Next breakthroughs in exoplanet discovery

May 1, 2017 by Sheyna E. Gifford, Astrobiology Magazine, Astrobio.net
TESS will survey 200,000 stars in search of exoplanets. Credit: NASA

It was a good week for astrobiology. Within days of NASA's announcement that the necessary ingredients for life exist in the plumes erupting from the southern pole of Saturn's moon Enceladus, scientists gathered at Stanford University to discuss discovering life outside the Solar System.

Noting how, "The search for life in the Universe has been transformed from speculation to a data-driven science," speakers like Stanford physicist Peter Michelson offered detailed plans for finding life on exoplanets. Over the course of two days on April 20-21, dozens of scientists attending the Breakthrough Discuss Conference contemplated options for exploring in other star systems. These option included using a new generation of powerful telescopes for long distance observations, as well as advancing a first-of-its-kind technology to visit other star systems—all within the next generation.

What these strategies had in common was a focus on observing habitable zone planets in our local stellar neighborhood. In this neighborhood alone, within 30 light-years or so of our solar system, astrobiologists have already identified several Earth-like exoplanets and dozens of systems that may harbor Earth-like worlds. These exoplanets, identified by the effect they have on their parent star, are rocky and roughly the same size and density as Earth. They orbit their stars at a distance that would allow liquid water to exist on the surface. There is, however, at least one major difference between our planet and these potentially-habitable exoplanets. That is, they aren't circling stars like our sun.

On the spectrum of stars, our sun is what's know as a yellow dwarf. It's bright, and not terribly large compared to the largest stars in our galaxy. Yet, even middling stars like our Sun aren't all that common. Our local stellar neighborhood -— and probably in the Universe as a whole -— is filled with many more low-mass stars. There are 20 yellow dwarf stars like our sun nearby and 250 M-dwarfs, a variety of star so small and dim that, despite their abundance, can't be seen with the naked eye. Over the last three-to-four years, every single low-mass star we've studied appears to have at least one planet. Usually, they have more than one.

"How common are planets orbiting ? Very common indeed," explained Courtney Dressing, an astronomer at UC Berkeley to the assembled group. "For a typical M-Dwarf, there tends to be 2.5 planets. One-in-four of the stars has a planet the same size and temperature as Earth in the habitable zone."

Dressing's point was that given the number of M-dwarfs in the local region, there should be at least 60 potentially Earth-like planets in within 32 or so light-years from here, and perhaps many more. To date, most of our data comes from the Kepler spacecraft. The Kepler spacecraft has focused its search for planets on large M-dwarf stars. In the near future, when the small and medium-sized M-dwarfs are studied, we may discover that closer to one-in-three stars have an Earth-like planet in the habitable zone.

The diagram shows how new technology developed at Caltech will help astronomers search for molecular bio-signatures on exoplanets. Coronagraphs block a star’s light, making orbiting planets easier to see. High-resolution spectrometers would help further isolate a planet’s light, and could reveal molecules in the planet’s atmosphere. Credit: Caltech/IPAC-TMT

Apart from just being more abundant, studying the potentially-habitable exoplanets around these low mass stars comes with other advantages. These exoplanets have tight orbits around their stars because the habitable zones are close in, giving scientists opportunities to view their transits every few weeks. It is during these transits, when the exoplanets pass in front of their stars, that we have the best opportunity to study their atmospheres for signs of life. Many conference attendees, including Mercedes López-Morales from the Harvard Center for Astrophysics, explained how we will be surveying the atmospheres of the closest habitable zone planets for signs of life dwelling on the surface or in an ocean. "We're going to look for oxygen," she said.

Because the rise of oxygen in Earth's atmosphere corresponded with the appearance of life, we frequently use that particular molecule as a marker for the presence of life elsewhere. Also, oxygen likes to interact with other chemicals. If we discover a planet where oxygen is still hanging around in the atmosphere, something, possibly life, is actively making it. So, the search for life will focus on elements and molecules like hydrogen, oxygen, and methane. However, as López-Morales explained, there is a downside to this approach.

"A planet's atmosphere is only 1 percent the size of the planet. The size of the signal is tiny. You need to collect at least one trillion photons to be very certain that you are truly looking at oxygen."

The good news is that a new generation of telescopes designed for planetary exploration and astrobiology will be coming online to help us gather those photons. Around this time next year, the Transiting Exoplanet Survey Satellite (TESS) will be readying for launch. During its two-year mission, TESS will survey 200,000 stars, including the brighter ones in our local systems. The Giant Magellan Telescope (GMT) in Chile, slated to be operational by 2022, will have a resolving power 10 times greater than the Hubble Space Telescope. The GMT will feature a device called the G-CLEF spectrograph, which will be able to see molecules like oxygen in far-off planetary atmospheres. Finally, when the Extremely Large Telescope (ELT) opens in 2024, it will have more light-gathering-power than of Earth's current 8 to 10 meter telescopes combined. Astrobiologists are counting on these large telescopes coming online between now and 2024 to identify the prime candidates to look for oxygen and life in our stellar neighborhood.

