1: \section{Concluding remarks}
2: \setcounter{equation}{0}
3: \setcounter{figure}{0}
4: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
5: We have illustrated in \S 5 the cases $\omega_{d} = 365 \, \omega_{y}$ and $\omega_{d} = 6 \, \omega_{y}$.
6: We did so for ease of calculation and because the year's and day's cycles indeed dominate the surface thermodynamics of the planet
7: in the global stationary regime. Choosing two examples satisfying $\omega_{d} = n \, \omega_{y}$ is therefore significant.
8:
9: On the other hand we remark that the terrestrial ratio $\frac{\omega_{d}}{\omega_{y}}$ is not exactly 365, and in general the rule
10: $\frac{\omega_{d}}{\omega_{y}} = \frac{n_{1}}{n_{2}}$ cannot be expected to be the law of nature. In fact complicated astronomical
11: events are responsible for such ratio.
12:
13: When $\frac{\omega_{d}}{\omega_{y}} =$ real number, the temperature field is more complicated and we have shown in appendix C
14: that the average field $<T>_{\theta, \varphi} (t)$ has annual periodicity, in the stationary regime, but the field
15: $T (R, \theta, \varphi, t)$ is non periodic. This means that the Fourier expansion of $T (R, \theta, \varphi, t)$ spans the infinite interval
16: \begin{equation*}
17: 0 < t < \infty
18: \end{equation*}
19: and therefore $T$ contains a continuous spectrum in the frequency $\nu$. Instead the average $<T>_{\theta, \varphi} (t)$
20: spans the finite interval
21: \begin{equation*}
22: t' < t < t' + \tau_{y}
23: \end{equation*}
24: and therefore $<T>_{\theta, \varphi} (t)$ contains a discrete spectrum:
25: \begin{equation*}
26: \nu = \frac{M}{\tau_{y}}
27: \end{equation*}
28: This strange fact comes as a consequence of the simplicity of the
29: elliptic motion, which determines for the radiation input the factorized form
30: \begin{equation} \label{eq:x1}
31: \phi^{in} = K (t) \, \mathfrak{f} (\theta, \varphi, t)
32: \end{equation}
33: Evidently, a planetary motion sensible to many body interactions, produces a
34: radiation input which is much more complicated than (\ref{eq:x1}) \cite{ref:mac}
35: and the temperature field $T (R, \theta, \varphi, t)$ is extremely difficult to analyze.
36:
37: The above comments come from the fact that the equation of motion (see appendix C)
38: \begin{equation} \label{eq:z1}
39: c_{v} \, \rho_{v} \, \frac{\de T}{\de t} =
40: \kappa \, \Delta_{r, \theta, \varphi} \, T + \phi^{in} (\theta, \varphi, t) \, \delta (r - R)
41: \end{equation}
42: is linear dissipative and is attracted by the driving term (\ref{eq:x1}).
43:
44: We can make at this point a step forward and move to the consideration of the fluid motions on the surface of the planet, see \S 4.
45: The partial differential equation of the fluid motions, the Navier-Stokes equation containing the heat transport,
46: is non linear, and is coupled to the linear equation (\ref{eq:z1}) which acts as the free field, or unperturbed term,
47: in the self-consistent description of the interaction fluid-rigid surface.
48: The fluid motions are driven by the field $T$ solution of (\ref{eq:z1}), and in turn operate on it according to some
49: iterative procedure, not discussed in this paper.
50:
51: Now, the fluid velocity field has the property of being chaotic.
52: If we consider the global solution, we are induced to think that it will manifest a regular part and a chaotic part in some sort of proportion.
53: This concept of ``proportion'' is the extrapolation of the property discussed in this paper: periodic the surface average, non periodic locally.
54: It is exactly this proportion which is the most important constraint that the planetary orbit induces in the relationship
55: Star-Life.
56:
57: The living organism must cope both with the regular, periodic part of the ambient, and with the remaining chaotic unpredictable part of the ambient. Therefore its control strategy must be quite complex, perhaps we may say intelligent, and able to deal
58: with predictable ambient inputs plus unpredictable ambient inputs.
59: This analysis could be rejected in favor of the principle that unpredictability is dictated by geography.
60: In this view the discussion of extraterrestrial life seems to be reduced to casualness, so that we return to the geocentric viewpoint. This is not the viewpoint adopted in this paper. Above the uncertainties of geography stand the general constraints discussed
61: in \S 5, where we show that there are acceptable or non acceptable combinations of star temperatures and orbit semi-axis, plus acceptable or non acceptable combination of eccentricity and inclination. The definition of constraint we have adopted rests solely on general thermodynamics, and this is the only way we have to talk of the compatibility with life on planets which are not directly observable.
62: