DHTML Menu / JavaScript Menu Powered by Milonic
Already a member? Sign In

Village Journals help
Resonate your identity with Naseeb journals. Express your opinions, share your thoughts, post your writings and connect with like minded people through the power of expression.

The Privileged Planet


?Say, "Have you thought: if God made the night perpetual until the Day of Resurrection, which god besides God would have provided you with light? Do you not hear?" Say, "Have you thought: if God made the daylight perpetual until the Day of Resurrection, which god besides God would have provided you with a night for your rest? Do you not see?" -Quran 28:71-72

?In the creation of the heavens and the earth and the alternation of night and day, there are signs for those who understand.? -Quran 3:190

?We showed Abraham the kingdom of the heavens and the earth so that he may attain certainty.? ?Quran 6:75

For the first time in 1992, planets outside the solar system (exoplanets) were discovered orbiting a radio pulsar, a rotating neutron star www.nature.com). The first definitive confirmation of an exoplanet orbiting an ordinary main-sequence star came forth in 1995 www.nature.com). About 200 exoplanets, mostly hot gas giants, have been discovered since then. NASA's Kepler Mission, Space Interferometry Mission, Terrestrial Planet Finder, European Space Agency's Darwin and Gaia, and France's COROT are all gearing up for a thrilling celestial hunt for exoplanets. For instance, the Kepler Mission www.kepler.arc.nasa.gov) is scheduled to lift off in November 2008 to search for Earth-like planets in habitable orbital zones around stars:

?The Kepler satellite will orbit the Sun and study some 100,000 stars for four years, looking for planets that are similar in size to Earth and in similar orbits around their stars. Only planets with orbits in this so-called "habitable zone," where it is not too hot and not too cold, could have liquid water, scientists say. And liquid water is seen as a necessary ingredient for life as we know it? www.space.com).

The Privileged Planet: How Our Place in the Cosmos is Designed for Discovery proposes that the rare conditions that allow intelligent life to flourish on Earth (habitability criteria) also make the planet a uniquely well suited platform that permits intelligent life to study the universe (measurability criteria). From the Privileged Planet website:

?Elsewhere, you might learn that Earth and its local environment provide a delicate, and probably exceedingly rare, cradle for complex life. But there's another, even more startling, fact, described in The Privileged Planet: those same rare conditions that produce a habitable planet-that allow for the existence of complex observers like ourselves-also provide the best overall place for observing. What does this mean? At the least, it turns our view of the universe inside out. The universe is not "pointless" (Steven Weinberg), Earth merely "a lonely speck in the great enveloping cosmic dark," (Carl Sagan) and human existence "just a more-or-less farcical outcome of a chain of accidents" (Steven Weinberg). On the contrary, the evidence we can uncover from our Earthly home points to a universe that is designed for life, and designed for discovery? www.privilegedplanet.com).

Allow me to illustrate a few instances of the correlations between habitability and measurability:

1. The atmospheric mixture (the right proportion of the right chemicals such as ozone, oxygen, carbon dioxide, etc.) of Earth protects and flourishes life (habitability criterion), and the same mixture is stunningly so clear and transparent that it allows observers to use the night sky to study moons, planets, stars, celestial mechanics, nebulae, supernovae, and other astronomical phenomena even in the distant reaches of the visible universe (measurability criterion). Many planets seem to either lack clear and transparent atmospheres or lack atmospheres altogether.

Did anyone watch the sci-fi movie Pitch Black imdb.com)? Three suns would continuously illuminate the exoplanet for 22 years. The three suns would then align in such a way that the planet would get eclipsed by another giant, ringed planet in the system, tossing the eclipsed planet into uninterrupted pitch darkness for another 22 years. Planets like that in multiple-star systems are gravitationally unstable, yet are possible, given a certain celestial setup. If there were no night sky, no reasonably frequent alternation of day and night (i.e., in reasonable relation to a certain length of average human lifetime), or no transparent atmosphere, would we have ever learnt Kepler?s laws of planetary motion, discovered Galileo?s moons of Jupiter, confirmed Einstein?s general relativity, landed on the moon, known the Big Bang, launched satellites to study the cosmic microwave background radiation (the remnant of the explosive creation of space-time), and postulated possible cosmological geometries, to name a few? Reasonably frequent alternation of dark nights and lighted days and a transparent atmosphere promote scientific progress of intelligent life on a planet.

