Search This Blog

Wednesday, September 22, 2021

James Webb Space Telescope

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

James Webb Space Telescope
JWST spacecraft model 2.png
A rendering of the James Webb Space Telescope with its components fully deployed
NamesNext Generation Space Telescope (NGST)

Mission typeAstronomy
OperatorNASA / ESA / STScI
Websitewww.jwst.nasa.gov
Mission duration10 years (planned)

Spacecraft properties
ManufacturerNorthrop Grumman
Ball Aerospace & Technologies
Launch mass6,500 kg (14,300 lb) 
Dimensions20.197 m × 14.162 m (66.26 ft × 46.46 ft), sunshield
Power2 kW

Start of mission
Launch date18 December 2021 
RocketAriane 5 ECA
Launch siteCentre Spatial Guyanais, ELA-3
ContractorArianespace

Orbital parameters
Reference systemSun–Earth L2 orbit
RegimeHalo orbit
Perigee altitude374,000 km (232,000 mi) 
Apogee altitude1,500,000 km (930,000 mi)
Period6 months

Main
TypeKorsch telescope
Diameter6.5 m (21 ft)
Focal length131.4 m (431 ft)
Collecting area25.4 m2 (273 sq ft) 
Wavelengths0.6–28.3 μm (orange to mid-infrared)

Transponders
Band
  • S-band, telemetry, tracking, and control
  • Ka-band, data acquisition
Bandwidth
  • S-band up: 16 kbit/s
  • S-band down: 40 kbit/s
  • Ka-band down: up to 28 Mbit/s
JWST logo
James Webb Space Telescope insignia  

The James Webb Space Telescope (JWST or "Webb") is a joint NASAESACSA space telescope that is planned to succeed the Hubble Space Telescope as NASA's flagship astrophysics mission. The JWST will provide improved infrared resolution and sensitivity over Hubble, and will enable a broad range of investigations across the fields of astronomy and cosmology, including observing some of the most distant events and objects in the universe, such as the formation of the first galaxies, and atmospheric characterization of potentially habitable exoplanets.

The primary mirror of the JWST, the Optical Telescope Element, consists of 18 hexagonal mirror segments made of gold-plated beryllium which combine to create a 6.5 m (21 ft) diameter mirror—considerably larger than Hubble's 2.4 m (7 ft 10 in) mirror. Unlike the Hubble telescope, which observes in the near ultraviolet, visible, and near infrared (0.1 to 1 μm) spectra, the JWST will observe in a lower frequency range, from long-wavelength visible light through mid-infrared (0.6 to 28.3 μm), which will allow it to observe high redshift objects that are too old and too distant for Hubble to observe. The telescope must be kept very cold in order to observe in the infrared without interference, so it will be deployed in space near the Sun–Earth L2 Lagrange point, and a large sunshield made of silicon- and aluminium-coated Kapton will keep its mirror and instruments below 50 K (−223 °C; −370 °F).

The JWST is being developed by NASA, the European Space Agency and the Canadian Space Agency. The NASA Goddard Space Flight Center is managing the development effort, and the Space Telescope Science Institute will operate Webb after launch. It is named for James E. Webb, who was the administrator of NASA from 1961 to 1968 and played an integral role in the Apollo program. The prime contractor is Northrop Grumman.

Development began in 1996 for a launch that was initially planned for 2007 and a 500-million-dollar budget, but the project has had numerous delays and cost overruns, and underwent a major redesign in 2005. The JWST's construction was completed in late 2016, after which its extensive testing phase began. In March 2018, NASA further delayed the launch after the telescope's sunshield ripped during a practice deployment. Launch was delayed again in June 2018 following recommendations from an independent review board. Work on integration and testing of the telescope was suspended in March 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic, adding further delays. Following work resumption, NASA announced that the launch date had been delayed to 31 October 2021. Problems with the Ariane 5 launch vehicle have now pushed the launch date to 18 December 2021. The estimated total cost of developing the telescope had in 2020 increased to over US$10 billion, but in 2021 has fallen back below US$10 billion.

Features

Launch configuration of the JWST in an Ariane 5

The JWST has an expected mass about half of Hubble Space Telescope's, but its primary mirror, a 6.5 meter diameter gold-coated beryllium reflector will have a collecting area over six times as large, 25.4 m2 (273 sq ft), using 18 hexagonal mirrors with 0.9 m2 (9.7 sq ft) obscuration for the secondary support struts.

The JWST is oriented toward near-infrared astronomy, but can also see orange and red visible light, as well as the mid-infrared region, depending on the instrument. The design emphasizes the near to mid-infrared for three main reasons:

  • high-redshift objects have their visible emissions shifted into the infrared
  • cold objects such as debris disks and planets emit most strongly in the infrared
  • this band is difficult to study from the ground or by existing space telescopes such as Hubble

Ground-based telescopes must look through Earth's atmosphere, which is opaque in many infrared bands (see figure of atmospheric absorption). Even where the atmosphere is transparent, many of the target chemical compounds, such as water, carbon dioxide, and methane, also exist in the Earth's atmosphere, vastly complicating analysis. Existing space telescopes such as Hubble cannot study these bands since their mirrors are insufficiently cool (the Hubble mirror is maintained at about 15 °C (288 K)) thus the telescope itself radiates strongly in the infrared bands.

The JWST will operate near the Earth–Sun L2 (Lagrange point), approximately 1,500,000 km (930,000 mi) beyond Earth's orbit. By way of comparison, Hubble orbits 550 km (340 mi) above Earth's surface, and the Moon is roughly 400,000 km (250,000 mi) from Earth. This distance made post-launch repair or upgrade of the JWST hardware virtually impossible with the spaceships available during the telescope design and fabrication stage. Objects near this Lagrange point can orbit the Sun in synchrony with the Earth, allowing the telescope to remain at a roughly constant distance and use a single sunshield to block heat and light from the Sun and Earth. This arrangement will keep the temperature of the spacecraft below 50 K (−223 °C; −370 °F), necessary for infrared observations.

Sunshield protection

Test unit of the sunshield stacked and expanded at the Northrop Grumman facility in California, 2014

To make observations in the infrared spectrum, the JWST must be kept under 50 K (−223.2 °C; −369.7 °F); otherwise, infrared radiation from the telescope itself would overwhelm its instruments. It therefore uses a large sunshield to block light and heat from the Sun, Earth, and Moon, and its position near the Earth–Sun L2 point keeps all three bodies on the same side of the spacecraft at all times. Its halo orbit around the L2 point avoids the shadow of the Earth and Moon, maintaining a constant environment for the sunshield and solar arrays. The shielding maintains a stable temperature for the structures on the dark side, which is critical to maintaining precise alignment of the primary mirror segments.

The five-layer sunshield, each layer as thin as a human hair, is constructed from Kapton E, a commercially available polyimide film from DuPont, with membranes specially coated with aluminum on both sides and doped silicon on the Sun-facing side of the two hottest layers to reflect the Sun's heat back into space. Accidental tears of the delicate film structure during testing in 2018 were among the factors delaying the project.

The sunshield is designed to be folded twelve times so that it will fit within the Ariane 5 rocket's (4.57 × 16.19 m) payload fairing. Once deployed at the L2 point, it will unfold to 14.162 × 21.197 m. The sunshield was hand-assembled at ManTech (NeXolve) in Huntsville, Alabama, before it was delivered to Northrop Grumman in Redondo Beach, California, for testing.

Optics

Main mirror assembled at Goddard Space Flight Center, May 2016.

JWST's primary mirror is a 6.5-meter-diameter gold-coated beryllium reflector with a collecting area of 25.4 m2. If it were built as a single large mirror, this would have been too large for existing launch vehicles. The mirror is therefore composed of 18 hexagonal segments which will unfold after the telescope is launched. Image plane wavefront sensing through phase retrieval will be used to position the mirror segments in the correct location using very precise micro-motors. Subsequent to this initial configuration, they will only need occasional updates every few days to retain optimal focus. This is unlike terrestrial telescopes, for example the Keck telescopes, which continually adjust their mirror segments using active optics to overcome the effects of gravitational and wind loading. The Webb telescope will use 126 small motors to occasionally adjust the optics as there is a lack of environmental disturbances of a telescope in space.

JWST's optical design is a three-mirror anastigmat, which makes use of curved secondary and tertiary mirrors to deliver images that are free of optical aberrations over a wide field. In addition, there is a fast steering mirror which can adjust its position many times per second to provide image stabilization.

Ball Aerospace & Technologies is the principal optical subcontractor for the JWST project, led by prime contractor Northrop Grumman Aerospace Systems, under a contract from the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center, in Greenbelt, Maryland. Eighteen primary mirror segments, secondary, tertiary and fine steering mirrors, plus flight spares have been fabricated and polished by Ball Aerospace & Technologies based on beryllium segment blanks manufactured by several companies including Axsys, Brush Wellman, and Tinsley Laboratories.

The final segment of the primary mirror was installed on 3 February 2016, and the secondary mirror was installed on 3 March 2016.

Scientific instruments

NIRCam model
 
NIRSpec model
 
MIRI 1:3 scale model

The Integrated Science Instrument Module (ISIM) is a framework that provides electrical power, computing resources, cooling capability as well as structural stability to the Webb telescope. It is made with bonded graphite-epoxy composite attached to the underside of Webb's telescope structure. The ISIM holds the four science instruments and a guide camera.

