Awesome summary: "Promise me you'll bear all of this in mind...just because one model fits the data doesn't mean there aren't other models..." This is such a good summary of the essence of science that I will probably point my students at this video, whether we are studying anything to do with exoplanets or not.
I was thinking that as well. The thing with all this astrophysics stuff is that, until one actually sends a probe, it is all speculation. This isn't particle physics where one does controlled experiments. This is more like archaeology or anthropology, where a new pottery shard or bone fragment can totally change all the previous explanations. Just look at what JWST has done to the field in a short period of time. We have new "digs", in effect. As Dr. Becky points out, a particular molecule is only known to be made by life on earth, and cannot come from other atmospheric processes, etc. Well, just in our solar system we know of moons and planets (we sent probes) with totally different atmospheric composition and processes. Even in particle physics, for example, the experiment can only tend to support, or not, a particular model. This is what my physics professors, who I worked for in the High Energy Physics department, told me when I was a boy (half a century ago, actually). It's sort of the same thing. In both cases we are looking at either the very small or very large, or very short or very long timeframes, which are things we cannot directly experience.
One thing that blows my mind is that I went to university to study astrophysics not very long after the first exoplanet was discovered. I found it fascinating back then that we had the ability to detect planets around other stars. And now we're able to analyse the light passing through the atmospheres of these planets. I wonder where we'll be in another 30 years time.
Hopefully we will not be debating models of an atmosphere, but with good enough data to have certainty quickly. Naturally, the goal is not just the major components of the atmosphere, but molecules which make up a small percentage. I wonder how long that will take? Also, hopefully, we will be looking at light reflecting off an atmosphere, where the planet does not transit perfectly. I want all of this!
@@lyricallysupreme unless we change our data sets, I highly doubt it. We need to focus on G type stars, similar to our Sun (output and size). And, imho, a similar age. IMHO, we aren't looking in the right places and are currently wasting our time and resources.
@revelari5250 sure…to map the light curve for an Earth sized terrestrial exoplanet requires a 1m + telescope, if not larger. That’s a few million dollars…then there’s the spectroscopy equipment which isn’t cheap either…
"Well, this kind of confusion, of not knowing what the actual right answer is, is science in action and it's wonderful to see." This attitude is honestly the main reason I subscribed to your channel. I love it.
@@DrBeckywhat do you know about junglevrse.that you cannot tell!!!.Jwst..when proposed..supposed to see structures on exoplanet....Do you get to c any of these pics
Thank you for this great report! I've subscribed and I'm looking forward to more. As I watched, I was paying as much attention to the data analysis as to K2-18b itself. I'm applying to a Masters program in economics, and for that I'll need to know statistics and other analytical tools. So as your video got toward the end I was thinking, OK, time to start on that. And hey ho there you go, you're talking about Brilliant and its new material on data analysis. Synchronicity -- you gotta love it. Thank you for that too. Cheers, Chris Schulman
Just want to point out that magma means underground molten rock, where lava means topside molten rock. So a magma ocean would mean an underground ocean of molten rock. I guess that's sort of what we have right here at home in our own planet. In other words, we got K2-18b at home! :D
Meanwhile here i am internally screaming a little because the liquid water IS lava and water ice IS rock. Just because we are used to exist in the temperature and pressure range where it happens to be melting all the time it doesn't mean it's not lava. And sure, H2O is no SiO4, but hey, neither are tons of other minerals on Earth. Lava/magma is a very wide concept that matches tons of materials with different chemistry
Most rock in the mantle is solid. High pressure. It only becomes liquid near the surface, at the same temperature with less pressure. Not a liquid rock ocean by any stretch.
@@sillyjellyfish2421 Aha! A willing recruit for #TeamIce in the next "Mineral Cup" event on social media. We'll freeze out those "hot lava" people yet!
I simply love your channel because you illustrate quite well how same data can be interpreted in many different ways. And which is why we need to keep asking questions and obtaining more data to better understand our universe just a little more clearly.
I was in high school when discovery of the first exoplanet was announced. And now, we might soon have evidence of life on them. It almost feels like science fiction.
Your excitement about hat you do is invigorating and I enjoy listening to you explain plausible possibilities of complex scenarios is mesmerizing. I'm a retired Industrial teacher and I know when someone is doing a great job. I do share your astronomical interest. Have a sunny day and a clear night!
- the data (model2) shows that there may be an *Alien Nation* 👽 on planet k2-18b... lol... that's exciting! 12:04 - it also shows that i could be getting my hopes up about something that's just a ball of gas (model3) 😮💨 - i think they were right to go with occam's razor... the simpest explanation might be the correct one... - also... i would've loved to hear the doc say *occam's razor* with her pleasant accent... it could be a bit of a toungue-twister for her but i'm sure she could handle it because... that's that becky... Dr. Becky... 👩🏼🔬
I listen to this and am reminded of the old saying: Lies, damned lies and STATISTICS. Excellent explanation of something that goes so far over my head it could be in orbit 😊
As Jack Nicholson put it, You can't handle the truth. Science has gone down the road of telling little lies in order to get government funding. Now they are having to make up bigger lies in order to get bigger grants. JWST has found life on Planet 51. Now we need a bigger telescope to confirm it. We need money to build a radio-telescope array to listen for signals in case they might be communicating with us. It's always the same with these scammers.
Statistics don't lie. They often don't say what people don't want them to say, and some people lie with statistics by judiciously omitting confounders (and of course variance). But the numbers themselves don't lie.
Statistics is a relatively simple field. More people should do it - and would benefit from it. If it didn't depend, in significant degree, on calculus, I'd say rearranging compulsory maths education to ditch the calculus in favour of (applied) statistics would be a good thing. Pundits and politicians who like to hide reality behind confusingly inappropriate layers of statistical bullshit would hate that - it would be so much harder for them to lie to their audiences. So it'll never happen.
