Herschel Space Observatory Finds Precursors of Life In Orion

ogre7299 recommends an announcement out of Caltech on a milestone for HIFI, the Herschel Space Observatory's Heterodyne Instrument for the Far Infrared. "The Herschel Space Observatory has revealed the chemical fingerprints of potential life-enabling organic molecules in the Orion Nebula, a nearby stellar nursery in our Milky Way galaxy. ... This detailed-spectrum, obtained with the Heterodyne Instrument for the Far Infrared (HIFI) — one of Herschel's three innovative instruments — demonstrates the gold mine of information that Herschel-HIFI will provide on how organic molecules form in space. The spectrum, one of the first to be obtained with HIFI since it returned to full health in January 2010 following technical difficulties, clearly demonstrates that the instrument is working well. ... [The HIFI instrument had previously been offline since] August 2009 when HIFI experienced an unexpected voltage spike in the electronic system, probably caused by a high-energy cosmic particle, resulting in the instrument shutting down. On 14 January 2010, HIFI was successfully switched back on using its spare electronics, with science observations commencing on 28 February."

Comments

Nuke it!

[Colin Smith]

It's the only way to be sure!

 

Re:Nuke it!

[Jeremy Erwin]

The orion nebula is (very) roughly spherical, with a radius of 12 ly. It's about 1344ly away. Developing the technology to deliver millions of nukes across hundreds of parsecs might well be the sort of stimulus are planet needs to crawl out of this recession.

Re:Nuke it!

[Anonymous Coward]

pedant:
are = The second-person singular and plural forms of the verb "to be",
our = Our is the possessive determiner of the personal pronoun "we".
Rrr = What a pirate or old sea captain says.

Re:Nuke it!

[Hognoxious]

The correct formulation is "can't see the wood for the trees".

Re:Nuke it!

[Jeremy Erwin]

Hmm. Perhaps, I should of used the preview function.

Re:Nuke it!

[Anonymous Coward]

Uni? You say that like you're actually still proud of what you did while you were a child in school.

When you can kick someone's ass in the real world, then you can talk.

Re:Nuke it!

[Anonymous Coward]

"Hmm. Perhaps, I should of used the preview function."
Hmm. Perhaps, I should have used the preview function.
ftfy :^)

Re:Nuke it!

[rubicelli]

"Hmm. Perhaps, I should of used the preview function."
Hmm. Perhaps, I should have used the preview function.
ftfy :^)

*whooosh*

Re:Nuke it!

[Anonymous Coward]

R = a programming language for crazy people dealing with statistics

Re:Nuke it!

[Anonymous Coward]

You sure did! I think it was the question "How many times a day does that anonymous coward masturbate into his mother's panties?" that you got us all on. We all thought it was zero, but apparently the answer is a three digit number.

Re:Nuke it!

[vegiVamp]

Should HAVE used it this time round, too.

Re:Nuke it!

[vindimy]

Sadly, this is exactly what happened in Stanislaw Lem's novel Fiasco. A good read, prompts a lot of thought of whether we could (and should) seek out extraterrestrial life.

DNA in spaaaaace.

[pcjunky]

Can pigs be far behind

Re:DNA in spaaaaace.

[MichaelSmith]

My dad was out driving in country Western Australia once where the roads are seriously straight, remote and flat. He passes this line across the road. One kilometre ahead there is a second line with a sign, something like police aircraft speed detection.

Some smartarse had updated the sign by appending "pigs in space".

Definition of "working well"

[Anonymous Coward]

"The spectrum [...] clearly demonstrates that the instrument is working well."

Yep, we got a result that's good for some headlines, so clearly the system is working well! Otherwise, we'd have had to conclude it's still not working.

Re:Definition of "working well"

[TheKidWho]

Oh no! They make headlines with the device! It's obviously corrupted and not pure Science!

Re:Definition of "working well"

[pushing-robot]

Not Science? Not Science???

I'm doing a series of papers on the Procedural Generation of Headlines in Science Journals, you insensitive clod!

Re:Definition of "working well"

[AliasMarlowe]

Yep, we got a result that's good for some headlines, so clearly the system is working well!

The "Headline of the month club"?
That's one giant leap below the "Publication of the month club". Less effort, too.

Just don't go there

[Anonymous Coward]

Or The Guardian gets you! At least until you have invented something called 'merculite' and stuck it in missiles.

Re:Just don't go there

[Haxamanish]

Beware the revenge of Antares, make sure you have stellar convertors.

So that's where he went!

[blirp]

God isn't dead, he just moved to Orion!

M.

Re:So that's where he went!

[Foobar of Borg]

God isn't dead, he just moved to Orion!

But, did God need a starship to get there?

Re:So that's where he went!

[NEDHead]

No. He actually moved there to him. Less work than figuring out how to make a starship.

Re:So that's where he went!

[Hognoxious]

He went in an attack ship, but it caught fire. I've seen it.

Re:So that's where he went!

[meglon]

"Excuse me. I have a question."

Re:So that's where he went!

[Anonymous Coward]

He went in an attack ship, but it caught fire. I've seen it.

And c-beams?

So, what next?

[Darkness404]

Ok, so lets say we do find life even as advanced as, say, rats. What do we do with that information? Especially if its so far out that we can't possibly make it to that planet?

Re:So, what next?

