Summer Astrobiology Roundup #3: The Ripening Of The Planets

Although NASA’s planet hunting mission Kepler seems unlikely to return to a fully functioning state, after another reaction wheel failure, it has already yielded an extraordinary crop of new worlds.

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

This article was published in Scientific American’s former blog network and reflects the views of the author, not necessarily those of Scientific American



Although NASA's planet hunting mission Kepler seems unlikely to return to a fully functioning state, after another reaction wheel failure, it has already yielded an extraordinary crop of new worlds.

In fact, as well as finding many remarkable individual systems (from those orbiting binary stars to those laden down with planets), Kepler has provided a cornerstone for understanding planetary populations. In recent weeks I've been writing in a number of places about some of the broader implications of these and other exoplanetary discoveries. The particular thesis that I've been peddling...err, putting out for air, is that the sheer abundance of planets is in itself incredibly important.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


It's not - as I discuss in some detail in 'Are we alone' at Aeon magazine - because this wealth of planets is actually telling us that life is likely elsewhere. It doesn't tell us that, but it does tell us something very, very intriguing (you'll have to read the article).

However, it naturally raises one's hopes about there being other life in the universe, something I emphasize in an Op-Ed 'A Universe Full of Planets' over at the International Herald Tribune & New York Times, and that is a good thing for all manner of reasons - Copernican and otherwise.

Personally I think that these ideas are tremendously important to bear in mind, because astronomers and astrobiologists are reaching a point where we have to do a little better than just expressing our excitement over the detection of yet another possibly 'habitable' world. We need to be ready to articulate a deeper message, to explain why we should all be paying attention to this science, and why it belongs on the same stage as something like the Large Hadron Collider, or a mission to Mars.

The field is ripening, and so our scientific reasoning should as well.

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe