impossible planets

[Gotham Central]

One of the great things about scifi is that it usually presents the opportunity to showcase truly exotic and unique environments. Unfortunately, many are fairly mundane (being exactly like Earth) and are frequently impossible...I.e they defy scientific logic.

For instance, In the Chronicles of Riddick, the main characters visit the planet Crematoria. This is a planet that it literally scorched dailt by its sun.Yet it has a breatheable atmosphere. The notion was so silly that it took me out of the story.

Trek has lots of impossible planets. However the one that always seemed the most outrageous was The Founder homeworld featured in DS9's "The Search." Kira calls it a "rogue class M planet." How exactly does a planet without a star support a habitable environment?

Any others?

 

[Christopher]

How exactly does a planet without a star support a habitable environment?

That's actually not so implausible. Lots of planets are internally heated by molten cores and the decay of radioactive elements in the mantle. A planet the size of Earth or bigger can easily retain internal heat for billions of years, long enough for life to evolve. True, a rogue planet is more likely to be frozen over on the surface and have life in subglacial oceans, like what might possibly exist on Europa or Enceladus. But with a hot enough core and a dense enough atmosphere, a habitable surface might not be out of the question. (And a rogue planet might have an easier time holding onto a dense atmosphere -- and particularly a hydrosphere -- without sunlight to photodissociate its atmospheric gases or a solar wind to erode its upper atmosphere.)

Of course, the Founders' homeworld was probably terraformed to suit their needs and could've had artificial heat sources.

 

[Admiral_Young]

Couscant is pretty exotic as is Trantor from which it's influenced from. Not so much impossible in the far future as it is for us now to imagine a city planet. Dune isn't really impossible except for the fact that it possesses an impossible substance, Discworld.

 

[Trekker4747]

Pretty much every planet in the Star Wars Universe. All of them seem to be "one climate planets." There's the "ice planet" the "desert planet" the "volcano planet" the "city planet."

And while it could be argued that the volcano planet was a proto planet, planets like Hoth and Tatooine make little sense in the grand scale of things as they're both "single enviroment" planets. Consider how Earth has a wide range of enviroments across its surface, having a planet that's just a desert planet-wide is a little silly.

But, yeah, Crematoria in Riddick made my brain twitch as well.

 

[JonathonWally]

Pretty much every planet in the Star Wars Universe. All of them seem to be "one climate planets." There's the "ice planet" the "desert planet" the "volcano planet" the "city planet."

And while it could be argued that the volcano planet was a proto planet, planets like Hoth and Tatooine make little sense in the grand scale of things as they're both "single enviroment" planets. Consider how Earth has a wide range of enviroments across its surface, having a planet that's just a desert planet-wide is a little silly.

But, yeah, Crematoria in Riddick made my brain twitch as well.

Why is an ice planet and city planet so "impossible"?

Over the years they designated Coruscant as the capital of their galactic, GALACTIC Republic. They just kept building it up. Not so impossible.

As to Hoth, we have plenty of Ice planets and planetoids in our own solar system, so not really too far fetched. Next, you're going to say "yes, but people don't live on our ice planets" And I'm going to say, "No, they don't, but people didn't really live on Hoth either, that was the point. The Rebellion went to Hoth to due it being a craptacular shithole that no one would think to look for them on.

As for "desert planet"..um, Mars anyone?

 

[Temis the Vorta]

The Founders' homeworld only needed to support a very un-humanoid form of life that presumably didn't require an ecosystem where photosynthesis would ever occur, and therefore could dispense with a star's energy as input. That one didn't bother me, particularly not compared with Star Trek's usual standards of plausible science (Earthlike planets evolving mammalian humanoids up the wazoo).

 

[Kegg]

^
However, either Founder homeworld (there were in fact two, if anyone remembers - they relocated during the third season, leaving the old planet as bait for the Romulans and Cardassians) did have the ability to sustain human life; we saw our heroes on the surface of these worlds without breathing apparatus. So they needed a conventional atmosphere.


