Weitere Studien sind erforderlich, um festzustellen, ob K2-18B, das einen Stern 120 Lichtjahre entfernt, bewohnt oder sogar bewohnbar ist.
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/16/science/astronomy-exoplanets-habitable-k218b.html?unlocked_article_code=1.AE8.3zdk.VofCER4yAPa4&smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare
11 Kommentare
If there is life here, there is life EVERYWHERE
I feel like there are big groups of people out there that would do their best to keep information like this hush hush and out of the heads of their followers.
K2-18b. This was notable about a year ago when JWST detected a possible dimethyl sulfide signal, but it wasn’t confirmed. The properties alone of the planet, a “Hycean” super earth probably covered in a world ocean with a thick hydrogen atmosphere, make it super interesting. And now this team is saying they’ve detected not just dimethyl sulfide, but dimethyl disulfide and methane.
We’re at the point where either we’re missing something about geologic chemistry that can allow these chemicals to exist in large quantities in an environment like this (on earth, dimethyl sulfide is *only* produced by life) or this planet is teeming with aquatic life. Really exciting.
So this is obviously exciting news but how exactly are they detecting this molecule? Wavelengths of the light detected from the planet?
Can’t wait to see how this unfolds…it’s just remind us how tiny we are in this massive universe….
120 light years is ironically just a tad too far.
What sort of timeline are we looking at re: ever being able to confirm (or even just say with near certainty) that there’s life on K2-18b? Like is this something that requires decades of further research, or is it possible that we know within the next 5 years?
It’s sad that the current administration wants to cut funding for projects that can find things like this. This is huge
Pleasantly surprised that this isn’t another click bait article. I am also very hopeful with this news. I have always personally believed that the universe is teeming with life and that there is just no way that we can be it.
Exoplanet astronomer here. There are a lot of problems with this study, as well as the one that preceded it. To begin with, the scenario that would even allow for a biosphere (i.e. „hycean“) in K2-18 b’s situation is very, _very_ hard to achieve given what we know about how planets form. It’s not _impossible_, but based on what we know about the planet (like its radius, its mass, and the amounts of certain gases in its atmosphere), there are a whole lot more potential for it to not have an ocean at all. These conditions would be more akin to something we use to sterilize lab equipment than an ocean we could swim in.
Another important thing to note here about the claimed detection is that the way that we normally think about statistical significance is a bit different from how they’re reported for exoplanet atmospheres. For example, a 3-sigma detection would mean to us something like more than 333-to-1 odds against being spurious. This is the standard in sciences like astronomy, and „strong detections“ require even steeper odds. In the case of DMS/DMDS here, however, it’s more like 5-to-1 or less against, depending on the specific data or model used. Very few reputable astrophysicists would call this anything more than a „hint“ or „weak/no evidence,“ so while this may be the „strongest evidence yet,“ it is _not_ „strong evidence“ in and of itself.
In terms of the data itself, the paper this article is based on shows that they only get significant results if they look for the combination of DMS and DMDS – they only ever find DMS if DMDS isn’t included, and when both are in, each individual molecule is poorly constrained. This isn’t really a standard thing to do, so it’s a pretty big red flag. And considering that they claimed a „hint“ of it from their shorter wavelength data, it’s suspicious that they don’t include it here, as it should presumably make the signal stronger.
So how could we ever confirm that life does exist here? Are biosignatures the best we can get, or can we make a definitive yes/no conclusion based on further research?