Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Space Sugar Discovered In Binary System Star

timothy posted about 2 years ago | from the sweetness-and-light dept.

Space 94

SchrodingerZ writes "Sweet tooths rejoice! 400 light years from Earth in the constellation Ophiuchus, sugar molecules have been confirmed in a gas cloud surrounding a young star. The star, IRAS 16293-2422, though early in its life is relativity close to the size of our Sun. It is part of a Binary star system. '"In the disk of gas and dust surrounding this newly formed star, we found glycolaldehyde, which is a simple form of sugar, not much different to the sugar we put in coffee," study lead author Jes Jorgensen, of the Niels Bohr Institute in Denmark, said in a statement.' Glycolaldehyde has been found before in space, but never this close to a Sun-like planet. In fact 'the molecules are about the same distance away from the star as the planet Uranus is from our sun.' This discovery proves that the building blocks of life could have possibly existed in the earlier parts of our own solar system. This particular sugar reacts with propenal to form ribose, which is a major component for organic life on Earth."

cancel ×

94 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Sweet! (2, Funny)

K. S. Kyosuke (729550) | about 2 years ago | (#41204765)

The creationists will need something to sugar the pill.

Re:Sweet! (4, Funny)

MysteriousPreacher (702266) | about 2 years ago | (#41204839)

God spilt the sugar when he was making tea in Russell's Teapot.

Re:Sweet! (0)

snakeplissken (559127) | about 2 years ago | (#41205587)

made a bum moderation, posting to undo

snake

Re:Sweet! (1)

MysteriousPreacher (702266) | about 2 years ago | (#41206123)

Cheers. Nice username.

Re:Sweet! (1)

AmonTheMetalhead (1277044) | about 2 years ago | (#41208981)

I thought you were dead

Sweeet! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41204769)

hohum... :)

Why? (0, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41204781)

Why did you even post this?

"hohum... :)"?

You didn't get first post, and your post is worthless to boot.

Please kill yourself at the earliest possible opportunity.

I have a proposal! (1)

For a Free Internet (1594621) | about 2 years ago | (#41204773)

Since there can be life in outer space, and since the capitalist owners of all the means of production can't seem to make a living employing us workers any more except by impoverishing us and stealing the last crust of bread from our mouths, we should send all the capitalists on a big rocket to their new home over there on that star, away from all us pesky workers and our goddamn unions, and we will abolish private property and inaugurate the dawn of the communist future! Any takers?

Re:I have a proposal! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41204843)

Since there can be life in outer space, and since the capitalist owners of all the means of production can't seem to make a living employing us workers any more except by impoverishing us and stealing the last crust of bread from our mouths, we should send all the capitalists on a big rocket to their new home over there on that star, away from all us pesky workers and our goddamn unions, and we will abolish private property and inaugurate the dawn of the communist future! Any takers?

I agree with this.

Also: not a sockpuppet. Not at all, I am not, I repeat NOT a sock puppet of For a Free Internet nor in any way associated with same.

buttgoat. goatbutt. cia sells drugs.

Re:I have a proposal! (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41204875)

I'm not a sock puppet either, but we really should send the Italians off on that rocket as well.

Say hi to Laura

Re:I have a proposal! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41204877)

Since there can be life in outer space, and since the capitalist owners of all the means of production can't seem to make a living employing us workers any more except by impoverishing us and stealing the last crust of bread from our mouths, we should send all the capitalists on a big rocket to their new home over there on that star, away from all us pesky workers and our goddamn unions, and we will abolish private property and inaugurate the dawn of the communist future! Any takers?

I agree with this.

Also: not a sockpuppet. Not at all, I am not, I repeat NOT a sock puppet of For a Free Internet nor in any way associated with same.

buttgoat. goatbutt. cia sells drugs.

I also agree with this. I am not a sockpuppet and I am not creating false interest.

no sir-ee.

Re:I have a proposal! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41206025)

Since there can be life in outer space, and since the capitalist owners of all the means of production can't seem to make a living employing us workers any more except by impoverishing us and stealing the last crust of bread from our mouths, we should send all the capitalists on a big rocket to their new home over there on that star, away from all us pesky workers and our goddamn unions, and we will abolish private property and inaugurate the dawn of the communist future! Any takers?

Everything said here is correct.

Not actually sweet (5, Informative)

kraln (1477093) | about 2 years ago | (#41204779)

If the submitter had actually read the article, he'd know that while the molecules in question *are* sugar, they *are not* sweet and in fact are arguably not even saccharides.

Re:Not actually sweet (3, Funny)

Gryle (933382) | about 2 years ago | (#41205045)

Damn, and I was looking forward to the first interstellar Moon Pies, Star Crunches, and Cosmic Brownies!

Re:Not actually sweet (1)

jamstar7 (694492) | about 2 years ago | (#41205655)

Naw. We just gotta find us some space yeast and let the Universe make us space beer!!!

Re:Not actually sweet (1)

MysteriousPreacher (702266) | about 2 years ago | (#41205229)

His mention of "sweet tooths" jumping for joy is probably a joke. The trek to the fridge to fetch another tub of Chunky Munky seems nothing compared to a trip of several hundred light years.

See this article for additional guidance.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humor [wikipedia.org]

Re:Not actually sweet (1)

Kittenman (971447) | about 2 years ago | (#41209805)

His mention of "sweet tooths" jumping for joy is probably a joke. The trek to the fridge to fetch another tub of Chunky Munky seems nothing compared to a trip of several hundred light years.

See this article for additional guidance.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humor [wikipedia.org]

Trek... space ... I see what you did there...

Re:Not actually sweet (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41205905)

Way to sour an otherwise good story!

Re:Not actually sweet (2)

Samantha Wright (1324923) | about 2 years ago | (#41206227)

Personally, I'm still hung up on what a "sun-like planet" is. Sounds kinda... balmy.

Re:Not actually sweet (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41209365)

Listen, we need to make this story relatable to people, so the line "this is the same stuff you put on your coffee, we're just normal guys like you who happen to look through a telescope for aliving" plays great. Shut up.

that sugar is from (2)

kiep (1821612) | about 2 years ago | (#41204783)

destroyed sugar transport

Re:that sugar is from (2)

Dunbal (464142) | about 2 years ago | (#41204799)

I love hauler spawns.

Re:that sugar is from (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41206499)

You'd better not do that in high-sec space.

Re:that sugar is from (1)

Dunbal (464142) | about 2 years ago | (#41215521)

High sec is a filthy disgusting place, full of neutrals.

Re:that sugar is from (1)

slick7 (1703596) | about 2 years ago | (#41205567)

destroyed sugar transport

Was it arriving or departing Earth? Damn space pirates!

yawn (-1, Flamebait)

Hazel Bergeron (2015538) | about 2 years ago | (#41204787)

The great thing about all these discoveries so far far away is that they're really hard to confirm/falsify.

Oh, the building blocks of life - how exciting! This could mean.. uh... that we need more grant money, please! Work harder, proles!

Re:yawn (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41204791)

The great thing about all these discoveries so far far away is that they're really hard to confirm/falsify.

Oh, the building blocks of life - how exciting! This could mean.. uh... that we need more grant money, please! Work harder, proles!

Yes, we should only work on the things which are really easy, because nobody has done those before, and because the things which are currently really hard will become really easy if we just leave them alone for a while.

Re:yawn (2)

khallow (566160) | about 2 years ago | (#41204845)

It is worth noting that this effect does actually happen to some degree. For example, the radio telescope array [wikipedia.org] that they use, includes a great deal of computing power for controlling the system and signal and image processing. That technology didn't need to be independently developed from scratch.

As to cost, that system apparently costs more than a billion dollars. But I doubt that the system would have been the same order of magnitude, should one have developed it in 1970 (with the same capabilities as the current one) instead of now. Similarly, I imagine we'll find that computing technology and manufacture/construction would have advanced in the next twenty years to make the project somewhat easier and cheaper to do twenty years from now.

The real issue to such things is that there is a time value to research and development. Doing and learning things now does have greater value than doing those things twenty years from now.

