Talk:Habitable zone for complex life

Distinct from 'Habitable zone'?

How is the topic of this article distinct from that of habitable zone? (— 𝐬𝐝𝐒𝐝𝐬 — - talk) 23:33, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

I have the same question; this feels rather like an WP:OR list. User:Telecineguy, why do you think this list deserves a separate article from habitable zone? - Parejkoj (talk) 19:18, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

• The page tells you the answer, as it is the first zone listed. Habitable zone is only a place that would allows liquid water to remain for a short period of time. So Habitable zone is only looking at temperature and then temperature for a short period of time. A lot more is needed for life and even more for a Habitable Zone for Complex Life (HZCL). There are references for each of the zones. Astronomers, cosmologists and astrobiologist have written about these zones listed. Just look at the Habitable zone page, there is nothing about the other zones as it is all about liquid water. I plan to add example planets to the page, to help make it more clear. Thank you for asking. It was just yesterday, I thought about adding example planets that would help.Telecine Guy (talk) 19:43, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

• There are 21 known Life habitable zones. Habitable zone is only one of them. There is a page for this one zone. This page is about the other 20 known zones.Telecine Guy (talk) 05:11, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

• Before I post, would this be helpful to answer your question as to the difference between Life habitable zones and habitable zone. (I could add Venus also) (note:habitable zone is not about life and is singular)

• Example planets and their Life habitable zones. (if a zone is not list there is not enough data):

• Earth is in all known Life habitable zones with a stable star, the Sun.

• Mars:
  • Stable star - Sun:
  • Just on the edge of the habitable zone (water)
  • In Optimistic habitable zone
  • Out of Continuously habitable zone
  • Out of Conservative habitable zone
  • In Ultraviolet habitable zone
  • At edge of Photosynthetic habitable zone
  • Out of Tropospheric habitable zone
  • In Planet rotation rate habitable zone
  • At edge of Planet rotation axis tilt habitable zone
  • Out of Astrosphere habitable zone
  • Out of Atmosphere electric field habitable zone
  • In Tidal habitable zone
  • Out of Carbon Dioxide habitable zone
  • In Orbital eccentricity habitable zone
  • Out of Coupled planet-moon - Magnetosphere habitable zone
  • Out Pressure-dependent habitable zone
  • In Galactic habitable zone
  • In Supergalactic Habitable Zone
  • Out of Habitable Zone for Complex Life

• Kepler-1606b, gas giant or super-Earth:
  • In Habitable zone (water)
  • In Ultraviolet habitable zone
  • Unstable star (G-type star with high metallicity)
  • Out of Astrosphere habitable zone (Super earth)
  • Out Ultraviolet habitable zone (too close to star 0.6421 AU)
  • Out of Habitable Zone for Complex Life

• Kepler-1701b, gas giant:
  • In Habitable zone (water)
  • In Ultraviolet habitable zone
  • Unstable star (K1 star with high metallicity)
  • Out of Astrosphere habitable zone (Neptune-like)
  • Out Ultraviolet habitable zone (too close to star 0.5608 AU)
  • Out of Habitable Zone for Complex Life

• Kepler-62e, super-Earth:
  • In Habitable zone (water)
  • Edge of Ultraviolet habitable zone
  • Unstable star (small old K-type)
  • Out Ultraviolet habitable zone (too close to star 0.427 AU)
  • Out of Astrosphere habitable zone (too large and close)
  • Out of Habitable Zone for Complex Life

• Kepler-442b, super-Earth:
  • In Habitable zone (water)
  • Out of Astrosphere habitable zone (too large and close)
  • Unstable star (Young K-type, low metallicity)
  • Out Ultraviolet habitable zone (too close to star 0.409 AU)
  • In Eccentricity Zone 0.04
  • Out of Habitable Zone for Complex Life

