We Live in the Rarest Type of Planetary System

[Napoleon]

Scientists had long thought our own solar system—an “ordered” arrangement of tiny orbs closer to the sun and big ones farther out—was a typical outcome of this complex process. But NASA's planet-hunting Kepler mission revealed that most systems don't resemble our own at all, instead having “similar” configurations of closely packed worlds all nearly the same size and mass, like peas in a pod.

In another strike against the possibility of intelligent life out there - the Kepler data has revealed that ours is the rarest type of solar system in the galaxy

We Live in the Rarest Type of Planetary System

New work suggests four distinct star system types—and finds our own in the rarest category

www.scientificamerican.com

 

[iguanaman]

In another strike against the possibility of intelligent life out there - the Kepler data has revealed that ours is the rarest type of solar system in the galaxy

We Live in the Rarest Type of Planetary System

New work suggests four distinct star system types—and finds our own in the rarest category

www.scientificamerican.com

That means there are only a few billion just like it out there.

 

[Napoleon]

That means there are only a few billion just like it out there.

Far fewer than that with other considerations.

 

[iguanaman]

Far fewer than that with other considerations.

How does that matter?

 

[Napoleon]

How does that matter?

It matters because it adds to the improbability that any other intelligent life is out there.

 

[iguanaman]

It matters because it adds to the improbability that any other intelligent life is out there.

It doesn't change the probability that much. Billions of earth-like planets that could all have life means it is improbable that we are alone in the universe. But it matters not, the distances involved make it impossible to travel there anyway. We cannot move to a new planet so we better take care of the one we have.

 

[Napoleon]

It doesn't change the probability that much. Billions of earth-like planets that could all have life means it is improbable that we are alone in the universe. But it matters not, the distances involved make it impossible to travel there anyway. We cannot move to a new planet so we better take care of the one we have.

There are many factors involved. Let’s start at the galactic level. Any star system with any hope of supporting complex life must be within a galaxy’s habitable zone. In our galaxy, only 0.3% of stars are located in the habitable zone. That automatically takes you down from 100 billion stars to 300 million where the mere idea of complex life is even worth contemplating.

Now we go to stars. Ours is a rare Class G main sequence star that is only 7% of all the stars in our galaxy. That takes you down from 300 million stars to 21 million stars. What also makes our star rare is that is has no stellar companion. 85% of stars exist in a binary or other multiple system. So that takes you down from 21 million stars to 3.1 million stars.

Now we go to planetary systems. Only 50% of stars have a planet our size or larger orbiting it within its habitable zone. That takes you down from 3.1 million stars to 1.5 million stars. Ours (Ordered) is the rarest type of planetary system out there. 80% are the Similar type. So that takes you down from 1.5 million stars to somewhere south of 240,000 star systems where you can start thinking about the possibility of complex life.

And the rarities go on and on until what you’re left with is a long series of very rare things that all have to happen and happen perfectly in a particular order to end up with intelligent life. It’s a fluke that’s not likely to have been repeated anywhere else in the galaxy and maybe even the universe.

 

[HIP56948]

It doesn't change the probability that much. Billions of earth-like planets that could all have life means it is improbable that we are alone in the universe. But it matters not, the distances involved make it impossible to travel there anyway. We cannot move to a new planet so we better take care of the one we have.

Amen, you know what you're talking about. It's fun to speculate but the distances are not just far, they're totally insane.
Personally, if we were 100 IQ points higher, filled with love for each other plus with much longer life-spans (250X), I could see hope entering the future space travel.
What a wonderful world THAT would be...

 

[iguanaman]

There are many factors involved. Let’s start at the galactic level. Any star system with any hope of supporting complex life must be within a galaxy’s habitable zone. In our galaxy, only 0.3% of stars are located in the habitable zone. That automatically takes you down from 100 billion stars to 300 million where the mere idea of complex life is even worth contemplating.

Now we go to stars. Ours is a rare Class G main sequence star that is only 7% of all the stars in our galaxy. That takes you down from 300 million stars to 21 million stars. What also makes our star rare is that is has no stellar companion. 85% of stars exist in a binary or other multiple system. So that takes you down from 21 million stars to 3.1 million stars.

Now we go to planetary systems. Only 50% of stars have a planet our size or larger orbiting it within its habitable zone. That takes you down from 3.1 million stars to 1.5 million stars. Ours (Ordered) is the rarest type of planetary system out there. 80% are the Similar type. So that takes you down from 1.5 million stars to somewhere south of 240,000 star systems where you can start thinking about the possibility of complex life.

And the rarities go on and on until what you’re left with is a long series of very rare things that all have to happen and happen perfectly in a particular order to end up with intelligent life. It’s a fluke that’s not likely to have been repeated anywhere else in the galaxy and maybe even the universe.

There are 200 billion trillions of stars, as many as there are grains of sand on every beach on Earth. I have no idea where your numbers come from but they are way off.

There are approximately 200 billion trillion stars in the universe. Or, to put it another way, 200 sextillion. That's 200,000,000,000,000,000,000,000! The number is so big, it's hard to imagine.

https://www.astronomy.com/science/astro-for-kids-how-many-stars-are-there-in-space/#:~:text=There%20are%20approximately%20200%20billion,big%2C%20it's%20hard%20to%20imagine.

 

[Napoleon]

There are 200 billion trillions of stars, as many as there are grains of sand on every beach on Earth. I have no idea where your numbers come from but they are way off.

There are approximately 200 billion trillion stars in the universe. Or, to put it another way, 200 sextillion. That's 200,000,000,000,000,000,000,000! The number is so big, it's hard to imagine.

https://www.astronomy.com/science/astro-for-kids-how-many-stars-are-there-in-space/#:~:text=There%20are%20approximately%20200%20billion,big%2C%20it's%20hard%20to%20imagine.

My numbers are for our own galaxy. As far as the entire universe is concerned - the extreme rarity of all of the conditions required for complex life let alone intelligent life negates the total number of stars in the universe immaterial. That we don’t see aliens everywhere because there are none is a legitimate answer to the so-called fermi-paradox.

 

[iguanaman]

My numbers are for our own galaxy. As far as the entire universe is concerned - the extreme rarity of all of the conditions required for complex life let alone intelligent life negates the total number of stars in the universe immaterial. That we don’t see aliens everywhere because there are none is a legitimate answer to the so-called fermi-paradox.

Our galaxy is a tiny part of the universe. We don't see aliens because they are 1000's or millions of light years away. The speed of light is a universal constant that cannot be exceeded.

 

[HIP56948]

There are many factors involved. Let’s start at the galactic level. Any star system with any hope of supporting complex life must be within a galaxy’s habitable zone. In our galaxy, only 0.3% of stars are located in the habitable zone. That automatically takes you down from 100 billion stars to 300 million where the mere idea of complex life is even worth contemplating.

Now we go to stars. Ours is a rare Class G main sequence star that is only 7% of all the stars in our galaxy. That takes you down from 300 million stars to 21 million stars. What also makes our star rare is that is has no stellar companion. 85% of stars exist in a binary or other multiple system. So that takes you down from 21 million stars to 3.1 million stars.

Now we go to planetary systems. Only 50% of stars have a planet our size or larger orbiting it within its habitable zone. That takes you down from 3.1 million stars to 1.5 million stars. Ours (Ordered) is the rarest type of planetary system out there. 80% are the Similar type. So that takes you down from 1.5 million stars to somewhere south of 240,000 star systems where you can start thinking about the possibility of complex life.

And the rarities go on and on until what you’re left with is a long series of very rare things that all have to happen and happen perfectly in a particular order to end up with intelligent life. It’s a fluke that’s not likely to have been repeated anywhere else in the galaxy and maybe even the universe.

