We are all made of stars...

[Deidre32]

This is very intriguing!  Going with this, why aren't more planets similar to earth, then? Why would our planet only be able to sustain human life? Seeing that this wasn't an ''ordered'' but rather random occurence. Not sure if my question makes sense?  :-k

Dee, they have found rocky planets in the Universe like Earth, most have been bigger and determining the makeup is a little difficult at this time but it will happen eventually. The count on planets discovered outside our own solar system is well over 2,000 now. Most are like Jupiter and Saturn but only because they're larger and easier to find than those like Earth. Looking for Earth like planets is looking for one particular needle in a stack of needles inside a crate of needles. :P

As I stated earlier the existence of life elsewhere goes beyond the drake equation and now also includes a planets place in a stable region of a galaxy, a stabilizing moon and even tectonic activity or so the theory now goes.

Thank you for your answer, Moriarty!
But, it still begs the question--why is earth so far, the only planet that can sustain human life? (to the best of our knowledge) If the universe was created by a random occurence, how can that be? I'm not suggesting that the occurence was not random, but there should be more definitive answers as to why earth is the only planet capable of sustaining human life? We are fortunate to have even survived this long, when you stop to think about it. lol

[Moriarty]

This is very intriguing!  Going with this, why aren't more planets similar to earth, then? Why would our planet only be able to sustain human life? Seeing that this wasn't an ''ordered'' but rather random occurence. Not sure if my question makes sense?  :-k

Dee, they have found rocky planets in the Universe like Earth, most have been bigger and determining the makeup is a little difficult at this time but it will happen eventually. The count on planets discovered outside our own solar system is well over 2,000 now. Most are like Jupiter and Saturn but only because they're larger and easier to find than those like Earth. Looking for Earth like planets is looking for one particular needle in a stack of needles inside a crate of needles. :P

As I stated earlier the existence of life elsewhere goes beyond the drake equation and now also includes a planets place in a stable region of a galaxy, a stabilizing moon and even tectonic activity or so the theory now goes.

They also believe several of the moons of Jupiter and Saturn to possibly be able to sustain simple life forms.
Thank you for your answer, Moriarty!
But, it still begs the question--why is earth so far, the only planet that can sustain human life? (to the best of our knowledge) If the universe was created by a random occurence, how can that be? I'm not suggesting that the occurence was not random, but there should be more definitive answers as to why earth is the only planet capable of sustaining human life? We are fortunate to have even survived this long, when you stop to think about it. lol

I can only answer with theory~ They do believe that Mars was once a twin to Earth and capable of supporting life. Since it is smaller its iron metal core cooled down more quickly than ours, it stopped rotating which caused it's electromagnetic field to more or less disappear and turned it into the wasteland it is now.

[Plu]

But, it still begs the question--why is earth so far, the only planet that can sustain human life?

Because we've only been able to search for them for a very short time, they're very difficult to find, and the odds of a planet being capable of sustaining life aren't all that big.

We've spotted barely anything in this vast universe of ours, so it's a bit early to start making claims about why something is the only one. We simply haven't the data yet.

[Deidre32]

But, it still begs the question--why is earth so far, the only planet that can sustain human life?

Because we've only been able to search for them for a very short time, they're very difficult to find, and the odds of a planet being capable of sustaining life aren't all that big.

We've spotted barely anything in this vast universe of ours, so it's a bit early to start making claims about why something is the only one. We simply haven't the data yet.

That is a good point.

[Moriarty]

But, it still begs the question--why is earth so far, the only planet that can sustain human life?

Because we've only been able to search for them for a very short time, they're very difficult to find, and the odds of a planet being capable of sustaining life aren't all that big.

We've spotted barely anything in this vast universe of ours, so it's a bit early to start making claims about why something is the only one. We simply haven't the data yet.

That is a good point.

Watch this Dee, give a pretty good explanation of how small and insignificant our planet, even solar system is.

https://www.khanacademy.org/science/cos ... f-galaxies

[Deidre32]

Thanks Moriarty. :)
I do realize we/earth is but a speck in the scheme of things, but what I would like to see science reveal/discover is that other planets could very well have the same potential. There was a discovery that I read about stating that Mars is thought to have been the planet originating life (and that life traveled here), but to the best of our current knowledge base, no planet even can remotely offer the potential that earth has with regards to sustaining human life. Or any life forms similar to human life. Similar to human life even?

I will continue to wait impatiently. lol

[Moriarty]

Well well Dee.......decide for yourself!

http://www.sciencechannel.com/tv-shows/are-we-alone

All this week I believe.

[Atheon]

But, it still begs the question--why is earth so far, the only planet that can sustain human life? (to the best of our knowledge) If the universe was created by a random occurence, how can that be? I'm not suggesting that the occurence was not random, but there should be more definitive answers as to why earth is the only planet capable of sustaining human life? We are fortunate to have even survived this long, when you stop to think about it. lol

1. Within our Solar System

The Earth is the only planet which lies at the right distance from the sun to sustain liquid water. Earth remains consistently within the "habitable zone" of our solar system.

However, there is evidence that Mars once had oceans of liquid water long ago; plus there's reason to believe that oceans of liquid water lie under the icy surfaces of Europa and Enceladus, which may also harbor life... we just haven't explored it yet.)

2. Elsewhere in our galaxy (and beyond)

We just don't have the information yet. Small, earth-sized planets with liquid water in habitable zones of distant stars are very hard to detect. Data from missions such as the Kepler Space Telescope suggest that there are hundreds of billions of planets in our galaxy alone, which means that given our own existence (and the existence of hundreds of billions of galaxies), life of some form seems likely elsewhere. But our technology is not yet advanced enough to detect it. Out of around 2000 confirmed planets, a handful seem to be rocky planets in their stars' habitable zones, so there are at least some candidate planets out there. We've only just begun exploring.

[Sal1981]

We are indeed made out of star stuff (at least everything heavier than Hydrogen and Helium), but not from the stars you see in the night time. The Mother star that we are made of exploded for more than ~4.6 billion years ago and its resulting dust cloud formed the new Solar system and the planets that we today know. Just ask Joseph.

[dawiw]

This is very intriguing!  Going with this, why aren't more planets similar to earth, then? Why would our planet only be able to sustain human life? Seeing that this wasn't an ''ordered'' but rather random occurence. Not sure if my question makes sense?  :-k

The chances of life must be high, kepler has found a number of exoplanets that are in the habitable zone.