Quote:
|
More stringently define this thing called 'Habitable Zone', and you get a smaller answer than the original announcements … curious !
|
Not really...it would be normal for the number of candidates for inclusion to fall once you start putting more restrictions on the conditions. The more stringent they become, the less candidates will fall within the accepted limits. But, then you have to ask yourselves, "how stringent do we really have to be". If you want to be arbitrary about it, you could make the conditions for life so stringent that you'd only be left with the Earth as the only habitable planet. It's the same old problem...we're basing all our predictions on the one example we have and a few not so informed "guesstimates" based on broad, educated deliberations.
The only way they're going to resolve this is through more observation and empirical study. Find and confirm the planets, study their atmospheres and look for the signatures of life. Once they're found, then they can move forward with somewhat more confidence. Other than that, they're taking stabs in the dark.
Even on Earth, the more restrictions we put on how and where life thrives, the more often that life totally surprises us and makes us look like fools. The same will probably be evident with other planets.