Even as we anticipate a treasure trove of atmospheric data from these missions, scientists are discovering species that live quite happily without oxygen, light, and other features that we used to believe were required for life. These discoveries highlight how atmospheric bio-signatures like oxygen are an imperfect, if tantalizing, way to look for life from afar. The question then becomes: Could there be there another way to look for extraterrestrial life beyond studying exoplanet atmospheres?

Ideally, to definitively identify life on other worlds, we would visit nearby planets like Proxima b, only 4 light-years away, either in person or with a spacecraft. This is the goal of the Breakthrough's Starshot initiative. Announced a little more than a year ago, Starshot's goal, according to its founder, is to "literally reach the stars in our lifetimes." The plan to accomplish this feat involves launching a fleet of very small spacecraft. Starshot will then accelerate those craft to as close to lightspeed as possible. By aiming high-powered lasers at these gram-sized cameras in space we may be able to cut down the time, cost, and weight required to gain an up- close look at planets around other stars.

TESS: Transiting Exoplanet Survey Satellite Mission. Credit: NASA

"The goal is to fly a probe very close to a planet and figure out if it has life," said Avi Loeb, a physicist at the Harvard Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics. "What is the color of the planet? Is it green? Does it have vegetation? Is it blue, are there oceans? Or is it desert-like?"

At the conference, NASA engineer Ruslan Belikov premiered simulations of what an exoplanet might look like from Starshot's point of view. Even if the craft were moving at 90 percent the speed of light, the onboard cameras should still be able to pick up signs of large oceans, clouds, and land masses that an exoplanet might have.

The hope is that someday, by combining laser acceleration of these very small craft with cameras and other sensors, we might finally be able to take a firsthand look at habitable-zone-planets circling nearby , and in doing, perhaps definitively find life elsewhere in the Universe. Combining data from our of very large telescopes with atmospheric observations of nearby exoplanets around M-dwarfs may help us choose the best targets for small Starshot craft flyby.

"We are going to be the generation that is remembered for finding exoplanets. That's a fact," said López-Morales. "Are we going to be also the generation that will be remembered as the first ones who found on those planets?"

That, indeed, would be the breakthrough of a lifetime.

Explore further: The space weather forecast for Proxima Centauri B

Related Stories

The space weather forecast for Proxima Centauri B

April 3, 2017

Proxima Centauri, the closest star to the Earth (only 4.28 light-years away) is getting a lot of attention these days. It hosts a planet, Proxima Cen b, whose mass is about 1.3 Earth-mass (though it could be larger, depending ...

Possible venus twin discovered around dim star

April 7, 2017

Astronomers using NASA's Kepler space telescope have found a planet 219 light-years away that seems to be a close relative to Venus. This newly discovered world is only slightly larger than Earth, and orbits a low-temperature ...

Volcanic hydrogen spurs chances of finding exoplanet life

February 27, 2017

Hunting for habitable exoplanets now may be easier: Cornell University astronomers report that hydrogen pouring from volcanic sources on planets throughout the universe could improve the chances of locating life in the cosmos.

Kepler's six years in science (and counting)

May 13, 2015

NASA's Kepler spacecraft began hunting for planets outside our solar system on May 12, 2009. From the trove of data collected, we have learned that planets are common, that most sun-like stars have at least one planet and ...

How common are earths around small stars?

June 3, 2013

(Phys.org) —The Kepler mission has revolutionized the study of exoplanet statistics by increasing the number of known extrasolar planets and planet candidates by a factor of five, and by discovering systems with longer ...

Recommended for you

Solar-powered rover approaching 5,000th Martian dawn

February 16, 2018

The sun will rise on NASA's solar-powered Mars rover Opportunity for the 5,000th time on Saturday, sending rays of energy to a golf-cart-size robotic field geologist that continues to provide revelations about the Red Planet.

Hubble sees Neptune's mysterious shrinking storm

February 15, 2018

Three billion miles away on the farthest known major planet in our solar system, an ominous, dark storm - once big enough to stretch across the Atlantic Ocean from Boston to Portugal - is shrinking out of existence as seen ...

Kepler scientists discover almost 100 new exoplanets

February 15, 2018

Based on data from NASA's K2 mission, an international team of scientists has confirmed nearly 100 new exoplanets. This brings the total number of new exoplanets found with the K2 mission up to almost 300.

10 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

syndicate_51
1 / 5 (1) May 01, 2017
The ingredients of life from Enceladus has been known for some time already.

Not news.

Also claiming those worlds only have one major difference is deceptive. The list stretches far further like being tidally locked and such.

Another issue, detecting oxygen and declaring there is life there no matter what is not accurate. Oxygen presence alone does not indicate life. Actually the atmospheric description the give is no definitive indicator either.

I see a disturbing trend in this field. One thing being the attempt to broaden the definition of life as much as possible so as to fit their desired findings. Rather alarming. Also this field tends to make major announcements that are not actually fully representative of the finding. A bit of embellishment if you will, not outright falsification but a stretching of the truth. Like trying to make the finding a positive for life.

It's why I treat this particular field with the most skepticism.
JamesG
not rated yet May 01, 2017
Proxima b, the closest of these, is 20 years away via the Breakthrough Starshot sattelites. So, it's 40 years to get any possible information. Hard to get excited about that.
zbark123
5 / 5 (1) May 01, 2017
There is a danger here. These craft, even at 1 gram, will have the equivalent of energy of a nuclear bomb if they collide with a planet or moon. Although the probability would be low and depends upon the number we send, we could end up destroying life on a small moon or a city of an intelligent race. If there are intelligent civilization out there watching us, they might not take too kindly to the idea of us sending these "nuclear bullets" their way.
zbark123
5 / 5 (1) May 01, 2017
It might be safer to send craft less than a tenth of a gram, and have some kind of built in warning beacon or self-destruct mechanisms as well (preferably into a gasous state, where the molecules will slow down of their own accord safely).
Da Schneib
5 / 5 (1) May 01, 2017
At 0.9c a gram of matter would carry about 27 kilotons equivalent of TNT in kinetic energy (unless I screwed up the calculations: KE = (mc²/√(1-v²/c²)) - mc²) and 1t TNT = 4.184 TJ, if anyone wants to check). This is definitely a serious concern. If we can arrange to crash it into the local star it won't be any big deal, but this is definitely not anything we want to be tossing around anyplace anyone might be living.
Whydening Gyre
5 / 5 (3) May 01, 2017
I see a disturbing trend in this field. One thing being the attempt to broaden the definition of life as much as possible so as to fit their desired findings. Rather alarming. Also this field tends to make major announcements that are not actually fully representative of the finding. A bit of embellishment if you will, not outright falsification but a stretching of the truth. Like trying to make the finding a positive for life.

It's why I treat this particular field with the most skepticism.

Maybe you should be a little harsher on the journalists who do the embellishing and "picking" of what is a major announcement -
and not the researchers...
FredJose
1 / 5 (5) May 02, 2017
Because the rise of oxygen in Earth's atmosphere corresponded with the appearance of life

A very ambiguous and misleading statement indeed.
Firstly there's the unspoken assumption that life arose from no-living materials all by itself with no intelligent input whatsoever and secondly it assumes that a rise of oxygen is necessarily beneficial to the formation of life. Oxygen will actually be a poison to any molecules still in the non-sciencical process of "forming" life.
Merrit
not rated yet May 02, 2017
Starshot is still impractical with modern technology. Even if the ship arrives and takes the picture there is no way for it to return the data with our current technology and the weight limitations imposed.

I am thinking we need to send larger spacecraft with a launch system either on the moon or in space from a Lagrange point. Something like a massive rail gun. With no atmosphere, they could be launched at the tremendous speeds required.

The biggest issue, however, is space dust. Any collision at that speed could be fatal to the spacecraft. Where are those deflector shields when you need them?
Whydening Gyre
5 / 5 (3) May 02, 2017
Because the rise of oxygen in Earth's atmosphere corresponded with the appearance of life

A very ambiguous and misleading statement indeed.

Well, let's take a look...
Firstly there's the unspoken assumption that life arose from no-living materials all by itself with no intelligent input whatsoever

Not UNspoken, at all... More proof FOR it, than against it...
and secondly it assumes that a rise of oxygen is necessarily beneficial to the formation of life.

Not assumed, proven (for carbon based life as we know it.). Notice how O reacts with a LOT of things to create a variety of oxides...
Oxygen will actually be a poison to any molecules still in the non-sciencical process of "forming" life.

Reference(s) for that bit of crap?

Hmmm...
A very ambiguous and misleading COMMENT, indeed...
TheGhostofOtto1923
5 / 5 (1) May 05, 2017
and secondly it assumes that a rise of oxygen is necessarily beneficial to the formation of life
"So how did Earth end up with an atmosphere made up of roughly 21 percent of the stuff? The answer is tiny organisms known as cyanobacteria, or blue-green algae. These microbes conduct photosynthesis: using sunshine, water and carbon dioxide to produce carbohydrates and, yes, oxygen."

IOW life made the atmospheric O2. You have back-asswards.
Reference(s) for that bit of crap?
"Free oxygen is toxic to obligate anaerobic organisms, and the rising concentrations may have destroyed most such organisms at the time. Cyanobacteria were therefore responsible for one of the most significant extinction events in Earth's history."

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.