Go to https://brilliant.org/nutshell/ to try Brilliant's tutor for free + get 20% off the premium subscription!
This video was sponsored by Brilliant. Thanks a lot for the support!
As a worldbuilding enthusiast, I'll say this (I also tried creating a Super-Earth world with an analogue of the Proterozoic continental mosaic to prevent species from mixing): there is a ton of critical problems here.
1. You shouldn't get rid of cold polar regions—they contribute massively to ocean currents. By the way, this would severely hinder marine species. For instance, penguins didn't expand from Antarctica further toward the equator precisely because they couldn't cross the oceanic 'deserts' of warm water that were devoid of krill.
2. 300 meters is way too shallow for an ocean! You'd get massive zones of anoxia and euxinia. Just recall the Black Sea and the Sea of Azov. A warmer climate — less oxygen in the water than we have — the ocean overheats — organic matter from dead plankton gets buried at the bottom — even less oxygen. Combined with volcanism, this risks triggering a total collapse in pH. So, if I were the authors, I would definitely make the oceans at least 2–3 km deep at their maximum.
3. About tectonics. What's described in the video as 'many small plates' is highly reminiscent of the Proterozoic. The tectonics could be a mix of Proterozoic and modern types.
It’s fascinating how quickly the human mind starts designing perfect worlds once we step outside Earth mentally for a moment. And yet every comparison somehow circles back to how unbelievably specific the conditions for life already are here.
I think I'd push back a bit on the idea of "Super-habitable" meaning "more biodiversity". Biodiversity is substantially driven by having a range of different habitats, a range of different environmental conditions and niches which species can fit into. A planet like Hestia could easily find itself fairly homogenous, with a single set of well-adapted species spreading across the whole planet and outcompeting all other ecosystems, unhindered by the substantial barriers which more extreme environments would pose.
If this were a natural planet, it wouldn't ever even become the archipelago-like landscape that Kurzgesagt designed, because hundreds of tectonic plates bouncing on each other on an extremely active mantle would easily create large mountain ranges, continental landmasses and oceanic chasms within a few million years, or even less.
Ah yes the perfect planet. Everyday is 35C with 90% humidity, it has 5 million types of mosquitoes + giant insects and I need to take a boat ride whenever I need to go to the grocery store
“Perfect world” and it’s a sweltering endless rainforest hellscape with extreme life density. There would be so much competition you’d have to carve out your niche in blood every minute of the day.
That’s actually a really neat idea for a science fiction story
This planet sounds like absolute hell but the premise is for life in general, not humans. It just so happens that the circumstances required for the optimal allowance of biomass also makes it less desirable to this particular species of large mammal.
Somewhere in the universe, aliens are now watching a video about a "mini hestia", a weird rocky planet with 1 moon, where everything around it is sterile for thousands of light years, yet it harbors life
Go to brilliant.org/nutshell/ to try Brilliant's tutor for free + get 20% off the premium subscription!
This video was sponsored by Brilliant. Thanks a lot for the support!
We use cookies, device fingerprinting and cross-device tracking to personalise content, serve targeted advertising, and analyse how you use our site across your devices. By clicking Accept all you consent to the use of these tracking technologies. Your data may be used to build a profile of your interests and show you personalised ads on other sites.
Privacy policy
Comments (20)
Daily Junction discussion mixed with clearly attributed comments from the original video provider.
Join in — free. Comments on Daily Junction are for members, so real names stay rare and bots stay out.
One field. We email you a 6-digit code — no password needed. Your comment is kept while you do it.
Under 13? You’ll need a parent’s OK first — it takes them one click.
1. You shouldn't get rid of cold polar regions—they contribute massively to ocean currents. By the way, this would severely hinder marine species. For instance, penguins didn't expand from Antarctica further toward the equator precisely because they couldn't cross the oceanic 'deserts' of warm water that were devoid of krill.
2. 300 meters is way too shallow for an ocean! You'd get massive zones of anoxia and euxinia. Just recall the Black Sea and the Sea of Azov. A warmer climate — less oxygen in the water than we have — the ocean overheats — organic matter from dead plankton gets buried at the bottom — even less oxygen. Combined with volcanism, this risks triggering a total collapse in pH. So, if I were the authors, I would definitely make the oceans at least 2–3 km deep at their maximum.
3. About tectonics. What's described in the video as 'many small plates' is highly reminiscent of the Proterozoic. The tectonics could be a mix of Proterozoic and modern types.
Proceeds to invent the ultimate nightmare planet that's purely fictional.
actual answer: Humanity.
That’s actually a really neat idea for a science fiction story
cons: everywhere is tropical
This video was sponsored by Brilliant. Thanks a lot for the support!