Why Is the Search for Extrasolar Planets Crucial for Humanity?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter alex.cordero
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Planets
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the motivations and implications of the search for extrasolar planets, particularly in the context of NASA's Kepler mission and the quest for signs of extraterrestrial life. Participants explore the significance of finding Earth-like planets and the broader implications of such discoveries for humanity.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants argue that the search for extrasolar planets is driven by human curiosity and the desire to understand our place in the universe.
  • Others question the necessity of finding Earth-like planets, suggesting that there may be no practical reason for the search.
  • A few participants highlight the importance of detecting oxygen and ozone as indicators of life, noting the challenges in identifying these gases in exoplanet atmospheres.
  • Concerns are raised about the feasibility of traveling to discovered planets, with some suggesting that the effort may be futile given the vast distances involved.
  • Some participants emphasize that the search for life is not solely about travel, but also about expanding human knowledge and understanding of the universe.
  • There is a mention of Fermi's paradox and its implications, with some participants noting that it is not universally accepted as valid.
  • One participant expresses a desire to explore controversial issues in exobiology and the nature of scientific inquiry, emphasizing the role of curiosity in scientific progress.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree that curiosity is a primary motivator for the search for extrasolar planets. However, there are multiple competing views regarding the significance and practicality of this search, and the discussion remains unresolved on several points, including the implications of Fermi's paradox and the feasibility of interstellar travel.

Contextual Notes

Some participants express uncertainty about the validity of Fermi's paradox and the motivations behind NASA's search for extraterrestrial life. There are also discussions about the limitations of current technology in detecting signs of life and the challenges of interpreting data from exoplanet atmospheres.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be of interest to those exploring the fields of astronomy, exobiology, and the philosophical implications of space exploration, as well as individuals curious about the motivations behind scientific endeavors in the search for extraterrestrial life.

alex.cordero
Messages
19
Reaction score
0
I'm playing devil's advocate here.
  • Why are we bothering with extrasolar planets? (Kepler mission)
  • Why is it so important that we find other earthlike planets?
  • What's motivating NASA to find signs of life elsewhere (Fermi's paradox)?

-ac
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
alex.cordero said:
I'm playing devil's advocate here.
  • Why are we bothering with extrasolar planets? (Kepler mission)
  • Why is it so important that we find other earthlike planets?


  • There's absolutely no reason. Humans are curious, and many people, including me, think it's very exciting to find out about other worlds and whether they can harbor life.

    [*]What's motivating NASA to find signs of life elsewhere (Fermi's paradox)?

    Fermi's paradox is not universally accepted as valid. Even if it is, it clearly doesn't apply to non-intelligent life, which an analysis of extraterrestrial atmospheres would be able to detect once technology improves.
 
It is all about curiosity for sure, that is the motivation of most scientific endeavors. The search for oxygen is particularly interesting. Oxygen is too reactive to persist in any planetary atmosphere without constant replenishment, and photosynthesis is the only known replenishment mechanism. Oxygen is difficult to detect, but, ozone, is relatively easy to detect.
 
Chronos said:
It is all about curiosity for sure, that is the motivation of most scientific endeavors. The search for oxygen is particularly interesting. Oxygen is too reactive to persist in any planetary atmosphere without constant replenishment, and photosynthesis is the only known replenishment mechanism. Oxygen is difficult to detect, but, ozone, is relatively easy to detect.

That's an understatement. The overwhelming count of reducing atoms far outnumbers the oxidizing atomic count in first and second generation star systems. Free oxygen in the atmospere of a planet is only indicative of life--anentropic activity.

Oxygen is the waste product of life. Carbon is the staff of life. Freeing and preventing oxidation of carbon compounds is the most primitive life activity. Where there is free, cold oxygen, there is life.
 
I mention ozone because that is what we are actually looking for with spectroscopy. It is only expected to exist in the outer atmosphere of exosolar planets with significant amounts of atmospheric oxygen. Ozone is a smoking gun for photosynthesis.
 
Looking for and finding for extrasolar planets seems like a futile effort. If they find a planet that is in the "sweet spot, it would probably take us many light-years to get there and longer for the people observing on earth. It would a generational mission, perhaps four generations. What's the point? Or consider the following:
  • did SETI hear something worth looking into?
  • maybe we already have a way to get there and not being told.
 
