• On mySimon: Dragon Eye Oolong Tea
March 6, 2009 9:37 AM PST

Kepler: Finding a 'Goldilocks zone' in the Milky Way

by Jonathan Skillings
  • Font size
  • Print
  • 12 comments
NASA Kepler spacecraft

NASA's Kepler satellite will scope out a section of the Milky Way in hopes of finding planets similar to Earth.

(Credit: NASA/JPL)

In the vastness of the universe, there are likely to be nearly countless planets. The big question for humans, of course, is whether even a single one of them could support life.

NASA's Kepler satellite, which is scheduled to lift off at 10:49 p.m. EST tonight, is headed out to keep watch on a patch of the Milky Way for at least three and a half years. Unlike the Hubble space telescope, Kepler won't be taking brilliant pictures suitable for framing. Instead, it will look for minute changes in the brightness of stars--some 100,000 of them--that would indicate a planet passing in front.

Of all the planets Kepler eventually finds, what NASA is most interested in are planets like Earth. That is, it's looking for rocky orbs--from half as large to twice as large as our big blue marble--in the habitable zone around a given star where conditions might be amenable to folks like us, or at least some of our fellow earthly organisms.

"The habitable zone is where we think water will be," Bill Borucki, Kepler principal investigator at NASA Ames, says in a video on the space agency's Kepler site. "If you can find liquid water on the surface we think we may very well find life there. So that zone is not too close to the star, because it's too hot and water boils, and not too far away where the water is condensed...a planet covered with glaciers. It's the Goldilocks zone--not too hot, not too cold, just right for life."

To scope out the interstellar terrain, Kepler will use its photometer--essentially, an oversize light meter--equipped with 42 charged coupled devices, or CCDs. Your digital camera uses CCDs, too, though they're much smaller. And where your pocketable camera might be rated at 8 megapixels, Kepler's telescope weighs in at 95 megapixels.

Kepler's unblinking eye will scan a wider area than most astronomical telescopes, according to NASA. Where those devices see an area equivalent to a grain of salt held at arm's length, Kepler sees the whole hand at that distance.

According to a report issued this week by the Government Accountability Office, the Kepler project's total cost as of December was $595 million. Yes, that's more than was originally budgeted for it, and yes, it's launching about nine months behind schedule.

But for the moment, let bygones be bygones. Friday morning, NASA reported that the weather forecast in Florida is auspicious for tonight's launch: a 95 percent chance of favorable conditions, with a temperature of 64 degrees.

Jonathan Skillings is managing editor of CNET News, based in the Boston bureau. He's been with CNET since 2000, after a decade in tech journalism at the IDG News Service, PC Week, and an AS/400 magazine. He's also been a soldier and a schoolteacher. E-mail Jon.
Recent posts from Cutting Edge
Coming soon: Recyclable mannequin robots
DARPA's latest challenge: Locate these 10 balloons
Space station fliers land safely in Kazakhstan
Man loses job after searching too hard for aliens
Inside CERN with a collider scientist
CERN's collider sets proton speed record
Building circuits, code, community at Noisebridge hacker space
Shuttle Atlantis glides home after station visit
Add a Comment (Log in or register) (12 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next
by SteveW928 March 6, 2009 10:20 AM PST
This is a great thing, but the article is a bit misleading. There is a LOT more to the 'Goldilocks zone' than being within that size range, distance from the star, and water. However, this is a start to at least rule ones out that don't meet those minimal criteria. Based on what we've seen so far.... don't hold out too much hope people. But, this should help us expand the search enough to see which direction the data is headed and kind of put this thing to rest.
Reply to this comment
by island01 March 6, 2009 1:31 PM PST
"There is a LOT more to the 'Goldilocks zone' than being within that size range, distance from the star, and water."

Excellent observation! And I only say that because people don't generally bother to know that much about it.

The Goldilocks Enigma constrains the parameters to a balance of extremes... so it only applies to the ecosphere of galaxies that formed on the same evolutionary time/location "plane" as we did. Planets orbiting stars in galaxies that are too old or too new, too large or too small, do not fit the "coincidentally balanced" nature as the average of extremes... etc... etc... ect... all the way down to the local ecobalances of the ones that do, and life will only arise on planets in galaxies, (and universes), where ALL of the anthropic coincidences are simultaneously in effect.