Best exposition of the data. Kudos Dr. Becky. However, DMS can be produced by chemical processess. The first one is by reacting methanol and hydrogen sulfide. Methanol can be prouced by the reaction CH4+CO2→CH3OH+CO albeit at high T (600-1000 C). There are other ways to produce methanol. Also the reaction CO2+3H2→CH3OH+H2O also produces methanol but in the presence of metal catalysts such as Cu/ZnO/Al₂O₃. However even this reaction requires a T of 200 C to 270 C. I cannot exclude it though and it may be occuring in the "hot" zone of the planet and then spread in th atmosphere. So did they look for and find any metals? There is methane and water so I consider the reaction plausible! Dr. Nick, Biochemist
I really hope the media interest continues because that's how we inspire new people and hopefully encourage Governments to continue funding research into things that have no real current practical benefit at a time of pressing budget issues. The Chinese landing on the moon again and a likely cold war developing between China and Western democracies will hopefully encourage the US and other Western nations to put more resources into space exploration similar to what happened in the 1950s and 1960s where we went from the first satellite to landing on the moon in 12 years because each side was scared of being left behind. When I was growing up I fully expected that progress to continue and that interplanetary spaceflight would be routine nowadays but sadly, despite some impressive unmanned missions and telescopes like Hubble and JWST, we've mostly tread water as far as human exploration is concerned.
it'll inspire some and cause others to say THEY ARE JUST GUESSING! A NEW THEORY EVERY WEEK, which is actually how science works when something better or conflicting comes along.
The second amazing outlook on our frontier for space science. Thank You Dr Becky you are amazing also great work your videos are inspiring in so many ways
Agreed. Progress is rarely in the way you'd expect. Many people jumped the gun with those claims of room temperature superconductors as well. We all want to see emotionally evocative results and that can skew the conclusions we draw from data. I think the replication crisis is testament to that.
This is why I love science so much; there’s always something new and interesting going on! From exoplanets to the age of the Universe, it is so exciting! Thank you Dr Becky, and all scientists who make it so exciting to be alive in this day and age!👍🏼
As a non-scientist, but an armchair science enthusiast, it drives me crazy to see the claims that some of these "scientists" make using such imperfect data. The ambiguity in the data leaves way too much room for interpretation to make a claim this important.
@@DrBecky It has arrived Yay! Only at Standing on the shoulders of Giants, but am enraptured by it. Hardback, script well centred, and the leaves don't stick, the paper quality good. I struggle to put it down Dr.. Love it.
Interesting video to understand the level of analysis that goes into making every assumption, it's amazing thank you for revealing these to the under educated every day Joe like me. Also what stops someone like the Dr in the video from publishing her own findings? Is there monitary entry barrier or restricted data access just curious. Thank for an an amazing video I would keep coming back to try and understand eventually.
Great update and summary. This is what science is all about - never take just one explanation, especially ones based on models. Wielding Occam's does focus attention nicely. By calling it a magma ocean, this probably means that the planet is assumed to not have cooled enough for any crust to have formed. If a crust had formed and been covered by out-poring of magma from eruptions, this would be a lava ocean big enough to provide an atmosphere that fits the model gas from molten rock oceans. Would there be any way of seeing whether it is a planet with a surface comprising both crustal areas and lava oceans?
Thanks again for your work!!! Having Astrophysics broken down like this is amazing!!! I love to learn but as my dream job (I work in Chemistry) is sometimes demanding I don't have time to read as many papers in other fields as I would like so your channel is much much appreciated!!!
now being the odd person that i am, i keep thinking, why should life out there be anything that is similar to us or what our definition of what lifeforms should be? why can't there be sentient lifeforms that are completely different to what life is on this planet we live on? which means if we are looking for 'life' on other planets, we could jolly well have missed it because we are only looking for 'life' that is similar to us and what we know.
Huge thank you for the explanation and your objectiveness! I just enjoy to watch your videos. And hate the sensationalist media liars and the claims of the fanatical believers. I am looking forward to see more stuff from you.
Thanks for a great summary of the current studies on K2-18b. My only issue with the Wogan conclusion is that ammonia was not detected at all and would be expected for a mini-Neptune. They touch on it in the paper saying there are some reasons why a mini-Neptune might not have that much NH3 but it seems like an afterthought especially since Madhusudhan had already noted the non-detection of ammonia in concluding it was likely a Hycean world (presumably ruling out a mini-Neptune) . Looking forward to seeing the new analysis of the new data.
Thanks for the model explanation and differentiation. Much like other things there isn't just one way of looking at things. What's the car on the shelf in the background?
-Pack swimming suits! -Unpack swimming suits, pack fire proximity suits and lots of hydrogel! -Unpack the fire proximity suits, pack the gasmasks and bring a balloon
@DrBecky If there was a telescope that would use the mass of our own star or the mass of another distant object to focus, could we learn more about this exoplanet with the gravitational lens effect?
Using our own Sun as a gravitational lens is not viable due to its very high brightness wrt background. So any other thing u r trying to collect data for will be washed out
@@kedarsharma487 Értem, akkor használjunk bármilyen más viszonylag nagytömegű objektumot az említett exobolygó és közöttünk, továbbra is az a kérdés, hogy sikerülhet többet megtudni ezzel a módszerrel? Érdemes az új módszerre fejleszteni új teleszkópot?
If we were looking at Earth from K2-18B what could/would/should the Sigma value of Dimethyl sulfide look like using the same models? Can we estimate that? Basically what's the range of a sigma value where we can reasonably get excited?
If there's different advanced chemistry that become sentient then sebient not just aware. Of the world like an animal o maybe even a cell. But able to manipulate the world together more awareness like build telescopes and detect our atmosphere. Would they recognize a bio signature sense there basic chemistry is different . .
As a physicist myself I believe that is impossible to find life outside earth by astronomical means. The reason is that there is a bias (yes, a bias not scientific skepticism or Occam razor as I will explain) for which a "natural" explanation will always be accepted over an "alien" explanation. The base for this bias is the sentence "extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof" which I pretty much agree, but not in this case. In order to stablish that an occurrence is extraordinary one needs to know what ordinary is, i.e. one needs to have knowledge of the probability of such thing to happen. We don't have that data. You can always make a theory to explain any astronomical data with "natural" assumptions. Therefore never ever we will be able to find life using it.
hate to say it but i see your point and kinda agree with it. "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" (Carl Sagan) is one of the foundations of my worldview but when it comes to confirming extraterrestrial life it could be a huge impediment.
Becky, is it not possible to use spectroscopy data from other space observatories which can detect other parts of the EM spectrum to distinguish between CH4 and DMS?
Makes me think - how about a mini neptune world with life? What if something somehow managed to evolve in the supercritical area of the planet? A gas that acts partially as liquid could maybe work for that. I wonder what the model for that would look like
Off topic question: Could an object created many eons ago, possibly during the big bang or shortly after, be moving at or near the speed of light? We use gravitational assist to accelerate space craft, could an object that has been around for a very long time have reached immense speeds?
The only way I could see the Hycean model being right is if the planet formed further out from its star and has migrated inwards. I would think this would give it a higher chance of holding an atmosphere since it wouldn't be close enough to have the atmosphere fully stripped away. But then that would be just speculation since I don't know of a way where we could tell if planetary migration has occurred. Especially if this is being done with the transit method alone.
I can’t think of anything we could observe that would convince 100% of scientists that we had confirmed life. At best we may get to “a majority of scientists think it more likely than not” and even then I’m not sure what we would observe that would get us there.
It's fascinating to see these concepts and their significance as well as the caveats involved be explained in such clear fashion. I'm not dissuaded by the uncertainty of data retrieved and analysed. That's what science is: indicate where doubt hides in the numbers, why and what the next step is to figure out a better answer which generates new and better questions in turn. Science is hard for a reason but it's totally achievable when we are honest about the results.
12:30 If you're going to dismiss one equally likely scenario with life just because the star is a bad tempered red dwarf then why are we wasting time and money with anything orbiting such star? Maybe because deep down nobody is sure about the lethality of red dwarfs. Like the assumption that it would strip the atmosphere - all of the models proposed implied atmosphere so why aren't we invalidating that assumption?
Hello Dr Becky, I’ve a question, with Euclid finding so many new galaxies and other massive objects, could it push the ratio of normal matter to dark matter up from 5% to, say 10% in future?
Hi Dr Becky, I am curious to know whether AI is being used at all in the fitting of the models to the absorption spectra? If not, is this something that is being worked on to increase the accuracy of identifying the chemical composition?
Love the video, thank you for the brilliant science facts without the hype. I found your channel via a lecture you did on another science lecture channel recently. Based on what you said in that lecture, I thought I'd let you know for the algorithm, I'm female. Hope that helps.
This was a very good and well explained video. Based on what you laid out I'm going to be cautiously optimistic for life but it's probably more likely it's a mini-Neptune. Hopefully the new data coming out will shed light and maybe settle everything. Here's to life being on that planet.
Thank you for a peek at the models. Last week this came up in conversation, "has alien life been detected?" I said the data might be there, but not clear. 🤓
Good job as always, thanks. Extraordinary claims always require extraordinary justification. But, the publicity is good for public engagement, which may help boost interest and even funding!
One thing I have learnt in all my time on this planet is "don't believe everything you read in the newspapers", especially "don't believe anything about advancements in science that you read in the newspapers"
In my freshman astronomy course, our professor did a whole segment on science media literacy. I thought it was ridiculous at the time, but man I can spot things in other fields that aren't real with ease now. I have my degree in physics so I can usually tell whether some stuff like this is true or not, but for biology and stuff it is really nice to know what signs to look for. Something fun about that course was that we had to write an article that was fake and used the same tactics that science journalists use, and my girlfriend at that time looked at what I was writing while I was in the bathroom and I came back to her looking horrified at the article I wrote about the moon spiraling towards the earth since I had told her I was working on a paper for that class. It gave me a good laugh.
@Alexander_Grant if you really have a degree in physics, then explain gravity. Explain time-dilation. Explain the daily and yearly tides if you are familiar with the moon and its orbit around the planet.
Before things kinda fell apart for them, most newspapers would have one or more science reporters who at least had some training or experience with a scientific field. Their job was to read the scientific papers and simplify them for the public -- the newspapers had a policy to keep the language/concepts simple enough to be understand by a 6th grader (or an adult with only a 6th grade education). When the rising tide of online media began driving print sales down into the sub-basements, those specialized reporters were the first ones that were cut... which left the general news reporters now trying to figure out complex reports and studies that were most definitely not written at a 6th grade level, with the disappointing results we have today :(
In discussing the second paper you mentioned that the authors said the planet would be unlikely to have a liquid water ocean because new stars were too hot after they formed. But I thought that new stars were cooler than they became as they aged and evolved? So liquid water on the surface of a planet 8n their habitable zone would be more likely when they were young, rather than later when the star had become brighter and hotter?
Intriguing video Dr. Bekcy. BUT can you explain something to me? You say the planet in this system should be much closer to its star to get enough heat, but how does this star not destory the planet's atmosphere with the like of solar flares/carrington events etc? Is it close enough where more solar activity could destory any life chance over time? (I don't know the differnece between star types and their solar flare / mass corona event is!). Thanks.
I'd love to know why different groups of researchers tend to settle on very different ways of explaining the same data. Did the groups that "found" DMS even consider the magma or mini Neptune model or do they just publish the very first model that somewhat fits the data? Is it just a lack of imagination or incentives to publish "big" findings?
The problem with best-fit models is that they only reflect the models you used in the analysis. There is always the possibility that one of the excluded models may fit the data as well or better. The most important point of these early papers is to point to the next avenue of research to either bolster or falsify the preliminary results.