Re:yawn (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41204861)

It is worth noting that this effect does actually happen to some degree. For example, the radio telescope array [wikipedia.org] that they use, includes a great deal of computing power for controlling the system and signal and image processing. That technology didn't need to be independently developed from scratch.

Right, but developing that computing power probably wasn't a stroll in the park either. I get your point: that if you don't tackle Problem A, then developments from the solution from Problem B can make solving Problem A easier later on. Thing is though, you've still got to solve Problem B to do that, which equally probably wasn't trivial.

You've got to start tackling the hard problems sooner or later if you want to make decent progess.

Re:yawn (1)

khallow (566160) | about 2 years ago | (#41204975)

Thing is though, you've still got to solve Problem B to do that, which equally probably wasn't trivial.

The point is that you were going to solve Problem B anyway. For example, I think we'll see a decline in the cost of space-based science missions just due to manufacture improvements on Earth (and eventually the entry of private charity into that endeavor).

Re:yawn (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41204835)

You're an ignorant moron.

These findings are usually independently confirmed/refuted by peers. It's the scientific method which separates morons like you from intelligent life.

Now, go back to sucking the comforting cock of your pastor while your swamp daddy pushes your putty from behind.

Re:yawn (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41204895)

You're an ignorant moron.

ignorant - Lacking knowledge, information, or awareness about something in particular: "ignorant of astronomy".

moron - Psychology . (no longer in technical use; considered offensive) a person of borderline intelligence in a former and discarded classification of mental retardation, having an intelligence quotient of 50 to 69.

Therefore, if one is a moron, then it is presumed that they'd be ignorant also.

You sir, are redundant.

redundant - characterized by verbosity or unnecessary repetition in expressing ideas

Re:yawn (1)

hazah (807503) | about 2 years ago | (#41206085)

And you're not?

Re:yawn (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41211471)

As you have just clearly demonstrated with your moronic post, the two are not mutually exclusive.

Re:yawn (0)

Hazel Bergeron (2015538) | about 2 years ago | (#41205011)

Unfortunately, these sorts of results are not usually confirmed independently, you dalliant goatherder.

Re:yawn (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41205277)

Confirmed with a different telescope? Do you suspect it's often a case of measurement error?

Re:yawn (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41205369)

...you dalliant goatherder.

... dalliant goatherder? Negative nerd points for a missing "scruffy looking nerfherder"

Re:yawn (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41207519)

You mean like when other researchers look at the same system now that they know there are organics there, and hope to find more complex ones? That happens all the time, but typically only makes the news when they find a new compound there that wasn't seen before.

Reacts with propenal (1)

Dunbal (464142) | about 2 years ago | (#41204789)

To form ribose, which is necessary for life?

Yeah, but the propenal reaction is not exactly how "life" does [wikipedia.org] it.

Re:Reacts with propenal (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41204811)

I feed my bacteria in the lab plenty of artificially synthesised compounds and they don't give a damn. Based on life as we know it, if it's availabe and it can use it then life will usually find some way of taking it up regardless of source.

The better question is do the chemicals react to form ribose under the conditions in space, or can they survive the transfer to somewhere they will react?

Re:Reacts with propenal (1)

RockDoctor (15477) | about 2 years ago | (#41217515)

I'm trying to remember the references for the nylon-precursor - eating bacterium. If you'd not posted AC, I'd consider looking harder. It exists ; find it.

Re:Reacts with propenal (2)

Forty Two Tenfold (1134125) | about 2 years ago | (#41204917)

Yeah, but the propenal reaction is not exactly how "life" does it.

Especially when it's not "life" yet. Got it?

Dang it! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41204793)

Is there nowhere in the universe where it's safe for me to diet???

NOW ALL WE NEED IS SOME SPACE TEA !! (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41204823)

with space ice, some space air (20% should do) and sure, why not, a few space girls, and we can have a space party like it's space 1999 !!

I would never socialize with a Slashdot user! (1)

alfs boner (963844) | about 2 years ago | (#41204849)

The title says it all: I would never willingly associate myself with the socially-retarded "aspies," or the forever-alone 40-year-old virgins that hang out here. Sorry guys, there's a reason nobody likes you :/

Imagine this... (2)

MindPrison (864299) | about 2 years ago | (#41204857)

...your average Brit, sitting there sipping his coffee or tea, listening to BBC morning news...

"And we interrupt this program to bring you the following news: A huge lump of sugar is headed towards planet earth, yes...that is where you and I live".

The unassuming average Brit, just sitting there, sipping on his morning coffee when he yet again is interrupted by a voice saying: "More sugar dear?" ...you all know where I am going with this.

Re:Imagine this... (0)

Teun (17872) | about 2 years ago | (#41205083)

Yep I see, them aliens have rotten teeth too.

Re:Imagine this... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41206527)

This summer... only one brit stands between us and the end of the world. Can he and his cup of tea survive?

Re:Imagine this... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41208413)

I'm sorry. Coffee or tea? Coffee?. Damn colonials.

Oh great! (1)

MindPrison (864299) | about 2 years ago | (#41204873)

As if we didn't have enough golf-club-gold-member yacht owning dentists in this world.

Imagine vampires turning people into more vampires, now...dentists will give birth to even more dentists...

Space pirates rejoice! (2)

Kazymyr (190114) | about 2 years ago | (#41204881)

If there's sugar, someone will surely make rum out of it. We'll have plenty of space grog. Arrr!

Caramel! (1)

linatux (63153) | about 2 years ago | (#41209007)

Sugar that close to a sun must be caramelised - mmmmmm

spice mines of kessel (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41204901)

guess han solo didnt make his last run.....

Bah. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41204907)

A sugar molecule is as far from an amoeba as a piece of quartz frim a supercomputer. Insisting that living things came from nonliving matter by random processes is absurd. Anyone who thinks that is being far more dogmatic than the creationists they stubbornly ridicule.

Re:Bah. (4, Interesting)

Black Parrot (19622) | about 2 years ago | (#41205205)

A sugar molecule is as far from an amoeba as a piece of quartz frim a supercomputer. Insisting that living things came from nonliving matter by random processes is absurd. Anyone who thinks that is being far more dogmatic than the creationists they stubbornly ridicule.

Where to start...

Amino acids are found in deep space, not exactly a prime spot for the development of life.

We know that living things came from nonliving matter (and energy), because the universe was once in a state where living matter could not exist, yet now living matter is rife in at least one place.

The universe and its processes are not entirely random. If they were, this sugar would not exist either.

It's the very opposite of "dogmatic" to base your views on evidence.

Yours might have been an OK troll the first day the internet existed, but now it's as far from "nice troll" as a sugar molecule is from an amoeba.

Re:Bah. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41210745)

Where to start...

Probably best to not.

Re:Bah. (1)

ChetOS.net (936869) | about 2 years ago | (#41224323)

We know life comes from non-life becase we are here. Yea for scientific method!

Re:Bah. (1)

hazah (807503) | about 2 years ago | (#41206101)

You're not even a new kind of stupid.

Ur-Quan threat detected (0, Offtopic)

Pav (4298) | about 2 years ago | (#41204935)

Aren't the Ur-Quan [sourceforge.net] meant to come from that part of space? We are so screwed. ;)

BTW, Star Control II (or the open source Ur-Quan Masters) is a great game and is part of many Linux repos, and also has Win32 binaries. Download it plus a cheat map (it's too hard otherwise) and lose a weekend... it's a great game, universe and story, and it has a quirky sense of humour. Make sure you download the full music and speech, and persist through the early game - it's a little slow.

Yay! (3, Funny)

greyblack (1148533) | about 2 years ago | (#41205141)

Just need some yeast and we'll have one hell of a party star!

The Meaning Of Life (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41205351)

I always knew the meaning of life was sweet and tasty.

Binary star? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41205497)

Binary Solo!
0000001 00000011 000000111 0000001111

"...never this close to a Sun like planet..." (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41205539)

"Glycolaldehyde has been found before in space, but never this close to a Sun-like planet."

Gentlemen. We have found the planet of heaven.

Re:"...never this close to a Sun like planet..." (1)

Kahlandad (1999936) | about 2 years ago | (#41211485)

Gentlemen, we have found the post of stupid.

