Professor-M

🧐 It has been over twenty years since it became apparent that the Universe is full not only of red-dwarf stars , but also of rocky planets orbiting said stars . The scientific consensus since then has become that these worlds are relatively hostile to life , and thus are not suitable candidates for future inhabitation . The reasons for this are varied , and include environmental factors such as extremely intense radiation regimes , inadequate volatile resources , and inadequate atmospheric densities . There are however , several significant underappreciated mitigating factors which could potentially moderate the abovementioned negative ones , and result in these particular exoplanets actually being not only survivable , but permanently livable as well . The foremost factor regarding the above is the directionality of the hard radiation given off by red-dwarf stars . Most of this is emitted in the poleward latitudes of these stars , and thus does not collide with the planets orbiting in the plane-of-the-ecliptic of these bodies . The second most impactful (and surprising) factor is the likely prevalence of at least some atmosphere on many of these worlds , this resulting from both robust and near-eternal volatiles replenishment regimes , and also moderately strong planetary magnetic-fields . The tertiary moderating factor is the likely presence of constantly circulating atmospheres evidencing planetary superrotation , and thus taking excess thermal energy from the starlit sides and redistributing it to the unlit sides of these planets . Lastly , tidal-heating might have a significant effect upon the thermal regime of these worlds, this then affecting their overall abilities to maintain planetary dynamos , and by extension , planetary magnetic-fields as well . There are also a myriad of lesser factors which could potentially affect both the usability and the hhabitability of the abovementioned planets , but the number of parameters and synergies involved is far to large for any facile generalizations .

So... , wherever we go , we'll bring our own "sick" with us , and maybe back to Earth ! 🤓

🤓 Fellow Spacers , Pathogenic diseases take enormous lengths of time to develop from scratch . No pathway for their development has yet existed on Mars, so... scratch ! The biggest risk by far is the same one that already exists on our space-stations , that of mutated pathogens fielding profoundly greater transmissibility and lethality than they normally possess .

It's a set of parameters , one the literal but unlikely scenario , the second the much more realistic one . The 46-seconds a century obviously is the former, equating to seize-up in 78 centuries. The latter should be 2300 , equating to just over 1.57 centuries . So almost 8k. years and under 1.57 centuries ; both well under ten-million , as originally stated . I will allow for a dropped decimal point in the original calculations , caused apparently by profound physical exhaustion and late-night in-the-head calculating . I am sure you can identify with this , right ? 😵 *Very busy ; refining right now .

🧐 I don't bullshit , I estimate or calculate . Also , using various search-engines yields only descriptions of the subject process which have less math in them than mine displayed up above . In otherwords , the involved variables make it impossible to produce a credible figure here , only the below process descriptions and numerical approximations are possible in this case . If we use Mr. Janus' figure of 27,000 times Luna's tidal-effect on Earth , then multiply that figure by a factor of 50 due to the mass increase likely needed to gestate an Earth-class moon around a Jupiter , then we get a sum-total of 135,000 times the tidal slow-down rate induced by Luna . Since that slow-down currently sits at ~1.7millisecond a century , the Question's moon could be expected to be slowing at about 46-seconds a century , or 46k.sec. per millennium . Even if we presume some sort of capture scenario whereby an Earth is placed in close orbit to Jupiter , then we calculate a slow-down rate of 46k.sec. per 50-millenia . The above means that the subject planet would theoretically cease rotating in under two-thousand years , one-hundred thousand if the host-planet is only one Jupiter-mass . Realistically , slow-down would be faster early on , and slower later on . This means that the above estimate could be off quite a bit , BUT even then , would still be nowheres near the initial estimate of ten-million years . *Now then , considering that the above Question simply seeks descriptions of the processes and consequences of having an Earth in close orbit around a Jupiter (full-mass or other) , and that NONE of the other writers came close to engaging in making the number of descriptive calculations that were demanded of me , I must ask why only I have to write a numerical treatise where they obviously do not . 🧐

🤓 Modification - An Earth situated very near Jupiter would be at the bottom of the greatest gravity-well in the outer solar-system . This draws in a steady and heavy influx of asteroidal and cometary materials, assuring that Earth’s atmosphere would be endlessly replenished . The planet would freeze up soon after tide-lock , but it's atmosphere would remain . This iceball-Eatth would periodically build up an excess of carbon-dioxide from volcanic activity , this resulting in relatively short interludes of global warm-up from the "greenhouse-effect" . Abundant surface water and plate-tectonics would inevitably combine to sequester said CO2 , returning the planet to iceball status fairly quickly , by geological standards . *. The below Reference addresses the likely atmospheric cycle should Jupiter's radiation-belts prove capable of stripping off much of Earth’s atmosphere . https://photos.app.goo.gl/sBj1Wyu4Jwrh7cLJ8

🤔 Regarding the disagreements within the botanical community ; these range from functional to taxonomic to phylogenetic to evolutionary . Finding and sifting through bunches of botanical forums (such as in the above link) for such debates could take weeks , but searching-up "Botanical disagreements on carnivorous plants" will give you quick results . *Example of major scholarly debate regarding plant carnivory : https://photos.app.goo.gl/vWTGB8rH7Pxamj2PA

Mr. Exchemist , click the link , then read the paragraph discussing "Murderous-plants" . This is from a large thread in another Forum hotly debating this subject . *I shan't link to another Forum . Mr. CharonY , my perception is that ANY struggle for resources can , over time , lead to profound changes in the morphology and function of involved species . If the absence of predators leads to an over-abundance of prey animals , many may become diseased or starve out . This may provide an unusual but steady supply of vital nutrients for the abovementioned plant-predators . Logically , over time those better-suited to take advantage of this supply will do better , and eventually outbreed those less-suited . The end result ? "The Running-Tree" !! 🫡

Biology-Fans , the Post-Question above is specifically referring to plants/trees that have evolved to trap , ensnare , poison , or even run down large animals . This meaning those above the size of geckos , hummingbirds or mice . Nature abhors a vacuum , and given an ecological niche being unutilized in a specific environment , will often make do by altering , through natural-selection , a species normally incapable of filling that niche . The above applies both to the Kingdoms of Plantea and Animalia , but with minimal crossover between the two . However , as always there are exceptions . The most obvious and well-known of these would be the carnivorous plants ; pitcher-plants , fly-traps , and honeydews for example . Less well-known known are those which kill various creatures , but do not directly "eat" them. These are the protocarnivores, plants which indirectly absorb nutrients from the bodies of their victims . The question of whether large animals poisoned by plants/trees , and dying where their roots can gain sustenance from the nutrients leaching through the ground into their roots , qualify as victims of protocarnivorous plants , is currently the topic of much debate . Similarly , this question also applies to large creatures entangled in thorny brambles , and dying if they can't escape . Non of the abovementioned scenarios involve highly mobile plants , however , the capabilities of some known plants to engage in sudden motions indicate that a series of coordinated movements , even by larger plants and trees , could well be possible . This could even encompass what we would call "running" ; a series of powerful action propelling an entity across a stretch of surface at speed . If a plant/tree could make evolutionary changes of this magnitude , then tying prey up in it's branches would definitely be doable . If the above predation paradigm were to actually become extant , then the issue of speedy absorption of the prey's nutrients becomes paramount . Just as animal-predators need to feed before any of their competitors can steal their prey , plant-predators would also need to adopt fast-feeding strategies and equipment . Given the complete absence of digestive-systems in most plants , but their ability to absorb nutrients in liquid form , the most likely strategy they would employ would be to quickly and forcibly remove the victim's nutrients from their body . The best example available in nature for this is that of spiders ; they inject digestive enzymes into their victims , this dissolving their soft-tissues, and enabling the predators to suction-out the resultant slurry , often crushing the prey's body in the process of feeding . *No evidence of such macropredadory plants has yet been found , however , given the vast scope of space , it is likely that the above has already come into being somewhere in the cosmos . These "Running-Trees" are doubtless out there , and future explorers of exoplanets would be well-advised to be aware of this shocking possibility . 🤓 https://photos.app.goo.gl/mFg3pav8g8FkoU3X6

Gentlemenses , True , it is difficult to predict exactly when we will gain specific capabilities . However , once we can make our Model-Ts (so to speak) , we can easily ship them out to distant lands without having to manufacture them there . 🤓

On the other hand... The higher the technology level , the easier and cheaper to make devices are . Consider the Model-T automobile ; making these today would be ridiculously simple , yet they could easily be made to last forever. Mars is currently a bridge to far for much in-situ utilization , but the next era of techno-industrial advancement will likely make that practical . As to negative medical effects imbued upon settlers by the Martian environment ; advanced biomedical facilities will be able to produce the necessary drugs and other treatments , while weight-suits combined with exoskeletons will enable the "Martians" to stress and load their musculoskeletal components while accomplishing the physical tasks necessary to keep the colonies functioning . *My Reference-Post : ^/photos.app.goo.gl/k9bBZXmdzA4Zr2WZ9

🤔 Mr. CharonY , Biomedical mitigation will doubtless be well ahead of where it is at present ; the list of medical conditions which have yielded to modern medicine in the last century is endless . So too will be the list of those conditions mitigated by near-future cures and treatments , these likely including those engendered by partial gravity .

🤓 Indeed Mr. Jolgus , that would place it in the category of "introduced everywhere" , and begets the question of anisotropy examined in the link above . Personally , I wonder if such an introduction would really be enough to account for the apparent black-hole mass overages referenced in the theory of Cosmological-Coupling .

🤓 Universal-Gentlemen , I am attempting to sleuth out which of two paradigms applies here ; is Dark-Energy created by "super-compression" of mass-energy , as with black-holes , this implying that it then spreads out to the regions of lowest density in the universe . OR is D-E preferentially directly generated within low-density regions , or even generated throughout ALL of space , then slipping-out through the areas of high density on it's way to those of low-density ?

Hallo MigL ! 🤓 I think that there would be "method to the madness" with this ; the characteristics you are describing would have averages and predictable patterns , even while appearing random and chaotic on the surface. This would be analogous to the overall manifestation of gravity within the Universe ; fairly constant when seen from the largest perspective , but seeming to be unpredictably intense when examined from many local ones . The behavior of Dark-Energy is now under more scrutiny than ever before , primarily because of advancing technology in the field of astronomy . This particularly applies to the dynamic history of .D-E. throughout the history of the Universe . *Reference Article below : https://www.astronomy.com/science/dark-energy-may-be-changing-over-time/