this post was submitted on 15 Sep 2023
333 points (93.0% liked)

Technology

59593 readers
6512 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Webb finds molecule only made by living things in another world::undefined

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Chriszz 115 points 1 year ago (4 children)

To me it’s not a matter of whether live exists anymore, but where it exists

[–] ViewSonik 31 points 1 year ago (1 children)

While I agree there is a very high probability of life out there, we truly do not know until we can prove it. This evidence JWT found may have another explanation that our scientists are unaware of yet.

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

Also probably simple life, I mean the eycariote cell happened only once on our planet ...

[–] scarabic 12 points 1 year ago (3 children)

I’m so excited to discover a totally different take on life because it will help us truly define what life is.

Then again if we find a similar take on life (carbon based, compatible chemistry to life on earth) then that’s pretty interesting too, implying either panspermia or that there’s something special about this configuration. It also likely means we have more potential for useful discoveries from that life system, as well as threats.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Convergent evolution happens all the time with life on earth. The fact the other life has developed in a similar way will not be surprising. It likely wouldn't be identical, but if they use a similar basis for a DNA type thing, or something like that, it won't imply panspermia.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] postmateDumbass 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

You will dig this if you haven't seen it.

The aliens will not be silicon

https://youtu.be/2nbsFS_rfqM

[–] FlyingSquid 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] postmateDumbass 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

StarTrek is not a documentary.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Art3sian 8 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I’d be pretty happy to put $100 right now on life being found on almost every planet and moon throughout the galaxy where liquid water exists.

[–] Chriszz 35 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I would bet all the money in my savings that life exists somewhere in our galaxy, but I’m not sure I’d do it for every moon with water

[–] eek2121 18 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] Grimy 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Im seriously excited to get to Europa

[–] Art3sian 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)
load more comments (1 replies)
[–] MossBear 7 points 1 year ago

In a hose, on a rose, up your nose. Everywhere where life can be is where life goes.

[–] [email protected] 92 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Only a 1 sigma confirmation at the moment so needs to be thoroughly reinvestigated

[–] [email protected] 33 points 1 year ago (3 children)
[–] ShittyBeatlesFCPres 66 points 1 year ago (6 children)

Sigma is basically a representation of certainty that your result isn’t a statistical fluke. It comes from standard deviation in statistics but 1 sigma is 68% certain. 2 sigma is 95%. 3 sigma is 99.7%.

By convention, astronomy uses 3 sigma for “significance,” meaning you almost definitely found something. Particle physics, since it’s usually done in controlled experiments, usually requires 5 sigma (99.99994%).

It’s similar to margin of error in political polls.

[–] ohlaph 8 points 1 year ago

All of our homies like 3 sigma.

[–] cashsky 3 points 1 year ago

Oh that's where 6 Sigma comes from. TIL

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] [email protected] 30 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It’s a number that statistically represents how strong the result is in the data basically. As far as I understand it, with astronomy the typical sigma value expected is 3

[–] FlyingSquid 10 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Technically, this is astrochemistry, not astronomy. I don't know what the expected sigma value there is.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago

It’s 3 plus/minus 1 sigma

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 28 points 1 year ago

By saying 1 sigma, they are basically saying tgat are 68% confident in the results. As you increase the sigma, your confidence in the results increases. Here is a site that goes into more in depth explanation: https://news.mit.edu/2012/explained-sigma-0209#

[–] [email protected] 50 points 1 year ago (1 children)

A chemical only produced by life on earth. But can it be produced by abiotic conditions on other planets? I’m not sure that has been ruled out at this point.

[–] [email protected] 24 points 1 year ago

Yeah, this headline is bullshit. It's indication of possible life, but it isn't what the headline makes it sound. There's always other possible methods, even if we aren't aware of them yet. It's interesting, but doesn't confirm anything yet.

[–] [email protected] 23 points 1 year ago (2 children)

it picked up hints of a substance only made by living things — at least, that is, on Earth.

What other process could theoretically produce it?

[–] [email protected] 21 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Given the vast differences in atmospheres (or the lack thereof) and their conditions, I wouldn't be surprised if those were the culprits

[–] PaulDevonUK 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

There are plenty of places on earth where life exists in conditions that seem alien compared to the rest of the planet.

"life finds a way".

[–] [email protected] 17 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

if you have methanol, hydrogen sulfide and enough heat along with a specific rock, it will get formed. or probably methane, hydrogen sulfide and UV

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 year ago (2 children)

there are many ways, and what i'm saying it's likely a massive clickbait

t. organic chemist, currently working with sulfur compounds

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] scarabic 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

“Specific rock” sounds like a video game crafting resource ;)

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 year ago
[–] [email protected] 16 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Sadly they cannot be communicated with in a single human life time; assuming they are intelligent and possess the capability to respond.

[–] Zron 31 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Even if Webb were to basically spot earth 2 5 light years away, I’d caution about getting excited for a radio chat.

Remember that life has existed on earth for something like 3 billion years, but multicellular life has only been around for 500 million or so years, humans in various forms have been around for about a million years, and we’ve only had radio for about a hundred years.

The vast majority of life that has ever existed on our planet has been single called organisms. Finding evidence of any life on another planet is huge news, but we should temper our expectations.

It’s way, way more likely for alien planets to have oceans full of plankton analogues as the dominant life. Considering the rest of this planet’s atmosphere is composed mostly of hydrogen, even their plankton would be weird by our standards.

[–] postmateDumbass 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

We could irradiate Earth2 with so much RF radiation the crearures of the other planet all develop immune to cancer!

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 year ago

It's a planet 8x the mass of the earth with a heavy hydrogen atmosphere and is considered very hot, the water is in a super critical state. I think if we found anything it would just be bacterial life.

My bet is on "previously unknown chemistry" creating the chemicals we found. It's never aliens :(

[–] scarabic 7 points 1 year ago

But the definition of a single human lifetime could very well change within one human lifetime from now.

[–] Art3sian 9 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Time for a new version of the Bible. The Adam and Eve thing is about to look pretty silly.

[–] antaymonkey 35 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

about to look pretty silly

Hate to break it to ya...

[–] Cheems 19 points 1 year ago (2 children)
load more comments (2 replies)
[–] [email protected] 18 points 1 year ago (5 children)

Just expand on the current one.

God made humans, in his image, because God is a jealous God and wouldn't want humans to be better looking than himself. He filled the world with animals for the humans to hug and eat. On the seventh day He rested.

On the either day, he started on some new planets, then on the ninth day He populated them with more life so that humans might expand to fill the universe he created, and find the life he scattered around for the humans to hug and eat. On the tenth day, he created intelligent life on other planets, because he is all knowing and therefore knows humans won't feel true camaraderie without attacking and wiping out other sentient life forms. On the eleventh day, He declared a public holiday, because He felt like resting but he already decided the Sabbath is every 7 days.

The bible was written by a bunch of religious scholars, and assembled into a series of books. There's no reason they can't "discover" some more books.

[–] scarabic 5 points 1 year ago

I had a Christian relative tell me “Hey I’m interested in science too. Like why did God make the universe so big? I mean… obviously to show his power, but why this big, exactly?”

I told her that she was starting with all the answers already defined and that this is not science.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›