Image of the Day: Astrophysicist Neil DeGrasse Tyson Pinpoints Superman's Home Planet Krypton in Red Dwarf Star System
Mystery of Earth's Missing Moon --Will NASA Solve It?

"Earth-like Planets More Widespread in Universe than Previously Believed"





“In general, we have shown that we are not quite as unique as we once thought. Our solar system closely resembles other observable planetary systems within our galaxy. In this way, our results serve to corroborate other research results which indicate that earth-like planets are more widespread in the universe than previously believed,” says Professor Martin Bizzarro, head of the Centre for Star and Planet Formation at University of Copenhagen.

Some 4.567 billion years ago, our solar system’s planets formed from an expansive disc of gas and dust rotating around the sun. While similar processes have been observed in younger solar systems throughout the Milky Way, the formative stages of our own solar system were believed to have taken twice as long to occur. New research led by the team at the Centre for Star and Planet Formation shows that  our solar system is not quite as special as once believed.

Using improved methods of analysis of uranium and lead isotopes, the current study of primitive meteorites has enabled researchers to date the formation of two very different types of materials, so-called calcium-aluminum-rich inclusions (or CAI’s for short) and chondrules, found within the same meteorite. By doing so, the chronology and therefore overall understanding of our solar system’s development has been altered. The study has just been published in the scientific journal, Science.

The researchers took a closer look at the first three million years of the solar system’s development by analysing primitive meteorites composed of a blend of our solar system’s very oldest materials. In part, the study confirmed previous analyses demonstrating that CAI’s were formed during a very short period of time. The new discovery is that the so-called chondrules were formed during the first three million years of the solar system’s development as well. This stands in contrast with previous assumptions asserting that chondrules only started forming roughly two million years after CAIs.

“By using this process to date the formation of these two very different types of materials found in the same meteorite, we are not only able to alter the chronology of our solar system’s historical development, we are able to paint a new picture of our solar system’s development, which is very much like the picture that other researchers have observed in other planetary systems,” says James Connelly of the Centre for Star and Planet Formation.*Showing that chondrules are as old as CAIs addresses a long-standing question of why chondrule formation should be delayed by up to 2 million years after CAIs. The answer – it is not.

The NASA artist's concept at top of the page shows a faraway solar system like our own -- except for one big difference. Planets and asteroids circle around not one, but two suns. NASA's Spitzer Space Telescope found evidence that such solar systems might be common in the universe.

The Daily Galaxy via University of Copenhagen

Image credit: NASA/JPL-Caltech/Univ.of Ariz.


Hey J-C, you're hired! Thanks for catching the oversight.

Miscreants with to much time on their hand....

If you open or read The Pleiadian Mission by Psychologist R. Winters, (of the same contacts), you will realise just how blinkered these Danish scientists are, (and others too). They don't wish to loose funding by stepping outside their little controlled little boxes.

As we have free will, and still have freedom of speech, we can roam outside this tightly-controlled league of misinformants and discover what really is 'out there', AND 'was in here'!

The mainstreeam scientist not 'recognising', and trying desperately to discredit and censor this info is their problem, not mine.

This is the stupidest article i have ever read. It makes no logical sense. First it says there are more 'earth-like planets" What is their definition? Size, shape, distance from a sun? Studying a rock in no way tells you the chemical composition of a planets atmosphere, soils, etc. It can only tell you some things but not all. And age? what a joke. You are just coming up with numbers. In order to you would have to make a lot of assumptions that you have no idea about in the past regarding the conditions and materials that made up the material and what happened assuming everything was at a steady rate. Besides i guess this is also dangerous because it gives people the impression that earth is not special after all there are so many more out there. Keep drinking the kool aid.

Bizarro? Martin BIZARRO? You gotta be kidding, right?

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)