Slashdot Mirror


Carbon Dioxide and Water Found On Exoplanet

Off the Rails writes "The BBC reports that evidence has been found for both water vapour and carbon dioxide on a planet 63 light years away. The planet is a 'hot Jupiter' with a surface temperature of 1173K and an orbital period of just 53 hours. The gases were found spectroscopically once its orbit had been deduced from observation. NASA hailed the news as proof that Kepler will be able to do its job of finding planets capable of supporting life." Wikipedia also has an entry on the planet, dubbed HD 189733b.

38 of 151 comments (clear)

  1. Well.... by Fluffeh · · Score: 4, Funny

    I for one welcome our new 1173 Kelvin alien overlords!

    --
    Moved to http://soylentnews.org/. You are invited to join us too!
    1. Re:Well.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      There must have been a lot of SUV's to make the planet so hot!

  2. Doxide? by dafrazzman · · Score: 2, Funny

    Seriously?

    --
    My preferred name is frazz, but someone keeps taking it. If you see him, tell him I said hi.
    1. Re:Doxide? by dafrazzman · · Score: 2, Informative

      No, I guess I foolishly assumed it was a spelling error. Then I googled it. Slashdot has the 3rd result (as of now). There's no wikipedia entry. Googling "doxide definition" gives no relevant results. Please, enlighten me on this definition. It appears you are in the know on this obscure term.

      --
      My preferred name is frazz, but someone keeps taking it. If you see him, tell him I said hi.
    2. Re:Doxide? by iluvcapra · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yeah, Doxide. It's what you get when you use inline markup in your IronPython source code to generate HTML documentation ;)

      --
      Don't blame me, I voted for Baltar.
  3. Really? by Tubal-Cain · · Score: 3, Insightful

    NASA hailed the news as proof that Kepler will be able to do its job of finding planets capable of supporting life.

    So the announcement about the discovery of a planet not capable of supporting life... is proof that Hubble's replacement will be able to find planets that will support life?

  4. Re:1173K! by Tubal-Cain · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Well, that's 1,651.73 Fahrenheit/899.85 Celsius according to Google. Almost cozy.

  5. Re:1173K! by d3ac0n · · Score: 3, Informative

    1175 K = 902 C = 1655.6 F

    Really damn hot.

    "That's LORD Kelvin to you!" - Adam Savage

    --
    Official Heretic from the "Church of Global Warming". Proven right thanks to whistle blowers. AGW = Flat Earth Theory
  6. Capable of supporting life? by blitzkrieg3 · · Score: 3, Informative
    1173 kelvin = 1 651.73 degrees Fahrenheit

    NASA hailed the news as proof that Kepler will be able to do its job of finding planets capable of supporting life.

    I guess all you need to support life these days is water vapor and carbon dioxide. Never mind that the planet is hotter than the surface of some stars.

    1. Re:Capable of supporting life? by King_TJ · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yeah.... that was my thought too. If you start throwing ideas out there about "new life forms that would thrive in that temperature range" -- why not postulate about ones that don't require an atmosphere or "breathing" at all? Seems just as possible to me.

    2. Re:Capable of supporting life? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      NASA hailed the news as proof that Kepler will be able to do its job of finding planets capable of supporting life.

      So he isn't dead?

    3. Re:Capable of supporting life? by vlm · · Score: 4, Informative

      The temperature of a gas giant has little meaning since it increases with depth.
      Since there is little to no "surface" there are just different temperatures at different altitudes.

      For example, there is perfectly comfortable weather on Venus at a certain altitude, around 50 km... just not at the surface.

      --
      "Science flies us to the moon. Religion flies us into buildings." - Victor Stenger
    4. Re:Capable of supporting life? by Explodicle · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Considering the top limit for hyperthermophiles here on Earth is 250 degrees F, it's not just human life that couldn't survive there. If we're going to assume it's life unlike anything we've ever seen before, then why do you think the presence of water or CO2 will help?

    5. Re:Capable of supporting life? by Fluffeh · · Score: 2, Informative

      Well, we found stuff living at the boiling point of water here. Why is it so hard to keep an open mind for the chance that something more exotic than we have found so far on this hunk of dirt exists out there?

      As for hotter than the surface of some stars? That's a bit misleading. There are thermal vents on our planet hotter than the surface of some stars if you count the same stars you are referring to - and that's not exactly mind-blowing.

      In other news. Temperatures hotter than the surface of stars used in everyday dessert cooking!

      --
      Moved to http://soylentnews.org/. You are invited to join us too!
    6. Re:Capable of supporting life? by ceoyoyo · · Score: 4, Informative

      Kepler is a space telescope designed to look for planets that transit their stars from our point of view.

