back to article Habitable HEAVY GRAVITY WORLD found just 42 light-years away

Astroboffins have found another super-Earth planet orbiting a star just 42 light years away from home, but this one could support life as we know it. Super-Earth HD40307g with its host star Super-Earth HD40307g alongside its host star. Credit: J. Pinfield, RoPACS, Uni of Hertfordshire Star HD40307 has been checked out …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. This post has been deleted by its author

  2. Winkypop Silver badge
    Trollface

    It doesn't matter not how far away it is

    The Germans will have already put their towels on all the best deck chairs.

    1. Nev

      Re: It doesn't matter not how far away it is

      I heard it was already full of drunk, sun-burnt, shaven headed Brit tourists....

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: It doesn't matter not how far away it is

      It rains highly concentrated acid rain there...........

      Or is that here?

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Somewhere

      To send the worlds politicians

  3. Evil Auditor Silver badge

    HD40307g, really?

    I thought it was called LV-426. Anyhow, let's go there!

    1. Daniel B.

      Re: HD40307g, really?

      Last call for the Weyland-Yutani flight to LV426 now boarding!

  4. lee harvey osmond

    EE 'Doc' Smith? Larry Niven?

    On El Reg, could we please confine our impressive grasp of fiction to official Government statistics?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: EE 'Doc' Smith? Larry Niven?

      Or perhaps you could open a book. And maybe even your mind.

      Both Niven and Smith produced excelent work.

      1. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge
        Thumb Up

        Re: EE 'Doc' Smith? Larry Niven?

        > Both Niven and Smith produced excelent work.

        And some of "Doc" Smith's books can be downloaded as ebooks from the Gutenberg project.

      2. Nigel 11
        FAIL

        Re: EE 'Doc' Smith? Larry Niven?

        The Valerian colonists were huge and powerful ...

        Showing an inability to understand basic physics (and Darwinian evolution). The larger a structure, the less able it is to resist gravity. A flea can survive hundreds (thousands? ) of self-inflicted gravities every time it jumps. A mouse can fall off a cliff and run away at the bottom, unharmed. A human being over seven foot tall is freakish, and at a clear evolutionary disadvantage. (Much more likely to break bones when he falls over, for starters).

        Inhabitants of high-G worlds will be small by Earth standards. Rugged and powerfully muscled for their size, certainly, but above all sufficiently small as to be able to resist gravity.

        Also unlikely to be bipedal, unless their nerves and reactions are much faster than ours. The consequences of falling over in high-G are greater, and the time available to avoid doing so is much less. Think small thick-set centaurs or wallabies.

        1. Subtilior

          Re: EE 'Doc' Smith? Larry Niven?

          Ja, but these are human colonists.

          1. Nigel 11
            Meh

            Re: EE 'Doc' Smith? Larry Niven?

            Same thing. OK, EE was before genetic engineering was on the horizon, so no new body plan. But if you were picking human colonists for a high-G world, you'd select the shortest and most heavily muscled humans you could find. I confidently predict that if the colony survived, the fifth-generation children would be shorter still, more heavily muscled, with denser bone structure, and bigger feet for stability. Think Hobbit weightlifters in this case.

            1. DaddyHoggy

              Re: EE 'Doc' Smith? Larry Niven?

              Doc Smith corrected some of his original High G human adaptations in the D'Alembert series of books. Short Squat densely boned heavily muscled human circus performers who are actually lightning quick super spies.

              Wonderful series.

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: EE 'Doc' Smith? Larry Niven?

          > Showing an inability to understand basic physics (and Darwinian evolution).

          Its nice to know that the elephant in the room doesn't exist because of Darwin.

          1. Nigel 11
            Meh

            Re: EE 'Doc' Smith? Larry Niven?

            An elephant is about the largest land animal (mammoths and dinosaurs were somewhat bigger). But that's on Earth, at 1G.

            Consider stumbling and falling. Impact kinetic energy after a fall of any stated distance at 2G is the same as that for a fall of twice the distance at 1G. For a human, a pratfall at 2G would be like falling over the edge of a drop of his own height at 1G. A twelve-foot fall won't always kill you, but it will sooner or later. Big terrestrial animals (horses or larger) often die if they fall while running, but 4-leg stability means such falls are rare enough for the species to survive. Surviving a broken leg is also difficult to impossible for a large animal, and at 2G the load on the legs is doubled for any particular body weight.

