By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General - NASA announced the discovery of a A Habitable Planet.

Dr.Grass on 08 December 2011

I don't think this means much tbh.



Around the Network
deskpro2k3 on 08 December 2011

even though its far away, if they discover other intelligent life, or just living things on a different planet, that alone is the discovery of the century.



dark_gh0st_b0y on 08 December 2011

it depends, they say they don't even know if the planet is mostly gas or liquid, but even if it has solid rock on it, it's still unreachable

seems so blue, imagine if intelligent fishy creatures live there : P



don't mind my username, that was more than 10 years ago, I'm a different person now, amazing how people change ^_^

NobleTeam360 on 08 December 2011

tell me when they find some life then its is worthy of news. Unless we have advanced to a point we have the tech to travel there withing a humans lifetime.



highwaystar101 on 08 December 2011
Dr.Grass said:
highwaystar101 said:
JOKA_ said:

Now all we need to do is create a ship that can travel 600x the speed of light and we can get there in a year!

 

For that all we need is an infinite amount of energy/hope relativity is wrong. It's almost too easy.

As for the planet, I'm not getting excited. It's considerably larger than the Earth and there are factors at play that we have no idea about (environment, axial tilt, etc) . To say it habitable is a stretch. This will be Gliese 581d all over again.


erm no. Special relativity would make it possible to reach the planet within a lifetime...time dilation means the time will move slower on a fast moving spaceship. Problem is that time on earth would be thousands of years ahead by the time you come back.

You really do like to be the big expert on physics round here, don't you? :D

I was actually just referring to the idea of going faster than the speed of llight itself. I know time will pass more slowly for you as you approach the speed of light and you could reach it in your own lifetime at 0.99c. 



Around the Network
Dr.Grass on 08 December 2011
highwaystar101 said:
Dr.Grass said:
highwaystar101 said:
JOKA_ said:

Now all we need to do is create a ship that can travel 600x the speed of light and we can get there in a year!

 

For that all we need is an infinite amount of energy/hope relativity is wrong. It's almost too easy.

As for the planet, I'm not getting excited. It's considerably larger than the Earth and there are factors at play that we have no idea about (environment, axial tilt, etc) . To say it habitable is a stretch. This will be Gliese 581d all over again.


erm no. Special relativity would make it possible to reach the planet within a lifetime...time dilation means the time will move slower on a fast moving spaceship. Problem is that time on earth would be thousands of years ahead by the time you come back.

You really do like to be the big expert on physics round here, don't you? :D

I was actually just referring to the idea of going faster than the speed of llight itself. I know time will pass more slowly for you as you approach the speed of light and you could reach it in your own lifetime at 0.99c. 

 

I don't consider myself an expert. I consider most statements I read about physics on here moronic. I see what you mean, but special relativity can't be broken. A wormhole is a better bet. Please don't try and make me look like an arrogant asshole. Sometimes I'm an asshole, but I really don't want to be an arrogant asshole.

I know a little more than most. Mkay.



Narishma on 08 December 2011

The title is incorrect. They haven't found a habitable planet, what they found is a planet in the habitable zone around that star. They don't yet have enough information about the planet to know if it's habitable or not. For example, both Venus and Mars are in the habitable zone of the Sun, but I would hardly call them habitable.



Final-Fan on 08 December 2011
Dr.Grass said:
highwaystar101 said:
Dr.Grass said:
highwaystar101 said:
JOKA_ said:

Now all we need to do is create a ship that can travel 600x the speed of light and we can get there in a year!

For that all we need is an infinite amount of energy/hope relativity is wrong. It's almost too easy.

As for the planet, I'm not getting excited. It's considerably larger than the Earth and there are factors at play that we have no idea about (environment, axial tilt, etc) . To say it habitable is a stretch. This will be Gliese 581d all over again.

erm no. Special relativity would make it possible to reach the planet within a lifetime...time dilation means the time will move slower on a fast moving spaceship. Problem is that time on earth would be thousands of years ahead by the time you come back.

You really do like to be the big expert on physics round here, don't you? :D

I was actually just referring to the idea of going faster than the speed of llight itself. I know time will pass more slowly for you as you approach the speed of light and you could reach it in your own lifetime at 0.99c. 

