THE SOUTHWORTH PLANETARIUM
70 Falmouth Street      Portland, Maine 04103
(207) 780-4249      usm.maine.edu/planet
43.6667° N    70.2667° W
Founded January 1970
2022-2023: XLVII
Sunrise: 6:55 a.m.
Sunset: 4:05 p.m.
Civil twilight begins: 6:22 a.m.
Civil twilight ends: 4:37 p.m.
Sun's host constellation: Ophiuchus
Moon phase: Waxing gibbous (62% illuminated)
Moonrise: 1:07 p.m.
Moonset: 12:53 a.m. (12/2/2022)
Julian date: 2459915.21 "May you live all the days of your life."
-Jonathan Swift



THE DAILY ASTRONOMER
Thursday, December  1, 2022
On "Habitable" Zones

“Habitable zone” is a particularly strange term which denotes a region
around a star in which conditions would be conducive to the development of
life. This zone is generally predicated on the notion that water must be as
essential to extraterrestrial life forms as it is to Earth-life. (We might
discover that this presumption is incorrect.) Also, a habitable zone should
have sufficient heat energy to facilitate the myriad biochemical processes
required to sustain and evolve life without being so hot as to prevent
these reactions due to molecular disassociation.

The habitable zone, as currently defined, depends entirely on the star. The
habitable zones around comparatively cool M-type dwarfs would be smaller
and closer to the star than those around hotter stars, such as F and G
type. (Note: The Sun is a G2 V…G-type dwarf.)

The diagram above, compliments of NASA, shows the habitable zones of M-type
dwarfs* (top row); K-type (middle row) and G-type (bottom row.) Note the
relative sizes and distances of the three different habitable zones. The
next image, also from NASA, shows the habitable zones of even hotter blue
stars.

Naturally, the habitable zones around hotter and more luminous blue stars
are much farther away than those around G, K or M type stars.

THE PROBLEMS WITH “HABITABLE ZONE.”

However, the word “habitable zone” can be quite misleading. For one, the
term, itself, implies that life exists on the worlds within such zones.
That is not necessarily true. The image below, courtesy of Mythic Scribes,
shows that Earth is not the only planet to revolve within the Sun’s
habitable zone. Mars is within this zone, as well. Even a wider zone,
dubbed “the optimistic zone,” includes Venus, which is a hell world with a
global wide surface temperature exceeding 900 degrees F

SIZE MATTERS

We know that a life-sustaining world must necessarily have a substantial
atmosphere. Astrobiologists are confident in their assertion that all life,
no matter where it exists, must utilize some form of respiration. One will
never find life thriving in an essentially airless world such as Mercury. A
research paper published in the Astrophysical Journal (August 2019)
entitled “Atmospheric Evolution on Low-gravity Waterworlds” (Constantin W.
Arnscheidt1,2,3, Robin D. Wordsworth1,4, and Feng Ding) places a lower
limit on habitable planet mass of 2.7% Earth’s mass (for comparison: the
moon’s mass is 1.2% of Earth; Mercury’s is 5.5%) Any planet with a lower
mass will not exert a strong enough gravitational pull to retain an
atmosphere. However, planets more massive than this limit, but still much
less massive than Earth could be suitable for life because as planets
decrease in size, their atmospheres expand outward. These larger
atmospheres increase both the absorption and radiation of heat, which could
help to stabilize the atmosphere over extremely long time periods.

RADIATION AND TIDAL LOCKING
M-type dwarfs represent the majority of active stars -those which produce
energy through core thermonuclear fusion reactions-. These stars tend to
spin more quickly and will often produce dangerously powerful solar flares
that could strip away the atmosphere of planets within the habitable zone.
Although that could pose a true problem, a recent study conducted by a team
from Leibniz Institute for Astrophysics Potsdam -using data collected by
the Transiting Exoplanet Survey Satellite- found through the study of red
dwarf light curves that these flares tend to erupt toward the star’s polar
regions (north and south of 55–60 degrees). Pole oriented flares wouldn’t
pose the same threat to planetary atmospheres as those that erupt out of
the equatorial regions.

The other problem pertains to tidal locking. While the percentages are a
matter of considerable dispute, the orbital mechanics between a red dwarf
and a planet close enough to be inside its habitable zone are such that
eventual tidal locking is highly probable, When a planet is tidally locked,
the planet’s rotational period will often -but not always**- equal the
revolutionary period so that one side of the planet is always directed
toward the star. Such a planet would hardly be hospitable to life due to
the vast temperature differential. Some have claimed that life would thrive
within the more temperate “twilight zones.” Although that would leave
precious little area in which life could develop.

NOT ENOUGH TIME
The more luminous the star, the shorter the lifespan. Yes, there is a
“habitable zone” around hot, highly luminous O-type stars. However, these
stars tend to evolve off the main sequence within tens of millions of years
or less. For instance, a star that is 10 times more massive than the Sun
will only “burn” hydrogen for about 20 million years before evolving into
the giant stage. Based on our own example, life didn’t even begin to
develop on Earth until approximately 800 million years after its formation.
While this value is also disputed, it would seem highly unlikely that life
could develop on a planet around a hot, highly luminous star.

Habitability involves a wide variety of factors -many of which I didn’t
mention- not just temperature.


*Yes, the plural is “dwarfs,” not “dwarves.” Years ago I enjoyed an utterly
pointless twenty-minute argument with a Tolkien-adoring student about the
appropriate plural for dwarf. I assured him that the plural of stellar
“dwarf” is the admittedly inelegant “dwarfs.” He remained frustratingly
obstinate about the matter, even after I assured him that I was not trying
to blaspheme the divine JRR, who I, too, greatly admire. He literally ended
the discussion with the challenge, “Would you dare to have this argument
with Gandalf?” To this question I had no response.

**Sometimes the locking will produce a spin-orbit resonance, such as
Mercury’s 3:2 spin-orbit resonance.

To subscribe or unsubscribe from the "Daily Astronomer"

http://lists.maine.edu/cgi/wa?A0=DAILY-ASTRONOMER