As far as desert worlds go, even Mars has ice caps, and IIRC, so too does Arrakis. I'm not sure if Tattooine does, but if it did it wouldn't be solely all desert anymore.

Anyway, I've heard people complain about how the Hallelujah Mountains of Pandora in Avatar don't make any sense, which is fair enough, cliffs floating in midair with waterfalls that just drop off nowhere seem a trifle like conspicous consumption to me as well - I know unobtainium is responsible for the floating effect but I'm not sure how good a pseudoscience answer that is (what is this, cavorite?).

Doesn't matter to me though, they're cool as hell.

 

[Arpy]

I didn't mind the Hallelujah Mountains as much as the waterfalls on them...where the hell is that water coming from? Electromagnetic-tech-the-tech explains the floating, but the waterfalls were too big for their source.

 

[Hyperspace05]

Nightly rainfalls could explain it. At least one nightly log entry has the rain pounding in the background. (this is typical of rain forest habitats)

 

[Manticore]

I didn't mind the Hallelujah Mountains as much as the waterfalls on them...where the hell is that water coming from? Electromagnetic-tech-the-tech explains the floating, but the waterfalls were too big for their source.

Constant rainfall? It was pretty cloudy when we saw the waterfalls. I don't remember if we saw them in clear skies as well, and the waterfalls might dry up if the rain does. *shrug*

 

[Christopher]

Pretty much every planet in the Star Wars Universe. All of them seem to be "one climate planets." There's the "ice planet" the "desert planet" the "volcano planet" the "city planet."

And while it could be argued that the volcano planet was a proto planet, planets like Hoth and Tatooine make little sense in the grand scale of things as they're both "single enviroment" planets. Consider how Earth has a wide range of enviroments across its surface, having a planet that's just a desert planet-wide is a little silly.

There is a planet that's just a desert planetwide. It's called Mars. A desert is an environment with little or no water, and it's certainly possible for an entire planet to be nearly devoid of water. (Okay, Mars has plenty of water, but it's frozen.) In fact, when Earth formed, all its surface water evaporated into space from the heat of the molten planet. Once it cooled, its volatiles were replenished mainly from cometary infall. In a system with less cometary ice available -- say, a binary system where the combined heat and stellar wind of the two stars had stripped most of the volatiles from the protoplanetary disk -- a planet could easily end up quite arid planetwide. And wouldn't you know it -- Tattooine has two suns!

As for a planet that's completely covered in ice, Earth may have been like that once too, hundreds of millions of years ago. There are certainly plenty of moons in the Solar System, around the four giant planets, that are made largely or primarily of ice. Galaxywide, water is far more commonly found in the form of ice than as a liquid or gas.

And an entire planet dominated by vulcanism isn't implausible either. Again, Earth went through such a stage, and Jupiter's moon Io is currently in one.

The case that's really implausible, though, is a city planet. An entire world that's nothing but city? How could it function? Where's the oxygen and food coming from? Even if those were artificially supplied, a planetwide city would roast itself. Cities are massive sources of heat, so massive that they alter the climate around them. An entire planet covered entirely in city, with the population density of a city, would generate enormous amounts of heat with nowhere for it to go.

Although there is one way it could work, as suggested by Larry Niven and Edward M. Lerner in their Known Space novels Fleet of Worlds and Juggler of Worlds. A planet like that, totally covered in populated urban environment, could function if it were either on the far outskirts of a star system or (going back to the start of the thread) traveling in deep space as a rogue. Its technology and population would generate so much heat that they wouldn't need a sun, and in fact would need a total absence of stellar heating. Given that, perhaps the one truly implausible thing about Coruscant and Trantor is that they have suns.

 

[Colonel Midnight]

The 'wandering' moon/planetoid from ENT's 'Rogue World' (or Rogue Planet? Can't remember, sorry!) comes to mind...

A hunk of rock floating through the void without a star, etc., yet has trees and carnivores roaming around through its forests.

Cheers,
-CM-

 

[sojourner]

In Star Wars we saw very little of the surfaces of the worlds in question. If you landed in the middle of the Amazon on earth would you conclude the entire planet is a jungle planet?

 

[Christopher]

The 'wandering' moon/planetoid from ENT's 'Rogue World' (or Rogue Planet? Can't remember, sorry!) comes to mind...

A hunk of rock floating through the void without a star, etc., yet has trees and carnivores roaming around through its forests.

See post #2. IIRC, that episode was inspired by an actual science article that writer Chris Black had read, which talked about the very real possibility of rogue planets made habitable by geothermal heating. Maybe the episode exaggerated the biosphere somewhat for drama, but it was grounded in plausible science, more so than a lot of Braga-era Trek.

In Star Wars we saw very little of the surfaces of the worlds in question. If you landed in the middle of the Amazon on earth would you conclude the entire planet is a jungle planet?

That's a good point, but generally we do see the planets in question from orbit and they don't seem to have much diversity of environments.

Tattooine
Hoth
Coruscant
Mustafar
Kamino

 

[The Laughing Vulcan]

The planet described in the Star Trek novel, The Covenant of the Crown, where the sun rose in the North? I did my head in trying to figure that out, never did...

EDIT: no that wasn't it... It was that the magnetic poles were East and West instead of North and South...

 

[sojourner]

That's a good point, but generally we do see the planets in question from orbit and they don't seem to have much diversity of environments.

Tattooine
Hoth
Coruscant
Mustafar
Kamino

I will continue the argument just for the sake of arguing, but yeah, as intended by Lucas, they are single environments.

Those images only show half of the planet.


I am waiting for more single environments.

The all bonsai tree planet.
The all putting green planet.
The all mud planet.
The all paved planet.
The all fjord planet. (might look cool from space)
The all Chevy planet.

 

[Trekker4747]

Pretty much every planet in the Star Wars Universe. All of them seem to be "one climate planets." There's the "ice planet" the "desert planet" the "volcano planet" the "city planet."

And while it could be argued that the volcano planet was a proto planet, planets like Hoth and Tatooine make little sense in the grand scale of things as they're both "single enviroment" planets. Consider how Earth has a wide range of enviroments across its surface, having a planet that's just a desert planet-wide is a little silly.

There is a planet that's just a desert planetwide. It's called Mars. A desert is an environment with little or no water, and it's certainly possible for an entire planet to be nearly devoid of water. (Okay, Mars has plenty of water, but it's frozen.) In fact, when Earth formed, all its surface water evaporated into space from the heat of the molten planet. Once it cooled, its volatiles were replenished mainly from cometary infall. In a system with less cometary ice available -- say, a binary system where the combined heat and stellar wind of the two stars had stripped most of the volatiles from the protoplanetary disk -- a planet could easily end up quite arid planetwide. And wouldn't you know it -- Tattooine has two suns!

As for a planet that's completely covered in ice, Earth may have been like that once too, hundreds of millions of years ago. There are certainly plenty of moons in the Solar System, around the four giant planets, that are made largely or primarily of ice. Galaxywide, water is far more commonly found in the form of ice than as a liquid or gas.

And an entire planet dominated by vulcanism isn't implausible either. Again, Earth went through such a stage, and Jupiter's moon Io is currently in one.

The case that's really implausible, though, is a city planet. An entire world that's nothing but city? How could it function? Where's the oxygen and food coming from? Even if those were artificially supplied, a planetwide city would roast itself. Cities are massive sources of heat, so massive that they alter the climate around them. An entire planet covered entirely in city, with the population density of a city, would generate enormous amounts of heat with nowhere for it to go.

