spoiler

Scientists have found new but tentative evidence that a faraway world orbiting another star may be home to life.

A Cambridge team studying the atmosphere of a planet called K2-18b has detected signs of molecules which on Earth are only produced by simple organisms.

This is the second, and more promising, time chemicals associated with life have been detected in the planet’s atmosphere by Nasa’s James Webb Space Telescope (JWST).

But the team and independent astronomers stress that more data is needed to confirm these results.

The lead researcher, Prof Nikku Madhusudhan, told me at his lab at Cambridge University’s Institute of Astronomy that he hopes to obtain the clinching evidence soon.

“This is the strongest evidence yet there is possibly life out there. I can realistically say that we can confirm this signal within one to two years.”

K2-18b is two-and-a-half times the size of Earth and is 700 trillion miles, or 124 light years, away from us - a distance far beyond what any human could travel in a lifetime.

JWST is so powerful that it can analyse the chemical composition of the planet’s atmosphere from the light that passes through from the small red Sun it orbits.

The Cambridge group has found that the atmosphere seems to contain the chemical signature of at least one of two molecules that are associated with life: dimethyl sulphide (DMS) and dimethyl disulphide (DMDS). On Earth, these gases are produced by marine phytoplankton and bacteria.

Prof Madhusudhan said he was surprised by how much gas was apparently detected during a single observation window.

“The amount we estimate of this gas in the atmosphere is thousands of times higher than what we have on Earth,” he said.

“So, if the association with life is real, then this planet will be teeming with life,” he added.

Prof Madhusudhan went further: “If we confirm that there is life on K2-18b, it should basically confirm that life is very common in the galaxy.”

He told BBC Radio 5Live on Thursday: "This is a very important moment in science, but also very important to us as a species.

“If there is one example, and the universe being infinite, there is a chance for life on many more planets.”

Dr Subir Sarkar, a lecturer in astrophysics at Cardiff University and part of the research team, said the research suggests K2-18b could have an ocean which could be potentially full of life - though he cautioned scientists “don’t know for sure”.

He added that the research team’s work will continue to focus on looking for life on other planets: “Keep watching this space.”

There are lots of “ifs” and “buts” at this stage, as Prof Madhusudhan’s team freely admits.

Firstly, this latest detection is not at the standard required to claim a discovery.

For that, the researchers need to be about 99.99999% sure that their results are correct and not a fluke reading. In scientific jargon, that is a five sigma result.

These latest results are only three sigma, or 99.7%. Which sounds like a lot, but it is not enough to convince the scientific community. However, it is much more than the one sigma result of 68% the team obtained 18 months ago, which was greeted with much scepticism at the time.

But even if the Cambridge team obtains a five sigma result, that won’t be conclusive proof that life exists on the planet, according to Prof Catherine Heymans of Edinburgh University and Scotland’s Astronomer Royal, who is independent of the research team.

“Even with that certainty, there is still the question of what is the origin of this gas,” she told BBC News.

“On Earth it is produced by microorganisms in the ocean, but even with perfect data we can’t say for sure that this is of a biological origin on an alien world because loads of strange things happen in the Universe and we don’t know what other geological activity could be happening on this planet that might produce the molecules.”

That view is one the Cambridge team agree with. They are working with other groups to see if DMS and DMDS can be produced by non-living means in the lab.

“There is still a 0.3% chance that it might be a statistical fluke,” Prof Madhusudhan said.

Suggesting life may exist on another planet was “a big claim if true”, he told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme, adding: “So we want to be really, really thorough, and make more observations, and get the evidence to the level that there is less than a one-in-a-million chance of it being a fluke.”

He said this should be possible in “maybe one or two years”.

Other research groups have put forward alternative, lifeless, explanations for the data obtained from K2-18b. There is a strong scientific debate not only about whether DMS and DMDS are present but also the planet’s composition.

The reason many researchers infer that the planet has a vast liquid ocean is the absence of the gas ammonia in K2-18b’s atmosphere. Their theory is that the ammonia is absorbed by a vast body of water below.

