

Habitable by what? Creatures certainly inhabit some moons already, like those moons composed of water and covered by layers of ice, that ice cracking and spraying geysers. Where there is liquid water, there will be life. I think we have to remember that humans are not the only habitants of this universe.

While I agree with your hopes, the fact is that we have absolutely no evidence yet that what you say is true. I expect we will find such evidence, but at the moment such statements as you make constitute faith rather than science.

Rob

[bystander]

Habitable by what? ... I think we have to remember that humans are not the only habitants of this universe.

When humans search for habitable planets and moons, I think you can be sure they are speaking of habitability by humans, as opposed to the search for life.

[northstar]

Habitable by what? ... I think we have to remember that humans are not the only habitants of this universe.

When humans search for habitable planets and moons, I think you can be sure they are speaking of habitability by humans, as opposed to the search for life.

Language is important. If we say 'one' relating to numbers we know we do not mean 'two'. If we say 'human inhabitants' we know we do not mean tapeworms. I'm not saying you, Bystander, are denying the importance of the science of language within the realm of cosmology, but some cosmologists must, it seems, place more emphasis on the importance of that science of language if they are to be awarded the honours their long studies in cosmolgy seem to deserve.

[bystander]

Language is important. If we say 'one' relating to numbers we know we do not mean 'two'. If we say 'human inhabitants' we know we do not mean tapeworms. I'm not saying you, Bystander, are denying the importance of the science of language within the realm of cosmology, but some cosmologists must, it seems, place more emphasis on the importance of that science of language if they are to be awarded the honours their long studies in cosmolgy seem to deserve.

Context is important, too. The search for habitable planets and moons in a general sense means the search for terrestial planets and moons inside the habitable zone, that region of space where an Earth-like planet can maintain liquid water on its surface. In a more specific sense, it means the search for planetary habitability, the planetary conditions required to maintain carbon-based life. I think it is well understood that we are not searching for a planet to support tapeworms. However, if we found one capable of supporting human life, tapeworms would probably be quite comfortable there, inside their host, of course.

I don't think it is just coincidence that our definition of life is based upon four of the most common elements in the universe (H, C, N, and O) or that the requirement for liquid water is a necessity for life. Although it may be theoretically possible, I think the formation of life under any other conditions is vanishingly small. I also do not think that even if life formed under alternative conditions that we would recognize it as such. Given that, I don't think it is necessary to qualify habitable as meaning habitable to human life. I think it is understood.

[northstar]

Given that, I don't think it is necessary to qualify habitable as meaning habitable to human life. I think it is understood.

Given that 60 percent of marriages end in divorce, and those divorces occuring of course between people who at one time enjoyed perfect communication, I think nothing should be left to chance when it comes to understanding what is being said. Understanding in its fullest sense comes only after thorough examination, testing, use, and doing away with supposition. While your position may be 'understood' by some scientists in some areas, that understanding will not be understood by others both scientists and non-scientists .. if the scientist in your area is to communicate your understanding to other people, the communication has to be full. I hope you don't think I'm denegrating what your are saying, I just want to enlarge on the problems of communication, and do away with them as far as possible.

[bystander]

Given that 60 percent of marriages end in divorce, and those divorces occuring of course between people who at one time enjoyed perfect communication, I think nothing should be left to chance when it comes to understanding what is being said. Understanding in its fullest sense comes only after thorough examination, testing, use, and doing away with supposition. While your position may be 'understood' by some scientists in some areas, that understanding will not be understood by others both scientists and non-scientists .. if the scientist in your area is to communicate your understanding to other people, the communication has to be full. I hope you don't think I'm denegrating what your are saying, I just want to enlarge on the problems of communication, and do away with them as far as possible.

I think you are picking nits. While it may be true that life (extremeophiles) exists on Earth under extreme conditions, no one would consider those conditions habitable. However, recognition that life can exist under those conditions fuels the search for life on Mars, Europa, Enceladus, et al, but without extreme terraforming, those places are not habitable.

[northstar]

I think you are picking nits. While it may be true that life (extremeophiles) exists on Earth under extreme conditions, no one would consider those conditions habitable. However, recognition that life can exist under those conditions fuels the search for life on Mars, Europa, Enceladus, et al, but without extreme terraforming, those places are not habitable.

Again, we return to the meaning of words. Why don't we just throw out all dictionaries and invent our own language? Or was that already done, resulting in the collapse of a tower which was to reach to the heavens?

[astrolabe]

Hello Northstari

[northstar]

Hello Northstari

I hear the song you are singing, Astrolullabi, good tune, pleasant invention of words also.