This point in our search for life on other planets is so strange, because the data we have are too noisy to get many definitive answers yet, but because we have so much data the media have so many opportunities to jump on it when there's a mildly abnormal peak in a spectrum somewhere. I love seeing these papers but newspapers shouldn't be allowed to cover them until they prove they won't oversensationalise them
Increased resolution means more pixels per same observed area means less noise in data means more accurate data with better fidelity (more individually measured points within the same range of scale).
In order to find a truly earth like planet wouldn't a star have to be observed for over a year to catch two crossing dips? Plus proper orientation of the planets orbital plane?
i hear you, and i get what you're saying. however, we are talking about a planet in the goldilocks zone, so wouldnt it be too cool to have a molten surface? and if the sun was too volatile for a rocky world to maintain its atmosphere, how then is a gas planet suppose to stay together? so even if those other waveforms also fit the pattern, do they really fit the scenario? (to be clear, this is intended as an honest, sincere question. please kindly enlighten me)
This channel and the other with the guy Anton is really against life in other planets for some reason. I know Anton is religious, so that's explains his side, maybe same with her. It's tbh shame, people are so scared and want to be special for some reason, they scared because what happens if we find out life is insanely common, and intelligent life is not rare? All the religion etc teaches you are special, we are special, we are the only intelligent life on earth etc etc, just look how scared are people because of AI lol
Laboratory Infrared Spectrometry Instruments label the wavelength in Reciprocal Centimeters which is the frequency divided by c. Ultraviolet/visible Spectrophotometers label their wavelength axis PROPERLY in Nanometers. For those who like four digit numbers you sometimes see it labelled as Angstroms where 1 Nanometer is 10 Angstroms. I never understood why Infrared Spectrophotometers fail to label their Horizontal Axis in Microns or Micrometers even as an Auxiliary Scale underneath the Reciprocal Centimeter one.
Dr. Becky ... 🙏🙏My favorite SMBH specialist. Did you saw the latest ANTON video? Could dig more into this discovery that he talks about SMBH magnetic lines that form around Black Holes snaping and being emitted as powerful jets that steal momentum from a spinning Black Hole... Is this going to accelerate the BH evaporation, because BH not lose lose energy from Hawking radiation but also from the magnetic fields snapping?
Yeah it’s crazy to think that any planet at all can harbour life ??? OHHH Except Earth that’s just the exception.. Like Earth was the centre of our solar system?? Then we realised there are other systems billions of them and billions of galaxies but only Earth can harbour life… Evan if it was discovered would they EVER TELL US.. I SAY ALL THE NAY SAYERS ARE CIA INFILTRATED ASTRO PHYSIC PAID $$$$$$ NAY SAYERS..
Awesome summary: "Promise me you'll bear all of this in mind...just because one model fits the data doesn't mean there aren't other models..." This is such a good summary of the essence of science that I will probably point my students at this video, whether we are studying anything to do with exoplanets or not.
I was thinking that as well. The thing with all this astrophysics stuff is that, until one actually sends a probe, it is all speculation.
This isn't particle physics where one does controlled experiments. This is more like archaeology or anthropology, where a new pottery shard or bone fragment can totally change all the previous explanations. Just look at what JWST has done to the field in a short period of time. We have new "digs", in effect. As Dr. Becky points out, a particular molecule is only known to be made by life on earth, and cannot come from other atmospheric processes, etc. Well, just in our solar system we know of moons and planets (we sent probes) with totally different atmospheric composition and processes.
Even in particle physics, for example, the experiment can only tend to support, or not, a particular model. This is what my physics professors, who I worked for in the High Energy Physics department, told me when I was a boy (half a century ago, actually). It's sort of the same thing. In both cases we are looking at either the very small or very large, or very short or very long timeframes, which are things we cannot directly experience.
Thanks!
@@louisgiokas2206 great comparison to archaeology! I've always been drawn to the room for debate and imagination that come alongside observations.
@DrBecky whats the story with anton petrovs new video? (Black hole jets switching directions)
Whole thing is fishy, makes no sense to me.
@@DrBeckyI hope there's actual real life there
One thing that blows my mind is that I went to university to study astrophysics not very long after the first exoplanet was discovered. I found it fascinating back then that we had the ability to detect planets around other stars. And now we're able to analyse the light passing through the atmospheres of these planets. I wonder where we'll be in another 30 years time.
Shaking trees, banging our chests and T-posing to assert dominance in the ongoing struggle to get access to potable water.
We’ll definitely have found life by then.
Hopefully we will not be debating models of an atmosphere, but with good enough data to have certainty quickly. Naturally, the goal is not just the major components of the atmosphere, but molecules which make up a small percentage. I wonder how long that will take? Also, hopefully, we will be looking at light reflecting off an atmosphere, where the planet does not transit perfectly. I want all of this!
@@lyricallysupreme unless we change our data sets, I highly doubt it. We need to focus on G type stars, similar to our Sun (output and size). And, imho, a similar age. IMHO, we aren't looking in the right places and are currently wasting our time and resources.
@revelari5250 sure…to map the light curve for an Earth sized terrestrial exoplanet requires a 1m + telescope, if not larger. That’s a few million dollars…then there’s the spectroscopy equipment which isn’t cheap either…
"Well, this kind of confusion, of not knowing what the actual right answer is, is science in action and it's wonderful to see."
This attitude is honestly the main reason I subscribed to your channel. I love it.
Thanks! 🤗
@@DrBeckywhat do you know about junglevrse.that you cannot tell!!!.Jwst..when proposed..supposed to see structures on exoplanet....Do you get to c any of these pics
Thank you for this great report! I've subscribed and I'm looking forward to more. As I watched, I was paying as much attention to the data analysis as to K2-18b itself. I'm applying to a Masters program in economics, and for that I'll need to know statistics and other analytical tools. So as your video got toward the end I was thinking, OK, time to start on that. And hey ho there you go, you're talking about Brilliant and its new material on data analysis. Synchronicity -- you gotta love it. Thank you for that too.
