U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

25–467PDF 2017

ADVANCES IN THE SEARCH FOR LIFE 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND 

TECHNOLOGY 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

APRIL 26, 2017 

Serial No. 115–11 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology 

( 

Available via the World Wide Web: http://science.house.gov 
(II) 

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY 

HON. LAMAR S. SMITH, Texas, Chair 

FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma 

DANA ROHRABACHER, California 

MO BROOKS, Alabama 

RANDY HULTGREN, Illinois 

BILL POSEY, Florida 

THOMAS MASSIE, Kentucky 

JIM BRIDENSTINE, Oklahoma 

RANDY K. WEBER, Texas 

STEPHEN KNIGHT, California 

BRIAN BABIN, Texas 

BARBARA COMSTOCK, Virginia 

GARY PALMER, Alabama 

BARRY LOUDERMILK, Georgia 

RALPH LEE ABRAHAM, Louisiana 

DRAIN LAHOOD, Illinois 

DANIEL WEBSTER, Florida 

JIM BANKS, Indiana 

ANDY BIGGS, Arizona 

ROGER W. MARSHALL, Kansas 

NEAL P. DUNN, Florida 

CLAY HIGGINS, Louisiana 

EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas 

ZOE LOFGREN, California 

DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois 

SUZANNE BONAMICI, Oregon 

ALAN GRAYSON, Florida 

AMI BERA, California 

ELIZABETH H. ESTY, Connecticut 

MARC A. VEASEY, Texas 

DONALD S. BEYER, JR., Virginia 

JACKY ROSEN, Nevada 

JERRY MCNERNEY, California 

ED PERLMUTTER, Colorado 

PAUL TONKO, New York 

BILL FOSTER, Illinois 

MARK TAKANO, California 

COLLEEN HANABUSA, Hawaii 

CHARLIE CRIST, Florida 
(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

April 26, 2017 

Page 

Witness List ............................................................................................................. 2 

Hearing Charter ...................................................................................................... 3 

Opening Statements 

Statement by Representative Lamar S. Smith, Chairman, Committee on 

Science, Space, and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives ..................... 4 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 6 

Statement by Representative Eddie Bernice Johnson, Ranking Member, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives .... 8 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 10 

Statement by Representative Brian Babin, Committee on Science, Space, 

and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives ............................................... 12 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 13 

Statement by Representative Ami Bera, Committee on Science, Space, and 

Technology, U.S. House of Representatives ....................................................... 14 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 16 

Witnesses: 

Dr. Thomas Zurbuchen, Associate Administrator, Science Mission Directorate, 

National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) 

Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 19 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 21 

Dr. Adam Burgasser, Professor of Physics, University of California, San Diego 

and UCSD Center for Astrophysics and Space Science; Fulbright Scholar 

Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 26 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 29 

Dr. James Kasting, Chair, Planning Committee, Workshop on the Search 

for Life Across Space and Time, National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine, Evan Pugh Professor of Geosciences, Pennsylvania State 

University 

Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 43 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 45 

Dr. Seth Shostak, Senior Astronomer, SETI Institute 

Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 56 

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 58 

Discussion ................................................................................................................. 64 

Appendix I: Answers to Post-Hearing Questions 

Dr. Thomas Zurbuchen, Associate Administrator, Science Mission Directorate, 

National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) ................................ 82 

Dr. Adam Burgasser, Professor of Physics, University of California, San Diego 

and UCSD Center for Astrophysics and Space Science; Fulbright Scholar .... 88 

Dr. James Kasting, Chair, Planning Committee, Workshop on the Search 

for Life Across Space and Time, National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine, Evan Pugh Professor of Geosciences, Pennsylvania State 

University ............................................................................................................. 89 
Page

IV 

Dr. Seth Shostak, Senior Astronomer, SETI Institute ......................................... 92 
(1) 

ADVANCES IN THE SEARCH FOR LIFE 

WEDNESDAY, APRIL 26, 2017 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY, 

Washington, D.C. 

The Committee met, pursuant to call, at 10:08 a.m., in Room 

2318 of the Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Lamar Smith 

[Chairman of the Committee] presiding. 
2 

LAMAR S SMITH, Tex~~ 

CHAIRMAN 

Q:ongrcss of the 1dnitcd ~tatcs 

i'lonsc of 'RQJrcscnmtiocs COMMITIEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY 

2321 RAYBURN HoUSE OFFICE BUILDING 

WASHINGTON, DC 20515-6301 

1202)225-6371 

wwwscte!lcehous~gov 

Advances in the Search for Life 

Wednesday, April 26, 2017 

!O:OOa.m. 

2318 Rayburn House Office Building 

Witnesses 

Dr. Thomas Zurbuchen, Associate Administrator, Science Mission 

Directorate, National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) 

Dr. Adam Burgasser, Professor of Physics, University of California, 

San Diego and UCSD Center for Astrophysics and Space Science; 

Fulbright Scholar 

EOOIE 8£:ANIC!: JOHNSON, Texas 

RANKING MEMBER 

Dr. James Kasting, Chair, Planning Committee, Workshop on the 

Search for Life Across Space and Time, National Academies of Science, 

Engineering, and Medicine, Evan Pugh Professor of Geosciences, 

Pennsylvania State University 

Dr. Seth Shostak, Senior Astronomer, SET! Institute 
3 

TO: 

FROM: 

DATE: 

SUBJECT: 

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY 

Charter 

Members, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology 

Majority Staff, Committee on Science, Space, and Technology 

April 26, 2017 

Full Committee Hearing: "Advances in the Search for Life" 

On Wednesday, April26, 2017 at 10:00 a.m. in Room 2318 of the Rayburn House Office 

Building, the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology will hold a hearing titled, 

"Advances in the Search for Life." 

Hearing Purpose 

The NASA Transition Authorization Act of2017 established "The search for life's 

origin, evolution, distribution, and future in the universe," as one of the national space program's 

objectives. The hearing will survey recent breakthroughs in a variety of fields that contribute to 

astrobiology, such as the continued discovery of exoplanets and research efforts to understand 

life's origin on Earth and in the lab. 

Witnesses 

• Dr. Thomas Zurbuchen, Associate Administrator, Science Mission Directorate, 

National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) 

• Dr. Adam Burgasser, Professor of Physics, University of California, San Diego 

and UCSD Center for Astrophysics and Space Science; Fulbright Scholar 

• Dr. James Kasting, Chair, Planning Committee, Workshop on the Search for 

Life Across Space and Time, National Academies of Science, Engineering, and 

Medicine, Evan Pugh Professor of Geosciences, Pennsylvania State University 

• Dr. Seth Shostak, Senior Astronomer, SET! Institute 

Staff Contact 

For questions related to the hearing, please contact Mr. Tom Hammond, Staff Director, 

Space Subcommittee, Dr. Michael Mineiro, Professional Staff Member, Space Subcommittee, or 

Ms. Sara Ratliff, Policy Assistant, Space Subcommittee, at 202-225-6371. 
4 

Chairman SMITH. The Committee on Science, Space, and Technology will come to order, 

Without objection, the Chair is authorized to declare recesses of 

the Committee at any time. 

Welcome to today’s hearing titled ‘‘Advances in the Search for 

Life.’’ 

Before I recognize myself and the Ranking Member for an opening statement, let me explain that both Republican and Democratic 

caucuses are now meeting. For reasons you can imagine, those 

meetings are going long, and there is much discussion, which 

means that everybody here left their caucuses early, so I hope you 

will consider that to be a form of compliment. But we do expect 

more Members to come in in the future few minutes. 

I’ll recognize myself for an opening statement. 

For centuries, humanity has wondered if life might exist elsewhere in the cosmos. Only in the last few decades have we been 

able to detect the existence of other worlds. 

Twenty-five years ago, we didn’t know that planets existed beyond our solar system. Today, we have confirmed the existence of 

over 3,400 exoplanets that orbit other suns. And we continue to 

make new discoveries. 

Today we can observe planets that may harbor life. Earlier this 

month, scientists announced the first detection of an atmosphere 

around an Earth-like planet outside our solar system. This is a significant step towards being able to determine whether some form 

of life exists there. 

Last week, scientists announced the discovery of another Earthlike exoplanet in the habitable zone of a star 40 light-years away— 

close by in cosmic terms. It is a prime target for future investigation. 

Even within our own solar system, scientists have found intriguing possibilities of habitability. NASA recently announced the discovery of hydrogen gas in plumes shooting from the icy surface of 

Saturn’s moon Enceladus. 

Organisms on Earth use hydrogen in a process to create nutrients. Perhaps simple organisms living near the moon’s hydrothermal vents could use a similar process. 

Hopefully, NASA will find similar conditions when it sends a 

spacecraft to investigate Jupiter’s moon Europa, where scientists 

have identified plume-like features. 

The United States pioneered the field of astrobiology and continues to lead the world in this type of research. Since its beginning, NASA has searched for life beyond Earth and has conducted 

numerous scientific investigations. 

Supported by NASA, the 2017 Astrobiology Science Conference is 

meeting this week in Mesa, Arizona. The theme of the conference 

is ‘‘Diverse Life and its Detection on Different Worlds.’’ 

The NASA Transition Authorization Act of 2017, which President 

Trump signed into law last month, ensures continued American 

leadership in astrobiology and the search for life. It establishes ‘‘the 

search for life’s origin, evolution, distribution, and future in the 

universe’’ as a fundamental objective for NASA. To accomplish this, 

the bill directs NASA and the National Academies to develop an 

exoplanet exploration strategy and an astrobiology strategy. 
5 

The pursuit of evidence of life beyond our planet fascinates the 

American people. Programs like the James Webb Space Telescope 

and the Wide Field Infrared Survey Telescope, both of which the 

NASA Transition Authorization Act supports, will further advance 

our understanding of exoplanets and inspire the next generation of 

American explorers. 

We do not just look at places where life might be. We are laying 

the groundwork to go there. The National Academies highly recommended a mission to Europa. The Europa Clipper mission will 

greatly aid NASA’s search for signs of life on Jupiter’s moon. 

Private citizens, amateur astronomers, and non-government organizations also play an important role in our search for life. Private citizens and philanthropists fund organizations such as the 

SETI Institute, which searches for extraterrestrial intelligence. Citizen scientists conduct astronomical observations and analysis of 

vast astronomical data sets. 

Earlier this month, news came of a mechanic who used NASA 

data to help discover a new exoplanet system. This is a great example of citizen scientists at work. We should support more contributions from citizen scientists. It enhances public engagement and 

helps encourage the next generation of young students to pursue 

careers in astronomy, astrophysics and astrobiology. 

It is human nature to seek out the unknown and to discover 

more about the universe around us. Many Americans often gaze 

into the beauty of the night sky in awe. We rightfully wonder if 

there is life beyond our pale blue dot. 

I thank our witnesses and look forward to hearing their testimony on recent developments in the field of astrobiology and the 

search for life elsewhere in the universe. 

[The prepared statement of Chairman Smith follows:] 
6 

~) i'S[~S1 SPACE, & TECHNOLOGY 

For Immediate Release 

April 26, 2017 

Media Contact: Kristina Baum 

(202) 225-6371 

Statement of Chairman Lamar Smith (R-Texas) 

Advances in the Search for Life 

Chairman Smith: For centuries, humanity has wondered if life might exist elsewhere in 

the cosmos. Only in the last few decades have we been able to detect the existence 

of other worlds. 

Twenty-five years ago, we didn't know that planets existed beyond our solar system. 

Today, we have confirmed the existence of over 3.400 exoplanets that orbit other suns. 

And we continue to make new discoveries. 

Today we can observe planets that may harbor life. Earlier this month, scientists 

announced the first detection of on atmosphere around an earth-like planet outside 

our solar system. This is a significant step towards being able to determine whether 

some form of life exists there. 

Last week, scientists announced the discovery of another earth-like exoplanet in the 

habitable zone of a star forty light-years away- close by in cosmic terms. It is a prime 

target for future investigation. 

Even within our own solar system, scientists have found intriguing possibilities of 

habitability. NASA recently announced the discovery of hydrogen gas in plumes 

shooting from the icy surface of Saturn's moon Enceladus. 

Organisms on Earth use hydrogen in a process to create nutrients. Perhaps simple 

organisms living near Enceladus' hydrothermal vents could use a similar process. 

