Oceans Crucial For Alien Life On Other Planets

Oceans Crucial For Alien Life On Other Planets

Oceans play a pivotal role in a planet’s ability to develop and sustain Earth-like life, according to a new study. Researchers at the University of East Anglia said that, so far, computer simulations of habitable climates on other planets have focused on their atmospheres. But oceans play equally vital role in moderating climates on planets and bringing stability to the climate.

Look for oceans on other planets

Scientists at NASA and SETI have repeatedly claimed that alien life does exist, and it may take researchers about two decades to discover them. Our Earth is unlikely to be the only planet to host life. There are more than 100 billion planets in our galaxy, and many of them may have alien life. To find planets that harbor extraterrestrial life, it’s important to identify features that sustain life.

Q2 2022 Hedge Fund Letters Database Now Live!

Hedge funds HFMQ2 2022 hedge fund letters database is now up. See what stocks top hedge funds are selling, what they are buying, what positions they are hiring for, what their investment process is, their returns and much more! This page is updated frequently, VERY FREQUENTLY, daily, or sometimes multiple times a day. As we get new Read More

David Stevens of the University of East Anglia’s School of Mathematics said the number of planets being discovered is rapidly increasing. Findings of this study will help answer whether these planets have the ability to sustain alien life. To conduct this study, researchers created computer simulations of ocean circulation of a hypothetical planet covered with ocean. Then they examined how different planetary rotation rates affect heat transport, factoring in the presence of oceans.

Oceans provide stability to a planet

They found that oceans help control climate on the planets. They help life on a planet by causing the surface temperature to respond extremely slowly to seasonal variations in solar heating. As a result, temperature swings on the planet remain at tolerable levels. Mars lies in the habitable zone of the Sun. But it doesn’t have oceans, so air temperatures usually swing over a range of 1000 degrees Celsius. Oceans provide stability to the planet’s climate.

NASA perhaps realizes the importance of oceans in finding alien life. The space agency has set its sight on Jupiter’s moon Europa. Europa is icy, and slightly smaller than our planet’s moon. NASA says Europa likely has an “ocean of water in contact with a rocky seafloor. If scientists prove the existence of the ocean, Europa would be a promising place to explore extraterrestrial life.

Updated on

No posts to display


  1. They cannot figure out Fibonacci sequence, yet trying to “discover” something beyond tips of their own noses… Impossible. Statistically. The probability is too slim.

    Science? With majority of today’s children not passing science tests – one has to wonder – what do their teachers have to educate them… Alas! Article such as this one are referenced in their “research” papers.

    No wonder this Nation has become dumb-down…

  2. I didn’t ‘deviate’ anything and I’m not the desperate and ignorant one here. Did you bother to read through what I wrote? Because your previous comment was so ambiguous, nobody could tell what you were referring to. So I responded to two likely possibilities, that you were either referring to what I was talking about (evolution or religion, which I can talk about and which I can give as a plausible and legitimate reason for why people keep bringing up the preposterous question of why cells don’t appear spontaneously out of non-living matter – a favorite strawman commonly vomited forth by religious creationists. Then I explicitly responded to that issue, the issue you seem so eager to preserve from a stance that can only be described as towering ignorance. Guess you missed that part about how molecular self-replicators are also subject to evolutionary cumulative selection, huh? In other words, the “issue” you keep harping at is not an issue at all. No matter how long and hard you flog that dead horse, that horse remains dead. As for conversation etiquette, you might brush up on your reading skills.

  3. I never said anything about evolution or religion. Your desperate need to deviate the conversation into that betrays your ignorance.

    I’m asking for one single instance where anyone observed and documented a living cell appearing out of non-living matter. That’s the issue here, not evolution or religion.

  4. That could be because you will deny anything that contradicts your certitude that evolution is wrong because your religious conviction contradicts it. One cannot adopt a more unscientific attitude. If you are demanding ‘experimental proof’ for evolution, there is a gigantic and still growing mountain of evidence for it since Darwin and Wallace described the basic idea. The scientific literature in favor of the reality of biological evolution via natural cumulative selection of traits through genetic mutations is overwhelming. Only willful ignorance or practiced insincerity can explain why anybody would say they “never heard about it”. But if you demand experimental demonstration of a cell assembling itself out of simple chemicals, you are demanding a red herring: cells are themselves the products of long evolution (cumulative selection) of self-reproducing molecular precursors under the conditions that existed on and within the Earth during its earliest billion years or so. Try reading up on this fascinating subject. You might learn something.

  5. I struck the point directly and accurately. And anybody who insists that evolution cannot be true because living cells don’t spontaneously spring out of chemical precursors using an utterly fallacious probability argument is hardly in a position to identify what a legitimate point should be.

  6. Really? Explain to me then how you can calculate the odds for something without having a single sample and without knowing the sample space.

  7. It effectively is. You are just splitting hairs now.

    Let’s put this way. If you are betting on one of two horse in a horse race, and one had 99% odds and the other had 1%, which horse would you place a bet on?

  8. Careful – you’re telling God what’s on his mind again. It’s a common conceit amongst God-did-it promoters that they know God better than the alleged deity knows himself. Laying down the law in an arrogant attempt at flashing the Ultimate Authority card is the only thing that plays in your case, pal.

  9. Agreed. I am inclined to agree with the statistical models given the sheer numbers involved. Twenty years ago there was no proof of planets around other stars than the sun. Now we know there are effectively infinite planets….

  10. God can create life on whatever planet He wants to. Maybe He did and maybe He didn’t. God’s Will is the only thing that plays here.

  11. Not there yet. 400 years ago there was no evidence of a spherical earth or that diseases were caused by bacteria and viruses not imbalance in the humors. Give it time.

    Where is the proof of divine creation?

  12. And that is just life as we know it. If there are non-carbon based life (which chemically speaking is unlikely given no molecule bonds to others as easily as carbon), it could exist on venus-like planets. We just don’t know, so can only model.

    If life is found elsewhere in this solar system, e.g. Mars or Europa, then it is virtually certain, life is widespread in our galaxy and probably the universe. If life can take hold in two bodies in the same solar system, it will take hold everywhere possible.

  13. Evidence? Where’s that one single reproducible experiment where a living cell spontaneously appeared out of non-living components?

  14. bgrnathan: “Proteins can’t come into existence unless there’s life first!”
    That’s ridiculous. You have it exactly backwards. Life cannot have emerged without chemical precursors. jamdev12 is completely correct. You don’t know what you are talking about.

  15. I read a recent report that there are an estimated 500 billion galaxies in the universe.

    Multiply that by billions of planets per galaxy, and then add in the moons that could potentially support life, and the number of worlds approaches infinite for all intents and purposes.

  16. …although I agree with everything you say….I also believe it is the height of arrogance to assume that we humans are the pinnacle of intelligence in this vast universe. In fact, we are only at the DAWN of our understanding and we are STILL closer to being monkeys throwing their feces, than we are to being cosmic scale intellectuals…..look at the Ukraine !!!! The fact is that WE ARE HERE and live on a planet that was once DOMINATED by LIZARDS…NOT US !!! That ONE fact illustrates the diversity of life, and what is possible on other planets. After all, out of the first four billion years of the earths history, the earth was STERILE ! Only in the LAST billion did life appear….did we get SPLATTERED somehow with organisms from outside our world to get things started here ? THAT is more likely an answer than thinking ALL LIFE in the universe STARTED HERE !!! How ARROGANT of us to think THAT !! We are STILL too primitive to understand how life in the universe arose from supposedly inanimate substances….however, the confirmation of the BIG BANG gives us dim primates a CLUE !!! ALL came into being AT ONCE !!! Thus, be MINDFUL of your actions in life….someone is WATCHING !!!!

  17. The opening line is severely underestimated: there are more the 100 billion planets in our Milky Way GALAXY alone. Multiply that by at least a hundred billion galaxies in the UNIVERSE.

  18. “They” are not ‘wondering.’ They know there is life out there, at least anyone who understands statistics, chemistry and biology. Stories like these serve a sort of ‘Sagan’ role, in keeping the general public interested in science.

