Most active commenters
  • throwaway290(3)

←back to thread

417 points fuidani | 11 comments | | HN request time: 0.754s | source | bottom
1. throwaway290 ◴[] No.43714434[source]
TL;DR

- K2-18b

- detected dimethyl sulfide and dimethyl disulfide, false positive possibility is now very low

- "produced by marine-dwelling organisms on Earth", possibility they were produced by other processes (unrelated to life as we know it) not high but maybe unknown unknowns

- other factors like distance from the star are in favor of life & water

- previous studies detected methane and carbon dioxide

replies(5): >>43714474 #>>43714477 #>>43714498 #>>43714512 #>>43714523 #
2. sph ◴[] No.43714474[source]
> false positive possibility is very low

No, it means we will soon discover how these compounds form naturally. Would love to be wrong, of course.

replies(3): >>43714494 #>>43714585 #>>43714622 #
3. dvh ◴[] No.43714477[source]
Parent is a flare star
replies(1): >>43714510 #
4. throwaway290 ◴[] No.43714494[source]
I meant (and I think the article meant) false positive of gas detection not life
5. psychoslave ◴[] No.43714498[source]
Is dimethil something expected to be generated with really procaryote life forms, or only from those with more complexe structures?
6. throwaway290 ◴[] No.43714510[source]
Like the sun, I guess
7. guax ◴[] No.43714512[source]
> The observations also provided a tentative hint of dimethyl sulfide (DMS), a possible biosignature gas, but the inference was of low statistical significance.

From the source paper. It is a very important result but not definitive, false positive is still possible as well as us finding a new way in which DMS can form without a biological process.

Still freaking exciting and fantastic scientific achievement. JWST is already bearing incredible fruits.

8. energy123 ◴[] No.43714523[source]
> false positive possibility is now very low

It's not that low, unfortunately. From the article:

> They say their observations have reached the ‘three-sigma’ level of statistical significance. This means there's a 0.3% probability the detection occurred by chance. And to reach the accepted level that would mean scientific discovery, observations would have to meet the five-sigma threshold. In other words, there would need to be below a 0.00006% probability they occurred by chance.

replies(1): >>43715055 #
9. actionfromafar ◴[] No.43714585[source]
Maybe the are cooking a lot of paper over there. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kraft_process
10. nottorp ◴[] No.43714622[source]
If plankton farts them, it's natural too, right?
11. fullstackchris ◴[] No.43715055[source]
Thats what I'd like to know, is this the kind of process that we can _get_ to 6 sigma by more observation time? Or would we need other observations / thats "as good as it gets" for the Webb's capabilities?