Mega-Earth found and it's 17 times Earth's mass

[413x]

I take it they have worked out that star age results in colder star and with this being so close to star it is in the 'habitable zone' if they are interested in life?

 

[Spook187]

We're assuming the mavity constant is the same across all planets and all universes,

I recommend you to the Nobel prize for finding another universe.

 

[porushinobu]

I recommend you to the Nobel prize for finding another universe.

mavity is not constant .....

 

[Spook187]

mavity is not constant .....

I didn't say that, i was quoting a piece of other universe

 

[Gruber]

mavity is not constant .....

'Big G' is a constant.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_constant

 

[Sliver]

mavity is not constant .....

There is a gravitational constant :

6.67×10−11 N·(m/kg)2 and denoted by letter G

It should not be confused with "little g" (g), which is the local gravitational field (equivalent to the free-fall acceleration), especially that at the Earth's surface.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_constant

 

[ChroniC]

I've always wondered if the alien life (in theory) would also be larger to the scale of the planet. So they would have humans 17 times larger and etc etc, i.e Land of the Giants.

 

[Gruber]

I've always wondered if the alien life (in theory) would also be larger to the scale of the planet. So they would have humans 17 times larger and etc etc, i.e Land of the Giants.

Nah, they'd be smaller.

Compare the tallest mountain on earth (Everest) to the tallest on Mars (Olympus). The reduced local 'g' allows a taller structure.

 

[Zefan]

I've always wondered if the alien life (in theory) would also be larger to the scale of the planet. So they would have humans 17 times larger and etc etc, i.e Land of the Giants.

Why would this be the case? What would be the evolutionary advantage to being bigger in relation to the size of the planet?

 

[Ryan-3]

I believe that's explained on the Wonders of Life - Size Matters. The environment places a maximum on any life that lives there, and the size of the atom places the minimum.

 

[413x]

With their structure trees are at the height limit as they can't pull water up any higher from transpiration. Not to say you couldn't get round it using a different method evolved on another planet

 

[porushinobu]

'Big G' is a constant.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gravitational_constant

Dam I forgot

 

[ChroniC]

Why would this be the case? What would be the evolutionary advantage to being bigger in relation to the size of the planet?

Hey it was only a friendly assumption!!!
I always guessed that if the star was bigger as well then the life forms could rely on more energy and grow to larger sizes, that said, atoms don't change in size, so maybe life is relative to that, but we are astronomically bigger than bacteria, so maybe there is no limit.
With such a big environment and lots of energy, what to say life wouldn't get bigger. Big plants, Big food, big animals.

 

[Gruber]

Bigger plants (on average) would get you an oxygen rich atmosphere which would help with bigger animals as it did on Earth. Land animals though are restricted in size by the amount of weight they can support.

More massive planet=higher mavity=lighter animals.

 

[thep02]

Why would this be the case? What would be the evolutionary advantage to being bigger in relation to the size of the planet?

The ability to take huuuuge steps and a boon to scientific advancement on the planet as their scientists would literally be standing upon the shoulders of giants.

 

[Django x2]

I recommend you to the Nobel prize for finding another universe.

Dammit, I keep saying Universe and mean Galazy...HAH, GHEY!

 

[porushinobu]

Dammit, I keep saying Universe and mean Galazy...HAH, GHEY!

I find it hard to get those 2 mixed up tbh

 

[MooMoo444]

At 17 times the G I doubt we'd be able to do anything there. We'd just fall over and not be able to move.

 

[exhashdotdot]

At 17 times the G I doubt we'd be able to do anything there. We'd just fall over and not be able to move.

If you see my previous post, you'll see that 17x the mass is not the same as 17x g

 

[Reeve]

At 17 times the G I doubt we'd be able to do anything there. We'd just fall over and not be able to move.

Its not 17g, its around 3g. It's only been said 3 times in this thread
Gravitational acceleration on the surface of the sun is ~28g and that's ~300,000 times heavier than Earth. The radius of the object has a big effect on its surface mavity due to the r^-2 term.