So you have this fancy telescope that produces artists interpretations.
A good article. Informative.
In all such articles, the word “life” should always be appended with the words “as we know it”. We are (and should be) looking for the kind of artifacts and by-products we ourselves produce on our planet. But it’s naive to assume that the universe will not produce lifeforms radically different from us, which might produce evidence of their existence that we aren’t capable of recognizing.
ALIENS, blah, blah, blah...
Misleading title.
“In the new few months, Webb is set to turn its mirrors toward TRAPPIST-1e ...”
This could be bad. Many muslims believe if you take their picture, you are stealing their soul and will kill you, should they have the opportunity.
What if Trappisters believe the same and see Webb taking their picture? Interstellar war risk! Stop before its too late!!
I mean it’s good and stuff but “TRAPPIST-1e is a rocky exoplanet in the habitable zone of a star 39 light-years from Earth” which means to get to it you’d have to travel at the speed of light for a year, 39 times.
Isn’t that about right? So, that part, I find, kind of depressing. It’s pretty much out of reach.
Who really thinks any of us will ever willingly leave the uniquely “habitable” Earth-Luna neighborhood?
The rest of the universe is like a cosmic ray-powered microwave. Have fun getting cooked.
They may have pick up something already.
Be very careful what you look for...You might just find it....
PING!..................
Klatu Nictu Veratta
I'm really tired of that crap. Those "artist's impressions" are worse than useless. Show me real imagery, real data.
The artists impression increases the chance of their being clouds and water there by how much?
Jwst nasa trying really hard to justify their huge delays and cost overruns.
“... Just Proved It’s Value in the Search for Alien Life”
I’ll accept that as true, but how valuable, in terms of money spent, is the search for alien life?
A figure most likely based on extrapolating data from known exoplanets and applying it to the total number of stars estimated to be in the milky way.
One problem here is that the star type which our sun belongs comprises about 7 percent of total stars.
So, the number likely drops to about 21 million. Still a large number but it drops significantly further when only the percentage of stars in the milky way that occupy our galaxy's habitable zone are counted.
That number drops further when stars not having relatively stable output are taken from the mix. On and on the reduction goes.