Mushballs

I first ran into the concept that not all planets had hard, rocky surfaces -- like Earth, and the ones I was all too familiar with from scientific documentaries like Lost in Space -- when I was about eight.

It was in one of those kids' books about astronomy, and I found the whole thing absolutely fascinating.  Mercury, Venus, Earth, and Mars were small, solid, and made mostly of silicate rocks.  Certainly, the four have their dramatic differences -- airless, scorched Mercury; Venus with its brutally hot, carbon-dioxide-rich atmosphere and clouds of sulfuric acid; temperate, lovely Earth; and chilly, windswept, dusty Mars.  But all four, at least to some extent, fit the picture I'd had of what a planet should look like.

But then the outer four -- Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus, and Neptune -- confounded that completely.

All four are gas giants, massive planets with no solid surface (or, if there is one, it's buried so deep as to be all but inaccessible).  The atmospheres are largely hydrogen, helium, carbon monoxide and dioxide, ammonia, and methane.  They rotate fast -- Jupiter, the largest planet, rotates once on its axis every ten hours -- and this, combined with some serious convection currents, creates enormous storms, the most famous of which is Jupiter's Great Red Spot, which is large enough to swallow the Earth entirely and has wind speeds over four hundred kilometers per hour.

[Image is in the Public Domain courtesy of NASA/JPL]

Even the gas giants' cores aren't like the Earth's; ours is predominantly iron and nickel, while Jupiter -- and, it is surmised, the other three -- have a core largely composed of hydrogen compressed to the point that its electrons delocalize and it begins to act like a metal.  (This metallic hydrogen core is thought to be the source of Jupiter's enormous magnetic field.)

So my picture of the outer four planets was forever changed.  They were huge, churning blobs of gas, not solid at all.  Saturn, in fact, has such a low overall density that if you could find a swimming pool big enough, it'd float.  Then, my mind was further blown when I was twenty and first saw Carl Sagan's Cosmos, where he suggested that such a planet might still host life -- floating or flying creatures that could ride the wild thermal updrafts, and somehow metabolize the anoxic stew of gases they live in.

What's coolest of all, though, is that our understanding of the gas giants is still being refined.  A study out of the University of California - Berkeley found that certain areas of Jupiter's atmosphere are strangely ammonia-depleted.  This is unexpected -- the constant turbulence, you'd think, would result in uniform mixing, just like stirring a cup of coffee distributes the cream and sugar evenly throughout.  If there are areas low in ammonia, what is keeping them that way?

The researchers found a mechanism that might be responsible.  Updrafts in low-pressure zones might, just as they do on Earth, create hailstorms.  But everything's bigger on Jupiter -- bigger than Texas, even -- and these enormous updrafts allow the formation of huge "mushballs" composed primarily of frozen ammonia and water that, once they are too heavy to keep aloft any more, fall down into the lower layers of the atmosphere, leaving upper regions depleted.

So unlike on Earth, where a three-centimeter hailstone is considered pretty huge, these would be between the size of a softball and a basketball.

"The mushball journey essentially starts about fifty to sixty kilometers below the cloud deck as water droplets," said Chris Moeckel, lead author of the paper on the phenomenon, which appeared in Science Advances this week.  "The water droplets get rapidly lofted all the way to the top of the cloud deck, where they freeze out and then fall over a hundred kilometers into the planet, where they start to evaporate and deposit material down there.  And so you have, essentially, this weird system that gets triggered far below the cloud deck, goes all the way to the top of the atmosphere and then sinks deep into the planet...  Imke [de Pater, Moeckel's advisor] and I both were like, 'There's no way in the world this is true.'  So many things have to come together to actually explain this, it seems so exotic.  I basically spent three years trying to prove this wrong.  And I couldn't prove it wrong."

So Sagan's floaters and flyers would not only have to deal with Jupiter's screaming winds and monstrous lightning storms, they'd have to dodge volleyball-sized hailstones.

Not the most hospitable place in the world.

It's pretty cool that even our own Solar System still has the capacity to amaze us.  The more we learn, the more questions we have.  It's like Neil deGrasse Tyson said; "As our knowledge grows, so too does the perimeter of our ignorance."  And sometimes it's a simple, innocuous-seeming question -- like, "why are some parts of Jupiter's atmosphere low in ammonia?" -- that leads to a huge shift in our picture of how some part of the universe works.

****************************************

Looking for a biosignature

From Gordon's Obsession #1 (paleontology) yesterday, today we're moving on to Gordon's Obsession #2: outer space and extraterrestrial life.

No, unfortunately, I'm not about to announce we've located the Andorian home world.  Maybe next time.

We're returning to this favorite topic of mine because of a paper this week in Astrophysical Journal Letters by a team led by Lisa Kaltenegger, of the Carl Sagan Institute of Cornell University, right in my part of the world in upstate New York.  Kaltenegger et al. describe models they've developed to refine how we look for Earth-like exoplanets -- by trying to figure out what our own world would have looked like from the depths of space during its entire geological history.

In "High-Resolution Transmission Spectra of Earth Through Geological Time," Kaltenegger's team recognizes the phenomenon we've discussed here before -- that seeing farther out into space means seeing further back into time.  An intelligent, technological alien species as little as 150 light years away wouldn't have any way of knowing that the Earth hosted a complex civilization with its own sophisticated scientific and technological capabilities, because they'd be seeing us as we were 150 years ago -- before the invention of long-distance radio-wave communication.  To them, the Earth would be a small rocky planet that was entirely silent, and apparently, devoid of life.

So are we making the same mistake with the exoplanets we're seeing?  And is there a way to get beyond that, and find "biosignatures" -- detectable traces of life on a far-distant world?

The key, says Kaltenegger, is in the world's atmosphere.  As the light from its host star passes through the thin envelope of gases surrounding the planet, the light is altered; each kind of gas has a specific set of frequencies it can absorb, and those are selectively removed from the stellar light, creating a dark-line or absorption spectrum.  This gives a fingerprint of what gases are there -- and, potentially, tells us what's going on down on the planet's surface, including whether or not there's anything alive.

The data they're using comes primarily from two sources -- the orbiting James Webb Space Telescope, and the Extremely Large Telescope out in the Atacama Desert of Chile.

I don't know about you, but the name of the latter always makes me laugh.  I'm picturing the scientists coming up with a name for the observatory after it was complete:

Scientist #1:  So, what are we gonna name our telescope?
Scientist #2:  How about naming it after Edwin Hubble?
Scientist #1:  No, that one's already taken.
Scientist #2:  Well, what's this thing's most outstanding feature?
Scientist #1:  It's extremely large.
*pause*
Scientist #1 and #2, together:  Heyyyyyy......!

But I digress.

Kaltenegger's team is looking for the presence of highly-reactive gases -- oxygen being the most obvious example -- that wouldn't be in an atmosphere unless something was continually pumping it out.  While there could be a non-biological way to inject large quantities of oxygen into an atmosphere, the better likelihood is some analogue to photosynthesis.

In other words, life.

The nice thing about this approach is that the presence of oxygen would have been detectable here on Earth over a billion years ago -- thus, potentially detectable by technological aliens from up to a billion light years away.  That's quite a window.  "Even though extrapolations from our findings suggest that one out of five stars hosts a planet which could be like Earth, it would be extremely surprising if all of them were at our Earth’s evolutionary stage," Kaltenegger said.  "So taking Earth’s history into account to me is critical to characterize other Earth-like planets."

What the team did is predict what the absorption spectra of the Sun's light would look like after passing through the Earth's atmosphere during the various periods of our prehistory -- the anoxic period (prior to the evolution of photosynthesis), the time during which aerobic life was present but uncommon, the transition to the land & evolution of plants, and so on, up through the Industrial Revolution, when (as James Burke put it in After the Warming) "instead of the atmosphere doing things to us, we started doing things to it."

The technique is not without its difficulties, however, most notably that the absorption spectrum of one of the biologically-produced reactive gases they studied -- methane -- is awfully close to that of water.  So teasing apart what's the signature of a ubiquitous compound, and what's the actual fingerprint of life, may not be simple.

What's certain is that we've only scratched the surface of what's out there.  At present there are a few more than 4,000 exoplanets identified, a lot of which are gas-rich Jovian planets that are likely not to have a solid surface.  (The reason for this is that the two main techniques for locating exoplanets, stellar occlusion and detection of a "wobble" in the star's position, work much better if the planet in question is large, biasing us against detecting small rocky worlds like our own.)  But if Kaltenegger is right that twenty percent of stars have Earth-sized planets, that's a lot of potential homes for alien life.

I don't know about you, but to me, that's tremendously exciting.  Even if we can't detect Vulcans and Klingons and Andorians yet, we might just be able to see if there's life at all out there.

And I'd be satisfied with that.  Just knowing we're not all alone in the cosmos would be reassuring, even if we don't know what that alien life is like, or whether they might be looking back at us through their own telescopes.

***************************************

This week's Skeptophilia book recommendation is an important read for any of you who, like me, (1) like running, cycling, and weight lifting, and (2) have had repeated injuries.

Christie Aschwanden's new book Good to Go: What the Athlete in All of Us Can Learn from the Strange Science of Recovery goes through all the recommendations -- good and bad, sensible and bizarre -- that world-class athletes have made to help us less-elite types recover from the injuries we incur.  As you might expect, some of them work, and some of them are worse than useless -- and Aschwanden will help you to sort the wheat from the chaff.

The fun part of this is that Aschwanden not only looked at the serious scientific research, she tried some of these "cures" on herself.  You'll find out the results, described in detail brought to life by her lucid writing, and maybe it'll help you find some good ways of handling your own aches and pains -- and avoid the ones that are worthless.

[Note: if you purchase this book using the image/link below, part of the proceeds goes to support Skeptophilia!]