[TheKidWho]

We send a probe? We rejoice in the fact that there is life outside of Earth, that there is strong possibility we are not the only intelligent life in this Universe?

Also prepare for our new overlords.

Re:So, what next?

[thms]

We send a probe?

... which we don't sterilize properly or which picks up life earth has scattered around the solar system. Then this type of life, which has a hundreds of millions of years head start, kills all the native life. But that might explain the Star Trek nose-ridge aliens.

I would really want to leave another planet with no interesting life alone so see what other molecular bases support life.

Re:So, what next?

[TheKidWho]

Who ever said the probe had to land on the planet?

Re:So, what next?

[Anonymous Coward]

We send a large fleet of Death-Stars armed with Stellar-Converters to exterminate those Antareans,

Re:So, what next?

[mhajicek]

We thumb our noses at the creationists.

Re:So, what next?

[MadnessASAP]

Yeah, more likely NASA will get their feet and meters mixed up again and the probe will spectacularly crash on the planet.
In the process of crashing it will probably also wipe out a budding otter civilization.

Re:So, what next?

[Greyfox]

Isn't it obvious? We figure out how to get over there, go there and deliver lots and lots of anal probes!

Re:So, what next?

[martas]

or, if there are rats, then it's a potential location for acquiring emergency nutrition supplies in case a space trip goes awry...

Re:So, what next?

[Anonymous Coward]

We can't possibly make it? As a whole, we don't seem to be interested in making it. Life might make us all interested. Then I'll show you 'can't possibly'.

Re:So, what next?

[DustoneGT]

Depends...did the spectrometer find any signs of unobtainium? If it did, we form a quasi-governmental corporate entity to kill the rats and harvest the minerals.

Re:So, what next?

[johno.ie]

If you want to rank life forms according to some arbitrary scale from most to least advanced, you'll find that rats are just as advanced as humans. Their body chemistry is almost identical to ours, they exhibit high intelligence and ability to solve problems. They outnumber humans worldwide, and their high reproductive rate allows them to evolve much faster than us, they probably go through 100 generations for each human generation.

Re:So, what next?

[migla]

Do you know something we don't know about advances in beam-up technology? Of course the probe has to land to get access to the butts to be probed. And butts need probing. Aliens always do that. And in this case, the aliens are us!

Re:So, what next?

[Anonymous Coward]

Ok, so lets say we do find life even as advanced as, say, rats. What do we do with that information? Especially if its so far out that we can't possibly make it to that planet?

We reduce our ignorance as a species. You see, science is about discovering the truths of the universe, regardless of whether or not certain truths are applicable to profitable business plans.

Re:So, what next?

[TheKidWho]

You're a rather silly person to assume they have a "butt."

Re:So, what next?

[repapetilto]

Humans kill rats at will... if we really wanted to we could wipe them out, its just a matter of them being good at hiding and your average human having other things to worry about or not caring that much. I would say that ability (although hypothetical, try imagining rats wiping humans out on purpose...) makes humans more advanced.

Re:So, what next?

[Xone47]

Great point. We should probably stop any and all science that doesn't have direct, actionable results. Like stop sending robots to the bottom of the ocean. It's not like we'll ever move down there...

Re:So, what next?

[Thing 1]

It seems you're the silly one, for assuming that any form of life wouldn't have an input and output port. Ports need probing!

Re:So, what next?

[TheKidWho]

What if they excrete through their entire body?

Re:So, what next?

[Anonymous Coward]

Then their entire body is a butt, and it needs probing. Jeez, do we have to explain everything to you?
  The only things that don't get probed are plantlike things that don't have butts because they get their meager sustenance from solar energy. And those guys are still negotiable if they have any openings vaguely like a butt.

Re:So, what next?

[Skidborg]

Let's wait until we find such a thing, shall we? Amino acids and oxygen do not a galactic civilization make. I don't see anywhere in the article that they even mention what kind of "organics" they found though.

Re:So, what next?

[Lotana]

Well maybe rats is not a good example.

Now think about ants. Good luck wiping those out!

Re:So, what next?

[johno.ie]

Ah, I see you have picked 1 criteria to decide whether rats or humans are the most advanced lifeform. This is a classic mistake that everyone I have had this debate with falls into.

Firstly, it is easy to demonstrate that your reasoning is false. People have been trying to wipe out rats for centuries. There was a project to wipe them out from a small offshore island, to protect the seabirds that nested there. It has taken over 10 years and the rats are still there. Also I'd bet on the rats to survive a nuclear war or global environmental disaster over the humans.

Secondly, if it were true, then I could use your logic to argue that since the Chytrid fungus is wiping out populations of amphibians all over the world, then this fungus is more advanced than amphibians. Since vertebrates are all more closely related than the fungi-animal divide, this is counter intuitive to most people. It's easy to turn the human-centric view of the world upside-down. If you put 1000 humans out in the wilderness, naked and without any tools, you'd soon see how advanced we are as a lifeform.

Re:So, what next?

[CoolHnd30]

It's easy to turn the human-centric view of the world upside-down. If you put 1000 humans out in the wilderness, naked and without any tools, you'd soon see how advanced we are as a lifeform.

Yeah, I'm guessing it would take approximately 2-5 minutes before those humans began making tools to improve their situation. I think that is what sets us apart as an advanced life form (along with the intelligence to continually improve those tools and communicate).

Re:So, what next?

[IndustrialComplex]

You're a rather silly person to assume they have a "butt."

So what you are saying, is that 'thing' that happend to me all those years ago was just the alien's way of shaking hands?

Re:So, what next?

[IndustrialComplex]

If you put 1000 humans out in the wilderness, naked and without any tools, you'd soon see how advanced we are as a lifeform.

Indeed we would. Notice how you didn't pick a 'wilderness'. Did you mean to say Savannah, Rainforest, Alpine, Coastal, Arid, Temperate Forest wilderness? Because there is a good chance that 1000 people would quickly adapt to their situation as long as it wasn't immediately lethal to unprotected bodies (Arctic, Desert, etc). I can virtually guarantee that if you dropped ME off in the middle of temperate forest right now (since temperatures are now within the bounds for the risks of death by exposure) I'd have a 75% chance of surviving a full year. That's me, alone, and without any tools.

Give me 1000 other people, 200 of which are in good health and able to labor, I'd think that within 1 year you would see that a good portion survived, and within 20 years, a population increase.

For these scenarios, you really need to pull out all the stops if you want to go full bore with your anti-humanism. State that their thumbs must be removed, and they aren't allowed to think too hard.

You might as well conduct a test on the survivability of the African Lion by dumping a pride of them 5 miles off the coast of Honduras. (A test, which ironically, naked toolless humans would have a non-zero chance of surviving)

Re:So, what next?

[bobzieruncle]

If the probe fails to land in at least one alien hayseed's anus, they're probably doing it wrong. :D

Re:So, what next?

[repapetilto]

yea I guess youre right... the real criteria should be which species gets into space first thus allowing the multitudinous spawn of mother earth to spread ever farther throughout the solar system. I guess in that case, though, bacteria may have still won out just because they're more hardy, diverse, and adaptable... but if there are crazy comet based earth descendants of earth bacteria or whatever, they didnt bring any other life along with them, or at least not as many as humans probably could.

Seriously though 1) Previous attempts at eradication of rats stopped short because humans didnt think it was worth it for whatever reason (such as, for example, not wanting to poison the birds they wanted to save). I qualified my original claim with that already.

2)I also said "on purpose." The fungus is just reproducing and killing the frogs along the way. Humans do that too, but we also have the capability to decide that some other species is just such a pain in the ass to everyone it should be eradicated at all costs. Likely in the case of microscopic organisms complete eradication would never really happen, but our ability to work together on a long term plan makes it more likely that we could do it to them than they to us. Really its all just a mind experiment though.

Hmph!

[Vinegar Joe]

Everyone knows there isn't a galaxy on Orion's belt!

Re:Hmph!

[M8e]

That's no belt, it's a collar you stupid alien!

Celebrate!

[bsharma]

Why rats? we should celebrate it as among the greatest discoveries if we can even confirm something as primitive as a worm. Evolutionarily, the jump from inorganic to a worm is far bigger jump than from a worm to (even an intelligent) man.

Re:Celebrate!

[bsharma]

Can evidence of even primitive life in galaxies so far away that they may not even exist now disprove all geocentric religions? (e.g. the Abrahamic faiths)

Re:Celebrate!

[Nadaka]

No. That is the great thing about faith, it can not be proven wrong. Evidence will be ignored by certain groups, some more than others, we still have flat earthers, people who claim that cell phones make them ill and vegans. I could claim 1 + 1 != 2 all day long and still believe it even if you whip out page 379 of Principia Mathematica.

Re:Celebrate!

[vlm]

Can evidence of even primitive life in galaxies so far away that they may not even exist now disprove all geocentric religions?

Probably about as well as the existence of native americans wiped out Christianity in 1492. Err, that's not quite how it turned out.

Considering how televangelists and shortwave broadcasters like to spend money, to blast people whom aren't interested with religious indoctrination, I'd suggest buying stock in companies that manufacture large satellite dishes and high power transmitters. Also expect at attempt at missionary activity (and by missionary activity, I'm not talking about the position).

Of course there is a bad side, the aliens will probably think we're idiots. On the other hand, if they've been watching TV, they already know that.

Re:Celebrate!

[Anonymous Coward]

Can evidence of even primitive life in galaxies so far away that they may not even exist now disprove all geocentric religions? (e.g. the Abrahamic faiths)

I frequently see people raise concerns like this. What I don't understand about it is simple: nowhere does the Bible (including the Pentateuch) say "Earth is the one and only place where God created life and there are no aliens of any sort". Or if it says that, I certainly cannot find it and have never received a reference for where it may be found. If it did say that, then I would understand the concerns about extraterrestrial life and the damage it might cause for various religions. So far as I can tell, the entire concern is either the doctrine of a particular church, making it intellectually dishonest to imply that this affects all Abrahamic faiths, or it's complete bullshit.

It's possible the Quran might have such teachings as I am much less familiar with it, but again if it were only Islam then that would not be "the Abrahamic faiths" it would be "one particular Abrahamic faith".

Re:Celebrate!

[TheKidWho]

Don't forget your own arrogance in assuming the Aliens do not believe in Gods or have their own religions.

Re:Celebrate!

[poopdeville]

Arggggggggggggg the Principia Mathematica. Why did you mention that on a Sunday? I was trying to forget about Russell.

Re:Celebrate!

[zappepcs]

I don't think that was arrogance. I think he simply assumed they would be smarter than humans.

Re:Celebrate!

[poopdeville]

nowhere does the Bible (including the Pentateuch) say "Earth is the one and only place where God created life and there are no aliens of any sort". Or if it says that, I certainly cannot find it and have never received a reference for where it may be found. If it did say that, then I would understand the concerns about extraterrestrial life and the damage it might cause for various religions.

http://www.roseavenue.org/Who%20we%20are/what%20we%20believe/Bible/complete%20and%20perfect.htm

The Bible is "perfect and complete". If the Bible didn't mention it, it didn't happen.

Re:Celebrate!

[Ogi_UnixNut]

The American Breed of Christian is something totally nuts. I'm a Christian, and I can tell you some of those religious Americans I've met scare me. Truly something else, really *really* narrow-minded, extreme fundamentalist and take the bible literally (WTF?).

I never understood the vitrol some people on /. show towards religion, until I met some of their Christians. It explained a lot, very irritating people, kept shoving god into every discussion or action.

Note: I'm sure there are very many normal Christians there too, just that a minority really really give the rest a bad name (I hope to god they are a minority).

And what's with tele-evangelism? It's like they turned religion into some sort of pay-for entertainment. I didn't get it at all.

Re:Celebrate!

[Anonymous Coward]

nowhere does the Bible (including the Pentateuch) say "Earth is the one and only place where God created life and there are no aliens of any sort". Or if it says that, I certainly cannot find it and have never received a reference for where it may be found. If it did say that, then I would understand the concerns about extraterrestrial life and the damage it might cause for various religions.

http://www.roseavenue.org/Who%20we%20are/what%20we%20believe/Bible/complete%20and%20perfect.htm

The Bible is "perfect and complete". If the Bible didn't mention it, it didn't happen.

The way I have always understood that, is that for a Christian, the Bible is "everything you need to know" and it is not "everything that could possibly be known." This is obvious, as the Bible does not mention the transistor, the internal combustion engine, integrated circuits, rock music, rap music, or many other things we now know of. In the sense that it's "everything you need to know" (i.e. to be a Christian) it is indeed perfect and complete. This neither affirms nor denies the existence of extraterrestrial life, however.

So I still consider my question unanswered. I haven't found a Biblical basis for the concern that ETs would destroy the Abrahamic religions as we know them. The way a group or a church chooses to interpret the Bible is not the same thing as the Bible making a positive statement to that effect. I mean, for that matter, some passages in the Bible were once used to justify American slavery of black people, something that all serious Christians would universally recognize as wrong. That does not mean you can find any passage in the Bible that says "thou shalt enslave a group of people based on race and treat them in an inhuman fashion" because it doesn't say that. So I think it's important to separate what the Bible actually says from what certain people decide to read into it.

Re:Celebrate!

[MichaelSmith]

But isn't that because the US was originally founded by European Christians who believed that they were more serious about their religion than their peers?

Re:Celebrate!

[smaddox]

Can you show me the page in Principia Mathematica where it proves the assumed axioms? It seems you have to start with something to get something.

Scientists and Mathematicians aren't immune to blind faith.

Re:Celebrate!

[MartinSchou]

And what's with tele-evangelism? It's like they turned religion into some sort of pay-for entertainment.

You answered the question yourself, I've just emphasized the relevant bit.

Re:Celebrate!

[Anonymous Coward]

You do realize that perfect and complete are two different ways to translate the same word from Greek?

Actually all Christians that actually believe in God believe in extra-terrestrial life. (God himself)

Based on the principle of Jeremiah 16:21, if you find an intelligent species inhabiting another planet that knows nothing about YHWH, then you have a case.

Re:Celebrate!

[Nadaka]

Not off the top of my head, I believe they at least define addition. But its not exactly what I would call light reading.

Re:Celebrate!

[Kjella]

Can evidence of even primitive life in galaxies so far away that they may not even exist now disprove all geocentric religions? (e.g. the Abrahamic faiths)

Not any more than evolution has managed to disprove the same religions, I'd wager. Oh there might be life elsewhere, but only man is created directly by God in his image and had Jesus Christ die for our sins. That's the true arrogance in those religions, not whether there's some überpowerful guy who runs the universe but that we humans are so important to him. If we were 7 billion whiny ants to him, God would still be God but religion wouldn't have nearly the same appeal.

Re:Celebrate!

[Nefarious Wheel]

Might I recommend "Mathematics Made Difficult" by Carl Linderholm. May be out of print. But if you get past chapter 2 you'll never be comfortable about counting again.

Re:Celebrate!

[Skidborg]

So far they've discovered chemicals that may or may not be somewhat similar to organic compounds. So unless you're really worried that the dirt under your feet believes in a supreme deity, you probably don't have to worry about these aliens believing in one either.

Re:Celebrate!

[meglon]

But.. those chemicals could still be smarter than humans. Something I'm almost willing to bet on, most of the time.

Re:Celebrate!

[dintech]

Can evidence of even primitive life in galaxies so far away that they may not even exist now disprove all geocentric religions?

It depends how far, far away they are...

Re:Celebrate!

[CharlyFoxtrot]

But isn't that because the US was originally founded by European Christians who believed that they were more serious about their religion than their peers?

Some of the earliest settlers (colonist period) perhaps but how many of the total number of migrants were puritans as opposed to economic migrants ? When you look at the early US history the attitude towards religion seems to be very enlightened. The current insanity to me seems to coincide with the latter stages of the american imperialist period (post-JFK) and it has been written into the official mythology and rites of power.

Re:Celebrate!

[Anonymous Coward]

I saw an interesting explanation for this once (possibly in Michael Adams' book "Fire and Ice"?). The idea was that in Canada, we have no official separation of church and state, in fact the churches have historically been heavily tied to the government, see for example constitutionally-mandated faith-based schools (the "separate school" system), various residential school disasters, etc. As a consequence, there were a few monolithic religious blocs that had a lot of influence in society. They came to rely on secular authority and lack of alternatives, rather than recruiting believers, and between that and the usual scandals that happen to anyone in power, people lost faith, and we are now a relatively easy-going society from a religious perspective. In contrast, in the U.S., with official separation between church and state, there was no one religious group that could claim to be "the true faith" backed by the government, and so what we see now is the result of a couple of centuries of Darwinian scrabbling for believers, where the ideas most effective at getting themselves branded into people's consciousness in letters of fire survived, and the rest were overtaken. Memetic evolution in action, resulting in diversity, and more than a few piranhas...

Re:Celebrate!

[steelfood]

Note: I'm sure there are very many normal Christians there too, just that a minority really really give the rest a bad name (I hope to god they are a minority).

You are wrong. Most Republicans receive the majority of their support from these people. Democrats also receive their support, but to a lesser extent. That there are so many Republicans in government says that at least half the population is like this. Half is not a minority.

Re:Celebrate!

[Anonymous Coward]

It sounds like you're not from the US. There are plenty of "reasonable" Christians here, but regarding the "scary" ones, you don't know the half of it until you've lived here, especially in the Bible Belt (TM) parts.

Some of this has been covered or discussed in OT threads on /. before, but here's some of the inanity we have to live with:

- There are entire US states where you can't buy a dildo or vibrator. In at least one state, this includes by mail order. In some cases restrictive laws are avoided by describing such items as "novelties".

- In some states, one cannot buy liquor on Sundays, sometimes including beer and wine. The distillery where Jack Daniels whiskey is made is in a "dry" county - alcoholic beverages of any kind cannot be sold there. There are dry counties in several states, although there are no dry states.

- President George H. W. Bush stated during his campaign that he wasn't sure atheists should be considered US citizens. The major news outlets basically ignored it. Now, imagine the controversy if he had said "Jews" instead of "atheists" - no doubt the MSM would have been all over that in a heartbeat.

- Elizabeth Dole in her 2008 US Senate re-election campaign attempted to "smear" her opponent Kay Hagan with two ads which accused Hagan of associating with atheists for political gain and implied that she might actually be an atheist. There was a backlash against Dole for the ads, but interestingly, it was mostly for the obvious dishonesty of the ads (Hagan was formerly a Sunday school teacher), not so much for the idea that being atheist or associating with them was somehow inappropriate for an elected official.

- Among the most christianist Protestant denominations, Catholics are not considered Christians. That's a serious mindfuck right there.

No doubt you are already aware of the idiocy about Obama's religion during his campaign, the political football of gay marriage, the hypocritical restrictions on pornography, and the political folly surrounding stem cell research. I shouldn't even have to mention the abortion debate, where the anti-abortion side is largely driven by religious ideology. Christian religion permeates US society despite the concept of separation of Church and State. In matters of sexuality, we're probably best described as schizophrenic - sex sells everything from toothpaste to celebrities, but you damned well better not be masturbating, or you and your hairy palms will be going straight to hell.

When I last looked at the demographics, the portion of US population who consider themselves "not religious" is slowly growing. However, among Christians there is a migration toward the more extreme Protestant denominations, essentially the "scary" types you mention. I live in the American midwest, and I generally keep my atheism to myself out of concern for my safety. Most Christians here would, at most, simply attempt to convert me, which is merely annoying; many wouldn't even bother. But I cannot rule out that there might be some very small number who would be willing to engage in vandalism or perhaps violence against an outspoken atheist. It's OK to wear a "Jesus saves" t-shirt here; it would be imprudent to wear a "there's no God" t-shirt. And I'm pretty much unelectable, if I were to ever run for even the least consequential office.

- T

Reverse optical psychology

[moteyalpha]

I don't know if they have thought of this, but it seems that what is not seen has more meaning than what is seen. If I had the data, I would look to see if the absorption spectrum was different at the primary frequency of the solar emissions and would indicate to me that life was present. I would assume that inorganic materials would have an absorption spectrum which was different from organic life as it uses this energy to manufacture itself. It would seem that this would be generally true in the overall spectrum of the universe and like the cosmic background measurements there should be a signature of the universe without life and one that indicates life. Just a thought.

Re:Reverse optical psychology

[Anonymous Coward]

Nah, just look for empty beer cans floating in space. The greatest indicator of intelligent life.

Re:Reverse optical psychology

[Hurricane78]

Sounds extremely oversimplified to me... I don‘t think that organic material necessarily has a different spectrum.

Re:Reverse optical psychology

[nashv]

Umm, no.

1. You are assuming that all life works in the same way, that it will be based directly on absorption of solar energy.

2. Even if it was happening as such, the amount of light absorbed by life in any part of the spectrum represents an unbelievably small fraction of the total solar output. On Earth, the total radiations received is ~1% of total solar output. And of course, plants use a fraction of that energy. To detect this over cosmic scales, you would need an instrument with sensitivity that is probably not achievable (yet, anyway) due to basic quantum barriers.

3. The instrument has high spectral sensitivity, you would need to couple that with spatial sensitivity to figure out if there is actually a local region where the spectrum is different. Given that planets are again, very tiny compared to stars , and we are just beginning to observe them indirectly out of our solar system, that seems like a hard call.

4. Finally, how would you know what the real , unperturbed spectrum of the star? The HIFI can detect signatures in the infra-red which is essentially vibrational and rotational modes of molecules. We know for sure that these organic molecules are far to unstable to exist in the stellar environment. So there must be a pool of it which the light is passing through. Their way is far better than yours because it works.

Re:Reverse optical psychology

[wasmoke]

You seem to have the wrong idea about what has been found. They have not found *life* in space but organic molecules commonly referred to as the "building blocks of life." This really is not a new development- we've found I want to say 92 (don't quote me on that number) amino acids in the middle of chondritic meteorites. To get life you essentially need to stick a bunch of these precursors in a bag (we use lipids on Earth) and get them to metabolize and replicate.

Re:Reverse optical psychology

[moteyalpha]

Very interesting and certainly an intelligent and considered reply. I recently finished graduate biochemistry, bioinformatics and cloning lab. As a programmer by trade, it would seem to me that if you capture samples from the universe in all spectra for 50 years that it makes a pile of data that becomes more able to discriminate any deviation from the norm.
I have done infrared spectroscopy so I understand what you are saying about the ability to identify specific bond types or umbrella scattering. I am also aware of the form of blackbody radiation and emission spectra of star classes. What I conjectured is that -if- life were common in the universe, that the deviation would be large. It was pure speculation on how I might proceed if I had the data available and was intending to mine it for patterns.
If it were one sample or sensor then I could understand that discrimination is an issue. The technique is similar to the detection of planets about other stars. They cannot discriminate the object as it passes, but in the averages it presents a cyclic minimum and maximum. I don't see where I stated that I would look at a specific deviation that matched photosynthesis. It seems that if the black body radiation of a specific moon of Saturn was missing a specific wavelength that this would indicate a process which absorbed and converted that energy. Thermophiles operate without sunlight and other types of life use chemical compounds to power their growth. I also must nit pick the level of the effect as I have computed it many times. R=4K R^2=16m and distance is 93M and surface 4 PI 10^16 and thus it is about 10^9 / 10^16 or 10^-7 of the solar surface energy area that would be variant. This is about 10,000 times less that 1% which is less than 1% so you are correct. And Occam says it was just a flip comment off the top of my head so take it with as much Sodium Chloride as needed to neutralize the quality of content.

Why did they wait 5 months?

[laing]

OK so their instrument had an upset. That sort of thing happens in space. Why did it take them 5 months to switch over to the redundant string?

Re:Why did they wait 5 months?

[mrsquid0]

To make sure that switching over would not cause problems of its own. One does not make changes to spacecraft operations lightly.

Re:Why did they wait 5 months?

[laing]

OK, maybe you are involved in the mission and know more than I. What I do know is that all spacecraft have an expected mission life (anywhere from a few months to 15 years depending upon the mission). Generally when an anomaly occurs there is a balancing act between understanding what went wrong and getting things going again quickly.

Five months is an awfully long time to spend scratching your head if you've got a redundant string ready to be switched on.

Re:Why did they wait 5 months?

[ogre7299]

OK so their instrument had an upset. That sort of thing happens in space. Why did it take them 5 months to switch over to the redundant string?

It took them 5 months to switch over to the redundant system because they wanted to be sure that they fully understood what happened with the first failure. The problem was that there wasn't software protection for the critical systems.
They then had to put preventative measures in place to ensure that it didn't happen to the redundant system; otherwise they would be screwed. The HIFI instrument has some of the most discovery potential and its capabilities cannot be duplicated from earth or and only partly with the SOFIA airborne mission.

Re:Why did they wait 5 months?

[laing]

Thanks! That's a reasonable explanation. The post (and the linked content) did not describe the anomaly in detail. Generally an SEU is a recoverable event. Apparently this one caused actual hardware damage to the primary string. I'm glad that they were able to figure out a solution and make this amazing observation in Orion.

Re:Why did they wait 5 months?

[uburoy]

It is a very complex instrument. And a cosmic is not the first hypothesis in these case. It was very hard to find out the cause of the issue. And they could not risk switching to backup without knowing for sure it would not fail as the first one, and loose the instrument for good. It is not like you can go out there and repair it by trial and errors.

Re:Why did they wait 5 months?

[nashv]

There isn't exactly a deadline on finding the signature of life in the Universe. Sure , it would be cool....but if the star/nebula I am looking at has a life of millions of years, I'd rather wait 5 months and be sure the instrument is fine, rather than flick it on to have a series of other mishaps because 50 other components had begun to malfunction.

Re:Why did they wait 5 months?

[close_wait]

Because unless you know what fried the primary controller, there's a good chance you'll just fry the back up controller too when turning it on.

Re:Why did they wait 5 months?

[salmacis2]

HIFI is only one of three instruments on board. PACS and SPIRE were able to take up the slack while HIFI was off. When HIFI was switched on again, they caught up using the time that had previously been allocated to PACS and SPIRE.

Not rats but 'Space Herring'

[fuego451]

I like the idea of space herring for a couple of reasons. It would lend credence to the poem 'Wynken, Blynken and Nod' which mom read to me as a child and it would give the Discovery Channel something to look forward to other than another case of crabs.

Very Old News

[AmigaMMC]

The Dogon already knew of the existance of life in Orion centuries ago... http://www.unmuseum.org/siriusb.htm

Re:Very Old News

[julesh]

The Dogon already knew of the existance of life in Orion centuries ago

Unfortunately (for it is a rather cool story) there is convincing evidence that it was cultural contamination (see Walter E. A. van Beek: "Dogon Restudied: A Field Evaluation of the Work of Marcel Griaule." Current Anthropology, 32 (1991): 139-167).

What we REALLY want to know

[93 Escort Wagon]

Are they green, and if so - are they female?

Re:What we REALLY want to know

[Anonymous Coward]

No, since Avatar blue is the new green of aliens.

Re:What we REALLY want to know

[Starfleet Command]

That's OK, blue girls are hot. LOL

Herschel's seen things you people wouldn't believe

[RevWaldo]

I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Precursors of life off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser gate. All those moments will be lost in time... like tears in rain... Time to die.
- Herschel Space Observatory's last transmission before deorbiting, November 2019

Small temp variations...

[Anonymous Coward]

Here we are waiting for China's pollution as a way to stop the First World eternal climate debate and force them to admit that looting the Earth isn't a sound strategy.

Meanwhile, and on topic, why not check for small temp increases?

Any advanced civilization is bound to generate heat -- and hopefully find a way out of it. If we filter these places about which our records point to a small temperature increase (e.g. 5C), we might find someone doing the same error we're doing.

Of course, we could find the Genii. 8-/

Re:Small temp variations...

[GameboyRMH]

The problem is what if they're not advanced enough (at the caveman stage or earlier) or too advanced (past using fossil fuels (if they ever needed/had them) and have re-stabilized their climate) or some planet just heated up relatively quickly for some other reason (maybe an asteroid impact or large volcanic eruption that wasn't detected)?

Your test only works for a pretty narrow set of conditions and could give a lot of false positives, plus you'd be looking for temperature changes over hundreds or thousands of years so it isn't fast either.

No it isn't!

[gbutler69]

It's, "..can't see the forest for the trees".

Re:No it isn't!

[Culture20]

It's, "..can't see the forest for the trees".

It's "plenty of fish in the seas". I suppose there is some audible similarity, but let's not loose sight of the big picture by focusing on the details.

*Yes, I threw that "loose" in their instead of "lose" to annoy the pedants. Can you find the other one? Mail a letter to Lord British at Origin Systems detailing your accomplishment!

Re:No it isn't!

[Anonymous Coward]

I can't believe I'm responding, but: ...seas". --> ...seas."

Oblig

[rozthepimp]

"But it wouldn't be life as we know it, Jim."

no nerds here

[corbettw]

A story about possible life in Orion and not a single comment about green slave women? What is wrong with you people?

Now, get off my lawn.

Re:no nerds here

[drinkypoo]

What we REALLY want to know (Score:2, Insightful)
by 93 Escort Wagon (326346) on 03-07-10 13:12 (#31393694)
Are they green, and if so - are they female?

no nerds here (Score:3)
by corbettw (214229) on 03-07-10 14:00 (#31394134)
A story about possible life in Orion and not a single comment about green slave women?

Fail

Hurry already

[chucklebutte]

the search for life else where needs to hurry up already. The moment life is detected else where will once and for end the silly notion of god or religion. I cant wait!

Re:Hurry already

[telomerewhythere]

But God is by definition "life elsewhere."

If you want to really shake a religionist to the core, find an extraterrestrial that doesn't age or die, lives in a paradise/heaven, and knows nothing of the LORD God or ole sweet Jesus. That will break their faith if anything will.

Re:Hurry already

[turbidostato]

"The moment life is detected else where will once and for end the silly notion of god or religion."

Because?

Re:Hurry already

[Skidborg]

Cheers to a boring old age then. They didn't even find anything more complex than your run of the mill elements and a few ordinary molecules. Calling them "organics" is borderline dishonest, all of them can be created inorganically.

Re:Hurry already

[Anonymous Coward]

My guess is the death rays.

Re:Hurry already

[PhetusPolice]

"The moment life is detected else where will once and for end the silly notion of god or religion."

Because?

BEECAAAUUSE we will eventually find a Space Jesus in another civilization!
The aliens that we discover will be worshiping their own Jesus, one who is older than ours - this will cause a schism between Earth Jesus followers, but many remain faithful to our Lord Jesus Christ. Another several thousands of years pass by when encounter YET ANOTHER civilization, one who worships, what we quickly came to call him as, Space Jesus #3, who bares an uncanny resemblance to the Space Jesus' 1 and 2.. also with Krishna, Mithra and Horus (thanks Bill Maher!) but we're talking about Jesus, here.

Some time later, we've come to discover over 200 Space Jesus' in our own Milky Way. After millennia of toil, the most recent Space Jesus lived within the SAME EXACT time period that Earth Jesus was being engorged for sins. This debunked the claim by the New Space Jesus Order that all Space Jesus, including Earth Jesus, were in fact the same Jesus, wiping out sin from the galaxy like an inverted Santa Claus. The remaining true believers of Earth Jesus, a blip compared to their former breadth of influence, are flabbergasted and are mocked by the majority.

However, the remaining followers, berated and on the cusp, regularly resort to violence to prove everyone else wrong. IN THE NAME OF EARTH JESUS!

Wait, did I say religion was gonna end? ..nuh-uh

Re:Hurry already

[Anonymous Coward]

Religions, creationism, anthropogenic global warming denial, whatever... They adapt. They change. You're using reason while they're not.
The world is not flat? OK. The Earth is not the center of the universe? OK. Creatures evolve ? OK. The animals weren't made in a week ? OK. There's still nothing wrong with our teachings , people, you'll just have to make a few edits or interpret it in a new, more complicated way. (e.g. "OK so there's micro-evolution but blah blah blah")

If all else fails, separate your teachings from the 'material world', criticize all of science, and blame world conspiracies. Apparently you can get on TV and millions of fans shouting they love you that way. Or in God-blessed America at least. They don't call it the American denial for no reason.

Re:Sigh.

[Anonymous Coward]

"MIT wannabe" also works.

Diplomatic envoys

[Kulfaangaren!]

We need to immediately send diplomatic representation to these little space guys.
I was thinking maybe ...

1. Bill Clinton (Head of delegation)
2. Britney Spears (Cultural attache)
3. MPAA, RIAA (IP attaches. If these aliens has been monitoring our radio/TV signals they have done so without paying the "artists" what they are owed, they are pirates!!!! I see a new ACTA discussion participant on the horizon. This in combination with that we really really don't want them on planet earth.)

Re:Diplomatic envoys

[GameboyRMH]

Sounds good, but I'll recommend Sarah Palin in place of Bill Clinton. I think she uh, connects with people better, yeah. And this all sounds too America-centric, I think Mahmoud Ahmadinejad should go along too, you know, for diversity.

Then they can all go in a "flawed" landing craft that burns up in the alien atmosphere in a "tragic" "accident." >:)

Why are headline so extereme?

[JDOHERTY]

Why is astronomy layman reporting (and global warming, and meteor science) all about the extreme case? Only so many characters in the headline field? Too much character in the headline writer? Thing is you're wearing out the reader - in a few more generations the only way for this story to get noticed will be "Aliens From Orion On Their Way To Eat You".

Re:Why are headline so extereme?

[GameboyRMH]

Thing is you're wearing out the reader - in a few more generations the only way for this story to get noticed will be "Aliens From Orion On Their Way To Eat You".

It looks like The Register is just ahead of the curve then.

Not Guildford after all

[GrahamCox]

Not news, we all know that Ford came from a small planet somewhere in the vicinity of Betelgeuse, and not Guildford after all.

Caltech!

[Anonymous Coward]

Please. It's Caltech, not Cal Tech.

Find life or we're dead meat

[gamecrusader]

I hope they find Life soon
It would be a bummer if Planet earth was on a list for demolition and since planet earth hasn't so far found life we haven't found out that our planet was scheduled for demolition.
and they say your planet has been scheaduled for demoliton you (planet earth) have not replyed there for your planet will be destroyed for an interglatic teleportation byway

Organic Molecules

[physburn]

Its not exactly new that organic molecules and precursors of life exist in the Orion Nebula. Radio telescopes have found them since the sixties, and the Orion Nebula is an especially easy place to detect such compounds. Still the Herschel satalite, can view Nebula in unpresidented detail.

---

Radio Astronomy Feed @ Feed Distiller

Re:Organic Molecules

[Anonymous Coward]

Meet Mr. Precedent.

All That Precursing Going On

[DynaSoar]

"Herschel Space Observatory Finds Precursors of Life In Orion"

I called Orion and let him know about this. He said he was well aware he had precursors of life inside, but failed to see how a telescope could be used in place of a microscope and an, um, sample to make this determination. When he asked where I got this from I told him. My son thanks you all for your concern, and promises to take due care when handling his precursors and resulting cursors, as long as you'll promise to point your telescope at someone else.

Fund raising...

[Yogijalla]

1. Researcher claims "possibility of life on X".
2. Publicity
3. President writes a letter. Bill Clinton (1997): “It speaks of the possibility of life. If this discovery is confirmed, it will surely be one of the most stunning insights into our Universe that science has ever uncovered. Its implications are as far-reaching and awe-inspiring as can be imagined.”
4. Profit.
5. Loop 1-4

http://science.slashdot.org/story/10/03/06/0252237/California-Lakes-Arsenic-Hints-At-a-Shadow-Biosphere
http://science.slashdot.org/index2.pl?fhfilter=life+on+mars

spelling

[Anonymous Coward]

Caltech. It's one word, not two.

what about...

[meglon]

When they confirm the spectrum of Plutonium Nyborg, then we'll have some serious interest.

I, for one

[asterix_2k1]

welcome the precursors to our new overlords.

Re:Herschel's seen things you people wouldn't beli

[Anonymous Coward]

Nice to dig up the quote, but as a pedant I have to point out that Herschel is at L2 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L2_point) and will not de-orbit. On the other hand it will run out of liquid helium long before 2019.