Why are bright, blue stars and dim, red stars not good candidates for supporting habitable planets?
What will be an ideal response?
For dim, red stars, the habitable zone typically exists within the tidal locking radius of the star, which forces the same side of a planet in the habitable zone to face the star at all times. This is detrimental to the habitability of the planet, as the two sides of the planet will experience extreme conditions.
Bright, blue stars spend a relatively small amount of time in the main-sequence stage of their evolution. This leaves significantly less time for life to evolve, thus decreasing the habitability of the planet. Furthermore, bright, blue stars have high UV fluxes which could be detrimental to life, particularly for plants on a planet without a significant UV screen.
You might also like to view...
An example of source reduction is making a product lightweight.
Answer the following statement true (T) or false (F)
Because glacial ice is a natural, consolidated aggregate of minerals, it is considered to be a rock. Explain what type of rock it is: igneous, metamorphic, or sedimentary
What will be an ideal response?
What evidence did James Hutton use to discount the biblical account of the Creation of Earth?
a. The erosion rates of streambeds b. The distribution of sediments in rivers c. The patterns of rocks found in the countryside d. All of these choices
Why are there volcanoes on the west coast of North America but not on the east coast? What will be an ideal response?