New Research on Planets indicates universe is full of them...

[Ackehece]

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nature11121.html


the jist is that small non metal rich stars still have many planets but they will be smaller without many giant or super giant class planets.
metal rich large stars have many! giant and super giant planets along with the smaller rocky planets.
ALL STARS ARE LIKELY TO HAVE PLANETS.

Planets everywhere is the new rule in cosmology.

 

[aramis]

Been the rule in Traveller for 30+ years.

 

[bookwyrm67]

does this mean an updated version of the scout system planetary/mainworld generator?

 

[Ackehece]

Been the rule in Traveller for 30+ years.

they are saying even more so than Traveller would suggest otoh it is nice to be ahead of the curve to some extent on the number of planets.

 

[far-trader]

I don't think they are saying there are as many habitable planets as Traveller produces though

 

[Carlobrand]

Yeah, but Traveller has the Grandfather clause.

 

[Ackehece]

I don't think they are saying there are as many habitable planets as Traveller produces though

True enough. If you consider many of the planets created by traveller's as habitable, but yeah Traveller really does create more habitable plans than is truly likely. I do think Travellers definition of habitable is loose sometimes though o: ... Insidious, vacuum, toxic, lower pressure, high pressure, barren, desert. :rofl:.

 

[mike wightman]

Once we have robots on the moons of Jupiter and Saturn we may just find that life is more common than we think.

 

[saundby]

I've had some "open and frank discussions" about low metallicity stars, globulars, and galaxies with some astrophysicists (in personal conversations, so they'll remain nameless.) I fully intend to rub their noses in this.

This is exciting.

And it means one of my story ideas is "hard" SF, again, without extra mechanics to explain away the planets' existence.

 

[Rigel Stardin]

But you're not going to hunt for a world in those systems. You want to find a planet very similar to your homeworld, thus you are going to locate star systems with the same type of star as your primary. In the hopes of find a world just like yours.

Don't get me wrong here, but most of those 'dangerious' worlds inhabited in Traveller are resource planet used by corporations to extract a profit or the occassional "ancient site". So Traveller may have gotten that right...

 

[aramis]

Actually, Rigel, I saw a recent (2012) interview in which Jeff Marci said that they ARE looking for worlds around every kind of star.

I would presume it's to be able to complete the standard model for system formation - he's stated that as a goal in the past.

Why people are looking is FAR more important that what they expect to find, especially in cases where they don't know what to expect.

People actually going is another matter - I fully expect jump drives to be a complete accident if ever discovered. There is sufficient evidence they aren't possible that no sane person would work on them - but some unrelated incident might just find one.

 

[Carlobrand]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/47907932/ns/technology_and_science-space/

Einstein was wrong: God does play dice with the universe. First gas giants at Mercury distances, now planets orbiting impossibly close to each other.

Well, clearly not "impossibly" close.

 

[Rigel Stardin]

Aramis, scienctist are always going to be looking for things that will improve their knowledge of the Universe. My assertion is that a government, private organization or corporation is going to bet on the sure thing. If you're going to colonize a world you would most likely choose the star system with the best chance of having a planet similar to our own. The cost of such colonization would be reduced if you didn't have to carry things need to support life. Why risk colonizing an M class star with a slim chance of having find said world.

Later, after the techiques for finding such worlds are refined, then you're going to look at every star but in the beginning Its going to be about the best chances of finding a world very similar to our own.

 

[aramis]

Aramis, scienctist are always going to be looking for things that will improve their knowledge of the Universe. My assertion is that a government, private organization or corporation is going to bet on the sure thing.

If that were true, there would be no white civilization in North America. Nor Australia.

It was known to be populated, and they sent colonies anyway. Then, the first several failed horribly. And they kept coming, without any real expectation of any resources except wood and slaves, but with a political goal of sending the unreliables off to be near-slave workers.

All you need for colonies is to make them cheaper to send than the bread and circuses needed to appease the masses and/or prisons to hold the prisoners. They don't even need to be pleasant - you send them one way. You're sending them off to die, but not telling people that's what you're trying to do. The Tsars did this with Siberia, too.

 

[mike wightman]

Forgive me for stepping on toes - but didn't most of the original colonists of North America consist of malcontents, groups fleeing persecution or religious fanatics?

Government backed colonies came much later, usually as penal servitude.

That isn't really what happened of course. Governments and big business backed the various colony attempts so that they could maintain their share of potential profits from the madcap idea.

 

[Dragoner]

Cortez conquered a country larger and richer than Spain. Though even Jamestown was a mercantile operation to raise tobbacco.

 

[Rigel Stardin]

America was discovered during the 15th century by a man with the backing of Spain.
The reason: They wanted to find a quicker way to the Far East because of the spice trade.

Yes there were other reasons that people took to ships afterward but the original exploration was financed by a government seeking profit from trade in the far east. If I remember correctly Portgual control much of the Africa coastal towns and there was a treat which prohibited Spain from exploring or trade in that area.

Columbus had to pitch his views to the Spainish court several times before he convince the queen and of course she wanted repayed. It was a business venture that drove exploration. The same would apply to any races wanting to explore space. Something there has to return a profit or it's not worth the effort.

 

[Carlobrand]

Forgive me for stepping on toes - but didn't most of the original colonists of North America consist of malcontents, groups fleeing persecution or religious fanatics?

Government backed colonies came much later, usually as penal servitude.

That isn't really what happened of course. Governments and big business backed the various colony attempts so that they could maintain their share of potential profits from the madcap idea.

Roanoke was supposed to be a profit-making venture. Didn't quite work out. Jamestown followed, same basic premise. Plymouth was a religious group seeking someplace they could practice without persecution and without their members being tempted off; they borrowed for the venture and were expected to repay with interest. Someone had to front the money for the ship, the crew, and all the equipment that went with the settlers, and that someone typically expected a return on their investment.

Initially, the hope was of lucking upon the same wealth the Spanish had found, and in the case of Roanoke I think there was some thought of using the colony as a base for privateering against the Spanish - Raleigh'd had a hand in starting that colony. North America had a wealth of animal pelts in demand in Europe that fueled later efforts, and the success of tobacco gave further interest to colonizing.

The land was known to be populated, but epidemic diseases made that an uneven affair: some new colonies found unfriendly neighbors, others were welcomed more warmly. Roanoke struggled with natives and we still don't quite know what happened to it. Plymouth lucked into a situation where disease from previous explorers had decimated the local population, leaving ample open space and weakened, more cooperative tribes. Jamestown was initially well-received and received valuable support from natives; by the time the situation soured, they were well-enough positioned to survive. However, Martin's Hundred was among a number of subsidiary settlements around Jamestown that suffered badly in a carefully planned native uprising that prompted Jamestown to withdraw from its outer settlements and consolidate in the main settlement. Nonetheless, Jamestown endured and prospered.

 

[Frankymole]

True enough. If you consider many of the planets created by traveller's as habitable, but yeah Traveller really does create more habitable plans than is truly likely. I do think Travellers definition of habitable is loose sometimes though o: ... Insidious, vacuum, toxic, lower pressure, high pressure, barren, desert. :rofl:.

Some of the LBB Book 6 (Scouts) and Grand Survey/WBH temperature ranges are pretty extreme as well...

 

[Ishmael]

That's because the temp procedure for Grand Survey/WBH is based on Book 6, and Book 6 uses an incorrect equation.