New Scientist: Venus' Atmosphere Implies Life

WolfWithoutAClause writes "This New Scientist article says that the atmosphere of Venus has features that may only be explaineable by the existence of life in its upper atmosphere. In particular it has cartain chemicals which are extremely difficult to make inorganically. At the altitude where life is suspected the temperature is about 70C and about 1 atmosphere. There are gases there which are not naturally found together. The article suggests something is actively producing them, quite possibly, life."

Life?

[Anonymous Coward]

There are more than a few explanations for that, I hate New Scientist, they jump to conclusions too often in an effort to drum up interest in their articles.

Life in the Atmosphere of Venus

[herwin]

New Scientist is not a peer-reviewed journal and often publishes speculative articles. This report is interesting, but I'd like to see the scientific article. There are alternative explanations, I'm sure, and I'm interested in seeing whether they've been adequately ruled out. In any case, how would you test this theory?

Developing ideas

[DeadeyeFlint]

From the Article:

Meanwhile the Swedish Space Agency is looking for international partners to develop their idea for a mission to return a sample of the atmosphere from Venus around 2010.

So how'd you do it?

Re:I may not know too much, but..

[Interfacer]

the reason that we focus on mars is that at least on mars we could land a craft without it melting before it touches the ground.

the temperature on venus is several 100 degrees C, not to mention the storms that rage at speeds near the speed sound, and the fact that the atmosphere would probably corrode the helmet off an astronaut in 30 minutes.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:Cool.

[cyrek]

1. Isn't the adjective pertaining to Venus 'venereal'?

Yes, but to avoid the obvious innuendo people tend to derive an alternative based on 'Martian'. i.e. 'Venusian' or 'Venutian'.

But not 'Venison'.:)

2. If true, life must truly be ubiquitous. In the solar system alone, we've got Earth, Mars, Europa, Titan and now Venus. Of course, there's only evidence so far of life on one, but the very fact that scientists are even considering it is a testament to life's tenacity.

The evidence so far from those other places is purely hypothetical and circumstantial. But you're right - it is comforting to think that self-replicating patterns, structures and chemicals exist beyond our world. The big question is - Are those patterns found elsewhere complex enough to form sentient beings. Or am I being sentimental?

3. Can someone who knows more than I tell us all how easy it'd be for UV light to penetrate to the required depth? I wouldn't have thought it possible.

I seem to remember reading somewhere that it would be possible to see your surroundings if you were somehow able to survive a visit to Venus' surface - the light being a dark dull red glow. If ordinary light can get through then UV will definitely make it to the surface - On a cloudy day here on Earth, 80% of the UV radiation can make it through the clouds. People don't get suntans on those days simply because they spend more time indoors.

Re:Developing ideas

[david.given]

But the heat just gives us even more reasons to not (at least not as a first step) land first and try to launch back up. It's much easier to propel the canister(s) from a decent altitude than if you wait until you're in deep. Gravity, pressure and heat all combine to make it unnecessary difficult (and expensive, since all propellants and other resources has to be brought along for the ride) to do launches from the surface.

Damn straight. Venus has the same gravity as Earth, remember? Which means that getting stuff out of its gravity well is an incredible hassle. If you need an Ariane or a Proton to get an object off Earth, you're going to need another Ariane or Proton to get it off Venus again once you've landed it there. And the super-dense atmosphere is going to cause even more problems.

No, launching from Venus is a problem that can happily wait until nuclear rockets or antigravity are feasible.

Besides, if there is life on Venus, I'd much rather study it in situ than bring some back here. While it almost certainly wouldn't survive in an Earth environment, that 'almost' worries me a bit...

Re:Life in the Atmosphere of Venus

[Hittite Creosote]

The article should appear in an ESA special publication (ESA SP-518). If the author submits it, it might appear in the new peer-reviewed journal International Journal of Astrobiology [cambridge.org]

To test the theory, obviously you'd need a sample of the atmosphere. Although New Scientist mentions ESA's Venus Express mission, it doesn't say whether the mission would have the necessary equipment to check for life.

Re:Life?

[Anonymous Coward]

For a while I foolishly believed that the
New Scientist was a reputable magazine...
but my fiancee (who is a real scientist, does stuff with dna & microbes & proteins that I'll never understand - I'll stick to my C++ and my Java ;^)
eh..ah yes...she laughed. Long and loud.
She compared it to the "Womans Weekly of the science world" (i.e. trash)

Turns out that most scientists that read the New Scientist only read it for one reason: The job-advertisements in the back!

Re:Life on Earth

[EllisDees]

>it could be a native form (at 70C?? I doubt it)

Why? We have identified thermophiles that can survive in temperatures over 100C here on earth.