Webb telescope detects a possible signature of life on a distant world

C

Cypress

Well-known member

Webb telescope detects a possible signature of life on a distant world​

A molecule detected on a planet 124 light-years away is produced on Earth by decaying phytoplankton and other microbes. There is no other known source.

A distant planet’s atmosphere shows signs of molecules that on Earth are associated only with biological activity, a possible signal of life on what is suspected to be a watery world, according to a report published Wednesday that analyzed observations by NASA’s James Webb Space Telescope.

The peer-reviewed report in the Astrophysical Journal Letters presents more questions than answers, acknowledges numerous uncertainties and does not declare the discovery of life beyond Earth, something never conclusively detected. But the authors do claim to have found the best evidence to date of a possible “biosignature” on a planet far from our solar system.

The planet, known as K2-18b, is 124 light-years away, orbiting a red dwarf star. Earlier observations suggested that its atmosphere is consistent with the presence of a global ocean. The molecule purportedly detected is dimethyl sulfide (DMS). On Earth it is produced by the decay of marine phytoplankton and other microbes, and it has no other known source. The astronomers want to observe the planet further to strengthen the evidence that the molecule is present.

 
Oh goody! Now Cypress will impress us all with quoting chemists for the day!

First Cypress demonstrated his MASSIVE knowledge of Quantum Mechanics in his discussion of imaginary numbers. Now we will be treated to a buffet of vague statements belying a profound ignorance of the subject backed up with quoting other people and whining when anyone questions him.

Cue the fun..... 3, 2, 1..... BLAAAAAAASTOFF!
 
DMS is a strong indicator of biological activity on earth but it may not be the same everywhere. Since there's no one on this thread who actually understands chemistry and run toward shiny objects without critical analysis, but DMS is not ipso facto always a sign of life.

To wit:

Abiotic production of DMS was achieved in lab settings using a photochemical reaction mechanism:

"Gas-phase products of H2S/CH4/N2 haze photochemistry, with or without CO2, were collected and analyzed using gas chromatography equipped with sulfur chemiluminescence detection. Depending on the starting conditions, we estimate that DMS, OCS, CH3SH, CH3CH2SH, CS2, and CH3CH2SCH3 are produced in mixing ratios >10−1 ppmv." (Reed et al, 2024)

The researchers indicate this constrains the reliance on things like DMS as a biosignature. For sure it is a biosignature on earth but that isn't necessarily true everywhere.

Reed et al were not the first or the only people to find evidence for abiotic production of DMS. Yang and Ru (2024) demonstrated abiotic formation of carbonyl sulfide (another potential biomarker we find on earth but also has a proposed mechanism for abiotic formation).

Hopefully this basic logic point will not upset posters like @Cypress. Yes it is a POSSIBLE sign of life, but not necessarily.

I know Cypress is at least smart enough to know that just because something happens ONE way it isn't necessarily the ONLY way. Of course Cy will come back on here (maybe) and tell me how many great minds agree with him. As if that is a logical riposte to the point.

Either way, here's an alternative explanation before we put on the party hats and celebrate life.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top