You probably know this:..>> The universe is still very young, compared to it's lifespan. Probably know this story also>>
One great short story is: The Earthlings invited themselves to a Galactic party. When they arrived at the point, only one host was there.
The Earthlings looked around for quite some time and finally asked the host "Where is everybody else? The host said: No one else is here yet.
When are they coming? asked the Earthlings. Host: Ah..you don't understand, they don't quite exist yet...give them time...give them time..

 

[Individual]

In another strike against the possibility of intelligent life out there - the Kepler data has revealed that ours is the rarest type of solar system in the galaxy

We Live in the Rarest Type of Planetary System

New work suggests four distinct star system types—and finds our own in the rarest category

www.scientificamerican.com

I found no mention of intelligent life in the article.

 

[Exquisitor]

In another strike against the possibility of intelligent life out there - the Kepler data has revealed that ours is the rarest type of solar system in the galaxy

We Live in the Rarest Type of Planetary System

New work suggests four distinct star system types—and finds our own in the rarest category

www.scientificamerican.com

It's hard to say, to be detected, the star's ecliptic must transit relative to Earth so we're not getting a full survey. Plus planets that are closer to stars like white dwarfs or large inner gas giants appear more common.

Earth is rare, it's a special planet chosen for the noon appearance of Chaitanya Mahaprabhu (1486), for Christ, scheduling a number of Avatars. It is the meeting of Father and Son who perpendicularly traverse the greater Creation. It is a jewel belonging to Ganesh (2300)(don't ruin it). All told though, it is a typical planet, unless one is so enlightened, it would appear like any other. It is also possible that planets usually host such Avatars, making Earth completely unremarkable.

Within 100 light years, there are 60,000 stars for 6,000 yellow dwarfs. If you had 100 yellow dwarfs, could you make a habitable planet in 100 of them? Probably not, but maybe in 300, so I would estimate about twenty habitable planets within 100 light years.

The Arcturus-Antares Midway Station, about 300 light years away, probably monitors more than just Earth. Just how many is privy information, I can appear there, but not able to focus on the monitor to gain such information, or ask the aliens I'm bothering. Not given to it. Just wondering doesn't render the answer.

 

[Exquisitor]

In another strike against the possibility of intelligent life out there - the Kepler data has revealed that ours is the rarest type of solar system in the galaxy

We Live in the Rarest Type of Planetary System

New work suggests four distinct star system types—and finds our own in the rarest category

www.scientificamerican.com

So, we call Earth, the second Ascended, guess who was first.

Here at the midpoint, it is time for planets to start going back to Godhead, whereas previously we all went our own way.

The planet of the Father is warlike, the planet of the Son is more warlike, and the planets of the Holy Ghost will be even more warlike (if you think there's anything to be gained by staying behind).

 

[RogueWarrior]

There are many factors involved. Let’s start at the galactic level. Any star system with any hope of supporting complex life must be within a galaxy’s habitable zone. In our galaxy, only 0.3% of stars are located in the habitable zone. That automatically takes you down from 100 billion stars to 300 million where the mere idea of complex life is even worth contemplating.

Now we go to stars. Ours is a rare Class G main sequence star that is only 7% of all the stars in our galaxy. That takes you down from 300 million stars to 21 million stars. What also makes our star rare is that is has no stellar companion. 85% of stars exist in a binary or other multiple system. So that takes you down from 21 million stars to 3.1 million stars.

Now we go to planetary systems. Only 50% of stars have a planet our size or larger orbiting it within its habitable zone. That takes you down from 3.1 million stars to 1.5 million stars. Ours (Ordered) is the rarest type of planetary system out there. 80% are the Similar type. So that takes you down from 1.5 million stars to somewhere south of 240,000 star systems where you can start thinking about the possibility of complex life.

And the rarities go on and on until what you’re left with is a long series of very rare things that all have to happen and happen perfectly in a particular order to end up with intelligent life. It’s a fluke that’s not likely to have been repeated anywhere else in the galaxy and maybe even the universe.