Hopefully, NASA will find similar conditions when it sends a spacecraft to investigate 

Jupiter's moon Europa, where scientists have identified plume-like features. 

The United States pioneered the field of astrobiology and continues to lead the world 

in this type of research. Since its beginning, NASA has searched for life beyond Earth 

and has conducted numerous scientific investigations. 

Supported by NASA, the 2017 Astrobiology Science Conference is meeting this week in 

Mesa, Arizona. The theme of the conference is "Diverse Life and its Detection on 

Different Worlds." 

The NASA Transition Authorization Act of 2017, which President Trump signed into law 

last month, ensures continued American leadership in astrobiology and the search for 

life. 
7 

It establishes "the search for life's origin, evolution, distribution, and future in the 

universe" as a fundamental objective for NASA. To accomplish this, the bill directs 

NASA and the National Academies to develop an exoplanet exploration strategy and 

an astrobiology strategy. 

The pursuit of evidence of life beyond our planet fascinates the American people. 

Programs like the James Webb Space telescope and the Wide Field Infrared Survey 

Telescope, both of which the NASA Transition Authorization Act supports, will further 

advance our understanding of exoplanets and inspire the next generation of 

American explorers. 

We do not just look at places where life might be. We are laying the groundwork to go 

there. The National Academies highly recommended a mission to Europa. The Europa 

Clipper mission will greatly aid NASA's search for signs of life on Jupiter's moon. 

Private citizens, amateur astronomers, and non-government organizations also play an 

important role in our search for life. 

Private citizens and philanthropists fund organizations such as the SETIInstitute, which 

searches for extraterrestrial intelligence. Citizen scientists conduct astronomical 

observations and analysis of vast astronomical data sets. 

Earlier this month, news came of a mechanic who used NASA data to help discover a 

new exoplanet system. This is a great example of citizen scientists at work. 

We should support more contributions from citizen scientists. It enhances public 

engagement and helps encourage the next generation of young students to pursue 

careers in astronomy, astrophysics and astrobiology. 

It is human nature to seek out the unknown and to discover more about the universe 

around us. Many Americans often gaze into the beauty of the night sky in awe. We 

rightfully wonder if there is life beyond our pale blue dot. 

I thank our witnesses and look forward to hearing their testimony on recent 

developments in the field of astrobiology and the search for life elsewhere in the 

universe. 

### 
8 

Chairman SMITH. That concludes my opening statement, and the 

Ranking Member, the gentlewoman from Texas, Eddie Bernie 

Johnson, is recognized for hers. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and good 

morning, and we welcome our witnesses. 

Humanity’s centuries-old quest to understand our place in the 

universe has gained significant ground in recent years. Geologists 

are uncovering evidence of the oldest life forms in Earth’s geological record. The age of these fossils indicates that, as soon as conditions were right on Earth, life appeared. That discovery raises profound questions. Has the same thing occurred on other bodies within and beyond our solar system? Is the genesis of life a common 

occurrence throughout the universe? 

Planetary scientists continue to find new environments within 

our solar system with the potential to harbor life. A key requirement for life as we know it is water and the mantra for the search 

for life beyond Earth has been to ‘‘follow the water.’’ Recent discoveries indicate that our solar system has an abundance of it. NASA’s 

Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter discovered intermittent flows of liquid water on or just below the Martian surface. The Hubble Space 

Telescope has sent back images of what appear to be intermittent 

water plumes gushing from the surface of Jupiter’s moon, Europa. 

And the NASA Cassini mission has revealed evidence of hydrothermal activity in the subsurface water ocean of Saturn’s moon, 

Enceladus. With indications of water on several other solar system 

bodies including asteroids and dwarf planets, and moons of Jupiter 

and Saturn, it appears that at least one condition for habitability 

is relatively common throughout our solar system. 

How do recent discoveries of water and habitable environments 

in our own solar system inform the search for life on planets orbiting other stars? NASA’s Kepler mission has more than doubled the 

number of known exoplanets, bringing astronomers closer to finding an elusive Earth twin. The upcoming launch of the James 

Webb Space Telescope and the Transiting Exoplanets Survey Telescope will provide more opportunities to study these systems and 

to uncover new ones. 

There appear to be many possible environments to search for life, 

both within our solar system and beyond. To narrow down the targets for research and exploration, scientists are working to understand fully how life originated here on Earth. 

The study of Earth’s history, the early forms of life on Earth, and 

how the two evolved together is critical to this effort. And so, the 

search for life truly is an interdisciplinary endeavor that draws on 

expertise in core science disciplines like biology, geology, chemistry, 

physics, and astronomy. The strength of these core disciplines is 

central to making maximum progress in the search for life beyond 

Earth, and that’s why we need to be committed to keeping America’s research enterprise strong. We need to continue to invest as 

a Nation in research and development, not cut back. 

I feel fortunate to be serving on the Science Committee at a time 

when progress is being made so rapidly in the search for life beyond Earth, and I look forward to hearing about that progress from 

our witnesses. 

With that, I yield back, Mr. Chairman. 
9 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Johnson follows:] 
10 

OPENING STATEMENT 

Ranking Member Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-TX) 

House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology 

"Advances in the Search for Life" 

April 26, 2017 

Good morning, and welcome to our witnesses. 

Humanity's centuries-old quest to understand our place in the universe has gained significant 

ground in recent years. Geologists are uncovering evidence of the oldest life forms in Earth's 

geological record. The age of these fossils indicates that, as soon as conditions were right on 

Earth, life appeared. That discovery raises profound questions. Has the same thing occurred on 

other bodies within and beyond our solar system? Is the genesis of life a common occurrence 

throughout the universe? 

Planetary scientists continue to find new environments within our solar system with the potential 

to harbor life. A key requirement for life as we know it is water and the mantra for the search for 

life beyond Earth has been to "follow the water." Recent discoveries indicate that our solar 

system has an abundance of it: NASA's Mars Reconnaissance Orbiter discovered intermittent 

flows of liquid water on or just below the Martian surface; The Hubble Space Telescope has sent 

back images of what appear to be intermittent water plumes gushing from the surface of Jupiter's 

moon, Europa; And the NASA Cassini mission has revealed evidence of hydrothermal activity in 

the subsurface water ocean of Saturn's moon, Enceladus, With indications of water on several 

other solar system bodies including asteroids, dwarf planets, and moons of Jupiter and Saturn, it 

appears that at least one condition for habitability is relatively common throughout our solar 

system. 

How do recent discoveries of water and habitable environments in our own solar system inform 

the search for life on planets orbiting other stars? NASA's Kepler mission has more than doubled 

the number of known exoplanets- bringing astronomers closer to finding an elusive Earth twin. 

The upcoming launch of the James Webb Space Telescope and the Transiting Exoplanets Survey 

Telescope will provide more opportunities to study these systems and to uncover new ones. 

There appear to be many possible environments to search for life, both within our solar system 

and beyond. To narrow down the targets for research and exploration, scientists are working to 

understand fully how life originated here on Earth. 
11 

The study of Earth's history, the early forms oflife on Earth, and how the two evolved together 

is critical to this effort. And so, the search for life truly is an interdisciplinary endeavor that 

draws on expertise in core science disciplines like biology, geology, chemistry, physics, and 

astronomy. The strength of these core disciplines is central to making maximum progress in the 

search for life beyond Earth, and that's why we need to be committed to keeping America's 

research enterprise strong. We need to continue to invest as a nation in research and 

development, not cut back. 

I feel fortunate to be serving on the Science Committee at a time when progress is being made so 

rapidly in the search for life beyond Earth and I look forward to hearing about that progress from 

our witnesses. With that, I yield back. 
12 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Ms. Johnson. 

And the Chairman of the Space Subcommittee, the gentleman 

from Texas, Mr. Babin, is recognized for his opening statement. 

Mr. BABIN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Great to see everybody. 

Thanks for being here. 

The science of astronomy, astrophysics and astrobiology expands 

mankind’s understanding of our universe. It seeks to answer fundamental questions as to the nature of our Universe, our place within 

it, and whether there is life beyond Earth. 

NASA has a long history of space-based astrophysics and astronomical science. Since the 1960s, NASA has operated space-based 

observatories. Among the most famous of these are the Hubble 

Space Telescope, which has produced some of the clearest images 

of the Universe to date. 

Looking to the future, the James Webb Space Telescope, or 

JWST, set to launch in 2018, will be the most powerful space-based 

observatory to date and will be used to search for planets outside 

our solar system that could harbor life. 

In my own district, at Johnson Space Center in Houston, NASA’s 

historic Chamber A thermal vacuum testing chamber is being used 

for end-to-end optical testing of JWST in a simulated cryo-temperature and vacuum space environment. I’m proud to represent the 

hardworking men and women at Johnson Space Center contributing to JWST, our Nation’s next great space-based observatory. 

Johnson Space Center is also home to NASA’s Astromaterials 

and Curation Office. This office is responsible for the curation of 

extraterrestrial samples from NASA’s past and future sample return—from future return missions. This is an exciting responsibility for Johnson Space Center and an important contribution in 

the search for life beyond Earth. 

We live in exciting times. The NASA Authorization Act of 2017 

provides strong direction for NASA to continue to search for life 

and advance the science of astronomy, astrophysics and 

astrobiology. It is quite possible that with continued efforts, humanity will finally answer the question and know definitely whether life exists on other worlds. 

I thank today’s witnesses for joining us today and I look forward 

to hearing your testimony, and I yield back, Mr. Chairman. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Babin follows:] 
13 

~:. ~S~RS!~ SPACE, & TECHNOLOGY 

For Immediate Release 

April 26, 2017 

Media Contact: Kristina Baum 

(202) 225-6371 

Statement of Space SubcommiHee Chairman Brian Babin (R-Texas} 

Advances in the Search for Life 

Chairman Babin: The science of astronomy, astrophysics and astrobiology expands 

mankind's understanding of the Universe. It seeks to answer fundamental questions as 

to the nature of our Universe, our place within it, and whether there is life beyond 

Earth. 

NASA has a long history of space-based astrophysics and astronomical science. Since 

the 1960s, NASA has operated space-based observatories. Among the most famous of 

these are the Hubble Space Telescope, which has produced some of the clearest 

images of the Universe to date. 

Looking to the future, the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST), set to launch in 2018, 

will be the most powerful space-based observatory to date and will be used to search 

for planets outside our Solar System that could harbor life. 

In my own district, at Johnson Space Center, NASA's historic "Chamber A" thermal 

vacuum testing chamber is being used for end-to-end optical testing of JWST in a 

simulated cryo-temperature and vacuum space environment. I'm proud to represent 

the hard working men and women at Johnson Space Center contributing to JWST, our 

nation's next great space-based observatory. 

Johnson Space Center is also home to NASA's "Astromaterials and Curation Office." 

This office is responsible for the curation of extraterrestrial samples from NASA's past 

and future sample return missions. This is an exciting responsibility for Johnson Space 

Center and an important contribution in the search for life beyond Earth. 

We live in exciting times. The NASA Authorization Act of 2017 provides strong direction 

for NASA to continue to search for life and advance the science of astronomy, 

astrophysics and astrobiology. It is quite possible that with continued efforts, humanity 

will finally answer the question and know definitely whether life exists on other worlds. 

I thank today's witnesses for joining us today and I look forward to hearing your 

testimony. 

### 
14 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Babin. 

And the gentleman from California, Mr. Bera, the Ranking Member of the Space Subcommittee, is recognized for an opening statement. 

Mr. BERA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you for holding 

this hearing on the Advances in the Search for Life. That is a timeless question, the question ‘‘Are we alone?’’ 

Over the centuries, whether it’s the child lying on the grass looking up at the vastness of our universe to the most advanced astrophysicist thinking about this question, and that is exactly what we 

ought to be doing as a species—asking those questions. We’re curious by nature. We’re explorers. And if you think about what we’re 

discovering and what we have discovered in recent years from the 

deep oceans on the moons of Enceladus and Europa, to the surface 

of Mars, the rapidity of findings habitable planets, you know, vastly moves us forward to answering that question: ‘‘Are we alone?’’ 

Now, what we may discover is not necessarily species that look 

like us but what we may discover are the building blocks of life, 

looking for water, looking for organic molecules, looking for bacteria. 

