What is "Earth-like"?

[JimC]

No, but it may have features that would facilitate the development of carbon-based aquatic life. A partial overlap with environmental features of the early Earth is perhaps significant, but not enough for the epithet "Earth-like"

[pErvinalia]

Should the moon have water, energy and organic chemicals, it could have the basic building blocks that developed into life on Earth. “For a long time humanity has been wondering whether there is life beyond Earth,” Nasa astrophysicist Paul Hertz said. “We’re lucky enough to live in an era where we can address questions like that scientifically.

“We have a special interest in any place that might possess those characteristics. Europa might be such a place.”

https://www.theguardian.com/science/201 ... lumes-nasa

...so then is Europa "Earth-like"?

building blocks.

[rainbow]

Should the moon have water, energy and organic chemicals, it could have the basic building blocks that developed into life on Earth. “For a long time humanity has been wondering whether there is life beyond Earth,” Nasa astrophysicist Paul Hertz said. “We’re lucky enough to live in an era where we can address questions like that scientifically.

“We have a special interest in any place that might possess those characteristics. Europa might be such a place.”

https://www.theguardian.com/science/201 ... lumes-nasa

...so then is Europa "Earth-like"?

building blocks.

Blithering bollocks, more likely.

[rainbow]

No, but it may have features that would facilitate the development of carbon-based aquatic life. A partial overlap with environmental features of the early Earth is perhaps significant, but not enough for the epithet "Earth-like"

...which makes the term completely meaningless. At least as far as looking for places in the Universe where life might exist.

[pErvinalia]

building blocks.

[Forty Two]

The term "Earth-like" is not completely meaningless. It has a definite meaning in astrophysics. It is just not accurately described by journalists, who are, all too often, complete and utter idiots or folks who don't give a fuck about accurately reporting scientific issues. On issues of science and law, a good rule of thumb is to assume that a journalist writing a news article has got it wrong. Start from that presumption and you'll never be disappointed, and if one or another gets it right, you'll react with a "that went better than expected" meme.

Earth-like, scientifically, means that a planet shares some basic characteristics of Earth, and is more like Earth than other types of planets, like gas giants and ice giants and dwarf planets, etc. They're generally talking about it being rocky and in the habitable zone. Proxima b, for example, is in the habitable zone and within some range of size in the ballpark of Earth. It's Earthlike. That doesn't mean we know it has oceans and is Star Trek class M "oxygen/nitrogen atmosphere."

[JimC]

If it's Earth-llke, it must have exotic alien females we can fuck.

(as good a definition as any...)

[rainbow]

If it's Earth-llke, it must have exotic alien females we can fuck.

(as good a definition as any...)

Except they will suck out your brain through your eye-sockets at the crucial moment.

Where is the fun in that?
(For you)

[rainbow]

http://www.timeslive.co.za/thetimes/201 ... rby-planet

A rocky planet discovered in the "habitable" zone of the star nearest to our sun could be covered by oceans, according to researchers at France's CNRS research institute.

[pErvinalia]

building blocks.

[rainbow]

Bullshit and Bollocks

[mistermack]

Whatever the water situation is, the planet would be almost certainly easy for humans to live on, as it's surface gravity would be similar to our own.
Unless it's like Venus, with a runaway greenhouse effect. But the distances involved in getting to the NEAREST star make it understandable how we have never been visited by aliens.

[pErvinalia]

There's probably a galactic Tahiti where they all go. No need to come here.

[rainbow]

Whatever the water situation is, the planet would be almost certainly easy for humans to live on, as it's surface gravity would be similar to our own.
Unless it's like Venus, with a runaway greenhouse effect. But the distances involved in getting to the NEAREST star make it understandable how we have never been visited by aliens.

...or they don't exist.

That would also be a reasonable explanation.

[pErvinalia]

Not if you consider...

Trigger Warning!!!1! :

building blocks