I don't consider myself an expert. I consider most statements I read about physics on here moronic. I see what you mean, but special relativity can't be broken. A wormhole is a better bet. Please don't try and make me look like an arrogant asshole. Sometimes I'm an asshole, but I really don't want to be an arrogant asshole.

I know a little more than most. Mkay.

Well the thing is, here's the conversation: 
"create a ship that can travel 600x the speed of light"
'For that, relativity would have to be wrong'
"erm no, special relativity blah blah blah"

You came in and spouted irrelevancies of which HWS was well aware.  Either you just weren't paying attention to what people were actually saying, which is pretty bad for someone supposedly correcting others' errors, or you disregarded the actual topic to flaunt your knowledge.  Either way, the appearance of arrogance is your fault. 



Tag (courtesy of fkusumot): "Please feel free -- nay, I encourage you -- to offer rebuttal."
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
My advice to fanboys: Brag about stuff that's true, not about stuff that's false. Predict stuff that's likely, not stuff that's unlikely. You will be happier, and we will be happier.

"Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts." - Sen. Pat Moynihan
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
The old smileys: ; - ) : - ) : - ( : - P : - D : - # ( c ) ( k ) ( y ) If anyone knows the shortcut for , let me know!
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I have the most epic death scene ever in VGChartz Mafia.  Thanks WordsofWisdom! 

Dr.Grass on 08 December 2011
Narishma said:

The title is incorrect. They haven't found a habitable planet, what they found is a planet in the habitable zone around that star. They don't yet have enough information about the planet to know if it's habitable or not. For example, both Venus and Mars are in the habitable zone of the Sun, but I would hardly call them habitable.


Does your name in any way relate to Nrsimha (lion-man) ?



Dr.Grass on 08 December 2011
Final-Fan said:
Dr.Grass said:
highwaystar101 said:
Dr.Grass said:
highwaystar101 said:
JOKA_ said:

Now all we need to do is create a ship that can travel 600x the speed of light and we can get there in a year!

For that all we need is an infinite amount of energy/hope relativity is wrong. It's almost too easy.

As for the planet, I'm not getting excited. It's considerably larger than the Earth and there are factors at play that we have no idea about (environment, axial tilt, etc) . To say it habitable is a stretch. This will be Gliese 581d all over again.

erm no. Special relativity would make it possible to reach the planet within a lifetime...time dilation means the time will move slower on a fast moving spaceship. Problem is that time on earth would be thousands of years ahead by the time you come back.

You really do like to be the big expert on physics round here, don't you? :D

I was actually just referring to the idea of going faster than the speed of llight itself. I know time will pass more slowly for you as you approach the speed of light and you could reach it in your own lifetime at 0.99c. 

I don't consider myself an expert. I consider most statements I read about physics on here moronic. I see what you mean, but special relativity can't be broken. A wormhole is a better bet. Please don't try and make me look like an arrogant asshole. Sometimes I'm an asshole, but I really don't want to be an arrogant asshole.

I know a little more than most. Mkay.

Well the thing is, here's the conversation: 
"create a ship that can travel 600x the speed of light"
'For that, relativity would have to be wrong'
"erm no, special relativity blah blah blah"

You came in and spouted irrelevancies of which HWS was well aware.  Either you just weren't paying attention to what people were actually saying, which is pretty bad for someone supposedly correcting others' errors, or you disregarded the actual topic to flaunt your knowledge.  Either way, the appearance of arrogance is your fault. 


I get what you did there. And you make sense, except that you missed something... 

My point was that special relativity allows one to travel 600 lightyears within a lifetime. I.e. special relativity doesn't have to be wrong. 

Way to go to try and show me up with your first post in this thread. Bravo. Maybe you should rather read properly before commenting.

 

I am allowed to comment on a subsection of what he said you know. Excuse me for just stating relevant facts. Relativity is often misunderstood, and even though I'm no expert, I like discussing/debating it. Not to mention that I was trying to be nice in that response you quoted.

''Either way, the appearance of arrogance is your fault. ''

I'm not taking this statement kindly.