  • NIRCam (Near InfraRed Camera) is an infrared imager which will have a spectral coverage ranging from the edge of the visible (0.6 micrometers) through the near infrared (5 micrometers). NIRCam will also serve as the observatory's wavefront sensor, which is required for wavefront sensing and control activities. NIRCam was built by a team led by the University of Arizona, with principal investigator Marcia J. Rieke. The industrial partner is Lockheed-Martin's Advanced Technology Center located in Palo Alto, California.
  • NIRSpec (Near InfraRed Spectrograph) will also perform spectroscopy over the same wavelength range. It was built by the European Space Agency at ESTEC in Noordwijk, Netherlands. The leading development team includes members from Airbus Defence and Space, Ottobrunn and Friedrichshafen, Germany, and the Goddard Space Flight Center; with Pierre Ferruit (École normale supérieure de Lyon) as NIRSpec project scientist. The NIRSpec design provides three observing modes: a low-resolution mode using a prism, an R~1000 multi-object mode, and an R~2700 integral field unit or long-slit spectroscopy mode. Switching of the modes is done by operating a wavelength preselection mechanism called the Filter Wheel Assembly, and selecting a corresponding dispersive element (prism or grating) using the Grating Wheel Assembly mechanism. Both mechanisms are based on the successful ISOPHOT wheel mechanisms of the Infrared Space Observatory. The multi-object mode relies on a complex micro-shutter mechanism to allow for simultaneous observations of hundreds of individual objects anywhere in NIRSpec's field of view. The mechanisms and their optical elements were designed, integrated and tested by Carl Zeiss Optronics GmbH of Oberkochen, Germany, under contract from Astrium.
  • MIRI (Mid-InfraRed Instrument) will measure the mid-to-long-infrared wavelength range from 5 to 27 micrometers. It contains both a mid-infrared camera and an imaging spectrometer. MIRI was developed as a collaboration between NASA and a consortium of European countries, and is led by George Rieke (University of Arizona) and Gillian Wright (UK Astronomy Technology Centre, Edinburgh, Scotland, part of the Science and Technology Facilities Council (STFC)). MIRI features similar wheel mechanisms as NIRSpec which are also developed and built by Carl Zeiss Optronics GmbH under contract from the Max Planck Institute for Astronomy, Heidelberg, Germany. The completed Optical Bench Assembly of MIRI was delivered to Goddard Space Flight Center in mid-2012 for eventual integration into the ISIM. The temperature of the MIRI must not exceed 6 kelvins (K): a helium gas mechanical cooler sited on the warm side of the environmental shield provides this cooling.
  • FGS/NIRISS (Fine Guidance Sensor and Near Infrared Imager and Slitless Spectrograph), led by the Canadian Space Agency under project scientist John Hutchings (Herzberg Institute of Astrophysics, National Research Council (Canada)), is used to stabilize the line-of-sight of the observatory during science observations. Measurements by the FGS are used both to control the overall orientation of the spacecraft and to drive the fine steering mirror for image stabilization. The Canadian Space Agency is also providing a Near Infrared Imager and Slitless Spectrograph (NIRISS) module for astronomical imaging and spectroscopy in the 0.8 to 5 micrometer wavelength range, led by principal investigator René Doyon at the Université de Montréal. Because the NIRISS is physically mounted together with the FGS, they are often referred to as a single unit; however, they serve entirely different purposes, with one being a scientific instrument and the other being a part of the observatory's support infrastructure.

NIRCam and MIRI feature starlight-blocking coronagraphs for observation of faint targets such as extrasolar planets and circumstellar disks very close to bright stars.

The infrared detectors for the NIRCam, NIRSpec, FGS, and NIRISS modules are being provided by Teledyne Imaging Sensors (formerly Rockwell Scientific Company). The James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) Integrated Science Instrument Module (ISIM) and Command and Data Handling (ICDH) engineering team uses SpaceWire to send data between the science instruments and the data-handling equipment.

Spacecraft Bus

Diagram of the Spacecraft Bus. The solar panel is in green and the light purple panels are radiators.

The Spacecraft Bus is the primary support component of the James Webb Space Telescope, that hosts a multitude of computing, communication, propulsion, and structural parts, bringing the different parts of the telescope together. Along with the sunshield, it forms the spacecraft element of the space telescope. The other two major elements of the JWST are the Integrated Science Instrument Module (ISIM) and the Optical Telescope Element (OTE). Region 3 of ISIM is also inside the Spacecraft Bus; region 3 includes ISIM Command and Data Handling subsystem and the MIRI cryocooler.

The Spacecraft Bus is connected to Optical Telescope Element via the Deployable Tower Assembly, which also connects to the sunshield.

The structure of the Spacecraft Bus weighs 350 kg (770 lb), and must support the 6.5-ton space telescope. It is made primarily of graphite composite material. It was assembled in California, assembly was completed in 2015, and then it had to be integrated with the rest of the space telescope leading up to its planned 2021 launch. The bus can provide pointing precision of one arcsecond, and isolates vibration down to two milliarcseconds.

The Spacecraft Bus is on the Sun-facing "warm" side and operates at a temperature of about 300 K. Everything on the Sun facing side must be able to handle the thermal conditions of JWST's halo orbit, which has one side in continuous sunlight and the other in the shade of the spacecraft sunshield.

Another important aspect of the Spacecraft Bus is the central computing, memory storage, and communications equipment. The processor and software direct data to and from the instruments, to the solid-state memory core, and to the radio system which can send data back to Earth and receive commands. The computer also controls the pointing and moment of the spacecraft, taking in sensor data from the gyroscopes and star tracker, and sending the necessary commands to the reaction wheels or thrusters.

Comparison with other telescopes

Comparison with Hubble primary mirror
 
Calisto architecture for SAFIR would be a successor to Spitzer, requiring greater passive cooling than JWST (5 Kelvin).

The desire for a large infrared space telescope traces back decades. In the United States, the Shuttle Infrared Telescope Facility (SIRTF) was planned while the Space Shuttle was in development, and the potential for infrared astronomy was acknowledged at that time. Compared to ground telescopes, space observatories were free from atmospheric absorption of infrared light. Space observatories opened up a whole "new sky" for astronomers.

The tenuous atmosphere above the 400 km nominal flight altitude has no measurable absorption so that detectors operating at all wavelengths from 5 μm to 1000 μm can achieve high radiometric sensitivity.

— S. G. McCarthy and G. W. Autio, 1978.

However, infrared telescopes have a disadvantage: they need to stay extremely cold, and the longer the wavelength of infrared, the colder they need to be. If not, the background heat of the device itself overwhelms the detectors, making it effectively blind. This can be overcome by careful spacecraft design, in particular by placing the telescope in a dewar with an extremely cold substance, such as liquid helium. This has meant most infrared telescopes have a lifespan limited by their coolant, as short as a few months, maybe a few years at most.

In some cases, it has been possible to maintain a temperature low enough through the design of the spacecraft to enable near-infrared observations without a supply of coolant, such as the extended missions of Spitzer Space Telescope and Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer. Another example is Hubble's Near Infrared Camera and Multi-Object Spectrometer (NICMOS) instrument, which started out using a block of nitrogen ice that depleted after a couple of years, but was then converted to a cryocooler that worked continuously. The James Webb Space Telescope is designed to cool itself without a dewar, using a combination of sunshields and radiators, with the mid-infrared instrument using an additional cryocooler.

James Webb Space Telescope Official Poster
Selected space telescopes and instruments
Name Year Wavelength
(μm)
Aperture
(m)
Cooling
IRT 1985 1.7–118 0.15 Helium
Infrared Space Observatory (ISO) 1995 2.5–240 0.60 Helium
Hubble Space Telescope Imaging Spectrograph (STIS) 1997 0.115–1.03 2.4 Passive
Hubble Near Infrared Camera and Multi-Object Spectrometer (NICMOS) 1997 0.8–2.4 2.4 Nitrogen, later cryocooler
Spitzer Space Telescope 2003 3–180 0.85 Helium
Hubble Wide Field Camera 3 (WFC3) 2009 0.2–1.7 2.4 Passive, and thermo-electric 
Herschel Space Observatory 2009 55–672 3.5 Helium
JWST 2021 0.6–28.5 6.5 Passive, and cryocooler (MIRI)

The James Webb telescope's delays and cost increases can be compared to the Hubble Space Telescope. When Hubble formally started in 1972, it had an estimated development cost of US$300 million (or about US$1 billion in 2006 constant dollars), but by the time it was sent into orbit in 1990, the cost was about four times that. In addition, new instruments and servicing missions increased the cost to at least US$9 billion by 2006.

In contrast to other proposed observatories, most of which have already been canceled or put on hold, including Terrestrial Planet Finder (2011), Space Interferometry Mission (2010), International X-ray Observatory (2011), MAXIM (Microarcsecond X-ray Imaging Mission), SAFIR (Single Aperture Far-Infrared Observatory), SUVO (Space Ultraviolet-Visible Observatory), and the SPECS (Submillimeter Probe of the Evolution of Cosmic Structure), the JWST is the last big NASA astrophysics mission of its generation to be built.

History

Background

Selected events
Year Events
1996 NGST started.
2002 named JWST, 8 to 6 m
2004 NEXUS cancelled 
2007 ESA/NASA MOU
2010 MCDR passed
2011 Proposed cancel
2021 Planned launch

Early development work for a Hubble successor between 1989 and 1994 led to the Hi-Z telescope concept, a fully baffled 4-meter aperture infrared telescope that would recede to an orbit at 3 AU. This distant orbit would have benefited from reduced light noise from zodiacal dust. Other early plans called for a NEXUS precursor telescope mission.

The JWST originated in 1996 as the Next Generation Space Telescope (NGST). In 2002, it was renamed after NASA's second administrator (1961–1968) James E. Webb (1906–1992), noted for playing a key role in the Apollo program and establishing scientific research as a core NASA activity. The JWST is a project of NASA, with international collaboration from the European Space Agency (ESA) and the Canadian Space Agency (CSA).

In the "faster, better, cheaper" era in the mid-1990s, NASA leaders pushed for a low-cost space telescope. The result was the NGST concept, with an 8-meter aperture and located at L2, roughly estimated to cost US$500 million. In 1997, NASA worked with the Goddard Space Flight Center, Ball Aerospace & Technologies, and TRW to conduct technical requirement and cost studies, and in 1999 selected Lockheed Martin and TRW for preliminary concept studies. Launch was at that time planned for 2007, but the launch date has subsequently been pushed back many times (see table further down).

In 2003, NASA awarded the US$824.8 million prime contract for the NGST, now renamed the James Webb Space Telescope, to TRW. The design called for a descoped 6.1 m (20 ft) primary mirror and a launch date of 2010. Later that year, TRW was acquired by Northrop Grumman in a hostile bid and became Northrop Grumman Space Technology.

Development

NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland, is leading the management of the observatory project. The project scientist for the James Webb Space Telescope is John C. Mather. Northrop Grumman Aerospace Systems serves as the primary contractor for the development and integration of the observatory. They are responsible for developing and building the spacecraft element, which includes both the spacecraft bus and sunshield. Ball Aerospace & Technologies has been subcontracted to develop and build the Optical Telescope Element (OTE). Northrop Grumman's Astro Aerospace business unit has been contracted to build the Deployable Tower Assembly (DTA) which connects the OTE to the spacecraft bus and the Mid Boom Assembly (MBA) which helps to deploy the large sunshields on orbit. Goddard Space Flight Center is also responsible for providing the Integrated Science Instrument Module (ISIM).

Cost growth revealed in spring 2005 led to an August 2005 re-planning. The primary technical outcomes of the re-planning were significant changes in the integration and test plans, a 22-month launch delay (from 2011 to 2013), and elimination of system-level testing for observatory modes at wavelength shorter than 1.7 micrometers. Other major features of the observatory were unchanged. Following the re-planning, the project was independently reviewed in April 2006. The review concluded the project was technically sound, but that funding phasing at NASA needed to be changed. NASA re-phased its JWST budgets accordingly.

In the 2005 re-plan, the life-cycle cost of the project was estimated at about US$4.5 billion. This comprised approximately US$3.5 billion for design, development, launch and commissioning, and approximately US$1.0 billion for ten years of operations. ESA is contributing about €300 million, including the launch. The Canadian Space Agency pledged $39 million Canadian in 2007 and in 2012 delivered its contributions in equipment to point the telescope and detect atmospheric conditions on distant planets.

Construction

A JWST mirror segment, 2010
 
Mirror segments undergoing cryogenic tests at the X-ray & Cryogenic Facility at Marshall Space Flight Center
 
The assembled telescope following environmental testing

In January 2007, nine of the ten technology development items in the project successfully passed a Non-Advocate Review. These technologies were deemed sufficiently mature to retire significant risks in the project. The remaining technology development item (the MIRI cryocooler) completed its technology maturation milestone in April 2007. This technology review represented the beginning step in the process that ultimately moved the project into its detailed design phase (Phase C). By May 2007, costs were still on target. In March 2008, the project successfully completed its Preliminary Design Review (PDR). In April 2008, the project passed the Non-Advocate Review. Other passed reviews include the Integrated Science Instrument Module review in March 2009, the Optical Telescope Element review completed in October 2009, and the Sunshield review completed in January 2010.

In April 2010, the telescope passed the technical portion of its Mission Critical Design Review (MCDR). Passing the MCDR signified the integrated observatory can meet all science and engineering requirements for its mission. The MCDR encompassed all previous design reviews. The project schedule underwent review during the months following the MCDR, in a process called the Independent Comprehensive Review Panel, which led to a re-plan of the mission aiming for a 2015 launch, but as late as 2018. By 2010, cost over-runs were impacting other projects, though JWST itself remained on schedule.

By 2011, the JWST project was in the final design and fabrication phase (Phase C). As is typical for a complex design that cannot be changed once launched, there are detailed reviews of every portion of design, construction, and proposed operation. New technological frontiers have been pioneered by the project, and it has passed its design reviews. In the 1990s it was unknown if a telescope so large and low mass was possible.

Assembly of the hexagonal segments of the primary mirror, which was done via robotic arm, began in November 2015 and was completed in February 2016. Final construction of the Webb telescope was completed in November 2016, after which extensive testing procedures began. In March 2018, NASA delayed the JWST's launch an additional year to May 2020 after the telescope's sunshield ripped during a practice deployment and the sunshield's cables did not sufficiently tighten. In June 2018, NASA delayed the JWST's launch an additional 10 months to March 2021, based on the assessment of the independent review board convened after the failed March 2018 test deployment. The review also found JWST had 344 potential single-point failures, any of which could doom the project. In August 2019, the mechanical integration of the telescope was completed, something that was scheduled to be done 12 years before in 2007. Following this, engineers now are working to add a five layer sunshield in place to prevent damage to telescope parts from infrared rays of the Sun.

Cost and schedule issues

The JWST has a history of major cost overruns and delays which have resulted in part from outside factors such as delays in deciding on a launch vehicle and adding extra funding for contingencies. By 2006, US$1 billion had been spent on developing JWST, with the budget at about US$4.5 billion at that time. A 2006 article in the journal Nature noted a study in 1984 by the Space Science Board, which estimated that a next generation infrared observatory would cost US$4 billion (about US$7 billion in 2006 dollars). By October 2019, the estimated cost of the project had reached US$10 billion for launch in 2021.

Then-planned launch and total budget
Year Planned
launch
Budget plan
(billion USD)
1997 2007 0.5
1998 2007 1
1999 2007 to 2008 1
2000 2009 1.8
2002 2010 2.5
2003 2011 2.5
2005 2013 3
2006 2014 4.5
2008, Preliminary Design Review
2008 2014 5.1
2010, Critical Design Review
2010 2015 to 2016 6.5
2011 2018 8.7
2013 2018 8.8
2017 2019 8.8
2018 2020 ≥8.8
2019 March 2021 9.66
2020 October 2021 ≥10
2021 December 2021  9.7

The telescope was originally estimated to cost US$1.6 billion, but the cost estimate grew throughout the early development and had reached about US$5 billion by the time the mission was formally confirmed for construction start in 2008. In summer 2010, the mission passed its Critical Design Review (CDR) with excellent grades on all technical matters, but schedule and cost slips at that time prompted Maryland U.S. Senator Barbara Mikulski to call for an independent review of the project. The Independent Comprehensive Review Panel (ICRP) chaired by J. Casani (JPL) found that the earliest possible launch date was in late 2015 at an extra cost of US$1.5 billion (for a total of US$6.5 billion). They also pointed out that this would have required extra funding in FY2011 and FY2012 and that any later launch date would lead to a higher total cost.

On 6 July 2011, the United States House of Representatives' appropriations committee on Commerce, Justice, and Science moved to cancel the James Webb project by proposing an FY2012 budget that removed US$1.9 billion from NASA's overall budget, of which roughly one quarter was for JWST. US$3 billion had been spent and 75% of its hardware was in production. This budget proposal was approved by subcommittee vote the following day. The committee charged that the project was "billions of dollars over budget and plagued by poor management". In response, the American Astronomical Society issued a statement in support of JWST, as did Maryland US Senator Barbara Mikulski. A number of editorials supporting JWST appeared in the international press during 2011 as well. In November 2011, Congress reversed plans to cancel the JWST and instead capped additional funding to complete the project at US$8 billion.

Some scientists have expressed concerns about growing costs and schedule delays for the Webb telescope, which competes for scant astronomy budgets and thus threatens funding for other space science programs. Because the runaway budget diverted funding from other research, a 2010 Nature article described the JWST as "the telescope that ate astronomy".

A review of NASA budget records and status reports noted that the JWST is plagued by many of the same problems that have affected other major NASA projects. Repairs and additional testing included underestimates of the telescope's cost that failed to budget for expected technical glitches and missed budget projections, thus extending the schedule and increasing costs further.

One reason for the early cost growth is that it is difficult to forecast the cost of development, and in general budget predictability improved when initial development milestones were achieved. By the mid-2010s, the U.S. contribution was still expected to cost US$8.8 billion. In 2007, the expected ESA contribution was about €350 million. With the U.S. and international funding combined, the overall cost not including extended operations is projected to be over US$10 billion when completed. On 27 March 2018, NASA officials announced that JWST's launch would be pushed back to May 2020 or later, and admitted that the project's costs might exceed the US$8.8 billion price tag. In the 27 March 2018 press release announcing the latest delay, NASA said that it will release a revised cost estimate after a new launch window is determined in cooperation with the European Space Agency (ESA). If this cost estimate exceeds the US$8 billion cap Congress put in place in 2011, as is considered unavoidable, NASA will have to have the mission re-authorized by the legislature.

In February 2019, despite expressing criticism over cost growth, Congress increased the mission's cost cap by US$800 million. In October 2019, the total cost estimate for the project reached US$10 billion.

Partnership

NASA, ESA and CSA have collaborated on the telescope since 1996. ESA's participation in construction and launch was approved by its members in 2003 and an agreement was signed between ESA and NASA in 2007. In exchange for full partnership, representation and access to the observatory for its astronomers, ESA is providing the NIRSpec instrument, the Optical Bench Assembly of the MIRI instrument, an Ariane 5 ECA launcher, and manpower to support operations. The CSA will provide the Fine Guidance Sensor and the Near-Infrared Imager Slitless Spectrograph plus manpower to support operations.

Participating countries

Public displays and outreach

Early full-scale model on display at NASA Goddard Space Flight Center (2005)

A large telescope model has been on display at various places since 2005: in the United States at Seattle, Washington; Colorado Springs, Colorado; Greenbelt, Maryland; Rochester, New York; New York City; and Orlando, Florida; and elsewhere at Paris, France; Dublin, Ireland; Montreal, Canada; Hatfield, United Kingdom; and Munich, Germany. The model was built by the main contractor, Northrop Grumman Aerospace Systems.

In May 2007, a full-scale model of the telescope was assembled for display at the Smithsonian Institution's National Air and Space Museum on the National Mall, Washington, D.C. The model was intended to give the viewing public a better understanding of the size, scale and complexity of the satellite, as well as pique the interest of viewers in science and astronomy in general. The model is significantly different from the telescope, as the model must withstand gravity and weather, so is constructed mainly of Aluminium and steel measuring approximately 24 m × 12 m × 12 m (79 ft × 39 ft × 39 ft) and weighs 5,500 kg (12,100 lb).

The model was on display in New York City's Battery Park during the 2010 World Science Festival, where it served as the backdrop for a panel discussion featuring Nobel Prize laureate John C. Mather, astronaut John M. Grunsfeld and astronomer Heidi Hammel. In March 2013, the model was on display in Austin for SXSW 2013. Amber Straughn, the deputy project scientist for science communications, has been a spokesperson for the project at many SXSW events from 2013 on in addition to Comic Con, TEDx, and other public venues.

Mission

The JWST has four key goals:

These goals can be accomplished more effectively by observation in near-infrared light rather than light in the visible part of the spectrum. For this reason the JWST's instruments will not measure visible or ultraviolet light like the Hubble Telescope, but will have a much greater capacity to perform infrared astronomy. The JWST will be sensitive to a range of wavelengths from 0.6 (orange light) to 28 micrometers (deep infrared radiation at about 100 K (−173 °C; −280 °F)).

JWST may be used to gather information on the dimming light of star KIC 8462852, which was discovered in 2015, and has some abnormal light-curve properties.

Launch and mission length

As of September 2021, the launch is scheduled for 18 December 2021 on an Ariane 5 launch vehicle from French Guiana. The observatory attaches to the Ariane 5 launch vehicle via a launch vehicle adapter ring which could be used by a future spacecraft to grapple the observatory to attempt to fix gross deployment problems. However, the telescope itself is not serviceable, and astronauts would not be able to perform tasks such as swapping instruments, as with the Hubble Telescope. Its nominal mission time is five years, with a goal of ten years. JWST needs to use propellant to maintain its halo orbit around L2, which provides an upper limit to its designed lifetime, and it is being designed to carry enough for ten years. The planned five year science mission begins after a 6-month commissioning phase. An L2 orbit is unstable, so it requires orbital station-keeping, or the telescope will drift away from this orbital configuration.

Orbit

JWST will not be exactly at the L2 point, but circle around it in a halo orbit.
 
Two alternate Hubble Space Telescope views of the Carina Nebula, comparing ultraviolet and visible (top) and infrared (bottom) astronomy. Far more stars are visible in the latter.

The JWST will be located near the second Lagrange point (L2) of the Earth-Sun system, which is 1,500,000 km (930,000 mi) from Earth, directly opposite to the Sun. Normally an object circling the Sun farther out than Earth would take longer than one year to complete its orbit, but near the L2 point the combined gravitational pull of the Earth and the Sun allow a spacecraft to orbit the Sun in the same time it takes the Earth. The telescope will circle about the L2 point in a halo orbit, which will be inclined with respect to the ecliptic, have a radius of approximately 800,000 km (500,000 mi), and take about half a year to complete. Since L2 is just an equilibrium point with no gravitational pull, a halo orbit is not an orbit in the usual sense: the spacecraft is actually in orbit around the Sun, and the halo orbit can be thought of as controlled drifting to remain in the vicinity of the L2 point. This requires some station-keeping: around 2–4 m/s per year from the total budget of 150 m/s. Two sets of thrusters constitute the observatory's propulsion system.

Infrared astronomy

Infrared observations can see objects hidden in visible light, such as the HUDF-JD2 shown here.

JWST is the formal successor to the Hubble Space Telescope (HST), and since its primary emphasis is on infrared astronomy, it is also a successor to the Spitzer Space Telescope. JWST will far surpass both those telescopes, being able to see many more and much older stars and galaxies. Observing in the infrared spectrum is a key technique for achieving this, because of cosmological redshift, and because it better penetrates obscuring dust and gas. This allows observation of dimmer, cooler objects. Since water vapor and carbon dioxide in the Earth's atmosphere strongly absorbs most infrared, ground-based infrared astronomy is limited to narrow wavelength ranges where the atmosphere absorbs less strongly. Additionally, the atmosphere itself radiates in the infrared spectrum, often overwhelming light from the object being observed. This makes a space telescope preferable for infrared observation.

The more distant an object is, the younger it appears: its light has taken longer to reach human observers. Because the universe is expanding, as the light travels it becomes red-shifted, and objects at extreme distances are therefore easier to see if viewed in the infrared. JWST's infrared capabilities are expected to let it see back in time to the first galaxies forming just a few hundred million years after the Big Bang.

Infrared radiation can pass more freely through regions of cosmic dust that scatter visible light. Observations in infrared allow the study of objects and regions of space which would be obscured by gas and dust in the visible spectrum, such as the molecular clouds where stars are born, the circumstellar disks that give rise to planets, and the cores of active galaxies.

Relatively cool objects (temperatures less than several thousand degrees) emit their radiation primarily in the infrared, as described by Planck's law. As a result, most objects that are cooler than stars are better studied in the infrared. This includes the clouds of the interstellar medium, brown dwarfs, planets both in our own and other solar systems, comets, and Kuiper belt objects that will be observed with the Mid-Infrared Instrument (MIRI).

Some of the missions in infrared astronomy that impacted JWST development were Spitzer and the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) probe. Spitzer showed the importance of mid-infrared, which is helpful for tasks such as observing dust disks around stars. Also, the WMAP probe showed the universe was "lit up" at redshift 17, further underscoring the importance of the mid-infrared. Both these missions were launched in the early 2000s, in time to influence JWST development.

Ground support and operations

The Space Telescope Science Institute (STScI), located in Baltimore, Maryland, on the Homewood Campus of Johns Hopkins University, was selected as the Science and Operations Center (S&OC) for JWST with an initial budget of US$162.2 million intended to support operations through the first year after launch. In this capacity, STScI will be responsible for the scientific operation of the telescope and delivery of data products to the astronomical community. Data will be transmitted from JWST to the ground via the NASA Deep Space Network, processed and calibrated at STScI, and then distributed online to astronomers worldwide. Similar to how Hubble is operated, anyone, anywhere in the world, will be allowed to submit proposals for observations. Each year several committees of astronomers will peer review the submitted proposals to select the projects to observe in the coming year. The authors of the chosen proposals will typically have one year of private access to the new observations, after which the data will become publicly available for download by anyone from the online archive at STScI.

The bandwidth and digital throughput of the satellite is designed to operate at 458 gigabits of data per day for the length of the mission. Most of the data processing on the telescope is done by conventional single-board computers. The conversion of the analog science data to digital form is performed by the custom-built SIDECAR ASIC (System for Image Digitization, Enhancement, Control And Retrieval Application Specific Integrated Circuit). NASA stated that the SIDECAR ASIC will include all the functions of a 9.1 kg (20 lb) instrument box in a 3 cm (1.2 in) package and consume only 11 milliwatts of power. Since this conversion must be done close to the detectors, on the cool side of the telescope, the low power use of this IC will be crucial for maintaining the low temperature required for optimal operation of the JWST.

After-launch deployment

Nearly a month after launch, a trajectory correction will be initiated to place the JWST into a Halo orbit at the L2 Lagrange point.

Once in position, JWST will go through the process of deploying its sunshade, mirror, and arm, which will take around three weeks. The mirror is in three pieces that will swing into place with motors.

Animation of James Webb Space Telescope trajectory
 
Polar view
 
Equatorial view

Allocation of observation time

JWST observing time will be allocated through a General Observers (GO) program, a Guaranteed Time Observations (GTO) program, and a Director's Discretionary Early Release Science (DD-ERS) program. The GTO program provides guaranteed observing time for scientists who developed hardware and software components for the observatory. The GO program provides all astronomers the opportunity to apply for observing time and will represent the bulk of the observing time. GO programs will be selected through peer review by a Time Allocation Committee (TAC), similar to the proposal review process used for the Hubble Space Telescope. JWST observing time is expected to be highly oversubscribed.

Early Release Science Program

Atmospheric windows in the infrared: Much of this type of light is blocked when viewed from the Earth's surface. It would be like looking at a rainbow but only seeing one color.

In November 2017, the Space Telescope Science Institute announced the selection of 13 Director's Discretionary Early Release Science (DD-ERS) programs, chosen through a competitive proposal process. The observations for these programs will be obtained during the first five months of JWST science operations after the end of the commissioning period. A total of 460 hours of observing time was awarded to these 13 programs, which span science topics including the Solar System, exoplanets, stars and star formation, nearby and distant galaxies, gravitational lenses, and quasars.

General Observer Program

Selection of Cycle 1 GO programs was announced on 30 March 2021. In the Cycle 1 proposal review, 266 proposals were approved, including 13 large and treasury programs.

Planetary habitability

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Understanding planetary habitability is partly an extrapolation of the conditions on Earth, as this is the only planet known to support life.

Planetary habitability is the measure of a planet's or a natural satellite's potential to develop and maintain environments hospitable to life. Life may be generated directly on a planet or satellite endogenously or be transferred to it from another body, through a hypothetical process known as panspermia. Environments do not need to contain life to be considered habitable nor are accepted habitable zones the only areas in which life might arise.

As the existence of life beyond Earth is unknown, planetary habitability is largely an extrapolation of conditions on Earth and the characteristics of the Sun and Solar System which appear favorable to life's flourishing. Of particular interest are those factors that have sustained complex, multicellular organisms on Earth and not just simpler, unicellular creatures. Research and theory in this regard is a component of a number of natural sciences, such as astronomy, planetary science and the emerging discipline of astrobiology.

An absolute requirement for life is an energy source, and the notion of planetary habitability implies that many other geophysical, geochemical, and astrophysical criteria must be met before an astronomical body can support life. In its astrobiology roadmap, NASA has defined the principal habitability criteria as "extended regions of liquid water, conditions favorable for the assembly of complex organic molecules, and energy sources to sustain metabolism". In August 2018, researchers reported that water worlds could support life.

Habitability indicators and biosignatures must be interpreted within a planetary and environmental context. In determining the habitability potential of a body, studies focus on its bulk composition, orbital properties, atmosphere, and potential chemical interactions. Stellar characteristics of importance include mass and luminosity, stable variability, and high metallicity. Rocky, wet terrestrial-type planets and moons with the potential for Earth-like chemistry are a primary focus of astrobiological research, although more speculative habitability theories occasionally examine alternative biochemistries and other types of astronomical bodies.

The idea that planets beyond Earth might host life is an ancient one, though historically it was framed by philosophy as much as physical science. The late 20th century saw two breakthroughs in the field. The observation and robotic spacecraft exploration of other planets and moons within the Solar System has provided critical information on defining habitability criteria and allowed for substantial geophysical comparisons between the Earth and other bodies. The discovery of extrasolar planets, beginning in the early 1990s and accelerating thereafter, has provided further information for the study of possible extraterrestrial life. These findings confirm that the Sun is not unique among stars in hosting planets and expands the habitability research horizon beyond the Solar System.

Earth habitability comparison

The chemistry of life may have begun shortly after the Big Bang, 13.8 billion years ago, during a habitable epoch when the Universe was only 10–17 million years old. According to the panspermia hypothesis, microscopic life—distributed by meteoroids, asteroids and other small Solar System bodies—may exist throughout the Universe. Nonetheless, Earth is the only place in the Universe known to harbor life. Estimates of habitable zones around other stars, along with the discovery of thousands of extrasolar planets and new insights into the extreme habitats on Earth, suggest that there may be many more habitable places in the Universe than considered possible until very recently. On 4 November 2013, astronomers reported, based on Kepler space mission data, that there could be as many as 40 billion Earth-sized planets orbiting in the habitable zones of Sun-like stars and red dwarfs within the Milky Way. 11 billion of these estimated planets may be orbiting Sun-like stars. The nearest such planet may be 12 light-years away, according to the scientists. As of June 2021, a total of 60 potentially habitable exoplanets have been found.

