Naphthalene Found In Outer Space

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Naphthalene Found In Outer Space

Posted by timothy on Saturday September 20, 2008 @02:38PM from the wake-me-up-when-they-find-remulac dept.

Adam Korbitz writes with an excerpt from his blog on an exciting discovery in space: "A team of researchers led by Spanish scientists has published their discovery of the complex molecule naphthalene in an interstellar star-forming cloud, indicating many prebiotic organic molecules necessary for life as we know it could have been present when our own solar system formed. According to the new research — published in The Astrophysical Journal Letters — the naphthalene molecules were discovered 700 light-years from Earth in a star-forming region of the constellation Perseus, in the direction of the star Cernis 52."

54 of 180 comments (clear)

This is evidence of life. by Anonymous Coward · 2008-09-20 14:44 · Score: 5, Funny

Naphtalene--or better known as the primary ingredient in MOTHBALLS

At last. We know the secret coordinates of Mothra. (S)he lies in the constellation Perseus. This may lead us to discover the origins of Godzilla.

My girlfriend brought over brownies...
1. Re:This is evidence of life. by DrMrLordX · 2008-09-20 14:52 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  Great, now all we need to do is stick it in my car's gas tank to improve fuel economy! Yay!
2. Re:This is evidence of life. by AnomaliesAndrew · 2008-09-20 16:14 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  So not only are the universe and my grandparents both extremely old, but they both smell the same now... great.
  
  --
  Move all sig!
3. Re:This is evidence of life. by Whiteox · 2008-09-20 18:32 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  Mothballs are exciting only to moths.
  A moth without balls is a eunuch.
  I would say that mothballs are extremely important to moths.
  
  --
  Don't be apathetic. Procrastinate!
4. Re:This is evidence of life. by Laser+Dan · 2008-09-20 19:25 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  Mothballs are exciting only to moths.
  A moth without balls is a eunuch.
  I would say that mothballs are extremely important to moths.
  This is Slashdot so I can see I need to explain something.
  I apologise for using a term you may be unfamiliar with, but a moth without balls is called a female moth.
me no RTFA by mrsteveman1 · 2008-09-20 14:45 · Score: 3, Interesting

How exactly does one detect specific molecules, 700 light years away?
1. Re:me no RTFA by pushing-robot · 2008-09-20 14:47 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  With one of these.
  
  --
  How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
2. Re:me no RTFA by icegreentea · 2008-09-20 14:50 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  They found the absorption spectrum of the naphthalene cation in the light. \
  ""We have detected the presence of the naphthalene cation in a cloud of interstellar matter located 700 lightyears from the Earth", says IAC researcher Susana Iglesias Groth."
3. Re:me no RTFA by pushing-robot · 2008-09-20 14:58 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Sorry, in my hurry I was wrong again. These articles cover the astronomical uses of spectroscopy:
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomical_spectroscopy
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emission_spectrum
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absorption_spectrum
  
  --
  How can I believe you when you tell me what I don't want to hear?
4. Re:me no RTFA by omeomi · 2008-09-20 15:03 · Score: 3, Insightful
  
  Humor attempted, seems failed.
  
  Indeed. I wasn't even sure if you were kidding...I was about to mention that Spectroscopy can be done just fine at a distance...
  
  --
  ZuluPad, the wiki notepad on crack
5. Re:me no RTFA by Tablizer · 2008-09-20 15:08 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  How exactly does one detect specific molecules, 700 light years away?
  Using Google, of course
  
  --
  Table-ized A.I.
6. Re:me no RTFA by Anonymous Coward · 2008-09-20 15:08 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  With one of these.
  
  .
  
  .
  
