Science news: Water detected on exoplanet
posted at 1:48 pm on April 10, 2007 by Bryan
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Before getting into the details of this story, I just want to note the amazing achievement that it represents. It wasn’t all that long ago that we were still looking for the first proof that planets even exist outside our solar system. The Drake equation said that they should, but we had no proof. And when we found the first proof, it was boring proof: We never actually saw the first extra-solar planet (or exoplanet) itself, we just saw its parent star wobble, hinting that a big planet-sized object’s gravity was affecting the star. There was no image, and we knew nothing about the planet itself beyond its rough mass. And we had to watch the parent star for a looong time to even be able to detect the wobble.
Well, we’ve come a long long way since then. Now we’re using Hubble to probe the atmosphere of an exoplanet. Hubble wasn’t designed to do that, so its capability here is a bonus. And it’s a frickin’ cool bonus, if you ask me.
Astronomers have detected water in the atmosphere of a planet outside our solar system for the first time.
The finding, to be detailed in an upcoming issue of Astrophysical Journal, confirms previous theories that say water vapor should be present in the atmospheres of nearly all the known extrasolar planets. Even hot Jupiters, gaseous planets that orbit closer to their stars than Mercury to our Sun, are thought to have water.
The discovery, announced today, means one of the most crucial elements for life as we know it can exist around planets orbiting other stars.
“We know that water vapor exists in the atmospheres of one extrasolar planet and there is good reason to believe that other extrasolar planets contain water vapor,” said Travis Barman, an astronomer at the Lowell Observatory in Arizona who made the discovery.
HD209458b is a world well-known among planet hunters. In 1999, it became the first planet discovered around a normal star outside our solar system and, a few years later, was the first exoplanet confirmed to have oxygen and carbon in its atmosphere.
HD209458b is separated from its star by only about 4 million miles (7 million kilometers)—about 100 times closer than Jupiter is to our Sun—and is so hot scientists think about it is losing about 10,000 tons of material every second as vented gas.
Thus, despite the discovery of water in its atmosphere, it is unlikely that any life exists on or in the gaseous planet.
Finding exoplanets is becoming almost easy. We know of hundreds of them now, and most of those are in our general galactic neighborhood. Probing their atmospheres is quite a feat, though.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages:
Paging Al Gore…THIS is true global warming, not what you’ve been peddling.
James on April 10, 2007 at 1:53 PM
Science?
Everyone who’s not a brainwashed kool-aid drinker knows that the science is still out on this so-called “science.”
JaHerer22 on April 10, 2007 at 2:01 PM
Soon the Hubble’s gonna be peering down on aliens cookin’ ribs on their backyard grills and Al Gore will beg them to stop destroying their planet.
Tony737 on April 10, 2007 at 2:06 PM
Drake’s equation is a sham. Anyone can make an equation that has 10 unknown variables (where you make up what they mean) and come up with a conclusion.
Here;s my drake’s equation.
AxLyTzRv = My % chance of having sex with Angelina
By the variables I chose, I figure I have a 100% chance of this happening. Don’t doubt me. Drakes equation says its inevitable, gosh darnit.
Aren’t we probing their atmosphere from several centuries ago (at least?) because of light speed and all that?
lorien1973 on April 10, 2007 at 2:07 PM
Well, yeah. Not that there’s anything wrong with that.
Bryan on April 10, 2007 at 2:10 PM
this is a very cool story
might be worthy to consider it a planet for colonization
Defector01 on April 10, 2007 at 2:10 PM
Some telescopes just dig the older atmospheres, that’s all.
James on April 10, 2007 at 2:11 PM
True. I guess if it was there centuries ago, it might still be there now. I’m not sure if I get the point though. I’d -much- rather have our space program focus on ways to get a colony on the moon (isn’t there supposed to be virtually unlimited energy up there?) or to Mars. That’s actually doing something. Hubble stalking alien planets is interesting, but it doesn’t do much for me.
NASA has been (essentially) doing nothing for 20 years or so. Robots on mars are nice, but let’s do something huge.
I’m not so sure how much of a stretch this is. Doesn’t hubble (and other telescopes) that work at such great distances really work by light wavelengths? Finding a wobbly star and saying there is a planet there, then its simply the matter of getting hubble to train on the object it finds, examine the light wavelengths and see what its emanating.
lorien1973 on April 10, 2007 at 2:17 PM
Rome wasn’t built in a day, as the saying goes. Do you have any idea what a trip to Mars would do to the human body? Or a long stay in the Moon’s weak gravity? Well, neither does anyone else, so they’re trying to figure that out. And they’re improving what we know about everything else while they’re at it. The characterization of NASA as doing nothing for 20 years is quite inaccurate.