      It's been well established by ground telescopes that you can detect planets, including fairly small planets and ones in quite distant orbits using this method.

      It's now been established that you can get reasonable spectra of transiting planets through this subtraction method.

      Thus, Kepler, which detects planets that transit their stars, should be able to detect planets that are the right size and in the right orbit for life, and should ALSO be able to obtain spectra so their composition can be determined.

      Thus, Kepler should be able to detect planets where life is possible, or even likely.

  7. Re:1173K! by gyrogeerloose · · Score: 2, Funny

    1175 K = 902 C = 1655.6 F Really damn hot.

    Yeah, it is. Almost as hot as Bakersfield in August, even.

    --
    This ain't rocket surgery.
  8. Um No. by DarthVain · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "NASA hailed the news as proof that Kepler will be able to do its job of finding planets capable of supporting life."

    Seeing as it can only seem to spot super massive planets the size of Jupiter or larger, this will likely not help one whit.

    Is it a good first step? Sure.

    So there is water vapor and CO2? Big deal. It is also over 1000 degrees K, a bit hot no? It is also not solid, sometimes a problem. It is also frickin huge, so unless you want to transform yourself into a diamond due to being crushed by unbelievable pressures, you may want to look else where.

    To my understanding (which may be limited) this stuff is figured out by observing the "wobble" of light from a star. This is apparently caused by small gravitational effects caused by planetary bodies. How they get composition I am not entirely sure. However it seems that unless your planetary body is of a significant mass, the "wobble" isn't as easily seen. Which is why we are getting news about a super massive hot Jupiter being proof that a technology will fulfill its roll in finding planets suitable for life.

    Perhaps they mean to do it by subtraction. Simply identify all those that are unsuitable, subtract that from the total, and what you are left are bountiful earth like paradises with green amazon women.

    1. Re:Um No. by CannonballHead · · Score: 4, Informative

      I'm of the opinion that spending billions of dollars on searching for ET life is silly, but in this article's [or the summary thereof] defense, it didn't say THIS planet was habitable. My reading was that they simply proved (presumably) that they were able to find out if water and CO2 exists on a planet.

    2. Re:Um No. by ceoyoyo · · Score: 4, Informative

      Your understanding is incorrect.

      Kepler is designed to detect planets that transit their parent stars. That is, the planet passes directly in front of the star from our point of view. That causes the perceived brightness of the start to decrease a little when the planet passes in front.

      Kepler is expected to be able to detect Earth-sized planets. Since the planet passes directly in front of the star, you can measure changes in the spectra from the system as the planet passes in front. By subtracting the star - planet and the star + planet measurements, you can get an idea of the composition of the planet's atmosphere.

  9. The article says differently... by Suisho · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "Although they are keen to stress the planet is far too hot to support life, they say the finding represents an important proof of concept, showing that it is possible to detect CO2 in the atmospheres of distant planets orbiting other stars, and that the same method could be used to look at planets which might support life."

  10. Kepler is not Hubble's replacement by StupendousMan · · Score: 4, Informative

    So the announcement about the discovery of a planet not capable of supporting life... is proof that Hubble's replacement will be able to find planets that will support life?

    Kepler will be a small telescope (about 1 meter) in orbit, with the sole mission of looking at a few fixed areas on the sky and searching for planets by the transit method: take thousands of pictures and look for stars which become dimmer for a few hours due to a planet crossing their disks. This small mission will launch in spring 2009 and is NOT a replacement for HST.

    The James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) is Hubble's replacement. It will be much larger (with a mirror around 6.5 meters in diameter) and carry out many, many different types of observations. This mission will launch, uh, some time around 2013, if all goes well.

    --
    Michael Richmond "This is the heart that broke my finger."
    mwrsps@rit.edu http://stupendous.rit.edu
    1. Re:Kepler is not Hubble's replacement by Kratisto · · Score: 2, Funny

      Which it won't, because we're all going to die in 2012 when the Ancient Mayans, resurrected by the Antichrist, Barack Obama go to the LHC and use it to create black holes and stranglets.

      ... Right?

      --
      Conscience is the inner voice which warns us that someone may be looking.
  11. Creative naming by Just+Some+Guy · · Score: 5, Funny

    Wikipedia also has an entry on the planet, dubbed HD 189733b.

    Notice that astronomers are not typically confused with the lives of the party.

    --
    Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
    1. Re:Creative naming by Bemopolis · · Score: 2, Funny

      Well, notice that our stars are in HD. We're early adopters!