• Gliese 667 Cc, super-Earth:
  • In Habitable zone (water)
  • Out of Astrosphere habitable zone (too large)
  • Unstable star (Red dwarf)
  • Out Ultraviolet habitable zone (too close to star 0.1251 AU)
  • Out of Astrosphere habitable zone
  • Out of Eccentricity habitable zone at 0.133
  • Out of Habitable Zone for Complex Life

• Kepler-1229b, super-Earth:
  • In Habitable zone (water)
  • Out of Carbon Dioxide habitable zone
  • Unstable star (Red dwarf)
  • Out Ultraviolet habitable zone (too close to star 0.289 AU)
  • Out of Astrosphere habitable zone
  • Out of Habitable Zone for Complex Life

• Kepler-62f, super-Earth:
  • In Habitable zone (water)
  • Out of Carbon Dioxide habitable zone
  • Unstable star (Red dwarf)
  • Out of Habitable Zone for Complex Life

• Kepler-186f, near Earth-sized:
  • In Habitable zone (water)
  • Out of Carbon Dioxide habitable zone
  • Unstable star (Red dwarf)
  • Out Ultraviolet habitable zone (too close to star 0.432 AU)
  • Out of Astrosphere habitable zone
  • Out of Habitable Zone for Complex Life

• Proxima Centauri b near Earth-sized:
  • In Habitable zone (water)
  • Out of Carbon Dioxide habitable zone
  • Unstable star (Red dwarf)
  • Out Ultraviolet habitable zone (too close to star 0.048 AU)
  • Out of Astrosphere habitable zone
  • Out of Habitable Zone for Complex Life

References

Title of article?

The phrase "Life habitable zones" does not appear in the article linked in the first sentence. Is this WP:SYNTH? (— 𝐬𝐝𝐒𝐝𝐬 — - talk) 02:17, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

• "New Discovery Shows "Not All Habitable Zones Are Created Equal" (there is more than one)."Habitable Zone for Complex Life", "Complex life might require a very narrow habitable zone" These are both talking about Life habitable zones. Telecine Guy (talk) 05:25, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

• Added Habitable Zone for Complex Life (HZCL), per your request.Telecine Guy (talk) 05:31, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

My suggestion was something like renaming the article to, "List of habitable zone types." The trouble might be with capitalization of phrases not found in other sources.... The article appears to be creating Names for Things out of descriptions of those things. Encyclopedias don't do that much. (— 𝐬𝐝𝐒𝐝𝐬 — - talk) 08:49, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

• This is not a "list" page, it currently has 116 references. It states it is the "parameters needed for life." Telecine Guy (talk) 19:39, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

Having a lot of references does not make it not a list. This definitely seems like WP:SYNTH to me. I checked a random sampling of the article bullet points, and many of your references do not use the term in the bullet. - Parejkoj (talk) 18:16, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

My random sample shows that some of the article bullets are supported by the references. Johnjbarton (talk) 18:54, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

How about "Alternative habitable zones" ? Add a summary in Habitable zone under a new section, "Extensions".

Or merge the content into Habitable zone in a new section "Extensions" or "Additional restrictions for complex life" Johnjbarton (talk) 02:05, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Actually I take back my suggestion "Alternative habitable zones". The 'zones' organization will limit the scope of the article: source may nor not discuss habitability in terms of zones.

IMO the scientific interesting, notable topic here is "constraints on habitability", not "zones". That is why the article ran into trouble after the exhausting the documented zones. Johnjbarton (talk) 02:14, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

FWIW I would support a move-over-redirect to Habitable zone for complex life and a focus in the article on that usage. (— 𝐬𝐝𝐒𝐝𝐬 — - talk) 20:25, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Examples of WP:SYNTH

Some of the "zones" here are described as such by the refs. But some are not.

To give an example, the article claims:

• "Carbon Dioxide habitable zone is the place the planets will have the correct levels of carbon dioxide."

No reference in that section refers to planets or zones. (It also seems incorrect to me, but that does not matter). The section should be deleted. Johnjbarton (talk) 19:12, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

I deleted the section. However, the issue of carbon dioxide is discussed in

• Schwieterman, Edward W., et al. "A limited habitable zone for complex life." The Astrophysical Journal 878.1 (2019): 19.