Please go to my linked page and tell me everything else that you know about it that I may have missed:

http://evolutionarydesign.blogspot.com/2007/02/goldilocks-enigma-again.html

Thanks!
by emag March 6, 2009 3:10 PM PST
Kind of put this thing to rest???? We're just getting started.
by SteveW928 March 6, 2009 7:53 PM PST
@ island01 - I'm not really an expert... just trying to pay some attention as kind of a 'lay scientist' as I interact with this stuff. I just find that the media really distorts most of this kind of news and what it really means. Another example would be the unique circumstance of our amount of water and carbon here on Earth, as well as our atmosphere, plate-tectonics, moon and tides, etc. They all play a role in allowing an eco-system which makes life possible. Much of this has to do with a collision the Earth had early in its formation. Without this, there would be too much water, carbon, and we'd have a really heavy atmosphere and things like that.

@ emag - What I meant is that in sci-fi and even science a few decades ago, it was popular to believe the universe was just teeming with intelligent life (or even life at all).... think of, for example, Carl Sagan or the SETI project. But, with what we have learned in the last few years is that this is just not likely the case. Even strong proponents of extraterrestrial life like Geoffrey Marcy (the guy who discovered the first, and many of the extra-solar planets) has backed way down on finding at least intelligent life.

Basically, if we looked at what science was saying a couple decades ago... and then what we know today.... the empirical evidence seems to be heading towards no other life. However, we aren't going on that much data yet, and the thoughts from a couple decades ago weren't really based on any evidence.... so we need more data points. Kepler should start to provide those data points.
by Kainchild March 6, 2009 1:46 PM PST
I came across this talk of something called the Lyra conspiracy in an extraterrestrial bulletin board and they talked about people claiming that aliens from the area in the Lyra constellation are visiting us. Now I wonder if that's the motivation that made them decide to point this thing in that direction....
Reply to this comment
by usrbingd March 7, 2009 11:09 AM PST
hey kainchild where did u read about this lyra conspiracy?
by emag March 6, 2009 3:10 PM PST
Quote, "In the vastness of the universe, there are likely to be nearly countless planets. The big question for humans, of course, is whether even a single one of them could support life." Um, uh, gee, I, ah, think at least ONE of them does, I live there......
Reply to this comment
by island01 March 6, 2009 3:23 PM PST
That the neat thing about the "golidilocks enigma" that nobody seems to get. It makes falsifiable predictions about where to look for life elsewhere in the universe. For example:

http://www.daviddarling.info/images/galactic_habitable_zone.jpg

It also predicts that life will not be found on Mars or Venus, even though "Venus, Earth, and Mars are approximately at the same distance from the Sun - formed out of the same material, and had approximately the same initial temperatures 4.5 billion years ago.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/94/Habitable_zone-en.svg/491px-Habitable_zone-en.svg.png

This is a "must-read":

http://evolutionarydesign.blogspot.com/2007/02/goldilocks-enigma-again.html
by SteveW928 March 6, 2009 7:57 PM PST
@ emag - Heh, yea... I think the author meant to say whether any other of them could support life... good catch.

@ island01 - I think we're likely to find life on other planets in our solar system... but it will turn out to be remnants of earlier earth life. Think of how much debris has been thrown off earth which would end up in these places.
by island01 March 7, 2009 2:27 AM PST
Steve, that's an interesting point, but I don't believe that it will be "alive".
Reply to this comment
by SteveW928 March 10, 2009 4:36 PM PDT
Very true...
by kmguru March 7, 2009 6:36 PM PST
The CCD imager may be too small. Somewhere I read, it is 95 Mpixels. Perhaps we need a GigaPixel
Reply to this comment
(12 Comments)
  • prev
  • 1
  • next
advertisement
Click Here

Inside the Apple, er, Microsoft Store

Although Redmond's foray into retail bears a big resemblance to Apple's approach, Microsoft has added some distinctive features to draw casual PC buyers and techies alike.

Big marketing budget drives Moto Droid sales

Verizon and Motorola are spending big bucks--$100 million--on marketing the new smartphone, and it looks like it will pay off with 1 million devices sold by year's end.

About Cutting Edge

Keep up-to-date on cutting-edge research and what's new in a wide range of areas from robotics, space ventures and general science to automobile design and solar energy.

Add this feed to your online news reader

Cutting Edge topics

advertisement
advertisement

Inside CNET News

Scroll Left Scroll Right