Drawing some pretty specific conclusions from pretty sparse data. Why not just say it is all due to intelligent design or some other nonsense instead of dragging it out...

 

[trouble13]

In another strike against the possibility of intelligent life out there - the Kepler data has revealed that ours is the rarest type of solar system in the galaxy

We Live in the Rarest Type of Planetary System

New work suggests four distinct star system types—and finds our own in the rarest category

www.scientificamerican.com

Except our planets don't fit their model. Mars is smaller than Venus and Earth when it should be larger. Also Jupiter is the largest planet and after that the planets begin to get progressively smaller. By their model Neptune or Pluto (if you believe it is a planet) should be our largest planet.

 

[trouble13]

There are many factors involved. Let’s start at the galactic level. Any star system with any hope of supporting complex life must be within a galaxy’s habitable zone. In our galaxy, only 0.3% of stars are located in the habitable zone. That automatically takes you down from 100 billion stars to 300 million where the mere idea of complex life is even worth contemplating.

Now we go to stars. Ours is a rare Class G main sequence star that is only 7% of all the stars in our galaxy. That takes you down from 300 million stars to 21 million stars. What also makes our star rare is that is has no stellar companion. 85% of stars exist in a binary or other multiple system. So that takes you down from 21 million stars to 3.1 million stars.

Now we go to planetary systems. Only 50% of stars have a planet our size or larger orbiting it within its habitable zone. That takes you down from 3.1 million stars to 1.5 million stars. Ours (Ordered) is the rarest type of planetary system out there. 80% are the Similar type. So that takes you down from 1.5 million stars to somewhere south of 240,000 star systems where you can start thinking about the possibility of complex life.

And the rarities go on and on until what you’re left with is a long series of very rare things that all have to happen and happen perfectly in a particular order to end up with intelligent life. It’s a fluke that’s not likely to have been repeated anywhere else in the galaxy and maybe even the universe.

WADR I think it's arrogant for us to think we can calculate the odds of other life existing in the universe. We can even see the entire universe. What we can see we can't see well enough to know if it has life on it or not. We know what conditions are required for our firm of life to exist but we don't know that other life could not form under different conditions. For all we know life could be incredibly common in other parts of the universe or we could be the only life in the entire universe. It's too big of a question for us to answer right now.

 

[multivita-man]

I think life either has existed, will exist, or probably exists now in numerous places in the Universe, but it's not necessarily complex, intelligent life. I think that may exist, but it's probably really rare and maybe impossible to detect in our life time, and maybe 100 or more lifetimes.

 

[Glitch]

In another strike against the possibility of intelligent life out there - the Kepler data has revealed that ours is the rarest type of solar system in the galaxy

We Live in the Rarest Type of Planetary System

New work suggests four distinct star system types—and finds our own in the rarest category

www.scientificamerican.com

Nonsense. It revealed no such thing.

Furthermore, while the article lists all the possible arrangements of planets, nobody has ever observed a "similar," "antiordered," or "ordered" planetary system because they don't exist. Every solar system we have observed, including our own, have been "mixed."

Mercury may be the smallest planet currently, but it wasn't the smallest when Pluto was still a planet. Nor is Jupiter the very last planet in our solar system, as it should be in an "ordered" planetary system. Mars becomes the second smallest planet after Mercury, with both Uranus and Neptune being smaller than either Saturn or Jupiter.

I have no idea where this author gets the idea that "ordered" planetary systems exist, because nobody has ever observed any. Every planetary system with three or more planets that we have observed have been "mixed."

What sets Earth apart and made intelligent life possible is the location of our solar system in the Milky Way galaxy. Had we stayed in the spiral arms, with the majority of the stars in our galaxy, we would likely never have evolved. But because we are in between two spiral arms, with the closest star being just over 4 light years away, we've had the time to evolve. When solar systems are only a light year apart from each other it is going to be too turbulent for life to gain much of a purchase, as they both interfere with each other's development. They are not likely going to have the 4.5 billion years of relatively peace and quiet we've had to evolve.

