Announcing the discovery of an exoplanet didn't likely come about because the planet has been seen directly. Not even through a telescope.
The existence of an exoplanet is usually only deduced - based on observing a feint light source, through a telescope, many times, over a long period of time, then measuring fluctuations in the intensity of the light and then measuring the timing of those fluctuations. If the fluctuations seem consistent, then it's deduced that the fluctuation may be caused by a planet's rotation in front of the light source. And there are other similarly indirect methods.
Sometimes it's happened after announcing the discovery of an exoplanet that the claim was retracted.
So it's not easy to be certain about an exoplanet's existence. It's even more difficult to conclude what the atmosphere around such an exoplanet might be, let alone conditions on the surface, if it indeed has a solid surface at all.
To say whether or not life exists on any such planet is therefore likely still a long, long way off.
The existence of an exoplanet is usually only deduced - based on observing a feint light source, through a telescope, many times, over a long period of time, then measuring fluctuations in the intensity of the light and then measuring the timing of those fluctuations. If the fluctuations seem consistent, then it's deduced that the fluctuation may be caused by a planet's rotation in front of the light source. And there are other similarly indirect methods.
Sometimes it's happened after announcing the discovery of an exoplanet that the claim was retracted.
So it's not easy to be certain about an exoplanet's existence. It's even more difficult to conclude what the atmosphere around such an exoplanet might be, let alone conditions on the surface, if it indeed has a solid surface at all.
To say whether or not life exists on any such planet is therefore likely still a long, long way off.
No comments:
Post a Comment