Home PEx Family and Society Realm of Thought

Sugar Found In Space: A Sign of Life?

Ghost RiderGhost Rider PEx Influencer ⭐⭐⭐
Sugar Found In Space: A Sign of Life?
Organic molecules found in gas swaddling a young star.

sugar-in-space-host-galaxy_58721_200x150.jpg
The simple sugar molecules were found in the Rho Ophiuchi star-forming region. Image courtesy WISE/Caltech/NASA

Ker Than

for National Geographic News

Published August 29, 2012

Astronomers have made a sweet discovery: simple sugar molecules floating in the gas around a star some 400 light-years away, suggesting the possibility of life on other planets.

The discovery doesn't prove that life has developed elsewhere in the universe—but it implies that there is no reason it could not. It shows that the carbon-rich molecules that are the building blocks of life can be present even before planets have begun forming.

Scientists use the term "sugar" to loosely refer to organic molecules known as carbohydrates, which are made up of carbon, hydrogen, and oxygen.

The molecules that the team detected in space are the simplest form of sugar, called glycoaldehyde, explained lead astronomer Jes Jørgensen of Denmark's Copenhagen University.

Glycoaldehyde can be found on Earth, usually in the form of an odorless white powder. While it isn't used to sweeten foods, it is important because scientists think it plays a key role in the chemical reaction that forms ribonucleic acid (RNA), a crucial biomolecule present in all living cells.

It's still unclear exactly how glycoaldehyde is produced in space, but observations suggest it forms on ice-covered dust grains in the dense, cold parts of interstellar molecular clouds, Jørgensen said.

Sugary Find a First in Space

This marks the first time sugar has been spotted so close to a sunlike star.

Previously, glycoaldehyde had been found in only two other places in space: near the center of the giant cloud of gas and dust at the heart of our own Milky Way galaxy, and in a massive star-forming region located 26,000 light-years from Earth.

"Both of these regions are much further away and were observed with much worse resolution, [so] it was not possible for the astronomers to pinpoint the location of the molecules," Jørgensen said.

The new discovery, which focused on the warm gas swaddling a young star called IRAS 16293-2422, was made using the Atacama Large Millimeter Array (ALMA), a large radio telescope located in Chile.

"These results are giving us and other astronomers ammunition," Jørgensen said, "to go out and look for other prebiotic, and possibly more complex, molecules in regions where stars and planets are forming."

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2012/08/120829-sugar-space-planets-science-life/
«13

Comments

  • IscharamoochieIscharamoochie PEx Veteran ⭐⭐
    must be a damn good telescope to be able to spot a sugar molecule lightyears away :D
  • Ghost RiderGhost Rider PEx Influencer ⭐⭐⭐
    Mooch, hindi actually yan first time, base sa article twice na before eto sila nakakita, medyo malabo nga lang daw ang anggulo, kasi mas malayo and worse resolution daw.

    Hintay tayo ng mga taga-INC dito, tutal hinahalo nila sa evolution ang origin of life, eto na ang hinihintay nila, hahaha...
  • IscharamoochieIscharamoochie PEx Veteran ⭐⭐
    aba oonga ano! uki payn sa olrayts kaching! :lol:
  • baka ang na-detect nila yun leftover namin noong nagpunta kami doon. Natapon saki yung starbucks coffee dala ko :D
  • Umiinom din ng kape ang mga alien ano.
  • Mooch, hindi actually yan first time, base sa article twice na before eto sila nakakita, medyo malabo nga lang daw ang anggulo, kasi mas malayo and worse resolution daw.

    Hintay tayo ng mga taga-INC dito, tutal hinahalo nila sa evolution ang origin of life, eto na ang hinihintay nila, hahaha...

    special mention ah bitter na bitter ang dating mo.

    Anong kinalaman ng sugar na molecule from outer space sa pagiging unggoy mo?
  • Ghost RiderGhost Rider PEx Influencer ⭐⭐⭐
    krams2 wrote: »
    special mention ah bitter na bitter ang dating mo.

    Anong kinalaman ng sugar na molecule from outer space sa pagiging unggoy mo?

    Tingnan mo, hinalo na naman ang evolution sa origin of life :lol:

    Seriously Krams, ano ang masasabi mo sa natuklasan ng mga scientists base sa article? We will also welcome ideas nila ETEs and angel para mas masaya :lol:

    Isa sa mga theories ng origin of life ang RNA World, so the article may support this theory, ano ang masasabi ng mga ministro ninyo about this?

    Kaya ko kayo na special mention kasi yung mga posts ninyo about evolution, nahahalo ang origin of life, well ganyan talaga kung hindi naiintindihan ng maigi :lol:
  • Tingnan mo, hinalo na naman ang evolution sa origin of life :lol:

    Seriously Krams, ano ang masasabi mo sa natuklasan ng mga scientists base sa article? We will also welcome ideas nila ETEs and angel para mas masaya :lol:

    Isa sa mga theories ng origin of life ang RNA World, so the article may support this theory, ano ang masasabi ng mga ministro ninyo about this?

    Kaya ko kayo na special mention kasi yung mga posts ninyo about evolution, nahahalo ang origin of life, well ganyan talaga kung hindi naiintindihan ng maigi :lol:

    Walang kinalaman sa pagtuturo ng salita ng Diyos ang natuklasan nila daw diumano na nakuha nila ang sugar molecule sa outerspace.

    Ang evolution eh diba origin of species . So sa pinakaunang organism eh ganun din ang kahahantungan kung paano nagkaroon ng buhay came from the bigbang etc hanggang sa naging tao ang unggoy in short dun din ang bagsak sa aking pagkakaintindi.

    theories pa lang naman pala eh baka sa paglipas ng panahon ikakapit din nila yan sa darwins evolution lol.
  • Ghost RiderGhost Rider PEx Influencer ⭐⭐⭐
    Origin of life is not synonymous to origin of species, magkaiba ang dalawang yan.

    Kasi kayo short-cut, pinaghalo ninyo, from non-living things (dust), nagkaroon ng complex living species (human, to be exact Homo sapien sapiens agad)

    Hindi ba pwedeng single-celled organism muna bago multi-cellular? hahaha...

    So pinasisinungalingan din ninyo ang cell theory tama ba? Hindi rin kayo naniniwala dito?

    The Cell Theory states:
    1. All living organisms are composed of cells. They may be unicellular or multicellular.
    2. The cell is the basic unit of life.
    3. Cells arise from pre-existing cells.

    The modern version of the Cell Theory includes the ideas that:
    1. Energy flow occurs within cells.
    2. Heredity information (DNA) is passed on from cell to cell.
    3. All cells have the same basic chemical composition.

    All living things are composed of cells, including us, cells arise from pre-existing cells, so saan papasok dyan na ang tao nagmula sa alikabok? May living cells ba ang dust? (oo nga pala naniniwala kayong pareho ang DNA at dust :lol:)
  • Ghost RiderGhost Rider PEx Influencer ⭐⭐⭐
    Parang kasi ang idea ninyo ng human origin ay same sa powerpuff girls: Sugar and spice and everything nice, hehehe...

    Pero balik tayo, may nasususlat ba sa Biblia base sa inyong interpretation about sa sugar molecules sa space na pwedeng pagsimulan ng buhay?
  • krams2 wrote: »
    Walang kinalaman sa pagtuturo ng salita ng Diyos ang natuklasan nila daw diumano na nakuha nila ang sugar molecule sa outerspace.

    Ang evolution eh diba origin of species . So sa pinakaunang organism eh ganun din ang kahahantungan kung paano nagkaroon ng buhay came from the bigbang etc hanggang sa naging tao ang unggoy in short dun din ang bagsak sa aking pagkakaintindi.

    theories pa lang naman pala eh baka sa paglipas ng panahon ikakapit din nila yan sa darwins evolution lol.

    HAHAHAHA. Albularyo ba science teacher niyo?

    Abiogenesis ang nagtatackle ng origin of life. Evolution naman ang origin of species.

    Talon ka nga galing sa tuktok ng simbahan niyo, tutal theory lang din naman ang nageexplain sa gravity.
  • Origin of life is not synonymous to origin of species, magkaiba ang dalawang yan.

    Kasi kayo short-cut, pinaghalo ninyo, from non-living things (dust), nagkaroon ng complex living species (human, to be exact Homo sapien sapiens agad)

    Hindi ba pwedeng single-celled organism muna bago multi-cellular? hahaha...

    So pinasisinungalingan din ninyo ang cell theory tama ba? Hindi rin kayo naniniwala dito?

    The Cell Theory states:
    1. All living organisms are composed of cells. They may be unicellular or multicellular.
    2. The cell is the basic unit of life.
    3. Cells arise from pre-existing cells.

    The modern version of the Cell Theory includes the ideas that:
    1. Energy flow occurs within cells.
    2. Heredity information (DNA) is passed on from cell to cell.
    3. All cells have the same basic chemical composition.

    All living things are composed of cells, including us, cells arise from pre-existing cells, so saan papasok dyan na ang tao nagmula sa alikabok? May living cells ba ang dust? (oo nga pala naniniwala kayong pareho ang DNA at dust :lol:)

    eh gawa lahat ng Diyos eh di sa kaniya lahat nagsimula.

    So saan lahat galing ang species from????
  • Ghost RiderGhost Rider PEx Influencer ⭐⭐⭐
    krams2 wrote: »
    eh gawa lahat ng Diyos eh di sa kaniya lahat nagsimula.

    So saan lahat galing ang species from????

    Point taken, ok lahat ngawa ng Diyos pero ano yung claim ninyo na hindi nag-evolve ang tao at nagmula instantly from dust?

    Abiogenesis mixed with evolution?
  • wimpy_kid wrote: »
    HAHAHAHA. Albularyo ba science teacher niyo?

    Abiogenesis ang nagtatackle ng origin of life. Evolution naman ang origin of species.

    Talon ka nga galing sa tuktok ng simbahan niyo, tutal theory lang din naman ang nageexplain sa gravity.


    may mga scientific truths that was written before science came into picture

    "He stretches out the north over EMPTY SPACE. He hangs the earth on NOTHING." (Job 26:7, NKJV throughout unless noted).

    masyadong matalas ang pakikipagtalakayan mo wimp lols.
    bagay sayo matalas na reply nyahahaha.
  • Point taken, ok lahat ngawa ng Diyos pero ano yung claim ninyo na hindi nag-evolve ang tao at nagmula instantly from dust?

    Abiogenesis mixed with evolution?

    hindi kami naniniwala na galing kami sa ancestors na unggoy kailangan ko bang ulit ulitin ito?

    saan lahat galing ang species ng hayop?
  • krams2 wrote: »
    may mga scientific truths that was written before science came into picture

    "He stretches out the north over EMPTY SPACE. He hangs the earth on NOTHING." (Job 26:7, NKJV throughout unless noted).

    masyadong matalas ang pakikipagtalakayan mo wimp lols.
    bagay sayo matalas na reply nyahahaha.

    And bats are birds. Chambahan. Oo bagay sakin matalas na usapan. Too bad mapurol kayo. :)) peace.
  • wimpy_kid wrote: »
    And bats are birds. Chambahan. Oo bagay sakin matalas na usapan. Too bad mapurol kayo. :)) peace.

    hindi mo ba ginoogle yang topic na yan? madali lang mag google nasagot na yan dun about sa bats and birds na ginagamit niyo nyahaha.

    Huwag ka masyadong mahangin baka liparin ka nyahaha.
  • Ghost RiderGhost Rider PEx Influencer ⭐⭐⭐
    krams2 wrote: »
    hindi kami naniniwala na galing kami sa ancestors na unggoy kailangan ko bang ulit ulitin ito?

    saan lahat galing ang species ng hayop?

    "hindi kami nanggaling sa ancestors ng unggoy"
    "saan galing ang species ng hayop"
    Pero naniniwala kayo sa evolution, sa hayop lamang.

    Therefore, hindi kayo naniniwala na isang uri ng hayop ang tao? :lol:
    Pero naniniwala kayo sa genetics and I assume sa cell theory na hindi mo sinasagot mga tanong ko?

    Fact, all lifeforms evolved from one single cell, no multicellular species where human species is associated evolved from dust or any non-living things. (read cell theory)

    Read this:

    All Species Evolved From Single Cell, Study Finds
    Creationism called "absolutely horrible hypothesis"—statistically speaking.


    Ker Than
    for National Geographic News
    Updated May 14, 2010 (first posted May 13, 2010)

    All life on Earth evolved from a single-celled organism that lived roughly 3.5 billion years ago, a new study seems to confirm.

    The study supports the widely held "universal common ancestor" theory first proposed by Charles Darwin more than 150 years ago.