But it could equally be explained by an ocean of molten rock, which would preclude life, according to Prof Oliver Shorttle of Cambridge University.

“Everything we know about planets orbiting other stars comes from the tiny amounts of light that glance off their atmospheres. So it is an incredibly tenuous signal that we are having to read, not only for signs of life, but everything else,” he said.

“With K2-18b part of the scientific debate is still about the structure of the planet.”

Dr Nicolas Wogan at Nasa’s Ames Research Center has yet another interpretation of the data. He published research suggesting that K2-18b is a mini gas giant with no surface.

Both these alternative interpretations have also been challenged by other groups on the grounds that they are inconsistent with the data from JWST, compounding the strong scientific debate surrounding K2-18b.

Prof Chris Lintott, presenter of the BBC’s The Sky at Night, said he had “great admiration” for Prof Madhusudhan’s team, but was treating the research with caution.

“I think we’ve got to be very careful about claiming that this is ‘a moment’ on the search to life. We’ve [had] such moments before,” he told Today.

He said the research should be seen instead as “part of a huge effort to try and understand what’s out there in the cosmos”.

Prof Madhusudhan acknowledges that there is still a scientific mountain to climb if he is to answer one of the biggest questions in science. But he believes he and his team are on the right track.

“Decades from now, we may look back at this point in time and recognise it was when the living universe came within reach,” he said.

“This could be the tipping point, where suddenly the fundamental question of whether we’re alone in the universe is one we’re capable of answering.”

The research has been published in The Astrophysical Journal Letters.

  • joaomarrom [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    37
    ·
    5 days ago

    Prof Madhusudhan said he was surprised by how much gas was apparently detected during a single observation window. “The amount we estimate of this gas in the atmosphere is thousands of times higher than what we have on Earth,” he said.

    beanis in space confirmed

  • Frivolous_Beatnik [comrade/them, any]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    5 days ago

    Some naive optimistic part of me wants to believe in the star trek future where, upon discovering life outside of our bubble, humanity will put aside greed and hate.

    What is probably more likely is the star trek future where humanity has apocalyptic eugenics wars and nuclear armageddon before it shuns capital.

    • Assian_Candor [comrade/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      5 days ago

      We won’t be able to progress meaningfully as a species until we achieve global communism. These efforts are planetary and generational in scale and require cooperation, not competition

    • huf [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      5 days ago

      the xeelee saga. where humanity eventually genocides/conquers every comparable-level civilization and then whips itself up into a murderous hysteria against the xeelee, a species so ascended they have fucking conquered time. the only thing they fear is dark matter creatures, cos you cant fight them.

      well, the xeelee eventually notice humanity making war on them, go “HUH?! what? why?” and wipe them all out (except for a small remnant they put in a special built reservation/prison. and then they help them get out of the dying universe into a new one).

      humanity never ends up improving.

    • SamotsvetyVIA [any]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      5 days ago

      Non-existence of life outside Earth is more outlandish than there being life out there, isn’t it? It should be the default assumption.

      • CarbonScored [any]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        4 days ago

        It really just… isn’t. All our knowledge of statistics and probability are practically useless when faced with one, singular distinct data point and no understanding of how life started.

        We’re not talking about farcically artificial stakes; if the probability of life appearing on any given square meter of any planet, every second, was, say, the odds of shuffling a specific set of cards. Then, even given 20 sextillion (2*10²²) planets, an optimistic 10³³ seconds until all stars and planets are gone, and 10¹⁴ square meters per planet, the likelihood of life appearing once, anywhere in the universe before heat death is still practically zero.

        But that’s all a guess. So long as we don’t know the likelihood of life starting, we simply cannot have a ‘default assumption’, it makes no sense. There is an altogether plausible reality where we are the be all and end all of life in the universe.

        • Biddles [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          4 days ago

          We already know life happened once. I feel like that updates any prior enough above 0 that, given the literally (?) infinite number of planets, the probability of life occurring somewhere else is 1

          • CarbonScored [any]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            4 days ago

            There are not an infinite number of planets, (in the observable universe, there are roughly 20 sextillion, which is why I chose that number) so I’m afraid not.