But when that happens, and inevitably that discover will likely 

happen in our lifetimes, the disruption that answers that question 

of are we alone is remarkable. I mean, if you think about 1997 with 

the Cassini space mission, we didn’t know what we were going to 

discover, and yet, you know, we’re seeing plumes of spewing material from Enceladus, let alone flying through those plumes and discovering what we may discover. 

So we live in this remarkable time. The Chairman of the Space 

Subcommittee talked about the advances and discoveries of Hubble 

and Hubble’s sibling that will launch shortly, James Webb, what 

that’s going to allow us to discover about who we are, where we 

are, and where we go from here. You know, again, this is a remarkable time. 

You know, the energy we saw this past weekend with thousands 

if not hundreds of thousands of folks marching around the country 

in support of science, around the world, in fact, these are discoveries that are not just unique to who we are as the United States 

but to who we are as humanity, and again, you know, I am encouraged by the Chairman and the President’s budget of the support 

for NASA funding and the support for continuing to explore and 

look for that next discovery. You know, this is incredibly important. 

At the same time as we make those discoveries, it helps us better 

understand who we are as a planet on Earth, how we evolved and 

where we may go next. 

So as we move forward, as we start looking at NASA’s 2018 

budget, you know, let’s make sure we continue to find that exploration externally but we also understand NASA’s multi-mission 

role here on Earth as well, that we continue to encourage, you 

know, the basic investments in basic science research in 

astrobiology and that search for life, and again, that we understand 

as we’re going through the 2018 budget debate that we understand 

the impacts of cutting budgets and we continue to support NASA’s 

multiple role. 
15 

So, you know, I think this is a great time for this hearing. This 

is an exciting time in that search for an answer to the question 

‘‘Are we alone?’’ 

And with that, I yield back. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Bera follows:] 
16 

OPENING STATEMENT 

Ranking Member Ami Bera (D-CA) 

of the Subcommittee on Space 

House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology 

"Advances in the Search for Life" 

April 26, 2017 

Good morning and welcome to our distinguished panel of witnesses. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, 

for holding this hearing on "Advances in the Search for Life". 

Based on years of investigations across NASA's science portfolio, researchers are increasingly 

finding evidence oflife's basic building blocks-liquid water, organic molecules, minerals, and a 

source of energy - occurring beyond Earth. 

From the deep oceans on the moons Enceladus and Europa, to the surface of Mars, and possibly 

planets and planetary systems now being identified beyond our solar system, the list of 

potentially habitable locations for life in the Universe continues to grow. 

I look forward to hearing from our witnesses on highlighting the many compelling findings about 

these and other advances in the search for life beyond Earth. 

This abundance of scientific discovery is just one example of the return on our nation's 

investments in basic research within NASA's science portfolio and across the Federal 

government. 

No one imagined that when the Cassini/Huygens mission was launched in 1997 to study Saturn 

and its moons, it would wind up identifying plumes spewing material from Enceladus, or let 

alone flying through the plumes and detect the elements needed to support potential life. 

And no one could have known about the diverse environment that exists on Mars without the 

systematic investigation of the planet by orbiting spacecraft, landers, and rovers over several 

decades. 

Our understanding of Earth and its capacity to support life- its origins, evolution, and its ability 

to survive in extreme environments- strongly inform the search for life beyond Earth and 

wouldn't be possible without our investments in basic scientific research including chemistry, 

biology, geology, and physics. 

The discoveries of today are the result of our past investments in research. Robust investments 

now and into the future will shape the story our children and grandchildren tell 20 or 30 years 

from now about Earth, our solar system, and perhaps even the existence of life beyond planet 

Earth. 
17 

However, that story will partially depend on advances that we make in research and technology 

across NASA's mission areas, including telescopes, instruments, spacecraft and the other 

systems needed to investigate potentially habitable locations across our universe. 

And while today's search for life relies solely on robotic missions, NASA's Journey to Mars 

program offers the pathway for humans to one day contribute to the study of whether Mars 

supports or once supported life. 

So, as we consider the details of the President's Fiscal Year 2018 budget proposal that are 

expected next month, I urge all of us to consider: 

• the importance ofNASA's multi-mission role in the search for life beyond Earth, 

• the relationship of investments in basic science research to the multidisciplinary study of 

astrobiology and the search for life, and 

• the impact of potential budget cuts on extended missions such as the one that led to 

Cassini's recent scientific discoveries. 

Thank you and I yield back. 
18 

Mr. MCNERNEY. Will the gentleman yield? 

Mr. BERA. Sure, I’ll yield. 

Mr. MCNERNEY. I just want to thank the Chairman for this hearing. 

This is an exciting hearing, but the only definitive answer possible is the affirmative. We can never answer definitively that 

there’s no life outside of the Earth. So that’s one of our challenges, 

but nothing has the ability to capture the imagination, the enthusiasm of people that the possibility of extraterrestrial life. So you 

all have the ability to really capture the American people’s imagination and attention, and we need that now. We need people to be 

enthusiastic about science, so my hat’s off to you, and I encourage 

you to do the best you can. 

With that, I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Bera. 

Let me introduce our panelists, and let me just say ahead of time 

that our hearings are always this bipartisan. You’re the happy recipients of not only great attendance but great interest as well. 

Our first witness today is Dr. Thomas Zurbuchen, Associate Administrator of the Science Mission Directorate at NASA. Dr. 

Zurbuchen previously served as a Professor of Space Science and 

Aerospace Engineering at the University of Michigan. He has 

worked on several NASA science missions including Ulysses, the 

MESSENGER spacecraft to Mercury, and the Advanced Composition Explorer. He earned both his master’s of science degree and 

his Ph.D. in physics from the University of Bern in Switzerland. 

Our second witness today is Dr. Adam Burgasser, Professor of 

Physics at the University of California in San Diego. Dr. Burgasser 

was awarded a 2017–18 Fulbright Scholarship to conduct astrophysical research in works with University of California-San Diego 

Center for Astrophysics and Space Science. He contributed to the 

discovery of the TRAPPIST–1 system and currently conducts research in physics. He specifically investigates the lowest mass 

stars, coldest brown dwarves, and exoplanets. He earned his bachelor’s of science in physics at the University of California-San Diego 

and his Ph.D. in physics from the California Institute of Technology. 

Our third witness today is Dr. James Kasting, Chair of the Planning Committee of the Workshop on the Search for Life Across 

Space and Time at the National Academies of Science, Engineering 

and Medicine. He also is an Evan Pugh Professor of Geosciences at 

Pennsylvania State University. He spent two years at the National 

Center for Atmospheric Research and seven years in the Space 

Science Division at the NASA Ames Research Center. Dr. Kasting 

also chaired NASA’s Exoplanet Exploration Program Analysis 

Group from 2009 to 2011. He earned his undergraduate degree in 

chemistry and physics from Harvard University and his Ph.D. in 

atmospheric sciences from the University of Michigan. 

Our fourth witness today is Dr. Seth Shostak, Senior Astronomer 

at the SETI Institute. For ten years, Dr. Shostak chaired the International Academy of Astronautics SETI Permanent Committee. Dr. 

Shostak has written, edited, and contributed to a half-dozen books 

on the search for life. His most recent work, Confessions of an 

Alien Hunter, details the history and scientific methodology of 
19 

SETI. Dr. Shostak gives approximately 60 presentations annually 

and is the regular host of the SETI Institute’s weekly 1-hour 

science radio show, Big Picture Science. Dr. Shostak earned an undergraduate degree in physics from Princeton University and a doctorate in astronomy from the California Institute of Technology. 

We welcome you all, and Dr. Zurbuchen, if you will begin? 

TESTIMONY OF DR. THOMAS ZURBUCHEN, 

ASSOCIATE ADMINISTRATOR, 

SCIENCE MISSION DIRECTORATE, 

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS 

AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION (NASA) 

Dr. ZURBUCHEN. I’d be glad to. Mr. Chairman and Members of 

the Committee, this is an exciting time for exploration and discovery, and especially the search for life elsewhere, and I’d like to 

begin by expressing our gratitude for the Committee’s long-term 

support of our efforts in this area. In particular, we are pleased by 

the Committee’s inclusion of a provision in the recently passed Authorization Act that makes astrobiology and the search for life part 

of NASA’s mission. We are not only committed but also enthusiastic about accomplishing the objectives that the Congress and the 

President have laid out for us. Furthermore, NASA is initiating 

work with the National Academies to develop science strategies for 

astrobiology and the study of exoplanets as requested. 

As part of our astrobiology effort, NASA supports research that 

leads to a better understanding of how life emerged and evolved on 

Earth, what conditions make any environment in our universe capable of harboring life, and what is the potential distribution of 

such worlds are with life beyond Earth. To fully engage in this pursuit, we need a convergence of many fields—biology, geology, astronomy, planetary sciences, Earth sciences, and many other disciplines. Together these researchers from these fields are exploring 

one of the greatest questions of our times. For example, just two 

weeks ago, NASA’s Cassini Mission confirmed the presence of hydrogen from plumes of Saturn’s moon Enceladus while our Hubble 

team announced the second observations of possible plumes on Jupiter’s moon Europa. Both discoveries displayed a potential of lifeenabling energy sources in oceans hidden away from our view beyond the icy crust and a confirmation which will be very significant 

for this science. That’s because scientists believe the plumes are 

spewing from cracks of these moons icy shells with material that 

are indicative of hydrothermal activity in their ocean floors, and we 

know from Earth that those parts of our world are spaces with lots 

of life, and while we haven’t found definitive signs of life elsewhere 

just yet, our search is making remarkable progress, and 

astrobiology is the focus of a growing number of NASA missions. 

Mars 2020, our next rover after Curiosity, will continue to advance this search by investigating a region of Mars where the ancient environment may have been favorable to microbial life. 

Science instruments on the rover will provide high-resolution imaging and spectroscopy in many ways for characterizing rocks and 

soil from a distance. The Mars 2020 mission will also search for 

signs of past life, and throughout its investigation will collect sam-
20 

ples that we hopefully can return in the future back to Earth to 

the best labs we have. 

NASA is currently developing a Europa Clipper Mission, which 

will conduct a detailed reconnaissance of Europa and investigate 

whether the icy moon could harbor conditions suitable for life. The 

promise of Europa Clipper is increasing day to day. If the potential 

plumes are linked to the subsurface oceans, studying their composition would help scientists investigate the chemical makeup of 

Europa’s potentially habitable environment while minimizing the 

need to drill through layers of ice. 

Beyond our solar system, a transformation of understanding is 

taking place regarding planets around other stars—exoplanets. I 

was in grad school when the first planet orbiting another star was 

announced. I still remember it vividly the day, the moment when 

I learned about this. It was so exciting, and that was just the beginning of an avalanche of discoveries. You mentioned we have 

close to three and a half thousand of such planets found and discovered elsewhere and billions more are waiting to be revealed in 

our galaxy alone. 

This February, NASA’s Spitzer Space Telescope team announced 

the discovery of seven Earth-sized planets, the most ever found 

around a single star, TRAPPIST–1, and I’ll leave up to you, Dr. 

Burgasser, to kind of fill in the details. It’s really exciting, and discoveries are coming out by the day on this one. 

NASA’s Spitzer, Hubble and Kepler space telescopes will continue to help astronomers plan for such follow-up studies using 

NASA’s upcoming James Webb Telescope launching in 2018. With 

much greater sensitivity, Webb will be able to detect the chemical 

fingerprints of water, methane, organics, other important molecules 

that really are related, we believe, to life and the factor that help 

us assess whether these worlds have an ability to harbor life. 

With all this activity related to the search of life in so many different areas, we are on the verge of one of the most profound discoveries ever. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Dr. Zurbuchen follows:] 
21 

Statement of 

Dr. Thomas Zurbuchen 

Associate Administrator 

Science Mission Directorate 

National Aeronautics and Space Administration 

before the 

Committee on Science, Space and Technology 

U.S. House of Representatives 

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to appear today to 

discuss the topic of astrobiology. As you all know, this is an exciting time for space exploration 

and discovery, and especially the search for life elsewhere, and I would like to begin by 

expressing our gratitude for the Committee's long-term support of our efforts in this area. 

In particular, we are pleased by the Committee's inclusion of a provision in the recently passed 

NASA Transition Authorization Act of 2017 that expressly makes astrobiology and the search 

for life part ofNASA's core statutory mission. We are not only committed to but also 

enthusiastic about accomplishing the objectives that Congress and the President have laid out for 

us. Furthermore, NASA is initiating work with the National Academies to develop science 

strategies for astrobiology and the study of exoplanets as requested by the 2017 Authorization 

Act. Once complete, these strategies will be used in planning and funding research and other 

activities as well as to provide a foundation for future initiatives related to astrobiology and 

exoplanet research. 

I have been working in NASA's Science Mission Directorate (SMD) for about seven months 

now and have come to appreciate the shear breadth and depth of our mission portfolio. And 

while most often, we think about our missions in terms of the science area in which it is 

managed, such as Astrophysics or Planetary Science, I find it useful to think about these 

missions in terms of how they contribute to three themes that are central to everything we do. 

The first of these themes is that we seek to expand knowledge- by investing in fundamental 

research to increase what we know and enlarge the space in which we live. Secondly, SMD is 

working with the greater scientific community on a focused science objective to search for life 

elsewhere, our second theme, which we will highlight today. The third theme is safeguarding and 

improving life on Earth, which refers to the research and missions from many disciplines that 

directly affects people on the ground, including Earth science, space weather and planetary 

defense. We are excited and inspired when SMD's fundamental research has direct and positive 

impacts in our lives! 

As part of our astrobiology effort, NASA supports research that leads to a better understanding 

of how life emerged and evolved on Earth, what conditions make any environment in our 

universe capable of supporting life, and what is the potential distribution of habitable worlds and 

1 
22 

life itself beyond Earth. Searching for life elsewhere is a collaborative and interdisciplinary 

theme by necessity. To fully engage in this pursuit, we need a convergence of the areas of 

biology, heliophysics, Earth science, astronomy, planetary science, and the astrophysical search 

for Earth-like planets that might show signs of life. Together, researchers in these fields are 

exploring one of the greatest questions of our time. 

For example, just two weeks ago, NASA's Cassini mission confirmed the presence of hydrogen 

from plumes on Saturn's moon Enceladus while our Hubble Space Telescope team armounced 

the second observation of possible plumes near the equator of Jupiter's moon Europa. Both 

discoveries display the potential for life-enabling energy sources in oceans hidden from view 

under an icy crest, a confirmation of which would be significant to all ofNASA. That's because 

scientists believe the plumes are spewing from cracks in these moons' icy shells with material 

indicative of hydrothermal activity on their ocean floor; and we know that within many 

hydrothermal vents in our deep oceans on Earth, we find life. Scientists are currently debating if 

life may have originated at locations like these. 

And while we haven't found definitive signs of life elsewhere just yet, our search is making 

remarkable progress and astrobiology is a focus of a growing number of NASA missions. 

One such mission is NASA's Curiosity rover, which has found evidence that ancient Mars did 

have the right chemistry to have supported microbial life as well as evidence that the raw 

ingredients for life to get started existed on the red planet at one time. Since landing in 2012, the 

rover has also found evidence of an ancient streambed and just last year, found chemicals in 

rocks that suggest Mars once had more oxygen in its atmosphere than it does now, indicative of a 

disequilibrium that also points to an environment supportive of past life. 

Mars 2020, our next rover currently in development, will continue to advance this search by 

investigating a region of Mars where the ancient environment may have been favorable for 

microbial life. On the rover's mast, two science instruments will provide high-resolution imaging 

and three types of spectroscopy for characterizing rocks and soil from a distance, also helping to 

determine which rock targets to explore up close. Two science instruments mounted on the Mars 

2020 rover's robotic arm will be used to search for signs of past life and determine where to 

collect samples by analyzing the chemical, mineral, physical and organic characteristics of 

Martian rocks. Throughout its investigation, it will collect samples of soil and rock, and cache 

them on the surface for potential return to Earth by a future mission. Given the sophisticated 

instrumentation available on Earth, returned samples could provide the biggest leap forward in 

understanding the biological potential of Mars. NASA is exploring a range of possible ways to 

potentially return these cached samples to Earth, including a future NASA Science or NASAsponsored mission, or via a commercial or international partnership. We are exploring 

opportunities to partner with industry to leverage their future missions to advance decadal survey 

science objectives. 

Beyond Mars, we focus on the ocean worlds of our outer solar system. A particularly interesting 

destination is Jupiter's moon Europa- which appears to meet the minimum requirements for life. 

Thus, NASA is currently developing a Europa Clipper mission, which will conduct a detailed 

reconnaissance of Europa and investigate whether the icy moon could harbor conditions suitable 

2 
23 

for life. The mission's nine science instruments include cameras and spectrometers to produce 

high-resolution images of Europa's surface and determine its composition. An ice penetrating 

radar would determine the thickness of the moon's icy shell and search for subsurface lakes 

similar to those beneath Antarctica's ice sheet. 

The mission would also carry a magnetometer to measure the strength and direction of the 

moon's magnetic field, which would allow scientists to determine the depth and salinity of its 

ocean. Finally, a thermal instrument would survey Europa's frozen surface in search of recent 

eruptions of warmer water at or near the surface, while additional instruments would search for 

evidence of water and tiny particles in the moon's thin atmosphere. 

The promise of Europa Clipper is increasing: As previously mentioned, NASA's Hubble Space 

Telescope has recently observed collimated water vapor near Europa's equator multiple times, 

providing evidence of water plumes. If the plumes are linked to a subsurface ocean, studying 

their composition would help scientists investigate the chemical makeup of Europa's potentially 

habitable environment while minimizing the need to drill through layers of ice. 

Beyond our solar system, a transformation of understanding is taking place regarding planets 

around other stars, or exoplanets, by means ofNASA missions. To me, this tantalizing set of 

science discoveries is woven into my personal story. 

I grew up in a small farm town in the Swiss mountains, one of the most beautiful places on 

Earth. By day I would explore the snowcapped mountains and crystal blue lakes, and by night 

the brilliant stars would transfix me with their beauty and seemingly endless number, sitting on 

the roof of our house with a star-map. How many of them were there, I wondered? I read books 

in the library and began learning more and more about the sheer magnitude of the universe, the 

peculiar objects that were in there, like exploding stars, black holes, neutron stars and 

speculation about worlds around other stars, possibly worlds just like ours. 

I was in graduate school when the first planet orbiting a "normal" star other than our own was 

announced by a team of Swiss astronomers. This planet, 51 Pegasi b, was large like Jupiter (half 

the mass), but orbited closer to its star than Mercury does to our Sun, speeding through its entire 

orbit in only four days. To say that this discovery was a surprise is a huge understatement- no 

one thought that giant planets could exist in such close proximity to a star. This discovery was 

met with skepticism- but within a few months it was confirmed by a U.S. team using the Lick 

Observatory in California and a new field of astronomy was born. Now, with NASA missions 

like the Kepler and Spitzer Space Telescopes, we have discovered more than 3,400 exoplanets, 

with billions more just waiting to be revealed in our galaxy alone. 

This February, NASA's Spitzer Space Telescope team announced the discovery of seven Earthsized planets, the most ever, found around a single star, called TRAPPIST -1. Three of these 

planets are firmly located in the habitable zone, the area around the parent star where a rocky 

planet is most likely to have liquid water. This system of seven rocky worlds- all of them with 

the potential for water, a key to life as we know it- is an exciting discovery in the search for life 

on other worlds. The TRAPPIST-I system is just 39light years away and its discovery tells us 

that there is plenty of planet making material in our little comer of the solar system, indicating 

3 
24 

that finding Earth-like planets may actually be closer to us than we originally thought. Future 

study of this planetary system could reveal conditions suitable for life. Since the initial 

observations, the follow-on findings for TRAPPIST -1 (and exoplanets in general) are occurring 

almost weekly, but the best is yet to come. 

NASA's Spitzer, Hubble, and Kepler Space Telescopes will continue to help astronomers plan 

for such follow-up studies using NASA's upcoming James Webb Space Telescope, launching in 

2018. With much greater sensitivity, Webb will be able to detect the chemical fingerprints of 

water, methane, oxygen, ozone, and other components of a planet's atmosphere. Webb also will 

analyze planets' temperatures and surface pressures- key factors in assessing their habitability. 

The Transiting Exoplanet Survey Satellite (TESS) mission will also launch next year, to survey 

the entire sky for nearby exoplanets, and the Wide Field Infrared Survey Telescope (WFIRST), 

launching in the mid-2020s, will directly image exoplanets and study their atmospheric 

chemistry for the first time using reflected light from their stars. NASA is studying mission 

concepts even beyond these near-term missions for the 2030s that would further explore and 

characterize the bounty of possible habitable Earth-like planets. These mission concepts include 

the Habitable Exoplanet Imaging Mission and the Large Ultraviolet/Visible/Infrared Surveyor, 

which would operate from the ultra-violet to the near-infrared like Hubble and WFIRST, and the 

Origins Space Telescope, which would operate from the mid-infrared to the far infrared like the 

James Webb telescope. 

With all of this activity related to the search for life, in so many different areas, we are on the 

verge of one of the most profound discoveries, ever. And as we know from experience, NASA's 

scientific discoveries of today continually drive impactful research for tomorrow that goes far 

beyond the initial observations. 

For astrobiology, the key thing to remember is that answering the fundamental question of "is 

there life out there?" will require scientific breakthroughs from many different science fields, 

including ones that are not currently engaged in this exciting endeavor. This, however, 

demonstrates the nature of great research: it's not just about answering questions that have been 

asked in the past, it is about finding entirely new questions that will have impact for a long time 

to come. 

Again, thank you for the opportunity to testify today. I look forward to responding to any 

questions you may have. 

4 
25 

Dr. Thomas Zurbuchen is the Associate Administrator for the Science Mission 

Directorate at the Agency's Headquarters in Washington, D.C. 

Previously, Zurbuchen was a professor of space science and aerospace 

engineering at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor. He was also was the 

university's founding director of the Center for Entrepreneurship in the 

College of Engineering. Zurbuchen's experience includes research in solar 

and heliospheric physics, experimental space research, space systems, and 

innovation and entrepreneurship. 

During his career, Zurbuchen has authored or coauthored more than 200 articles in refereed journals 

on solar and heliospheric phenomena. He has been involved with several NASA science missions--

Ulysses, the MESSENGER spacecraft to Mercury, and the Advanced Composition Explorer (ACE). 

He also has been part of two National Academy standing committees, as well as various science and 

technology definition teams for new NASA missions. 

Zurbuchen earned his Ph.D. in physics and master of science degree in physics from the University 

of Bern in Switzerland. 

His honors include receiving the National Science and Technology Council Presidential Early Career 

for Scientists and Engineers (PECASE) Award in 2004, a NASA Group Achievement Award for the 

agency's Ulysses mission in 2006, and the Swiss National Science Foundation's Young Researcher 

Award in 1996-1997. 
26 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Dr. Zurbuchen. 

And Dr. Burgasser. 

TESTIMONY OF DR. ADAM BURGASSER, 

PROFESSOR OF PHYSICS, 

UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, 

SAN DIEGO AND UCSD CENTER FOR 

ASTROPHYSICS AND SPACE SCIENCE; 

FULBRIGHT SCHOLAR 

Dr. BURGASSER. Thank you, Chairman Smith, Ranking Member 

Johnson, and esteemed Members of the Committee. It is an honor 

to share with you today recent discoveries and future opportunities 

in the search for potentially habitable worlds and life amongst the 

smallest stars. 

I speak today as a representative of the international team that 

discovered the seven-planet system around the star TRAPPIST–1, 

a system that harbors as many as three potentially habitable 

Earth-size worlds. This and other recent discoveries represent the 

beginning of an era of exoplanet exploration that in the next 5 to 

ten years will allow us to identify truly habitable worlds and possibly life beyond Earth. These transformative advances addressing 

one of humanity’s most persistent questions—are we alone?—are 

fully achievable through a diverse portfolio of research programs 

led by U.S. scientists and supported by federal funding to NASA, 

NSF and other science agencies. Slide, please. 

[Slide.] 

Today I will focus my testimony on the opportunities afforded by 

the lowest mass stars. When we look up in a clear night sky, most 

of the stars we see are hot, massive and distant. This visual sample does not reflect our Milky Way galaxy’s actual stellar population, which is dominated by cool, low-mass and dim stars barely 

perceptible, even with the largest telescopes. Next slide, please. 