  19. 100 billion planets in the universe!!!??? Really???!!! There are over 200 billion stars in our galaxy alone and so far on average we’ve found 2 to 3 planets per star. I’m wondering where you took math as this equates to about 500 billion planets in our own galaxy alone. Please go back to school if you can’t even write a semi accurate article with a better mathematical model.

  20. Please spare me the stupid rant about your religious given explanations. The fact that you call yourself a biologist and rant the same tune every time there is an article about evolution of life tells me that you tried your hardest to convince people yet you have no evidence for your false assumptions you creationist crapshooter. Go to a real school and learn some real biology. Learning it from a theology school doesn’t count.

  21. Agreed. Readers digest-style of journalism.

    I cannot believe they are still wondering if there is “life” out there… Yet humanity cannot figure out basics of life here on Earth.

  22. HAVING THE RIGHT CONDITIONS AND RAW MATERIALS FOR LIFE doesn’t mean that life can originate by chance.

    Proteins can’t come into existence unless there’s life first! Although Miller, in his famous experiment in 1953, showed that individual amino acids (the building blocks of proteins) could come into existence by chance, it’s not enough just to have amino acids. The various amino acids that make-up proteins must link together in a precise sequence, just like the letters in a sentence, to form functioning protein molecules. If they’re not in the right sequence the protein molecules won’t work. It has never been shown that various amino acids can bind together into a sequence by chance to form protein molecules. Even the simplest cell is made up of many millions of various protein molecules. And, proteins would be useless outside of a living, complete, and fully-functioning cell

    The probability of just an average size protein molecule arising by chance is 10 to the 65th power. Mathematicians have said any event in the universe with odds of 10 to 50th power or greater is impossible! The late great British scientist Sir Frederick Hoyle calculated that the the odds of even the simplest cell coming into existence by chance is 10 to the 40,000th power! How large is this? Consider that the total number of atoms in our universe is 10 to the 82 power.

    Also, what many don’t realize is that Miller had a laboratory apparatus that shielded and protected the individual amino acids the moment they were formed, otherwise the amino acids would have quickly disintegrated and been destroyed in the mix of random energy and forces involved in Miller’s experiment.

    There is no innate chemical tendency for the various amino acids to bond with one another in a sequence. Any one amino acid can just as easily bond with any other. The only reason at all for why the various amino acids bond with one another in a precise sequence in the cells of our bodies is because they’re directed to do so by an already existing sequence of molecules found in our genetic code.

    Of course, once you have a complete and living cell then the genetic code and biological machinery exist to direct the formation of more cells, but how could life or the cell have naturally originated when no directing code and mechanisms existed in nature? Read my Internet article: HOW FORENSIC SCIENCE REFUTES ATHEISM.

    A partially evolved cell would quickly disintegrate under the effects of random forces of the environment, especially without the protection of a complete and fully functioning cell membrane. A partially evolved cell cannot wait millions of years for chance to make it complete and living! In fact, it couldn’t have even reached the partially evolved state.

    Please read my popular Internet articles listed below:


    Visit my newest Internet site: THE SCIENCE SUPPORTING CREATION

    Babu G. Ranganathan*
    (B.A. theology/biology)


    * I have had the privilege of being recognized in the 24th edition of Marquis “Who’s Who In The East” for my writings on religion and science, and I have given successful lectures (with question and answer time afterwards) defending creation from science before evolutionist science faculty and students at various colleges and universities.

  23. There are billions of planets just within our own galaxy. There are hundreds of billions of galaxies in the universe. Also, many planets have moons that could be capable of supporting life. Thus, there are trillions upon trillions of worlds scattered throughout the universe.

    Statistically speaking, it would be almost impossible for our planet to be the only one in the universe with life. It would be extremely unlikely even without our own galaxy. Even if only 1 out of every billion worlds contained life, that would still be billions upon billions of worlds with life.

  24. Another “scientific” noise… I’m curios who may expect to get any benefits from publishing such trivialities… it’s quite pathetic…

  25. Mr. Shukla falls into the same logical trap that snags all exo-life freaks. Since nobody knows how life began on Earth, it’s not a justifiable assumption to say that life exists on other planets.

Comments are closed.