NASA's announcement

[Emraldis]

Except the stars radiation output is puny, which is why even at sub mercury orbits the planets are getting less radiation than the Earth does. Yeah, it's more than Uranus, but it's not more than what the Earth is getting. The atmospheric insulation depends a whole lot on the composition of the atmosphere. For example, water clouds have extremely high albedo (at least at visual wavelengths, not sure if that holds true in the IR where this star is putting out most of it's light), which means they reflect much of the incoming radiation back into space. So if you're forming a lot of clouds on the sunlight side, this will drive the effective albedo of the planet up and decrease the incoming radiation flux.

Sounds like we took the same courses!

Even then, If you're under continuous bombardment of energy, you're going to heat up, even if it is more slowly. Plus, with the suggestion of clouds, there would likely be winds circling the planet, due to the temperature difference on either side, meaning that cloud cover would not be permanent, unless the entire planet would be enshrouded. Also, as can be seen on planets like Venus, an atmosphere does not necessarily provide an effective method for redistributing incoming radiation, it can frequently just trap it once it passes through the atmosphere (Think greenhouse effect).

 

[Black_Shade]

For a reference on this, you can see this paper: https://arxiv.org/abs/1307.0515
The whole thing might be a bit technical if you don't have a science background but the abstract is pretty clear. The substellar location they reference is the point on the planet directly facing the star.

The habitable zone (HZ) is the circumstellar region where a planet can sustain surface liquid water. Searching for terrestrial planets in the HZ of nearby stars is the stated goal of ongoing and planned extrasolar planet surveys. Previous estimates of the inner edge of the HZ were based on one-dimensional radiative-convective models. The most serious limitation of these models is the inability to predict cloud behavior. Here we use global climate models with sophisticated cloud schemes to show that due to a stabilizing cloud feedback, tidally locked planets can be habitable at twice the stellar flux found by previous studies. This dramatically expands the HZ and roughly doubles the frequency of habitable planets orbiting red dwarf stars. At high stellar flux, strong convection produces thick water clouds near the substellar location that greatly increase the planetary albedo and reduce surface temperatures. Higher insolation produces stronger substellar convection and therefore higher albedo, making this phenomenon a stabilizing climate feedback. Substellar clouds also effectively block outgoing radiation from the surface, reducing or even completely reversing the thermal emission contrast between dayside and nightside. The presence of substellar water clouds and the resulting clement surface conditions will therefore be detectable with the James Webb Space Telescope.

 

[Emraldis]

For a reference on this, you can see this paper: https://arxiv.org/abs/1307.0515
The whole thing might be a bit technical if you don't have a science background but the abstract is pretty clear. The substellar location they reference is the point on the planet directly facing the star.

The habitable zone (HZ) is the circumstellar region where a planet can sustain surface liquid water. Searching for terrestrial planets in the HZ of nearby stars is the stated goal of ongoing and planned extrasolar planet surveys. Previous estimates of the inner edge of the HZ were based on one-dimensional radiative-convective models. The most serious limitation of these models is the inability to predict cloud behavior. Here we use global climate models with sophisticated cloud schemes to show that due to a stabilizing cloud feedback, tidally locked planets can be habitable at twice the stellar flux found by previous studies. This dramatically expands the HZ and roughly doubles the frequency of habitable planets orbiting red dwarf stars. At high stellar flux, strong convection produces thick water clouds near the substellar location that greatly increase the planetary albedo and reduce surface temperatures. Higher insolation produces stronger substellar convection and therefore higher albedo, making this phenomenon a stabilizing climate feedback. Substellar clouds also effectively block outgoing radiation from the surface, reducing or even completely reversing the thermal emission contrast between dayside and nightside. The presence of substellar water clouds and the resulting clement surface conditions will therefore be detectable with the James Webb Space Telescope.

Huh Fascinating. I'll have a look at this when I get back from work. I didn't know we knew enough about climate models to predict that. Guess that's why I'm not a climate scientist lol.

 

[Black_Shade]

Huh Fascinating. I'll have a look at this when I get back from work. I didn't know we knew enough about climate models to predict that. Guess that's why I'm not a climate scientist lol.

TBH I don't trust them all that much, almost every planetary scientist I know who uses them has found problems in the code. But it's an interesting idea, at least. And it's enough to make me think that you can still have a chance for sophisticated life forms to develop even if you are on a tidally locked system. I'm more worried about the stars activity/stability in terms of habitability.

 

[Emraldis]

TBH I don't trust them all that much, almost every planetary scientist I know who uses them has found problems in the code. But it's an interesting idea, at least. And it's enough to make me think that you can still have a chance for sophisticated life forms to develop even if you are on a tidally locked system. I'm more worried about the stars activity/stability in terms of habitability.

Yeah, as mentioned earlier in the thread that could be a problem. But, if it does turn out to be possible to live on those planets, you would not have a hard time hopping between them! Maybe we'll find a little interplanetary society over there?

