this post was submitted on 08 Mar 2024
137 points (99.3% liked)

Astronomy

4030 readers
172 users here now

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

This is about as close as we can get for carbon-based life habitable planet. 2.6 times the radius of Earth and mostly ocean, what sort of marine lives swim in there? Give me chills if they exist.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago (2 children)

I think the methane is a better marker...AFAIK, it's almost always a byproduct of some biological process.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago (1 children)

Bruh...that's why I said almost.

I also got about 1/2 way through typing almost the same response below about gases that naturally degrade quickly, not being able to accumulate to high enough concentrations to be detectable at these distances but @TropicalDingDing did so more eloquently than their name would indicate possible, so I'll let you read theirs here: https://lemmy.world/comment/8258449

[–] [email protected] 3 points 8 months ago (1 children)

It’s a good biosignature but a real smoking gun would be if a planet has intelligent life that’s not always so intelligent. Then, we might detect chlorofluorocarbons or some other synthetic pollutant.

“Well, we detected an alien civilization but their atmosphere is in way worse shape than 1950’s London and they’re 100 light years away. I guess we’ll keep checking and see if they get their act together or not.”

[–] [email protected] 1 points 8 months ago

Plot twist, they're already dead by the time we detect them, the light from them exploding the planet just hasn't reached us yet.