Even Earth had a close call some 70,000 years ago. A binary system passed within 0.8 light years of Earth. Considering our solar system extends for a light year, it means that both solar systems collided. Had we been in one of the spiral arms this would have been a regular occurrence because the stars are more densely packed together.

So it is not the size the planets or their order that makes the difference. It is our placement in our particular type of galaxy that makes the difference. Had we evolved in an elliptical or lenticular galaxy instead of a spiral galaxy then all the stars would be more evenly distributed and they would all have an equal chance of evolving life. However, in spiral or irregular galaxies you end up with very closely clumped together star systems, and that does not bode well for life.

 

[Glitch]

It doesn't change the probability that much. Billions of earth-like planets that could all have life means it is improbable that we are alone in the universe. But it matters not, the distances involved make it impossible to travel there anyway. We cannot move to a new planet so we better take care of the one we have.

Well, you are partially right. The distances involved make it currently impossible to travel to another solar system. However, that does not mean that we cannot move to a new planet. There is, of course, Mars. I also would not be concerned about Earth. It will still be here long after we become extinct.

As the sun ages its luminosity increases. In another ~500 million years the luminosity of the sun will have increase by another 10%. Increasing the amount of energy Earth receives to over 1,500 W/m². That will be sufficient to increase the surface temperature to 100°C and boil off all the liquid water on the surface of the planet. Effectively ending the possibility of life on Earth. Assuming humanity manages to survive the next few hundred million years, it would behoove us to find another planet to live before then.

Interstellar travel, without exceeding the speed of light, is theoretically possible. It requires a spacecraft capable of generating 1 g of continuous thrust. At an acceleration rate of 9.8 m/s² you can achieve 99.5% the speed of light after just over two years of traveling. If your means of propulsion was hydrogen fusion, once you reach relativistic speeds (> 1% the speed of light) the rarefied hydrogen in interstellar space becomes a viable fuel source. You could literally travel forever, or at least as long as your engines held out.

As a result of time dilation, the astronauts could arrive at Alpha Centauri in just under 4 years. While to observers on Earth it would appear to take 5 years. By the time they return to Earth the astronauts will only be 8 years older, but Earth observers will have 10 years lapse.

 

[iguanaman]

Nonsense. It revealed no such thing.

Furthermore, while the article lists all the possible arrangements of planets, nobody has ever observed a "similar," "antiordered," or "ordered" planetary system because they don't exist. Every solar system we have observed, including our own, have been "mixed."

Mercury may be the smallest planet currently, but it wasn't the smallest when Pluto was still a planet. Nor is Jupiter the very last planet in our solar system, as it should be in an "ordered" planetary system. Mars becomes the second smallest planet after Mercury, with both Uranus and Neptune being smaller than either Saturn or Jupiter.

I have no idea where this author gets the idea that "ordered" planetary systems exist, because nobody has ever observed any. Every planetary system with three or more planets that we have observed have been "mixed."

What sets Earth apart and made intelligent life possible is the location of our solar system in the Milky Way galaxy. Had we stayed in the spiral arms, with the majority of the stars in our galaxy, we would likely never have evolved. But because we are in between two spiral arms, with the closest star being just over 4 light years away, we've had the time to evolve. When solar systems are only a light year apart from each other it is going to be too turbulent for life to gain much of a purchase, as they both interfere with each other's development. They are not likely going to have the 4.5 billion years of relatively peace and quiet we've had to evolve.

Even Earth had a close call some 70,000 years ago. A binary system passed within 0.8 light years of Earth. Considering our solar system extends for a light year, it means that both solar systems collided. Had we been in one of the spiral arms this would have been a regular occurrence because the stars are more densely packed together.

