Model Boat Mayhem

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length.
Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: A rare Sun?  (Read 403 times)

justboatonic

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,515
  • Location: Thornton Cleveleys
A rare Sun?
« on: June 17, 2020, 11:20:02 pm »

This guy, David Kipping, produces some great thought provoking videos on the cosmos.
Ive said for many years our solar system is tending towards uniqueness the more and more we learn about the galaxy.
https://youtu.be/TAQKJ41eDTs
Logged

dreadnought72

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,898
  • Wood butcher with ten thumbs
  • Location: Airdrie, Scotland
Re: A rare Sun?
« Reply #1 on: June 18, 2020, 01:24:06 am »

I disagree.


Sure, if 3.7% of our galaxy's stars are Sun-like, that still means there are 9 billion like it in the Milky Way. Rare? Maybe. Unusual? Not so much.


Andy
Logged
Enjoying every minute sailing W9465 Mertensia

roycv

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2,753
  • Location: S.W. Herts
Re: A rare Sun?
« Reply #2 on: June 18, 2020, 08:32:36 am »

Hi I go along with the first post.  Water seems to be a key, which places a planet within a very small variation of distance from the sun. 

Next we owe much for the stability of the planet to the moon another unusual happenstance.  This keeps the axis of Earth relatively stable, life needs stability to evolve.

Then there is the invading debris from the great outside.  We are shielded by the unusual size and position in orbit of Jupiter which in comparison to us is a gas giant.  The enormous gravity attracts these asteroids and probably deflects them from Earth.
The one that was witnessed hitting Jupiter a few years ago weighed in at 17Billion tons and it got deflected and broken up by gravity even before making a black mark on Jupiter's surface the size of Earth.

There have been 5 Earth mass extinction events.  The worst one was 250 million years ago, the 'dinosaur extinction' of 65 Million years ago was not as bad.

Life (as we know it Jim) takes a long while to evolve and requires stability.  I do not go along with the 'blind' mathematical odds in this particular issue, you can only really compare like with like.

I think the biggest concern to work out first is just what is 'Dark Energy' or 'Dark Matter' We might know more then. It accounts for over 90% of the Universe and we can neither see it nor know where it is.  One possible theory is the Multiverse idea.

As far as I am concerned the more you learn the more you find there is to know.
I am not claiming we are alone just that Earth developed in a special way and that time is now.  Perhaps similar events happened elsewhere but millions of years before us?
regards
Roy


Logged

warspite

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2,211
Re: A rare Sun?
« Reply #3 on: June 18, 2020, 10:37:25 am »

I have a theory that, currently we have evolved as expected and in the universe there are the black holes that have been observed, as time passes, the black holes suck up all the debris and old systems, each getting bigger and bigger until these start to come together creating bigger and bigger black holes, whose mass attract more and more material, until one final fateful day their mass is such that they all come together in one large collision and ------


There is this all mighty big bang


and it all starts all over again, ad infinitem
Logged
Operational - 1/72 LCMIII, 1/180 Sovereign, HMS Victory to be sailed
Non Operational - 1/72 Corvette, 1/72 E-Boat, 1/72 vosper mtb
incomplete, tug, cardboard castle class convert

justboatonic

  • Full Mayhemer
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1,515
  • Location: Thornton Cleveleys
Re: A rare Sun?
« Reply #4 on: June 18, 2020, 12:50:56 pm »

I disagree.


Sure, if 3.7% of our galaxy's stars are Sun-like, that still means there are 9 billion like it in the Milky Way. Rare? Maybe. Unusual? Not so much.


Andy
Well you're just extrapolating Y times 2.7% (not 3.7%) = 9 billion in isolation and ignore a lot of what he goes on to say. He says the Sun, a G class dwarf and that type is representative of 2.7% of the total.

He continues 50% our star's type are in a binary star system whereas, obviously, our star is a single system. So that 2.7% relevant to our star type is now halved.
Further, if the remaining half of the Sun like stars are 'noisier' this cuts the number of G Class dwarves that are the same as the Sun. Sorry, Im not certain what fraction he says this it but based on the intended extension of the Kepler mission by a further 4 years, Id guess this to be in the region of another 50% or thereabouts.
Nowfactor in the different ages of G Class stars compared to our Sun and the number drops again by a factor of at least 50% if not more like 70% or so.
All this is before you start discounting G Class dwarves that have no terrestial planets in the goldilocks zone etc, etc.

Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up