2. The solar system is located about halfway between the galactic center and the edge of the galactic disk and in the mid-plane of the Milky Way galaxy when viewed edge on. As we approach the galactic center, the risk of supernovae, short-lived stars, black holes, quasars, gamma ray bursts, and other violent cosmic events proportionally increases. Also, closer to the center, the night sky would be much brighter and thus would obscure the view of background stars and other celestial objects from observation. As we travel out from the center, the metallicity of stars proportionally declines, resulting in increasingly lower likelihood of terrestrial planet formation. The solar system?s location within the Milky Way galaxy is exceptional. Our planet is not located in the violent central galactic bulge, not near a source of gamma radiation, not in a gravitationally unstable multiple-star system, not near a pulsar, and not near a star too small, too large, or soon to explode into a supernova (habitability criterion). Our planet is located precisely in that region of the Milky Way?s spiral arm that permits telescopes to pierce into the background stars and the farthest reaches of the visible universe. Our view of the cosmos from Earth is free of obstruction by dense star clusters and by diffuse gas found in other regions of the galaxy (measurability criterion).

3. The Earth has a magnetosphere that shields life from solar flares (habitability criterion), and the stable magnetic field facilitates terrestrial and aerial navigation (measurability criterion). Can we imagine leading the expansion of the Arabian Empire through the African Sahara in the 8th century AD without a compass, or flying United Airlines from Los Angeles to Sydney on an Earth without a magnetic field?

I have offered a brief and an admittedly incomplete analysis of many such exceptional and fascinating correlations between habitability and measurability. Our planet seems to be exquisitely fit not only to support life but also to offer us the best platform or laboratory for probing the universe. It is as if the Earth were specially designed both for life and for scientific discovery (Privileged Planet hypothesis). The Privileged Planet hypothesis undermines the Copernican Principle and the Principle of Mediocrity in the philosophy of science. The Principle of Mediocrity holds that there is nothing special about Earth and the human race. It is a Copernican Principle, which maintains that no special observers should be proposed.

The data from exoplanet space missions serves as a test of the Privileged Planet hypothesis. Are there more Earth-like planets that have conditions suitable for intelligent life to flourish and conditions suitable for the life forms to discover the marvels of the universe? Is there something strangely extraordinary about the correlation between the Earth?s habitability and measurability conditions? Are our planet and our existence special and purposeful? With forthcoming data from exoplanet space missions, it would be interesting to see how the hypothesis fares against orthodox philosophical notions that maintain that the human race?s existence is unexceptional in the cosmos. Stay tuned.

Nadeem

References (excludes web links)

Gonzalez, Guillermo, and Jay W. Richards. The Privileged Planet: How Our Place in the Cosmos is Designed for Discovery. Washington, DC: Regnery Publishing, Inc., 2004.

Lead Author's Bio www.public.iastate.edu discovery.org)

Guillermo Gonzalez is an Assistant Professor of Astronomy at Iowa State University. He received his Ph.D. in Astronomy in 1993 from the University of Washington. He has done post-doctoral work at the University of Texas, Austin and at the University of Washington and has received fellowships, grants and awards from such institutions as NASA, the University of Washington, Sigma Xi (scientific research society) and the National Science Foundation.

Gonzalez has extensive experience in observing and analyzing data from ground-based observatories, including work at McDonald Observatory, Apache Point Observatory and Cerro Tololo Interamerican Observatory. He is a world class expert on the astrophysical requirements for habitability and on habitable zones and a co-founder of the Galactic Habitable Zone (GHZ) concept. Astronomers and astrobiologists around the world are pursuing research based on my work on extra solar planets host stars, the GHZ, and several discoveries pertaining to stellar abundances.

Gonzalez has also published over sixty articles in refereed astronomy and astrophysical journals including Astronomy and Astrophysics, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, Astrophysical Journal and Solar Physics. His current research interests in astrobiology focus on the "Galactic Habitable Zone" which captured the October 2001 cover story of Scientific American, and the properties of the host stars of extra solar planets. He also is the co-author of the second edition of "Observational Astronomy" an advanced college astronomy textbook..

In 2004 he co-authored The Privileged Planet: How Our Place In The Cosmos Is Designed For Discovery with Jay W. Richards.
 

Add Comments

 
Add
 

  Comments on this journal

Login to find out (May 3, 2007 at 4:40pm)
It seems that it was actually ESO?s press release that inserted the word ?habitable? into the original title of Udry?s paper to be published in Astronomy & Astrophysics.

Udry obswww.unige.ch): ?The HARPS search for southern extra-solar planets*? (title). ?XI. Super-Earths (5&8M ) in a 3-planet system? (sub-title).

