Did scientists discover life on another planet? Experts weigh the biological bomb report

Last week, researchers who use James Web Telescope for Space (JWST) announced that they had found something interesting to exoplanet, so-called K2-18 B: a possible group of dMS, a molecule, on the ground, which is almost exclusively produced by Marine’s microscopic life. The external planets, which are located about 120 light years away, and the courses inside the area suitable for a red dwarf star and may be a Hessian world: a planet covered with oceans with an atmosphere rich in hydrogen.

While the discovery came with a statistical confidence of three columns (very promising, but not final), the main headlines around the world raises speculation about the first revelation of life outside the earth. But not everyone is convinced. Scientists are now weighing through disciplines – some of them are optimistic about the latest research, while others are very skeptical. Could DMS be a sign of life, or is it just a strange, non -biological chemistry that occurs under extreme conditions?

For this last fashion, we have collected expert reactions to the results, drilling in chemistry, data restrictions, and what the needing of the needle will require from “perhaps” to something more harsh. Because in astronomy, the line is between Interesting and rare It is a thin haircut. The following responses were lightly released and intense for clarity.

Oliver Shaqit

The planetary chemist at Cambridge University studies potential planets, among other things.

I have worked to develop an understanding of the climate and structure (i.e. the size and degree of the heat of the atmosphere, what is the reason behind the atmosphere and so on) from K2-18b.

I don’t think the DMS report in the K2-18 B spectrum moves the astronomical needle. A series of steps to the confidence we have seen as the signs of life outside the earth is almost:

1. Creating a sign is in fact from the planet that is seen (in this case, from the absorption of light that passes through the planet’s atmosphere)
2. Creating a signal is due to vitality with interest (in this case, molecular absorption in the spectrum of DMS).
3. Excluding non -biological processes as being able to produce biological.
4. The base in the (virtual) biological processes as a ability to produce biological.

K2-18 B 1 or 2 has not been discovered so far-because society needs to confirm themselves there is a sign. This is not my experience.

3 and 4 closer to my experience. Here, K2-18 B is a special challenge to life. There is currently no condition of the data hosted by this planet, liquid water oceans and a viable climate. In fact, based on the data, there are all reasons for the belief that the climate will be very hot for the oceans of liquid water, as the deep atmosphere is likely under the oceans of magma, not liquid water. For this reason, even if it returns 1 and 2 DMS discovery, our expectation should be that this (the molecule) has appeared in an important, hot, sulfur, rich in hydrogen and ask us about what the weather chemistry would have been able to do so. Instead believe that this is DMS of biological origin that will require the heart of all our expectations regarding the climate of this planet, without any other reason to do so of the data.

In other words, we are far from believing that K2-18 B can inhabit, not to mention the essential.

Christopher Glenn

Gyucheviki at the Southern West Research Institute and an expert in the search for the possibility of life outside the planet in the worlds of the oceans.

This is a very enjoyable new data collection. There seem to be unparalleled features in the K2-18 B spectrum, which can be attributed to methyl sulfide or methyl diopitide. However, these results extend to its borders (K2-18 B are a somewhat small planet), and more analysis can find that there is no statistically significant evidence for these features. We need more astronomers in this case as soon as possible! Currently, I am fascinated but wary of the possible presence of these molecules on K2-18 B.

Even if the DMS or DMDs exist, we must be very careful in treating them as biological bodies. We have just started to ask questions about the injuded background about this type of planet. The strange chemistry may surprise us, because the planets are more complicated (and greatly interesting) than we assume first. In order for life to be discovered, multiple supporting parts must be found, and that will take time. Let’s target these new results and go to work.

for me Preprint An important discovery is adapted below:

“Given the deep renovator scenario in the atmosphere can absorb the abundance of CO (carbon monoxide) and NH3 (ammonia), the clear absence of these species should not be considered as evidence against this type of scenario for TO270 D (planet revolving around another red dwarf, discovered in 2019), and K2-8 B. It is not necessary to explain any data, although this does not prevent the existence Hycean worlds.

Niko Madosodhan

Astronomical physicist at the University of Cambridge and the author of the recent study.

The needle is somewhat more in the direction of a possible life than before, but we need to remain very cautious and open to other capabilities.

I think what we should be enthusiastic about is the fact that we have any data we start with, even to discuss the possibilities. I think more data

Over the next two years, it should provide better restrictions.

Ignas Snellen

and Astronomical physics world At the University of Leiden and an expert in planets outside the pole.

Everything completely explodes from the proportions. Sorry because I was a little shortened in my answers, but I had to deal with this in the Dutch media and Belgium in the past two days, and I have ended a little.

The research team finds bumps in their spectrum. It is not clear whether this is real, and if so, what can be caused. There can be dozens of molecules (if they are real), or even cloud features. What do the authors do? They only look at whether this DMS can cause (and add DMDS). They ignore dozens of other types (i.e. non -biological sources of molecules) that can cause this bump and call them a day. If you were the ruling, I would have stopped this post there. There is no reason to summon astronomical biology, not to mention its name is the greatest progress or anything else.

Most reporters write a piece where they say something like “However, not all scientists are convinced …” I can tell you, it’s much worse, but most of us keep our mouths closed. I understand why, in these difficult times, but in the long run it will harm this astronomy when no one takes us seriously. You can quote me on that.

Sarah Seger

The world of planets at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology specializes in the planet’s atmosphere outside the pole.

Because they are not likely to be confirmed at all in both cases, we have to live with what we might call “the planet’s vital planet candidates”. This planet needs more work to get there. You can make sure that others work on ways that DMS can produce without life.

I appreciate the enthusiasm of people. With more evidence, these planets and other planets may be “blessed” as biological candidates, but they will remain in the category of candidates indefinitely.