Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
NASA

How NASA Could Find Evidence of Life on Another Planet Within 25 Years (washingtonpost.com) 131

Posted by EditorDavid from the truth-is-out-there dept.
"In all likelihood, in the next 25 years, we'll find evidence of life on another planet..." begins a new essay by author Dave Eggers in the Washington Post.

"In more than a dozen conversations with some of the best minds in astrophysics, I did not meet anyone who was doubtful about finding evidence of life elsewhere — most likely on an exoplanet beyond our solar system. It was not a matter of if. It was a matter of when." [A]ll evidence points to us getting closer, every year, to identifying moons in our solar system, or exoplanets beyond it, that can sustain life. And if we don't find conditions for life on the moons near us, we'll find it on exoplanets — that is, planets outside our solar system. Within the next few decades, we'll likely find an exoplanet that has an atmosphere, that has water, that has carbon and methane and oxygen. Or some combination of those things.

And thus, the conditions for life. In a few years, NASA will launch the Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope, which will have a panoramic field of vision a hundred times greater than the Hubble Space Telescope. And on the Nancy Grace Roman Space Telescope — we'll call it Roman from here on out — there will be a coronagraph, a device designed to perform something called, beautifully, starlight suppression. Starlight suppression is the blocking of the rays of a faraway star so that we can see behind it and around it. Once we can master starlight suppression, with Roman and NASA's next astrophysics flagship, the Habitable Worlds Observatory, we'll find the planets where life might exist.

To recap: For thousands of years, humans have wondered whether life is possible elsewhere in the universe, and now we're within striking distance of being able to say not only yes, but here.

And yet this is not front-page news. I didn't really know how close we were to this milestone until I visited the Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena, Calif., on a hot and dry day in June...
Eggers' article is part of an ongoing series called "Who is government?" (For the series Michael Lewis also profiled the uncelebrated number-crunchers at the U.S. Department of Labor, while Casey Cep wrote about the use of DNA to identify the remains of World War II soldiers for America's Veteran Affairs' department's.) But this week Eggers wrote that the work being done at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory "is the most inspiring research and exploration being done by any humans on our planet..."

"No billionaires will fund work like this because there's no money in it. This is government-funded research to determine how the universe was created and whether we are alone in it. If NASA and JPL were not doing it, it would not be done."

Eggers emphasizes later that "doesn't mean it's intelligent life, or even semi-intelligent life. It could be bacteria, or some kind of interstellar sea cucumber. But whatever form it takes, we are close to finding it..."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

How NASA Could Find Evidence of Life on Another Planet Within 25 Years More

How NASA Could Find Evidence of Life on Another Planet Within 25 Years

Comments Filter:
  • There has been tons of money in UFO "research", convincing people that there is extraterrestrial life, etc.

    • That is alien life on earth, this article is about ET's at their home.

      • Pointing out: A weekly advertorial for more NASA funding at the end of the federal budget year (ends Sept 2024) seems about normal for this time of the year.

        It's if NASA has a 'boiler room' https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0... [imdb.com] of PR agents sending out as many fund NASA now news articles as possible this time of year.

        I thought, based on recent /. NASA items, that they had higher priorities than searching for ET, like fixing crumbling building and such.

        The skeptic wants to see NASA priorities, costs, cost of fac

  • Always going to produce the answer in 30 years time?

    • Yes, but something like this can't have a timeline written in ink attached to it.

  • Being close to having the ability (Score:5, Insightful)

    by TheNameOfNick ( 7286618 ) on Sunday September 22, 2024 @07:23AM (#64807315)

    doesn't mean there is any to find.

    • This was exactly my first thought. Now, me personally truly believe earth is not singular in this aspect, but my belief, or other's aren't proof that there must be. And the headline kind of makes the point that it's just a question of time before it is found, hence implying that it must exist and we just haven't found it yet.

      I wish people could stop with the catchy phrases disregarding their validity. Example during an event in this town, they claimed that "Littering during [event] costs the city [such and

    • doesn't mean there is any to find.

      You noticed that, eh? He just implicitly assumes it's there to be found.

    • The math says there has to be, even if that means it's damned difficult to detect.

      • The math says no such thing.

        • Sure it does. We know because we exist that p(life | planet) > 0. Take whatever number of planets in the universe causes the expected number of planets with life to be 1. Now, how confident are you that there aren't more planets than that out there?

          • Do I need to be rude? There is a non-zero chance that Earth is the only planet with life on it. You can get your hopes up for finding life in other places, but do not claim to be certain. That's the difference between a scientist and a kook.

            • There's a non-zero chance, out of the massive number of planets in the Universe, of there being some form of life, and yes you're being a rude jackass.
              What are you, a 'creationist' or something? If so then GTFO, we're trying to have an intellgent discussion.
              Don't like that I just said that to you? Then don't call people a 'kook'.

              • Fucking morons. There being a non-zero chance that there is life on anther planet is not the same as that chance being 1. The chance of rolling a dice n times and not even once getting a six is (5/6)^n. That will be a very small number for large n, but never zero.

                • That argument is precisely why it seems so incredibly unlikely that we are the only ones.
                  • I don't know why that guy is on Slashdot, he's clearly an accountant or some other profession that doesn't require any imagination whatsoever, but that actively discourages imagination and creative thinking, and furthermore is so thoroughly rooted in only what he can see, hear, and touch, that anything theoretical or imaginative is just plain incomprehensible to him. The kind of guy that never gets invited to parties because he's an incomparable bore and never laughs at jokes because he doesn't get them at
                • Say only 1 planet out of 1 million develops life. If you have 10 million planets, the odds that none of them have life is (1-1/1000000)^10000000, or 4e-5. It's just incredibly unlikely that we are the only ones.
                  • Absolutely. We may not yet have the technology to detect them, though, and for all we know we don't even know what to be looking for out there; what if alien life, even plants or microbial life, is so completely alien that the outward signs of it aren't something we'd even look for?
                • The current theoretical estimate of the number of galaxies in our Universe is somewhere between 100,000,000,000 and 200,000,000,000.
                  Our own Milky Way galaxy has something on the order of 100,000,000,000 stars in it; if you use that as a rough estimate for the number of stars in all galaxies, you get somewhere between 1x10^22 and 2x10^22 stars in the Universe -- and again that's a rough estimate, it may go up as our ability to build and launch bigger, more sensitive space-based telescopes improves, allowing

                  • You idiots really don't understand the words. "Possible" does not mean "inevitable". "Unlikely" does not mean "impossible". You jump from "not impossible" to "probable" to "certain" like all the other esotericists and religious fanatics who claim to have proof.

                    • You talk like a 12-year-old arguing about who would win a fight between Superhero 'A' and Superhero 'B'.
                      You also have apparently zero imagination and I'm guessing zero sense of humor either. You must be a gigantic bore at parties and therefore don't get invited to them.
                      Your picture must be in encyclopedias for the entry entitled 'get off my lawn'.

                      YES, I'm saying that it is INEVITABLE that humans WILL find non-terrestrial life SOMEWHERE in our Universe IF our species lives long enough do so.
                      I'm not bud

            • There is a non-zero chance that Earth is the only planet with life on it.

              There is a general scientific principle that "We're not special." Our planet is average, our star is average, and so on. Any argument that Earth and what is on it is unique in the universe is an extraordinary claim that requires extraordinary evidence.

              • If you throw dice and only get a six once, there's nothing special about that throw, but it's still the only time you got a six. Stop being religious about math.

                • Re: (Score:2)

                  by Chaset ( 552418 )

                  I think the argument is that the 'cosmic dice' are being thrown trillions of trillions of trillions of times around the universe. The billion-sided die came up one on our planet. It would be 'statistically impossible' for it to not come up ever again in the 10^whatever other instances across the universe.

                  One explanation of 'statistically impossible':
                  All the air molecules in a room are bouncing around randomly. Nothing prevents the random motion to end up causing all the air molecules to end up on one sid

                • It's religion that holds that man has a special place in the universe. "Rate Earth" hypotheses are a creationist red flag.

                  • "Rate Earth"

                    Mostly harmless, 6/10 with rice.

                    Someone who can't acknowledge that a probability below 1 does not mean certainty is not taking the math seriously enough to be considered a rational person. You can believe anything you want, but that is religion. The math does not prove the existence of life on even one other planet. It just says it's possible, likely even, but not certain. You're making the same kind of mistake that gambling people often make: If you haven't rolled a six five times, the next has to be a six

    • "within 25 years" is code for "we have absolutely no idea, it might never happen, and if it does it will be completely random."

  • In my opinion though.. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by JamesTRexx ( 675890 ) on Sunday September 22, 2024 @07:27AM (#64807319) Journal

    "is the most inspiring research and exploration being done by any humans on our planet..."

    I think the most inspiring research is the one done right here on this one and only home we (still) have.
    It's nice to learn about the origins and what's out there and all, but if we don't understand what's going on right now with what we have and what we're doing to it, it's less important.

    Then again, it's less glamorous and imaginative, and it forces us to face our responsibilities and consequences.

    • Look at how much progress we've made here because of space-based research, though, how much technological advances have been made as a side-product of it all. I can't even begin to theorize about how our continuing efforts will affect our understanding and stewardship of this island Earth we live on.

      I will say this though: some of our species is attempting to solve the problems we've created for ourselves here on Earth, but some others of our species either don't care enough to participate in that, and s

      • If you mean space based as the use of satellites, ISS, etcetera, indeed, but that's still here on this planet.
        Learning about apace and other planets is neat, but doesn't address most of what's going on under our noses.

        If you want to see our Earth-bound problems addressed more effectively, perhaps we should focus on removing the influence of those obstructionist types?

        That would take overturning the "brawns over brains" mentality for most mankind first. Entertainment sells, not scientific facts.

  • Where even scientists are allowed to have faith.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by dmay34 ( 6770232 )

      We actually have more direct evidence for a creator god than we do aliens.

      • Citation required

      • Wow. They really got to you as a kid, didn't they?

        Churches. Not even once.

      • Re:Alien life (Score:5, Insightful)

        by FudRucker ( 866063 ) on Sunday September 22, 2024 @08:29AM (#64807405)
        evolution disproved the creation story in the bible


        which means Adam & Eve NEVER existed
        which means NO original sin
        which means jesus NEVER existed


        every museum of natural history in the world is a warehouse of evidence proving evolution to be a true fact


        what do religious nuts have?
        a dusty old bible written by goat molesters


        All gods are mythology
        All holy books are fiction
        All religions are bullshit

        • You can't argue with the faithful; anything you 'disprove' in the Bible is allegory, at least until you've left the room then it's literal again.

          • We, as a species, will either evolve past that particular flaw in our brains, or it will devour us. I'm hoping for the former, but I won't live to see what happens.
        • ..and Man made 'God' in their own image, which is why it's a 'god' of blood and vengeance.
          The 'Bible' is an ages-old work of fiction, and in the 21st Century, organized religion is just a means of The Few controlling the lives of The Many, and The Few are inevitably corrupt; power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Just look at countries like Iran or Afghanistan and you'll see evidence of that corruption.

        • evolution disproved the creation story in the bible ... which means jesus NEVER existed

          There's nothing in evolution that disproves the existence of a historic Jesus - of some of the stories told about him perhaps - but revolutionary leaders with messianic pretensions are a pretty common occurrence (Got one running for the American presidency right now). Maybe leave it to the historians and archaeologists to argue that one out.

      • Um no. Evidence is a God entity saying "Howdy!" to the world and removing all doubt. Voices in the head don't count Hallucinations that happen while the brain is shutting down during the process of dying is not evidence. Nor do I count any artifacts which are very sketchy at best. Let me know when that "Howdy!" is coming because so far it never happened, certainly I've never heard it.

        • >Hallucinations that happen while the brain is shutting down during the process of dying is not evidence.

          Actually, we've flipped that one. It's now evidence AGAINST God, since we've learned how to trigger it at will with a magnetic pulse to the brain and are in the beginning stages of understanding how it works.

          So anytime you want to see the tunnel, the bright light at the end, the friendly face, and feel that feeling of peace... go talk to a neuroscientist with some idle lab equipment.

        • Truth be told, it would be easier to prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that 'real magic' exists than would be to prove that their so-called 'God' exists, and having known a whole group of people who did believe in magic, I can tell you that no one can prove any of that either.
          For my money, the sooner our entire species evolves past this brain-flaw that produces this 'faith' and 'belief' nonsense, the better off we'll be in every aspect of life, but sadly at the rate we're going none of us alive today will l

        • Hallucinations that happen while the brain is shutting down during the process of dying is not evidence.

          God and life after death are two different things. Neither requires or proves the other.

      • 'I refuse to prove that I exist,' says God, 'for proof denies faith, and without faith, I am nothing.' 'But, says Man, the Babel fish is a dead giveaway, isn't it? It could not have evolved by chance. It proves you exist, and, by your own arguments, you don't. QED.' 'Oh dear,' says God, 'I hadn't thought of that,' and vanishes in a puff of logic.

      • We actually have more direct evidence for a creator god than we do aliens.

        *eye roll*

        We require proof, not """faith""", and by 'proof' I mean things that can be independently tested, not 'trust me bro, it's the truth'.

      • We actually have more direct evidence for a creator god than we do aliens.

        False dichotomy, since the creator god could BE aliens.

    • People are struggling to keep food on their plate. We have a apocalyptic level mental health crisis in America which we "never have enough funding" to try to correct. And there are far more items on that giant laundry list But we have money to throw at finding space aliens. Uh, OK. I think ET can wait while we try to get our house in order.
      • So NASA should be working to fix mental health issues rather than directing their efforts at their core competence? I don't think you've really thought this through.

      • People are struggling to keep food on their plate. We have a apocalyptic level mental health crisis in America which we "never have enough funding" to try to correct. And there are far more items on that giant laundry list But we have money to throw at finding space aliens. Uh, OK. I think ET can wait while we try to get our house in order.

        If we correct all the ills of humanity before ever doing any scientific work, we will neither get any scientific work or correction of our ills.

        I always wondered how Americans are presumably starving while there as so many ways for them to get food either free, or ad drastically reduced price.

        And anti-depressants and even anti psychotics are so mainstreamed now that they are actively trying to get as many people on them for life.

        • I always wondered how Americans are presumably starving while there as so many ways for them to get food either free, or ad drastically reduced price.

          Have you ever tried to get food free or at drastically reduced price? It isn't as easy as you make it sound.

          And anti-depressants and even anti psychotics are so mainstreamed now that they are actively trying to get as many people on them for life.

          Antidepressant drugs are not very effective, antipsychotics have severe side effects, and drugs of any kind tend to cost money.

          I'm not any kind of mental-health professional at all, but it seems likely to me that a lot of depression and some other psychiatric problems aren't the result of chemical imbalances in the brain but rather the result of living in a dehumanizing society. People who are constan

          • I always wondered how Americans are presumably starving while there as so many ways for them to get food either free, or ad drastically reduced price.

            Have you ever tried to get food free or at drastically reduced price? It isn't as easy as you make it sound.

            When I was a child, my family got surplus food. It wasn't exactly balanced, but some things were in demand, like Butter, and the surplus peanut better was strange stuff. Made the best peanut butter cookies ever. Also big blocks of cheese. And there was a trade thing going on, so in combination with gardening and relatives buying meat in bulk to save money, then making sausage, we got by. That was way back. Now to today.

            A friend hit some hard times, and he went onto the food stamp system. It wasn't di

          • I forgot to mention, I love your pseudonym!
      • If you want to 'get our house in order' then help remove the obstructionists who perpetually are standing in the way of finding and implementing the solutions to the problems we're faced with!
        You know who I'm talking about, right?

      • People are struggling to keep food on their plate. We have a apocalyptic level mental health crisis in America which we "never have enough funding" to try to correct.

        The US Department of Health and Human Services has $3.07 Trillion in "budgetary resources" [usaspending.gov] in fiscal year 2024. (I'm making an assumption that you're talking about the US.) According to the Planetary Society [planetary.org], "NASA's fiscal year 2024 budget is $24.875 billion, a 2% cut relative to 2023." (Detailed financial statements here [nasa.gov].) That's 0.8% of $3 trillion, meaning all of NASA's annual budget would last HHS about three days, and NASA does a lot besides looking for aliens.

        Even worse, "mental health" is an unsolve

  • SETI: "No REALLY! We'll find in in the next 25 years! Pinky swear!"

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by stwrtpj ( 518864 )

      SETI: "No REALLY! We'll find in in the next 25 years! Pinky swear!"

      I'm not sure what you think you're making fun of here. You're right in that SETI has yet to find anything. There's nothing wrong with this. No one in that field is seriously stating that we will find evidence of intelligent life in X number of years. They are simply continuing to test the hypothesis that intelligent life exists. Nothing more, nothing less.

  • Most of us want for that to happen. Alas, we still do know what it is that reality has in store for us in this respect.

  • A more correct statement would be that within 25 years, we'll be in a position to detect life if it exists within an X lightyear radius. That's still speculative, but doesn't commit the sin of promising something predicated on an unknown.

  • Pie in the sky, head in the clouds stuff is fine at a small scale, but when it starts to eat billions, it's no longer fun and games, it's real money and time that comes at the expense of other things.

    Pure science obviously has some value for society at large, even if it's just as a training ground for smart people who cut their teeth staring at the stars and then go on to do real things in their real lives. But throwing tens of billions of dollars on a very niche thing like resolved images of exoplanets see

  • Reality vs. Fantasy (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Baron_Yam ( 643147 ) on Sunday September 22, 2024 @08:27AM (#64807401)

    The speed of light is a bitch. In practical terms, it means nobody on Earth will ever visit a world that orbits a star other than ours. We may find microbes living under the surface of a moon of Saturn or something, but as far as complex life goes, Earth is it for life around the Sun.

    We have learned how to do remote sensing, though, and it's pretty awesome. Spectrographical analysis of starlight that has passed through an exoplanet's atmosphere can tell us a lot about the atmospheric chemistry going on there, even from thousands of lightyears away. While there is uncertainty involved because we can't always tell what is produced by an Earthlike biosphere vs. a previously unknown geological process, if we see something the size of Earth orbiting a star at a distance that allows liquid water on the surface, and detect certain compounds in its atmosphere... damn right we're going to know we've found life.

    Not only are we starting to look for these kinds of things, we're rapidly getting better at it in terms of precision, accuracy, understanding, and rate. There are around 30 billion stars in the Milky Way that could potential have a truly Earthlike planet orbiting them (not Earthlike as astronomers use the term, but as in theoretically the same in all the characteristics that caused us to be here talking about it).

    If you start with the assumption that we're not special, and the understanding that we're just the outcome of chemistry based on the available type and quantity of material that collapsed and formed the Solar system, then it's just a matter of how good or bad the odds of an Earth forming are... and there literally 10s of billions of chances floating around our galaxy. We don't have to go to them, their light comes to us, we just have to look.

    So yes, unless the odds of life evolving around a star in a galaxy are in the trillions-to-one-against range, we're going to find it. And given how quickly the technology is advancing, most of us will live long enough to see the announcement of it.

    • Maybe we will. Finding life does not require finding other civilizations, which is the assumption that people jump to. There has been life on earth for nearly a billion years and detectable civilization for less than 200. Based on current trends, it does not seem likely that advanced civilizations are likely to last very long either. If there is another civilization out there that contact us, they are probably so advanced that they would want nothing to do with us.

      • The brevity of a technologically advanced civilization I can buy. If it takes 4.5 billion years (approximately) for one to emerge, on an Earth-like planet around a Sun-like star that life probably has a half-million year window even if it doesn't go extinct for any of a billion different reasons.

        The rarity of such civilizations is an unknown. Maybe we're the fluke of all flukes. Intelligence appears very much to be an inevitable outcome of complex life given enough time, but our degree of it may just be

        • We may be a fluke for sure. There are other species on Earth that use tools, but they never felt a need to land on the Moon. We're not the only species with complex social hierarchies, so it's not that either, nor opposable thumbs. Something happened to us in particular that led to "all this". It would make sense that the past near-extinction had something to do with it. The survivors would've had to adapt to changing conditions in creative ways, maybe travel long distances; stuff that requires more complex

          • What humans have is meta-tool use. We make tools to make tools to make tools etc.

            And this technology is a nearly unlimited force multiplier. Unfortunately, I think it is exceedingly rare that evolution would create a creature that can safely use an unlimited force multiplier.

      • Science fiction tends to depict alien civilizations as being peer level to ours, for the simple reason that science fiction is usually an allegory of our own culture. A book or movie is not going to engage our imagination if it's not relatable. A true alien civilization, especially one that has survived for a very long time, might be completely incomprehensible to us. The longer lived a civilization, the more likely it is extant at the same time as us and (probably) the less like us in its psychology. We wo

    • Not only are we starting to look for these kinds of things, we're rapidly getting better at it in terms of precision, accuracy, understanding, and rate. There are around 30 billion stars in the Milky Way that could potential have a truly Earthlike planet orbiting them (not Earthlike as astronomers use the term, but as in theoretically the same in all the characteristics that caused us to be here talking about it).

      Would like to see some references, and your qualification of "Earthlike" There are 100 billion

      • >Would like to see some references, and your qualification of "Earthlike" There are 100 billion stars in the Milky Way. You are claiming 1/3 of them have potential for Earthlike planets.

        More current estimates of the number of stars in the Milky Way are in the 200 billion range. I'm not an astronomer, but I'm guessing that it's fairly difficult to count them the inside.

        Having just double-checked, I do have to revise my estimate of G-type stars downward from 10% to 7%. However, you should still add in th

    • For all we know, 100 years from now some physicist will make some breakthrough discovery that will allow us to break the lightspeed limitation.

