Member (Idle past 927 days)
From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts
Message 4 of 24 (603186)
02-03-2011 9:33 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Taq
02-02-2011 5:39 PM
I still don't know where I stand on this. I feel like there are still too many variables remaining. Surely it confirms the notion that life-bearing planets similar to Earth could be common, but I'm uncomfortable taking it much further than that.
I'm also interested in the size distribution of the planets they've found: about half of the planet candidates found so far seem to be Neptune-sized, with smaller numbers being larger or smaller than that. Does this represent an accurate assessment of size distributions? Or is it still skewed toward larger planets because of methodological constraints?
Also, is the search still restricted to planets very close to their primary? Or have they been able to find planets further out?
-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)
Darwin loves you.
|This message is a reply to:|
| ||Message 1 by Taq, posted 02-02-2011 5:39 PM|| ||Taq has responded|
|Replies to this message:|
| ||Message 5 by Taq, posted 02-03-2011 11:33 AM|| ||Blue Jay has acknowledged this reply|
| ||Message 6 by RAZD, posted 02-04-2011 2:35 PM|| ||Blue Jay has acknowledged this reply|