Research suggests that stars might be capable of producing organic matter

[William Gaatjes]

Astronomers discover complex organic matter in the universe
http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-10-astronomers-complex-universe.html

In today's issue of the journal Nature, astronomers report that organic compounds of unexpected complexity exist throughout the Universe. The results suggest that complex organic compounds are not the sole domain of life but can be made naturally by stars.

Prof. Sun Kwok and Dr. Yong Zhang of the University of Hong Kong show that an organic substance commonly found throughout the Universe contains a mixture of aromatic (ring-like) and aliphatic (chain-like) components. The compounds are so complex that their chemical structures resemble those of coal and petroleum. Since coal and oil are remnants of ancient life, this type of organic matter was thought to arise only from living organisms. The team's discovery suggests that complex organic compounds can be synthesized in space even when no life forms are present.

The researchers investigated an unsolved phenomenon: a set of infrared emissions detected in stars, interstellar space, and galaxies. These spectral signatures are known as "Unidentified Infrared Emission features". For over two decades, the most commonly accepted theory on the origin of these signatures has been that they come from simple organic molecules made of carbon and hydrogen atoms, called polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) molecules. From observations taken by the Infrared Space Observatory and the Spitzer Space Telescope, Kwok and Zhang showed that the astronomical spectra have features that cannot be explained by PAH molecules. Instead, the team proposes that the substances generating these infrared emissions have chemical structures that are much more complex. By analyzing spectra of star dust formed in exploding stars called novae, they show that stars are making these complex organic compounds on extremely short time scales of weeks.

Not only are stars producing this complex organic matter, they are also ejecting it into the general interstellar space, the region between stars. The work supports an earlier idea proposed by Kwok that old stars are molecular factories capable of manufacturing organic compounds. "Our work has shown that stars have no problem making complex organic compounds under near-vacuum conditions," says Kwok. "Theoretically, this is impossible, but observationally we can see it happening."

Most interestingly, this organic star dust is similar in structure to complex organic compounds found in meteorites. Since meteorites are remnants of the early Solar System, the findings raise the possibility that stars enriched the early Solar System with organic compounds. The early Earth was subjected to severe bombardments by comets and asteroids, which potentially could have carried organic star dust. Whether these delivered organic compounds played any role in the development of life on Earth remains an open question.

 

[William Gaatjes]

Our sun might be more of a mother to us then we would think. Instead of thinking of just mother earth, mother solar system might be more appropriate. ^_^

 

[Biftheunderstudy]

I actually just attended a lecture on these "Unidentified Infrared Emission features". The general consensus is that they are indeed PAH's.

Problem is, the "signatures" they speak of are pretty generic. PAH's fit the model quite well, and we can understand how they are made. For instance, there are many combinations of PAH that will produce the spectrum we observe in the infrared but you can't distinguish between individual molecules.

I'm not sure if big organic molecules have the same properties and can fit the observations....is there a paper associated with this?

That said, we do find pretty substantial amounts of things like amino acids in meteors etc. so I'm sure there is some organic matter being made.

 

[DrPizza]

Our sun might be more of a mother to us then we would think. Instead of thinking of just mother earth, mother solar system might be more appropriate. ^_^

Our sun hasn't produced organic compounds (directly), because our sun hasn't gone, and never will go supernova.

 

[silverpig]

Our sun hasn't produced organic compounds (directly), because our sun hasn't gone, and never will go supernova.

...yet

(warms up doomsday device)


muahahaha

 

[Jeff7]

...yet

(warms up doomsday device)


muahahaha

'kay, I'm ready. Let's do this!

 

[Sunny129]

Our sun hasn't produced organic compounds (directly), because our sun hasn't gone, and never will go supernova.

i'm not entirely sure that's what the article is implying (that supernovae are required to produce these complex organic molecules), as its slightly misleading...after all, the article isn't really spot-on with its terminology - it refers to exploding stars as novae...did our author simply misquote the term for an exploding star, or does he/she in fact mean to talk about classic novae - the act of a star dumping matter onto the surface of its companion white dwarf (as opposed to the spectacular end of a sufficiently massive star's life that we call a supernova)?

nevertheless, i agree with you that our sun will never go supernova, and therefore will never produce these molecules (if in fact a supernova proves to be a prerequisite). also, even if the article did intend to reference classic novae and not supernovae, we needn't worry about that either since 1) the sun won't become a white dwarf for another several billion years, and 2) it hasn't a companion that could dump matter onto it at once it reaches that stage of its evolution.

all that aside, the research is pretty fascinating...

 

[Biftheunderstudy]

Yes it is true our sun has not and, barring a catastrophic encounter, will never go Type II or Type I supernova. However, a supernova is not necessary to create organic compounds, namely Carbon, Nitrogen, Oxygen. These elements are produced in very large quantities in massive stars through the CNO cycle of fusion and shed off of the star throughout its life...our sun is no where near massive enough for this cycle to begin.

Creation of other, heavier, elements is attributed to nova and the rapid neutron capture scenario.

 

[DrPizza]

Yes it is true our sun has not and, barring a catastrophic encounter, will never go Type II or Type I supernova. However, a supernova is not necessary to create organic compounds, namely Carbon, Nitrogen, Oxygen. These elements are produced in very large quantities in massive stars through the CNO cycle of fusion and shed off of the star throughout its life...our sun is no where near massive enough for this cycle to begin.

Creation of other, heavier, elements is attributed to nova and the rapid neutron capture scenario.

Carbon, Nitrogen, Oxygen are not compounds; they're elements. Compounds, especially those discussed in the article, are made up of combinations of these elements (and others, namely hydrogen). However, these organic compounds would not exist at the temperatures present in the sun or on the surface of the sun.

 

[wirednuts]

i am under full belief our universe is absolutely teaming with life. even if its one planet per galaxy on average, that a lot of fucking animals out there and entirely plausible that even if they too had intelligent radio waves beaming through space we might not ever hear it.

 

[DrPizza]

i am under full belief our universe is absolutely teaming with life. even if its one planet per galaxy on average, that a lot of fucking animals out there and entirely plausible that even if they too had intelligent radio waves beaming through space we might not ever hear it.

We wouldn't hear it because we probably wouldn't recognize it. We make the assumption that aliens would communicate via radio waves the same way we do - over very narrow ranges of frequencies. Why wouldn't/couldn't they communicate by using a much broader range of frequencies? We'd never recognize it.

An easy way to think about this: think about communications on Earth from the time the telephone was invented until about 20 years ago (or so.) Now imagine that you're a human from that era, and were able to tap into the phone lines on an alien world, wondering if the aliens even existed. A human in the 1950's would expect voice, else possibly a signal like morse code. Now imagine that human from the 1950's was employed to intercept a communication via a satellite to Earth. All he would hear is static.

 

[William Gaatjes]

Our sun hasn't produced organic compounds (directly), because our sun hasn't gone, and never will go supernova.

Current data seems to suggest that you are right.
I will defend my initial idea that our complete solar system is the remnant of a previous star gone supernova. Thus i think it is still save to say : "mother solar system..."

 

[Biftheunderstudy]

Carbon, Nitrogen, Oxygen are not compounds; they're elements. Compounds, especially those discussed in the article, are made up of combinations of these elements (and others, namely hydrogen). However, these organic compounds would not exist at the temperatures present in the sun or on the surface of the sun.

I did not mean to imply that C,N, and O were the organic compounds, but rather the building blocks of them were made in these massive stars.

Our current understanding is that these massive stars shed large amounts of mass during their lifetimes enriching the surrounding environment with C,N, and O among other elements. These emission features are strongly correlated with young star forming regions, places where you have massive stars.

As massive stars don't live very long, they develop into RGB or AGB stars where the 'dust' can be formed directly in the atmosphere of these stars and shed off during this phase. AGB stars are thought to a dominant source of interstellar dust in galaxies.

DOI: 10.1051/0004-6361:200810036 --> here is one paper that I dug up real quick on arxiv, there are many more if you search up PAH and massive stars on any citation engine.

It is not completely ridiculous to think that complex organic molecules can be "made" by stars, but my guess is that the PAH make up the dominant emission with other more complex molecules perhaps accounting for other lines.

 

[Jeff7]

We wouldn't hear it because we probably wouldn't recognize it. We make the assumption that aliens would communicate via radio waves the same way we do - over very narrow ranges of frequencies. Why wouldn't/couldn't they communicate by using a much broader range of frequencies? We'd never recognize it.

An easy way to think about this: think about communications on Earth from the time the telephone was invented until about 20 years ago (or so.) Now imagine that you're a human from that era, and were able to tap into the phone lines on an alien world, wondering if the aliens even existed. A human in the 1950's would expect voice, else possibly a signal like morse code. Now imagine that human from the 1950's was employed to intercept a communication via a satellite to Earth. All he would hear is static.

And there's the fact that there are still some ancient languages that we can't decipher.
We don't even have the ability to effectively communicate with a chimp, or a dog.

What if we encounter a species that has an average IQ of 2500? They'll try to say their equivalent of a greeting, and we'd just cock our heads to the side like a confused dog.

 

[pw38]

And there's the fact that there are still some ancient languages that we can't decipher.
We don't even have the ability to effectively communicate with a chimp, or a dog.

What if we encounter a species that has an average IQ of 2500? They'll try to say their equivalent of a greeting, and we'd just cock our heads to the side like a confused dog.

The only issue with that is that you assume (from what I gather from reading your response) all intelligence is scaled to a perfect curve. There's a difference between you talking to an ant and expecting some sort of response (outside of it biting the crap out of your foot or hand) and an alien talking to you because an ant doesn't have the capacity to critically think, reason, etc.. It just lives on by instinct. We can rationalize though and are curious to a fault, something we'll need when/if we ever meet aliens.

That doesn't say I agree that we'd be able to comprehend what they would say to us because I believe what Stanislov Lem argued; namely that any alien intelligence would be so far removed from our own that meaningful communication, while not impossible, would most likely be improbable or futile. Our saving grace is that we could at least attempt to make contact back with them, something an ant or a lion or a bear or etc. wouldn't begin to try to do.

 

[WHAMPOM]

Astronomers discover complex organic matter in the universe
http://www.physorg.com/news/2011-10-astronomers-complex-universe.html

Or other civilizations are shooting their dead into their sun for cremation and we are detecting the expelled organic matter.

 

[PowerEngineer]

We wouldn't hear it because we probably wouldn't recognize it. We make the assumption that aliens would communicate via radio waves the same way we do - over very narrow ranges of frequencies. Why wouldn't/couldn't they communicate by using a much broader range of frequencies? We'd never recognize it.

You might find this book interesting:

http://www.amazon.com/His-Masters-Vo.../dp/0810117312

 

[SunnyD]

We wouldn't hear it because we probably wouldn't recognize it. We make the assumption that aliens would communicate via radio waves the same way we do - over very narrow ranges of frequencies. Why wouldn't/couldn't they communicate by using a much broader range of frequencies? We'd never recognize it.

An easy way to think about this: think about communications on Earth from the time the telephone was invented until about 20 years ago (or so.) Now imagine that you're a human from that era, and were able to tap into the phone lines on an alien world, wondering if the aliens even existed. A human in the 1950's would expect voice, else possibly a signal like morse code. Now imagine that human from the 1950's was employed to intercept a communication via a satellite to Earth. All he would hear is static.

It's the recognition that's the key. That's our premise of identifying alien life - our notion of communications is there there will be some preceptable pattern over whatever communications medium we're "listening" on. Language, or our notion of it, is that it relies on repetitive patterns. Over the course of any sort of communications, there WILL be a repetitive pattern. That's what we're looking for. Even if whatever communications medium "aliens" use - for your example perhaps - even over a broad swath of "frequency", we will still detect a repetitive pattern.

That's what we're looking for.