"Space Sugar" (0)

Impy the Impiuos Imp (442658) | about 2 years ago | (#41205931)

"Space Sugar" would make a great name for a healer Jedi chick on Star Wars: The Old Republic MMO.

"Pour a little sugar on me honey!
Pour a little sugar on me baby!"

Oh, wait. I haven't played that game in 3 months. n/m

Ribose as a major component for organic life? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41205963)

Since when is ribose "a major component for organic life on Earth"? Central—yes; but major? That would be Glucose, I think ...

Re:Ribose as a major component for organic life? (3, Insightful)

drooling-dog (189103) | about 2 years ago | (#41206223)

Ribose is an important component of RNA (and deoxy-ribose of DNA), so yeah, I'd say it's pretty central to life.

Re:Ribose as a major component for organic life? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41206277)

RNA World [rockefeller.edu]

Mayhaps more important than you think.

Re:Ribose as a major component for organic life? (1)

Electricity Likes Me (1098643) | about 2 years ago | (#41206325)

And notably, you can make enzymes from RNA as well - which is one of the hypothesized ways that life might've bootstrapped itself from the primordial ooze in the first place. There are a lot of RNAzymes floating around in your cellular nuclei right now.

Re:Ribose as a major component for organic life? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41208057)

I'd say it's pretty central to life

That's what I said (I'm the AC from above). The article said it was only "major".

Re:Ribose as a major component for organic life? (1)

drooling-dog (189103) | about 2 years ago | (#41210093)

Why yes, I now see that you did. You are hereby vindicated!

Re:Ribose as a major component for organic life? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41214913)

This day be praised! This is the day of vindication of our submissive Anonymous Cowardshipness!

Devotedly,
AC

--
That's one small step for deoxyribose, a giant leap for Anonymous Cowards.

Sugar in space? Oh no! (1)

excelsior_gr (969383) | about 2 years ago | (#41205983)

Quick! Somebody clean this mess up before space-flies gather on top of it.

Re:Sugar in space? Oh no! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41206403)

There's also a planet filled with turkey stuffing.

Re:Sugar in space? Oh no! (1)

Sulphur (1548251) | about 2 years ago | (#41209001)

Quick! Somebody clean this mess up before space-flies gather on top of it.

It may indicate Space Diabetes.

It's a clue... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41205999)

That's where all the Maple Syrup went!!

Coffee is not meant to be sweet (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41207367)

Sugar? In coffee?
What the hell is wrong with these people?

Re:Coffee is not meant to be sweet (1)

VortexCortex (1117377) | about 2 years ago | (#41209021)

Sugar? In coffee? What the hell is wrong with these people?

Life is not meant to exist. Fuck 'em if they can't take a joke, I say.

old news! (2)

Tastecicles (1153671) | about 2 years ago | (#41209761)

This is a rehash of a paper published in November 2008 (Beltran, et. al.). By the way, glucolaldehyde is NOT a sugar, it is a diose. Well, the only diose.

Re:old news! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41216153)

It's not old news. This molecule hasn't been observed in this object before (so it's new) and they've also managed to pin down the location much better (Beltran et al., 2009 found an upper limit to the distance from the massive stellar core of 10^4 AU). This is definitely very different because it's 25 AU away from a Sun-like star. Being closer to the star means warmer temperatures which could mean different formation processes are involved and since this is 25 AU away and falling in toward the stars, it could plausibly play a role in the development of life in this system. Plus it's a Sun-like star which is generally more interesting when it comes to life because lower mass stars live longer.

Oh, and by the way, Beltran et al. (2009) wasn't the first detection of this molecule in space either, it was first found by Hollis et al. toward source SgrB2(N) in 2000.

So that's where (1)

TuxWithoutPants (2719479) | about 2 years ago | (#41209907)

Willy Wonka went after he retired.

You would not want to swallow this stuff (2)

L. J. Beauregard (111334) | about 2 years ago | (#41210079)

Glycolaldehyde is the first step in the metabolism of ethylene glycol, and likewise will be metabolized to oxalic acid, which is the poison in rhubarb.