[Slide.] 

These low-mass stars outnumber sun-like stars five to one and 

include some of our nearest stellar neighbors, many discovered just 

in the past five to ten years, thanks to deployment of advanced infrared detector technology and missions such as NASA’s Wide field 

Infrared Survey Explorer. 

The search for potentially habitable worlds around these scars is 

a search for terrestrial planets with surfaces on which liquid water 

can persist. Such planets reside in the Goldilocks habitable zones 

around stars—not too hot, not too cold. For low-mass stars, this 

habitable zone can be up to 20 times closer to the star than Earth 

is to the sun, which makes such planets easier to find and easier 

to study. Next slide, please. 

[Slide.] 

Thanks to public investment in technology, facilities and people, 

this search has borne fruits. In 2014, the NASA Kepler spacecraft 

team reported discovery of Kepler-185F, the first Earth-size world 

in the habitable zone of another star, work led by my former classmate and San Diego native, Dr. Lisa Quintana, now at NASA Goddard. 
27 

Just last year, it was announced that the nearest star to our sun, 

Proxima Centauri, has a super-Earth planet orbiting its habitable 

zone. Next slide, please. 

[Slide.] 

The University of Puerto Rico at Arecibo’s Planet Habitability 

Lab tabulates 12 very likely habitable worlds identified to date, all 

of which orbit stars less massive than the sun. Next slide, please. 

[Slide.] 

The discovery of the TRAPPIST–1 system is a capstone to this 

endeavor and an example of how partnerships between universities, government agencies, and international collaborators can 

produce truly transformative results. TRAPPIST stands for the 

Transiting Planets and Planeteslmals Small Telescope, a facility 

operated by the University of Liege, Belgium, and led my colleague, 

Dr. Michael Gillon. I should say TRAPPIST is also the name of a 

popular Belgian beer. 

This facility is relatively modest: a robotic telescope with a 2- 

foot-wide mirror optimized for the search of planets around the 

lowest mass stars. Even the stars are modest. TRAPPIST–1 is only 

eight percent the mass of the sun and is about the size of Jupiter, 

yet our international team, which includes scientists, students, and 

engineers from two dozen institutions and 11 countries on five continents including U.S. researchers in the states of California, Maryland, Massachusetts, Texas, and Washington were able to mobilize 

our shared resources to make this exciting discovery. Next slide, 

please. 

[Slide.] 

Key to our success was NASA’s Spitzer Space Telescope, America’s flagship infrared space facility, that monitored TRAPPIST–1 

for 21 days, revealing this amazing light curve. Each dip you see 

is one or more of the planets passing between the star and us, dimming the starlight by less than one percent. We detected 92 transits associated with seven planets, all around the size of the Earth, 

with orbital periods between 1–1/2 and 18.8 days. The planets in 

this compact system fit easily within the orbit of Mercury and are 

so close that they gravitationally tug each other, causing measurable variations in their transit times. Such a compact system would 

be cooked if it was in our solar system but around a cool star like 

TRAPPIST–1, three of the planets, E, F and G, orbit within the 

star’s habitable zone. 

With three changes for a habitable world, the TRAPPIST–1 system is one of the most promising to date in the search for life beyond the solar system, but all indications are that this is just the 

tip of the iceberg. 

Chairman Smith mentioned the discovery around—of a super 

Earth around the habitable zone of a nearby star by the NSF-funded MEarth project, and this will be joined by a space-based project 

TESS in the next year that we expect will discover hundreds of 

stars around other planets. 

Our generation is the first in human history to know that there 

are worlds beyond our solar system. Will the next generation know 

whether life exists on those worlds? We have the opportunity and 

responsibility to continue our Nation’s legacy of exploration dis-
28 

covery so that our children and grandchildren can search for life 

in new ways. 

[The prepared statement of Dr. Burgasser follows:] 
29 

New Opportunities in the Search for Life Among the Lowest-Mass Stars 

Statement of 

Dr. Adam Jonathan Burgasser 

Professor, University of California, San Diego 

Department of Physics 

Center for Astrophysics & Space Sciences 

before the 

Committee on Science, Space, and Technology, 

United States House of Representatives 115th United States Congress 

On 

Advances in the Search for Life 

April26, 2017 

Chairman Smith, Ranking Member Johnson, and esteemed Members of the 

Committee, it is an honor and privilege to discuss with you recent discoveries 

and future opportunities in the search for potentially habitable worlds and life 

among the smallest stars. I am particularly honored to speak today as a 

representative of the team that discovered the seven-planet system around the 

star TRAPPIST-1, a system that harbors as many as three potentially habitable 

Earth-sized worlds. This and other recent discoveries represent a beginning of an 

era of exoplanet exploration that in the next 5-10 years will enable 

measurements that identify habitable worlds and possibly life beyond Earth. In 

the next 15-25 years, we will have the capability to directly image other Earths. 

These transformative discoveries, which address one of humanity's most 

persistent questions, "Are We Alone?", are fully achievable through a diverse 

portfolio of research programs led by US scientists and supported by federal 

funding to NASA and NSF. 

My own research interests center on cool, low-mass stars like TRAPPIST-1, 

which are the most common stars in the Milky Way Galaxy, and yet in many 

ways the most difficult to study. My path to this work began as a child in the late 

1970s and 1980s in post-industrial Buffalo, NY, at a time when Dr. Carl Sagan 

appeared on PBS to talk about the beauty of the billions of galaxies, stars and 

worlds in the cosmos; and when the Voyager 2 spacecraft sent back the first 

close-up views of Uranus and Neptune. My love of math fed an interest in 

physics and a deep curiosity about the Universe, encouraged by many teachers 

and mentors. As an undergraduate and Physics major at UC San Diego, I had 

the privilege to work with Dr. Sally Ride on a project, which enabled high school 

students around the country to take pictures of their own planet. As a PhD 

student at Caltech, I used data from the 2 Micron All Sky Survey (2MASS), a sky 

Page 1 of 13 
30 

35 

0.015 

:Jo 

25 0.012 "' ~ 8 w 

2! 20 " ro 

Bl 0.009 " ~ ~ ::; "' 3 !5 !2 0 0.006 '~ ,... "0 

!0 ~ 

0.003 

0 

(Figure 1) The distribution of stars within 25 light-years of the Sun, ordered by spectral type. 

Massive hot stars are to the left, low-mass cool stars are to the right. The Sun is one of 8 Gtype stars in the local volume. The vast majority of stars are dim, low-mass M dwarfs. 

(From Kirkpatrick et al. 2012, Astrophysical Journa/753, 156) 

survey using newly developed infrared array technology, to discover an entire 

class of invisible, low-mass stars. These data were available to myself and many 

other early career scientists exploring new areas of astronomical research thanks 

to federal funding provided by NASA and NSF. Today, I am able to weave these 

life-long scientific interests into the search for potentially habitable worlds around 

the lowest mass stars, a search that has recently born fruit and is transforming 

the way we see the Universe and our place within it. 

Overview 

When we look up into a clear, dark night sky, most of the stars we see are hot, 

luminous, massive and distant. This "visible" sample is not representative of our 

Milky Way's overall stellar population, which is dominated by cool, low mass and 

dim stars, barely perceptible even with a sizeable telescope. Astronomers 

designate these stars as cool or ultracool dwarfs. Compared to our Sun they are 

less than half as warm, have less than half the mass, and radiate less than 1% of 

the light energy. Most of this light is emitted at far-red visible and infrared 

wavelengths, beyond our visual range. They are literally invisible stars, only 

recently discovered in large numbers thanks to infrared detector technology 

development (a collaboration of military, university and private research) and the 

use of these detectors in federally supported surveys of the sky. Despite their 

recent detection, these lowest-mass stars are proving to be extremely important 

in the search for life in our Universe. 

Cool dwarf stars have a number of unique properties that are important in the 

search for life beyond our Solar System. First, they are common. Over 75% of 

Page 2 of 13 
31 

stars in the immediate vicinity of the Sun are cool or ultracool dwarfs (Figure 1 ), 

and the lowest-mass stars (S1 0% the mass of the Sun) are more than five times 

more abundant that Sun-like stars. This fact means that low-mass stars are 

typically the closest stars to the Sun, including the closest star, Proxima Centauri 

(12% of the Sun's mass), 4.21ight-years away. The 5th, 6th and 7th nearest stars 

to the Sun, and a star that passed within 1 light-year of the Sun roughly 70,000 

years ago, are examples of very low-mass stars found only the past 4 years. 

These stars have extremely long lifetimes, measured as the time over which they 

extract energy from the fusion of hydrogen into helium in their hot cores. The Sun 

is about halfway through its lifetime and will deplete its core hydrogen supply in 

the next 4-5 billion years (in the process, engulfing or rendering uninhabitable the 

inner terrestrial planets). The lowest-mass stars will continue to fuse hydrogen for 

trillions of years, one hundred times longer than the current age of the Universe. 

This means that nearly every low-mass star ever formed is still around today and 

will persist well past the demise of the Sun, making them very long-term 

sanctuaries for life if they possess habitable worlds. Finally, we now know that 

the lowest-mass stars are capable of forming planets - and specifically Earthsized planets- thanks to recent discoveries summarized in this testimony. 

Why search for habitable worlds around the lowest-mass stars? 

The low-mass star population provides an exciting opportunity for the search of 

potentially habitable worlds. Here, I will follow scientific convention to define 

"potentially habitable world" as one in which there is the possibility of persistent 

liquid water on its surface. While worlds with interior oceans (such as the icy 

moons Europa and Enceladus) or other surface liquids {such as the hydrocarbon 

lakes on the Saturnian moon Titan) may support the development of novel life 

forms, life as we know it- Earth-based life- requires liquid water at or near the 

planet's surface to thrive. Liquid water can exist only on planetary surfaces with 

an atmosphere and within a specific range of temperatures, 0°C to 1 00°C at 

standard atmospheric pressure. The surface temperature of a planet is 

determined primarily by the amount of radiation it receives from its star, which in 

turn depends on the star's surface temperature, size, and distance from the 

planet, as well the fraction of starlight absorbed by the planet surface, and the 

fraction of thermal radiation emitted out into space. Other heat sources, such as 

geothermal activity and tidal forces, can also play a role. The primary factors 

define a star's "habitable zone", the region in which planets could maintain 

surface liquid water. Not surprisingly, Earth resides in the Sun's habitable zone, 

but so does the Moon and Mars, illustrating the importance of atmospheres {for 

the Moon) and the transience of habitability {Mars likely lost its surface water to 

by exposure to the Solar wind and the atmospheric escape of hydrogen). 

The lowest-mass stars have several properties that make them ideal targets in 

the search for potentially habitable worlds. First, both theoretical calculations and 

observational studies show that the kinds of planets with surfaces- rocky or icy 

"terrestrial" worlds- are more likely to form and be found around the lowestmass stars. Analysis of data from the Kepler spacecraft and ground-based 

Page 3 of 13 
32 

300 

250 

c 1;; 

!-200 T~ 3 ~ 

~ ~ 

0 "§150 

22 "" 0 -- -g 

-" 1100 e " 0. c 

0.2 50 

0 0.0 0 

0.1 02 05 1.0 

mass(Msun) 

Figure 2: Measures of delectability for transiting Earth-sized planets in the habitable zones 

of 1 billion-year-old stars of different stellar mass. Curves show the geometric probability of 

transit (blue dotted line), transit depth (red dashed line) and number of orbits in a year 

(black solid line). All of these metrics strongly favor searches for planets among the lowestmass stars (green region). From Triaud et al. 2013, httos://arxiv.org/abs/1304.7248. 

microlensing surveys find that there are on average 2 Earth-sized planets per 

low-mass star. Compared to Sun-like stars, low-mass stars have 3.5 times more 

Earth-sized planets and 50% more terrestrial planetary mass overall. With 

infrared-sensitive detectors, planets in the habitable zones of low-mass stars are 

also easier to detect. Because these stars are both cooler and smaller than the 

Sun, their habitable zones are closer in, so habitable-zone planets have shorter 

orbital periods. This facilitates their discovery by the radial velocity technique, in 

which the presence of a planet is inferred by its back-and-forth gravitational pull 

on the star. The closer the planet, the stronger the pull, and a lower mass star 

will also exhibit a greater reflex motion. Habitable zone planets are also easier to 

detect through the transit method, applicable for a small fraction of systems 

(about 1-4%) in which a planet passes between us and its star, briefly blocking a 

small fraction of the star's light. The amount of light blocked - the transit signal -

is larger for smaller stars, while the probability of transit is greater for closely 

orbiting planets. For both radial velocity and transit methods, the short orbit 

periods of close-in habitable zone planets produce more frequent periodic 

signals, improving the likelihood of their detection. 

Low-mass stars may also have pitfalls when it comes to planet habitability, 

although here there is more uncertainty given our very recent discovery of these 

systems. Planets orbiting close to their stars are subject to tidal locking, in which 

the star's gravitational forces cause the planet to rotate so that it always faces 

one side toward the star (tidal locking is why we see only one side of the Moon 

from Earth). While initial research suggested that tidal locking would be 

catastrophic for planet habitability, causing atmospheres to evaporate on the day 

side and freeze out on the night side, more recent work has shown that heat can 

be redistributed around a tidally-locked planet even with a relatively thin 

Page 4 of 13 
33 

Figure 3: Graphical summary of 12 potentially habitable exoplanets as compiled by the 

Planet Habitability Laboratory at the University of Puerto Rico at Arecibo. These are the 

most "conservative" systems, with the highest probability of having surface liquid water. 

The images of the exoplanets are artistic representations scaled in size relative to the 

Solar System planets shown at right. The distances and names of the exoplanets are 

listed, and those marked with an asterisk are still considered candidates. From the 

PHL website, t®WJ2!J.Lldill:&!i!lli!lmi!~!Lllil.lllii!!2!!~~1@!:!Silll::l"&!lilll29. 

atmosphere. Cloud formation on the dayside can also play a role in stabilizing the 

environment. Indeed, tidal locking could reduce variations in planetary tilt, 

resulting in global climates that are more stable than Earth, and thus well suited 

for the development of life. The forces that cause tidal locking can also heat the 

interior of the planet, potentially driving excessive geothermal activity similar to 

that seen on Jupiter's volcanic moon lo. Again, while extensive volcanism could 

be problematic for the development of life, tectonic activity drives many of the 

chemical cycles (such as the silicate-carbon cycle) that are essential for life on 

Earth. Low-mass stars are also known to be highly magnetically active, 

producing high-energy flares and coronal mass ejections with often greater 

intensity that the Sun. The X-ray and ultraviolet radiation, and high energy 

particles, emitted by this magnetic activity can damage biological organisms, 

evaporate the oceans, and strip away the atmospheres of closely-orbiting 

planets. On the other hand, if the planets themselves had strong enough 

magnetic fields and ozone in their atmospheres (possibly produced from the 

oxygen released by evaporating oceans), their surfaces would be shielded from 

these effects, just as the Earth's magnetic field shields us from the Sun's 

magnetic storms. 

The habitability and evolution of terrestrial planets around the lowest mass 

stars are among the most uncertain and exciting aspects of this developing 

area of research, allowing us to explore the origins of life in novel systems. 

Fortunately, we are entering an era in which both targets (planets) and the 

tools (technology) will be available to find and characterize these worlds. 

Page 5 of 13 
34 

Barycemnc Juhan Oaie ~ 2.457.600 fdayj 

d 0.06 

OJJ4 

Orbital separation [AUj 

Figure 4: Data leading to the discovery of the TRAPPIST-1 seven-planet system. Panels (a) 

and (b) show the 22-day light curve obtained in September 2016 with space-based Spitzer 

observations (dark points) and ground-based measurements (grey points). Colored symbols 

denote the transit times for each of the seven planets. Panel (c) shows the individual transits 

for each of the planets. The transit depth measures the size of the planet relative to the star, 

while the transit duration measures the speed of the planet and thus its orbit distance. Panel 

(d) is a visualization of the planet orbits, with the grey region mapping the TRAPPIST -1 's 

habitable zone. Three planets- e, f and g -orbit within this zone. The axes are measured in 

Astronomical Units (AU), the distance between the Earth and the Sun. For comparison, 

Mercury orbits between 0.31 and 0.39 AU from the Sun, about 10 times the distance of 

TRAPPIST-1f and g. From Gillon et al. 2017, Nature 542, 456. 

Page 6 of 13 
35 

Discovering potentially habitable terrestrial exoplanets 

Given that conditions favor their detection around the lowest-mass stars, it is no 

surprise that the first discoveries of potentially habitable Earth-sized worlds were 

made around stars less massive than the Sun. Kepler-62f and Kepler-186f, each 

the fifth planet around their respective host stars, were the first potentially 

habitable planet discoveries, both identified through the transit method with the 

Kepler spacecraft. Similar planets have been found around low-mass stars by the 

radial velocity method, most notably Proxima Centauri b, a greater-than Earth 

mass planet orbiting in the habitable zone of the nearest star to the Sun. The 

University of Puerto Rico Planet Habitability Laboratory maintains an up-to-date 

list of potentially habitable planets, and categorize 12 planets as "conservatively" 

likely to have surface liquid water (Figure 3) All of these were discovered in the 

past 5 years, and all orbit stars less massive than the Sun, most less than onethird the Sun's mass. Eight of the twelve planets are within 40 light-years, 

considered "very nearby" on a cosmic scale. While there are many selection 

effects that enter into these statistics, these discoveries nevertheless confirm that 

potentially habitable worlds are present and detectable around the lowest mass 

stars. 

Earlier this year, three of these planets were discovered by our team as part of a 

system of seven Earth-sized planets orbiting a very low-mass star 39 light-years 

from Earth (Figure 4 ). This star, called TRAPPIST -1, is an ultra cool dwarf first 

discovered with 2MASS data in 2000, and has a mass 8% that of the Sun and a 

diameter equivalent to the planet Jupiter. All seven planets were detected by the 

transit method, combining data from ground-based and space-based facilities. 

Three of the planets- e, f and g- orbit within the star's habitable zone. Because 

TRAPPIST-1 is dim (emitting less than 0.1% of the Sun's total radiation), these 

potentially habitable planets orbit close to their star, less than 5% of the distance 

between the Earth and the Sun. The entire system fits easily within the orbit of 

Mercury. The seven planets have orbit periods between 1.5 and 18.8 days and 

are organized in "resonance chains" that cause them to gravitationally pull on 

each other in their orbits, a phenomenon we can discern by variations in their 

transit times of up to 40 minutes. Overall, this small, compact system looks more 

like the Galilean moon system around Jupiter than the Sun's planetary system, a 

potential clue to its origin. 

Our discovery was possible thanks to an international collaboration of scientists 

from two dozen institutions in ten countries on four continents, including US 

researchers based in the states of California, Maryland, Massachusetts, Texas, 

and Washington. In 2015, our team reported the detection of three transiting 

planets orbiting TRAPPIST-1 based on observations obtained with the 

TRAnsiting Planets and Planetesimals Small Telescope South (TRAPPISTSouth), a 60-cm robotic telescope located in Chile. A second telescope, 

TRAPPIST-North, is in operation at Ouka'imden Observatory in Morocco (Figure 

5). Both facilities are operated by the University of Liege, Belgium, and led Dr. 

Michael Gillon with support by European research funds. We found two close-in 

Page 7 of 13 
36 

Figure 5: The TRAPPIST facilities at the ESO La Silla Observatory in Chile (left) and the 

Ouka'imden Observatory in Morocco (right). Both are 60 em robotic telescopes optimized for 

the detection and characterization of exoplanets and small bodies in our solar system. 

(Photo credit: Emmanuel Jehin) 

planets too hot to sustain life; and a third candidate habitable zone planet with 

only two transit detections and a highly uncertain orbit period. Uncertainties in 

planet detections are common for ground-based transit programs, as data can 

only be acquired at night, in good weather, and when the star is well above the 

horizon, resulting in significant sampling bias. As we continued to monitor this 

star using facilities in Chile, South Africa, the United Kingdom, Spain, Morocco 

and the US, we began to see evidence that there were more planets in the 

system. We turned to the Spitzer Space Telescope, a NASA-funded infrared 

space facility launched in 2003 onto an Earth-trailing orbit around the Sun. As a 

stable, space-based platform, Spitzer provides exceptional brightness 

measurements with no day/night or weather interruptions. Monitoring TRAPPIST1 with Spitzer for 21 days along with concurrent ground-based observations 

revealed 92 transits that could be assigned to seven distinct planets. These 

results were subsequently verified in a 7 4-day monitoring campaign conducted 

by the NASA-funded Kepler space telescope, with data released to scientists and 

the public last month. 

Beyond revealing the presence of a planet, the transit method yields 

measurements of its size relative to its star. Our observations and analysis of the 

TRAPPIST-1 star show that the planets are between 0.7 to 1.1 times the size of 

the Earth. In addition, the transit timing variations observed for these planets 

have yielded the first estimates of the masses of the planets (0.09 to 1.6 times 

the mass of Earth) and their average densities (0.2 to 1.4 times the density of 

Earth). These measurements currently have large uncertainties but will improve 

with time. Importantly, the indicate that the planet's interiors are dominated by 

rock and volatiles, the latter including liquid and solid water, carbon dioxide and 

ammonia. These worlds may be the first ocean worlds to be discovered in the 

habitable zone of a star, which would have profound implications on the search 

for life beyond the Solar System. 

The TRAPPIST-1 system establishes several exoplanet firsts, including the 

lowest-mass star known to host planets and the largest number of Earth-sized 

worlds found around any star (including the Sun). It is arguably the most 

promising system to date in the search for life beyond our Solar System, with at 

Page 8 of 13 
37 

Figure 6: Characterization of the TRAPPIST -1 system. (Left) Planet radii and masses 

measured from transits and transit timing variations compared to models of interior 

composition. This study predicts that the habitable zone planets- e, f and g- may have 

interiors of up to 50-100% water. (Middle) Surface temperature maps of planets d, e and f 

based on climate modeling. (Right) One possible scenario for the formation of the 

TRAPPIST-1 system based on migration and circumstellar disk interaction. (Figures from 

Wang et al. 2017, submitted to Astrophysical Journal, httos://arxiv.org/abs/1704.04290; Wolf 

2017, Astrophysical Journal Letters 839, L 1; and Ormel et al. 2017, submitted to Astronomy 

& Astrophysics, https://arxiv.org/abs/1703.06924). 

least three chances at a habitable world. The system has energized the scientific 

community, with over a twenty follow-up studies published since the full system 

was announced in February 2017. These studies are exploring the origin, orbits, 

composition, and climates of the planets, as well as the space environment 

around by the star (Figure 6). 

Yet TRAPPIST-1 is only one of many systems with habitable zone Earth-sized 

worlds around low-mass stars that we expect to find over the next several years. 

Just last week, the NSF-funded MEarth project, which has deployed a network of 

40-cm telescopes in Chile and Arizona for its own search for planets around lowmass stars, reported the discovery of a super-Earth (6.6 times the mass of Earth) 

in the habitable zone of a star that has 15% the mass of the Sun and is also 39 

light-years away. As the TRAPPIST and MEarth programs continue, our team will 

also be expanding our ground-based transit search through the Search for 

habitable Planets EClipsing ULtra-cOOl Stars (SPECULOOS) project, with four 

1-meter robotic telescopes optimized for the lowest-mass stars currently under 

construction in Chile. These ground-based programs will soon be joined by the 

NASA-funded Transiting Exoplanet Survey Satellite (TESS), scheduled for 

launch in March 2018, which is expected to discover hundreds of planets around 

the nearest and brightest low mass stars. Other program, funded by NASA, NSF, 

and international funding agencies, are also gearing up to identify planets around 

low-mass stars through the radial velocity and microlensing techniques, using 

new instrumentation and multi-telescope systems sensitive to dim red stars. 

Page 9 of 13 
38 

Figure 7: Methods for characterizing planets transiting a low-mass star. 

The number of potentially habitable worlds around the lowest mass stars is 

expected to increase dramatically over the next several years, and with that 

comes an opportunity to directly search for evidence of life on other 

worlds. 

From discovery to planet characterization to the search for life 

Determining whether a potentially habitable planet is in fact habitable requires 

observations of its atmosphere and surface. Astronomers have developed a 

number of techniques to do these challenging measurements (Figure 7). During 

transit, spectroscopic observations can be used to measure the gas composition 

of the atmosphere and infer the presence of high-altitude hazes and clouds. 

