Sugar Found In Space: A Sign of Life?

[shnozzola]

The discovery doesn't prove that life has developed elsewhere in the universe—but it implies that there is no reason it could not. .................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.

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

[none]

so now we have sugar in space and this is awesome, all that is left to find is sex.

[HAL]

I'm not getting excited until till they discover artificial sweeteners in space - then we'll really know something.

[none]

I'm not getting excited until till they discover artificial sweeteners in space - then we'll really know something.

that would be like wearing a condom when it comes to the big picture.

[Boots]

The discovery doesn't prove that life has developed elsewhere in the universe—but it implies that there is no reason it could not. .................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.

SWEEEEET!!  (I can't believe no one said that yet)

[jetson]

The discovery doesn't prove that life has developed elsewhere in the universe—but it implies that there is no reason it could not. .................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.

SWEEEEET!!  (I can't believe no one said that yet)

You're our winner!  No prize though, sorry. 

[Nick]

So that is why the universe is obese.

[jaimehlers]

Once again, we discover that our conception of the universe just doesn't match up to the real thing.

[Astreja]

Does this mean that we can become One with the Universe by eating a sufficient amount of candy?

And is there any truth to the rumour[1] that Tom Baker's version of the TARDIS ran on jelly babies?

1.	which I just started.

[Noman Peopled]

The exciting (or at least new) thing about this is not that this particular sugar was discovered in space.[1] It's that this time it's close to a star, and a sun-like star to boot. Which means that glycoaldehyde not only forms in space, it can and does reach planets. The at least potential importance of such an occurence for abiogenesis can't be discounted.

1.	We already knew that. Well, not me, scientists. Me, I'm always lagging behind.

[jetson]

The at least potential importance of such an occurence for abiogenesis can't be discounted.

Ha!  you haven't been paying close enough attention to the creationist movement (not that I would blame you)!

[Noman Peopled]

Ha!  you haven't been paying close enough attention to the creationist movement (not that I would blame you)!

Hmmm ... fair enough. It can't be sensibly discounted.

Better?

[mrbiscoop]

Okay this was a cool discovery but can we stop calling it a sugar. Fuck what NG says, they are wrong too. Not all words that begin with glyco or have glyco in them are sugars.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glycolaldehyde

[Noman Peopled]

I see you're linking to Glycolaaldehyde, not glycoaldehyde. I noticed because i made sure I was writing it the exact same way as the NatGeo writer, who wrote it without an "l" consistently.
The former gets 90k hits in Google, the latter 12k. I seriously have no idea if they are the same thing or it's just a common typo or what. Googling for chemical structures or formulae gave me a nosebleed. Two chemistry wikis didn't have an entry for either.

Also, I hate auto-correction.



(edit: Well, wolframalpha.com interprets glycoaldehyde as glycolaldehyde. And after a bit of soul-crushing research involving more of Google, online encyclopedias, and a grumpy neighborhood shaman, they do seem to be referenced by the same [wiki]cas number[/wiki]. So as far as I can tell they're synonymous and glycoaldehyde is thus no more a sugar than glycolaldehyde is.

Good thing it's not my job to write science articles ...)

[mrbiscoop]

  Okay, I'm getting a headache. 

[Boots]

SWEEEEET!!  (I can't believe no one said that yet)

You're our winner!  No prize though, sorry. 

I got a karma for it.   

[jetson]

SWEEEEET!!  (I can't believe no one said that yet)

You're our winner!  No prize though, sorry. 

I got a karma for it.   

I stand corrected!  Well deserved, too.

[Boots]

SWEEEEET!!  (I can't believe no one said that yet)

You're our winner!  No prize though, sorry. 

I got a karma for it.   

I stand corrected!  Well deserved, too.

SWEEEEEET!!!  (some jokes never get old!!  Is this one???  Only time will tell . . .)

[Hatter23]

So that is why the universe is obese.

When you need a belt that's several trillion light years long to go around you, yet you're still expanding, it is a sign you have a serious problem.