The uncertainty of science: A renowned astronomer reminds everyone — the public, the astronomy community, and most importantly, the press — that the data collected on most exoplanets so far are far more uncertain than is often claimed.
A planet’s atmosphere is the gateway to its identity, including how it was formed, how it developed and whether it can sustain life, stated Adam Burrows, author of the review and a Princeton University professor of astrophysical sciences. But the dominant methods for studying exoplanet atmospheres are not intended for objects as distant, dim and complex as planets trillions of miles from Earth, Burrows said. They were instead designed to study much closer or brighter objects, such as planets in Earth’s solar system and stars.
Nonetheless, scientific reports and the popular media brim with excited depictions of Earth-like planets ripe for hosting life and other conclusions that are based on vague and incomplete data, Burrows wrote in the first in a planned series of essays that examine the current and future study of exoplanets. Despite many trumpeted results, few “hard facts” about exoplanet atmospheres have been collected since the first planet was detected in 1992, and most of these data are of “marginal utility.”
The good news is that the past 20 years of study have brought a new generation of exoplanet researchers to the fore that is establishing new techniques, technologies and theories. As with any relatively new field of study, fully understanding exoplanets will require a lot of time, resources and patience, Burrows said. “Exoplanet research is in a period of productive fermentation that implies we’re doing something new that will indeed mature,” Burrows said. “Our observations just aren’t yet of a quality that is good enough to draw the conclusions we want to draw. “There’s a lot of hype in this subject, a lot of irrational exuberance. Popular media have characterized our understanding as better than it actually is,” he said. “They’ve been able to generate excitement that creates a positive connection between the astrophysics community and the public at large, but it’s important not to hype conclusions too much at this point.” [emphasis mine]
Burrows’ point is absolutely right. Every single story describing the atmosphere or make-up of any particular exoplanet at this point in time is essentially fantasy. The data are too weak or vague, and hardly robust enough to come to any solid conclusions. In fact, this research repeatedly reminds me of the conclusions many scientists drew from the flimsy spectrographic data that was gathered before the space age about the solar system’s planets. When we finally got spacecraft to those planets, we found those conclusions were routinely wrong.
This is not to say that our new knowledge of exoplanets is not exciting or significant. It is both. We just shouldn’t put too much faith in it at this time.
