Conditions of a more ideal version of earthWhat if an Earth-like planet had no axial tilt? (impact on ecosystem)What earth conditions would make a permanent bronze-colored sky?Order of Solar System Colonization (alternate version)The Reindeer--Let's Get Real, Shall We?Sabotage of Biosphere after Doomsday EventConditions for ideal/quick terraforming candidates that cannot currently support lifeUnder what circumstances is Humanity more expendable than Earth?All conditions being ideal (gravity, ecosystem, etc), what are the physical limits of tree growth on earth?Macroevolution in an isolated roomExtreme adaptation: evolutionary narrative for Vantablack-like skin pigment
Sextortion with actual password not found in leaks
Is it possible to eat quietly in Minecraft?
The seven story archetypes. Are they truly all of them?
Why did computer video outputs go from digital to analog, then back to digital?
Using paddles to support a bug net
How to repair basic cable/wire issue for household appliances
Raw curve25519 public key points
USA: Can a witness take the 5th to avoid perjury?
Why did modems have speakers?
What is the spanish equivalent of "the boys are sitting"?
Bug in Lualatex: not printing characters from calculation
How to extract only values greater than a threshold
My current job follows "worst practices". How can I talk about my experience in an interview without giving off red flags?
QGIS field calculator conditional operators
Do Rabbis get punished in Heaven for wrong interpretations or claims?
What is "ass door"?
what to say when a company asks you why someone (a friend) who was fired left?
What would be the side effects on the life of a person becoming indestructible?
Why is DC so, so, so Democratic?
How can Kazakhstan perform MITM attacks on all HTTPS traffic?
What the purpose of the fuel shutoff valve?
How to write a sincerely religious protagonist without preaching or affirming or judging their worldview?
"It is what it is" in French
Is it possible to build or embed the SMILES representation of compounds in 3D?
Conditions of a more ideal version of earth
What if an Earth-like planet had no axial tilt? (impact on ecosystem)What earth conditions would make a permanent bronze-colored sky?Order of Solar System Colonization (alternate version)The Reindeer--Let's Get Real, Shall We?Sabotage of Biosphere after Doomsday EventConditions for ideal/quick terraforming candidates that cannot currently support lifeUnder what circumstances is Humanity more expendable than Earth?All conditions being ideal (gravity, ecosystem, etc), what are the physical limits of tree growth on earth?Macroevolution in an isolated roomExtreme adaptation: evolutionary narrative for Vantablack-like skin pigment
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
$begingroup$
What would be the specific conditions required for a planet to be a more ideal version of Earth?
I want the world to have a much larger proportion of land covered by lush jungle and forest ecosystems with only a very small fraction of the world populated by human-esque people.
It would be in a galaxy with a G star similar to our sun.
Would the conditions be almost identical to earth or are there any subtle or non-subtle improvements that could be made in any of earth's properties (atmosphere, geometry, etc.) that would provide a more suitable world for nature to thrive.
science-based
edited 7 hours ago
EDL
3,8414 silver badges23 bronze badges
asked 9 hours ago
rendered_mercuriusrendered_mercurius
163 bronze badges
New contributor
rendered_mercurius is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
What would be the specific conditions required for a planet to be a more ideal version of Earth?
I want the world to have a much larger proportion of land covered by lush jungle and forest ecosystems with only a very small fraction of the world populated by human-esque people.
It would be in a galaxy with a G star similar to our sun.
Would the conditions be almost identical to earth or are there any subtle or non-subtle improvements that could be made in any of earth's properties (atmosphere, geometry, etc.) that would provide a more suitable world for nature to thrive.
science-based
edited 7 hours ago
EDL
3,8414 silver badges23 bronze badges
asked 9 hours ago
rendered_mercuriusrendered_mercurius
163 bronze badges
New contributor
rendered_mercurius is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
In this case you quickly received an answer that is very good but in general it is best to wait some time, perhaps a day, before accepting an answer as "The Answer." It is possible that there are other people who had not yet seen your question who could provide a more suitable answer, or perhaps a similar but more detailed answer.
$endgroup$
– krb
6 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
What would be the specific conditions required for a planet to be a more ideal version of Earth?
I want the world to have a much larger proportion of land covered by lush jungle and forest ecosystems with only a very small fraction of the world populated by human-esque people.
It would be in a galaxy with a G star similar to our sun.
Would the conditions be almost identical to earth or are there any subtle or non-subtle improvements that could be made in any of earth's properties (atmosphere, geometry, etc.) that would provide a more suitable world for nature to thrive.
science-based
edited 7 hours ago
EDL
3,8414 silver badges23 bronze badges
asked 9 hours ago
rendered_mercuriusrendered_mercurius
163 bronze badges
New contributor
rendered_mercurius is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
What would be the specific conditions required for a planet to be a more ideal version of Earth?
I want the world to have a much larger proportion of land covered by lush jungle and forest ecosystems with only a very small fraction of the world populated by human-esque people.
It would be in a galaxy with a G star similar to our sun.
Would the conditions be almost identical to earth or are there any subtle or non-subtle improvements that could be made in any of earth's properties (atmosphere, geometry, etc.) that would provide a more suitable world for nature to thrive.
science-based
science-based
edited 7 hours ago
EDL
3,8414 silver badges23 bronze badges
asked 9 hours ago
rendered_mercuriusrendered_mercurius
163 bronze badges
New contributor
rendered_mercurius is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
edited 7 hours ago
EDL
3,8414 silver badges23 bronze badges
asked 9 hours ago
rendered_mercuriusrendered_mercurius
163 bronze badges
New contributor
rendered_mercurius is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
edited 7 hours ago
EDL
3,8414 silver badges23 bronze badges
edited 7 hours ago
EDL
3,8414 silver badges23 bronze badges
edited 7 hours ago
EDL
3,8414 silver badges23 bronze badges
3,8414 silver badges23 bronze badges
asked 9 hours ago
rendered_mercuriusrendered_mercurius
163 bronze badges
New contributor
rendered_mercurius is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked 9 hours ago
rendered_mercuriusrendered_mercurius
163 bronze badges
asked 9 hours ago
rendered_mercuriusrendered_mercurius
163 bronze badges
163 bronze badges
New contributor
rendered_mercurius is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
rendered_mercurius is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$begingroup$
In this case you quickly received an answer that is very good but in general it is best to wait some time, perhaps a day, before accepting an answer as "The Answer." It is possible that there are other people who had not yet seen your question who could provide a more suitable answer, or perhaps a similar but more detailed answer.
$endgroup$
– krb
6 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
In this case you quickly received an answer that is very good but in general it is best to wait some time, perhaps a day, before accepting an answer as "The Answer." It is possible that there are other people who had not yet seen your question who could provide a more suitable answer, or perhaps a similar but more detailed answer.
$endgroup$
– krb
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
In this case you quickly received an answer that is very good but in general it is best to wait some time, perhaps a day, before accepting an answer as "The Answer." It is possible that there are other people who had not yet seen your question who could provide a more suitable answer, or perhaps a similar but more detailed answer.
$endgroup$
– krb
6 hours ago
$begingroup$
In this case you quickly received an answer that is very good but in general it is best to wait some time, perhaps a day, before accepting an answer as "The Answer." It is possible that there are other people who had not yet seen your question who could provide a more suitable answer, or perhaps a similar but more detailed answer.
$endgroup$
– krb
6 hours ago
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
In astrobiology, this concept is known as the 'Superhabitable Planet'.
Such a planet would be more massive than Earth, up to about 2.5 Earth masses. This additional mass provides shallower oceans, and lower topography. Additionally, it is likely that this feature will be paired with a thicker atmosphere, which distributes the warmth received from insolation more evenly from the equator to the poles.
The star that such a planet orbits would more suitably be a K-class orange dwarf. These stars emit much less UV radiation, and have longer lifespans. Additionally, the habitable zone around such a star doesn't move so much during the lifetime of the star, so over a long timescale, the planet's climate will be more stable.
answered 8 hours ago
Arkenstein XIIArkenstein XII
3,7939 silver badges37 bronze badges
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Most astrobiologists consider Earth to be on the inside edge of the habitable zone, so I'm not sure a thicker atmosphere at Earth's orbital radius would be a good thing. At Mars' orbit though it'd probably be good.
$endgroup$
– stix
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
@stix for a dimmer K-class star, this orbit should be good.
$endgroup$
– Alexander
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
@stix Being more centred in the habitable zone would probably be nice. i.e a touch further out.
$endgroup$
– Arkenstein XII
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
True. It's also important to keep in mind the habitable zone changes over time. Astrobiologists are still trying to figure out how the Earth could have been in a habitable zone 4 billion years ago when life arose, given how much colder the Sun would have been, and in another few hundred million years, the Sun's output will be too hot for Earth.
$endgroup$
– stix
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
@stix One of the major benefits of a K-class star is that it doesn't get much hotter as it evolves. Certainly not so much as our sun has.
$endgroup$
– Arkenstein XII
8 hours ago
|
show 3 more comments
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "579"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
rendered_mercurius is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworldbuilding.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f151545%2fconditions-of-a-more-ideal-version-of-earth%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
In astrobiology, this concept is known as the 'Superhabitable Planet'.
Such a planet would be more massive than Earth, up to about 2.5 Earth masses. This additional mass provides shallower oceans, and lower topography. Additionally, it is likely that this feature will be paired with a thicker atmosphere, which distributes the warmth received from insolation more evenly from the equator to the poles.
The star that such a planet orbits would more suitably be a K-class orange dwarf. These stars emit much less UV radiation, and have longer lifespans. Additionally, the habitable zone around such a star doesn't move so much during the lifetime of the star, so over a long timescale, the planet's climate will be more stable.
answered 8 hours ago
Arkenstein XIIArkenstein XII
3,7939 silver badges37 bronze badges
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Most astrobiologists consider Earth to be on the inside edge of the habitable zone, so I'm not sure a thicker atmosphere at Earth's orbital radius would be a good thing. At Mars' orbit though it'd probably be good.
$endgroup$
– stix
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
@stix for a dimmer K-class star, this orbit should be good.
$endgroup$
– Alexander
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
@stix Being more centred in the habitable zone would probably be nice. i.e a touch further out.
$endgroup$
– Arkenstein XII
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
True. It's also important to keep in mind the habitable zone changes over time. Astrobiologists are still trying to figure out how the Earth could have been in a habitable zone 4 billion years ago when life arose, given how much colder the Sun would have been, and in another few hundred million years, the Sun's output will be too hot for Earth.
$endgroup$
– stix
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
@stix One of the major benefits of a K-class star is that it doesn't get much hotter as it evolves. Certainly not so much as our sun has.
$endgroup$
– Arkenstein XII
8 hours ago
|
show 3 more comments
$begingroup$
In astrobiology, this concept is known as the 'Superhabitable Planet'.
Such a planet would be more massive than Earth, up to about 2.5 Earth masses. This additional mass provides shallower oceans, and lower topography. Additionally, it is likely that this feature will be paired with a thicker atmosphere, which distributes the warmth received from insolation more evenly from the equator to the poles.
The star that such a planet orbits would more suitably be a K-class orange dwarf. These stars emit much less UV radiation, and have longer lifespans. Additionally, the habitable zone around such a star doesn't move so much during the lifetime of the star, so over a long timescale, the planet's climate will be more stable.
answered 8 hours ago
Arkenstein XIIArkenstein XII
3,7939 silver badges37 bronze badges
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Most astrobiologists consider Earth to be on the inside edge of the habitable zone, so I'm not sure a thicker atmosphere at Earth's orbital radius would be a good thing. At Mars' orbit though it'd probably be good.
$endgroup$
– stix
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
@stix for a dimmer K-class star, this orbit should be good.
$endgroup$
– Alexander
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
@stix Being more centred in the habitable zone would probably be nice. i.e a touch further out.
$endgroup$
– Arkenstein XII
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
True. It's also important to keep in mind the habitable zone changes over time. Astrobiologists are still trying to figure out how the Earth could have been in a habitable zone 4 billion years ago when life arose, given how much colder the Sun would have been, and in another few hundred million years, the Sun's output will be too hot for Earth.
$endgroup$
– stix
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
@stix One of the major benefits of a K-class star is that it doesn't get much hotter as it evolves. Certainly not so much as our sun has.
$endgroup$
– Arkenstein XII
8 hours ago
|
show 3 more comments
$begingroup$
In astrobiology, this concept is known as the 'Superhabitable Planet'.
Such a planet would be more massive than Earth, up to about 2.5 Earth masses. This additional mass provides shallower oceans, and lower topography. Additionally, it is likely that this feature will be paired with a thicker atmosphere, which distributes the warmth received from insolation more evenly from the equator to the poles.
The star that such a planet orbits would more suitably be a K-class orange dwarf. These stars emit much less UV radiation, and have longer lifespans. Additionally, the habitable zone around such a star doesn't move so much during the lifetime of the star, so over a long timescale, the planet's climate will be more stable.
answered 8 hours ago
Arkenstein XIIArkenstein XII
3,7939 silver badges37 bronze badges
$endgroup$
In astrobiology, this concept is known as the 'Superhabitable Planet'.
Such a planet would be more massive than Earth, up to about 2.5 Earth masses. This additional mass provides shallower oceans, and lower topography. Additionally, it is likely that this feature will be paired with a thicker atmosphere, which distributes the warmth received from insolation more evenly from the equator to the poles.
The star that such a planet orbits would more suitably be a K-class orange dwarf. These stars emit much less UV radiation, and have longer lifespans. Additionally, the habitable zone around such a star doesn't move so much during the lifetime of the star, so over a long timescale, the planet's climate will be more stable.
answered 8 hours ago
Arkenstein XIIArkenstein XII
3,7939 silver badges37 bronze badges
answered 8 hours ago
Arkenstein XIIArkenstein XII
3,7939 silver badges37 bronze badges
answered 8 hours ago
Arkenstein XIIArkenstein XII
3,7939 silver badges37 bronze badges
answered 8 hours ago
Arkenstein XIIArkenstein XII
3,7939 silver badges37 bronze badges
3,7939 silver badges37 bronze badges
$begingroup$
Most astrobiologists consider Earth to be on the inside edge of the habitable zone, so I'm not sure a thicker atmosphere at Earth's orbital radius would be a good thing. At Mars' orbit though it'd probably be good.
$endgroup$
– stix
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
@stix for a dimmer K-class star, this orbit should be good.
$endgroup$
– Alexander
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
@stix Being more centred in the habitable zone would probably be nice. i.e a touch further out.
$endgroup$
– Arkenstein XII
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
True. It's also important to keep in mind the habitable zone changes over time. Astrobiologists are still trying to figure out how the Earth could have been in a habitable zone 4 billion years ago when life arose, given how much colder the Sun would have been, and in another few hundred million years, the Sun's output will be too hot for Earth.
$endgroup$
– stix
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
@stix One of the major benefits of a K-class star is that it doesn't get much hotter as it evolves. Certainly not so much as our sun has.
$endgroup$
– Arkenstein XII
8 hours ago
|
show 3 more comments
$begingroup$
Most astrobiologists consider Earth to be on the inside edge of the habitable zone, so I'm not sure a thicker atmosphere at Earth's orbital radius would be a good thing. At Mars' orbit though it'd probably be good.
$endgroup$
– stix
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
@stix for a dimmer K-class star, this orbit should be good.
$endgroup$
– Alexander
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
@stix Being more centred in the habitable zone would probably be nice. i.e a touch further out.
$endgroup$
– Arkenstein XII
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
True. It's also important to keep in mind the habitable zone changes over time. Astrobiologists are still trying to figure out how the Earth could have been in a habitable zone 4 billion years ago when life arose, given how much colder the Sun would have been, and in another few hundred million years, the Sun's output will be too hot for Earth.
$endgroup$
– stix
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
@stix One of the major benefits of a K-class star is that it doesn't get much hotter as it evolves. Certainly not so much as our sun has.
$endgroup$
– Arkenstein XII
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
Most astrobiologists consider Earth to be on the inside edge of the habitable zone, so I'm not sure a thicker atmosphere at Earth's orbital radius would be a good thing. At Mars' orbit though it'd probably be good.
$endgroup$
– stix
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
Most astrobiologists consider Earth to be on the inside edge of the habitable zone, so I'm not sure a thicker atmosphere at Earth's orbital radius would be a good thing. At Mars' orbit though it'd probably be good.
$endgroup$
– stix
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
@stix for a dimmer K-class star, this orbit should be good.
$endgroup$
– Alexander
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
@stix for a dimmer K-class star, this orbit should be good.
$endgroup$
– Alexander
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
@stix Being more centred in the habitable zone would probably be nice. i.e a touch further out.
$endgroup$
– Arkenstein XII
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
@stix Being more centred in the habitable zone would probably be nice. i.e a touch further out.
$endgroup$
– Arkenstein XII
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
True. It's also important to keep in mind the habitable zone changes over time. Astrobiologists are still trying to figure out how the Earth could have been in a habitable zone 4 billion years ago when life arose, given how much colder the Sun would have been, and in another few hundred million years, the Sun's output will be too hot for Earth.
$endgroup$
– stix
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
True. It's also important to keep in mind the habitable zone changes over time. Astrobiologists are still trying to figure out how the Earth could have been in a habitable zone 4 billion years ago when life arose, given how much colder the Sun would have been, and in another few hundred million years, the Sun's output will be too hot for Earth.
$endgroup$
– stix
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
@stix One of the major benefits of a K-class star is that it doesn't get much hotter as it evolves. Certainly not so much as our sun has.
$endgroup$
– Arkenstein XII
8 hours ago
$begingroup$
@stix One of the major benefits of a K-class star is that it doesn't get much hotter as it evolves. Certainly not so much as our sun has.
$endgroup$
– Arkenstein XII
8 hours ago
|
show 3 more comments
rendered_mercurius is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
rendered_mercurius is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
rendered_mercurius is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
rendered_mercurius is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Thanks for contributing an answer to Worldbuilding Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fworldbuilding.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f151545%2fconditions-of-a-more-ideal-version-of-earth%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
$begingroup$
In this case you quickly received an answer that is very good but in general it is best to wait some time, perhaps a day, before accepting an answer as "The Answer." It is possible that there are other people who had not yet seen your question who could provide a more suitable answer, or perhaps a similar but more detailed answer.
$endgroup$
– krb
6 hours ago