These measurements may provide evidence for atmospheric water vapor, which 

would link directly to the presence of surface liquid water; they can also probe 

geothermal processes (volcanism) and life (biogenic gases). Transit observations 

can also assess the stability of an atmosphere through the search of trailing 

absorption features, signatures of atmospheric gases escaping from the planet. 

Additional dips in starlight following a planet's transit could signal the presence of 

a large moon. When the planet passes behind the star, a phase known as 

secondary eclipse, starlight reflected by the planet's clouds or surface can be 

used to infer their composition and structure. Infrared observations at this phase 

can measure the temperature of the planet, and with spectroscopy the dayside 

surface or atmospheric composition. As the planet orbits between these two 

phases, variations in the combined light of star and planet can constrain both 

heat circulation and cloud/surface structure around the planet. For planets on 

wider orbits, quadrature is the optimal phase to obtain a direct image or spectrum 

Page 10 of 13 
39 

Figure 8: (Left) Model transit spectrum of an Earth-like world, showing the locations of water 

vapor and potential biogenic gases. JWST will be sensitive across the entire wavelength 

range shown. (Right): Visualization of the Starshade concept by NASA for direct exoplanet 

imaging. An external occulting array is placed up to 50,000 kilometers in front of a space 

telescope like WFIRST to suppress the planet's host starlight. (From Kaltenegger & Traub 

2009, Astrophysical Journa/698, 519; and NASNJPL) 

of the planet. Some of these measurements can be achieved for non-transiting 

planets as well, although the separation of star and planet light becomes more 

challenging. 

Each of these measurements has been achieved for the largest transiting 

exoplanets (Jupiter- and Neptune-like gas giants) and attempted for Earth-sized 

planets around low-mass stars (including TRAPPIST-1), using large groundbased telescopes and the Hubble Space Telescope (HST). Unfortunately, these 

facilities do not have the sensitivity to detect the spectroscopic signatures of an 

Earth-like atmosphere (e.g., C02 or Oz-rich) or reflectance signal from a 

terrestrial world. Extending these techniques to potentially habitable worlds will 

require the next generation of ground-based and space-based facilities. Very 

large telescopes in the 25-35 meter diameter range, including the Thirty Meter 

Telescope (TMT), the Giant Magellan Telescope (GMT) and the European 

Extremely Large Telescope (E-EL T), coupled with advanced instrumentation, 

should have the resolution and sensitivity to detect Earth-sized planets around 

low-mass stars with the radial velocity technique, as well as measure the 

atmospheres of transiting and non-transiting super-Earth planets around these 

stars. These facilities are expected to come online in the next decade. The 

James Webb Space Telescope (JWST), HST's successor with a planned launch 

in late 2018, will extend atmospheric characterization to Earth-sized worlds in the 

habitable zones of the lowest-mass stars, particularly at mid-infrared 

wavelengths where several important biomarkers (e.g., oxygen, ozone, methane 

and nitrogen-oxide compounds; Figure 8) have strong absorption features. JWST 

will also have the sensitivity to measure the thermal emission from these worlds 

during secondary eclipse, allowing us to map out heat circulation to assess the 

overall environments of these planets. Again, such measurements favor systems 

around the lowest-mass stars, and could reveal evidence of liquid water or life on 

any of these worlds. 

Full characterization of potentially habitable worlds will ultimately require direct 

detection of their surfaces and atmospheres, a task made challenging by the 

overwhelming glare of the star the planet orbits. NASA's Exoplanet Exploration 

Page 11 of 13 
40 

program will be a critical asset in this endeavor, as only space-based facilities will 

have the stability, sensitivity and capability of imaging a potentially habitable 

world around another star. Following JWST, the Wide Field Infrared Space 

Telescope (WFIRST), the top priority among large space missions from the 2010 

National Academy of Sciences Astronomy Decadal Review, will greatly increase 

the number of known exoplanets, particularly through the microlensing technique. 

For direct detection, NASA scientists and engineers are now exploring the 

feasibility of matching WFIRST to an external occulter to suppress starlight- the 

Starshade concept- a facility that could directly image an Earth-like world 

around a Sun-like star by 2030, if implemented. This facility won't be able to 

resolve planets in the close-in habitable zones of the lowest-mass stars, but the 

technology does pave the path for future direct imaging missions of these 

systems, possibly through concept missions Habitable Exoplanet Imaging 

Mission and the Large UV/Optical/lnfrared Surveyor. Meanwhile, the Origins 

Space Telescope would provide detailed chemistry of the atmospheres of these 

planets in the far infrared. If selected, these facilities would conduct observations 

in the 2030s and 2040s. 

While the potential for an image of an Earth-like world in the next 15-25 years is 

exciting in its own right, it is worth noting other ambitious programs aimed at 

exploring these worlds in different ways. These include the Breakthrough 

Initiative Starshot project that aims to propel ultralight satellites at high speeds to 

the nearest stars through laser propulsion; and the search for signals from 

advanced life forms across the electromagnetic spectrum through the Search for 

Extraterrestrial Intelligence (SETI) project. These public-private partnerships will 

have plenty of potentially habitable worlds to target among the many low-mass 

stars in the immediate vicinity of the Sun. 

Concluding Remarks 

Our recent advances in the search for habitable worlds and life beyond our Solar 

system has captured the imagination of people around the world, including US 

citizens of all backgrounds. After the announcement of TRAPPIST -1 was made 

in February 2017, I and my colleagues have had hundreds of conversations with 

children and parents, students and teachers, scientists and artists, Uber drivers 

and airline pilots, janitors and Senators, friends, family and complete strangers, 

people from all walks of life who are curious about these worlds and what they 

mean for life on and beyond Earth. I have personally received emails, texts, 

tweets and good old-fashioned letters suggesting names for the planets, 

presenting personal artwork (Figure 9), and sharing stories both fiction and nonfiction inspired by this discovery. These messages reflect a diversity of 

engagement with science, technology, engineering and math that extend beyond 

the classroom. Research leading to the discovery of new worlds is also broadly 

accessible to young scientists and the public alike, thanks to the open data policy 

of federally-funded programs. In my own lab, I have had high school students 

and teachers from local underserved school districts, undergraduates from 

minority-serving institutions, and graduate students from around the world 

Page 12 of 13 
41 

working on these data to better understand the stars and planets we have found. 

And many people are excited to learn that they can be directly involved in the 

search for habitable worlds through citizen science programs such as Planet 

Hunters, Exoplanet Explorers, Backyard Worlds, SETI@home, and Project 

Panoptes, to name a few. There is undeniably a broad interest among our fellow 

citizens to be part of the search for life beyond Earth. 

Continued federal funding of a diverse portfolio of research programs is critically 

essential to this work. None of this is possible without public support. Federal 

funding is also critical for maintaining US leadership not just in astrobiology and 

space science, but in science and technology in general. The search for life 

beyond Earth requires advanced observational facilities and instrumentation on 

Earth and in space, computational facilities and data science programs to 

process the petabytes of data from current and future missions, theoretical work 

to understand the origins and evolution of other worlds, and laboratory 

experiments to explore the diverse biochemistry of life in environments that may 

exist on these worlds, among other areas. As in all basic research programs, 

public investment and public-private partnerships in this area will have broad 

impacts on society through technology development, new materials, biomedical 

applications and computational advancements. Perhaps most important are the 

educational and public outreach initiatives that not only share these exciting 

discoveries with the nation, but train the next generation of scientists to tackle a 

broad range of challenges and opportunities we have now and in the future. 

This generation is the first in human history to know that there are other worlds 

beyond our Solar System. Will the next generation know that life exists on those 

worlds? We have both the opportunity and the responsibility to continue our 

nation's legacy of exploration and discovery so that our children and 

grandchildren will know more about life in the Universe than we can even hope to 

imagine. 

Page 13 of 13 
42 

Dr. Adam J. Burgasser 

Short Narrative Biography 

Dr. Adam Burgasser is a Professor of Physics at UC San Diego and an 

observational astrophysicist investigating the lowest mass stars, coldest brown 

dwarfs, and exoplanets. He uses a variety of ground-based and space-based 

telescopes to discover and research the physical properties of these objects 

across the electromagnetic spectrum. He has authored or co-authored over 175 

peer-reviewed publications over his career, including contributions to the 

discovery of seven Earth-sized planets around the nearby low-mass star 

TRAPPIST-1. Dr. Burgasser. also conducts education research in physics, 

examining cooperative and flipped-model learning strategies in large-format 

physics courses; and interdisciplinary research along the science-art continuum, 

examining data-driven artforms, trans-sensory perception, and participatory 

public science-art installations. In 2016, he was awarded UCSD's Distinguished 

Teaching Award. 

Dr. Burgasser is committed to improving equity and inclusion in the sciences, by 

identifying and addressing barriers for underrepresented groups. He has chaired 

the American Astronomical Society (MS) Committee on the Status of Minorities 

in Astronomy, directs the UC-HBCU UCSD-Morehouse-Spelman Physics Bridge 

Program, and was part of the organizing committee that hosted the first Inclusive 

Astronomy conference at Vanderbilt University in 2015. In 2014, he was 

awarded the Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action and Diversity Award at UC San 

Diego for his diversity and outreach work. 

Dr. Burgasser earned his B.S. in Physics at UC San Diego in 1996, where he 

was also a national champion springboard diver and recipient of the NCAA Top 

VII award. He earned his Ph.D. in Physics (with a specialization in Planetary 

Science) from the California Institute of Technology in 2001. Dr. Burgasser 

conducted postgraduate work as a Hubble Postdoctoral Fellow at UC Los 

Angeles and a Spitzer Postdoctoral Fellow at the American Museum of Natural 

History in New York City. He has held faculty positions in the Departments of 

Physics at MIT and UC San Diego. In 2017, he was awarded a Fulbright 

scholarship to conduct research at the University of Exeter. 

Dr. Burgasser's astrophysical, educational and creative research work has been 

supported by the National Science Foundation, NASA, the American 

Astronomical Society, the American Physical Society, the MIT Alumni Class 

Funds, the UC Office of the President, the UC Institute for Research in the Arts, 

the UCSD Center for the Humanities, the UCSD Frontiers in Science Program, 

the UCSD Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion, the UCSD Division of 

Physical Sciences, Fulbright Program, and the Chris and Warren Hellman 

Fellowship. 
43 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Dr. Burgasser. 

And Dr. Kasting. 

TESTIMONY OF DR. JAMES KASTING, 

CHAIR, PLANNING COMMITTEE, 

WORKSHOP ON THE SEARCH FOR LIFE 

ACROSS SPACE AND TIME, 

NATIONAL ACADEMIES OF SCIENCE, 

ENGINEERING, AND MEDICINE, 

EVAN PUGH PROFESSOR OF GEOSCIENCES, 

PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY 

Dr. KASTING. Chairman Smith, Ranking Member Johnson, and 

Members of the Committee, thank you for allowing me to testify at 

this hearing. I was selected for this spot because I chaired the 

Planning Committee for the recent National Academies’ workshop 

on searching for life across space and time. 

In my written testimony, I’ve attempted to summarize key points 

made by various participants at that workshop. Here I will focus 

on two important new discoveries, one within our solar system and 

another outside of it. I should emphasize that I’m speaking on my 

own behalf as an active researcher and not on behalf of the National Academies. 

The new solar system measurement was made by NASA’s 

Cassini spacecraft, which has been orbiting Saturn for the last 12 

years. Chairman Smith already mentioned this. One of the objects 

the Cassini has studied is Saturn’s moon Enceladus, which is 

shown on the slide. Enceladus is of great interest to astrobiologists 

because, like Jupiter’s moon Europa, it’s thought to have a subsurface ocean. Part of the evidence for this ocean is a plume of material emanating from Enceladus’ south pole. During its lifetime, 

Cassini has performed multiple passes through this plume, sampling the gases that make it up. Previous measurements had already determined that the plume consists mainly of water vapor 

with smaller amounts of carbon dioxide and methane. 

As many of you already know, NASA is about to bring the 

Cassini Mission to an end by plunging the spacecraft into Saturn 

sometime late this summer. With the end in sight, flight controllers 

have been taking more risks with the mission over the past two 

years. In 2015, Cassini made its deepest penetration yet through 

the plume, passing within 49 kilometers of the moon’s surface. The 

mass spectrometer was also operated in a different mode that allowed it to measure molecular hydrogen. This in turn allowed researchers to estimate the amount of chemical energy available 

within Enceladus’ ocean from the reaction between carbon dioxide 

and hydrogen to make methane. This reaction is used by 

methanogens here on Earth to power their metabolisms. 

The new results indicate there should be enough chemical energy 

available within the ocean to support methanogens. This of course 

does not mean that life is present on Enceladus, however, it suggests that the search for life there could be rewarding. Next slide, 

please. 

[Slide.] 
44 

My second update concerns rocky planets that have been discovered orbiting within the habitable zones of nearby red dwarf stars, 

also known as M stars. Adam Burgasser just told you about the 

planets orbiting TRAPPIST–1 and about the other new exoplanet 

announced last week that orbits this M star LHS–1140. 

All of these planets were discovered from the ground by looking 

for transits in which the planet passes in front of its parent star. 

During transit, some of the starlight passes through the planet’s 

atmosphere, allowing its composition to be studied 

spectroscopically. This has been done previously for giant planets 

using the existing Hubble and Spitzer space telescopes but it will 

be done much more accurately by NASA’s upcoming James Webb 

Space Telescope, JWST, which launches late next year. The hope 

is to look for the presence of possible biosignature gases, especially 

molecular oxygen, O2, which is produced by photosynthetic plants 

and algae here on Earth. 

A third new exoplanet discovery announced late last summer, 

which you also have heard about already, is a rocky planet orbiting 

within the habitable zone of the nearest M star, in fact, the nearest 

star, Proxima Centauri. This planet was discovered from the 

ground by a team of European astronomers using the radial velocity method. This technique uses the Doppler effect to look for the 

back-and-forth motion of the star caused by planets orbiting around 

it. Because the Proxima Centauri planet probably does not transit, 

it is harder to study with JWST. The planet is close enough, however, that it can potentially be characterized from the ground using 

planned 30- to 40-meter telescopes. By again using the Doppler effect, researchers can separate the absorption lines in the planet’s 

atmosphere from lines formed within the Earth’s atmosphere, allowing them to look for biomarker gases such as oxygen and ozone. 

Ultimately, astrobiologists would like to look for Earth-like planets orbiting more stars more like the sun. This will require large 

space-based direct imaging telescopes that have not yet been approved. The good news is that NASA is again studying them. Hopefully within the next 15 to 20 years, we’ll be able to search for habitable planets and life around all the stars within the solar neighborhood. 

Thank you again for allowing me to testify at this hearing. 

[The prepared statement of Dr. Kasting follows:] 
45 

Statement of Dr. James F. Kasting 

Evan Pugh Professor of Geosciences 

Penn State University 

before the 

Committee on Science, Space, and Technology 

U.S. House of Representatives 

April 26, 2017 

Chairman Smith, Ranking Member Johnson, and Members of the House Committee on 

Science, Space, and Technology, thank you for allowing me to testify at this important 

committee hearing. I was selected for this spot because I chaired the planning committee for a 

recent National Academies' workshop entitled "Searching for Life Across Space and Time" held 

on Dec. 5-6, 2016, in Irvine, CA. Henceforth, I will refer to this as the 'Biosignatures 

Workshop'. As you will recognize, an Academies' workshop is a venue for discussion and 

debate-an essential effort in allowing the scientific process to unfold. Published proceedings 

chronicle the presentations and discussions that take place at these types of Academies' 

activities, and the proceedings from the December event will be published later this Spring. My 

testimony today will attempt to sunnnarize my personal perspective on key points made by 

various participants at that workshop. However, I will update this story with four important 

discoveries, three of which were announced after the workshop was held. And I will attempt to 

show how the present search for life relates to the ongoing search for intelligent life, which was 

not discussed at the workshop. I should emphasize that I am speaking in my personal capacity as 

an active researcher and am not speaking on behalf of the National Academies of Sciences, 

Engineering, and Medicine. 

Relation of the search for life to SETI 

Interest in the search for life off the Earth has been growing continuously over the last 

four decades. Many of us are ultimately motivated by the Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence 

(SETI), which has been going on for that amount oftime, or longer. We would like to know 

whether there is someone else to talk to out there in the galaxy, or in the larger Universe. The 

late Carl Sagan helped pioneer this search and inspired millions of people worldwide, including 

me, to share his aspirations. 

In a logical world, however, SETI would have been preceded by a search for less 

complex forms of life. If life does originate in places other than Earth, then simple life forms are 

probably more abundant than complex or intelligent life forms, according to the Drake equation 

that Carl Sagan helped formulate (along with Frank Drake). We started looking for intelligent 

life first because the technology for building radio telescopes matured well before that needed to 

look for life itself. Looking for simple life is difficult. Within the solar system, we can do this 

most effectively by sending spacecraft to other planets and observing them either from orbit or 

from landers/rovers, like the Curiosity rover that is exploring Mars right now. Outside of the 

solar system, astronomers have identified numerous exoplanets from the ground using the radial 
46 

velocity, or Doppler, method. More recently, our knowledge of exoplanets has exploded as a 

result of NASA's successful Kepler Space Telescope mission. Kepler found planets by detecting 

their transits in front of their parent stars. Thanks to Kepler, we now know the addresses of 

thousands of exoplanets, and we also know that most stars are accompanied by two or more 

planets. But we know virtually nothing about whether any of these planets are habitable or 

inhabited. Figuring this out is our biggest goal for the future. 

Subdividing the search for life 

At the recent Biosignatures Workshop, we divided the search for extraten·estriallife into 

four quadrants, as shown in Fig. 1. The two vertical columns represent in-situ life detection 

(which we can do in the solar system) and remote life detection (which is all that we can hope to 

do for exoplanets, given present technology). The two horizontal rows represent life 'as we know 

it' and life 'as we don't know it'. We don't really know how different alien life would be from 

us, and this affects where we think to look for it, as well as the techniques we might use to 

identify it. 

Fig. I Schematic diagram showing the four different conceptual areas 

in the search for life off the Earth. The planetary bodies that are 

representative of three of these areas are (clockwise from the upper 

left) Mars, Earth, and Saturn's moon, Titan. The fourth area is 

undefined for the moment, and likely to remain so. 

2 
47 

In situ detection of life as we know it 

Mars 

Life as we know it here on Earth shares many common characteristics. At its most basic 

level: 1) Life is carbon-based, 2) it requires the presence ofliquid water at least some of the time, 

and 3) it utilizes the molecules DNA and RNA to store and transfer genetic information. Mars is 

one planet within the solar system where we might search for this type oflife. Indeed, various 

researchers have proposed that life could have been transferred from Mars to Earth, or vice 

versa, by meteorites. So, it might not actually be surprising to find DNA-based life on Mars. One 

workshop participant, Gary Ruvkin from Harvard Medical School, suggested sending a modem, 

mobile DNA sequencer to Mars. Such machines can detect and analyze extraordinarily small 

samples of DNA, and would likely be able to find Earth-like life if it was there. But if martian 

organisms don't rely on DNA, then such a search would be fruitless even if Mars was teeming 

with life. 

Big strides in Mars' exploration have been taken over the last few years by the Mars 

Exploration Rovers, which began their mission in 2003, and by the Curiosity rover, which has 

operated since 2014. John Grotzinger from Caltech, who has been involved in both missions, 

gave an overview of Curiosity results, highlighting the evidence for long-lived lakes. Jennifer 

Eigenbrode from NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center talked about detection of organic 

compounds. Organic compounds have indeed been found, but that is to be expected because of 

continual meteorite bombardment. Bottom line: Curiosity has found additional evidence of 

habitability-i.e., an environment with conditions appropriate to the support oflife at some time 

in the past-but nothing that would definitely indicate present or past life. Curiosity has also 

reported seeing methane, in agreement with ground-based observations, but that fmding remains 

controversial. (Some researchers have argued that Curiosity brought the methane with it from 

Florida.) The ESA-Russian ExoMars Trace Gas Orbiter mission, which is at Mars now and will 

achieve its science orbit early next year, will hopefully answer this question. 

Mars exploration is proceeding at a good rate, with missions launched at nearly every 2-

year opportunity. The big debate is whether to concentrate on additional orbiters and rovers, 

sample return, or human exploration. I will not attempt to weigh in on this question. This will be 

one of the issues discussed by the 2022 planetary science decadal survey, organized by the 

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 

Ocean worlds 

Jupiter's moon, Europa, and Saturn's moon, Enceladus, both harbor subsurface oceans 

and could also conceivably be horne to life as we know it. But they differ from Mars in the sense 

that transfer oflife between the outer solar system and Earth is considered unlikely. So, if we 

were to fmd life on one of these moons, it would likely indicate that life originated more than 

once-a point made by JPL's Kevin Hand at the workshop. This in itself would be a discovery of 

enormous importance, as we still do not know whether the origin oflife is a chance event, or 

whether it happens whenever the circumstances are right. Possible life forms on these moons 

could still be carbon-based and require liquid water, but whether they would utilize DNA and 

RNA is an open question that biologists would love to answer. 

3 
48 

Update #I: The most exciting news in this field is the recent announcement (made well 

after the workshop) that molecular hydrogen, H2, has been identified in the plume emanating 

from Enceladus' south polar region (J.H. Waite et al., Science, 2017). The Cassini spacecraft has 

flown through the plume multiple times and had previously identified CHi (methane) and C02 

(carbon dioxide), in addition to the major constituent H20. Finding Hz, and measuring its 

concentration relative to H20, allowed researchers to estimate the thermodynamic free energy 

available from the reaction: C02 + 4 H2 --t CH4 + 2 H20. This is one of the reactions used by 

methanogenic bacteria here on Earth to power their metabolism. The Cassini researchers 

calculated that the available free energy in Enceladus' subsurface ocean was an enormous 80±20 

kJ/mole. To put this in perspective, methanogens on Earth can typically draw H2 down until they 

are only getting about 10-15 kJ/mole. Synthesizing ATP (adenosine tri-phosphate) from ADP 

(adenosine di-phosphate) requires 35.6 kJ/mole. ATP is the standard unit of energy 'currency' 

for terrestrial organisms. If the new analysis is correct, there is plenty of free energy available to 

sustain life in Enceladus' ocean. But we are left to ponder why, if methanogens are there, have 

they not drawn H2 down to lower concentrations, as they do here on Earth. Could it perhaps be 

because they are limited by other factors, e.g., nutrient supply? Given the uncertainties, it would 

clearly be wrong to conclude at this time that Enceladus is inhabited. But there is lots of 

incentive to study this object further. 

Progress in learning about ocean worlds has been greatly accelerated by the approval of 

funds for NASA's Europa Clipper mission. Clipper will make multiple passes by Europa and 

may be able to sample plumes that have been reported based on observations from the Hubble 

Space Telescope. Clipper should also be able to determine the thickness of Europa's icy crust 

and take spectra of the brownish material that is thought to ooze up through the cracks. A Europa 

lander mission, which has been extensively studied but not yet been approved, could take this 

search even further. It is considered to be technically difficult, though, because of the intense 

charged particle radiation environment on and around Europa. 

In situ detection of life as we don't know it 

Titan 

Some biologists (and chemists) who like to think 'out of the box' have suggested that life 

may be a more general phenomenon than what we encounter here on Earth. A formal report 

issued by the National Academies in 2007, entitled The Limits of Organic Life in Planetary 

Systems, examined this hypothesis in some detail. Informally, this document is sometimes 

referred to as the 'Weird Life' report. NASA and NSF co-organized a recent 'Ideas Lab' to 

follow up on this report. Life on Saturn's moon Titan, if it exists, would fall into this category. 

Titan, which has been explored over the past 15 years by the NASA-ESA Cassini mission and 

the accompanying Huygens probe, sports lakes of liquid methane. The mean surface temperature 

is a frigid 93 K, compared to 288 K here on Earth. Whether or not life could originate or survive 

on Titan is unknown. Earth-like life obviously could not, but perhaps there is some kind of life 

that could. Finding life on Titan would be even more profound than finding life on Enceladus or 

Europa because it would suggest that life is an extremely general phenomenon. