It's life Jim, but not as we know it... Jim being James Webb

[StarryEyed]

Just to bring it back on track this is a really exciting announcement. Can you imagine all the jaws hitting the floor when they saw the data.

[saac]

2 minutes ago, StarryEyed said:

Just to bring it back on track this is a really exciting announcement. Can you imagine all the jaws hitting the floor when they saw the data.

Agree it really is exciting. It is remarkable that they can,with any degree of confidence, analyse the spectrum of the parent star through an exo planet's atmosphere.  It's almost the stuff of science fiction - I do love spectroscopy it's one of my favourite areas of physics when teaching. 

Although I can't help but wonder how this discovery could ever be conclusive or advanced, I don't think it could; shame the system is so far away.  In no way does it detract from what has been done and of course increments the science and technology.

Jim 

[StarryEyed]

Smart science is demonstrating the need for a bigger better experiment than the last one. Otherwise your out of a job.

[saac]

1 hour ago, StarryEyed said:

Smart science is demonstrating the need for a bigger better experiment than the last one. Otherwise your out of a job.

We need a bigger boat lol.   Hey did you see the ELT on the Sky at Night, looks very promising. 

Jim 

[StarryEyed]

Have to admit putting all other TV and streaming on hold while I rebinge (did I invent a word) Red Dwarf. I don't know why or how this happened. Probably got bored waiting for an episode of the sky at night. I'm nearly done episode 2 series XII.

Normality will resume shortly. (Sounds like a plot line)

Edited September 16, 2023 by StarryEyed

[Barry Fitz-Gerald]

3 hours ago, saac said:

Anything is possible, it's  "probable" that makes them flights of fantasy

.......................probability based on Bayesian Statistics

https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1921655117

 

 

Edited September 16, 2023 by Barry Fitz-Gerald

[Barry Fitz-Gerald]

3 hours ago, saac said:

Anything is possible, it's  "probable" that makes them flights of fantasy

.......................probability based on more Statistics

https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/international-journal-of-astrobiology/article/abiogenesis-the-carter-argument-reconsidered/BBA3D5F057C5212D76E01F1A0570AB0D

 

Edited September 16, 2023 by Barry Fitz-Gerald

[saac]

Looks like they have delt themselves a free hand with that one, like I said flights of fantasy, or maybe it should be fancy. It's all in statistics!!

"The observation of life on Earth is commonly believed to be uninformative regarding the probability of abiogenesis on other Earth-like planets. This belief is based on the selection effect of our existence. We necessarily had to find ourselves on a planet where abiogenesis occurred, thus nothing can be inferred about the probability of abiogenesis from this observation alone. "

They are pushing against an open door with that one to be honest.   The truth remains we have no clue how life started abiogenesis or otherwise, we only have a good analogue for its development.  If I was spending money looking for life elsewhere I know where I'd be hanging hat  with respect to what I'd be looking for.  

Jim 

Edited September 16, 2023 by saac

[StarryEyed]

The data coming from Webb is emperical. The teams working with that data are looking to produce an evidence based result. One that stands up to scrutiny. Then you need to repeat on a bigger scale.

You can't allow the theoretical and practical to get mixed up even though they directly influence each other. The truth is we don't have the money to risk failure. Science doesn't get funded easily. I've seen research scientists basically selling their soul for funding just to keep their work alive. Others as soon as they get published move to lecturing (far smarter than me just friends) just so they can have some stability for their families.

Theories are free. The collection of empirical data envitably costs money.

[saac]

I think we may need to wait a few million years for the DMS producing lifeforms to evolve and then develop the radio before we can say job done.

Jim

[Mr Spock]

We have no clue who, or what is out there, and have no direct evidence of such. I suggest, as a weak and feeble species, we not poke the bear, or whatever creatures may be out there 

[DaveS]

I think we should keep shtum, as we are in a dark forest. Don't attract the grabby aliens.

[MalcolmP]

" few million years for the DMS producing lifeforms to evolve and then develop radio"

Good afternoon all,
How do we know that "they" did not already do that Xbillion years ago, and stopped using it Xby +100y ago ?
Our use of multi kilowatt transmitters (mult megawatt erp) is probably coming to an end soon after only 100 +/-y
Thinks - I must reinvestigate this planet/system - how far away is it? Do we have the tech to detect their radio if they are still using it domestically. I mean domestically, not deliberately beaming a "hello" towards us ?

But I really jumped in to say :- Darwin's survival of the fittest is very persuasive, so I am with the "keep our heads down" brigade.  
 

[MalcolmP]

33 minutes ago, MalcolmP said:

how far away is it?

Only about 120 light-years away !
not far at all, I wonder if it has been on Frank and SETI's watch list ?

Not too far away, I could be there in a few years to have a look-see, at a decent fraction of light speed, but I wouldn't see you lot again and would have trouble reporting back home  !
 

[saac]

51 minutes ago, MalcolmP said:

" few million years for the DMS producing lifeforms to evolve and then develop radio"

Good afternoon all,
How do we know that "they" did not already do that Xbillion years ago, and stopped using it Xby +100y ago ?
Our use of multi kilowatt transmitters (mult megawatt erp) is probably coming to an end soon after only 100 +/-y
Thinks - I must reinvestigate this planet/system - how far away is it? Do we have the tech to detect their radio if they are still using it domestically. I mean domestically, not deliberately beaming a "hello" towards us ?

But I really jumped in to say :- Darwin's survival of the fittest is very persuasive, so I am with the "keep our heads down" brigade.  
 

Coz there would be other markers (both bio and non bio) in the spectrum other than DMS.  

Jim 

Edited September 17, 2023 by saac

[saac]

1 hour ago, Mr Spock said:

We have no clue who, or what is out there, and have no direct evidence of such. I suggest, as a weak and feeble species, we not poke the bear, or whatever creatures may be out there 

Nah, I think "they" are the ones keeping quiet, they have seen what we can do !  If there are any cosmic bears out there we will poke them for sure. 

Jim  

[MalcolmP]

45 minutes ago, saac said:

 other markers

Which we presume they looked for and didnt find, especially Oxygen,  but the beeb item at the top of the topic didnt say either way.
I have found a NASA item about it and that does not say either, which means that they did not find any - as that is an indicator of higher life forms. When it comes to peer review would that be a problem if they had not looked for Oxygen ?

Can DMS be produced by any non-oxy-producing life (as we know it Jim) ?
 

Edited September 17, 2023 by MalcolmP

[saac]

43 minutes ago, MalcolmP said:

Which we presume they looked for and didnt find, especially Oxygen,  but the beeb item at the top of the topic didnt say either way.
I have found a NASA item about it and that does not say either, which means that they did not find any - as that is an indicator of higher life forms. When it comes to peer review would that be a problem if they had not looked for Oxygen ?

Can DMS be produced by any non-oxy-producing life (as we know it Jim) ?
 

Exactly, they didn't find any of what may be termed advanced industrial markers! So fairly safe to say they (our cosmic DMS emitteres) haven't invented the radio yet, or invented it and then abandoned it as suggested lol    We can but wait with intrepidation !

Can DMS be produced by non biological processes?   Yes it can - however the reason it is an exciting find is that here on Earth the majority of DMS apparently has a biological origin. 

Jim 

ps - here is a link which contains the atmospheric spectral analysis of K2-18B

https://www.nasa.gov/goddard/2023/webb-discovers-methane-carbon-dioxide-in-atmosphere-of-k2-18b

Edited September 17, 2023 by saac

[MalcolmP]

33 minutes ago, saac said:

wait with intrepidation !

and be prepared to say "Yes sir, Mr Big Bear" after they finish playing tag in ufos

34 minutes ago, saac said:

by non biological

Thanks yes, I see, but I was meaning dms produced by life that is not producing oxygen. As you say dms on earth is mostly a consequence of life but so also is massive quantities of oxygen at the same time, one without the other is, perhaps, on the unlikely side of the scales?
So it is best to say " we have detected dms as a possible sign of life" rather than " we have detected dms but without oxygen is is unlikely to be a sign of life"
 

[Barry Fitz-Gerald]

You do not an oxygen atmosphere to produce dimethyl sulphide, anaerobic bacteria as well as other others can synthesise it quite happily. If you went back to the early earth say 3billion years ago there would have been dimethyl sulphide in the atmosphere but not a whiff of oxygen - which would have been toxic to most life forms.

[dweller25]

On 12/09/2023 at 16:35, Astronomist said:

the planet is much too far away to ever go there.

Whether by chance or design that’s probably a good thing 🤔

[MalcolmP]

14 minutes ago, Barry Fitz-Gerald said:

anaerobic bacteria as well as other others

Thank you, that is exactly what my tiny brain-cell was driving at,
but not being a biologist I was unsure of.
Yes, it was the arrival of (cyanobacteria ?) photosynthesis that produced the oxygen extinction event(s?)
Till now I had not come across the relative importance of dms,
so yes I'll take the @saac imperative to sit back and wait for the radio sigint to arrive
 

[Barry Fitz-Gerald]

Orbiting an M7 Dwarf might be a bit of dodgy place for complex life to evolve what with all those nasty flares, so I am not too concerned about a Mars Attack scenario from that direction. It is nice to see DMS getting some attention after all these years, but of course the detection of Methane, which is a biomarker but unstable and needs to be constantly replaced to be detectable, is also interesting - rather like its detection some time ago on Mars that provoked a bit of a stir. But methane can also be produced by non biological pathways so less exciting than DMS - if it has in fact been detected, which is still up in the air.

[saac]

3 hours ago, MalcolmP said:

So it is best to say " we have detected dms as a possible sign of life" rather than " we have detected dms but without oxygen is is unlikely to be a sign of life"
 

I'm not sure they have said it is a sign of life - that is typical media laziness. What they have announced is detection of DMS in the atmospheric spectrum.  They further  acknowledge that DMS on Earth is predominantly released by biology.  Remember as well that for a large period of Earth's history our atmosphere was also depleted of oxygen it being dissolved and trapped in sea water.  

extract from NASA release 

"The abundance of methane and carbon dioxide, and shortage of ammonia, support the hypothesis that there may be a water ocean underneath a hydrogen-rich atmosphere in K2-18 b. These initial Webb observations also provided a possible detection of a molecule called dimethyl sulfide (DMS). On Earth, this is only produced by life. The bulk of the DMS in Earth’s atmosphere is emitted from phytoplankton in marine environments.  The inference of DMS is less robust and requires further validation. “Upcoming Webb observations should be able to confirm if DMS is indeed present in the atmosphere of K2-18 b at significant levels,” explained Madhusudhan."

 

Jim 

Edited September 17, 2023 by saac

[Swoop1]

On 15/09/2023 at 19:56, Mr Spock said:

Humans think they are the centre of the universe. 

I think it is a bit harsh to paint the whole of humanity with the same brush.

Teenagers however......

😉