        • WoodScientist [she/her]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          4 days ago

          Exactly. Consider one observation about Earth life. We know that life started pretty early in Earth’s history. It happened within a few hundred million years of Earth no longer being a ball of molten slag. But I can explain that observation with completely opposite conclusions:

          1. Life may be easy to start. It happened so soon, that life must form nearly anywhere once conditions are sufficient for it. Simple bacterial life is an inevitable process. It’s likely our own solar system is brimming with life, with every deep Martian aquifer and outer system ice shell moon overflowing with simple life forms at a minimum.

          2. Life may be incredibly difficult to start. You’ll have to scour a billion galaxies before you find a planet with life as complex as Earth has. But we can only exist on one of those lucky oddballs. The only chance complex intelligent life has of forming on a planet is if everything goes absolutely perfect. If the evolution of life were delayed by a billion years, we wouldn’t exist. Within a billion years the warming Sun will boil away Earth’s oceans. Our evolutionary time frame is freakishly fast compared to the average. The fact that life started so early is simply a selection effect. We can only exist on a world that evolved complex intelligent life, and that required breakneck pace evolution.

          Even this one observation, that life started early, can be explained with completely opposite conclusions. The simple truth is, as you note, we can’t know anything about life’s prevalence with a sample of only one. That’s why we really should work hard to search the solar system for present or past life. It’s one of the few shots we have short of interstellar travel of actually determining the prevalence of life.

          I’m also skeptical that we’ll ever be able to prove life via chemical detections like this one. The problem is that while we may not know of a way for a compound to be produced without life, we can’t ever be certain that there isn’t some unknown non-biological route for that compound’s synthesis. It’s an unknown unknown. Maybe dimethyl sulfide can form without life, but in some odd conditions that just don’t exist on our planet. We can’t prove there isn’t some non-biological way to form it. There are really only two ways to prove that a planet has life on it:

          1. Physically go there or bring back samples. Find said life, examine it with your own eyes or under a microscope, and directly observe it reproducing, reacting to its environment, etc.

          2. Detect radio or other signals or signatures of a clearly technological origin.

          This is why I’m a big proponent of SETI. Even beyond the prospect of making contact, detecting technosignatures is one of the few ways we could have truly unambiguous evidence of alien life. If you find some loud laser or radio beacon belching out long strings of prime numbers, well, you’ve just proven beyond any doubt that life exists outside of Earth. Maybe that life is long dead. Maybe the life forms were replaced by machines. Who knows. But if you find something clearly technological out there, you can know for certain that there had to be life involved somewhere along the chain from dead random matter to interstellar beacon.

          • CarbonScored [any]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            4 days ago

            All true, though even “detecting signals” isn’t so unambiguous, there was that hoohaa about ‘regular radio signals’ that turned out to be pulsars. I’m not sure I’d take a radio signal shouting prime number sequences as proof beyond doubt.

            Interesting point about finding past life, though. If we could find any proof that life even did once exist, we could actually start calculating probabilities of life out there.

    • happybadger [he/him]@hexbear.netOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      5 days ago

      It’d be nice. A good chunk of my climate change despair comes from this planet being the only definitive source of life. Even if we don’t find intelligent life, if there’s some backup out there for it in general then we aren’t extinguishing the only spark in the universe. It’s a mixed blessing that this planet is too far away for us to fuck it up too, at least without multi-million year generation ships.

      • kristina [she/her]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        4 days ago

        at least without multi-million year generation ships.

        I mean this is probably a bit of an overshoot, its 124 light years. Maybe like 10k years at the current tech

          • kristina [she/her]@hexbear.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            9
            ·
            edit-2
            4 days ago

            Also within the next 100 years its likely we will put up sophisticated telescopes that use the sun as a lens, such an array could generate enough resolution to see the continents and the colors of those continents of planets within 100-200 light years. China has it on their far future plan iirc

      • cosecantphi [he/him, they/them]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        4 days ago

        I don’t think humans are capable of wiping out life on this planet for good. We’ll really mess shit up, there will be untold suffering amongst human and non-human sentient populations alike, but anthropogenic climate change is something that will take care of itself in short (on geological timescales) order once it causes our population to collapse. Life on Earth has survived much worse in the past.

        • TheaJo [she/her,comrade/them]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          4 days ago

          humans ourselves are likely to survive and rebuild new civilizations anyhow. the problem to me isn’t us going extinct completely it’s all the dying that’ll be done before the new world is on its feet

  • The Cambridge group has found that the atmosphere seems to contain the chemical signature of at least one of two molecules that are associated with life: dimethyl sulphide (DMS) and dimethyl disulphide (DMDS). On Earth, these gases are produced by marine phytoplankton and bacteria.

    Prof Madhusudhan said he was surprised by how much gas was apparently detected during a single observation window.

    “The amount we estimate of this gas in the atmosphere is thousands of times higher than what we have on Earth,” he said.

    SOLARIS BACTERIA WORLD!

    • LeninsBeard [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      4 days ago

      Prof Madhusudhan said he was surprised by how much gas was apparently detected during a single observation window.

      Oh shit it’s a planet full of Dirt_Owls

  • Really hope this is true, but to me, this would just create more questions than it answers wrt intelligent life. The Fermi paradox is still in effect, basically. If there is life that close to us (even single-celled), that implies the universe is absolutely lousy with life, and therefore we should be constantly picking up electromagnetic radiation (radio waves) from other advanced life. Yet we’re not.

    • CyborgMarx [any, any]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      edit-2
      4 days ago

      Hot take: There’s no such thing as the Fermi Paradox, the day I learned anything about radio emissions is the day that theory became bunk to me, the radio bubble surrounding earth is only 75-light-years wide, and the furthest signals are weak and undetectable even with sensitive equipment

      The theory rests on the assumption that radio is a universal technology and not a short-lived transitional technology, most of this planet already communicates primarily thru microwaves and fiber optics, even if radio is a common “transitional” technology the magnitudes of time implied in trying to find it at the right time in space makes detection nearly impossible

      At a certain distance we can’t distinguish between natural and artificial radio signals, the debates over the WOW! Signal and BLC1 show even if you detect “something” it doesn’t mean much to the wider scientific community

      We JUST started looking for techno-signatures in an organized fashion during the last four years, and even that method suffers from similar problems to the radio method (debate over Taby’s Star for instance)

      We’re a blind, deaf person in the middle of the woods who occasionally whispers Marco Polo every ten years and then wonders where everyone is

      • Planetary radar from earth emits a 10,000 light year bubble, but yeah, I get what you mean. If anyone were to detect it, would they even interpret it as a valid signal? And would we even still be here by the time they received it? Kinda grim.

      • Right, and even in that short time that’s still (give or take by a couple decades) enough time to be detectable by other life forms if the distances involved between our world and this one is anything to go by. It’s real close.

        Plus, if we assume we’re not first (which I doubt) then life starting somewhere else, say 3.9 billion years ago, could mean ET emitting radio waves for 100 million years by now! A time/distance that makes this really look like you could reach out and touch it.

    • happybadger [he/him]@hexbear.netOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      4 days ago

      If this turns out to be an ocean world, that’s working toward a partial solution to the Fermi paradox. Life might be common, even around hostile star classes like red dwarfs, but the safest place for life to develop is in a setting where you can’t develop fire-based technology. Life could be as intelligent as a dolphin without the ability to do metallurgy or cook food.

      • AtmosphericRiversCuomo [none/use name]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        4 days ago

        Ocean worlds are common + ocean world roughly every 120 light years => billions of ocean worlds with the potential for complex life

        An octopus or something should be able to occasionally climb out of the waves and build a radio. Where is my Octopus version of Prairie Home Companion?!? Get on it you slimy weirdos.

    • LargeAdultRedBook [none/use name]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      4 days ago

      It is probable that civilizations are either not a common form of life or that electromagnetic radiation is not used to communicate as we understand it for very long in the lifespan of a civilization.