And if you really really want NASA to do something huge, get off your complaining butt and help out.
Bryan on April 10, 2007 at 2:22 PM
Because their options were between 1) Going to Mars or 2) Looking through a telescope and they can’t do both at the same time…
Nonfactor on April 10, 2007 at 2:23 PM
I see K-Mart’s having a big sale on ignorance-based snark today. Stock up!
Bryan on April 10, 2007 at 2:26 PM
This is soooooo far above my level of comprehension, that I don’t think I should even comment. I’m still trying to grasp that Pluto is not really a planet, but a “dwarf planet.”
pullingmyhairout on April 10, 2007 at 2:27 PM
Just think, if you believe in the Islamist doctrine, none of this will ever or ever exist, in fact it would be off with your head for even suggesting such blasphemy..
Way cool story by the way, Maybe Adama and Co. will find a suitable place after all.
Viper1 on April 10, 2007 at 2:28 PM
This is a classic case of “not their fault”.
NASA can only do what they are budgeted to do, and they’ve been shrunk and shrunk many times over the last 30 years, and monstrously restricted in their “out of the box” thinking since the Challenger disaster.
Aside from the lack of money to “do something huge”, PC and paranoia have robbed much of the adventurism from the folks who try to make the impossible happen. The men of action and ideas get replaced by well-credentialed placeholders.
In spite of all of that, NASA, JPL, etc. manage to so some incredibly remarkable stuff. Bryan, ditto.
Freelancer on April 10, 2007 at 2:30 PM
Especially if one of those variables is “Chance I’m willing to name my own hand ‘Angelina’, at least temporarily”.
The Monster on April 10, 2007 at 2:32 PM
I think the only thing that’ll help NASA out is privatization. It’s just another government program. We will make no progress in space if the program is shut down for 2 years everytime someone dies. People who volunteer for the work know the risks.
The x-space program (or whatever it was called) made a ship that could be launched twice into space within a week’s time. NASA couldn’t do the same in 30 or more years.
lorien1973 on April 10, 2007 at 2:47 PM
The “Rare Earth” hypothesis popularized by Peter Ward and Donald Brownlee is a much more sober and detailed alternative to the Drake equation.
Granted, the result–that planets and even microbial life might be common, but we’re nevertheless almost certainly the sole example of intelligent life in the galaxy–isn’t particularly sexy. But it does at least account for the Fermi paradox (which asks, if the galaxy is so full of intelligent life, why can’t we detect any of it?). And nobody ever promised that the truth would be exciting (as should be readily evident to anybody who’s ever done math).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rare_earth_hypothesis
Blacklake on April 10, 2007 at 2:47 PM
It should have been obvious that we were going to find water pretty much everywhere in our universe:
Ahh, just you just love science? (I do!)
Science: Working hard to prove what we’ve been told by God from the beginning of time.
; )
Fatal on April 10, 2007 at 2:53 PM
Cool astronomy dittos, Bryan.
In centuries to come, it will be discovered that not only is life not rare in the universe, life is the precondition of the universe.
Halley on April 10, 2007 at 2:53 PM
HUGE ROBOTS ON MARS!!
my five-point plan:
1) the blue robot will represent the water element.
2) the red robot will reside in a volcano and represent…
jummy on April 10, 2007 at 3:02 PM
I actually think life is going to turn out to be rather rare in the universe. At least, that’s the course we’re on now. Most of the galaxy can’t support life-bearing planets for one reason or another. The areas that can seem to be dominated by solar systems that can’t support life as we know it. Our own solar system only has one rock that can do the job, and its layout is weird. Jupiter shouldn’t be where it is, but if it wasn’t there we wouldn’t be here.
Re NASA and privatization, that’s not a magic talisman you can just wave at stuff and fix it. The reality is, most of NASA is already privatized in one way or another. I spent eight years at Hubble and never worked a single day of it directly for the government. Like most people who “work for NASA,” I was a contractor. But the contractors do what the GSs tell them to do. You’ll have GSs as long as you have NASA, and you’ll have the government telling the GSs what to do as long as tax dollars and politicians are involved. And you’ll only have private enterprise involved when there’s a profit motive to be involved, for the most part.
Bryan on April 10, 2007 at 3:04 PM
Click your heels three times and say, there’s no place like HD209458b. There’s no place like HD209458b. There’s no place like HD209458b.
pistolero on April 10, 2007 at 3:08 PM
But if Gore had been elected in 2000, it would still be the paradise it was before Bush ruined it.
infidel4life on April 10, 2007 at 3:08 PM
Nice Hotair science post.
Next up Allah will reveal the latest developments at Darpa. When is Hotair getting “The Glove?”
Theworldisnotenough on April 10, 2007 at 3:09 PM
Now that would make NASA some coin.
infidel4life on April 10, 2007 at 3:11 PM
Life is apparently rare in our solar system and could be assumed to be rare in our galaxy; and further the universe.
But I think life, even intelligent life must exist somewhere else in the universe. I know theology does not have room for this thought but the shear number of opportunities makes it nearly statistacally impossible not to be the case. Cool post BTW.
brtex on April 10, 2007 at 3:34 PM
Not to get mystical, but if there were no sentient being alive – anywhere – in the universe, would/could the universe “exist” at all? That’s a trickier question than it sounds. I believe there are huge surprises for us down the road, when science (now still in pre-infancy) explodes in the next couple centuries.
http://www.esa.int/SPECIALS/Mars_Express/index.html
another cool site for space fans
Halley on April 10, 2007 at 3:36 PM
Sorry… you’re right. There hasn’t been a UN panel of politicians to declare it as consensus yet — therefore, no science.
/barf
db on April 10, 2007 at 3:41 PM
I’m packed and ready to move.
I new my collection of Star Trek memorabilia would come in handy some day.
Way too frikin KEWL!
Kini on April 10, 2007 at 3:43 PM
It’s a good thing there are no illegal aliens out there ’cause then we’d NEVER SEE THEM! We can discover water light years away but a citizen of Mexico here illegally? Never. (Yah, I know that was a bit of a tangent.)
Mojave Mark on April 10, 2007 at 3:43 PM
Scientists really need to figure out if there are still thetans in the Galactic Federation that Xenu missed before he brought them here to Teegeeack on an airplane and put them in the volcanoes and blew them up with bombs.
Matticus Finch on April 10, 2007 at 3:46 PM
Even when we do return to the Moon and put people on Mars, those will be only temporary operations, just like Skylab was and the current space station is.
The only way we are going to get permanent colonies in space is if they are: one, politico-militarily worthwhile, or two, economically profitable. Oddly enough, our own technology works against colonization, as computers and remote control make it much easier and cheaper to run operations without the expense and danger of actually putting people in space and providing all the complex life support and logistics they would need.
Don’t get me wrong, I would love to see permanent colonies in space, but I do wonder what things would have to be like down here to make it worthwhile for people to spend their lives Up There.
What should be done is a convention of scientists, engineers, political philosophers, psychologists and economists to look at the issue of space colonization holistically instead of just from the technologic standpoint. I think this could show us a clearer picture of the future of space colonization than any NASA press release.
On another note, I find my belief in God makes it easier to believe in the existence of extraterrestrial life. If there is no God but blind random chance, then Earth is probably the only inhabited planet in the entire galaxy, but if there is a God, then its fifty-fifty whether He parked an inhabited planet where we may be able to find it within our lifteimes (or that of our grandchildren). After all, the Bible never says that we are His only creation.
Lancer on April 10, 2007 at 3:59 PM
profit motive on the moon?
http://www.energybulletin.net/192.html
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2002/04/0426_042602_TVmoonenergy.html
lorien1973 on April 10, 2007 at 4:02 PM
Execute Plan 9! Execute Plan 9!
tomas on April 10, 2007 at 4:26 PM
Good post, Bryan! I like following things like this. I spend time every week looking through the New Horizons site. Can’t wait to see those pictures of Pluto!
jaleach on April 10, 2007 at 5:07 PM
I think the same…rare, but not impossible. I also believe we all, no matter our backrounds, want to be alive to hear the day that life, in any form, exists elsewhere in the universe. For the most part, I hope it’s not intelligent…and if it is, would it rock the very foundation of religion?
And as has been brought up in the comments above, we are seeing most of the vast universe as it existed a looong time ago. We’ll get to Mars soon enough too…it really wasn’t long ago in grand scheme of things we didn’t even have TV! Or even far shorter, this thing called the internet.
I have always wondered if perhaps we are the most advanced form of life in the universe…and it will be, one day in the far-off future, humans who will be the “UFO’s” on other planets…
JetBoy on April 10, 2007 at 5:57 PM
Cool astronomy but at what price? We pour billions of dollars into this science and we find out there’s a planet really far away that has water that is too hot for us to do anything with. We already knew that water was common in the universe, so what’s the big deal?