            Now consider 5G rather than 2G. 5G means the impact from falling over is the same as falling five times your own height on Earth. And consider that with a multiplied G force, you'd have to react many times faster to correct a postural instability before it becomes uncorrectable and results in a fall.

            The elephant in the room on a 2G planet will be at most the size of a small pony. Which is good, not least because the maximum possible unsupported roof span will be a lot smaller than on Earth.

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              Re: EE 'Doc' Smith? Larry Niven?

              > Consider stumbling and falling. Impact kinetic energy after a fall of any stated blah blah blah

              Nigel the Fish: There is no point in leaving the ocean. Consider that you will have to support your entire body weight. There will be no ocean protecting you and providing you with buoyancy. If you fall you will hit the ground causing serious injury. All you will ever be able to do is slide around because if you try and stand you will fall and thus be more likely to die and Darwin the Fish says this means standing will be an evolutionary dead end.

              AC the fish ignored Nigel and left the ocean. His descendants ended up as giraffes.

              Gravity on the planet would only be one contributing factor to evolution. Since the people there will be intelligent (how else will they have got there) factors which may kill off or force a non-intelligent species down one path or another will not have as much (if any) impact on an intelligent species. A broken arm or leg in a human does not result in death. It usually does for an animal.

        3. Gaius
          Boffin

          Re: EE 'Doc' Smith? Larry Niven?

          Right. Your mass goes up as a cube but the cross section of your bones goes up as a square, as you get bigger.

    2. Peter Gathercole Silver badge
      Alien

      Re: EE 'Doc' Smith? Larry Niven?

      Having contributed in the comments sections about scientifiction, I disagree. The younger members of the readership should be reminded about the Golden Age of Science fiction, up to and including the 1970s and 80s popular writers when it was at its most popular (IMHO).

      1. DaiKiwi
        Alien

        Re: EE 'Doc' Smith? Larry Niven?

        "The Golden Age of science fiction is twelve."

        1. Destroy All Monsters Silver badge
          Paris Hilton

          Re: EE 'Doc' Smith? Larry Niven?

          You understand SciFi at twelve? I don't think so.

    3. Zane
      WTF?

      Re: EE 'Doc' Smith? Larry Niven?

      Never EE Doc Smith nor Larry Niven might be thought of as "literature". But I'd say you're a moron if you haven't heard their names - and as tech person you should have read at least one of their books.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Prior art

        Wasn't the Frumious Bandersnatch a Victorian era creation of Dodgson's?

        1. TheOtherHobbes

          Re: Prior art

          The name was.

          He was somewhat vague about its DNA profile and ecological niche though.

        2. Frumious Bandersnatch

          Re: Prior art

          Wasn't the Frumious Bandersnatch a Victorian era creation of Dodgson's?

          Indeed it was.

          I think this is what's known as an homage.

        3. Allan George Dyer
          Go

          Re: Prior art

          The name was given by the human colonists, who knew something of their literary history.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: EE 'Doc' Smith? Larry Niven?

        I remember first reading the Skylark series back in the 1960s when recovering from being run over. Very enjoyable, at least to a 7 year old. It is was what started me reading Science Fiction and I quickly progressed to the Lensman series, Asimov, Niven, Heinlein, Silverburg, Bradbury and many many others. I even bought the Lensman series again when I was in my twenties just to see if they were as I remember them. They were even better!! I still have the books tucked away in the loft somewhere.

  5. Crisp

    So....

    Any chance of putting together an interstellar probe to take a look at this a bit closer up?

    1. cowslayer
      Unhappy

      Re: So....

      Considering the voyager probes are only something like 0.02 light years away, i fear we will never know in our lifetimes.

      1. Nigel 11

        Re: So....

        Unless we ever manage to tune in to their TV broadcasts.

        1. Code Monkey
          Thumb Up

          Re: So....

          The Great Alien Bake-off. Now you're talking!

        2. Pedigree-Pete
          Thumb Up

          Re: So....

          But if we could see their TV broadcasts, they'd be 42 years out of date. Would you like to be judged on 1970s Corri St?