Although there is one way it could work, as suggested by Larry Niven and Edward M. Lerner in their Known Space novels Fleet of Worlds and Juggler of Worlds. A planet like that, totally covered in populated urban environment, could function if it were either on the far outskirts of a star system or (going back to the start of the thread) traveling in deep space as a rogue. Its technology and population would generate so much heat that they wouldn't need a sun, and in fact would need a total absence of stellar heating. Given that, perhaps the one truly implausible thing about Coruscant and Trantor is that they have suns.

Yeah, but look at Mars and the ice moons of Jupiter and Saturn. They're not habitable.

Hoth and Tatooine are -in Trek terms- "Class M", they're habitable with breathable atmospheres and presumably weather patterns. Their enviroments are stable and compelx enough to have allowed complex life to develop.

If Hoth is all Ice and Tatooine is all desert, then where are their respective atmospheres coming from, since neither seemed to have any notable plantlife to generate oxygen. Tattoine was so arid that an entire industry had developed around "farming" what little atmospheric moisture there is.

So, sure, while single-enviroment planets are possible, that they support diverse life suggests they should have far more complex enviroments. The only planet in Star Wars that springs to mind as being shown to be diverse in terms of its enviroment and landscape would be Naboo.

Hell, even Kashyykk (?) is "all forest" and Dagobah is all jungle.

To me, that's not interesting and doesn't strike me as greatly "realistic" for life-supporting planets supporting diverse and complex life. Making a planet "all forest", "all desert", "all jungle", etc. just strikes me as lazy and uncreative.

 

[Christopher]

I am waiting for more single environments.
...
The all putting green planet.

I think we saw that in the fourth Futurama movie.

The all mud planet.

And that was in the cartoon in The Star Wars Holiday Special.

The all fjord planet. (might look cool from space)

Ahh, Slartibartfast's solo job.

Yeah, but look at Mars and the ice moons of Jupiter and Saturn. They're not habitable.

Sure, but they demonstrate that there's a wide range of forms that planets can take. There's certainly the possibility of middle ground between Earth and an uninhabitable world. If there's one thing we've learned in the past decade or two of exoplanet research, it's that we can't assume the planets we know of are in any way typical or inclusive of what might be out there.

Hoth and Tatooine are -in Trek terms- "Class M", they're habitable with breathable atmospheres and presumably weather patterns. Their enviroments are stable and compelx enough to have allowed complex life to develop.

If Hoth is all Ice and Tatooine is all desert, then where are their respective atmospheres coming from, since neither seemed to have any notable plantlife to generate oxygen. Tattoine was so arid that an entire industry had developed around "farming" what little atmospheric moisture there is.

Planets don't stay unchanged forever. Tatooine could've had more water in geologically and evolutionarily recent times but now have lost most of it to space. Perhaps its oxygen levels are falling but not yet to a critical level. Hoth could similarly be a planet that was more habitable in the past and is now dying. A transition that's brief on a geological scale could still allow human/sentient habitation for thousands or millions of years.

Besides, don't underestimate the ability of life forms to adapt to a desert environment. There are lots of species that get by with very limited amounts of water. And water in a desert can be hidden in unusual places, such as underground reservoirs or the interiors of desert plants such as cactus.

Of course, since Tatooine is a planet in a vast interstellar civilization, how do we know the life forms we see there are even indigenous? (Maybe the Expanded Universe makes such claims, but I'm innocent of that.) By the same token, how do we know the oxygen isn't manufactured in big factories? We know Coruscant would need to have a totally artificial life-support system, so similar things could exist on other worlds.

Now, I'm not necessarily saying the portrayal of these planets wasn't implausible. I'm just saying it's not impossible for planets similar to these to exist, that our conventional assumptions of what's possible in a planet are far too narrow given what science is now revealing.

To me, that's not interesting and doesn't strike me as greatly "realistic" for life-supporting planets supporting diverse and complex life. Making a planet "all forest", "all desert", "all jungle", etc. just strikes me as lazy and uncreative.