Cheers,
Chris Schulman
Dr. Becky videos are just pure gems. Thank you again.
Just want to point out that magma means underground molten rock, where lava means topside molten rock. So a magma ocean would mean an underground ocean of molten rock. I guess that's sort of what we have right here at home in our own planet. In other words, we got K2-18b at home! :D
Meanwhile here i am internally screaming a little because the liquid water IS lava and water ice IS rock. Just because we are used to exist in the temperature and pressure range where it happens to be melting all the time it doesn't mean it's not lava. And sure, H2O is no SiO4, but hey, neither are tons of other minerals on Earth. Lava/magma is a very wide concept that matches tons of materials with different chemistry
I think there was a card in the video pointing this out :P
K2-18b at home: 🌍
What do you expect from the people who consider oxygen to be a metal?
Most rock in the mantle is solid. High pressure. It only becomes liquid near the surface, at the same temperature with less pressure. Not a liquid rock ocean by any stretch.
@@sillyjellyfish2421 Aha! A willing recruit for #TeamIce in the next "Mineral Cup" event on social media. We'll freeze out those "hot lava" people yet!
I simply love your channel because you illustrate quite well how same data can be interpreted in many different ways. And which is why we need to keep asking questions and obtaining more data to better understand our universe just a little more clearly.
1st rule of media: Don't let data & scientific analysis get in the way of selling a good story.
Isn't capitalism great!!??
You're right damn it.
The original saying was never let the facts get in the way of a good story. Your version works too..
Or more funding.
@@katesmiles4208we choose truth over facts.
When the facts don't support the narrative, choose truth.
Awesome analysis. You break it down nicely for the layman. Appreciate you! Keep up the great work.
THANKS! I saw the headlines but didn't even bother to read, hoping it'd be covered here, especially if it wasn't the usual news hype.
I was in high school when discovery of the first exoplanet was announced. And now, we might soon have evidence of life on them. It almost feels like science fiction.
For most of my life, it was considered that detecting planets around other stars was beyond our capability.
It is.
Your excitement about hat you do is invigorating and I enjoy listening to you explain plausible possibilities of complex scenarios is mesmerizing. I'm a retired Industrial teacher and I know when someone is doing a great job. I do share your astronomical interest. Have a sunny day and a clear night!
Another great video... Thanks Dr. Becky
I really like the way you cover this by talking through each of the papers.
Ok, we need to build a bigger telescope right now.
Yeah, we do! The question is, where do we put it?
We could just find people with smaller eyes, save a lot of money.
@@davelordy It just might work!!!!!!
Already in the works. Just 20 years away
They are.
- the data (model2) shows that there may be an *Alien Nation* 👽 on planet k2-18b... lol... that's exciting!
12:04
- it also shows that i could be getting my hopes up about something that's just a ball of gas
(model3) 😮💨
- i think they were right to go with occam's razor... the simpest explanation might be the correct one...
- also... i would've loved to hear the doc say *occam's razor* with her pleasant accent... it could be a bit of a toungue-twister for her but i'm sure she could handle it because... that's that becky... Dr. Becky... 👩🏼🔬
Always excited when a new becky video drops! Space videos at night is the vibe🤩
I listen to this and am reminded of the old saying:
Lies, damned lies and STATISTICS.
Excellent explanation of something that goes so far over my head it could be in orbit
😊
As Jack Nicholson put it, You can't handle the truth.
Science has gone down the road of telling little lies in order to get government funding. Now they are having to make up bigger lies in order to get bigger grants.
JWST has found life on Planet 51. Now we need a bigger telescope to confirm it. We need money to build a radio-telescope array to listen for signals in case they might be communicating with us.
It's always the same with these scammers.
Came here to say the same thing.
Statistics don't lie. They often don't say what people don't want them to say, and some people lie with statistics by judiciously omitting confounders (and of course variance).
But the numbers themselves don't lie.
Gotta be careful with statistics.
25% of crashes are caused by drink drivers.......75% sober drivers.
Therefore it's safer to drive whilst drunk 😉
Statistics is a relatively simple field. More people should do it - and would benefit from it. If it didn't depend, in significant degree, on calculus, I'd say rearranging compulsory maths education to ditch the calculus in favour of (applied) statistics would be a good thing.
Pundits and politicians who like to hide reality behind confusingly inappropriate layers of statistical bullshit would hate that - it would be so much harder for them to lie to their audiences. So it'll never happen.
Thank you as always for making the complex easy to understand for the casual observer.
Thanks so much for creating and sharing this informative video. Great job. Keep it up.
Thanks!
Best exposition of the data. Kudos Dr. Becky. However, DMS can be produced by chemical processess. The first one is by reacting methanol and hydrogen sulfide. Methanol can be prouced by the reaction CH4+CO2→CH3OH+CO albeit at high T (600-1000 C). There are other ways to produce methanol. Also the reaction CO2+3H2→CH3OH+H2O also produces methanol but in the presence of metal catalysts such as Cu/ZnO/Al₂O₃. However even this reaction requires a T of 200 C to 270 C. I cannot exclude it though and it may be occuring in the "hot" zone of the planet and then spread in th atmosphere. So did they look for and find any metals? There is methane and water so I consider the reaction plausible! Dr. Nick, Biochemist
I really hope the media interest continues because that's how we inspire new people and hopefully encourage Governments to continue funding research into things that have no real current practical benefit at a time of pressing budget issues.
The Chinese landing on the moon again and a likely cold war developing between China and Western democracies will hopefully encourage the US and other Western nations to put more resources into space exploration similar to what happened in the 1950s and 1960s where we went from the first satellite to landing on the moon in 12 years because each side was scared of being left behind.
When I was growing up I fully expected that progress to continue and that interplanetary spaceflight would be routine nowadays but sadly, despite some impressive unmanned missions and telescopes like Hubble and JWST, we've mostly tread water as far as human exploration is concerned.
it'll inspire some and cause others to say THEY ARE JUST GUESSING! A NEW THEORY EVERY WEEK, which is actually how science works when something better or conflicting comes along.
Thank you so much for making this video. I am going to share this with an intro to remote sensing class I am teaching.
The second amazing outlook on our frontier for space science. Thank You Dr Becky you are amazing also great work your videos are inspiring in so many ways
Thank you for another great video Doctor. One for the algorithm! 🙂
Super insightful video! The scientific method can be quite sobering but it's our best path towards unbiased truths
Agreed. Progress is rarely in the way you'd expect. Many people jumped the gun with those claims of room temperature superconductors as well. We all want to see emotionally evocative results and that can skew the conclusions we draw from data. I think the replication crisis is testament to that.
This is why I love science so much; there’s always something new and interesting going on! From exoplanets to the age of the Universe, it is so exciting!
Thank you Dr Becky, and all scientists who make it so exciting to be alive in this day and age!👍🏼
As a non-scientist, but an armchair science enthusiast, it drives me crazy to see the claims that some of these "scientists" make using such imperfect data. The ambiguity in the data leaves way too much room for interpretation to make a claim this important.
Knowledge and facts are worthy to pass on.
Just got your book. Thank you.
Hope you enjoy it!
@@DrBecky
It has arrived Yay!
Only at Standing on the shoulders of Giants, but am enraptured by it.
Hardback, script well centred, and the leaves don't stick, the paper quality good.
I struggle to put it down Dr..
Love it.
Interesting video to understand the level of analysis that goes into making every assumption, it's amazing thank you for revealing these to the under educated every day Joe like me. Also what stops someone like the Dr in the video from publishing her own findings? Is there monitary entry barrier or restricted data access just curious. Thank for an an amazing video I would keep coming back to try and understand eventually.
I appreciate your presenting varied theories associated with represented data. Again I do enjoy your presentation
Love you Dr B!
Great update and summary. This is what science is all about - never take just one explanation, especially ones based on models. Wielding Occam's does focus attention nicely. By calling it a magma ocean, this probably means that the planet is assumed to not have cooled enough for any crust to have formed. If a crust had formed and been covered by out-poring of magma from eruptions, this would be a lava ocean big enough to provide an atmosphere that fits the model gas from molten rock oceans. Would there be any way of seeing whether it is a planet with a surface comprising both crustal areas and lava oceans?
Thanks again for your work!!! Having Astrophysics broken down like this is amazing!!! I love to learn but as my dream job (I work in Chemistry) is sometimes demanding I don't have time to read as many papers in other fields as I would like so your channel is much much appreciated!!!
now being the odd person that i am, i keep thinking, why should life out there be anything that is similar to us or what our definition of what lifeforms should be? why can't there be sentient lifeforms that are completely different to what life is on this planet we live on? which means if we are looking for 'life' on other planets, we could jolly well have missed it because we are only looking for 'life' that is similar to us and what we know.
Huge thank you for the explanation and your objectiveness! I just enjoy to watch your videos. And hate the sensationalist media liars and the claims of the fanatical believers.
I am looking forward to see more stuff from you.
Thanks for a great summary of the current studies on K2-18b. My only issue with the Wogan conclusion is that ammonia was not detected at all and would be expected for a mini-Neptune. They touch on it in the paper saying there are some reasons why a mini-Neptune might not have that much NH3 but it seems like an afterthought especially since Madhusudhan had already noted the non-detection of ammonia in concluding it was likely a Hycean world (presumably ruling out a mini-Neptune) . Looking forward to seeing the new analysis of the new data.
I'm back in school now, majoring in Dr. Becky. This is so fascinating.
Been there. Extremely jarring. Life is fragile. I hope to g-d you're okay. Changes are good that you are.
I just started following BBC earth science and was pleasantly surprised to see you on it.
Thanks for the model explanation and differentiation. Much like other things there isn't just one way of looking at things. What's the car on the shelf in the background?
Fascinating stuff! Thank you Dr Becky!! 👏👏
11:42 Is that a Lego Peugeot 9X8 hypercar on the book shelf over your shoulder?!?! Sorry...had to ask. Love the videos, but racing fan too. 🙂
Yes! It’s Sam’s not mine though 😅
Call me back when found an earth-sized planet arround a G-Star with life signs on it.
I've found one. I just looked down. No intelligent life, unfortunately.
@@bujin1977 😂good one
You'll wait a long time for that call. Like an eternity.
You're a great teacher, Dr. Becky!
-Pack swimming suits!
-Unpack swimming suits, pack fire proximity suits and lots of hydrogel!
-Unpack the fire proximity suits, pack the gasmasks and bring a balloon
@DrBecky If there was a telescope that would use the mass of our own star or the mass of another distant object to focus, could we learn more about this exoplanet with the gravitational lens effect?
Using our own Sun as a gravitational lens is not viable due to its very high brightness wrt background. So any other thing u r trying to collect data for will be washed out
@@kedarsharma487 Értem, akkor használjunk bármilyen más viszonylag nagytömegű objektumot az említett exobolygó és közöttünk, továbbra is az a kérdés, hogy sikerülhet többet megtudni ezzel a módszerrel? Érdemes az új módszerre fejleszteni új teleszkópot?
We've achieved so many milestones in human civilization, yet we will be discovered by aliens based on fart we produce.
You can't hide a fart forever lol
we fart loud here
A fart on a planet 8x mass than Earth would be quite the fart.
Never trust a fart
"Like a fart in the wind."
Nails on point! also, damned great show.
If we were looking at Earth from K2-18B what could/would/should the Sigma value of Dimethyl sulfide look like using the same models? Can we estimate that?
Basically what's the range of a sigma value where we can reasonably get excited?
When grow up I want to study space so watching you is really useful
If there's different advanced chemistry that become sentient then sebient not just aware. Of the world like an animal o maybe even a cell. But able to manipulate the world together more awareness like build telescopes and detect our atmosphere. Would they recognize a bio signature sense there basic chemistry is different . .
As a physicist myself I believe that is impossible to find life outside earth by astronomical means. The reason is that there is a bias (yes, a bias not scientific skepticism or Occam razor as I will explain) for which a "natural" explanation will always be accepted over an "alien" explanation.
The base for this bias is the sentence "extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof" which I pretty much agree, but not in this case. In order to stablish that an occurrence is extraordinary one needs to know what ordinary is, i.e. one needs to have knowledge of the probability of such thing to happen. We don't have that data.
You can always make a theory to explain any astronomical data with "natural" assumptions. Therefore never ever we will be able to find life using it.
hate to say it but i see your point and kinda agree with it. "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" (Carl Sagan) is one of the foundations of my worldview but when it comes to confirming extraterrestrial life it could be a huge impediment.
Becky, is it not possible to use spectroscopy data from other space observatories which can detect other parts of the EM spectrum to distinguish between CH4 and DMS?
Makes me think - how about a mini neptune world with life? What if something somehow managed to evolve in the supercritical area of the planet? A gas that acts partially as liquid could maybe work for that. I wonder what the model for that would look like
Off topic question: Could an object created many eons ago, possibly during the big bang or shortly after, be moving at or near the speed of light? We use gravitational assist to accelerate space craft, could an object that has been around for a very long time have reached immense speeds?
this is such a nice video thanks
The only way I could see the Hycean model being right is if the planet formed further out from its star and has migrated inwards. I would think this would give it a higher chance of holding an atmosphere since it wouldn't be close enough to have the atmosphere fully stripped away. But then that would be just speculation since I don't know of a way where we could tell if planetary migration has occurred. Especially if this is being done with the transit method alone.
I wonder what would happen if all of the scientists agreed that there IS life on some planet 100+ light years from earth.
That will happen as soon as we can watch an episode of "Aliens got Talent"
@@forMacguyver well said.
'Show me what you got'
Then there would be a great deal of compelling evidence for that.
I can’t think of anything we could observe that would convince 100% of scientists that we had confirmed life. At best we may get to “a majority of scientists think it more likely than not” and even then I’m not sure what we would observe that would get us there.
It's fascinating to see these concepts and their significance as well as the caveats involved be explained in such clear fashion.
I'm not dissuaded by the uncertainty of data retrieved and analysed. That's what science is: indicate where doubt hides in the numbers, why and what the next step is to figure out a better answer which generates new and better questions in turn.
Science is hard for a reason but it's totally achievable when we are honest about the results.
Great exposition. Thanks Dr Becky!
12:30 If you're going to dismiss one equally likely scenario with life just because the star is a bad tempered red dwarf then why are we wasting time and money with anything orbiting such star?
Maybe because deep down nobody is sure about the lethality of red dwarfs. Like the assumption that it would strip the atmosphere - all of the models proposed implied atmosphere so why aren't we invalidating that assumption?
There is a paper which says red dwarfs might not strip the atmosphere out at all, just sayin
Hello Dr Becky, I’ve a question, with Euclid finding so many new galaxies and other massive objects, could it push the ratio of normal matter to dark matter up from 5% to, say 10% in future?
The term zero is not used where you are located Doctor Becky?
Very cool. As much as I'd love to find evidence of life, I really appreciate this discussion of all the neat possibilities!
I always fall back to the trope: it is never aliens' until it is!
Hi Dr Becky, I am curious to know whether AI is being used at all in the fitting of the models to the absorption spectra? If not, is this something that is being worked on to increase the accuracy of identifying the chemical composition?
Love the video, thank you for the brilliant science facts without the hype.
I found your channel via a lecture you did on another science lecture channel recently. Based on what you said in that lecture, I thought I'd let you know for the algorithm, I'm female. Hope that helps.
Thanks for all the info, dr. Becky! 😊
Stay safe there with your family! 🖖😊
This was a very good and well explained video. Based on what you laid out I'm going to be cautiously optimistic for life but it's probably more likely it's a mini-Neptune. Hopefully the new data coming out will shed light and maybe settle everything.
Here's to life being on that planet.
Another excellent presentation of published papers that identifies the issues at stake and the path to resolving the different conclusions.
Cheers from the Pacific West Coast of Canada.
na
neptune is not gas all the way down
it must have a solid layer at some point
if not from metalic elements then from pressure
Na. Do some basic research.
@@davidhoward4715 its like Berkley's subjectivism, i only see clouds and no surface so there must be no surface
Thank you for a peek at the models.
Last week this came up in conversation, "has alien life been detected?" I said the data might be there, but not clear. 🤓
Scientist brain: More observations, please. That's a weak signal-to-noise.
Dork me: [Micheal Myers voice] LIIIIQUID, MAAAHHHGMMAHHH
Why would they not have observed with Miri along with the 2 other instruments the 1st time? Was it scheduling or transit time or some other reason?
Good job as always, thanks. Extraordinary claims always require extraordinary justification. But, the publicity is good for public engagement, which may help boost interest and even funding!
13:40 laevelengths?^^ (Not heckling, just found that sound very funny)
Thank you Dr. Becky, you make me love science so much!
One thing I have learnt in all my time on this planet is "don't believe everything you read in the newspapers", especially "don't believe anything about advancements in science that you read in the newspapers"
One thing I have learned is that learnt is not a word....
I like the very old saying of:- Never believe everything you hear, and only half of what you see.
In my freshman astronomy course, our professor did a whole segment on science media literacy. I thought it was ridiculous at the time, but man I can spot things in other fields that aren't real with ease now. I have my degree in physics so I can usually tell whether some stuff like this is true or not, but for biology and stuff it is really nice to know what signs to look for. Something fun about that course was that we had to write an article that was fake and used the same tactics that science journalists use, and my girlfriend at that time looked at what I was writing while I was in the bathroom and I came back to her looking horrified at the article I wrote about the moon spiraling towards the earth since I had told her I was working on a paper for that class. It gave me a good laugh.
