First extra-solar organic molecule discovered

**DimondLight** · March 20, 2008, 01:41 PM

http://www.news.com/2300-11397_3-6235000-1.html

Interesting. At least we know that it's not that far-fetched that their could be life on other planets.(Not that I doubted it anyway)

**Bernem** · March 20, 2008, 04:07 PM

it's a veeery big step from methane to life

**CtrlAltDe1337** · March 20, 2008, 05:00 PM

Interesting but I doubt life could exist at 1700 degrees.

**NaptownKnight** · March 20, 2008, 05:09 PM

I believe that this Methane does not come from life. The big thing about this discovery is not the fact that we found Methane on this random gas giant, but it confirms that we can detect Methane if present. It would be a bigger discovery to find methane on a rocky planet in the "Goldie Locks" area, where life is sustainable.

Then again who are we to say "life can't exist on ________", if we found methane then there is a possibility of life, and wouldn't it be fair to assume that life in other parts of the universe is greatly different from us? I mean, life on a Gas Giant, not even taking into account how close this one is to it's star, is a little far fetched, but we can't assume something one way or the other.

**Simetrical** · March 20, 2008, 09:13 PM

Methane is basically the simplest organic molecule there is. It doesn't indicate the presence of life at all, or make it much more likely than it was. It's interesting to note, is all.

Originally Posted by Crucifix

Interesting but I doubt life could exist at 1700 degrees.

Not life as we know it, no. That's far above the boiling point of water, and for that matter well above the point at which carbon compounds in the presence of oxygen will usually burn.

**Syron** · March 20, 2008, 11:04 PM

As NaptownKnight said, the significance is more that the ability to detect methane has been shown. It's a vote of confidence in the next generation of planet-hunting telescopes that are being designed to characterize the atmospheres of the planets they discover.

Why search for life which would have similar requirements to terrestrial life? Well because terrestrial life is the only one we know of and can study, and would be much easier to detect due to our understanding of it. Yeh there could be all sorts of weird lifeforms out there but since we have nothing to compare it to, looking for it would be even more of a shot in the dark right now.

**NaptownKnight** · March 23, 2008, 05:38 PM

Originally Posted by Syron

Why search for life which would have similar requirements to terrestrial life? Well because terrestrial life is the only one we know of and can study, and would be much easier to detect due to our understanding of it. Yeh there could be all sorts of weird lifeforms out there but since we have nothing to compare it to, looking for it would be even more of a shot in the dark right now.

After watching Planet Earth the other day, and seeing some of the extremely weird life forms on our own planet, I can't imagine what kind of weird forms of life they would find on another planet. Your explanation makes sense though.

I have a question, I hear that radio signals carry through space from many sources, but my friend tells me radio signals break up after going a little outside of our own solar system. Which is true? Would we be able to communicate, however slowly, if we found life in a close system?

**Syron** · March 25, 2008, 02:54 AM

Originally Posted by NaptownKnight

After watching Planet Earth the other day, and seeing some of the extremely weird life forms on our own planet, I can't imagine what kind of weird forms of life they would find on another planet. Your explanation makes sense though.

Well, take for example the discovery a few years ago of plasma "cells" interacting in the upper atmosphere. A study on them showed that they undergo many of the processes that we consider identify life. If i remember correctly just as many as viruses do. Are these "life"? These could easily "live" in the upper atmospheres of hot gas giants.

In the end the problem stems from our definition of life. It could well be completely inaccurate because there is only one sample planet we so far know of to make a definition.

At the moment scientists think the only thing that binds life on earth is the presence of liquid water. This is useful as it can help us to narrow down the planets on which life like ours could survive. These give "habitability zones", regions away from a parent star where the temperatures are right for water to be liquid. Of course as our solar system shows you can get liquid water formed by other processes like the gravitational forces inside the moons of Jupiter and Saturn for example.

Methane and Oxygen are important too. While they are not necessary for life on earth, biological processes are one of the few ways they are formed. They also have a tendancy to break down under the effects of sunlight so the presence of life is one of the few explanations to why they would persist on an extrasolar planet. Oxygen is also important due to the formation of Ozone reducing the harmful radiation allowing delicate lifeforms to survive.

If we didn't have guides like these formed from our knowledge of earth life, we couldn't narrow down the search. Maybe life doesn't necessarily need water, it could just be a peculiarity of life on earth. Maybe life can form in regions of high radiation. Unfortunately that doesn't help us narrow things down so it's not a useful line to go down right now.

Originally Posted by NaptownKnight

I have a question, I hear that radio signals carry through space from many sources, but my friend tells me radio signals break up after going a little outside of our own solar system. Which is true? Would we be able to communicate, however slowly, if we found life in a close system?

Yes as simetrical said it is possible, quite slow of course. In fact not only is it possible but a demonstration has already been attempted!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arecibo_message

**Dracula** · March 25, 2008, 03:29 AM

I thought mathane is a simple gas. And how can a gas be organic ?

**Syron** · March 25, 2008, 03:37 AM

Originally Posted by Dracula

I thought mathane is a simple gas. And how can a gas be organic ?

"Organic" in chemistry terms refers to molecules containing Carbon-Hydrogen bonds, of which Methane is one of the simplest. In fact "Organic Chemistry" is often also called Carbon Chemistry. The name comes from the fact that they were once thought to be only present in living things. In fact due to the ubiquitous presence in living beings earth life is often referred to in such terms, "Carbon-Based Lifeforms" spiel in sci-fi for example.

While they aren't exclusive to living things, as they do make up a large component of "living" interactions they can be an indication of it.

**Simetrical** · March 24, 2008, 10:29 AM

Radio signals will propagate indefinitely in a vacuum. They will grow weaker according to the inverse square of the distance from the source, so eventually they'll become undetectable, unless you have sufficiently good detection equipment. They're no different from any light in this way: we can see the light from stars billions of light years off perfectly well, and that includes radio waves as well as other types of light. Astronomers study all of them.