There is a lot of spin off technology to be sure. And I’ve seen techniques that backyard astronomers can use to find exoplanets. But goodness gracious, NASA is just another hole that we throw money down. At least they could teach their more homicidally inclined astronauts how to use a rest stop rather than adult diapers. Or at least develop a miniaturized makeup kit that they could use before mug shots. That would be a better use of our tax dollars.
Seriously, NASA is invaluable at developing rockets, aircraft, communications equipment, and a whole host of other scientific and technological apparati. But they do stuff like this to get John Q. Public excited and raise their budgets. This is science, no doubt, but science of little practical use.
cmay on April 10, 2007 at 6:17 PM
All true, and that’s only scratching the surface… let’s not even get in to what our planet would be like if the moon and/or sun were slightly closer or further away. Let’s not note what a “coincidence” it is that they appear the same size in our sky, etc. etc. etc. etc.
But this makes it all the more annoying that they throw in this obligatory and baseless line:
As always I have to tell our Darwinian friends, this isn’t science, THIS IS ASSUMPTION.
By the way, I think I’ll wait for more concrete evidence before I even buy any of what they’re telling us about this planet in the first place. We’ve been shocked by discoveries in our own solar system repeatedly over the last few years, becasue our assumptions were based on evolutionary time tables. Start with the activity on Io and Enceladus that should be frozen lumps. How about when Deep Impact hit comet Temple 1 and left people scratching their heads?
I just think we need to hold off all of this hooplah until we get solid evidence for claims made about supposed discoveries in space, because more often than not the assumption is totally wrong. Folks also need to keep in mind that these scientists, like archaelogists, need to prove they’re getting somewhere and that they’re worth funding. Follow the money.
RightWinged on April 10, 2007 at 6:18 PM
Hey NASA? We want, nay, need manned missions… like, yesterday.
ScottMcC on April 10, 2007 at 7:02 PM
Just wait, the MSM will interview some lib in bib overalls saying :
“We hafta fix the problems down here be’for we go out there.”
Kini on April 10, 2007 at 7:14 PM
Uh-oh…and I almost put that in my last comment…*hides*
JetBoy on April 10, 2007 at 8:16 PM
If science is too concerned with practical use, it becomes engineering. If Hubble is providing breakthrough discoveries in astronomy, then it’s doing it’s job. Hubble’s success is actually a good argument against the manned space program; most of the big science news lately has come from the much less costly JPL programs.
There is a long history of Christian thought regarding the nobility of scientific inquiry. Creation is God’s work, and through science we learn more about that work. Therefore astronomy brings us closer to understanding the ways of God, even if it doesn’t yield any economic benefits. Those of my co-religionists who want to reflexively knock scientists need to consider that before they toss a snark about Darwin into the conversation.
There are many legitimate debates about how much the government should spend on Nasa’s mission — and even more debate about what that mission really is these days. These questions could form a national referendum on what it means to be a great nation that attempts great things, such as the original Apollo missions.
Since we live in deeply unserious times, my prediction is that Nasa continues to die the death of a thousand budget cuts.
Anton on April 10, 2007 at 9:48 PM
A very cool post, Bryan, but I love all things about space. Isn’t the Hubble going to expire soon? I think it needs maintenance that NASA has no funding for. Too bad. We’ve acquired some great pictures from it, and now this. I personally don’t believe there is life out there. I truly believe Earth was created as a special place in the heavens to one day become the seat of God’s throne. Admittedly a very Christian point of view, but that’s just how I see it. In the meantime, I enjoy the science we learn from the robots NASA is sending out. I can’t wait to hear and see more about Pluto in the coming months and years.
thedecider on April 10, 2007 at 10:31 PM
Late to the dance again………… “Mr. Data, Station Salem One, if you please, Warp Factor 5…….. Engage!”
PinkyBigglesworth on April 10, 2007 at 10:32 PM
Remember, we’re talking huge numbers in the Milky Way alone. If only .001% of 200,000,000,000 (estimated number of stars in the Milky Way) can support life, that is still 2,000,000 stars
gmoonster on April 10, 2007 at 10:56 PM
Good post and thread. With the time you spent in the military as well as the contractor experience I’m sure you’ve met enough engineers and scientists to realize that when it comes to a “vision thing” it is not normally found in these really intelligent folks.
This is where a national leader needs to do something similar to what Kennedy did about going to the moon. Challenge all the NASA guys with a clear dream and they will perform absolute miracles. This also makes it a little more acceptable for the citizens at large to understand and accept that some risk is involved in getting there.
Bradky on April 11, 2007 at 7:44 AM
Comment pages: