Share
Aliens, quantum mechanics, and airplane physics!
 ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌ ‌

view on the web

Watch This Spacetime: The Newsletter of Katie Mack, Astrophysicist

Hi friend,

Welcome to the September edition of Watch This Spacetime

In this issue:

  • My musings on alien talk

  • Quantum superposition of physics and instrument flying

  • The full Quantum 101 video series

  • Space is big. Really big. How big?

  • Upcoming event in Dallas (Oct 5)

  • How particle colliders study invisible particles

  • Women in Science forum video

  • How physics makes old airplanes harder to fly

As always, feel free to reply with your thoughts about any of the content, or to let me know if you'd like to be removed from the list. In the meantime, I'm glad you're here!

- Katie

Artist's impression of an exoplanet (via NASA)

There's been a LOT of talk about aliens lately.


For the most part, I try not to comment on news stories about UFOs or, as they're more often called these days, "unidentified aerial phenomena" (UAPs) . In fact, I've written about why if you have questions about UAPs, I'm definitely not the one to ask. The short version is that UAPs are aerial phenomena -- things that are seen inside the Earth's atmosphere, usually by people who are also inside the Earth's atmosphere, doing complicated things (like flying fighter jets). Most of my expertise lies in deep space, theoretical physics, and the evolution of the cosmos as a whole. I can assure you that the videos and sightings discussed by UAP folks are things definitely better evaluated by experts in optics, atmospheric physics, and military hardware.


Nonetheless, this week, I've had lots of questions from friends and family about a UAP hearing in Mexico (about which there have been pretty major concerns) and about a report by a NASA committee that concluded that there's really no evidence that UAPs are anything extraterrestrial (but that we should probably keep studying this stuff anyway, just in case they're interesting one way or another). I don't think there's a whole lot more to say about those news items -- from my perspective, I'm pretty sure if there were solid, reliable, intriguing evidence for something really cool (or scary), it would be completely impossible to hide it, because all the scientists would be far too excited to keep quiet.


But some scientists were excited about possible aliens this month: a JWST result was announced hinting at signs that an exoplanet -- a planet orbiting another star -- just might have signs of life.


The signs are... ambiguous, at best. The observation consisted of looking at the spectrum of the parent star when the planet was in the way, so the light was filtered through the planet's atmosphere. That allowed scientists to infer the presence of certain chemicals in the atmosphere of the planet, based on patterns in how the light was absorbed. From Hubble observations, we already had data suggesting that this planet, K2-18 b, is in its star's habitable zone and has water vapor in its atmosphere. Intriguing!


The biggest news from the JWST result was that the spectrum is consistent with a planet that has a watery ocean, an atmosphere containing hydrogen, carbon dioxide, and methane (all good signs!), and seems to contain hints of a chemical called dimethyl sulphide (DMS). On Earth, DMS is mostly produced by plankton in the ocean, so a lot of people got excited about the possibility that we are seeing a byproduct of alien life.


There are also reasons to be cautious. The detection of DMS was marginal at best, and just because something is produced by life on Earth, it doesn't mean that it can't be produced by weird geophysics or chemistry somewhere else. As soon as the result was announced, I came across several social media threads and articles from astronomers expressing extreme skepticism about all aspects of the result. Based on everything I've read, it seems we have a long way to go before we can say much at all about this planet's prospect for harboring (possibly microscopic) aliens.


But both the claimed detection and the discussion around it are good illustrations of what it will probably be like if (when?) we eventually do find extraterrestrial life. It probably won't be little green men landing in a field, asking to be taken to our leader. Most likely, the first solid evidence for life on other worlds will be a weird little feature in an exoplanet spectrum indicating a ratio of chemical species we don't expect to find on a lifeless world. There may be conflicting observations (in this case, while Hubble explicitly detected water, JWST, for whatever reason, didn't), and there will certainly be endless arguments, debates, criticisms, and discussions among experts about what kind of chemistry was seen, whether or not the detection is robust, and what it means if it is.