So it is not the size the planets or their order that makes the difference. It is our placement in our particular type of galaxy that makes the difference. Had we evolved in an elliptical or lenticular galaxy instead of a spiral galaxy then all the stars would be more evenly distributed and they would all have an equal chance of evolving life. However, in spiral or irregular galaxies you end up with very closely clumped together star systems, and that does not bode well for life.

Well, you are partially right. The distances involved make it currently impossible to travel to another solar system. However, that does not mean that we cannot move to a new planet. There is, of course, Mars. I also would not be concerned about Earth. It will still be here long after we become extinct.

As the sun ages its luminosity increases. In another ~500 million years the luminosity of the sun will have increase by another 10%. Increasing the amount of energy Earth receives to over 1,500 W/m². That will be sufficient to increase the surface temperature to 100°C and boil off all the liquid water on the surface of the planet. Effectively ending the possibility of life on Earth. Assuming humanity manages to survive the next few hundred million years, it would behoove us to find another planet to live before then.

Interstellar travel, without exceeding the speed of light, is theoretically possible. It requires a spacecraft capable of generating 1 g of continuous thrust. At an acceleration rate of 9.8 m/s² you can achieve 99.5% the speed of light after just over two years of traveling. If your means of propulsion was hydrogen fusion, once you reach relativistic speeds (> 1% the speed of light) the rarefied hydrogen in interstellar space becomes a viable fuel source. You could literally travel forever, or at least as long as your engines held out.

As a result of time dilation, the astronauts could arrive at Alpha Centauri in just under 4 years. While to observers on Earth it would appear to take 5 years. By the time they return to Earth the astronauts will only be 8 years older, but Earth observers will have 10 years lapse.

We would be better off colonizing the moon instead of Mars. At least the sun is strong enough to grow plants and make enough solar power to split water for oxygen . Not to mention being much closer to earth. There is little left of Mars to support life.

 

[multivita-man]

We would be better off colonizing the moon instead of Mars. At least the sun is strong enough to grow plants and make enough solar power to split water for oxygen . Not to mention being much closer to earth. There is little left of Mars to support life.

If we could find ways to analyze planetary atmospheres and then seed them accordingly so that they could support life, and then if we could figure out a way to travel to different bodies within the right time frame.

My take is that there is, has been, or will be complex, multi-cellular life in the universe; it's very unlikely we will make any meaningful contact with it. We might be able to detect some signatures of life, or intelligent life elsewhere might be able to detect our signatures, but we won't interact.

My ultimate take is that everything in this universe - including us - was meant to be destroyed, just as it was meant to be created. Everything that has a beginning, has an end. We will end.

 

[Glitch]

We would be better off colonizing the moon instead of Mars. At least the sun is strong enough to grow plants and make enough solar power to split water for oxygen . Not to mention being much closer to earth. There is little left of Mars to support life.

The sun is strong enough to both grow plants on Mars and split water for oxygen.

We receive between 1,321 and 1,413 W/m², depending on the location of our orbit. While Mars receives between 492 and 715 W/m².

Photosynthesis requires between 500 and 1,000 lux of sunlight, or a minimum of 4 W/m² and a minimum of between 150 and 180 ppmV of CO2 in the atmosphere. Mars has both, in spades. Hydrolysis is also possible on Mars, it would just take a little more than 2.5 times longer than on Earth or the moon. There is also considerably more CO2 in Mars' atmosphere than on the moon.

 

[gboisjo]

My take is that there is, has been, or will be complex, multi-cellular life in the universe; it's very unlikely we will make any meaningful contact with it. We might be able to detect some signatures of life, or intelligent life elsewhere might be able to detect our signatures, but we won't interact.

Complex life like ourselves exceedingly rare IMO. The trajectory of life on our planet for millions of years was towards biological weapons, not brains.

Why, because life feeds on life. But for a freak asteroid 66 millions years ago rat like mammals would still live in holes beneath the dinosaurs feet.

Life yes. intelligent life like ourselves, exceedingly rare.