Oh, I agree, it's a lazy and overused cliche. I'm just saying it doesn't necessarily fit the criterion of "impossible planets." An impossible planet would be something like, say, Mars in Total Recall. A rocky crust over an icy core? That makes as much sense as a boulder floating in a lake. Rock is denser than ice, so it would inevitably sink to the core. So the depiction of Mars in Total Recall is a literal, physical impossibility, as opposed to merely a rare or unlikely scenario.

 

[JonathonWally]

Planets don't stay unchanged forever. Tatooine could've had more water in geologically and evolutionarily recent times but now have lost most of it to space. Perhaps its oxygen levels are falling but not yet to a critical level. Hoth could similarly be a planet that was more habitable in the past and is now dying. A transition that's brief on a geological scale could still allow human/sentient habitation for thousands or millions of years.

Besides, don't underestimate the ability of life forms to adapt to a desert environment. There are lots of species that get by with very limited amounts of water. And water in a desert can be hidden in unusual places, such as underground reservoirs or the interiors of desert plants such as cactus.

Of course, since Tatooine is a planet in a vast interstellar civilization, how do we know the life forms we see there are even indigenous? (Maybe the Expanded Universe makes such claims, but I'm innocent of that.) By the same token, how do we know the oxygen isn't manufactured in big factories? We know Coruscant would need to have a totally artificial life-support system, so similar things could exist on other worlds.

Now, I'm not necessarily saying the portrayal of these planets wasn't implausible. I'm just saying it's not impossible for planets similar to these to exist, that our conventional assumptions of what's possible in a planet are far too narrow given what science is now revealing.

The story goes is that Tatooine is where human life came from in the Star Wars universe, not Corellia or Coruscant like was thought.

Wait, I can do better, here's a paste job from Wookiepedia

Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic puts parallels between Earth and Tatooine, describing Tatooine as the ancestral home world of Humanity instead of the commonly accepted original home world being Corellia or Coruscant, and describes the climate dying because of unrestrained development and warfare with the Rakata. Lastly, Tatooine is on the galaxy's edge, similar to how Earth is on the edge of the Milky Way galaxy, as shown by the shot of the constellation Orion in the night sky in The Phantom Menace.

Kotor also gives some origin on Kashyyyk, stating that it was terraformed to be that way since it doesn't have an axial tilt and is in a perfect circular orbit giving it only one season. The game also says how it's ecosystem does vary a bit including some desert and plains.

But back to Tatooine. The games says how the planet is in it's current condition because it was ruined by civilization, that it's current state isn't natural.

So take from all that what you will. The explanation works for me, but I'm not a huge continuity buff. As far as I know, Kotor doesn't wreck the rest of Star Wars' history.

 

[Christopher]

Wait, I can do better, here's a paste job from Wookiepedia

Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic puts parallels between Earth and Tatooine, describing Tatooine as the ancestral home world of Humanity instead of the commonly accepted original home world being Corellia or Coruscant, and describes the climate dying because of unrestrained development and warfare with the Rakata. Lastly, Tatooine is on the galaxy's edge, similar to how Earth is on the edge of the Milky Way galaxy, as shown by the shot of the constellation Orion in the night sky in The Phantom Menace.

What the hell? Earth isn't on the edge of the Milky Way, it's smack in the middle of the stellar disk, about equidistant from the central bulge and the rim, and pretty close to the midpoint of the disk's thickness. If we were way out on the edge, Sol System probably wouldn't have enough heavy elements for large planets to form. Instead, we're right in the galactic "habitable zone" (as it tends to be called, though I find that an overstatement and think "temperate zone" would be a better name), the region of the stellar disk that's believed to be most conducive to the formation of life -- close enough in for heavy elements and large planets, but not so close that those planets are constantly bombarded by comets and radiation as they would be in the denser, more turbulent inner regions of the galaxy.

And Orion is seen in TPM? Whaa? I thought it was a galaxy far, far away. Why would it have our local constellations?