    Using computer models and statistical methods, biochemist Douglas Theobald calculated the odds that all species from the three main groups, or "domains," of life evolved from a common ancestor—versus, say, descending from several different life-forms or arising in their present form, Adam and Eve style.

    The domains are bacteria, bacteria-like microbes called Archaea, and eukaryotes, the group that includes plants and other multicellular species, such as humans.

    The "best competing multiple ancestry hypothesis" has one species giving rise to bacteria and one giving rise to Archaea and eukaryotes, said Theobald, a biochemist at Brandeis University in Waltham, Massachusetts.

    But, based on the new analysis, the odds of that are "just astronomically enormous," he said. "The number's so big, it's kind of silly to say it"—1 in 10 to the 2,680th power, or 1 followed by 2,680 zeros.

    heobald also tested the creationist idea that humans arose in their current form and have no evolutionary ancestors.

    The statistical analysis showed that the independent origin of humans is "an absolutely horrible hypothesis," Theobald said, adding that the probability that humans were created separately from everything else is 1 in 10 to the 6,000th power.


    (As of publication time, requests for interviews with several creationist scientists had been either declined or unanswered.)

    Full article here:

    Nag-eeror kapag nilalagay ko ang link, anyway sa NatGeo ang source niyan, google na lang ninyo ang article title, lalabas agad yan
  • "hindi kami nanggaling sa ancestors ng unggoy"
    "saan galing ang species ng hayop"
    Pero naniniwala kayo sa evolution, sa hayop lamang.

    Therefore, hindi kayo naniniwala na isang uri ng hayop ang tao? :lol:
    Pero naniniwala kayo sa genetics and I assume sa cell theory na hindi mo sinasagot mga tanong ko?

    Fact, all lifeforms evolved from one single cell, no multicellular species where human species is associated evolved from dust or any non-living things. (read cell theory)

    Read this:

    All Species Evolved From Single Cell, Study Finds
    Creationism called "absolutely horrible hypothesis"—statistically speaking.


    Ker Than
    for National Geographic News
    Updated May 14, 2010 (first posted May 13, 2010)

    All life on Earth evolved from a single-celled organism that lived roughly 3.5 billion years ago, a new study seems to confirm.

    The study supports the widely held "universal common ancestor" theory first proposed by Charles Darwin more than 150 years ago.


    Using computer models and statistical methods, biochemist Douglas Theobald calculated the odds that all species from the three main groups, or "domains," of life evolved from a common ancestor—versus, say, descending from several different life-forms or arising in their present form, Adam and Eve style.

    The domains are bacteria, bacteria-like microbes called Archaea, and eukaryotes, the group that includes plants and other multicellular species, such as humans.

    The "best competing multiple ancestry hypothesis" has one species giving rise to bacteria and one giving rise to Archaea and eukaryotes, said Theobald, a biochemist at Brandeis University in Waltham, Massachusetts.

    But, based on the new analysis, the odds of that are "just astronomically enormous," he said. "The number's so big, it's kind of silly to say it"—1 in 10 to the 2,680th power, or 1 followed by 2,680 zeros.

    heobald also tested the creationist idea that humans arose in their current form and have no evolutionary ancestors.

    The statistical analysis showed that the independent origin of humans is "an absolutely horrible hypothesis," Theobald said, adding that the probability that humans were created separately from everything else is 1 in 10 to the 6,000th power.


    (As of publication time, requests for interviews with several creationist scientists had been either declined or unanswered.)

    Full article here:

    Nag-eeror kapag nilalagay ko ang link, anyway sa NatGeo ang source niyan, google na lang ninyo ang article title, lalabas agad yan

    hindi naman kasi lahat about science eh against sa paniniwalang may Diyos. Kaya nga gumawa ng sariling version ang catholic ng theistic evolution nila about sa unggoy na naging tao.

    Eh ikaw nga lapse catholic eh. Kaso tapagtanggol ng lahing unggoy.

    Hindi talaga kami naniniwala na Hayop kami pero minsan nagaasal hayop ang iba kaya siguro napagkamalang may lahi ng hayop lol.
  • Ghost RiderGhost Rider PEx Influencer ⭐⭐⭐
    So ayan for the record, hindi kayo naniniwala na hayop kayo, hahaha...

    So debunk now the Cell theory, umpisahan mo na, dahil hindi ganyan ang pananaw at sinasabi ng biological theories and sciences.

    Popcorn please...
Sign In or Register to comment.