  .
  
  times 1E17
7. Re:me no RTFA by Kardos · 2008-09-20 15:34 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  with one of these: http://images.craveonline.com/article_imgs/Image/smelloscope.jpg
Unbeknownst to many by Trails · 2008-09-20 14:48 · Score: 5, Interesting

An early draft of Arthur C. Clarke's 2001:A Space Odyssey contained the line

My God, it's full of mothballs

which was changed during editing, but further reinforces the prescience of Mr. Clarke.
1. Re:Unbeknownst to many by DrMrLordX · 2008-09-20 14:54 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  I guess you could say the original draft of 2001: A Space Odyssey was mothballed? Hur hur!
2. Re:Unbeknownst to many by belmolis · 2008-09-20 15:25 · Score: 3, Funny
  
  The next thing they'll find is that that region is where all the defunct spaceships are kept.
No moths in outer space! by kybur · 2008-09-20 14:52 · Score: 5, Funny

I always wondered why there were no moths in outer space. This explains everything!
1. Re:No moths in outer space! by omeomi · 2008-09-20 15:08 · Score: 3, Interesting
  
  I always wondered why there were no moths in outer space. This explains everything!
  
  I've always wondered why the elderly are so keen on mothballs. Were there more moths around 75 years ago?
  
  --
  ZuluPad, the wiki notepad on crack
2. Re:No moths in outer space! by Tablizer · 2008-09-20 15:12 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  I've always wondered why the elderly are so keen on mothballs. Were there more moths around 75 years ago?
  Natural fibers are more susceptible to them than synthetics, which we use more of now.
  
  --
  Table-ized A.I.
3. Re:No moths in outer space! by arth1 · 2008-09-20 16:24 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  Natural fibers are more susceptible to them than synthetics, which we use more of now.
  A plausible answer, but a wrong one. It's not just moths that are more scarce inside our homes, but other flying insects too. Few homes have fly paper hanging in various rooms anymore. And young people today panic if they get a bumblebee inside the house -- they simply don't know how to deal with it, because they almost never have to.
  The reason is simply that insects had an easier time flying through an open window or chimney than an air conditioner or electric/gas powered heater. The window screen is pretty new too -- even where available earlier, the windows were usually side-hinged and not sliding, and window screens had to be much bigger, and it was a hassle to add and remove them.
  These days, you only get large flying insects entering when a door is open.
  Cockroaches, ants and other crawling insects, you still get. And fruit flies, which people bring in with plants and produce.
4. Re:No moths in outer space! by Kagura · 2008-09-20 17:11 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  Do you know you have more nerve endings in your gut than you have in your head? You can look it up. Now, I know some of you are going to say, "I did look it up, and that's not true." That's 'cause you looked it up in a book. Next time, look it up in your gut. I did. My gut tells me that's how our nervous system works.
  
  Also, I am AC.
5. Re:No moths in outer space! by Hognoxious · 2008-09-21 09:00 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  You post on slashdot ... with a five figure user Id ... and you've had clothes that weren't polyester? Hand in your card!
  
  --
  Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Another win for panspermia theory by symbolset · 2008-09-20 15:01 · Score: 4, Interesting

Literally "the origin of life is everywhere," panspermia theory posits that the seeds life exist all over the universe. A related but separate theory called "exogenesis" posits that life began somewhere other than Earth and was delivered here.
We've observed vast clouds of organic material far larger than our galaxy in the reaches of space. Now we've discovered prebiotic chemicals there. It's not that much of a stretch to guess that life-as-we-know-it is not uncommon. Intelligence (such as it is?) may be less common. Given the vastness of space and time it's not unreasonable to hope that we're not alone.

--
Help stamp out iliturcy.
1. Re:Another win for panspermia theory by symbolset · 2008-09-20 15:34 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  Dewd. The girls that eat up panspermia are teh hawtness.
  Now escape mom's basement, k?
  /Some elements of post may be parent specific.
  
  --
  Help stamp out iliturcy.
2. Re:Another win for panspermia theory by amRadioHed · 2008-09-20 17:43 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  Dewd. The girls that eat up panspermia are teh hawtness.
  Eww, I hope that's not the part specific to your parents. TMI.
  
  --
  We hope your rules and wisdom choke you / Now we are one in everlasting peace
OIL! by sanman2 · 2008-09-20 15:01 · Score: 4, Funny

Time to invade
1. Re:OIL! by linumax · 2008-09-20 16:11 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  Time to invade
  
  Time to Liberate(TM).
2. Re:OIL! by Lord+Lode · 2008-09-20 20:33 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  Woot, just 1400 years of flying there and back and it's all ours on Earth!
Misread that one by Cylix · 2008-09-20 15:01 · Score: 3, Insightful

At first I thought it said Neanderthal.
This would be so much cooler then Naphtalene.
My first thought was something along these lines.
Exactly how did he get out there?
I suspected it was a crude version of this... http://www.defensetech.org/archives/002387.html

--
"You should always go to other people's funerals; otherwise, they won't come to yours." -- Yogi Berra
simple molecule by wizardforce · 2008-09-20 15:08 · Score: 3, Informative

napthalene is a simple aromatic hydrocarbon, basically one benzene ring fused with another. molecular formula C10H8. hydrocarbons can be cracked under certain conditions to produce various aromatic hydrocarbons so finding it in space could be fairly common if there are hydrocarbons near a source capable of cracking them.

--
Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
1. Re:simple molecule by symbolset · 2008-09-20 15:23 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  napthalene is a simple aromatic hydrocarbon, basically one benzene ring fused with another. molecular formula C10H8. hydrocarbons can be cracked under certain conditions to produce various aromatic hydrocarbons so finding it in space could be fairly common if there are hydrocarbons near a source capable of cracking them.
  Great. Now you need to explain why by accident vast quantities of the organic material hydrocarbons were converted to napthalene in sufficient quantity to be detected at a range of 400 lightyears, and then explain how this event is locally unique so that it didn't happen in every corner of the universe. Good luck with that. May I offer you a noodle? You need only let it touch you to feel its effects.
  
  --
  Help stamp out iliturcy.
I didn't know anybody lost it by Tablizer · 2008-09-20 15:14 · Score: 2, Funny

nuf sed

--
Table-ized A.I.
abiogenesis is cool! by purpleraison · 2008-09-20 15:22 · Score: 4, Informative

For those not familiar with the field of abiogenesis, it is a truly remarkable field of study. The search for the first origin of life on our planet, or rather when organic matter achieved 'life' as we understand it.
I find it quite interesting personally, how the primordial sludge brewed into our very first ancestor.
Excelsior!!

--
I am open source, and Linux baby!
1. Re:abiogenesis is cool! by TapeCutter · 2008-09-20 18:13 · Score: 4, Informative
  
  Good video explaination of abiogensis, from the museum of science. No gods, no aliens, no impossible improbability, no fungus covered comets, no lightning striking mud puddles, just chemistry and physics! Nice soundtrack too....enjoy!
  
  --
  And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
The reason why this is important by spineboy · 2008-09-20 15:41 · Score: 4, Interesting

Napthalene is a conjugated benzene ring compound. This then somewhat shows that complex ring compounds can be made in space. If these, then, can be made, then the jump to the DNA bases, and amino acid bases is not too far away.

--
..........FULL STOP.
1. Re:The reason why this is important by moderatorrater · 2008-09-20 17:00 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  Perhaps, then, the Star Trek vision of the future, where all life forms are similar, could be correct, at least to the extent that they're all DNA and carbon based? Also, wouldn't this push the chances of life evolving on a suitable planet close to 100%?
2. Re:The reason why this is important by Kagura · 2008-09-20 17:03 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  The chance of life evolving on a suitable planet is already 100%. ;)
3. Re:The reason why this is important by moderatorrater · 2008-09-20 17:49 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Unless I'm misreading your comment, you're mistaking observed rate for overall chance.
4. Re:The reason why this is important by magarity · 2008-09-20 21:11 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  Ah, but what's the chance of intelligent life evolving?
5. Re:The reason why this is important by JaumPaw · 2008-09-20 21:31 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  Now, now, no need to be cynical.
6. Re:The reason why this is important by David+Gerard · 2008-09-20 23:48 · Score: 4, Funny
  
  Star Trek had silicon-based lifeforms. Silicone-based lifeforms are a bit more like this.
  
  --
  http://rocknerd.co.uk
7. Re:The reason why this is important by David+Gerard · 2008-09-21 01:09 · Score: 2, Funny
  
  That was the sixties! The breasts were real then!
  
