Dead stars may play host to living worlds

David A. Aguilar (CfA)

A planetary nebula surrounds a white dwarf star with a hypothetical habitable planet in orbit.

By Irene Klotz
Discovery

Earth-sized planets that host life should be far easier to find around parent stars that are white dwarfs, the ultimate incarnations of stars like the sun, a new study shows.

Alien worlds could circle dying white dwarf stars, this NBCNews.com report explains.

White dwarfs are the dense stellar cores that remain after a sunlike star runs out of fuel and goes through its expanding, red giant phase, a process that will consume its inner planets. In our solar system, for example, Mercury, Venus and possibly Earth will be destroyed when the sun evolves into a red giant some 4.5 billion years from now.

But the system won't necessarily be doomed.

PICTURES: Exquisite Exoplanetary Art

Outer planets may migrate inward, closer to the star, and new worlds may form. Not all will be in stable orbits, but an Earth-sized world located about 1 million miles away from a host white dwarf star would have a temperature roughly the same as Earth’s. At that distance, the planet could have liquid water on its surface, a condition believed to be necessary for life.

Scientists are developing techniques to scan the atmospheres of planets beyond the solar system for oxygen and other chemical signs of life. It's a laborious and time-consuming process to separating out light passing through a planet’s atmosphere from all the background starlight.

But Earth-sized planets circling white dwarf stars, which are themselves about as big as Earth, make for much bigger needles in extrasolar planet haystacks.

ANALYSIS: Could Dead Stars Support Life? 

Avi Loeb, a theorist at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, figures the upcoming James Webb Space Telescope, a successor to the Hubble observatory, would need only about five hours of observing time to look for biomarkers in the atmosphere of a planet circling in a white dwarf’s habitable zone.

“Usually the background star is so much brighter, it’s so much bigger than the planet that absorption (of light) due to the atmosphere is a very small signal that you have to fish out of the much more prominent emission from the background star,” Loeb told Discovery News.

“In the case of the white dwarf, it’s sort of the best of all circumstances, where the object that is blocking the star is of the same size as the star itself. That offers the best prospect for detecting the absorption due to the atmosphere, relative to the background light,” he said.

Like NASA’s planet-hunting Kepler Space Telescope, the technique would only work for white dwarf systems that are aligned relative to the observatory’s line of sight so that orbiting planets pass in front of, or transit, their parent stars.

While the star is eclipsed, some light will pass through the planet’s atmosphere -- if it has one -- and leave telltale chemical fingerprints that can be detected by instruments in a telescope.

“If we happen to be situated so that we can see an eclipse, then the planet would block a substantial fraction of the light from the white dwarf. Then we can basically use the light that is passing through the atmosphere to figure out what the atmosphere is made of,” Loeb said.

VIDEOS: Aliens and Other Space Mysteries

Of key interest would be detections of oxygen, which on Earth is a clear sign of life from photosynthesis by plants.

“The only reason we have oxygen in the atmosphere right now is because of life,” Loeb said. “If you remove life from Earth, then within 1 million years or so, the oxygen will be completely depleted. It will make all kinds of molecules of oxidized metals, for example, and it will be consumed from the atmosphere.”

Scans of exoplanets’ atmospheres also could find water vapor and other potential biomarkers.

While there is not yet any direct evidence of planets circling white dwarfs, astronomers believe they exist. Previous studies have shown that as many as 30 percent of white dwarf stars have heavy elements on their surfaces, presumably from rocky bodies that broke up relatively soon after the white dwarf formed.

PICTURES: Exquisite Exoplanetary Art

A planet could find a stable orbit in white dwarfs’ habitable zone, one that would have it circle its parent star in just 10 hours.

“I’m not saying that we definitely know that such planets are there, but it’s quite plausible that the system after a while cleans itself up and for over a billion years or more, it may have stable Earth-mass planets,” Loeb said.

“It sounds like a reasonable extrapolation for what we’ve seen,” added astronomer Marc Kuchner, with the Exoplanets and Stellar Astrophysics Laboratory at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Md.

“There’s no reason to think you wouldn’t find one now and then," Kuchner told Discovery News.

The research will be published in an upcoming edition of the Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society and is available online via the arXiv preprint service.

Discuss this post

The article forgets to point out a key fact. There is not a single white dwarf star in the universe and there won't be for another several billion years.

  • 1 vote
Reply#1 - Wed Feb 27, 2013 1:38 PM EST

I think you are confused. There are white dwarfs, black dwarfs (the theoretical end state of a white dwarf finally emitting all of it's energy) do not exist yet. The universe just hasn't been around long enough for them to develop and/or a mass emitting no energy or waves would be really hard to spot, but not impossible.

  • 7 votes
#1.1 - Wed Feb 27, 2013 1:49 PM EST

and it was that theoretical end state star to which the article was alluding.

    #1.2 - Wed Feb 27, 2013 2:00 PM EST

    The article was referring to white dwarfs, not black dwarfs. A black dwarf would no longer radiate any energy to support life on an orbiting planet.

    • 4 votes
    #1.3 - Wed Feb 27, 2013 2:45 PM EST

    while I enjoy the constant deliberation and search for life outside of ours, I have to say that

    1) we don't even understand ourselves

    2) we don't know out entire world history. I want more than just "Tiktaalik" as proof for evolution

    3) we still don't have a cure for cancer

    while I appreciate physicists, I also do my best to fight them at every turn. who cares about the universe when we have bigger problems at home??????? (unless they believe someone out there will solve all our problems)

    • 1 vote
    #1.4 - Wed Feb 27, 2013 5:08 PM EST

    Don't worry, there is plenty of more evidence for evolution beyond tiktaalik. Somehow, I think that if you were truly interested in understanding evolution, you would likely already know that. And the work of physicists have made possible the computer and Internet you currently enjoy using.

    Caring about the universe and how things in it work have done more to solve the problems at home than any other method known to man.

      #1.5 - Wed Feb 27, 2013 7:58 PM EST

      kimposibl

      while I enjoy the constant deliberation and search for life outside of ours, I have to say that

      1) we don't even understand ourselves

      2) we don't know out entire world history. I want more than just "Tiktaalik" as proof for evolution

      3) we still don't have a cure for cancer

      I agree, although I think evolution is very evident.

      Think about it this way.....if we took everything we know and put it in our right hand you would need a microscope to see it all.....if you then took everything we don't know and put it in you left hand you would need a telescope of unfathomable power to begin to see it.....not to mention your left hand would be as big as the universe itself!

      • 1 vote
      #1.6 - Wed Feb 27, 2013 8:43 PM EST

      Eoanthropus

      The article forgets to point out a key fact. There is not a single white dwarf star in the universe and there won't be for another several billion years.

      Incorrect, click or cut and paste the kink below and you will see my friend.

      en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_dwarf

      • 1 vote
      #1.7 - Wed Feb 27, 2013 8:50 PM EST
      Reply

      so at the current rate of astrophysic evolution, is it safe to say that one day we will have knowledge of not only all habitable planets, but also knowledge of when uninhabatiable planets will become habitable due to the death of its star?

      • 1 vote
      Reply#2 - Wed Feb 27, 2013 4:02 PM EST

      There are billions of white dwarfs in the Universe and some of them could host planets in the Habitable Zone." What I am concerned about are gravitational effects on a planet a million miles from a star with the mass of the Sun. The tidal effects would be enormous, racing around the planet at very high speeds.

        Reply#3 - Wed Feb 27, 2013 5:13 PM EST

        Terrible tidal forces would probably shred the planet into a pile of debris or pull water into a shape no longer a sphere.

          #3.1 - Wed Feb 27, 2013 7:25 PM EST

          Although the temperature would be in the goldilocks zone at 1 million miles, what would the radiation levels be?

            #3.2 - Wed Feb 27, 2013 8:59 PM EST

            Plus, orbiting the sun at just 10 hours per year, I know I'd probably get very dizzy.

              #3.3 - Wed Feb 27, 2013 9:04 PM EST
              Reply

              The article mentions that a white dwarf could host a planet for a billion years.Doesn't seem like much time at all for life to develop.All things considered.Including if the planet had to move towards the white dwarf to begin with.

              • 3 votes
              Reply#4 - Wed Feb 27, 2013 7:01 PM EST

              Wouldn't the planet be tidally locked at that distance? While it may be capable of supporting life, a constant darkside and constant sunny side wouldn't help.

                Reply#5 - Wed Feb 27, 2013 9:38 PM EST
                You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead.
                As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.