Quake3World

Posted: **Sat Nov 19, 2005 8:30 pm**

Realisticly and measured in something easy like ??? x Earths Size.

Posted: **Sat Nov 19, 2005 8:35 pm**

Wether a planet can support life has more to do with its atmosphere than its size.

Posted: **Sat Nov 19, 2005 8:36 pm**

Yes I know but a planet needs to be of a certain size to be able to support an atmosphere. I was just wondering if a planet can be TOO big to support one.

Posted: **Sat Nov 19, 2005 8:37 pm**

keep in mind that the bigger a planet is, the larger its gravitational field will be.

Posted: **Sat Nov 19, 2005 8:38 pm**

Mr.Magnetichead wrote:Yes I know but a planet needs to be of a certain size to be able to support an atmosphere. I was just wondering if a planet can be TOO big to support one.

The planet must have a big enough gravitational force to keep its fluids from escaping. There would be no upper limit.

So you're looking at: bigger than venus, smaller than infinity.

Posted: **Sat Nov 19, 2005 8:40 pm**

[xeno]Julios wrote:keep in mind that the bigger a planet is, the larger its gravitational field will be.

you mean bigger the mass?

Posted: **Sat Nov 19, 2005 8:41 pm**

shadd_ wrote:
[xeno]Julios wrote:keep in mind that the bigger a planet is, the larger its gravitational field will be.
you mean bigger the mass?

bigger sass

Posted: **Sat Nov 19, 2005 9:04 pm**

Whats the circumference of the earth?

Posted: **Sat Nov 19, 2005 9:05 pm**

shadd_ wrote:
[xeno]Julios wrote:keep in mind that the bigger a planet is, the larger its gravitational field will be.
you mean bigger the mass?

yea good point.

but all things being equal, larger volume = larger mass, so it is something to consider.

Posted: **Sat Nov 19, 2005 9:13 pm**

Mr.Magnetichead wrote:Whats the circumference of the earth?

about 40000kms around the equator.

Posted: **Sat Nov 19, 2005 9:48 pm**

Mr.Magnetichead wrote:Realisticly and measured in something easy like ??? x Earths Size.

Hard to tell, we don't really know the answer. There are many factors worth considering, some listed already. I don't believe you'll find any astrobiologist (a field not even in it's infancy), who could give you a proper and complete answer.

Posted: **Sat Nov 19, 2005 9:58 pm**

Additionally, the question "what is life?" is not a settled one in the philosophy of biology according to my extremely superficial assessment.

Example: nanobacteria or nanocrystals?

Posted: **Sat Nov 19, 2005 10:05 pm**

Higher forms of sentient life supported by vegetation systems.

Posted: **Sat Nov 19, 2005 10:45 pm**

MQ was kinda saying what i was thinking.
are we talking human life or just life in general?

Posted: **Sat Nov 19, 2005 10:50 pm**

Mr.Magnetichead wrote:Yes I know but a planet needs to be of a certain size to be able to support an atmosphere.

And this conclusion comes from where again ?

Posted: **Sat Nov 19, 2005 10:51 pm**

Again, hard to tell. (directed @ Mr.M)

Try asking these folks. The site hasn't been updated in almost 4 years but they may still answer emails.

Posted: **Sat Nov 19, 2005 10:52 pm**

Iccy (temp) wrote:
Mr.Magnetichead wrote:Yes I know but a planet needs to be of a certain size to be able to support an atmosphere.
And this conclusion comes from where again ?

Haha u so dumb.

Posted: **Sat Nov 19, 2005 10:54 pm**

Enlighten me. You talking about a planet possibly being so large that it cant support a atmosphere. So tell me oh guiding fountain of knowledge, what makes you so sure it can get too big ?

Posted: **Sat Nov 19, 2005 10:56 pm**

What? I said it had to be a certain size to support an atmosphere... as in a minimum.

Posted: **Sat Nov 19, 2005 11:00 pm**

an atmosphere might not be necessary to support all conceivable forms of "life", especially subterranean forms

Posted: **Sat Nov 19, 2005 11:06 pm**

But that would require liquid water which would require active tectonics/volcanic activity and the development of organisms not reliant on light derived energy such as tube worms.

Posted: **Sun Nov 20, 2005 12:55 am**

I think you need to give us, or we establish here first, what is the definition of life your talking about before you can answer that question.

Posted: **Sun Nov 20, 2005 12:56 am**

Mr.Magnetichead wrote:But that would require liquid water which would require active tectonics/volcanic activity and the development of organisms not reliant on light derived energy such as tube worms.

so is that not feasible?

Posted: **Sun Nov 20, 2005 9:55 am**

Canidae wrote:I think you need to give us, or we establish here first, what is the definition of life your talking about before you can answer that question.

Higher forms of sentient life supported by vegetation systems.

Posted: **Sun Nov 20, 2005 10:12 am**

someone's been watching naked science on the national geographic chanel.

Quake3World

In theory how large can a life supporting planet be?

In theory how large can a life supporting planet be?

Re: In theory how large can a life supporting planet be?