  --
  http://rocknerd.co.uk
8. Re:The reason why this is important by WgT2 · 2008-09-21 01:34 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  A PhD in Biology once posed this to me:
  
  Suppose you can get all the ingredients for live together in one 'soup' but how do you 'accidently' get a lipid membrane to surround it?
  Thus, it won't matter whether the primordial soup ever existed until it can be shown that said soup could become surrounded by a hydrophobic membrane on its own.
9. Re:The reason why this is important by lysergic.acid · 2008-09-21 06:29 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  i think i saw this discussed in a TV program or documentary. if i remember correctly, there are already labs working on this problem. i think one university researcher has even successfully created such hydrophobic membranes using basic chemical reactions that could spontaneously occur under the right conditions.
  obviously there are many different pieces of the puzzle that need to be solved, but the discovery of Naphthalene in space, like the lipid membrane problem, are just one more key element that we've gotten out of the way.
  i mean, without the primordial soup, the hydrophobic membrane would not matter either. so it doesn't make sense to dismiss this just because there are still other important issues. otherwise we'd never learn anything unless all of the pieces suddenly materialized all at once.
Re:I don't believe it! by ufoolme · 2008-09-20 16:03 · Score: 4, Funny

You obversely haven't played spore.
Re:ummmm /confused by usul294 · 2008-09-20 16:22 · Score: 4, Informative

When a electron leaves an excited state it emits a photon. Every element and molecule has a unique set of frequencies for these transfers. So by looking at the light coming off of it, you can figure out whats in it. Its called spectroscopy. If in high school chemistry you ever burned chemicals and used a cardboard thing over your eye to see lines, you've got the basic idea.
Re:I don't understand by lrbays · 2008-09-20 16:28 · Score: 2, Funny

It doesn't make a bit of difference, guys. The balls are inert.
Re:ummmm /confused by Anonymous Coward · 2008-09-20 16:29 · Score: 4, Insightful

If you don't know the difference between microbes and molecules, you should probably go read some science books.
Would it really be that hard? by tjstork · 2008-09-20 16:39 · Score: 3, Interesting

While the production of naphthalene is rare, I doubt it is unique. They are only looking 700 light years out.
You figure that there's some set mixing, temperature and pressure that coupled with the right raw materials, kicks out different kinds of organic chemicals. Park the right cloud of raw good next to the right kind of star and in the right kind of gravity area, and, it seems reasonable that all sorts of organics might be found eventually all over the universe.
For all we know, our solar system just whipped right through a cloud of stellar cooked organics, and we practically just have life rained down on our little world.

--
This is my sig.
1. Re:Would it really be that hard? by symbolset · 2008-09-20 16:47 · Score: 4, Interesting
  
  For all we know, our solar system just whipped right through a cloud of stellar cooked organics, and we practically just have life rained down on our little world.
  And since all the stars we can closely observe have planets, to expect that the star that went supernova and gave us all the elements above Iron did not also have them is perhaps silly.
  So... Is the "stuff of life" common or not? Further study is needed and is under way. We may discover in the Oort cloud the seeds of life. If we do, that should lay the question to rest.
  
  --
  Help stamp out iliturcy.
Eega Beeva! by Neoncat · 2008-09-20 17:00 · Score: 2, Insightful

This just proofs that Eega Beeva is out there, somewhere...
Again? by DynaSoar · 2008-09-20 18:44 · Score: 3, Informative

The same observatory reported the same thing 15 years ago: www.iac.es/folleto/research/preprints/files/PP08019.pdf
"And we're going to KEEP discovering it until you get it right!"

--
"I may be synthetic, but I'm not stupid." -- Bishop 341-B
that explains it by zoid.com · 2008-09-20 20:57 · Score: 2, Funny

I knew I smelled something...

--
Zoid.com
Re:ummmm /confused by Fear+the+Clam · 2008-09-21 01:04 · Score: 2, Funny

When a electron leaves an excited state it emits a photon.
Thus explaining the origin of photon-crusted socks in the hamper.