Top
Best
New

Posted by fuidani 4/17/2025

“Most promising signs yet” of alien life on a planet beyond our Solar System(www.skyatnightmagazine.com)
417 points | 351 commentspage 2
southernplaces7 4/17/2025|
It would be somewhat worrisome to actually find signs of primitive extraterrestrial life because of the Fermi Paradox. Given the age of the universe, and how long it took both complex life to develop on earth and for a creature such as us to emerge from that, finding life elsewhere would beg a return to Fermi's question of "Where is everyone?" implying that something comes along and causes evolving civilizations to be exterminated before they ever show signs to their presence to the wider galaxy.

If life, even of a very primitive sort, were found, it would stand to reason that it had done so in the past and that other civilizations, possibly even many of them, had formed in our huge galaxy long ago, giving them time to develop enough to be detectable even to us, so then, where are they?

Then again of course, there are probably many, many known unknowns and unknown unknowns lurking amidst all of the above supposition.

n4r9 5/1/2025||
One problem with the Fermi paradox is that the Drake equation simply multiplies expected values together without regard to the underlying distributions. You can think about it this way: what if the actual mechanisms of the evolution of life result in there being a very high probability of 1 or 2 space-faring civilisations evolving, and a tiny probability of trillions of space-faring civilisations? The expected value coming out of the Drake equation would be large but useless.

A few years ago some researchers at the Future of Humanity institute explored what happens if you take distributions into account. It turns out that this makes a surprising difference and results in a substantial probability of no other intelligent life. No need for speculation about great filters, predatory civilisations, etc... . The paper is freely available on ArXiv: https://arxiv.org/pdf/1806.02404

rossant 4/17/2025||
Maybe sufficiently advanced civilizations just stay under the radar to avoid being exterminated by others.
cdplayer96 4/17/2025||
Here's to hoping we can learn more about this. But I feel like this could be caused by us simply not understanding how dimethyl sulfide can be formed on other planets, especially ones over 100 lightyears away..
wolframhempel 4/17/2025||
Maybe we need to widen our search for life. Earth is a planet with about 15 degree average temperature and abundant water and oxygen. So that's what live here consumes and where it thrives. But life is all about adaptation. So, father than looking for planets with similar temperatures and resources, shouldn't we be looking for other possible foundations for life? Maybe there's a thriving civilization out there, living happily at 300 degrees, breathing neon and eating sulfur?
tsoukase 4/18/2025||
Unfortunately we cannot answer fundamental questions about ET life. Like, how long an advanced civilization lasts, which is capable of manipulating radio signals. Because we can since the last 100 years and we don't know how long we will be able.

If that time is a few hundred years, then very few happen to be functioning _now_ (in relativistic meaning) and very far away to have meaningful contact.

rotis 4/17/2025||
Atmosphere of this exoplaned is rich in hydrogen. Also it has likely different atmospheric pressure than we have on Earth. Doubtful there is any life form as we know it. I suspect best we can expect there is something like a primordial soup: a mix of relatively simple organic compounds.
Phelinofist 4/17/2025||
Aren't we looking into the past when looking at things this far away? So, just assuming here, that these are indeed signs of life, would that mean that "they" might have been primitive when these signatures were sent out into space and are now further developed?
ChicagoBoy11 4/17/2025|
Yes, but isn't it "just" 124 light years away. So, we're looking at it 124 years ago, which, in the scale of evolution, isn't particularly long ago?
tomelders 4/17/2025||
My understanding is that the great filter theory means this is bad news for us humans here on earth. And considering the state of the world right now, it's especially ominous. Fate loves irony.
StopDisinfo910 4/17/2025||
The great filter is only one of the possible explanations of the Fermi paradox however. There are other far less bleack including that there is actually no paradox at all: life is indeed frequent and but we are just bad at detecting it/have not been looking for it long enough.
consumer451 4/17/2025||
I used to think that rare earth/rare life was the bleak option. As I get older, I think the bleak thing would be a galaxy full of technologically advanced species with morals potentially equal to, or worse than ours.
encrypted_bird 4/17/2025|||
With due respect, the Great Filter is a hypothesis, not a theory.

That being said, I agree. I read in a similar thread yesterday someone confused how this would be bad news rather than good news—that there are many other intelligent species indicates that such a filter either doesn't exist or is very easy to pass. But, like your point does, I think it's important to recognize that such a "good news" position is predicated on the notion that we as a species are already past the Great Filter, rather than that we're still behind it and the others are ahead.

detritus 4/18/2025|||
Not necessarily. I think it's reasonable to imagine that 'some sort of low-level life' might be fairly common across the galaxy ('one in a ten million'), whereas complex life - never mind 'intelligent' or technologically-sophisticated life might be very much rarer.

The older I get and the more I appreciate Just How Lucky we are to exist at all on our planet here, the more I favour the above thinking.

mtlmtlmtlmtl 4/17/2025||
How so? If great filters exist at all, which is not a given, there could be multiple ones, first of all. They could be somewhere between our level of biological complexity and the kind hypothesised to be responsible for this signal. Endosymbiosis is a very plausible such filter. The evolution of language and the bootstrapping of cultural evolution is another one. Both n=1 on our planet. Probably there are others I can't think of right now.
VP2262 4/17/2025||
K2-18 is a red dwarf. These stars often emit powerful flares that can "sterilise" lifeforms on nearby planets. Maybe microbial forms can protect themselves though?
jmyeet 4/17/2025||
Earlier discussion: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43711376
aurareturn 4/17/2025|
Even if this has 5% of being right, it should still be upvoted all the way to the top of HN. It's that important.
tjpnz 4/17/2025|
How far off are we from being able to image an exoplanet?
t8sr 4/17/2025||
Directly imaging an exoplanet has been done about 20 times (maybe more, by now). If you're asking how far are we from resolving an exoplanet to more than a single point of light, the answer is we will never be able to do that from this distance.
mr_toad 4/18/2025|||
There are proposals to use the solar gravitational lens.

Failing that, you’d need thousands of optical interferometers larger than the Hubble spread across a distance wider than the Earth.

rabf 4/17/2025|||
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_gravitational_lens
dguest 4/18/2025||
Depends on what you mean by "image". We might be able to capture blurry blobs with our current telescopes. Let's say you want to take a picture of Alien Manhattan 100 light years away, where you can see e.g. bridges and buildings, stuff about 10m across. I think we could do it pretty well if we could launch around 50,000 space telescopes, each 30 km across.

My math is below.

Note: I'm not an astronomer.

----

The angular resolution limit for a telescope is roughly the wavelength of the light it's sensitive to over the diameter.

If we want to sense things 10m across, with light at the shorter end of the visible spectrum (400 nm), we'd need a telescope with a diameter of about 1/4th of an AU (i.e. the distance from the earth to the sun), around 40 million kilometers.

More practically we could use a telescope array with this diameter, which could conveniently be in lot of orbits about 1 AU out. But the area is still a problem: assuming this 100m^2 object is as bright as it would be on earth under midday sun, it's going to be reflecting around 100 kw of energy. One of these photons has an energy of around 3 eV, so we're getting 2e23 of them a second. Unfortunately these spread out over a sphere with a surface area of 1e31 km^2 by the time they reach earth, meaning we see one every second if we have a telescope array with an area of 50 million square km.

Ok, so let's go kind of sci-fi and say we can build a 30 km diameter space telescope. It would be impressive (and unprecedented) but since it's floating in space and could be made of thin material you might be able to imagine it with today's technology and a lot of coordination. That gets us around 1000 square km! Now we just do it 50,000 more times.

Great, now we have 1 Hz of photons coming from each 100 m^2 patch of Alien Manhattan! I'm sure in the process of building 50k mega-projects we'll figure out a way to filter out the noise, and with a few years of integration we'll have a nice snapshot!

More comments...