Its a thirst for knowledge thing. It is unlikely we will ever travel to even the nearest star in the next thousand years. It would be nice to know the best direction before we even contemplate the effort.
 
alex.cordero said:
Looking for and finding for extrasolar planets seems like a futile effort. If they find a planet that is in the "sweet spot, it would probably take us many light-years to get there and longer for the people observing on earth. It would a generational mission, perhaps four generations. What's the point? Or consider the following:
  • did SETI hear something worth looking into?
  • maybe we already have a way to get there and not being told.

(1) Why should getting there be the only goal?
(2) The first people who studied planetary motion didn't live to see man walk on the Moon or space probes visit other planets. The first people who studied electricity didn't live to see it become the economic backbone of the world. That doesn't mean these endeavors were pointless; we'd still be riding horses without them.

On the other hand, the inventor of the transistor did witness the start of the information age.
 
ideasrule said:
(1) Why should getting there be the only goal?
The http://kepler.nasa.gov/Science/KeplerScience/ScientificGoals/" of Kepler Mission is to determine the frequency of terrestrial and larger planets in or near the "habitable zone" of a wide variety of spectral types of stars.
The http://marsprogram.jpl.nasa.gov/science/life/index.html" of Martian exploration is to find life or if it was ever there. The search for life elsewhere has intensified. If you google "why are we looking for life elsewhere?", you'll find articles from reputable sources talking about this. This all just "plain old" curiosity?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #10
I think you misunderstood the question: your previous post implied that traveling to such planets was a goal:
If they find a planet that is in the "sweet spot, it would probably take us many light-years to get there and longer for the people observing on earth.
Ideasrule is asking for the sake of pointing out that trying to visit is not one of the reasons we are currently searching.

Also, the next part of your post #6 is leaning toward conspiracy theory. Please understand, that is not an acceptable topic for discussion here.
 
  • #11
russ_watters said:
Also, the next part of your post #6 is leaning toward conspiracy theory. Please understand, that is not an acceptable topic for discussion here.
Thank you, Russ. I'm not leaning toward a conspiracy theory--frankly, they scare me. I'm an amateur astronomer with a great imagination and I enjoy examining possibilities far beyond what data indicates. My imagination is what interested me in astronomy--not the data. My mind does not grow from taking pictures of space with my C8 or spending time at star parties. I've spent the last 25 years doing this and M31 looks the same as it did when I first saw it through my 60mm Jason refractor as a child. I asked if anyone knew what was motivating NASA to look for signs of life elsewhere? It's on their website (that's why I posted links), not my theory.
 
  • #13
russ_watters said:
It really is just plain, ordinary curiosity.
LOL - Ok Russ, thanks...
 
  • #14
Curiosity is what sets us apart from other species on this planet. We look at ants and are fascinated by how they interact communaly. A chimp just eats them.
 
  • #15
Chronos said:
Curiosity is what sets us apart from other species on this planet. We look at ants and are fascinated by how they interact communaly. A chimp just eats them.
I agree. Curiosity is one of my strong points which is why I became fascinated by astronomy and particularly exobiology. Curiosity is why I asked the questions that I started this thread with. The point of studying anything is to find out why it puzzles us so much. I guess that after having spent many years as an astronomy-fan (for lack of a better word) you get to the point where you want to find out the point of it all.

Folks, I'm realizing that I'm in the wrong forum. Although I'm not interested in conspiracy theories, I am interested in contraversial issues (exobilogy, ftl) because--and let's face it--challenges and contraversy is how we grow in scientific knowledge, not simply doing what other scientists have already done. We don't have the data for what I'm interested in now, that's why I'm curious about it.

To your point, I'm one of those that would really like to observe and if possible, interact with the ants or at least watch them interact. Sometimes I feel like most people around me are afraid to even look for anthills.

Thanks for your fine responses and your time.

-Alex
 

Similar threads

Undergrad New Developments In The Search For Planet X
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
High School Miscellaneous Trivia: Planets and Moons
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
Undergrad Planet Hunters: First Two Planet Candidates Identified
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
7K
Is Humanity Detectable Everywhere on Earth?
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Stargazing Can distance in space be measured by human systems?
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
4K
Undergrad Search patterns in observational studies
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Graduate Terrestrial planet search review paper
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Undergrad Is the Drake Equation a Reliable Tool for Estimating Extraterrestrial Life?
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Writing: Input Wanted Different Cosmic Disasters for Different Plot Points
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
Graduate How Does the Solar Wind's Protective Role Affect Astronomical Observations?
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K