Surprised this hasn't been said yet (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41210549)

. . . so I'll have to do it:

I, for one, welcome our new monosaccharide overlords!

Re:Surprised this hasn't been said yet (1)

Tastecicles (1153671) | about 2 years ago | (#41210907)

there's a reason.

quick question (1)

slashmydots (2189826) | about 2 years ago | (#41210735)

I keep seeing articles like this on slashdot but this one takes the cake, pun semi-intended. I have a question

In the disk of gas and dust surrounding this newly formed star, we found glycolaldehyde.

How? Does it reflect some rare particular frequency of light? Oh wait, Doppler wavelength dilation. Did they travel out there and scoop some up to sample it? I don't get it! Why do they never mention how they determined what molecule is off on some distant solar system?! Good thing some intelligent slashdotter is about to reply and explain it to all of us 10x simpler and faster than any article anywhere ever :-D

Re:quick question (1)

Tastecicles (1153671) | about 2 years ago | (#41210955)

if I must.

The primary method of determining what's out there is infrared spectroscopy. Each and every element and compound has its own infrared signature; regardless of temperature, luminosity, or the conditions of the surrounding space, the signature of a given compound/element is the same, therefore where you see a given signature you can be pretty certain that the compound to which it refers is present. What makes the science even more fun is that you can determine the signature of each molecule using samples on Earth. If you see the same signature through the telescope, as it were, you'd be looking at a significant mass of that molecule.

Here [nasa.gov] is a list of molecules found on a regular basis in interstellar clouds.

Re:quick question (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41216331)

In this case, they used spectroscopy, but it's radio, not infrared (they used the Atacama Large Milimetre Array or ALMA for short).

The simplest kind of spectroscopy would be atomic spectroscopy, which basically just works because electrons can only exist in certain atomic orbits. So atoms can only absorb light of certain energies (or wavelengths or frequencies, you can convert between them if you must), which excites their electrons and make these electrons jump to higher levels. Once these electrons are excited, they can spontaneously jump back down to lower levels and emit a photon (removing energy from the system). Each atom will emit and absorb photons of different energies, so if we look at a spectrum, we can tell which atoms are there. If you want to develop a better understanding, I suggest looking up the hydrogen spectrum (and if you want to get into some basic quantum mechanics, you can solve the energy levels).

Molecules can undergo electronic transitions like atoms, but they can also vibrate and rotate. The vibrational and rotational energies of molecules are also quantized so molecules will only absorb and emit photons of particular energies as well, but they do it in more ways and can do it at different energy levels. Generally it takes a lot of energy to excite a molecule's electrons, so you see these in the visible or ultraviolet spectrum. Vibrational transitions are usually seen in the infrared and pure rotational transitions are usually seen in the far infrared to radio wavelengths. In this case, since we're looking at a molecule at radio wavelengths (thus low-energy photons), they're going to be observing rotational transitions of the molecule.

For all them creationists out there ... (1)

freaker_TuC (7632) | about 2 years ago | (#41211603)

Sweet justice ! ...

... The truth is as sweet as sugar !

Spaaace Sugaaaah! (1)

arisvega (1414195) | about 2 years ago | (#41211615)

.. 't makm' e feeeeel so gooooood!

WhuuaaAAAAuuu!

It's pollution from Earth (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41214055)

It's pollution from Earth. not only are we ruining our home, we are spreading our trash universally.

Questionable (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41214699)

I respect all that science has given me and have excepted it's truths as my own personal savior. But every time I read about a discovery like this, I can't help but feel like somebody really wanted to justify the grant money they were given. At 400 million light years distance the milimeter/submilimeter apparatus used to make this "discovery" seems a bit ludicrous. I'm not an astrophysicist but I'm pretty sure that the potential for random anomalies to contaminate the observations made over such great distances would give one pause. And I just can't believe that finding the same results over and over for a relatively limited time period makes up for the shortcomings of our technology.

Uninsightful (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#41219171)

"... proves that the building blocks of life could have possibly existed ..."

Is it just me or is this an extremely vague and uninsightful statement? In a way, it reminds me of this xkcd [xkcd.com] .

"proves that ... could have possibly" --- "up to 15% or more"

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>