    • Agreed that there probably isn't any complex life in the solar system (unless you look quite carefully on Earth ;-) )

      However, finding even some microbes poses some existential questions. Christianity (and others?) think that God only made mankind on Earth - to find that God also made Microbes on Europa or wherever rather repaints a long-held belief. Additionally, whilst microbes wouldn't prove this definitively, it rather increases the likelihood of other (simple) life on other planets around other stars be

      • I'm neither an exoplanet expert nor a chemist or biologist. I don't know how complex things can get in specific circumstances, but I do believe it is logical to assume that a gentle energy gradient in the right temperature range with the right mix of materials sloshing around in liquid water will generate life given time.

        Abiogenesis is a chemical process, and it will happen wherever it can like any other reaction.

    • The speed of light is a bitch. In practical terms, it means nobody on Earth will ever visit a world that orbits a star other than ours.

      I am guessing you forgot about the other properties of light. If a person were to launch from Earth and achieve relativistic speeds close to the speed of light, the journey to another star may take only a few hours from that person's perspective... so in theory, many people from Earth could visit a world orbiting another star. They just wouldn't be able to come back to Earth and tell you about it.

  • Is a large hint that this is BS, With such far off time scales they are hoping in less than 25 yeas no one will recall this.
  • there may be plenty of life in the universe trouble is we have to be in the same space \ time as it to find it.

  • Its likely that before the end of 2049 there will be life on another planet, but it won't be alien.
    (Humans going to Mars).

  • Please give us money for this project which will produce tangible results within a human lifetime

  • we could find intelligent life somewhere...

  • https://www.imdb.com/title/tt5... [imdb.com]

    what ever is found, please just leave it there

  • The UAP issue is gaining traction now, and unfortunately it's been repressed for about 70 years. Headlines are: They are here, we know, it's a secret, it's not good overall, what we know isn't right and we're very far down a food chain to them. There are large things in the sea, and things on the moon. In other news, James Webb has seen something(s) and the information is being discussed in closed congress sessions. It will be 2027 before amateur astronomy is able to see this apparently. Something is comin
  • First of all: the infamous '25 years' line. Just like 'we'll have practical fusion reactors' in a similar timeline. *eye roll*. I certainly would like us to find incontrovertible proof of life of any kind, even bacteria, on some celestial body other than Earth, but that '25 years' goalpost tends to get moved frequently, doesn't it?

    Next: 'for thousands of years' we've been questioning whether there's life elsewhere in our Universe? Well, no, I'd say it's significantly less than 1000 years, as beyond a cer
  • For starters, "scientists" have found the preconditions for life whereever they look for it. Titan. Venus. Exoplanets. Water. Phosphorus. etc. There's no doubt all the preconditions for "life" are EVERYWHERE. Most astrophysicists will tell you that is a fact. What they won't do is go the next step and say it's a logical conclusion that therefore there IS life on these places. It's just bad for your career to be the pioneer.. what's the saying? pioneers are the ones with arrows in their backs...?

    You have the
  • I'm just wondering who would represent Earth if we did make first contact, terrifying thought!

  • In 2015, NASA’s chief scientist Ellen Stofan predicted that humans would find strong evidence of alien life within 10-20 years. She highlighted advancements in the search for habitable planets and microbial life on Mars.

    A 2017 NASA study on the Europa Clipper mission suggested that life might exist in the subsurface oceans of Europa, one of Jupiter’s moons, leading to predictions of possible life detection within decades.

    In 2021, NASA's new James Webb Space Telescope raised predictions of findin

  • I am not sure that it is inevitable that intelligent life will develop a civilization where resources are used to explore the universe to feed the intellectual curiosity of a few members of its ruling elite while other people lack both food and shelter.
  • I do not think it is a question, the odds make it a certainty for it to POSSIBLY exist elsewhere, but that does not mean that it does, only that by our extremely limited understanding of life, we see it as possible.

  • I predict the world will run on fusion energy before any life is found anywhere other than earth, unless it originated on earth and we brought it somehow.

  • Evidence is not proof. For example, methane is evidence of life. But you can have methane without life. Evidence is not even overwhelming evidence. Besides what is "life"? A little hard to define. If you demand say DNA, then maybe too restrictive. If you demand only replication, then maybe too liberal.

Slashdot Top Deals

Do molecular biologists wear designer genes?

Close