Something out there?

[Pincher]

Wonder if this will amount to anything?

https://www.independent.co.uk/space/k218b-planet-e...

Edited by Pincher on Thursday 17th April 06:47

[SpudLink]

This will drive scientists to theorise ways in which the molecules can be produced in non-biological ways.

Unfortunately we can’t say it’s evidence of life. It’s evidence of the possibility of life.

[Austin Prefect]

Arguably finding a previously unknown chemical process that could produce these effects would be more useful, if less exciting, than detecting something green and squishy 120 light years away.

[Simpo Two]

'large amounts of chemicals'

What chemicals?

[Austin Prefect]

Simpo Two said:

'large amounts of chemicals'

What chemicals?

Dimethyl sulfide, or possibly dimethyl disulfide. Both of which are generally short lived so the implication is that something is replenishing it.

[Pincher]

Simpo Two said:

'large amounts of chemicals'

What chemicals?

Better article here - https://www.newscientist.com/article/2477008-astro...

I read another one (Telegraph possibly) that said they have been try to disprove the signals received so far but are struggling to do so at the moment.

[Simpo Two]

Austin Prefect said:

Dimethyl sulfide, or possibly dimethyl disulfide...

I thought they sounded a bit volcanic so checked and and Google AI says:

Dimethyl disulfide (DMDS), a volatile sulfur compound with a strong odor, can be released into the atmosphere from natural sources, including volcanoes, and from anthropogenic sources. While DMDS is not directly emitted by all volcanoes, it can be a component of volcanic gas emanations, particularly in areas with active fumaroles (volcanic vents).
Here's a more detailed look:

Volcanic Sources:
DMDS, along with other volatile organic sulfur compounds (VOSCs) like hydrogen sulfide (H2S) and dimethyl sulfide (DMS), can be present in volcanic gases. These gases are released from volcanic vents and fumarole fields


Maybe the scientists didn't check that. I would suggest 'nothing to see here'.

[LimaDelta]

At 124ly from earth I can't see the news effecting my day-to-day routine too much.

I mean, we already very strongly suspect there is life out there, does this really change anything?

[SpudLink]

LimaDelta said:

At 124ly from earth I can't see the news effecting my day-to-day routine too much.

I mean, we already very strongly suspect there is life out there, does this really change anything?

This doesn’t get us any close to answering the question. And I don’t think we’ll find strong evidence in the foreseeable future.

But, if we ever get comprehensive proof that life exists beyond our solar system, I’d say it would be the biggest scientific discovery of all time. Regardless of whether it affects the day-to-day routine of me, you, or anyone else on this planet.

[LimaDelta]

SpudLink said:

LimaDelta said:

At 124ly from earth I can't see the news effecting my day-to-day routine too much.

I mean, we already very strongly suspect there is life out there, does this really change anything?

This doesn’t get us any close to answering the question. And I don’t think we’ll find strong evidence in the foreseeable future.

But, if we ever get comprehensive proof that life exists beyond our solar system, I’d say it would be the biggest scientific discovery of all time. Regardless of whether it affects the day-to-day routine of me, you, or anyone else on this planet.

But is proving something we already 'know' really that much of a discovery? The numbers says they are out there. Does knowing exactly where (or when) they are matter? I'm all for discovery and intellectual curiosity, because it can lead to all kinds of other unintended consequences, but would finding life actually change any policy on earth? It's not like we are going to suit up and ask Elon to fire someone off on a 250* year round trip to say hello.

* at c, obviously it would take us a little bit longer

[Eric Mc]

That's the thing, we DON'T know.

Evidence like this is only an indicator. It's not proof - yet.

[Austin Prefect]

LimaDelta said:

But is proving something we already 'know' really that much of a discovery? The numbers says they are out there. Does knowing exactly where (or when) they are matter? I'm all for discovery and intellectual curiosity, because it can lead to all kinds of other unintended consequences, but would finding life actually change any policy on earth? It's not like we are going to suit up and ask Elon to fire someone off on a 250* year round trip to say hello.

* at c, obviously it would take us a little bit longer

The numbers don't really say that. It you make a reasonable sounding assumption of say 0.001% of theoretically habitable planets having life then they certainly do. But it's an assumption. It's possible in principle that there is only one. But if a planet not only in the same galaxy but essentially next door turns out to have life then it implies life is pretty common.

[askmemum]

Plenty of 'science' and not enough evidence it seems. Didn't we all go through something like this not long ago?

[Eric Mc]

Yes - very similar to an announcement made a couple of years ago regarding the discovery of certain chemical compounds in the atmosphere of Venus. After a brief flurry of excitement, this particular "evidence of life" seems to have faded - for the moment anyway.

[LimaDelta]

Eric Mc said:

That's the thing, we DON'T know.

Evidence like this is only an indicator. It's not proof - yet.

And never will until we are literally staring it in the face. It will always only be indicators, or theoretical mathematical 'proofs' given the vast distances involved.

Unless we find evidence of dead microbes on Mars, in which case we are two for two, and therefore it wouldn't be that unreasonable to assume there is 'life' pretty much everywhere else too.

[Terminator X]

Pincher said:

Wonder if this will amount to anything?

https://www.independent.co.uk/space/k218b-planet-e...

Edited by Pincher on Thursday 17th April 06:47

Life I guess is "abundant". Intelligent life takes a super long time to arrive and needs a very stable planet etc. The article seems a tad optimistic to me.

TX.

[redstar1]

LimaDelta said:

But is proving something we already 'know' really that much of a discovery? The numbers says they are out there. Does knowing exactly where (or when) they are matter? I'm all for discovery and intellectual curiosity, because it can lead to all kinds of other unintended consequences, but would finding life actually change any policy on earth? It's not like we are going to suit up and ask Elon to fire someone off on a 250* year round trip to say hello.

* at c, obviously it would take us a little bit longer

No but science funding is dependent on many things, one of those being a continued 'interest' in work being done, particularly when commercial results from the work are difficult to visualise. So the press release is "Possible evidence of life found" rather than "Almost certain volcanic activity detected".

[Simpo Two]

LimaDelta said:

And never will until we are literally staring it in the face. It will always only be indicators, or theoretical mathematical 'proofs' given the vast distances involved.

Unless we find evidence of dead microbes on Mars, in which case we are two for two, and therefore it wouldn't be that unreasonable to assume there is 'life' pretty much everywhere else too.

DNA or an alien equivalent would be conclusive.

[SpudLink]

LimaDelta said:

Eric Mc said:

That's the thing, we DON'T know.

Evidence like this is only an indicator. It's not proof - yet.

And never will until we are literally staring it in the face. It will always only be indicators, or theoretical mathematical 'proofs' given the vast distances involved.

Unless we find evidence of dead microbes on Mars, in which case we are two for two, and therefore it wouldn't be that unreasonable to assume there is 'life' pretty much everywhere else too.

Dead microbes on Mars would be huge.
But…
There will be the possibility, however remote, that early life could have been carried from one planet to another inside rocks after a meteor strike.
What we need is evidence of life on a planet outside our solar system.

[Austin Prefect]

SpudLink said:

Dead microbes on Mars would be huge.
But…
There will be the possibility, however remote, that early life could have been carried from one planet to another inside rocks after a meteor strike.
What we need is evidence of life on a planet outside our solar system.

EFA