Buckyballs Detected In Space

Rhodin writes "Fullerenes, also known as buckminsterfullerenes or 'buckyballs,' were detected about 6,500 light years from Earth in the cosmic dust of Tc 1 (PDF; abstract), an object known as a planetary nebula. 'We found what are now the largest molecules known to exist in space,' said astronomer Jan Cami of the University of Western Ontario, Canada, and the SETI Institute in Mountain View, Calif. 'We are particularly excited because they have unique properties that make them important players for all sorts of physical and chemical processes going on in space.'" (More, below.) These results hark directly back to the experiments that originally identified Buckminsterfullerene, which mimicked the outer atmospheric chemistry of red giant carbon stars. Harry Kroto, who jointly won a Nobel Prize for this discovery in 1996, is excited by the findings' clarity. 'The spectrum is incredibly convincing,' the Florida State University academic said. 'I thought I would never be as convinced as I am. The fact that the four lines are there, and C70 is there, is just unbelievable. It's a spectacular paper.'"

Comments

Dark matter?

[captainpanic]

We're still searching for dark matter, right?

So, now we found yet another material that absorbs light. So that could mean that the stars we see actually burn brighter (and are more massive?) than we thought. And in addition, there is a material previously unknown to exist in space.

Could is be possible that dark matter is just ordinary matter, made up of atoms and such, and that we just haven't found it yet because it absorbs the radiation we scan for?

-- I admit that I'm no expert, so don't mod me down for stupidity. Just correct me instead, please.

We can detect tiny, molecules...

[h4rm0ny]

and tell what they are at a distance that take light slightly longer than our recorded history as a species to travel.

Fuck yeah!

(That is all)

Re:We can detect tiny, molecules...

[Tom]

But remember, it's only a theory! If you find a tiny snippet in some backwater part of the bible that contradicts it, then of course the old book is right. So don't get your hopes up.

Re:We can detect tiny, molecules...

[FuckingNickName]

We've decided we can do it because we assume the conclusion is correct, and we assume the conclusion is correct because we've decided we can do it. It's all too easy in astronomy and theoretical physics to go all Platonic and rejoice at something seductively beautiful rather than something with enough evidence.

What if we are misinterpreting the results as referring to a combination of other signatures or combination fo sources, perhaps partially absorbed? What if we're hearing local noise? This is a uniquely sensitive telescope and results have not been duplicated.

Re:Actually

[Zocalo]

AFAIK down to like 20-30 atoms

Given that a single molecule of C-60 contains 60 carbon atoms, you probably meant to put "molecules" there.

Re:Cool

[twisteddk]

I think the "news" is that this time they've been detected in space, where there may be less cnadle flames than there's room for ;)