[removed]

[removed]

[removed]

[removed]

[removed]

Yes, different stars are different sizes and output different amounts of radiation, light, heat, and gravitational pull. All of these things affect the planets and celestial bodies around them. And stars in their final days balloon outwards as they expend the last hydrogen inside of them. This also shifts the Goldilocks zone outward.

So yes.

It is totally possible. As you correctly noticed, at different stages of the star's evolution its spectral energy distribution changes, meaning that at some stages most energy is emitted in the infrared range, and at other stages - in visible, ultraviolet, etc. Depending on the planet's atmosphere composition, it will absorb/reflect/transmit different wavelengths with different efficiency. Atmosphere composition, in turn, depends on many factors, such as geological age of the planet, its initial composition, amount of water, presence of life, etc. In other words, the surface temperature on the planet depends on many factors that can and do change as the central star and the planet itself evolve. Consequently, the Goldilocks zone can move.

[removed]

[removed]

The Goldilocks zone will depend on the star's temperature and therefore how much its energy output is, so yes over time it will shift. To take an extreme example, our Sun's late life stage will see it expand and swallow up the earth; clearly we will no longer be in the zone when that happens.

So yes, the zone will shift but the lifespan of a star is so long that it won't change on a human (or even humanity's) timescale for most stars.

It is already a part of the calculation. Different types of stars have different goldilocks zones so if a star transitions between types the zone placement will be different afterwards.

If you're asking would life on a specific planet survive the transition, the answer is no, almost certainly not. Take our star and Earth as an example. It's the only one we have. In 5 billion years when our sun transitions to a red giant its diameter will massively increase but its mass will remain the same. So the planetary orbits relative to the center of the sun will remain the same. There's a good chance that the Earth will be consumed entirely. Wherever the new goldilocks zone is, you can be pretty certain that it's not inside the star.

This type of problem will be similar with most of these transitions. If the stars diameter and energy output change but the orbits of the planets surrounding it do not, it's highly unlikely that a planet would be inside it both before and after the transition. Probably impossible but I don't have the time or data to prove that.

[removed]

Yes. It happens all the time. During the Red Giant phase, the Earth will either become a bunch of new thermal energy to add into the system or become the new Mercury and the goldilocks zone will have shifted to somewhere between Saturn and Uranus. It will also be influence by temp too but anyways,it is also predicted that Titan and Europa could hypothetically reach levels tolerant enough to reach Earth's current temp.

[removed]

As others have said the zone shifts with a sizeable change at the end of a stars life. But it is also changing through a stars main phase. Our star for instance is increasing its output and will push the goldilocks zone out as it does so.

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/what-will-we-do-when-the-sun-gets-too-hot-for-earths-survival/

[removed]

However!

When scientists talk about a new planet in the goldilocks zone, they're talking about today (or what appears to be today, but might be many years ago). They're looking at a specific sun as it is today, and commenting on that.

Yeah, in a billion years, it will be different. And that's okay.

[removed]

So...could that mean...we evolved as scientists think we did but maybe we did that on another planet in our our system and had to move to Earth when the goldilocks zone shifted?

....maybe? Even in a "plausible sci fi" way?

Or is the change over too many billions of years to make any sense?

[removed]

That would be a nope from chief. My understanding is that the earth has always been in the Goldilocks zone. I think you're severely underestimating the time it would take for the Goldilocks zone to move far enough so that earth is no longer within it. We would definitely know if we changed planets; that is not something that would fly under the radar.

The only possibility that I have heard is perhaps Mars is where life started, got blasted off by an asteroid impact, fragments came to earth and restarted here as Mars became inhospitable. That was decades ago and we have done lots of studies on Mars since, so the plausibility of that I don’t really know.

The Sun is heating up. In 1 billion years the Earth will no longer be in the Goldielocks zone. So we probably have about 500 million years before it becomes a real issue for humans. Hopefully by then we should be able to either move the Earth as the zone moves, or build space habitats.

[removed]

Before the Sun goes red giant, its temperature will rise enough for Earth to be out of the goldilocks zone. Currently estimated at 1 billion years.

[removed]

[removed]

Sad, but I appreciate your response

It's fun to wonder even if we can't know

[removed]

[removed]

I never understood what would be more fascinating about life originating on another planet rather than earth. It just passes the buck. Also it doesn't explain the rest of the biodiversity we have here

It's more like humans feel sorta...out of place.

How do we feel out of place to you?

[removed]

[deleted]

When the Sun had just formed its luminosity was ~70% today’s, and so Earth back then would’ve received 70% its current light too. But the thing is, with carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases, liquid water oceans can exist much further out than we are now. With just carbon dioxide the outer limit is around 40% Earth’s sunlight, so Earth has always been within the habitable zone.

Not really. Our entire biology and fossil history fits with the diversity of life in Earth.

As multicellular, deuterostome, bilateral, chordate vertebrates, osteichthyans, sarcoptergyians, tetrapods, synapsids, mammals, eutherians, primates, cercopithicoids, hominoids and hominids we have an entire branching and interlinked family history with all of the other life that shares our planet.

For any of that to make sense, that shared history would also have to be extraterrestrial, making the introduction billions of years ago at the very beginning of cellular life, and as such just adds more questions without actually answering anything.

[removed]

[removed]

This is actually nonsense since the sun is not actually hot, the surface is but not the space around it. The sun rays hitting the atmosphere creates heat. Its actually very cold high up in the earth atmosphere where oxygen is low the sun is not heating up space. As long you have liquids distance don't matter much it could support life.

[removed]

600 million years before the Earth becomes too hot to support the carbon cycle.

Safe to say humans will have problems long before that.

although even 1000 years is a very long time with our current rate of technological progress. credible plans exist to change the orbit of the Earth to keep us in the Goldilocks zone.

edit: for the doubters/downvoters.

https://lifeboat.com/ex/lets.lift.the.earth

[removed]

I feel like this post is getting a lot more hate than it deserves. OP is asking something a lot of people ask. It may be ignorant of a lot of important facts, but asking questions and having them answered is a big part of how you remedy ignorance. OP is clearly trying to do that, and is taking the responses seriously, and changing their view of things as they get new information. That sort of thing should be encouraged.

There is the panspermia hypothesis. The idea is that microbial life could somehow be ejected from its home planet by something like a meteor impact. So you have a rock floating through space that contains a dormant single-cell organism. It floats around space for millions of years until it eventually lands on a planet with a habitable atmosphere. The organism evolves over millions of years and eventually, the planet is covered in diverse life forms. That could have happened on Earth. While this theory is interesting it doesn't do much to answer the question of the origin of life. It just passes the buck to somewhere else in the universe.

I think the article below best answers your question. Think of the earth’s distance from the sun as fixed but the habitable zone is expanding outwards.

I can’t speak to evolution at all.

For your follow up question in a sci fi way if Venus was in the habitable zone before earth yes we would need to move outward in the solar system.

I think the most fascinating fact in the article is that earth has already moved through 70% of the habitable zone.

https://www.nature.com/articles/nature.2013.13788

Assume that is true. A planet of equal size farther from the sun receives fewer total rays because that is how angles work. Yet solar rays are considered effectively parallel due to the extreme distance. So is it the apparent size of the sun in the sky that makes the difference? If distance doesn"t matter, we would be heated by all the stars in the sky and there would be little difference between day and night temperature. Is there a large difference between day and night? This illustrates the problem with describing things using generalities.

[removed]

[removed]

I did not mean that distance did not matter at all. But considered that a planet whit lots of volcanic activity and thich atmosphere could do fine at a long distance or perhaps even without a sun at all.

Ok, I didn't know where you were going with "As long you have liquids" but think I get it now.

You make a good point about the radiated energy of the sun only being converted to heat once it strikes matter. Orbiting high energy reflectors could make a planet habitable closer to a sun. On distant planets, low altitude energy absorbers which reradiate IR could raise surface temps enough to boost biology which conditions the atmosphere favorably.

It wouldn't make much difference on a cosmological scale, but to an intelligent species facing extinction, it might be something they/we would attempt at the edges of goldilocks zones to eek out a few more generations.