Science Complex molecules found on Saturn’s moon Enceladus

  • 🏰 The Fediverse is up. If you know, you know.
  • Want to keep track of this thread?
    Accounts can bookmark posts, watch threads for updates, and jump back to where you stopped reading.
    Create account
https://www.sciencealert.com/comple...raterrestrial-life?perpetual=yes&limitstart=1

BREAKING: Complex Organic Molecules Discovered on Enceladus For The First Time
It has everything needed to host alien life!


MICHELLE STARR
27 JUN 2018
The plumes of salty water shooting out of Saturn's ocean moon Enceladus have just ponied up one of the most significant ingredients for habitability: large organic molecules rich in carbon.

It's a discovery that suggests a thin, organic rich film atop the oceanic water table - very similar to the sea surface microlayer here on Earth, which is extraordinarily rich in organic compounds.

And yes, you guessed it. These findings bolster the hypothesis that, deep under its icy crust, Enceladus could be harbouring simple marine life, clustered around the warmth of hydrothermal vents.

Previously, simple organic molecules detected on the little moon were under around 50 atomic mass units and only contained a handful of carbon atoms.

"We are, yet again, blown away by Enceladus," said geochemist and planetary scientist Christopher Glein of the Southwest Research Institute.

"We've found organic molecules with masses above 200 atomic mass units. That's over ten times heavier than methane.

"With complex organic molecules emanating from its liquid water ocean, this moon is the only body besides Earth known to simultaneously satisfy all of the basic requirements for life as we know it."

Let that sink in for a moment.

One might think that a moon far from the Sun with an ocean covered by a thick crust of ice would be an unlikely place to look for extraterrestrial life, but the case for it is mounting.

Last year, Cassini data revealed the presence of molecular hydrogen in the plumes shooting off the surface of Enceladus - a possible source of which would be the ocean's water reacting with rocks via hydrothermal processes.

That process has been observed here on Earth - around hydrothermal vents, volcanic apertures in the seafloor that spew heat into the surrounding water.

These terrestrial hydrothermal vents are often far from the life-giving light of the Sun, which triggers the photosynthesis on which the vast majority of Earth's life depends.

But the warmth from the vents allows a different process to take place - chemosynthesis. Bacteria around the vents harness chemical energy, such as the reaction between hydrogen sulfide from the vent and oxygen from the seawater, to produce sugar molecules - food.

"Hydrogen provides a source of chemical energy supporting microbes that live in Earth's oceans near hydrothermal vents," said physicist Hunter Waite of the Southwest Research Institute, principal investigator on the Cassini Ion and Neutral Mass Spectrometer.

"Once you have identified a potential food source for microbes, the next question to ask is 'what is the nature of the complex organics in the ocean?' This paper represents the first step in that understanding - complexity in the organic chemistry beyond our expectations!"

The molecules were also detected by Cassini, which sampled an Enceladus plume before it was decommissioned in September of last year.

It then used its Cosmic Dust Analyzer and Ion and Neutral Mass Spectrometer to take measurements, both of the plume and of Saturn's E ring - the planet's second outermost ring, within which Enceladus orbits. It's formed by particles escaping the moon's gravity.

It's possible that a future probe may be able to dive through the plumes, equipped with a high-resolution mass spectrometer, to analyse those molecules in greater detail, and with more advanced technology.

Meanwhile, researchers here on Earth are continuing to observe and experiment on hydrothermal vents in the hopes of advancing our understanding of what life on Enceladus might look like.

And there are a number of proposed missions to actually send a craft to the ice moon to investigate more closely the possibility of life - and maybe even find it. But sadly, none of those are in development yet, so any such mission would still be years away, if it happens at all.

But, based on what we're still continuing to learn from Cassini, the moon is only looking more and more intriguing.

"Even after its end," Glein said, "the Cassini spacecraft continues to teach us about the potential of Enceladus to advance the field of astrobiology in an ocean world."

The research has been published in the journal Nature.

From above article:
"With complex organic molecules emanating from its liquid water ocean, this moon is the only body besides Earth known to simultaneously satisfy all of the basic requirements for life as we know it."

That’s some cool stuff.
 
If you use life on Earth as a guide, it's reasonable to assume that intelligent life (the kind capable of interstellar travel and communication) is probably very few and far between. It is estimated that upwards of 5 billion different species have lived on Earth throughout it's long history, yet so far only one has achieved the intellectual capacity to wonder what might exist beyond our world: us.
Well, at least to our knowledge. Anything that happened long before the Dinosaurs is pretty much just a huge mystery, since nothing from beyond that time survived aside from a few very, very badly aged fossils. For all we know, there could have been a space-exploring species of sentient crab-people two billion years ago.