@Alexander_Grant if you really have a degree in physics, then explain gravity. Explain time-dilation. Explain the daily and yearly tides if you are familiar with the moon and its orbit around the planet.
Before things kinda fell apart for them, most newspapers would have one or more science reporters who at least had some training or experience with a scientific field. Their job was to read the scientific papers and simplify them for the public -- the newspapers had a policy to keep the language/concepts simple enough to be understand by a 6th grader (or an adult with only a 6th grade education). When the rising tide of online media began driving print sales down into the sub-basements, those specialized reporters were the first ones that were cut... which left the general news reporters now trying to figure out complex reports and studies that were most definitely not written at a 6th grade level, with the disappointing results we have today :(
I will never kneel before Zod.
😂🤣🤣 Good one!!
Good to get those kind of declarations out there early. You avoid the inevitable rush should Zod ever actually show up.
Zod dammit!!
What about Mega Maid?
So we can calculate redshift but Alexa still doesn't know how much time there's left on the timer?!
0:08 - this doesn't look like a "best fit curve" to me :/ ...
In discussing the second paper you mentioned that the authors said the planet would be unlikely to have a liquid water ocean because new stars were too hot after they formed. But I thought that new stars were cooler than they became as they aged and evolved? So liquid water on the surface of a planet 8n their habitable zone would be more likely when they were young, rather than later when the star had become brighter and hotter?
Intriguing video Dr. Bekcy. BUT can you explain something to me?
You say the planet in this system should be much closer to its star to get enough heat, but how does this star not destory the planet's atmosphere with the like of solar flares/carrington events etc? Is it close enough where more solar activity could destory any life chance over time? (I don't know the differnece between star types and their solar flare / mass corona event is!). Thanks.
I'd love to know why different groups of researchers tend to settle on very different ways of explaining the same data. Did the groups that "found" DMS even consider the magma or mini Neptune model or do they just publish the very first model that somewhat fits the data? Is it just a lack of imagination or incentives to publish "big" findings?
The problem with best-fit models is that they only reflect the models you used in the analysis. There is always the possibility that one of the excluded models may fit the data as well or better.
The most important point of these early papers is to point to the next avenue of research to either bolster or falsify the preliminary results.
This point in our search for life on other planets is so strange, because the data we have are too noisy to get many definitive answers yet, but because we have so much data the media have so many opportunities to jump on it when there's a mildly abnormal peak in a spectrum somewhere. I love seeing these papers but newspapers shouldn't be allowed to cover them until they prove they won't oversensationalise them
A very interesting video. I am intrigued by the point of nitrogen dissolving in magma.
How would an increase in resolution improve the quality of results when analyzing the atmosphere’s gaseous content?
Increased resolution means more pixels per same observed area means less noise in data means more accurate data with better fidelity (more individually measured points within the same range of scale).
@@sillyjellyfish2421 👍🏻
In order to find a truly earth like planet wouldn't a star have to be observed for over a year to catch two crossing dips? Plus proper orientation of the planets orbital plane?
Dr. Becky, can you give us some information about the cars on the shelves behind you?
what would the x2r value be if you just drew a straight line through 0.292 or so?
Hey HeyDr. Becky! You're the COolest
Would the surface temperature of K2-18b be able to differentiate a planet between a hard surface and a thick gas atmosphere?
That is the question I had. Is there anyway to estimate the temperature of K2-18b? What about other exo-planets? Perhaps someone can answer this.
"It's never aliens, until it is" -Matt O'Dowd PBS Space Time
But it never is.
i hear you, and i get what you're saying. however, we are talking about a planet in the goldilocks zone, so wouldnt it be too cool to have a molten surface? and if the sun was too volatile for a rocky world to maintain its atmosphere, how then is a gas planet suppose to stay together? so even if those other waveforms also fit the pattern, do they really fit the scenario? (to be clear, this is intended as an honest, sincere question. please kindly enlighten me)
This channel and the other with the guy Anton is really against life in other planets for some reason. I know Anton is religious, so that's explains his side, maybe same with her. It's tbh shame, people are so scared and want to be special for some reason, they scared because what happens if we find out life is insanely common, and intelligent life is not rare? All the religion etc teaches you are special, we are special, we are the only intelligent life on earth etc etc, just look how scared are people because of AI lol
Laboratory Infrared Spectrometry Instruments label the wavelength in Reciprocal Centimeters which is the frequency divided by c.
Ultraviolet/visible Spectrophotometers label their wavelength axis PROPERLY in Nanometers.
For those who like four digit numbers you sometimes see it labelled as Angstroms where 1 Nanometer is 10 Angstroms.
I never understood why Infrared Spectrophotometers fail to label their Horizontal Axis in Microns or Micrometers even as an Auxiliary Scale underneath the Reciprocal Centimeter one.
Dr. Becky ... 🙏🙏My favorite SMBH specialist. Did you saw the latest ANTON video? Could dig more into this discovery that he talks about SMBH magnetic lines that form around Black Holes snaping and being emitted as powerful jets that steal momentum from a spinning Black Hole... Is this going to accelerate the BH evaporation, because BH not lose lose energy from Hawking radiation but also from the magnetic fields snapping?
Imagine discovering a planet but it's filled by dinosaurs.
Yeah it’s crazy to think that any planet at all can harbour life ??? OHHH Except Earth that’s just the exception.. Like Earth was the centre of our solar system?? Then we realised there are other systems billions of them and billions of galaxies but only Earth can harbour life… Evan if it was discovered would they EVER TELL US.. I SAY ALL THE NAY SAYERS ARE CIA INFILTRATED ASTRO PHYSIC PAID $$$$$$ NAY SAYERS..