139
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 08 Mar 2024
139 points (99.3% liked)
Astronomy
3942 readers
2 users here now
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
I think the methane is a better marker...AFAIK, it's almost always a byproduct of some biological process.
It’s a good biosignature but a real smoking gun would be if a planet has intelligent life that’s not always so intelligent. Then, we might detect chlorofluorocarbons or some other synthetic pollutant.
“Well, we detected an alien civilization but their atmosphere is in way worse shape than 1950’s London and they’re 100 light years away. I guess we’ll keep checking and see if they get their act together or not.”
Plot twist, they're already dead by the time we detect them, the light from them exploding the planet just hasn't reached us yet.
bruh
https://science.nasa.gov/resource/trapping-of-methane-in-enceladus-ocean
We know of abiogenic sources of methane in this solar system.
Bruh...that's why I said almost.
I also got about 1/2 way through typing almost the same response below about gases that naturally degrade quickly, not being able to accumulate to high enough concentrations to be detectable at these distances but @TropicalDingDing did so more eloquently than their name would indicate possible, so I'll let you read theirs here: https://lemmy.world/comment/8258449