This example shows why trying to shoe-horn the references into a "zone" list is not encyclopedic. Wikipedia is a summary of existing knowledge, not a mechanism for imposing structure. Johnjbarton (talk) 19:24, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

I agree with previous comments that there are issues here with WP:SYNTH and WP:OR. In particular: does the term "Life Habitable Zone" appear at all in research literature or other sources? Or is this a term that was just made up for the title of this article? If this term doesn't have established notability then it should not be used in WP and certainly not for the title of an article. I'd agree with prior suggestions to change this article into a list of habitable zone types, which would be a better way to frame the content that's contained here. Aldebarium (talk) 01:27, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

The List concept has the problem that not all of the discussions of additional constraints on habitability are framed as "zones". To me that is the core problem here. The "additional constraints on habitability" concept is notable and well referenced here, but forcing everything into "zones" is not supported by the refs. Johnjbarton (talk) 02:08, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

OK, I understand your point. Perhaps reframing this as an article about (or as a list of) constraints on habitability could work. A change in title is still needed too. Aldebarium (talk) 02:36, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

• If you wish can change name to Habitable Zone for Complex Life (HZCL), as these are the parameters needed for life.
• This is the parameters needed for life, not a list.Telecine Guy (talk) 19:51, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

• Sorry I missed ref on "Carbon Dioxide habitable zone" I will recheck the refs to make should I did not miss any others.

"Carbon Dioxide habitable zone" [1] (as noted above "A limited habitable zone for complex life." The Astrophysical Journal 878.1 (2019): 19. [2] with a chart.Telecine Guy (talk) 19:37, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

I suggest that an article named Habitable zone for complex life should start from the point of view in the corresponding article that introduced that name. A section on zones which are actually named as such by references would be fine, say under "Named zones"; a different section on "Other habitability limits" could have content that does not have specific zones named. (I'll repeat that the zones thing is not that important compared to the considerations of the limitations). This approach avoids the SYNTH issues with zone names. Johnjbarton (talk) 22:08, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Proposal to move to Habitable zone for complex life

The Talk page has many discussions on the reasons to rename the article. It looks like there may be consensus to move to "Habitable zone for complex life". We may still decide to organize or merge the article but this much seems like a start.

Please reply Move to support this move or Keep to not move. @Telecineguy @Aldebarium @Sdsds Johnjbarton (talk) 22:04, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Move - Habitable zone for complex life is used in published literature, including with the HZCL shortening: https://arxiv.org/abs/1902.04720 (— 𝐬𝐝𝐒𝐝𝐬 — - talk) 23:36, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Move - Changing the article title is necessary although I’m not convinced that HZCL is the right title either. It seems like the overall theme of the article is constraints or issues affecting habitability, which is a little different from HZCL. But HZCL is an improvement over the current title. The article will still need a lot of editing and modification as previously discussed. Aldebarium (talk) 16:32, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

• Moved. Telecine Guy (talk) 02:30, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

 Done I didn't sense any opposition, so I went ahead. Johnjbarton (talk) 02:46, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

New organization, incomplete.

I broke the list "Named habitable zones", "Named habitable zones for complex life", and "Other orbital-distance related factors". Items on the middle section that do not have verifiable references matching the name given should be moved to the third section. I moved the "Milankovitch cycle" because I did not find a ref naming a zone "Milankovitch cycle zone". The remainder need to be verified and maybe moved.

