J3 Evyn MacDude (25 Dec 2018 19:34 UTC)
Re: [TML] J3 Phil Pugliese (25 Dec 2018 21:34 UTC)
RE: [TML] J3 Frank Filz (29 Dec 2018 06:29 UTC)
Re: [TML] J3 Evyn MacDude (31 Dec 2018 02:43 UTC)
RE: [TML] J3 Frank Filz (02 Jan 2019 17:55 UTC)
Re: [TML] J3 Ethan McKinney (02 Jan 2019 19:42 UTC)
RE: [TML] J3 Frank Filz (02 Jan 2019 21:14 UTC)
Re: [TML] J3 Kurt Feltenberger (03 Jan 2019 00:01 UTC)
Re: [TML] J3 Phil Pugliese (03 Jan 2019 00:31 UTC)
Re: [TML] J3 Evyn MacDude (04 Jan 2019 00:33 UTC)
Re: [TML] J3 Greg Nokes (04 Jan 2019 01:55 UTC)
Re: [TML] J3 Kurt Feltenberger (04 Jan 2019 02:11 UTC)
Re: [TML] J3 Cian Witherspoon (04 Jan 2019 03:08 UTC)
Re: [TML] J3 Tim (04 Jan 2019 04:40 UTC)
Re: [TML] J3 Phil Pugliese (04 Jan 2019 08:52 UTC)
Re: [TML] J3 Tim (04 Jan 2019 04:33 UTC)
Re: [TML] J3 Phil Pugliese (04 Jan 2019 08:50 UTC)
Re: [TML] J3 Evyn MacDude (04 Jan 2019 09:33 UTC)
Re: [TML] J3 Phil Pugliese (04 Jan 2019 22:32 UTC)
RE: [TML] J3 Frank Filz (04 Jan 2019 15:54 UTC)
Re: [TML] J3 Tim (05 Jan 2019 06:36 UTC)
Re: [TML] J3 Phil Pugliese (05 Jan 2019 18:21 UTC)
Economics [was] J3 Evyn MacDude (05 Jan 2019 23:55 UTC)
Re: [TML] Economics [was] J3 Catherine Berry (08 Jan 2019 20:39 UTC)
Re: [TML] Economics [was] J3 Phil Pugliese (08 Jan 2019 20:58 UTC)
Re: [TML] Economics [was] J3 Catherine Berry (08 Jan 2019 21:09 UTC)
Re: [TML] Economics [was] J3 evyn.macdude (08 Jan 2019 23:39 UTC)
Re: [TML] Economics [was] J3 Phil Pugliese (09 Jan 2019 00:51 UTC)
Re: [TML] Economics [was] J3 Greg Nokes (09 Jan 2019 00:53 UTC)
Re: [TML] Economics [was] J3 Rupert Boleyn (09 Jan 2019 00:55 UTC)
Re: [TML] Economics [was] J3 Richard Aiken (09 Jan 2019 04:49 UTC)
Re: [TML] Economics [was] J3 evyn.macdude (09 Jan 2019 04:41 UTC)
Re: [TML] Economics [was] J3 Bruce Johnson (09 Jan 2019 18:51 UTC)
Re: [TML] J3 Bruce Johnson (06 Jan 2019 18:52 UTC)
Re: [TML] J3 Phil Pugliese (06 Jan 2019 20:27 UTC)
Re: [TML] J3 Tim (06 Jan 2019 23:56 UTC)
Re: [TML] J3 Tim (04 Jan 2019 03:53 UTC)
Re: [TML] J3 Evyn MacDude (04 Jan 2019 07:26 UTC)
Re: [TML] J3 Phil Pugliese (04 Jan 2019 08:36 UTC)
Re: [TML] J3 Rupert Boleyn (04 Jan 2019 03:00 UTC)
Re: [TML] J3 Phil Pugliese (07 Jan 2019 20:32 UTC)
Re: [TML] J3 Rupert Boleyn (07 Jan 2019 21:36 UTC)
Re: [TML] J3 Catherine Berry (08 Jan 2019 01:04 UTC)
Re: [TML] J3 Richard Aiken (08 Jan 2019 02:14 UTC)
Re: [TML] J3 Phil Pugliese (08 Jan 2019 20:46 UTC)
Re: [TML] J3 Catherine Berry (08 Jan 2019 21:04 UTC)
Re: [TML] J3 Phil Pugliese (09 Jan 2019 00:46 UTC)
Re: [TML] J3 Catherine Berry (09 Jan 2019 00:57 UTC)
Re: [TML] J3 Rupert Boleyn (09 Jan 2019 01:06 UTC)
Re: [TML] J3 Vareck Bostrom (09 Jan 2019 03:05 UTC)
Re: [TML] J3 Catherine Berry (09 Jan 2019 17:51 UTC)
Re: [TML] J3 Sudnadja (09 Jan 2019 18:14 UTC)
Re: [TML] J3 Catherine Berry (09 Jan 2019 18:37 UTC)
Re: [TML] J3 Bruce Johnson (09 Jan 2019 19:01 UTC)
Re: [TML] J3 Catherine Berry (09 Jan 2019 19:20 UTC)
Re: [TML] J3 Ethan McKinney (02 Jan 2019 19:46 UTC)
Re: [TML] J3 Richard Aiken (09 Jan 2019 04:42 UTC)
Re: [TML] J3 Catherine Berry (09 Jan 2019 17:53 UTC)
Re: [TML] J3 shadow@xxxxxx (18 Jan 2019 07:20 UTC)
Re: [TML] J3 Sudnadja (09 Jan 2019 18:09 UTC)
Re: [TML] J3 Catherine Berry (09 Jan 2019 18:34 UTC)
Off topic request for info; Re: [TML] J3 Phil Pugliese (10 Jan 2019 01:20 UTC)
Re: [TML] J3 shadow@xxxxxx (18 Jan 2019 07:20 UTC)
Re: [TML] J3 Tim (18 Jan 2019 08:00 UTC)
Re: [TML] J3 Phil Pugliese (18 Jan 2019 09:29 UTC)
Re: [TML] J3 Tim (18 Jan 2019 13:03 UTC)

Re: [TML] J3 Tim 18 Jan 2019 13:03 UTC

On Fri, Jan 18, 2019 at 09:29:17AM +0000, Phil Pugliese (via tml list) wrote:
> Wouldn't surface gravity be a problem on a 'Super-Earth'?
> Could/would it be possible to have 1G at the surface of a planet 5X
> the mass of Terra?

Yes, if the density was lower.  For example, Gliese 1214b appears to
have a mass of more than 5x that of Earth, but the visual radius is
also more than 2.5x.  That would give it a surface gravity probably
less than Earth's.  However, we don't know which of many possibilities
for its composition might be true.

It might be a water world, with surface gravity similar to its
estimated value at top of atmosphere.  Though in this particular case,
a better name would be steamworld due to its distance from the star.
Oceans can exist at 150 C, given a somewhat denser atmosphere.
Other waterworlds might be more hospitable.

However, it might instead be a smaller rocky world with a thick
atmosphere of hydrogen. In that case the gravity at the surface
underneath all the gas might be somewhat greater than at the top of
atmosphere, and the pressure greater than the Challenger Deep.

A third possibility would be a mini gas giant with no well-defined
transition between gas and liquid, so that "surface" gravity doesn't
apply and there wouldn't be a surface to build a habitat on anyway.

- Tim