 

[thedarkendstar]

Yeah, as mentioned earlier in the thread that could be a problem. But, if it does turn out to be possible to live on those planets, you would not have a hard time hopping between them! Maybe we'll find a little interplanetary society over there?

STAR TREKKIN ACROSS THE UNIVERSE boldly going forward cause we cannot find reverse!

I've always assumed that another species that has advanced enough to achieve a multi planet civilization must be united and if they are united considering our own history it seems more likely due to more peaceful means empires formed from war don't tend to last cultures rebel but unions that represent all those living in it tend to last longer.

So here's hoping most species we meet are peaceful and aren't like the Klingons or at the very least would just integrate us into the empire not murder/kill us all

 

[TwiceAHuman]

You assume a species that has united would be hostile the fact they didn't destroy themselves shows either they united peacefully or one group dominated the others only 1 implies conquest the other not.

Or maybe it has sentient life but not on the level of Humans who doesn't want space dinos

No, I imply that their either may be total d$cks like humans, in which case they would turn us into a mindless slaves without blinking, or they can be a perfect harmounious society that sees us as barborous monsters who should be subjugated before they have a chance to develop a significant force. These are only two of countless possibilities, but those two are pretty likely. Because the nature favors species with aggressive tendencies more or less. What made mitochondrions? Cells eating each other. What made highly energetic living beings? Leaching energy from others instead of photosynthesis or chemosynthesis. What made advanced neural system? Predatory lifestile. What makes human technology? Wars. In such reality a very small percentage of sentient species would be peaceful, as their entire essesnce is usually beating someone with the neareast solid object and eating them.

 

[thedarkendstar]

No, I imply that their either may be total d$cks like humans, in which case they would turn us into a mindless slaves without blinking, or they can be a perfect harmounious society that sees us as barborous monsters who should be subjugated before they have a chance to develop a significant force. These are only two of countless possibilities, but those two are pretty likely. Because the nature favors species with aggressive tendencies more or less. What made mitochondrions? Cells eating each other. What made highly energetic living beings? Leaching energy from others instead of photosynthesis or chemosynthesis. What made advanced neural system? Predatory lifestile. What makes human technology? Wars. In such reality a very small percentage of sentient species would be peaceful, as their entire essesnce is usually beating someone with the neareast solid object and eating them.

But obviously we have been coming closer and closer to at least try to end this. The average person does not want war peace is valued kindness is valued across the globe the Leader of North Korea puts out propaganda to say he is generous etc.

One part of your comment interests me they wouldn't see us as barbarous monsters if they were like us once more like children in there mid teenage years

 

[TwiceAHuman]

But obviously we have been coming closer and closer to at least try to end this. The average person does not want war peace is valued kindness is valued across the globe the Leader of North Korea puts out propaganda to say he is generous etc.

One part of your comment interests me they wouldn't see us as barbarous monsters if they were like us once more like children in there mid teenage years

That's... Dependant. And despite peace is seemingly is valued all that much, I don't see much peace round these parts, especially since the main form of diplomacy of our species is creating military or economic (mainly military) pressure. Besides, since our... Behaviour is mainly caused by our biological nature (hormonal balance, the fact that our body and nervous system acts as if they were never intended to house a concioussness thus creating diffirent problems such as irrational behaviour, ect), not some kind of cultural ignorance. That all makes me thing that we either will genetically modify ourselves to be mind over matter and CO or destroy ourselves in some war or become... The Imperium of Man. XD

And if I was an alien, I wouldn't like to let the third outcome happen. For instance, my stance towards primitives in Stellaris is very... Proactive. It's never about petty 6 research points, but about not letting another Fanatical Purifier launch its first satellite. From both strategic and roleplay perspective.

 

[Waab]

Wich level of life are we talking about?
Microbial?
full Biosphere?
Sentient lifeforms?

I was thinking they were unlikely to have anything in full Biosphere level or above. Mcrobial life is kind of "meh" on the level of intersting stuff to find.

As we have find no microbial life outside Earth I would say that microbial life is a little bit above "meh". Suddenly you have two data points of life.

Maybe it is only single cell life but it would still be huge.

 

[Emraldis]

As we have find no microbial life outside Earth I would say that microbial life is a little bit above "meh". Suddenly you have two data points of life.

Maybe it is only single cell life but it would still be huge.

Even at that basic of a level, it demonstrates that it is possible for life to evolve on other worlds. I would hate for our galaxy to turn out as Asimov's does in his Foundation series, where we never discover any alien, or even any predatory-towards-humans life.

 

[NEXUS12]

Looks like Paradox agrees with the OP.

https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/foru...e-discovery-of-the-trappist-1-system.1001193/

My topic has gone slightly off course

But it seems Paradox agree with me!

Happy days.