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: So....

            "But if we could see their TV broadcasts, they'd be 42 years out of date"

            Stop being so negative, they could be thousands of years more advanced than us so we might be receiving a broadcast from our equivalent year of 3979, just before they annihilate us with their advanced weaponry for breaching their copyright law.

            1. LaeMing
              Go

              Re: So....

              and invalidate all our patents with their prior art.

    2. Christoph

      Re: So....

      Best bet at the moment for getting results within a lifetime is probably Starwisp.

    3. MacroRodent
      Boffin

      Re: So....

      > Any chance of putting together an interstellar probe to take a look at this a bit closer up?

      A more realistic idea is to start to implementing the plans for a really huge telescope in space. That is the only change to peek at it and other exoplanets during our lifetime without breaking any laws of physics.

    4. Zmodem

      Re: So....

      earth need a nuclear powered orbital railgun, to blast probes to other stars and comets that will destroy earth, with a aircraft type of slingshot for big probes and cargo

  6. Ian K
    Headmaster

    About that picture caption: "Super-Earth HD40307g alongside its host star"

    It's a very nice picture, with oceans and continents and fluffy clouds and everything. Which in the circumstances makes me suspect there really should be an "artist's impression" in that caption somewhere.

    1. Destroy All Monsters Silver badge

      Re: About that picture caption: "Super-Earth HD40307g alongside its host star"

      Nah. When the planet's other side comes into view, you will see the addy for the local McDonalds. It's pretty realistic.

  7. Flocke Kroes Silver badge

    Several g is about 2g if HD40307g has the same density as Earth

    Seven times the mass means seven times the gravity only if the plannet is the same radius as Earth. That would be impossible because even osmium - the densest element - is only about four times the density of the Earth. If we pretend the density is the same as Earth then the radius is ³√7 times that of Earth. Gravity decreases with the square of the radius. 7 / (³√7²) = ³√7 ≈ 2.

    Chronic exposure (23 generations) to high gravity (2.5g) has been tested on chickens. See: "Great Mambo Chicken & the Transhuman Experience" by Ed Regis.

    1. Chris Rowland

      Re: Several g is about 2g if HD40307g has the same density as Earth

      Given those assumptions the velocity for low orbit will be about 14.5 km/sec and escape velocity about 20.5 km/sec.

      For Earth these are 7.8 and 11.kps respectively,

      That's going to make getting into space from the surface a bit difficult.

      1. TheOtherHobbes

        Re: Several g is about 2g if HD40307g has the same density as Earth

        So you can check out any time you like, but you can never leave.

        Then again it might make any hypothetical inhabitants more inventive.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Several g is about 2g if HD40307g has the same density as Earth

      @Flocke Kroes - Epic Fail, I'm afraid.

      Newton's law of universal gravitation says that the gravitational force between two massive bodies is = G*m1*m2/(r*r) where G is the Gravitational Constant, m1 and m2 are the masses of the two bodies and r is the distance between their centres of mass. The r does not refer to the radius of one the bodies (what if it was not spherical?)

      Density does not appear anywhere in Newton's equation.

      1. squigbobble
        Holmes

        Re: Several g is about 2g if HD40307g has the same density as Earth

        Density does not affect the the total gravitational force exerted by the body but it does affect how large the body is which, in turn, affects how close you are to the centre of gravity of the body when you're stood on it. Less dense planet = larger radius = planet's surface further from planet's centre of gravity = lower surface gravity. More dense planet = smaller radius = planet's surface closer to planet's centre of gravity = higher surface gravity.

      2. Michael Wojcik Silver badge

        Re: Several g is about 2g if HD40307g has the same density as Earth

        AC at 8:10: The r does not refer to the radius of one the bodies...

        First: If you're standing on the surface of a planet, then the distance between your center of mass, and that of the planet, is very close to ... wait for it ... the radius of the planet.

        True, planets are generally not perfectly spherical, and a planet's center of mass may not be exactly at its geometrical center, and you may be very very tall. But in most cases, the radius of the planet will be a good first approximation for the r in the law of universal gravitation.

        Second: Flocke Kroes never said that density "appear[ed] in Newton's equation". He made the - I thought fairly obvious - implication that given the mass of a planet, its density will tell you its volume, and (again assuming a roughly spherical planet) that gives you its radius. Then see point one.

        But points for beginning by labeling someone else's post an "Epic Fail". If you're going to go down, you might as well go down fighting, eh?

  8. Big_Boomer Silver badge
    Happy

    DesPlaines

    would be a better example. The planet that Edward Elmer Smiths "Family D'Alembert" came from. They are all short and stocky and very strong. Not EE's best works but fun nonetheless. His best works are probably "The Galaxy Primes" and the later "Lensman" books.

    @Cowslayer, cheer up mate. They might invent warp-drive next week. Then again the Aztec Calendar Doom Merchants may be right and we may all be dead come the 21st December. I'm having a party on the 22nd to celebrate that we didn't all die and that they were all wrong,... AGAIN!

    1. Justicesays
      Alert

      Re: DesPlaines

      Probably not "his best works" because they are not his works at all.

      EE wrote a novella using that concept.

      His estate authorized Stephen Goldin to use the concept and name to write a series.

      10 years after he died.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Family_D%27Alembert

  9. Darren Davison
    Go

    another super-Earth planet orbiting a star just 42 light years away from home...

    excellent news, start rounding up the lawyers and the marketeers and have a ship prepared.

    1. John F***ing Stepp

      Re: another super-Earth planet orbiting a star just 42 light years away from home...

      And the phone sanitizers; not really needed after this profligation of cell phones.

  10. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Heavy gravity home world of the Drakk'Har perhaps?

  11. I think so I am?
    Coat

    whats the point

    1 light year in distance is 5,865,696,000,000 miles

    47 light years in distance is 275,687,712,000,000 miles

    If we could travel at 10% the speed of light it would take around 4,700 years to make the 47 light year trip.

    (if some one could check my sums that would be stella)

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: whats the point

      470 years, Shirley?

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: whats the point

        470 years + a couple of months.

        No human could stand the acceleration up to 10% the speed of light in a short time frame. If we want some sort of comfort then 1G acceleration would be ideal (roughly 10m/s/s) , meaning it would take 3,000,000 seconds (34 days) to accelerate up to 10% speed of light (forgetting any power issues). We would then have the deceleration month at the other end. Admittedly we would have covered some distance during those 68 days so I just rounded to 470 years + 2 months (which will also then allow for finding a parking space).

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: whats the point

          First we need to know which side of the road they drive on, because that's going to be one hell of a fucking car-wreck if they're coming to see us at the same time.

          1. Grikath

            Re: whats the point

            Lower acceleration for a longer time would work as well.. Would be worth the shot anyways as it would be the first *macroscopic* item we'd get up to speeds like that, and in and of itself a nice set of experiments. Even if it would arrive well without our lifetime, the thing would reach relativistic speeds within ours, and certainly during that of the current young generation..

    2. Gizzit101
      Terminator

      Re: whats the point

      Hold up - 10% light speed is around 67 million MPH, right? I think the fastest man made object yet, the Helios probes, achieved roughly 150,000 MPH by virtue of a "slingshot" from the sun (the fiery ball of gas, not the "newspaper"). Accelerating from 150,000 to 67,000,000? >420 years to get there?

      Send me a postcard

      1. Tom Melly

        Re: whats the point

        AFAICT if you accelerate/decelerate at 1G the whole way, then you can make it in around 12 years (ship time).

  12. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    We are EE...

    We are eEe...

    Tune springs to mind!

  13. Primus Secundus Tertius

    But in the ocean...

    Land life would have to be rugged. But in the ocean the gentlest jellyfish would get on fine.

    Remember, life began in the seas.

  14. Anonymous Coward
    Thumb Up

    So hitchhikers was right about 42

    Supprised I had to scroll down this far for no HHGTTG reference. So 42 was the answear, and now we know the unit of measurement.

    --

    need a done panic icon

  15. Anonymous Coward
    Alien

    QX!

    How delightful to read a reference to Arisia's favourite project here on El Reg!

    Peter vanBuskirk would/will be delighted ... !

  16. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Speculations

    In a high gravity world, it would seem that water based creatures would be better equipped to survive. Assuming water exists of course. Human colonists on such a world may find growing gills and living underwater to be better; assuming they can deal with the higher pressures present in these oceans.

