How Would Science Have Explained A Universe Full Of Inhabitable Planets?

[Nimos]

If God would’ve decided to make more than one inhabitable planet don’t you think he would’ve made an infinite amount and close enough to each other where travel between them would’ve been possible?

I wonder how science would’ve explained such an existence had God made it that way. Science probably would have just theorized it in some way. Perhaps science wouldn’t be able to even theorize it. Perhaps it would be too much outside the laws of nature. Maybe that’s by God couldn’t have done it. I don’t know. Maybe somebody here with more scientific knowledge could shed a bit more light on this hypothetical theory. Could a universe full of inhabitable planets, that were close enough together to travel to and from, even exist at all?

Could God have made it to where trillions of inhabitable planets with suns orbited around Sagittarius A?

In theory yes since God can do whatever he wants as he is not constrained by physical laws and he could manipulate them to overcome these laws.

 

[Jimmy]

No, suns cannot reside close to other suns, over time their gravities atteact each other. Colliding suns make big boom

I just googled how far apart two suns must be in order not to collide. It said around 1,000,000 miles. So if each sun had one planet orbiting it, they could easily be traveled between in a spacecraft today.

 

[ChristineM]

I just googled how far apart two suns must be in order not to collide. It said around 1,000,000 miles. So if each sun had one planet orbiting it, they could easily be traveled between in a spacecraft today.

The earth is 93,000,000 from the sun

Methinks 1,000,000 is a bit close except in a very fast orbiting binary sun system. Gravitational waves would be so disruptive that it's very unlikely intelligence can develop on any planet within thousands of AU

 

[Alien826]

If God would’ve decided to make more than one inhabitable planet don’t you think he would’ve made an infinite amount and close enough to each other where travel between them would’ve been possible?

Suspending disbelief to assume a God, maybe each planet could be a separate "experiment" that has to be separated to avoid interaction.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

You think I was being sarcastic?

No, I think your attitude towards science is childishly dismissive and that the question you originally posed is leading and nonsensical.

 

[Jimmy]

Methinks 1,000,000 is a bit close except in a very fast orbiting binary sun system. Gravitational waves would be so disruptive that it's very unlikely intelligence can develop on any planet within thousands of AU

So if I have two single rogue planets that are 200 million miles apart from each other and each of them is orbiting a sun travel would only take about a year and a half to 3 yrs depending where the planets are in their orbits.

 

[Jimmy]

No, I think your attitude towards science is childishly dismissive and that the question you originally posed is leading and nonsensical.

You’re entitled to your opinions about me.

 

[Balthazzar]

Maybe because of the eco system hazards it would likely pose for any given planet. One foreign species can wreak havoc to a stable ecosystem. Pythons in the Everglades for example, and even feral hogs in places like Georgia. They were brought over by the English and domesticated, but many have gone wild (feral) since, causing millions of dollars in damage every year.

Rebalancing is necessitated after these introductions and can endanger and/or cause some indigenous species to become extinct. It's probably best to keep the distance between planets if there's life on other planets at all.

Yup

 

[Subduction Zone]

I was referring more to rogue planets where one inhabitable planet revolves around one sun. No solar system. Then close by another single inhabitable planet around another sun and so on. Would a scenario like this be likely do you think?

No. Other solar systems would be under the same physical laws as ours. The first planets to form were likely the gas giants. And those are the least likely to have life. A solar system is probably needed for life.

 

[ChristineM]

So if I have two single rogue planets that are 200 million miles apart from each other and each of them is orbiting a sun travel would only take about a year and a half to 3 yrs depending where the planets are in their orbits.

Rogue planets have no sun, hence the reason they sre rouge

Anyway

Gravity of one sun will interfere with the orbit of a planet of the second sun. Throwing the planet out of orbit. Which could mean it'll become roque, with no sun to keep it warm there would be no life.

There is not much point in going further, you've had an idea based on your belief of god magic, it's not going to work in real life.

 

[Jimmy]

No. Other solar systems would be under the same physical laws as ours. The first planets to form were likely the gas giants. And those are the least likely to have life. A solar system is probably needed for life.

What makes a one planet one sun system unlikely?

 

[Jimmy]

Rogue planets have no sun, hence the reason they sre rouge

Anyway

Gravity of one sun will interfere with the orbit of a planet of the second sun. Throwing the planet out of orbit. Which could mean it'll become roque, with no sun to keep it warm there would be no life.

There is not much point in going further, you've had an idea based on your belief of god magic, it's not going to work in real life.

My beliefs aside. I’m curious about science as well

 

[ChristineM]

My beliefs aside. I’m curious about science as well

Right but you put forward impossible scenarios based on your belief and expect science to bend to fit your ideas.

 

[Subduction Zone]

No, suns cannot reside close to other suns, over time their gravities atteact each other. Colliding suns make big boom

I had to look up how close stars are near the core of the galaxy. They are much much closer there. The average distance at cores of galaxies is a mere .013 light years. That is still a fair distance. To put it in perspective Pluto is .0007 light years from the Sun at its furthest. Voyager1 is getting near to being a light day away from us. Even that distance is a multigenerational trip with today's technology. I could see space travel being possible for at least probes on an interstellar basis in the core, but it still would be incredibly expensive for intelligent beings to make that trip unless there is a major change in attainable velocities.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

You’re entitled to your opinions about me.

I know nothing about you, and I both suspect and hope that you are more than the attitudes you might expose in some internet forum.

 

[Jimmy]

Right but you put forward impossible scenarios based on your belief and expect science to bend to fit your ideas.

That’s not what I’m doing. Like I said, put my beliefs aside. This is a genuine question as to why the universe isn’t set up to support habitable planets that are relatively close enough to travel between.

 

[ChristineM]

I had to look up how close stars are near the core of the galaxy. They are much much closer there. The average distance at cores of galaxies is a mere .013 light years. That is still a fair distance. To put it in perspective Pluto is .0007 light years from the Sun at its furthest. Voyager1 is getting near to being a light day away from us. Even that distance is a multigenerational trip with today's technology. I could see space travel being possible for at least probes on an interstellar basis in the core, but it still would be incredibly expensive for intelligent beings to make that trip unless there is a major change in attainable velocities.

Like solar systems, it seems galaxies also have a habitable zone. That close to galactic centre is outside that zone

 

[Twilight Hue]

If God would’ve decided to make more than one inhabitable planet don’t you think he would’ve made an infinite amount and close enough to each other where travel between them would’ve been possible?

I wonder how science would’ve explained such an existence had God made it that way. Science probably would have just theorized it in some way. Perhaps science wouldn’t be able to even theorize it. Perhaps it would be too much outside the laws of nature. Maybe that’s by God couldn’t have done it. I don’t know. Maybe somebody here with more scientific knowledge could shed a bit more light on this hypothetical theory. Could a universe full of inhabitable planets, that were close enough together to travel to and from, even exist at all?

Could God have made it to where trillions of inhabitable planets with suns orbited around Sagittarius A?

It's why I don't put religion into nature starting with conclusions and then looking for the pieces to fit things together it just doesn't work.

I would just look at science and nature with out God and proceed from that point where the truth is clear and obvious around you and the questions that come from those truths you would do through investigation experimentation and realization. If and when those experiments succeed, opening new questions and doing it all over again.

Essentially you start out with questions then look for answers rather than go with what you think are the answers first and trying to find the pieces to fit ones conclusions.

 

[Jimmy]

It's why I don't put religion into nature starting with conclusions and then looking for the pieces to fit things together it just doesn't work.

I would just look at science and nature with out God and proceed from that point where the truth is clear and obvious around you and the questions that come from those truths you would do through investigation experimentation and realization. If and when those experiments succeed, opening new questions and doing it all over again.

Essentially you start out with questions then look for answers rather than go with what you think are the answers first and trying to find the pieces to fit ones conclusions.

No, this is all wrong. Like I said, put my beliefs aside. This is a genuine question as to why existence isn’t set up to support habitable planets that are relatively close enough to travel between.

 

[Twilight Hue]

No, this is all wrong. Like I said, put my beliefs aside. This is a genuine question as to why existence isn’t set up to support habitable planets that are relatively close enough to travel between.

Well if you like science then you can see it all out there in the universe at varying stages of development on how planets formed why they are so far apart and things like that. Of course there's always going to be the unknown, so it's probably a good thing to do a little investigation on your own and listen to the experts.