Once this is complete I think the article is defensible as notable, distinct, and not synth. Johnjbarton (talk) 03:41, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Range of distances from a star

Describing a zone as a 'range of distances from a star' may be questionable. It doesn't seem to cover some cases. Binary systems. (Maybe even singleton stars with polar features different from equatorial features?) Even the existence of other planets in the system might alter a habitable zone e.g. if the other planet were radioactive. What about describing a zone as a 'region of space around a star'? (— 𝐬𝐝𝐒𝐝𝐬 — - talk) 04:25, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Similarly the current 'requires a very narrow zone' might be better phrased as 'requires a tightly constrained zone,' or something similar. (— 𝐬𝐝𝐒𝐝𝐬 — - talk) 04:30, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

I think the additional complexity in the definition is not needed because the exceptional cases would never be considered. Maybe "range of distances from a normal star" or similar? IMO "region of space" is far too vague.

Ref from habitable zone:

• Cruz, Maria; Coontz, Robert (2013). "Exoplanets - Introduction to Special Issue". Science. 340 (6132): 565. doi:10.1126/science.340.6132.565. PMID 23641107.
  • “the annulus around a star where a rocky planet with a CO2-H2O-N2 atmosphere and sufficiently large water content (such as on Earth) can host liquid water on its solid surface.”

Johnjbarton (talk) 17:17, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

I see your point. Some readers might benefit from an early link to planetary system (which seems to be implied in the current lede of this article). E.g: 'In a planetary system a Habitable Zone for Complex Life (HZCL) is ....' Or is that self-evident for the intended readers? (— 𝐬𝐝𝐒𝐝𝐬 — - talk) 22:55, 7 March 2024 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. Johnjbarton (talk) 03:09, 8 March 2024 (UTC)

Deleted text

The NASA Ref.NASA clearly talks about the Carbon dioxide habitable zone and Carbon monoxide habitable zone. It even has a chart of these two zone. Ref "Schwieterman, Edward W., et al. "A limited habitable zone for complex life." The Astrophysical Journal 878.1 (2019): 19." also is ref for these two. So why is this deleted? Telecine Guy (talk) 02:31, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

@ComplexRational said in the edit summary:

• boldly removing CO and CO2 "zones", since atmospheric composition does not correlate with orbital distance, and no search results in journal articles feature these names

Johnjbarton (talk) 22:42, 13 May 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the ping. Indeed, I removed the article text because I couldn't find these terms anywhere, although the sources do describe how CO and CO₂ levels are problematic in certain regions within the habitable zone. The article text, as written, was also somewhat vague. I'm now reading that there is an indirect correlation, for instance due to planets near the outer edge of the classical habitable zone requiring toxic amounts of CO₂ to provide the necessary greenhouse effect, which was not at all obvious from the text I removed. If there's a better name for this "zone" or "correlation" used throughout the scientific literature, perhaps it can have a standalone bullet point, but if not, I think it's better rewritten in the list item (broadly) dedicated to the complex life habitable zone, since it seems to be more so a part of that than a "habitable zone" in its own right. ^Complex/_Rational 00:13, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

I should add that the graphic looks hand-drawn in MS paint and not extracted directly from the journal article, so is not necessarily accurate and therefore is inappropriate for use here. However, the article is available under a CC-BY 3.0 license, and thus its graphics are suitable for uploading (unless explicitly labeled under a non-free license). ^Complex/_Rational 00:17, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

[3]

Carbon Dioxide habitable and Carbon Monoxide habitable zone

• Carbon dioxide habitable zone: the place the planets will have the correct levels of carbon dioxide. Carbon dioxide is essential for life, though only within a narrow range of concentrations. Life forms use carbon dioxide to regulate respiration and control blood pH. Plants use carbon dioxide to create oxygen through photosynthesis. High carbon dioxide levels causes hypercapnia.

• Carbon monoxide habitable zone: the zone in which planets have low levels of carbon monoxide. Carbon monoxide is a poisonous, colorless, odorless, and tasteless gas. Carbon monoxide is little less dense than air. A planet that has life given atmosphere, cannot have star any dimmer than the Sun, as this would have deadly levels of carbon monoxide. On Earth, carbon monoxide does not accumulate as the Sun has the correct parameters to destroy carbon monoxide in the atmosphere. Carbon stars are at the extreme side of deadly carbon monoxide levels.

References