New data raises doubts about exoplanet having chemicals that on Earth come from life
The uncertainty of science: Using new data from the Webb Space Telescope, scientists now conclude that the identification on an exoplanet in April 2025 of the molecules dimethyl sulfide (DMS) and/or dimethyl disulfide (DMDS) — both of which on Earth are only associated with the presence of life — is now uncertain and that these molecules likely aren’t there.
The new work uses [Webb] data to better qualify what is going on. The work confirms the presence of an ocean on this peculiar exoplanet, although it can’t confirm if there is a thick or thin atmosphere. They couldn’t find water vapor in the atmosphere, suggesting that there is an efficient cold trap, keeping evaporation to a minimum on this temperate sub-Neptune world.
Those potential biosignatures were all below the threshold for an undeniable detection, and their model suggests that a possible presence of DMS could be explained by sources unrelated to life. They advise considering more and different molecules to use as biosignatures. Astronomers are studying worlds that are very different from our own, and the chemical signatures that seem obvious here on Earth might not fit well with those exoplanets.
In other words, they simply don’t have enough data to know, one way or the other. No surprise, The science of studying exoplanets is in its infancy, and right now can only tease out the smallest of details based on our limited technology and the distances involved.
You can read the new paper here [pdf]. It notes further that using these molecules as a sign of life is also a mistake, as they can be created in other ways having nothing to do with biology.
The uncertainty of science: Using new data from the Webb Space Telescope, scientists now conclude that the identification on an exoplanet in April 2025 of the molecules dimethyl sulfide (DMS) and/or dimethyl disulfide (DMDS) — both of which on Earth are only associated with the presence of life — is now uncertain and that these molecules likely aren’t there.
The new work uses [Webb] data to better qualify what is going on. The work confirms the presence of an ocean on this peculiar exoplanet, although it can’t confirm if there is a thick or thin atmosphere. They couldn’t find water vapor in the atmosphere, suggesting that there is an efficient cold trap, keeping evaporation to a minimum on this temperate sub-Neptune world.
Those potential biosignatures were all below the threshold for an undeniable detection, and their model suggests that a possible presence of DMS could be explained by sources unrelated to life. They advise considering more and different molecules to use as biosignatures. Astronomers are studying worlds that are very different from our own, and the chemical signatures that seem obvious here on Earth might not fit well with those exoplanets.
In other words, they simply don’t have enough data to know, one way or the other. No surprise, The science of studying exoplanets is in its infancy, and right now can only tease out the smallest of details based on our limited technology and the distances involved.
You can read the new paper here [pdf]. It notes further that using these molecules as a sign of life is also a mistake, as they can be created in other ways having nothing to do with biology.