(Remember when everyone got excited about a detection of phosphine on Venus? That detection was argued endlessly at the time and ultimately not confirmed in later observations. So it goes.)


All these observations and arguments will be highly technical and take a lot of time, but that's how science works. The technical aspect is because it's just fundamentally hard to do this kind of research, and the arguing is a feature. If a group of scientists ever start actually agreeing on stuff, you can tell the evidence has gotten really compelling.


In any case, if you're really excited about the prospect of alien life, my advice is to pay attention on the exoplanet astronomers, not the UAP reports.


Further reading:

If You Read Nothing Else

Watch me fly a plane while talking about quantum superposition!

Pilot Nerds YouTube Video: Quantum IFR‽

I've been doing a lot of flying lately! Here's a fun little video my friend Steve and I shot, during a low-workload segment of a flight, where I took a bit of time to talk about quantum superposition in between radio calls.

Watch On YouTube
Cosmic Conversations

Recent articles, interviews, and features.

Quantum 101 logo

Quantum 101 with Katie Mack

The full 10 episodes of the Quantum 101 YouTube series are now posted! Check out this playlist to watch all 10 episodes in order (starting with the series teaser, which doesn't count among the 10). Each episode is about 5 minutes and introduces some concept in quantum physics, its applications, and how researchers at the Perimeter Institute and elsewhere are using quantum concepts to change the world.

Learn More
A night sky image

Big Space

Our planet is a tiny porthole, looking over a cosmic sea. Can we learn what lies beyond our own horizons of perception? (From the vault, but a fun piece.)

Learn More
Upcoming Events

Mark your calendar for upcoming talks and events.

Allman Family Lecture

"A Map of Cosmic Time"
October 5th

Dallas Hall, McCord Auditorium in Dallas TX


In Einstein's universe, space and time merge and morph. In this presentation, we'll explore how gathering data and about the distant universe can allow us to directly observe a timeline of our cosmic past, and how new theories and observations are giving us the tools to extend that timeline out into the future.


Secure your spot.

From the Astro Archive

Previous articles, interviews, and research you may have missed.

Particles colliding

How the hunt for invisible particles is opening a new scientific frontier

No one has ever seen a Higgs boson. But here's how we can still use them to learn about the universe.

Read Here
The women in science panelists

Emmy Noether National Forum: The Power of WHY? | Methods and Mindsets of Women in Science

Four perspectives (including mine!) on the role of curiosity, creativity, collaboration, and courage in science.

Watch Here
I Can't Stop Thinking About...

sometimes random physics things get stuck in my head

A tailwheel airplane
FlightChops YouTube Video: Scaring myself - Tail Wheel Flying - Strong Gusting Cross Wind - Ground Loop Risk

How physics makes old airplanes harder to fly


I've been doing tailwheel training for a while -- learning to fly airplanes that have two big main wheels under the wings and a little one under the tail, as opposed to the usual "tricycle gear" setup with two under the wings and one under the nose. They fly well, but on/near the ground (at take-off, landing, and taxi) they are fundamentally unstable to a "ground loop," a kind of ground-level crash where the tail suddenly whips around so you're facing backward, probably having scraped a wing and damaged the plane. The reason is pretty simple physics: in tricycle gear planes, the center of mass is in front of the main gear. That means the momentum of the plane is pulling the main wheels along. In a tailwheel plane, it's pushing them. For the same reason it's easier to pull a trailer behind a truck than to push it, a tailwheel plane has to be exactly lined up with its direction of motion to go straight, and if it isn't, it'll whip around to be pulling the gear (meaning it'll be facing backward). My friend Steve (the left seat pilot in the Quantum IFR video featured earlier in this e-mail) has a great aviation YouTube channel, FlightChops, and did a nice episode talking about this instability; see video link above (or click here).

Learn More: Disciples of Flight

Thank you so much for being part of my community!

If you'd like to support this newsletter (which is free for readers but not for me), you can do so at the link below. And THANK YOU SO MUCH to those who already have!

Support this Newsletter

Subscribe to the AstroKatie Newsletter



Email Marketing by ActiveCampaign