Kmar wrote:
The vast majority of planets have been found by the doppler method. Those telescopes were built for this job.
That being the case, nevermind most of what I said. I suppose the best purpose trying to find specific planets gives is the refinement and improvement of techniques needed to determine all possible variables. I still don't however see the purpose in trying to find habitable planets many lightyears away while we haven't even managed to travel to the edge of our own solar system in an acceptable timeframe (let alone managing to communicate with unmanned objects on such distances, to not even mention
manned expeditions). It's simply supporting science with the reasoning being "because it's science".
Kmar wrote:
Faster than light travel is impossible from what we know now.. as a matter of physics. It is the universal speed limit. However over time we may discover ways around it. There is a lot we still don't know when it comes to how the universe works. No one here has a crystal ball. But I will say, the so called impossible has been made possible time and time again through out human history. I see no reason to stop trying or learning.
Quite true but there comes a point in which the required effort to attain the desired level of speed is simply ridiculous. I think anyone would be content with near lightspeed travel if we could extend our own lives by X amount of years. Time above all is relative. However, the problem lies in trying to achieve a speed so insanely fast. The amount of energy you need to propell something at 2x10^8 or even 3x10^8 m/sec is simply mind boggling. We're going to have to sit in our own solar system stockpiling resources for some time would it ever become a feasible option. Furthermore, there are
alot of biological problems that need to be overcome with the idea of humans in space if we ever wish to go somewhere in person.
Because nobody really has any idea on how to make gravity work aside from the known being that mass and the coupled density of an object influence it, I can't really speak on any idea involving it's manipulation. Perhaps if we'd ever find the higgs we might get some unprecedented insight in the possibilities surrounding the concept. Even so, again, the amount of energy required to find the higgs is ludicrous. I'm quite sure that trying to make the whole gravity network do as we like would cost much more effort than just that.
In closing I believe it's pretty vital we concentrate on getting off this aptly named 'pale blue dot' and delve into the resources of our own solar system before we start daydreaming about visiting something a gazillion miles away. If there's anything I understand about the subject, it is that our own resources and the ones we can make are by far not enough to open up the possibility of interstellar travel. We need to start thinking bigger, much, much bigger.
Acerider wrote:
Although the distance to that planet is immense, as kmar said, we have not by any chance discovered all the planets and solar systems in the galaxy, or universe, due to the vast amount. It's entirely possible that there is a closer solar system to us with the ability to host earth like life.
The definition of "close" used by scientists however is far from reality when thinking on a cosmic scale involving humans. Furthermore the possibility of a habitable planet even closer than this one in another solar system is highly unlikely. The closest solar systems are generally the first to be discovered.
Acerider wrote:
And there is also the possibility that we might discover life that thrives in conditions we find hostile, with a different genetic makeup.
We already have, just need to know where to look. Right beneath our feet. An interesting subject in the search right now is Lake Vostok, take a look at it if you like.