      --
      "I guess the moral of the story is, don't paint your airship with rocket fuel." -- Addison Bain
  12. Re:1173K! by Threni · · Score: 5, Funny

    640k ought to be enough for anyone.

    All we need now is some sodastream flavouring and we're sorted!

  13. Are you sure? by TheNecromancer · · Score: 2, Funny

    Are they sure that someone didn't spill soda pop on the lens, when they took the measurements? Hmm, this spectroscopic analysis seems remarkably like the spectrum of Pepsi.

    Unless, of course, our new alien overlords also drink Pepsi!

    --
    Attention all planets of the Solar Federation! We have assumed control! - Neil Peart
  14. Re:1173K! by thedonger · · Score: 4, Funny

    Suntan lotion won't stop you from getting baked; it will just leave your corpse without that nice, crispy skin. I say don't fight it and lather up with butter, salt, and pepper.

    --
    Help fight poverty: Punch a poor person.
  15. Re:Doxide by CompMD · · Score: 3, Funny

    Doxide is what you get when Linux documentation geeks consume Doxygen.

  16. Quick! Look busy, Obama is coming by lateralus_1024 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    " NASA hailed the news as proof that Kepler will be able to do its job of finding planets capable of supporting life."

     
    Somebody's trying to avoid funding cuts from the new administration ;) I'm looking at you NASA.

    --
    If you think /. comments are bad, check out Digg.
  17. CO2, if present, is the real news by swimsaturn · · Score: 2, Informative
    The presence of water vapor in an object like HD 189733b is not remarkable: water has been detected in the spectra of brown dwarfs, in the giant planets of our own solar system, and the transiting exoplanet HD209458b.

    Carbon dioxide, on the other hand, is a surprise: at the temperatures and pressures encountered in an exoplanet atmosphere of this type, all carbon should be present as methane (if cool enough) or carbon monoxide. Giant planet atmospheres are generally far too hydrogen-rich for CO2 to form in any appreciable quantity. So its detection requires an extra-ordinary explanation for its origin.

    Here is a Nature preprint from the same research group, describing H2O, CH4, and CO detection. I was hoping to find a research article (and not just a news story or press release) describing CO2 detection, but haven't found any yet...

  18. Re:1173K! by RodgerDodger · · Score: 2, Funny

    Hotter than Hell, but considerably cooler than Heaven.

    --
    "Software is too expensive to build cheaply"
  19. Re:1173K! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Suntan lotion won't stop you from getting baked

    Nothing stops me from getting baked.

  20. Re:Enough SUV bashing by SwedishPenguin · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That may well be true, but that doesn't take away the negative impact SUVs have on the environment. An SUV is far heavier and emits far more greenhouse gasses than a regular car.
    Just because other things are even worse doesn't mean we shouldn't do anything about massive, unnecessary cars. Get a smaller car, use transit, get a bike, it does have an impact. If you constantly argue that anything you do has a smaller impact than other things, we'll never get anywhere.

  21. They didn't say THIS planet could support life! by Chris+Burke · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Is it really not obvious what they were saying? Does it really need to be spelled out? Apparently, so here goes. They were able to identify a planet that has both water and carbon dioxide. It happens to be very hot, and thus this particular planet is unlikely to host life, however it is a proof of concept for the technique of doing spectroscopy on distant exoplanets. They are going to be fielding better telescopes in the future, which should be able to detect smaller and cooler planets that are capable of supporting life.

    Hope that makes sense!

    --

    The enemies of Democracy are
    1. Re:They didn't say THIS planet could support life! by Chris+Burke · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I had assumed what you said was what they meant, but the summary still could have been worded better.

      Lol, yeah, of course you did, but an "I understand it, but think the summary could have been worded better" post isn't as fun as an "I'm smarter than NASA" post, is it?

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
  22. Re:1173K! by Godji · · Score: 2, Funny

    I was going to give you a +1 Funny for the 640K reference (pure genius!), but then I wrote this to explain why I was going to do mod you up. Tough luck.

  23. Re:1173K! by fireman+sam · · Score: 2, Funny

    Nothing stops me from lathering up with butter, salt, and pepper.

    --
    it is only after a long journey that you know the strength of the horse.
  24. Re:Your Point Is? +1, Interesting by Timberwolf0122 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Carbon Dioxide and Water + 100 tons per square inch atmospheric pressure != NO LIFE (look at the ocean floor)
    Carbon Dioxide and Water + 100 tons per square inch atmospheric pressure + 1173K = NO LIFE

    --
    In the not too distant future, next Sunday A.D.