    As for living on the ground, the high gravity will probably tend to mean less height & size for most vegetation and animal life. Though I can envisage large gas filled organisms (hydrogen perhaps) that can overcome the heavy gravity. For humans it will also probably mean a shorter life span, unless internal organs change to compensate.

    Can we send a probe there once NASA figures out how to make a practical warp bubble?

    1. Nigel 11
      Pint

      Water worlds

      http://www.lsbu.ac.uk/water/phase.html

      There's no reason you can't have liquid water in a high-G or high-pressure environment. It doesn't squash into a solid phase at all easily. Indeed, for everyday ice rather than one of the other high-pressure forms, squashing it converts ice to water rather than vice versa).

      It's even possible to concieve of liquid planets - ones made of H2O all the way through. (At high pressure just about anything has high solubility in water, so that's where any small rocky or iron core would disappear to).

      Maybe even a beer planet? (Microbial life in liquid suspension? Check. Excreting ethyl alcohol? Check.)

  17. cd
    Alien

    Wrong end

    We keep looking at habitability from the wrong end. We need to suss out what makes us what we are, and implant that in a body that has fewer stringent requirements for survival and doesn't age, something that can use anything as fuel, has a long sleep/hibernation mode. Once that is done, the universe is our playground. The way we think now is like going camping with raw eggs instead of hard boiled, and working around that rather than exploring. Mammal bodies are ridiculously susceptible to allergies, viral and bacteriological attacks, and maundering behavior from chemical imbalances. Time to move on.

    1. Marshalltown
      Alien

      And thus . . .

      . . . we come to Marvin the paranoid android. Behaviour maundernig due to electronic imbalances.

    2. Nigel 11

      Re: Wrong end

      We need to suss out what makes us what we are, and implant that in a body that has fewer stringent requirements for survival and doesn't age, something that can use anything as fuel, has a long sleep/hibernation mode.

      Silicon chips optimised for energy efficiency, clocked very slowly during the long boring bit in interstellar space? Can't beat the speed of light, but can crank up subjective speed by any desired factor just as long as the hardware in the real world lasts the voyage.

      Uploading a human being into a virtual reality is the hard part of the problem we haven't addressed yet. Indeed, we don't yet know for sure whether consciousness is a wholly classical phenomenon. If it's quantum in nature, a personality (soul?) is not uploadable to any conventional computer, and is not uploadable at all without destruction of its original. This is where physics meets theology via IT.

      1. OrsonX

        This is where physics meets theology via IT

        This is where physics meets physics via IT

        quantum =/= theology

        1. Destroy All Monsters Silver badge
          Paris Hilton

          Re: This is where physics meets theology via IT

          > Indeed, we don't yet know for sure whether consciousness is a wholly classical phenomenon.

          Seeing that most people cannot even hold half a thought at any one time, let alone infinitely many, odds aren't good.

  18. Graham Marsden
    Happy

    "the dangerous Bandersnatch"

    I think you mean "Frumious Bandersnatch"!

    1. Chris Miller

      Re: "the dangerous Bandersnatch"

      Larry N's Bandersnatchi were highly dangerous. Their scientific name was Frumious bandersnatch.

    2. Frumious Bandersnatch

      Re: "the dangerous Bandersnatch"

      I think you mean "Frumious Bandersnatch"!

      Did you expect me to make a comment here? Who do you think I am? Kibo?

  19. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    BBW

    I suppose the high gravity means that those of us who appreciate BBWs are strictly out of luck? For that matter, the BBW lovers who like it on the bottom are probably suicidal on such a planet! :-(

    Anonymous

    P.S. What? Ya mean y'all didn't think about the s*x aspects?

  20. Midnight

    Optional

    Jinx? Why not Mesklin? That would be a little more interesting.

    1. Tom Melly

      Re: Optional

      Ah, I was wondering who would make the Mission of Gravity connection...

  21. Nigel 11
    Alert

    SF life in a REALLY high-G environment

    On the surface of a neutron star. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dragon%27s_Egg

  22. Lonesome Twin

    I think you are all being pointlessly pessimistic. At an acceleration of only 1G (which even a decent car can briefly manage) for a year, you'll be doing the speed of light. In 10yrs you're up to 10x light speed and it's time to start thinking of truning round to slow down. When you arrive at your heavy destination you'll be stronger since you will be many years younger than when you started. S'easy, let's get on with it.

