Have “Artificial City Lights” Been Discovered by Webb Telescope On Other planets

[727Sky]

This is a recent Earthfiles video and if any of the reports are true about lights detected on distant planets then "WOW" .... color me doubtful but interesting nonetheless.

Life after death questions...

[SomeJackleg]

This is a recent Earthfiles video and if any of the reports are true about lights detected on distant planets then "WOW" .... color me doubtful but interesting nonetheless.

Life after death questions...

not a fan of lmh, she is just another and no better than the other ancient aliens hucksters or the one that on the alien huckster speaking tours. not that i don't believe that there is other life in the universe, God said he created at least two forms of life Angles and us. it would be arrogant to me to think he didn't make more and didn't tell us about them.

i use visit lmh's earthfiles way back when before she started charging for it.  got no problem with people making money, but i do have a problem when you charge for everything and that includes obvious lies. when you everything is you see or report is alins without real proof to me is a lie. i don not let my web shadow darken her site any if i can help it.
that said i went to first of the many sites that report cosmic discoveries in a search, and what they reported if true, alien life may be closer than ever suspected.  the article said 7 trillion miles. if i used the converted right, that is a little over one light year. where as before ircc the near life supporting planet suspected was 4.something light years away.

here is the converter page i used.

Convert 7,000,000,000,000 Miles to Light Years

here i the article,

Since its historic launch on December 25, 2021, the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST), an incredible collaboration between NASA, the European Space Agency (ESA), and the Canadian Space Agency (CSA), has been a source of ground-breaking astronomical discoveries. This cutting-edge telescope, painstakingly built to outperform the Hubble Space Telescope, has just pulled off an incredible feat that could completely change our knowledge of the universe: it has successfully detected the faint glow of city lights from an astounding 7 trillion miles away, offering a remarkable window into the vastness and complexity of the cosmos. This astounding finding creates new opportunities for astronomical research, providing never-before-seen insights into the evolution of the universe and illuminating the mysteries of far-off galaxies. The JWST is positioned to make even more astounding discoveries and increase our understanding of the universe beyond anything we have seen before thanks to its unmatched capabilities.

The James Webb Space Telescope’s Astounding Discovery: City Lights 7 Trillion Miles Away

[Ninurta]

7 trillion miles sounds like a long way away, but 1 light year is about 6.9 trillion miles, meaning that this planet would still be in the Oort cloud of our own sun,

The nearest star external to the solar system is 4.3 light years away (Proxima Centauri) and it's a red dwarf star, generally considered unsuitable for life as we know it. Planets within it's "goldilocks zone" would be close enough to the star to be tidally locked to it, as the moon is to Earth. That means it would have one permanently sunlit side and one side in perpetual darkness. Alpha Centauri, which Proxima orbits around, is a binary star, and is about 5.5 light years away.

Most red dwarves are "flare stars" - they have violent outbursts that would probably sterilize any planets that were close enough to otherwise have a chance of bearing life.

As far s I know, the only photos of planets they've gotten with ANY equipment is just another pin prick of light floating around a bigger pinprick of light. Since planets are very, very dim compared to the stars they orbit, the central star's light has to be blocked out to even get that pinprick of light from the planet. I don't think even the JWST is able to resolve continents, much less city lights, that far away.

I've seen this claim at other places on the internet, but I'm just not buying it.  I have no doubt there is life elsewhere, but I don't believe Earth has developed the technology to take pictures of it yet. The vast distances involved in interstellar space means that even something as big as a planet still has too small an angular diameter at the distances involved to allow the resolution that would be necessary to actually take photos of the surface with enough detail to be meaningful. If the JWST had that kind of resolution, we should have already mapped the entire surface of Pluto, which is much closer than extrasolar planets, in pretty fine detail - at least as good as the detail we got from the Pluto probe of only a part of it's surface.

.

[SomeJackleg]

The nearest star external to the solar system is 4.3 light years away (Proxima Centauri) and it's a red dwarf star, generally considered unsuitable for life as we know it. Planets within it's "goldilocks zone" would be close enough to the star to be tidally locked to it, as the moon is to Earth. That means it would have one permanently sunlit side and one side in perpetual darkness. Alpha Centauri, which Proxima orbits around, is a binary star, and is about 5.5 light years away.

that is what was i thought. but there are some that say Proxima Centauri b sometimes called Alpha Centauri Cb  some say it maybe habitable, it's others say it is not.

[Ninurta]

The nearest star external to the solar system is 4.3 light years away (Proxima Centauri) and it's a red dwarf star, generally considered unsuitable for life as we know it. Planets within it's "goldilocks zone" would be close enough to the star to be tidally locked to it, as the moon is to Earth. That means it would have one permanently sunlit side and one side in perpetual darkness. Alpha Centauri, which Proxima orbits around, is a binary star, and is about 5.5 light years away.

that is habitablewhat was i thought. but there are some that say Proxima Centauri b sometimes called Alpha Centauri Cb  some say it maybe habitable, it's others say it is not.

First, I need to make a correction - Alpha Centauri is about 4.5 light years away, not the 5.5 light years I typoed in there.

While I do beieve an exoplanet has been discovered around Proxima (ALF CEN C), I've not really studied the system in any sort of detail.I don't know the orbital distance, or whether or not Proxima is a "flare star". Speaking in generalities, M-class stars or "red dwarves" as Proxima is have small habitable zones around them because of their weaker radiation and temperatures. A planet close enough to be in the habitable zone will almost always also be close enough to be tidally locked to the star, leaving one side permanently facing the star and the other side permanently facing away from it, creating a hot side and a cold side. There has, however, been some discussion as to whether a narrow habitable band might be created on the planet in the terminator or "twilight zone" between the day and night sides of the planet.

Then there is the matter of solar flares to consider. Many red dwarfs are flare stars, and have violent outbursts at irregular intervals that would sterilize any planets within range of the flares, which distance generally includes the habitable zone around M class stars. Closer to the star, as is necessary to be in the habitable zone for red dwaves, also means more danger to the planet.

So, while it may be technically feasible for life to exist on a planet around Proxima Centauri, it has a pretty low probability. What's more important as regards this video is the resolution of the JWST vs. the distance to Proxima and the angular size both star and planet present back here on Earth. I don't think we yet have technology to bring the planet to resolution enough to show any detail at all, however fuzzy. That would probably require several JWSTs in a space-based wide interferometer array, I'm not sure that even a planet-wide interferometer would approach that resolution. It would probably take a wider baseline for the interferometer than the diameter of the Earth could provide, even if atmospheric interference could be cancelled.

This "discovery" was claimed to be at a distance of 7 trillion miles, but the closest known star, Proxima Centauri, is located at nearly 30 trillion miles away, quite a bit farther than the claimed discovery. I don't fault the writers for not knowing that, nor do I fault any readers for not knowing it. Most folks just don't understand the vast distances involved in astronomical matters. They usually don't have to, because someone else tells them distances in "light years", which some folks can make use of by using familiar units to cover the discrepancies. If a distance is reported in familiar, but seemingly huge, numbers, most folks just don't have the wherewithal or inclination to make the conversions to verify them. They wouldn't know, for example, that a "light year" is roughly 6.9 trillion miles, so a report of "7 trillion miles away" would seem to them to be huge, but making the report as "about 1 light year away" would show the improbability of the report right away.

I only know these things because astrophysics is what I studied at university, with a concentration on interstellar distances and mapping and navigating the same. It's not something most normal folks think about on a daily basis, so there is no fault in folks who don't realize the intricacies involved. They know other things I have no clue about, things that make my lifer easier without ever realizing it.

.