Hi Cyrus,
Very interesting! Red Dwarfs are apparently the most common star types. Unfortunately, because their host suns are fairly dim, their habitable zones are close in, resulting in tidally locked worlds. So, baking on one side and freezing on the other. In simulations, vast oceans can make for better heat distribution, but there is also the question of whether such worlds can generate the strong magnetic fields necessary to protect them from the solar flares and solar wind of their host star. Overall, and sadly from my perspective, I think they will almost always turn out to be barren rocks.
It is too early in the process of exploring the universe to say this for sure, but it looks like the situation with most exoplanets will be much like the situation we faced as we became able to look more closely at the other planets in our own star system--barren and environmentally hostile worlds where massive terraforming projects would be necessary to turn them into anything like our own beautiful world. From this I hesitantly deduce that:
(1) We will face the same dilemma elsewhere that we do in our own star system--(a) terraforming; (b) living in pressurized domes, etc.; and/or (c) building space habitats where we can simulate earth conditions and gravity. So, O'Neill (and Bezos) may be correct in choosing (c) after all (versus Musk). I like the idea of terraforming myself, but these are typically long-term projects that will depend on finding planets suitable for the purpose, whereas space habitats seem only to require the presence of suitable resources.
(2) Our dreams of a universe teeming with alien life forms and habitable worlds may all be bunkum. I grew up reading science fiction books where both Mars and Venus were habitable and the Solar System teemed with strange life forms and intelligent life. The current generation has grown up with science fiction shows and movies where other star systems teem with habitable planets, strange life forms and intelligent life. It appears that both suppositions are erroneous. We seem to live on an "Eden" world surrounded by an enormous waste, and life elsewhere may be exceedingly rare if not non-existent.
(3) Therefore, we need to vigilantly protect what we have--for it seems unlikely there will be any replacements. This doesn't mean that we shouldn't move forward with what Bezos and Musk are trying to do, but we better be **** careful to preserve the original while we are at it.
Cordially,
S&S
PS--There is one other option, which is rarely explored in Sci Fi, but should nonetheless be mentioned. We might adapt ourselves and the other creatures on our world for the planets we find and/or what we can make of them. I doubt we would ever be able to bioengineer our type of life to survive on a world without an atmosphere, or a chlorine atmosphere, but with those provisos I am not sure what the limits might be. Could a water world like the one shown be filled with mer-people and aquatic life adapted to the conditions? Can we make people with strengthened limbs, strange lungs and armored hides to live on a planet with high gravity, high UV, and a different atmospheric mix? I am not sure what the limits are here, but it may turn out that the "aliens" of the future will be our own descendents. Or, maybe not.
Cordially,
S&S