Nerd mode on

[abomvubuso]

Could the Planets in Star Wars Actually Support Life?

Turns out, most of them no - at least not in the way shown in the movies.

Comments

[nairiporter]

They have genetically high number of midi-chlorins.

[abomvubuso]

All of them?

[nairiporter]

Not sure. I'm not familiar with the Star Wars legendarium.

[htpcl]

Stronger magnetic field.

Their auroras must kick ass!

[ddstory]

A fully urbanized planetary society doesn't have to be sustainable - there's ample opportunity for farming resources in orbit.

[mikeyxw]

If you live on a fully urbanized planet and your kid's pet spaceworm gets too big for your apartment, dumping it in the nearest asteroid belt would be the equivalent of flushing an alligator down the toilet in New York for a society that has FTL ships. They of course will grow to an enormous size.

Also, when you get a new job on that urbanized planet and can't bring your pet Wampa, letting them loose on Hoth might sound like a good idea. You know some people would do such a thing, and the galaxy seems very full of people-like folks. It all fits together once you think of what kind of invasive species an intergalactic society would create. Thinking of each planet as an island is where this article misses the point.

[underlankers]

With a magic energy field in the background that raises good and evil wizard like the teeth of Cadmus's dragon, I think conventional physics and biology applies in a dubious sense. ;)

[ponitacupcake]

Star Wars has never been known for scientific accuracy.

See also: Han Solo (and possibly Lucas) doesn't know wtf parsecs are.

It's not even proper science fiction (at least Rodenberry tried) but I still like it.

[airiefairie]

It is more like a space fairy-tale.

[ponitacupcake]

I like the term "space opera" except that implies lots of singing. Which would not be terrible, probably hilarious but not terrible.

[telemann]

Yeah I remember Carl Sagan talking about that parsec issue with the first Star Wars movie.