Carbon From Outer Space Older Than Our Sun

Roland Piquepaille writes "While looking at interplanetary dust particles (IDPs) found in the Earth's stratosphere, researchers from the Washington University in St. Louis have found carbon older than the Solar System. They identified the organic material by its carbon isotopic composition, different from the one of carbon found on Earth. "Our findings are proof that there is presolar organic material coming into the Solar System yet today," said Christine Floss, the leading scientist. "This material has been preserved for more than 4.5 billion years, which is the age of the Solar System. It's amazing that it has survived for so long." This overview contains more details and references. It also contains pictures including the one of a sample's isotopic structure at a sub-micrometer scale."

Comments

About time

[shadowbearer]

Our findings are proof that there is presolar organic material coming into the Solar System yet today

I would have been shocked if this hadn't been found eventually - but it's nice to have positive proof.

Seems to me that this evidence gives a small boost to the Panspermia theory.

SB

Re:About time

[xilmaril]

and for those not familier with the subject (ie most people)

Svante Arrhenius theorized that bacterial spores propelled through space by light pressure were the seeds of life on Earth. British astronomers Fred Hoyle and Chandra Wickramasinghe rekindled interest in panspermia. They also proposed that comets, which are largely made of water-ice, carry bacterial life across galaxies and protect it from radiation damage along the way. Not necessarily a view I subscribe to, but an interesting one nevertheless.

by Theorellior, of Everything2.com

isotopic ratios

[gumbi west]

here is the isotopic ratio here on earth.

• 98.90 % C-12
• 1.10 % C-13

Re:isotopic ratios

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, I have a hard time understanding how they could use the ratio of 12 to 13 to date the carbon to 4.5 billion years if both isotopes are stable. Radiocarbon dating of the type we use to analyze fossil remains is based on the decay of C 14, which according to link above has a half life of about 6000 years. That makes it good for archaeology, since human history doesn't go back more than a couple orders of magnitude further, but I don't think you could extrapolate back billions of years that way. You'd end up with an imperceptibly small amount. Too bad the article doesn't specify what particular isotopes they're looking at...

Ancient Carbon Origin

[no longer myself]

A Long Time Ago In A Galaxy Far, Far, Away...

Jabba the Hut had Lando freeze a bunch of people including Han Solo in Carbonite. He hung Han on the wall where he was later rescued. The rest got launched into space and were used for target practice. This was probably their remains.

Ah, come on... It's late, it's Friday, and it's supposed to be funny! :-)

May not mean anything

[Hungus]

It may not be anything but a statistical anomoly. How we date and locate things has always fascinated me. I.e. this is older because it is underneath this other thing. This volcanic rock is this old because there is this much of a potasium isotope present. We have been acurately recording radiometrics for how long now? 20-30 years? (I know we have been recording them longer but not to the accuracy we can today) So think about the statistics: We look at the decay across 30 years and immediately say it must have a half life of 1.251 billion years? excuse me but thats a pretty small sample rate for my tastes. THis example uses K-AR but that just because I found google hits faster than for carbon isotopes .. sme basic priciple applies though not on as large a scale.

Re:May not mean anything

[addaon]

You are, I suppose, technically correct. It may be nothing but a statistical anomaly. Have you actually, uh, studied statistics? It's pretty easy to figure out the probability of that. It is equally probably that what we observe as gravity is merely a coincidence of random motion, and that the whole solar system go back to it's expected behavior and dissipate into a fine myst tomorrow.

Re:May not mean anything

[Hungus]

Yes it is possible but not equally probable that we could all simultaneously cease to exist . Yes, I have studied statistics to answer your question. And to counter your argument about gravity it is much more like someone saying gravity is 9.8mss cecause everywhere we have looked this was teh case. Now teh universe as a whole? I think we can observe that not only does gravity act in predicatble ways but we can manipulate it with ease ( add mass increase density etc) On the other hand I am talking about observing a dynamic substance over an infantesimal period of its existance. In fact I do not know of anything except for things like the platinum Kilogram standard and its ilk that have been studied for any duration. And to be honest I have my doubt about even that. Supposedly the kilogram is becoming less massive due to various factors, but those factors are well within the limits of measurement. More importantly than my knowledge of statistics would have been little things like my appointment to City College London to study Physics and Materials Sciences 14 years ago. What were you doing then?

Re:May not mean anything

[You're All Wrong]

Maybe, maybe not.

Assume that they have 6*10^20 atoms of the stuff. If the half life is a billion years, then they can 'sample' >10^10 decays. That's not a small sample.

YAW.

Vacuum cleaner?

[zeux]

looking at interplanetary dust particles (IDPs) found in the Earth's stratosphere

How do you do that? You catch them with a giant Swiffer mop?

The Cosmic Recycling Center

[Rob Riggs]

They are called stars: fusion, E=mc^2, supernovae. Behold the power of the atom.

Oh, and those theoretical apparitions called black holes -- the great Insinkerators in the sky.

Well.

[ColaMan]

Seeing that carbon generation is a long way down the chain from the present hydrogen -> helium main cycle our star is in, it is logical to conclude that all carbon here on earth must at one point have come from some extra-solar source.

So this is news because?

Re:Well.

[John Hasler]

The Solar System formed out of a single gas and dust cloud resulting from one or more supernovas. This cloud had a characteristic isotopic composition. The carbon these researchers have found has a different composition and so must have originated in a different dust cloud.