The entire concept of colonizing other worlds, outside of perhaps Venus, is deeply exceptional. The human skeleton rapidly degrades in low gravity environments, and prolonged exposure to cosmic radiation is lethal. This rules out nearly every planet and moon in our solar system. Unless FTL is ever proven to be both possible and feasible, I think humans will never physically leave Earth, and will have to be content living on our biological paradise world and exploring and strip mining the rest of the solar system via an army of probes.
Given how humankind has outright refused to aknowledge that some regions on earth are too inhospitable for human life and settled there just as a big "fuck you" to mother nature, I hope we'll overcome these issues the same way we always did:
By cheating.

Maybe, one day, someone will find a way to shield ships from these lethal radiations. Maybe, someone will find a way to built a propulsion system that offers high thrust at high specific impulse.
And when it comes to gravity that can be simulated by spinning. Technically, you'd need a ring of at least several hundred metres to avoid nauseating everyone aboard to death, but -again- you can cheat and use it in a far smaller ship:
Put the crew compartment on a long piece of rope with a counter-weight and spin that contraption. It will look utterly ridiculous, but it'll work all the same.

What I'm trying to say is that I am an optimist when it comes to these things. Though I'll admit that it all boils down to "these limits might be overcome eventually." I'm not counting on anything happening any time soon.

Though space drones harvesting stuff millions of miles away would be badass...
 
Maybe, one day, someone will find a way to shield ships from these lethal radiations.
Radiation affecting ships isn't that big of an issue, aside from specific environments such as near Jupiter, which is basically a planet-sized Chernobyl. (And exotic stellar regions like around pulsars or in the galactic core but obviously that's tomorrow's problem.) It's more about having relatively unshielded settlements that can accommodate high populations.

And support a transplanted ecosphere I suppose, since every world we know is dead and even if there are other garden worlds out there - even if their air is breathable! - the odds that the local ecology has the right match of vitamins and amino acids to provide a suitable diet is pretty low. We can grow plants in hydroponic farms just fine, if colonists don't mind a permanently vegan diet... and don't feel sad at the thought of never seeing a pretty tree or hearing birds sing again.
 
It would appear to be, unless you want to run full-tilt into the Fermi paradox. However, completely isolated ecosystems have been found in the deepest parts of the sea living in total dependence on a single hydro-thermal vent with multi-cellular fish and other complex organisms. The conditions of those "hotspots" on Earth and Enceladus are very similar.

The problem then becomes, if life is so easily found, then why haven't we been contacted by ayys yet? There are a LOT of solar systems and planets surrounding us.

I've always thought the answer to Fermi is pretty simple. Yes, there has been time for generation or cryo ships to travel the stars at sunlight speed. That shit is expensive and takes too long.

To the answer to Fermi's paradox is the Occulus Rift.

By that I mean, it's much, much cheaper, quicker, and self gratifying to explore an ultra hyper quantum computer recreation of the universe. Or fantastical universes. Life doesn't spread to the stars cause it isn't worth the hassale. Everyone just lives in the Matrix, studying the universe by proxy, or living multiple lifetimes of your wild fantasy.
 
By that I mean, it's much, much cheaper, quicker, and self gratifying to explore an ultra hyper quantum computer recreation of the universe. Or fantastical universes. Life doesn't spread to the stars cause it isn't worth the hassale. Everyone just lives in the Matrix, studying the universe by proxy, or living multiple lifetimes of your wild fantasy.
So long as the Earth remains viable, that is. We could offload a LOT of our pollution to the Moon utilizing robotics and microwave transmission. Oh well.
 
Dealing with radiation would require shielded structures or subterranean settlements, neither of which is infeasible but doesn't say much for quality of life. It pretty much rules out Jupiter's moons though. As for gravity, I don't think artificial simulation of gravity is necessarily out of the question. It could be as simple as settling a small asteroid, hollowing it out, and giving it a desirable spin. There are at least several hundred "small" asteroids that are at least 100km in diameter whose velocity could be controlled and altered over time with rockets, how many millions could even one of those potentially house?

Easier to just take the shit you want out of those asteroids (most of which are literal rubble piles and would fly apart if you spun them up) and build an O'Neill cylinder out of it.

By that I mean, it's much, much cheaper, quicker, and self gratifying to explore an ultra hyper quantum computer recreation of the universe. Or fantastical universes. Life doesn't spread to the stars cause it isn't worth the hassale. Everyone just lives in the Matrix, studying the universe by proxy, or living multiple lifetimes of your wild fantasy.

But if I want to explore the IRL universe? Or what if I'm an AI just as smart as the biological programmed into the system and want to do the same? What if my star system has literally been exhausted of resources or my star is dying/dead? And I can do both at the same time. I can wait centuries/millennia/however long it takes to get to the nearest star system because I'll be entertained the whole time along the way. I could run my computer system so slow (saving enormous energy) that it only feels like a few minutes has passed.

Fermi paradox needs to account for the behavior of every member of every species, and the idea that no one would want to explore the universe is questionable. Grabbing more resources to make your computer bigger/faster (to run more AI/simulate more universes/whatever) is always a good reason.
 
There is that whole light speed problem. And we do see weird stuff occasionally, like that weirdly flickering light source those scientists got all excited over.

Also, they probably had their own Carl Sagans who told them they better look out and not announce themselves to the other aliens.

They probably also had their own idiots who blasted out RF of their version of Hitler at the 1936 Olympics, I Love Lucy, and so on.

Well, at least to our knowledge. Anything that happened long before the Dinosaurs is pretty much just a huge mystery, since nothing from beyond that time survived aside from a few very, very badly aged fossils. For all we know, there could have been a space-exploring species of sentient crab-people two billion years ago.

Much of that stuff had soft bodies that weren't preserved except in outline, like much of the Edicacaran stuff. We have no clue what most of that stuff even was, or whether the stuff we have outlines of were even plants, animals, or whatever.
 
I think you guys are missing the point of why this is so cool. We have never seen life that's come from somewhere besides Earth, and while this isn't proof of life yet, it's a good sign that it either exists, or will probably exist at some point. We'll never live there ourselves, but this could still be an answer to the question "Is there life in the universe besides Earthlings?"
 
It's more about having relatively unshielded settlements that can accommodate high populations.
I think a lot of problems with space travel will be solved when (or if) we find a way to generate copious amounts of energy reliably.

Wouldn't surprise me if it was possible to recreate earth's magnetic field around space colonies if there was a huge enough energy source at hand... and then there's ideas for propulsion systems that use electromagnetics to increase efficience and it's pretty rad:
They come with a great TWR and are highly fuel efficient - but the most amazing thing is, by reducing thrust, the fuel efficience grows (cause the same amount of magnetic energy is transfered to less exhaust gases). You can scale that thing from "As efficient as a Xenon thruster" to "as much thrust as a regular rocket" and anything in between. Afaik, at both extremes it performs better than the alternatives, too.

Only downside: It takes a shitton of energy to accomplish, and unless someone wants to build a nuclear reactor in space, it's not going to be viable.

That's sort of the biggest problem, too. It's always about weight, cost per pound and a lack of an energy source powerful enough to do anything.
 
This is pretty cool. For a long time Europa was always the place everything thought life had the best chance of developing, but after finding so many subsurface oceans over the past decade or two now it looks like Enceladus is one of the favored areas to look for life.
The entire concept of colonizing other worlds, outside of perhaps Venus, is deeply exceptional. The human skeleton rapidly degrades in low gravity environments, and prolonged exposure to cosmic radiation is lethal. This rules out nearly every planet and moon in our solar system. Unless FTL is ever proven to be both possible and feasible, I think humans will never physically leave Earth, and will have to be content living on our biological paradise world and exploring and strip mining the rest of the solar system via an army of probes.
I recommend watching Isaac Arthur on YouTube, he goes into great detail on just how we could go about colonizing literally every single celestial body in the Solar System.
 
Cool (pun intended).

But if there's no free oxygen in the water, it may be difficult for multicellular life to survive there.
 
Last edited:
Some bizarre form of chemosynthesis comes to mind.
I guess I should've clarified with life as we know it.

Enceladus would be a very different environment. The surface is airless and made of rock-hard ice. The only known entrances to the sea are in the south pole, which is currently dark during it's "winter" season which it shares with Saturn.

The entrances themselves are the geysers. If you could somehow survive going into one of them, you'd wind up in a dark subglacial sea. The sea is said to be global, but the ice cover is said to be thinnest at the south pole.

Any life there could be bioluminescent (glowing).
 
I think a lot of problems with space travel will be solved when (or if) we find a way to generate copious amounts of energy reliably.