 

[PalmettoExplorer14]

NEVER AGAIN!

Why do you say that?

I would be very happy if Pluto regained its status as a planet.

Because I can never unlearn that there are nine planets in the Solar System! Plus, I like the little jiggle that you had to learn the nine planets and their order in our system!

 

[Antediluvian Monster]

Why do you say that?

It's a silly little space rock, undeserving of planetary prestige. They should destroy the thing with relativistic projectile to bring end to the discussion, but I fear we'd just get "should Pluto have been classified as planet before NASA blew it up?" instead.

 

[Kamakaze Panda]

So, today NASA has just announced they have found a solar system with 7 possible rocky planets in it, approximately 40 light years away from our solar system. 3 of those may well support life.

Maybe this system could be included in the start for UNE? Maybe with just one of the planets habitable for balancing issues, with the other two habitable after terraforming.

After all, Alpha Centurai is always close to Sol at the start, with a habitable planet, and no one can say that a planet in that system is definitely habitable.

Just a thought.

Certainly a fascinating find and it seems Paradox have already created the system possibly for next patch.

However, not to rain on anyone's parade with this fantastic discovery, but the Star itself is only 500 Million Years old which makes chances of life incredibly slim, even more so than usual, however, only further monitoring will yield any evidence. That isn't to say that billions of years down the line you couldn't have three life bearing planets there.

 

[Werther]

""Gillon and his colleagues plan to seek out similar solar systems with a new project, Search for Habitable Planets Eclipsing Ultracool Stars, or SPECULOOS. (Like Trappist beer, speculoos cookies are a Belgian delicacy. His next effort will have to be called WAFFLES.)""

Belgian... best people on Earth

 

[thedarkendstar]

However

That's... Dependant. And despite peace is seemingly is valued all that much, I don't see much peace round these parts, especially since the main form of diplomacy of our species is creating military or economic (mainly military) pressure. Besides, since our... Behaviour is mainly caused by our biological nature (hormonal balance, the fact that our body and nervous system acts as if they were never intended to house a concioussness thus creating diffirent problems such as irrational behaviour, ect), not some kind of cultural ignorance. That all makes me thing that we either will genetically modify ourselves to be mind over matter and CO or destroy ourselves in some war or become... The Imperium of Man. XD

And if I was an alien, I wouldn't like to let the third outcome happen. For instance, my stance towards primitives in Stellaris is very... Proactive. It's never about petty 6 research points, but about not letting another Fanatical Purifier launch its first satellite. From both strategic and roleplay perspective.

as a Xenophile myself (The Fanatic Purifiers would need to put me in reduction camps ) Species that are xenophile would look and see how we develop if we make it to space what is our values and using what we have become rather than what we are the human race isn't one blanket ideology atm every ideology in Stellaris basically exists on this planet which one with win who knows.

The west will continue to have the materialist and spiritual debate. And xenophile and xenophobia are constantly switch which is dominant.(in this case referring to immigrants.) For all we know we might end up as the Galaxies Blorg

 

[Waab]

Why do you say that?

I would be very happy if Pluto regained its status as a planet.

Because I can never unlearn that there are nine planets in the Solar System! Plus, I like the little jiggle that you had to learn the nine planets and their order in our system!

The problem you will have is that you would have to relearn any way. If Pluto became a planet again so would Ceres and Vesta. Then you probably could argue about even more of the different kuiper belt objects should be called a planet.

 

[Navarro]

So, today NASA has just announced they have found a solar system with 7 possible rocky planets in it, approximately 40 light years away from our solar system. 3 of those may well support life.

Hmm. I don't know about this. My science ship wasn't able to provide confirmation, though the captain assures me he thoroughly surveyed the system.

The NASA panel joked during their conference that they were going to name each of the seven planets after a Belgian beer.

My sources told me that one of the planets will be named "Waffle."

Wrong. Sid Meier proved Alpha Centauri can host habitable planets, at least one.

I can confirm that I've several times discovered habitable planets at Alpha Centauri. This is clearly representative of reality.

Sadly they are around a red star

In game, I'm pretty sure I've seen habitable planets around pulsars, which science says is impossible.

For all we know we might end up as the Galaxies Blorg

All spacefaring civilizations likely end up as the Borg, given sufficient time to progress to technological singularity. We're visibly moving in that direction now.

 

[TwiceAHuman]

However

as a Xenophile myself (The Fanatic Purifiers would need to put me in reduction camps ) Species that are xenophile would look and see how we develop if we make it to space what is our values and using what we have become rather than what we are the human race isn't one blanket ideology atm every ideology in Stellaris basically exists on this planet which one with win who knows.

The west will continue to have the materialist and spiritual debate. And xenophile and xenophobia are constantly switch which is dominant.(in this case referring to immigrants.) For all we know we might end up as the Galaxies Blorg

More likely Tzynn, though. Glory to the God Emperor!