ESO www.eso.org): ?The HARPS search for southern extra-solar planets : XI. An habitable super-Earth (5 MEarth) in a 3-planet system?

Why would ESO misquote the title? Did the media follow ESO?s lead and tag on the word ?habitable? in news headlines? GI 581 c is deemed ?habitable? and the other massive planet is not also labeled ?super-Earth? as Udry?s title declared. ESO?s title gives the false impression that this one planet is ?habitable? and is the only Earth, albeit super, in the 3-planet system. Why does ESO?s press release glamorize GI 581 c at the center of public theatrics? Udry et al. correctly and cautiously note that the planet is ?probably the most Earth-like of all known exoplanets? (not that it actually is in fact Earth-like) and even so in terms of radius and temperature parameters only, that ?the actual surface temperature of the planet very much depends on the highly uncertain composition and thickness of its atmosphere,? and that a ?detailed study will also need to consider the possible tidal locking of the planetary rotation to the orbital period.? Such vigilant qualifications, barely reported by the media, apparently were not enough to prevent a supposedly scientific organization from misquoting the title, claiming that the planet is ?habitable.? ESO?s misquotation might have contributed to igniting the frenzied chain reaction.
 
Login to find out (May 2, 2007 at 5:14pm)
The planet is 5 times more massive than Earth (not quite ?Earth-like?). The size of the planet more closely resembles that of Earth (1.5 times the radius of Earth - though I am not sure that even that statistic could be considered ?Earth-like? since there is no definition of the term, as far as I am aware). I do not argue that planets close to the size or the mass of Earth are rare. Rather, I ask what precisely ?Earth-like? means: 1.5 times the radius of Earth, within +/-20% of the size and within +/-15% of the mass of Earth, planetary radius and mass must produce (as per Newton?s universal law of gravitation) surface gravity not so large that it undermines terrestrial life?s energy-draining locomotion, planet that has a material recycling system like Earth?s plate tectonics, planet that has modest axial tilt variation stabilized by the gravitational force of a nearby, relatively large moon and that therefore has only moderate climate fluctuations throughout geologic history, planet that is located in a cosmic neighborhood protected from rogue asteroids and that therefore has low probability of being hit by Armageddon-style extinctions, planet that is located sufficiently away from a soon-to-go supernova before life has had a chance to purportedly evolve, or what?

Although a few headlines do use the accurate clause (?most Earth-like planet found to date?), many headlines (including that from the European Organization for Astronomical Research) proclaim that the planet is a ?super-Earth? or is or could be ?Earth-like? (even though it is 5 times more massive than Earth), and other headlines illicitly equate ?Earth-like? with ?habitable? and ?life?:

?Astronomers Find First Earth-like Planet in Habitable Zone? -European Organization for Astronomical Research in the Southern Hemisphere
?All Wet? Astronomers Claim Discovery of Earth-like Planet? -Scientific American
?New 'Super Earth' found in space? -BBC
?New Planet Could Be Earthlike, Scientists Say? -New York Times
?Astronomers Discover an Earth-Like Planet? -Newsweek
?New Earth-like Planet 'Habitable'? -Discovery Channel
"Gliese 581c Discoverer: More Earth-Like Planets to Come" -Wired Science
?Astronomers Find Habitable Earth-like Planet? -Astrobiology Magazine
?Astronomers Find First Habitable Earth-Like Planet? -Space Daily
?Earth-like planet found that may support life? -CTV News
?Scientists find earth-like planet? -Los Angeles Times
?Search for Life Next on Habitable Earth-Like Planet? -Sci-Tech Today
?Earth-like planet discovery 'may support life'? -Ireland Online
??Earth-like? planet found? -Glasgow Evening Times, UK
?Scientists Find Planet Like Earth? -The Moscow Times, Russia
?First habitable 'Earth-like' planet found? -National Post, Canada
?Red dwarf is mother to an Earth-like planet? -Manila Bulletin, Philippines
?New Earth-like planet 'habitable'? -ABC Science Online, Australia
?Scientists find planet like Earth that may have life? -Shanghai Daily, China
?Earth-like planet discovered? -iAfrica.com, South Africa
?Astronomers find Earth:like planet? -NZZ Online, Switzerland
?Earth-like planet discovered? -Gulf News, United Arab Emirates
?First habitable Earth like planet outside Solar System discovered? -Zee News, India

The research paper itself (?The HARPS search for southern extra-solar planets: XI. An habitable super-Earth (5 MEarth) in a 3-planet system,? by S. Udry et. al.) seems to have hastened to declare the planet ?habitable.?

What an outstanding bandwagon! This appears to be an even bigger bandwagon than the one that ballyhoos discoveries of fossilized skulls and fragments in favor of evolution. The term ?Earth-like? seems to solely refer to ?Earth-like? average surface temperatures that permit water in its liquid state. The planet is deemed ?habitable? primarily due to the essentially trivial fact that its orbit is confined to the circumstellar habitable zone, which allows planetary surface temperature to accommodate liquid water. But that is not a sufficient criterion for habitability.

The media and the scientists alike neglected to clearly define the term. It was evident that they neither understand nor appreciate the host of factors crucial to habitability (On a side note, it is no wonder that the Quran states that there exist many ?signs,? throughout the heavens and the Earth, for ?those who understand.?) How can this planet be Earth-like if it is 5 times more massive than Earth? For instance, consider this: ?the fact that it has a mass at least 5x Earth's means that it will have a high surface gravity and less surface relief than the Earth -- meaning no dry land,? according to astronomer Dr. Guillermo Gonzalez www.evolutionnews.org). This is not to imply that life cannot thrive on a planet more massive than Earth, though too massive a planet would be an unlikely cradle for complex (animals and higher plants) and intelligent (technological) life. The point is this: surely, must we reckon that this particular planet is ?Earth-like? after all?
 
Login to find out (April 29, 2007 at 5:25pm)
Here?s the word from astronomer Guillermo Gonzalez, confirming my initial reluctance in believing that the planet might be habitable:

?You are right about the host star being an M dwarf posing problems for habitability. The smallest planet's eccentricity is comparable to that of Mercury, so it is probably locked into a 3:2 spin-orbit resonance. So, the planet will experience large temperature variations over the course of its orbit. What's more, because its rotation is slower, it should have a weaker magnetic field and be subject to enhanced solar wind stripping of its atmosphere. Finally, the fact that it has a mass at least 5x Earth's means that it will have a high surface gravity and less surface relief than the Earth -- meaning no dry land.?

discovery.org www.evolutionnews.org)

So there you have it ? an ?Earth-like? planet after all.
 
Login to find out (April 28, 2007 at 8:27am)
>> Lif is life, if it just started then it will be microbial, but if given time, it will more likely to evolve to higher forms including intelligent, semi-intelegent and probably things we have never imagined.

It does not occur to me that you understand and appreciate an important differentiation. I shall state my point in the form of a question. Do you envision a clear distinction between planetary conditions hospitable for microbial life and conditions hospitable for complex (animals and higher plants) and intelligent (technological) life? Even if microbial life were to somehow arise on a planet, you seem to overlook the fact that a host of other additional habitability conditions have to be in place to permit the purported evolution of complex and intelligent lifeforms.

It is a separate debate whether the Darwinian evolutionary mechanism of blind chance (random mutation) and natural selection is indeed capable of producing the diversity of life on Earth. If at all, I refer interested readers to Darwin?s Black Box by biochemist Michael Behe. I dispute whether microbial life might have naturalistically transformed over time into the gargantuan complexity of life on Earth. Whether a comparable result might be achieved on some other planet is likewise disputed. But that is outside my intended scope of discussion.

>> and even more complex and more advance.

Vague. Imaginative speculation. Personal wishful thinking. Science fiction. Ungrateful or ignorant of life-supportive conditions on and around Earth.
 
Login to find out (April 26, 2007 at 8:00pm)
Lif is life, if it just started then it will be microbial, but if given time, it will more likely to evolve to higher forms including intelligent, semi-intelegent and probably things we have never imagined.

even with all the conditions you mentioned, supernova, black holes and the like, I still believe that there is more than enough possibility to produce many worlds like ours. and even more complex and more advance.
 
Login to find out (April 26, 2007 at 7:50pm)
By ?life? do you mean microbial life, complex life, or intelligent life? Simple, microbial life can thrive in extreme environments such as near hot under-sea volcanoes on Earth. In fact, it would not be surprising to find such microbes on Jupiter's moon Europa. Complex or intelligent life is inherently more sensitive to temperature anomalies and, in general, to planetary climate fluctuations. So I feel that it would be enlightening for me to grasp your point better if you would clarify this ambiguity.

Even ?Earth-like? planets, as you have defined, cannot exist ?all over the universe.? The sector of a galaxy hospitable to life must be sufficiently impervious to asteroid impact threats, high-energy radiation, supernovae, black holes, and other life-threatening cosmic events. An extinction-causing asteroid collision with Earth, for instance, is thought to have wiped out the dinosaurs about 65 million years ago. Regions of the galaxy closer to the center would wipe out any higher lifeforms through more frequent impact collisions than what has been the fortunate case on Earth. If such life-supporting cosmic factors were thoroughly considered, one by one, the vast regions of galaxies would be trickled down to narrow zones most likely supportive of life. Therefore, ?Earth-like? planets will not be found ?all over the universe.?

It is not the potential existence of many ?Earth-like? planets that is contested. The planet that I contest is more narrowly defined than the one you have described. Based on the observation that habitability and measurability conditions on Earth correlate to such an astonishing degree, is it really easy to imagine that there are ?many many? planets that nurture conditions suitable for intelligent life to flourish and conditions suitable for the life forms to learn cosmology and astrophysics? As per your definition, however, of course there might be many more ?Earth-like? planets out there.
 
Login to find out (April 26, 2007 at 7:04pm)
Earth like means: a planet somewhat similar in size and life supporting conditions. why is it so hard to imagine the existence of many of these planets all over the universe?
 
Login to find out (April 26, 2007 at 6:29pm)
Thanks for your critical assessment. It was refreshing to note your point of view. Can you please specify what you mean by many planets "like ours"? I am sorry that my analysis was so in-depth that you probably did not get to read the part where I mentioned that the term "Earth-like" is deceptive and vague.
 
Login to find out (April 26, 2007 at 5:46pm)
too long to read
but if you are trying to tell me that earth is unique nd no planet is like it in the universe, then this sound as foolish as saying that the earth is center of the universe.

statistical speaking, there has to be many many planets like ours out there.
 
Login to find out (April 26, 2007 at 4:30pm)
Key parameters, including mass and distance data, for the three planets orbiting the M3 red dwarf star (GI 581) have been reported in Table 1 of the research paper submitted to Astronomy and Astrophysics ("The HARPS search for southern extra-solar planets: XI. An habitable super-Earth (5 MEarth) in a 3-planet system,? by S. Udry et al. - obswww.unige.ch). For the sake of argument, I will refer to the parameters pertaining to the circular case, the data for which appears to be close to that of the free eccentricity case anyway:

Gl 581 b: 15.6 Earth-masses, 0.041 AU
Gl 581 c: 5.06 Earth-masses, 0.073 AU
Gl 581 d: 8.3 Earth-masses, 0.25 AU

Wherever possible, I calibrated the data from the perspective of our solar system (cf. www.solarviews.com):

Gl 581 b: nearly the mass of Neptune (17.1 Earth-masses), 11% of AU from sun to Mercury (0.39 AU)
Gl 581 c: 5.06 Earth-masses, 19% of AU from sun to Mercury
Gl 581 d: 8.3 Earth-masses, 64% of AU from sun to Mercury

Three noteworthy points:

1. A relatively massive giant nearly the mass of Neptune and at least two other planets more massive than Earth are tightly packed into orbits much smaller than the orbit of Mercury.

2. Ignoring the orbits of Neptune and Pluto, the shortest average distance between the orbits of any two planets in the solar system is between the orbits of Earth and Venus (0.277 AU). The distance between the orbits of Gl 581 c and the massive Neptune-sized giant is within a stunning 12% of the Earth-Venus orbital spacing! Based on this orbital spacing parameter alone, it is almost as if GI 581 c is a moon of the giant, or might anytime, upon close encounter with the giant, be gravitationally captured into an orbit around the giant if it has not done so already (or, at worst, possibly crash into the giant)! The Privileged Planet hypothesis makes the predictive, testable, and falsifiable scientific argument that it is unlikely that intelligent life will be found on a moon.

3. The distance between the orbits of GI 581 c and GI 581 d is within 64% of the Earth-Venus orbital spacing.

Do these jam-packed orbits and proximity of Gl 581 c to a relatively massive giant undermine, due to potential gravitational perturbation, the habitability of Gl 581 c, the ?best candidate? that we have discovered so far? Even if life, in any form whatsoever, currently exists on the planet, it is hard to believe how life could persist for billions of years on a planet with potentially unstable, gravitationally perturbed orbit. The slightest perturbation of a planetary orbit could result in considerable global climate change, including cryogenic deep-freeze. On the other hand, stable and nearly circular orbit of Earth, spaced far apart from the Jovian gas giants (and the gas giants themselves spaced far apart), has contributed to flourishing habitable conditions for life on Earth for more than 3.5 billion years. Do the orbits of the planets and the spacing between them really rival the life-friendly orbits and spacing of the planets in the solar system?

A stable orbit over vast tracts of time is only one of many other habitability criteria for life. Have SETI folks evaluated these criteria in an unbiased manner? Or, due to the nature of their paid profession, are they inherently biased in favor of the possibility of finding intelligent life at the slightest likelihood of the presence of mere liquid water? Are they inherently liable to be unappreciative of life-friendly conditions on and around Earth? Do they really understand and appreciate the assortment of life-friendly conditions that enable their subsistence?

>> ? the planet nevertheless lies in the habitable zone, the region around a star where water could be liquid! www.eso.org)

A circumstellar habitable zone is defined as the space around a star where planetary surface temperature might accommodate liquid water. Since liquid water is a necessary but not a sufficient criterion for life, the confinement of a planetary orbit to the circumstellar habitable zone is a necessary but not a sufficient criterion for complex or intelligent, if not extremophilic microbial, life. Contrary to the SETI Institute, there has not been sufficient reason so far to get thrilled about the odds of finding complex or intelligent life on GI 581 c. Further studies are needed to determine whether conditions there are habitable enough to increase the odds of the presence of complex or intelligent life.
 
Login to find out (April 26, 2007 at 4:23pm)
?Say, "Have you thought: if God made the night perpetual until the Day of Resurrection, which god besides God would have provided you with light? Do you not hear?" Say, "Have you thought: if God made the daylight perpetual until the Day of Resurrection, which god besides God would have provided you with a night for your rest? Do you not see?" -Quran 28:71-72
 
Login to find out (April 25, 2007 at 7:16pm)
A ?major? discovery of an exoplanet has been reported today (official announcement - www.eso.org space.com news article - www.space.com). The planet will ?most probably be a very important target of the future space missions dedicated to the search for extra-terrestrial life,? said one of the team members. Seth Shostak of the SETI institute has deemed this planet ?the best candidate the solar planet guys have come up with yet.?

I have quoted below the space.com article.

>> An Earth-like planet spotted outside our solar system is the first found that could support liquid water and harbor life, scientists announced today.

>> ?It means there probably are many more such planets out there,? Charbonneau said in a telephone interview.

The term ?Earth-like? is deceptive and vague. The Privileged Planet hypothesis is more explicit. The real contention is whether this ?best candidate? for life nurtures conditions suitable for intelligent life to flourish and conditions suitable for the life forms to unravel the universe.

>> Liquid water is a key ingredient for life as we know it.

Liquid water is a necessary but not a sufficient requisite for life. Also, it must be clearly spelled out whether ?life? means simple (microbial) life, complex life, or intelligent life. Just what kind of ?life? are they hoping to find?

>> Shostak said he was ?jazzed? by the discovery. ?This is pointing to something that in the past has only been an assumption, namely that Earth-sized worlds are not rare,? he said. ?We know of only two . We know this one and we know our own. But two is better than one.?

It is not contested whether the size of the Earth is rare. There may be many more Earth-sized worlds out there. The issue is whether there are other planets that nurture conditions suitable for intelligent life to flourish and conditions suitable for the life forms to unravel the universe.

Despite the publicized thrill behind this discovery, certain key conditions that permit intelligent life on a planet have been apparently overlooked, at least so far. Just a few brief examples. First, the planet, which orbits a red dwarf star, is located ?14 times closer to its star than the Earth is from the Sun.? A planet in proximity to a star faces the risk of rotational braking induced by the gravitational field of its host star, permanently halting the planet?s rotation and freezing potential water and atmosphere on the planet?s dark side. Second, if the planet lacks stable and protective magnetic field, the stronger solar flare intensity of the red dwarf would threaten planetary life, and occasional flare bursts could damage protective chemicals such as ozone in the planet?s atmosphere. In contrast, the Earth?s atmosphere has protected life for billions of years. Third, the spectrum of a star is vital for photosynthetic activity. Is the spectrum of the planet?s red dwarf star hospitable to life? Fourth, if spacing between this planet and the other large planets in the system is not far enough (as it is in the Earth-Jupiter-Saturn system), the system risks gravitational perturbation, which could toss, like billiard balls, one or more of the planets out into cosmic void. This is by no means an exhaustive list of the many obstacles relevant to planetary habitability, let alone measurability. Yet, Shostak is ?jazzed? by the discovery.