There's already copious amounts of energy being radiated uselessly into space 8.3 light minutes away. We just need to find a way to capture it.

Enceladus would be a very different environment. The surface is airless and made of rock-hard ice. The only known entrances to the sea are in the south pole, which is currently dark during it's "winter" season which it shares with Saturn.

Sounds like the kind of life that would develop is like giant tubeworms near thermal vents. Why would they evolve since they have all they need? The variance between the areas that would be habitable and the rest is so vast I don't see how anything would evolve to move onto "land" since there isn't any.

That or any intelligent life that would develop in such a place would be like a Lovecraftian horror to us (and vice versa).
 
I guess I should've clarified with life as we know it.

Enceladus would be a very different environment. The surface is airless and made of rock-hard ice. The only known entrances to the sea are in the south pole, which is currently dark during it's "winter" season which it shares with Saturn.

The entrances themselves are the geysers. If you could somehow survive going into one of them, you'd wind up in a dark subglacial sea. The sea is said to be global, but the ice cover is said to be thinnest at the south pole.

Any life there could be bioluminescent (glowing).
Sorry my autism was showing.
 
I think a lot of problems with space travel will be solved when (or if) we find a way to generate copious amounts of energy reliably.

Wouldn't surprise me if it was possible to recreate earth's magnetic field around space colonies if there was a huge enough energy source at hand... and then there's ideas for propulsion systems that use electromagnetics to increase efficience and it's pretty rad:
They come with a great TWR and are highly fuel efficient - but the most amazing thing is, by reducing thrust, the fuel efficience grows (cause the same amount of magnetic energy is transfered to less exhaust gases). You can scale that thing from "As efficient as a Xenon thruster" to "as much thrust as a regular rocket" and anything in between. Afaik, at both extremes it performs better than the alternatives, too.

Only downside: It takes a shitton of energy to accomplish, and unless someone wants to build a nuclear reactor in space, it's not going to be viable.

That's sort of the biggest problem, too. It's always about weight, cost per pound and a lack of an energy source powerful enough to do anything.

There is a huge enough energy source in space, I've even seen it a few times I've left my computer to walk outside.

But seriously, you don't need magnetic fields in a space colony, you just need thick enough walls to block almost all the radiation. Any colony design which rotates already has this since the rotating part can't be exposed to space because micrometeors will mess up the rotation. Even an extra layer of gas is fine for blocking radiation.

Current spacecraft/ISS can't afford thick hulls because of the weight issue from launching them unlike a space colony (which nobody can afford in general but if they ever get built they hulls will be plenty thick). Later spacecraft actually built in space will probably have this.
 
There is actually a hypothesis I always found intriguing that life on Earth actually began in ice. There's been some tentative experimentation showing that at extremely low temperatures ice crystals tend to organize organic molecules into long chains. If it's possible, it could happen on Enceladus.

They probably also had their own idiots who blasted out RF of their version of Hitler at the 1936 Olympics, I Love Lucy, and so on.
The window in which our own signal processing was so terrible we needed giant blasts of radio waves to pick up Hitler at the Olympics instead of weaker, more directional signals was quite small. The better you get at this stuff the less of discernible footprint you leave in space.

Fermi's Paradox isn't even a paradox. The equation being discussed in this thread is equally useless since it's one in which every single variable is unknown.
Cool (pun intended).

But if there's no free oxygen in the water, it may be difficult for multicellular life to survive there.
There's multicellular life on Earth that doesn't use any oxygen at all at any part of its life cycle. Was discovered about a decade ago. It's not big, but it is pretty complex and the largest samples are just barely visible to the naked human eye. They're a weird clade of Loriciferans that live in deep sea anoxic basins and ocean sediments. Not much is known of their metabolism yet besides that they've been shown to live, mate, and lay viable eggs that hatch with no oxygen dissolved in the water at all. And also at very high hydrogen sulfide concentrations. But that's less weird.
 
aw yiss my alien mermaid creation is finally about to be proven :feels::feels::feels:

In all seriousness, this is very interesting. While organic compounds have been found before on various celestial bodies, such as methane, it was initially thought the reason was life but in all actuality it was just produced by various chemical reactions on the planet, with no organic hand in it whatsoever. Whenever people bring up about the search for life, I remember how we just discovered an ocean zone with hundreds of species in the Bahamas, an area that was so heavily traveled and visited that the resulting high numbers of negative incidents caused people to believe it was cursed.
 
Back
Top Bottom