In August 2021, a new class of habitable planets, named "hycean planets", which involves "hot, ocean-covered planets with hydrogen-rich atmospheres", has been reported. Hycean planets may soon be studied for biosignatures by terrestrial telescopes as well as space telescopes, such as the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) scheduled to be launched later in 2021.

Suitable star systems

An understanding of planetary habitability begins with the host star. The classical HZ is defined for surface conditions only; but a metabolism that does not depend on the stellar light can still exist outside the HZ, thriving in the interior of the planet where liquid water is available.

Under the auspices of SETI's Project Phoenix, scientists Margaret Turnbull and Jill Tarter developed the "HabCat" (or Catalogue of Habitable Stellar Systems) in 2002. The catalogue was formed by winnowing the nearly 120,000 stars of the larger Hipparcos Catalogue into a core group of 17,000 potentially habitable stars, and the selection criteria that were used provide a good starting point for understanding which astrophysical factors are necessary to habitable planets. According to research published in August 2015, very large galaxies may be more favorable to the formation and development of habitable planets than smaller galaxies, like the Milky Way galaxy.

However, what makes a planet habitable is a much more complex question than having a planet located at the right distance from its host star so that water can be liquid on its surface: various geophysical and geodynamical aspects, the radiation, and the host star's plasma environment can influence the evolution of planets and life, if it originated. Liquid water is a necessary but not sufficient condition for life as we know it, as habitability is a function of a multitude of environmental parameters

Spectral class

The spectral class of a star indicates its photospheric temperature, which (for main-sequence stars) correlates to overall mass. The appropriate spectral range for habitable stars is considered to be "late F" or "G", to "mid-K". This corresponds to temperatures of a little more than 7,000 K down to a little less than 4,000 K (6,700 °C to 3,700 °C); the Sun, a G2 star at 5,777 K, is well within these bounds. This spectral range probably accounts for between 5% and 10% of stars in the local Milky Way galaxy. "Middle-class" stars of this sort have a number of characteristics considered important to planetary habitability:

  • They live at least a few hundred million years, allowing life a chance to evolve. More luminous main-sequence stars of the "O" classes and many members of the "B" classes usually live less than 500 million years and in exceptional cases less than 10 million.
  • They emit enough high-frequency ultraviolet radiation to trigger important atmospheric dynamics such as ozone formation, but not so much that ionisation destroys incipient life.
  • They emit sufficient radiation at wavelengths conducive to photosynthesis.
  • Liquid water may exist on the surface of planets orbiting them at a distance that does not induce tidal locking.

K-type stars may be able to support life far longer than the Sun.

Whether fainter late K and M class red dwarf stars are also suitable hosts for habitable planets is perhaps the most important open question in the entire field of planetary habitability given their prevalence (habitability of red dwarf systems). Gliese 581 c, a "super-Earth", has been found orbiting in the "habitable zone" (HZ) of a red dwarf and may possess liquid water. However it is also possible that a greenhouse effect may render it too hot to support life, while its neighbor, Gliese 581 d, may be a more likely candidate for habitability. In September 2010, the discovery was announced of another planet, Gliese 581 g, in an orbit between these two planets. However, reviews of the discovery have placed the existence of this planet in doubt, and it is listed as "unconfirmed". In September 2012, the discovery of two planets orbiting Gliese 163 was announced. One of the planets, Gliese 163 c, about 6.9 times the mass of Earth and somewhat hotter, was considered to be within the habitable zone.

A recent study suggests that cooler stars that emit more light in the infrared and near infrared may actually host warmer planets with less ice and incidence of snowball states. These wavelengths are absorbed by their planets' ice and greenhouse gases and remain warmer.

A 2020 study found that about half of Sun-like stars could host rocky, potentially habitable planets. Specifically, they estimated with that, on average, the nearest habitable zone planet around G and K-type stars is about 6 parsecs away, and there are about 4 rocky planets around G and K-type stars within 10 parsecs (32.6 light years) of the Sun.

A stable habitable zone

The habitable zone (HZ) is a shell-shaped region of space surrounding a star in which a planet could maintain liquid water on its surface. The concept was first proposed by astrophysicist Su-Shu Huang in 1959, based on climatic constraints imposed by the host star. After an energy source, liquid water is widely considered the most important ingredient for life, considering how integral it is to all life systems on Earth. However, if life is discovered in the absence of water, the definition of an HZ may have to be greatly expanded.

The inner edge of the HZ is the distance where runaway greenhouse effect vaporize the whole water reservoir and, as a second effect, induce the photodissociation of water vapor and the loss of hydrogen to space. The outer edge of the HZ is the distance from the star where a maximum greenhouse effect fails to keep the surface of the planet above the freezing point, and by CO
2
condensation.

A "stable" HZ implies two factors. First, the range of an HZ should not vary greatly over time. All stars increase in luminosity as they age, and a given HZ thus migrates outwards, but if this happens too quickly (for example, with a super-massive star) planets may only have a brief window inside the HZ and a correspondingly smaller chance of developing life. Calculating an HZ range and its long-term movement is never straightforward, as negative feedback loops such as the CNO cycle will tend to offset the increases in luminosity. Assumptions made about atmospheric conditions and geology thus have as great an impact on a putative HZ range as does stellar evolution: the proposed parameters of the Sun's HZ, for example, have fluctuated greatly.

Second, no large-mass body such as a gas giant should be present in or relatively close to the HZ, thus disrupting the formation of Earth-size bodies. The matter in the asteroid belt, for example, appears to have been unable to accrete into a planet due to orbital resonances with Jupiter; if the giant had appeared in the region that is now between the orbits of Venus and Mars, Earth would almost certainly not have developed in its present form. However a gas giant inside the HZ might have habitable moons under the right conditions.

In the Solar System, the inner planets are terrestrial, and the outer ones are gas giants, but discoveries of extrasolar planets suggest that this arrangement may not be at all common: numerous Jupiter-sized bodies have been found in close orbit about their primary, disrupting potential HZs. However, present data for extrasolar planets is likely to be skewed towards that type (large planets in close orbits) because they are far easier to identify; thus it remains to be seen which type of planetary system is the norm, or indeed if there is one.

Low stellar variation

Changes in luminosity are common to all stars, but the severity of such fluctuations covers a broad range. Most stars are relatively stable, but a significant minority of variable stars often undergo sudden and intense increases in luminosity and consequently in the amount of energy radiated toward bodies in orbit. These stars are considered poor candidates for hosting life-bearing planets, as their unpredictability and energy output changes would negatively impact organisms: living things adapted to a specific temperature range could not survive too great a temperature variation. Further, upswings in luminosity are generally accompanied by massive doses of gamma ray and X-ray radiation which might prove lethal. Atmospheres do mitigate such effects, but their atmosphere might not be retained by planets orbiting variables, because the high-frequency energy buffeting these planets would continually strip them of their protective covering.

The Sun, in this respect as in many others, is relatively benign: the variation between its maximum and minimum energy output is roughly 0.1% over its 11-year solar cycle. There is strong (though not undisputed) evidence that even minor changes in the Sun's luminosity have had significant effects on the Earth's climate well within the historical era: the Little Ice Age of the mid-second millennium, for instance, may have been caused by a relatively long-term decline in the Sun's luminosity. Thus, a star does not have to be a true variable for differences in luminosity to affect habitability. Of known solar analogs, one that closely resembles the Sun is considered to be 18 Scorpii; unfortunately for the prospects of life existing in its proximity, the only significant difference between the two bodies is the amplitude of the solar cycle, which appears to be much greater for 18 Scorpii.

High metallicity

While the bulk of material in any star is hydrogen and helium, there is a significant variation in the amount of heavier elements (metals). A high proportion of metals in a star correlates to the amount of heavy material initially available in the protoplanetary disk. A smaller amount of metal makes the formation of planets much less likely, under the solar nebula theory of planetary system formation. Any planets that did form around a metal-poor star would probably be low in mass, and thus unfavorable for life. Spectroscopic studies of systems where exoplanets have been found to date confirm the relationship between high metal content and planet formation: "Stars with planets, or at least with planets similar to the ones we are finding today, are clearly more metal rich than stars without planetary companions." This relationship between high metallicity and planet formation also means that habitable systems are more likely to be found around stars of younger generations, since stars that formed early in the universe's history have low metal content.

Planetary characteristics

The moons of some gas giants could potentially be habitable.

Habitability indicators and biosignatures must be interpreted within a planetary and environmental context. Whether a planet will emerge as habitable depends on the sequence of events that led to its formation, which could include the production of organic molecules in molecular clouds and protoplanetary disks, delivery of materials during and after planetary accretion, and the orbital location in the planetary system. The chief assumption about habitable planets is that they are terrestrial. Such planets, roughly within one order of magnitude of Earth mass, are primarily composed of silicate rocks, and have not accreted the gaseous outer layers of hydrogen and helium found on gas giants. The possibility that life could evolve in the cloud tops of giant planets has not been decisively ruled out, though it is considered unlikely, as they have no surface and their gravity is enormous. The natural satellites of giant planets, meanwhile, remain valid candidates for hosting life.

In February 2011 the Kepler Space Observatory Mission team released a list of 1235 extrasolar planet candidates, including 54 that may be in the habitable zone. Six of the candidates in this zone are smaller than twice the size of Earth. A more recent study found that one of these candidates (KOI 326.01) is much larger and hotter than first reported. Based on the findings, the Kepler team estimated there to be "at least 50 billion planets in the Milky Way" of which "at least 500 million" are in the habitable zone.

In analyzing which environments are likely to support life, a distinction is usually made between simple, unicellular organisms such as bacteria and archaea and complex metazoans (animals). Unicellularity necessarily precedes multicellularity in any hypothetical tree of life, and where single-celled organisms do emerge there is no assurance that greater complexity will then develop. The planetary characteristics listed below are considered crucial for life generally, but in every case multicellular organisms are more picky than unicellular life.

Mass

Mars, with its rarefied atmosphere, is colder than the Earth would be if it were at a similar distance from the Sun.

