Slashdot Mirror


First Organic Molecules Found on Alien World

Galactic_grub writes "The detection of planet HD 189733b is in some ways just another small victory for extra-solar planetary science. It is too hot for there to be anything 'alive'. Just the same, somewhere on the planet are trace amounts of the gas methane. The fact that the element was detected at all offers hope for understanding future discoveries of Earth-like worlds, says NewScientistSpace. Researchers from Caltech and University College London used the Hubble Space Telescope to peer at the planet and examined spectral signature of starlight filtered by the planet's atmosphere, to identify different chemicals. 'The authors suggest that some ill-understood chemical process might be responsible, either concentrating the methane in cooler parts of the atmosphere, or generating extra methane directly. Alternatively, the methane might simply mean that the planet happens to be very rich in carbon.'"

5 of 146 comments (clear)

  1. Methane is not an element by I'm+a+banana · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The fact that the element was detected at all
  2. Methane is an element? by blcamp · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The fact that the element was detected at all There's certainly an element of misunderstanding here.

    --
    The problem with socialism is that they always run out of other people's money. - Margaret Thatcher
  3. Misleading headline by slapout · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "trace amounts of the gas methane" != "First Organic Molecules Found"

    --
    Coder's Stone: The programming language quick ref for iPad
  4. Re:Unfortunately, not a smoking gun... by Metasquares · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Would such life depend on water? Well, not liquid water. It wouldn't be made up of combustable carbon chains, either.

    Slightly tangential, but I never did understand why we primarily evaluated the life supporting capability of a planet based on whether water could be present. We might know tons about terrestrial life, but we know nothing about how life could begin in a different environment. Our earth-centric assumptions may not hold, even though the same laws of chemistry and physics do.

  5. Re:Unfortunately, not a smoking gun... by gstoddart · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Slightly tangential, but I never did understand why we primarily evaluated the life supporting capability of a planet based on whether water could be present. We might know tons about terrestrial life, but we know nothing about how life could begin in a different environment.

    You've answered your own question with the second sentence.

    See, we don't know how to look for things we can't even fathom. If we look for places with liquid water, we know that "life as we know it" might exist there. All other statements are guess-work.

    Looking for forms of "life as we can't even fathom it" is sorta difficult --- you could look at anything, and you say "well, a form of life I can't conceive of might be there, but I have no test or measurement", which is meaningless. Basically, scientists are sticking to what they know and can make statements about, since anything else would be random conjecture and speculation, and have nothing to do with science.

    It's not that tough of a concept. Once we know about life forms we've never conceived of, we could expand our search for the conditions which those might thrive in. Until then, we just kinda assume that anything there would have to be a total long shot and beyond what we can know. Since it has no predictive value whatsoever, they ignore it completely.

    Cheers
    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.