From: Robin Lee Powell (email@example.com)
Date: Mon Oct 04 2004 - 19:39:55 MDT
On Mon, Oct 04, 2004 at 08:23:40PM -0400, Keith Henson wrote:
> At 02:23 PM 30/09/04 -0700, Thomas Buckner <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> >--- Dani Eder <email@example.com> wrote:
> >> Re: Fermi Paradox
> >> > >Possibility: we're really the first.
> >> >
> >> > Given the extremely unfriendly planetary systems we have seen
> >> > so far, this looks increasingly likely.
> >> >
> >> The extrasolar planets we have found so far are a biased sample
> >> due to the way we have been looking for them.
> That's true, but the data we have *rules out* earth like planets
> in the habitable zone in most or maybe *all* systems so far. You
> just don't get stable orbits for the little guys when the big ones
> have close in or seriously elliptical orbits.
According to http://www.obspm.fr/encycl/catalog.html
update: 3 October 2004
Global statistics: 117 planetary systems
13 multiple planet systems
So, that removes as many as 120 or so main sequence stars from the
pool of "stars that could have habitable planets". Yes, clearly
habitable zone planets must be rare!
Our sample size thus far is paltry to the point of total
-- http://www.digitalkingdom.org/~rlpowell/ *** http://www.lojban.org/ Reason #237 To Learn Lojban: "Homonyms: Their Grate!"
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 17 2013 - 04:00:49 MDT