    1. Tom Melly

      Mostly correct, but I don't know where you get the 'years younger' bit. At 1G, it will take you about 12 years (ship time), and you will therefore be 12 years older...

  23. Anonymous John

    Bootnote # 3

    Pyrrus in the Deathworld series.

  24. This post has been deleted by its author

  25. EatsRootsAndLeaves
    Alien

    What? No 'Mission of Gravity' reference?

    Pshaw. The children today.

    1. Palf

      Re: What? No 'Mission of Gravity' reference?

      Ayup. I bet Barlenaan is there, falling off 1 cm ledges and screaming. He should do his own show. Make-up would be a bitch, though. All those frakkin' legs.

    2. Tom Melly

      Re: What? No 'Mission of Gravity' reference?

      'Mesklin' was mentioned by another poster...

  26. Stephen 27
    Coat

    Could it be a planet with moon?

    The information they have indicates a mass at an orbit. But is there anything to say that it can't be a smaller planet with its own moon and therefore not sooo heavy?

  27. Local G
    Unhappy

    I don't need more gravity.

    I'd like a little levity for a change.

    1. hplasm
      Thumb Up

      Re: I don't need more gravity.

      That's what we need! Artificial Levity!

      wizz! (For Atomms)

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Ab Pos

        A half a laff etc.

  28. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    new life

    Assuming that this planet does support life, one wonders how long it will be before Cameron and his ilk hand them a tax bill.

  29. Palf

    about that gee thing

    If it's the same size as Earth, then the surface gee will be 7g. But if it''s the same density as Earth, then it will only be 7^(1/3) gee or 1.9g. With a few workouts, it could be done. Kinda.

  30. kwg06516

    It could just as likely be an Earth sized moon orbiting a Neptune sized planet totaling 7 EM. Just don't expect to find any floating islands.

  31. Terry Cloth
    Alien

    How could you forget Mesklin?

    In _Mission of Gravity_, Hal Clement created Mesklin, a heavy-gravity, rapidly-rotating planet home to some intelligent and very strong millipedes. One of the interesting points is that he spent much more time working the physics of such a situation into his plots, and in very natural ways. Much better than the heavy planet = strong (humanoid) inhabitants (and nothing more) of Smith and Niven.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mesklin

  32. Paul Hovnanian Silver badge
    Boffin

    RE: about that gee thing

    "1.9g. With a few workouts, it could be done. Kinda."

    That falls within one sigma of the American population's body mass distribution. If my countrymen can survive, I don't see why the settlers couldn't adapt.

    Perhaps a trip involving a gradual increase to 1.9G acceleration (and then a 1.9G deceleration) would condition the settlers to their new habitat.

  33. Anonymous Coward
    Alien

    Meanwhile, 42 light years away....

    We've found a light-gravity liquid water-bearing planet that based on their intercepted mass media seems to be inhabitied by a bunch of sociopathic shaved apes!!

    1. Destroy All Monsters Silver badge
      Alien

      Re: Meanwhile, 42 light years away....

      Excellent. I seems everyone is looking for jobs in their centrally managed economies. Prepare a standard Galactic Forces Recruitment Flyer Package.

      These mammals are really good for one thing only.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Alien

        Re: Meanwhile, 42 light years away....

        I don't know about the ONLY use. The Galactic Cooking Network is suggesting a new chef's competition show, tentatively titled "To Serve Man". The shooting location is a bit remote, but the cost of ingredients will be insignificant....

        1. Destroy All Monsters Silver badge
          Thumb Up

          Re: Meanwhile, 42 light years away....

          A reference to "To Serve Man"? Respect, good sir.

  34. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    And our first signal from them would probably be

    Ack Ack AAAK AAAK AAK Ack.

    AC/DC

  35. J. R. Hartley

    It's what we call a 'Shake n Bake' colony.

  36. Avatar of They

    Cool

    All the comments of heavy gravity and science fiction races and no one mentions the squat race from Game workshop 40,000K,

    "Dwarf like in stature due to their high gravity worlds and close proximity to the galactic core"

This topic is closed for new posts.