Low-mass planets are poor candidates for life for two reasons. First, their lesser gravity makes atmosphere retention difficult. Constituent molecules are more likely to reach escape velocity and be lost to space when buffeted by solar wind or stirred by collision. Planets without a thick atmosphere lack the matter necessary for primal biochemistry, have little insulation and poor heat transfer across their surfaces (for example, Mars, with its thin atmosphere, is colder than the Earth would be if it were at a similar distance from the Sun), and provide less protection against meteoroids and high-frequency radiation. Further, where an atmosphere is less dense than 0.006 Earth atmospheres, water cannot exist in liquid form as the required atmospheric pressure, 4.56 mm Hg (608 Pa) (0.18 inch Hg), does not occur. The temperature range at which water is liquid is smaller at low pressures generally.

Secondly, smaller planets have smaller diameters and thus higher surface-to-volume ratios than their larger cousins. Such bodies tend to lose the energy left over from their formation quickly and end up geologically dead, lacking the volcanoes, earthquakes and tectonic activity which supply the surface with life-sustaining material and the atmosphere with temperature moderators like carbon dioxide. Plate tectonics appear particularly crucial, at least on Earth: not only does the process recycle important chemicals and minerals, it also fosters bio-diversity through continent creation and increased environmental complexity and helps create the convective cells necessary to generate Earth's magnetic field.

"Low mass" is partly a relative label: the Earth is low mass when compared to the Solar System's gas giants, but it is the largest, by diameter and mass, and the densest of all terrestrial bodies. It is large enough to retain an atmosphere through gravity alone and large enough that its molten core remains a heat engine, driving the diverse geology of the surface (the decay of radioactive elements within a planet's core is the other significant component of planetary heating). Mars, by contrast, is nearly (or perhaps totally) geologically dead and has lost much of its atmosphere. Thus it would be fair to infer that the lower mass limit for habitability lies somewhere between that of Mars and that of Earth or Venus: 0.3 Earth masses has been offered as a rough dividing line for habitable planets.

However, a 2008 study by the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics suggests that the dividing line may be higher. Earth may in fact lie on the lower boundary of habitability: if it were any smaller, plate tectonics would be impossible. Venus, which has 85% of Earth's mass, shows no signs of tectonic activity. Conversely, "super-Earths", terrestrial planets with higher masses than Earth, would have higher levels of plate tectonics and thus be firmly placed in the habitable range.

Exceptional circumstances do offer exceptional cases: Jupiter's moon Io (which is smaller than any of the terrestrial planets) is volcanically dynamic because of the gravitational stresses induced by its orbit, and its neighbor Europa may have a liquid ocean or icy slush underneath a frozen shell also due to power generated from orbiting a gas giant.

Saturn's Titan, meanwhile, has an outside chance of harbouring life, as it has retained a thick atmosphere and has liquid methane seas on its surface. Organic-chemical reactions that only require minimum energy are possible in these seas, but whether any living system can be based on such minimal reactions is unclear, and would seem unlikely. These satellites are exceptions, but they prove that mass, as a criterion for habitability, cannot necessarily be considered definitive at this stage of our understanding.

A larger planet is likely to have a more massive atmosphere. A combination of higher escape velocity to retain lighter atoms, and extensive outgassing from enhanced plate tectonics may greatly increase the atmospheric pressure and temperature at the surface compared to Earth. The enhanced greenhouse effect of such a heavy atmosphere would tend to suggest that the habitable zone should be further out from the central star for such massive planets.

Finally, a larger planet is likely to have a large iron core. This allows for a magnetic field to protect the planet from stellar wind and cosmic radiation, which otherwise would tend to strip away planetary atmosphere and to bombard living things with ionized particles. Mass is not the only criterion for producing a magnetic field—as the planet must also rotate fast enough to produce a dynamo effect within its core—but it is a significant component of the process.

The mass of a potentially habitable exoplanet is between 0.1 and 5.0 Earth masses. However is possible for a habitable world to have a mass as low as 0.0268 Earth Masses. 

Radius

The radius of a potentially habitable exoplanet would range between 0.5 and 1.5 Earth radii.

Orbit and rotation

As with other criteria, stability is the critical consideration in evaluating the effect of orbital and rotational characteristics on planetary habitability. Orbital eccentricity is the difference between a planet's farthest and closest approach to its parent star divided by the sum of said distances. It is a ratio describing the shape of the elliptical orbit. The greater the eccentricity the greater the temperature fluctuation on a planet's surface. Although they are adaptive, living organisms can stand only so much variation, particularly if the fluctuations overlap both the freezing point and boiling point of the planet's main biotic solvent (e.g., water on Earth). If, for example, Earth's oceans were alternately boiling and freezing solid, it is difficult to imagine life as we know it having evolved. The more complex the organism, the greater the temperature sensitivity. The Earth's orbit is almost perfectly circular, with an eccentricity of less than 0.02; other planets in the Solar System (with the exception of Mercury) have eccentricities that are similarly benign. Nonetheless, there may be scientific support, based on studies reported in March 2020, for considering that parts of the planet Mercury may have been habitable, and perhaps that actual life forms, albeit likely primitive microorganisms, may have existed on the planet after all.

Habitability is also influenced by the architecture of the planetary system around a star. The evolution and stability of these systems are determined by gravitational dynamics, which drive the orbital evolution of terrestrial planets. Data collected on the orbital eccentricities of extrasolar planets has surprised most researchers: 90% have an orbital eccentricity greater than that found within the Solar System, and the average is fully 0.25. This means that the vast majority of planets have highly eccentric orbits and of these, even if their average distance from their star is deemed to be within the HZ, they nonetheless would be spending only a small portion of their time within the zone.

A planet's movement around its rotational axis must also meet certain criteria if life is to have the opportunity to evolve. A first assumption is that the planet should have moderate seasons. If there is little or no axial tilt (or obliquity) relative to the perpendicular of the ecliptic, seasons will not occur and a main stimulant to biospheric dynamism will disappear. The planet would also be colder than it would be with a significant tilt: when the greatest intensity of radiation is always within a few degrees of the equator, warm weather cannot move poleward and a planet's climate becomes dominated by colder polar weather systems.

If a planet is radically tilted, seasons will be extreme and make it more difficult for a biosphere to achieve homeostasis. The axial tilt of the Earth is higher now (in the Quaternary) than it has been in the past, coinciding with reduced polar ice, warmer temperatures and less seasonal variation. Scientists do not know whether this trend will continue indefinitely with further increases in axial tilt.

The exact effects of these changes can only be computer modelled at present, and studies have shown that even extreme tilts of up to 85 degrees do not absolutely preclude life "provided it does not occupy continental surfaces plagued seasonally by the highest temperature." Not only the mean axial tilt, but also its variation over time must be considered. The Earth's tilt varies between 21.5 and 24.5 degrees over 41,000 years. A more drastic variation, or a much shorter periodicity, would induce climatic effects such as variations in seasonal severity.

Other orbital considerations include:

  • The planet should rotate relatively quickly so that the day-night cycle is not overlong. If a day takes years, the temperature differential between the day and night side will be pronounced, and problems similar to those noted with extreme orbital eccentricity will come to the fore.
  • The planet also should rotate quickly enough so that a magnetic dynamo may be started in its iron core to produce a magnetic field.
  • Change in the direction of the axis rotation (precession) should not be pronounced. In itself, precession need not affect habitability as it changes the direction of the tilt, not its degree. However, precession tends to accentuate variations caused by other orbital deviations; see Milankovitch cycles. Precession on Earth occurs over a 26,000-year cycle.

The Earth's Moon appears to play a crucial role in moderating the Earth's climate by stabilising the axial tilt. It has been suggested that a chaotic tilt may be a "deal-breaker" in terms of habitability—i.e. a satellite the size of the Moon is not only helpful but required to produce stability. This position remains controversial.

In the case of the Earth, the sole Moon is sufficiently massive and orbits so as to significantly contribute to ocean tides, which in turn aids the dynamic churning of Earth's large liquid water oceans. These lunar forces not only help ensure that the oceans do not stagnate, but also play a critical role in Earth's dynamic climate.

Geology

Geological cross section of Earth
 
A visualization showing a simple model of Earth's magnetic field.

Concentrations of radionuclides in rocky planet mantles may be critical for the habitability of Earth-like planets as such planets with higher abundances likely lack a persistent dynamo for a significant fraction of their lifetimes and those with lower concentrations may often be geologically inert. Planetary dynamos create strong magnetic fields which may often be necessary for life to develop or persist as they shield planets from solar winds and cosmic radiation. The electromagnetic emission spectra of stars could be used to identify those which are more likely to host habitable Earth-like planets. As of 2020 radionuclides are thought to be produced by rare stellar processes such as neutron star mergers. Additional geological characteristics may be essential or major factors in the habitability of natural celestial bodies – including some that may shape the body's heat and magnetic field. Some of these are unknown or not well understood and being investigated by planetary scientists, geochemists and others.

Geochemistry

It is generally assumed that any extraterrestrial life that might exist will be based on the same fundamental biochemistry as found on Earth, as the four elements most vital for life, carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, and nitrogen, are also the most common chemically reactive elements in the universe. Indeed, simple biogenic compounds, such as very simple amino acids such as glycine, have been found in meteorites and in the interstellar medium. These four elements together comprise over 96% of Earth's collective biomass. Carbon has an unparalleled ability to bond with itself and to form a massive array of intricate and varied structures, making it an ideal material for the complex mechanisms that form living cells. Hydrogen and oxygen, in the form of water, compose the solvent in which biological processes take place and in which the first reactions occurred that led to life's emergence. The energy released in the formation of powerful covalent bonds between carbon and oxygen, available by oxidizing organic compounds, is the fuel of all complex life-forms. These four elements together make up amino acids, which in turn are the building blocks of proteins, the substance of living tissue. In addition, neither sulfur, required for the building of proteins, nor phosphorus, needed for the formation of DNA, RNA, and the adenosine phosphates essential to metabolism, is rare.

Relative abundance in space does not always mirror differentiated abundance within planets; of the four life elements, for instance, only oxygen is present in any abundance in the Earth's crust. This can be partly explained by the fact that many of these elements, such as hydrogen and nitrogen, along with their simplest and most common compounds, such as carbon dioxide, carbon monoxide, methane, ammonia, and water, are gaseous at warm temperatures. In the hot region close to the Sun, these volatile compounds could not have played a significant role in the planets' geological formation. Instead, they were trapped as gases underneath the newly formed crusts, which were largely made of rocky, involatile compounds such as silica (a compound of silicon and oxygen, accounting for oxygen's relative abundance). Outgassing of volatile compounds through the first volcanoes would have contributed to the formation of the planets' atmospheres. The Miller–Urey experiment showed that, with the application of energy, simple inorganic compounds exposed to a primordial atmosphere can react to synthesize amino acids.

Even so, volcanic outgassing could not have accounted for the amount of water in Earth's oceans. The vast majority of the water—and arguably carbon—necessary for life must have come from the outer Solar System, away from the Sun's heat, where it could remain solid. Comets impacting with the Earth in the Solar System's early years would have deposited vast amounts of water, along with the other volatile compounds life requires onto the early Earth, providing a kick-start to the origin of life.

Thus, while there is reason to suspect that the four "life elements" ought to be readily available elsewhere, a habitable system probably also requires a supply of long-term orbiting bodies to seed inner planets. Without comets there is a possibility that life as we know it would not exist on Earth.

Microenvironments and extremophiles

The Atacama Desert in South America provides an analog to Mars and an ideal environment to study the boundary between sterility and habitability.

One important qualification to habitability criteria is that only a tiny portion of a planet is required to support life, a so-called Goldilocks Edge or Great Prebiotic Spot. Astrobiologists often concern themselves with "micro-environments", noting that "we lack a fundamental understanding of how evolutionary forces, such as mutation, selection, and genetic drift, operate in micro-organisms that act on and respond to changing micro-environments." Extremophiles are Earth organisms that live in niche environments under severe conditions generally considered inimical to life. Usually (although not always) unicellular, extremophiles include acutely alkaliphilic and acidophilic organisms and others that can survive water temperatures above 100 °C in hydrothermal vents.

The discovery of life in extreme conditions has complicated definitions of habitability, but also generated much excitement amongst researchers in greatly broadening the known range of conditions under which life can persist. For example, a planet that might otherwise be unable to support an atmosphere given the solar conditions in its vicinity, might be able to do so within a deep shadowed rift or volcanic cave. Similarly, craterous terrain might offer a refuge for primitive life. The Lawn Hill crater has been studied as an astrobiological analog, with researchers suggesting rapid sediment infill created a protected microenvironment for microbial organisms; similar conditions may have occurred over the geological history of Mars.

Earth environments that cannot support life are still instructive to astrobiologists in defining the limits of what organisms can endure. The heart of the Atacama desert, generally considered the driest place on Earth, appears unable to support life, and it has been subject to study by NASA and ESA for that reason: it provides a Mars analog and the moisture gradients along its edges are ideal for studying the boundary between sterility and habitability. The Atacama was the subject of study in 2003 that partly replicated experiments from the Viking landings on Mars in the 1970s; no DNA could be recovered from two soil samples, and incubation experiments were also negative for biosignatures.

Ecological factors

The two current ecological approaches for predicting the potential habitability use 19 or 20 environmental factors, with emphasis on water availability, temperature, presence of nutrients, an energy source, and protection from solar ultraviolet and galactic cosmic radiation.

Some habitability factors
Water  · Activity of liquid water
 · Past or future liquid (ice) inventories
 · Salinity, pH, and Eh of available water
Chemical environment Nutrients:
 · C, H, N, O, P, S, essential metals, essential micronutrients
 · Fixed nitrogen
 · Availability/mineralogy
Toxin abundances and lethality:
 · Heavy metals (e.g. Zn, Ni, Cu, Cr, As, Cd, etc.; some are essential, but toxic at high levels)
 · Globally distributed oxidizing soils
Energy for metabolism Solar (surface and near-surface only)
Geochemical (subsurface)
 · Oxidants
 · Reductants
 · Redox gradients
Conducive
physical conditions
 · Temperature
 · Extreme diurnal temperature fluctuations
 · Low pressure (is there a low-pressure threshold for terrestrial anaerobes?)
 · Strong ultraviolet germicidal irradiation
 · Galactic cosmic radiation and solar particle events (long-term accumulated effects)
 · Solar UV-induced volatile oxidants, e.g. O 2, O, H2O2, O3
 · Climate and its variability (geography, seasons, diurnal, and eventually, obliquity variations)
 · Substrate (soil processes, rock microenvironments, dust composition, shielding)
 · High CO2 concentrations in the global atmosphere
 · Transport (aeolian, ground water flow, surface water, glacial)

Alternative star systems

In determining the feasibility of extraterrestrial life, astronomers had long focused their attention on stars like the Sun. However, since planetary systems that resemble the Solar System are proving to be rare, they have begun to explore the possibility that life might form in systems very unlike our own.

Binary systems

Typical estimates often suggest that 50% or more of all stellar systems are binary systems. This may be partly sample bias, as massive and bright stars tend to be in binaries and these are most easily observed and catalogued; a more precise analysis has suggested that the more common fainter stars are usually singular, and that up to two thirds of all stellar systems are therefore solitary.

The separation between stars in a binary may range from less than one astronomical unit (AU, the average Earth–Sun distance) to several hundred. In latter instances, the gravitational effects will be negligible on a planet orbiting an otherwise suitable star and habitability potential will not be disrupted unless the orbit is highly eccentric. However, where the separation is significantly less, a stable orbit may be impossible. If a planet's distance to its primary exceeds about one fifth of the closest approach of the other star, orbital stability is not guaranteed. Whether planets might form in binaries at all had long been unclear, given that gravitational forces might interfere with planet formation. Theoretical work by Alan Boss at the Carnegie Institution has shown that gas giants can form around stars in binary systems much as they do around solitary stars.

One study of Alpha Centauri, the nearest star system to the Sun, suggested that binaries need not be discounted in the search for habitable planets. Centauri A and B have an 11 AU distance at closest approach (23 AU mean), and both should have stable habitable zones. A study of long-term orbital stability for simulated planets within the system shows that planets within approximately three AU of either star may remain rather stable (i.e. the semi-major axis deviating by less than 5% during 32 000 binary periods). The continuous habitable zone (CHZ for 4.5 billion years) for Centauri A is conservatively estimated at 1.2 to 1.3 AU and Centauri B at 0.73 to 0.74—well within the stable region in both cases.

Red dwarf systems

Relative star sizes and photospheric temperatures. Any planet around a red dwarf such as the one shown here (Gliese 229A) would have to huddle close to achieve Earth-like temperatures, probably inducing tidal locking. See Aurelia. Credit: MPIA/V. Joergens.

Determining the habitability of red dwarf stars could help determine how common life in the universe might be, as red dwarfs make up between 70 and 90% of all the stars in the galaxy.

Size

Astronomers for many years ruled out red dwarfs as potential abodes for life. Their small size (from 0.08 to 0.45 solar masses) means that their nuclear reactions proceed exceptionally slowly, and they emit very little light (from 3% of that produced by the Sun to as little as 0.01%). Any planet in orbit around a red dwarf would have to huddle very close to its parent star to attain Earth-like surface temperatures; from 0.3 AU (just inside the orbit of Mercury) for a star like Lacaille 8760, to as little as 0.032 AU for a star like Proxima Centauri (such a world would have a year lasting just 6.3 days). At those distances, the star's gravity would cause tidal locking. One side of the planet would eternally face the star, while the other would always face away from it. The only ways in which potential life could avoid either an inferno or a deep freeze would be if the planet had an atmosphere thick enough to transfer the star's heat from the day side to the night side, or if there was a gas giant in the habitable zone, with a habitable moon, which would be locked to the planet instead of the star, allowing a more even distribution of radiation over the planet. It was long assumed that such a thick atmosphere would prevent sunlight from reaching the surface in the first place, preventing photosynthesis.

An artist's impression of GJ 667 Cc, a potentially habitable planet orbiting a red dwarf constituent in a trinary star system.

This pessimism has been tempered by research. Studies by Robert Haberle and Manoj Joshi of NASA's Ames Research Center in California have shown that a planet's atmosphere (assuming it included greenhouse gases CO2 and H2O) need only be 100 millibars (0.10 atm), for the star's heat to be effectively carried to the night side. This is well within the levels required for photosynthesis, though water would still remain frozen on the dark side in some of their models. Martin Heath of Greenwich Community College, has shown that seawater, too, could be effectively circulated without freezing solid if the ocean basins were deep enough to allow free flow beneath the night side's ice cap. Further research—including a consideration of the amount of photosynthetically active radiation—suggested that tidally locked planets in red dwarf systems might at least be habitable for higher plants.

Other factors limiting habitability

Size is not the only factor in making red dwarfs potentially unsuitable for life, however. On a red dwarf planet, photosynthesis on the night side would be impossible, since it would never see the sun. On the day side, because the sun does not rise or set, areas in the shadows of mountains would remain so forever. Photosynthesis as we understand it would be complicated by the fact that a red dwarf produces most of its radiation in the infrared, and on the Earth the process depends on visible light. There are potential positives to this scenario. Numerous terrestrial ecosystems rely on chemosynthesis rather than photosynthesis, for instance, which would be possible in a red dwarf system. A static primary star position removes the need for plants to steer leaves toward the sun, deal with changing shade/sun patterns, or change from photosynthesis to stored energy during night. Because of the lack of a day-night cycle, including the weak light of morning and evening, far more energy would be available at a given radiation level.

Red dwarfs are far more variable and violent than their more stable, larger cousins. Often they are covered in starspots that can dim their emitted light by up to 40% for months at a time, while at other times they emit gigantic flares that can double their brightness in a matter of minutes. Such variation would be very damaging for life, as it would not only destroy any complex organic molecules that could possibly form biological precursors, but also because it would blow off sizeable portions of the planet's atmosphere.

For a planet around a red dwarf star to support life, it would require a rapidly rotating magnetic field to protect it from the flares. A tidally locked planet rotates only very slowly, and so cannot produce a geodynamo at its core. The violent flaring period of a red dwarf's life cycle is estimated to only last roughly the first 1.2 billion years of its existence. If a planet forms far away from a red dwarf so as to avoid tidal locking, and then migrates into the star's habitable zone after this turbulent initial period, it is possible that life may have a chance to develop. However, given its age, at 7–12 billion years of age, Barnard's Star is considerably older than the Sun. It was long assumed to be quiescent in terms of stellar activity. Yet, in 1998, astronomers observed an intense stellar flare, surprisingly showing that Barnard's Star is, despite its age, a flare star.

Longevity and ubiquity

Red dwarfs have one advantage over other stars as abodes for life: far greater longevity. It took 4.5 billion years before humanity appeared on Earth, and life as we know it will see suitable conditions for 1 to 2.3 billion years more. Red dwarfs, by contrast, could live for trillions of years because their nuclear reactions are far slower than those of larger stars, meaning that life would have longer to evolve and survive.

While the likelihood of finding a planet in the habitable zone around any specific red dwarf is slight, the total amount of habitable zone around all red dwarfs combined is equal to the total amount around Sun-like stars given their ubiquity. Furthermore, this total amount of habitable zone will last longer, because red dwarf stars live for hundreds of billions of years or even longer on the main sequence. However, combined with the above disadvantages, it is more likely that red dwarf stars would remain habitable longer to microbes, while the shorter-lived yellow dwarf stars, like the Sun, would remain habitable longer to animals.

Massive stars

Recent research suggests that very large stars, greater than ~100 solar masses, could have planetary systems consisting of hundreds of Mercury-sized planets within the habitable zone. Such systems could also contain brown dwarfs and low-mass stars (~0.1–0.3 solar masses). However the very short lifespans of stars of more than a few solar masses would scarcely allow time for a planet to cool, let alone the time needed for a stable biosphere to develop. Massive stars are thus eliminated as possible abodes for life.

However, a massive-star system could be a progenitor of life in another way – the supernova explosion of the massive star in the central part of the system. This supernova will disperse heavier elements throughout its vicinity, created during the phase when the massive star has moved off of the main sequence, and the systems of the potential low-mass stars (which are still on the main sequence) within the former massive-star system may be enriched with the relatively large supply of the heavy elements so close to a supernova explosion. However, this states nothing about what types of planets would form as a result of the supernova material, or what their habitability potential would be.

Four classes of habitable planets based on water

In a review of the factors which are important for the evolution of habitable Earth-sized planets, Lammer et al. proposed a classification of four water-dependent habitat types:

Class I habitats are planetary bodies on which stellar and geophysical conditions allow liquid water to be available at the surface, along with sunlight, so that complex multicellular organisms may originate.

Class II habitats include bodies which initially enjoy Earth-like conditions, but do not keep their ability to sustain liquid water on their surface due to stellar or geophysical conditions. Mars, and possibly Venus are examples of this class where complex life forms may not develop.

Class III habitats are planetary bodies where liquid water oceans exist below the surface, where they can interact directly with a silicate-rich core.

Such a situation can be expected on water-rich planets located too far from their star to allow surface liquid water, but on which subsurface water is in liquid form because of the geothermal heat. Two examples of such an environment are Europa and Enceladus. In such worlds, not only is light not available as an energy source, but the organic material brought by meteorites (thought to have been necessary to start life in some scenarios) may not easily reach the liquid water. If a planet can only harbor life below its surface, the biosphere would not likely modify the whole planetary environment in an observable way, thus, detecting its presence on an exoplanet would be extremely difficult.

Class IV habitats have liquid water layers between two ice layers, or liquids above ice.

If the water layer is thick enough, water at its base will be in solid phase (ice polymorphs) because of the high pressure. Ganymede and Callisto are likely examples of this class. Their oceans are thought to be enclosed between thick ice layers. In such conditions, the emergence of even simple life forms may be very difficult because the necessary ingredients for life will likely be completely diluted.

The galactic neighborhood

Along with the characteristics of planets and their star systems, the wider galactic environment may also impact habitability. Scientists considered the possibility that particular areas of galaxies (galactic habitable zones) are better suited to life than others; the Solar System in which we live, in the Orion Spur, on the Milky Way galaxy's edge is considered to be in a life-favorable spot:

  • It is not in a globular cluster where immense star densities are inimical to life, given excessive radiation and gravitational disturbance. Globular clusters are also primarily composed of older, probably metal-poor, stars. Furthermore, in globular clusters, the great ages of the stars would mean a large amount of stellar evolution by the host or other nearby stars, which due to their proximity may cause extreme harm to life on any planets, provided that they can form.
  • It is not near an active gamma ray source.
  • It is not near the galactic center where once again star densities increase the likelihood of ionizing radiation (e.g., from magnetars and supernovae). A supermassive black hole is also believed to lie at the middle of the galaxy which might prove a danger to any nearby bodies.
  • The circular orbit of the Sun around the galactic center keeps it out of the way of the galaxy's spiral arms where intense radiation and gravitation may again lead to disruption.

Thus, relative isolation is ultimately what a life-bearing system needs. If the Sun were crowded amongst other systems, the chance of being fatally close to dangerous radiation sources would increase significantly. Further, close neighbors might disrupt the stability of various orbiting bodies such as Oort cloud and Kuiper belt objects, which can bring catastrophe if knocked into the inner Solar System.

While stellar crowding proves disadvantageous to habitability, so too does extreme isolation. A star as metal-rich as the Sun would probably not have formed in the very outermost regions of the Milky Way given a decline in the relative abundance of metals and a general lack of star formation. Thus, a "suburban" location, such as the Solar System enjoys, is preferable to a Galaxy's center or farthest reaches.

Other considerations

Alternative biochemistries

While most investigations of extraterrestrial life start with the assumption that advanced life-forms must have similar requirements for life as on Earth, the hypothesis of other types of biochemistry suggests the possibility of lifeforms evolving around a different metabolic mechanism. In Evolving the Alien, biologist Jack Cohen and mathematician Ian Stewart argue astrobiology, based on the Rare Earth hypothesis, is restrictive and unimaginative. They suggest that Earth-like planets may be very rare, but non-carbon-based complex life could possibly emerge in other environments. The most frequently mentioned alternative to carbon is silicon-based life, while ammonia and hydrocarbons are sometimes suggested as alternative solvents to water. The astrobiologist Dirk Schulze-Makuch and other scientists have proposed a Planet Habitability Index whose criteria include "potential for holding a liquid solvent" that is not necessarily restricted to water.

More speculative ideas have focused on bodies altogether different from Earth-like planets. Astronomer Frank Drake, a well-known proponent of the search for extraterrestrial life, imagined life on a neutron star: submicroscopic "nuclear molecules" combining to form creatures with a life cycle millions of times quicker than Earth life. Called "imaginative and tongue-in-cheek", the idea gave rise to science fiction depictions. Carl Sagan, another optimist with regards to extraterrestrial life, considered the possibility of organisms that are always airborne within the high atmosphere of Jupiter in a 1976 paper. Cohen and Stewart also envisioned life in both a solar environment and in the atmosphere of a gas giant.

"Good Jupiters"

"Good Jupiters" are gas giants, like the Solar System's Jupiter, that orbit their stars in circular orbits far enough away from the habitable zone not to disturb it but close enough to "protect" terrestrial planets in closer orbit in two critical ways. First, they help to stabilize the orbits, and thereby the climates of the inner planets. Second, they keep the inner stellar system relatively free of comets and asteroids that could cause devastating impacts. Jupiter orbits the Sun at about five times the distance between the Earth and the Sun. This is the rough distance we should expect to find good Jupiters elsewhere. Jupiter's "caretaker" role was dramatically illustrated in 1994 when Comet Shoemaker–Levy 9 impacted the giant.

However, the evidence is not quite so clear. Research has shown that Jupiter's role in determining the rate at which objects hit Earth is significantly more complicated than once thought.

The role of Jupiter in the early history of the Solar System is somewhat better established, and the source of significantly less debate. Early in the Solar System's history, Jupiter is accepted as having played an important role in the hydration of our planet: it increased the eccentricity of asteroid belt orbits and enabled many to cross Earth's orbit and supply the planet with important volatiles such as water and carbon dioxide. Before Earth reached half its present mass, icy bodies from the Jupiter–Saturn region and small bodies from the primordial asteroid belt supplied water to the Earth due to the gravitational scattering of Jupiter and, to a lesser extent, Saturn. Thus, while the gas giants are now helpful protectors, they were once suppliers of critical habitability material.

In contrast, Jupiter-sized bodies that orbit too close to the habitable zone but not in it (as in 47 Ursae Majoris), or have a highly elliptical orbit that crosses the habitable zone (like 16 Cygni B) make it very difficult for an independent Earth-like planet to exist in the system. See the discussion of a stable habitable zone above. However, during the process of migrating into a habitable zone, a Jupiter-size planet may capture a terrestrial planet as a moon. Even if such a planet is initially loosely bound and following a strongly inclined orbit, gravitational interactions with the star can stabilize the new moon into a close, circular orbit that is coplanar with the planet's orbit around the star.

Life's impact on habitability

A supplement to the factors that support life's emergence is the notion that life itself, once formed, becomes a habitability factor in its own right. An important Earth example was the production of molecular oxygen gas (O
2
) by ancient cyanobacteria, and eventually photosynthesizing plants, leading to a radical change in the composition of Earth's atmosphere. This environmental change is called the Great Oxygenation Event. This oxygen proved fundamental to the respiration of later animal species. The Gaia hypothesis, a scientific model of the geo-biosphere pioneered by James Lovelock in 1975, argues that life as a whole fosters and maintains suitable conditions for itself by helping to create a planetary environment suitable for its continuity. Similarly, David Grinspoon has suggested a "living worlds hypothesis" in which our understanding of what constitutes habitability cannot be separated from life already extant on a planet. Planets that are geologically and meteorologically alive are much more likely to be biologically alive as well and "a planet and its life will co-evolve." This is the basis of Earth system science.

The role of chance

Green dots represent simulated natural planets that stayed habitable for 3 bn sim. years, a) different sim. planets run one time b) a repeated run of those 1,000 planets, showing a 1.5% × 39% chance of these planets repeatedly staying habitable.

In 2020 a computer simulation of the evolution of planetary climates over 3 billion years suggested that feedbacks are a necessary but not a sufficient condition for preventing planets from ever becoming too hot or cold for life, and that chance also plays a crucial role. Related considerations include yet unknown factors influencing the thermal habitability of planets such as "feedback mechanism (or mechanisms) that prevents the climate ever wandering to fatal temperatures".

Politics of Europe

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia ...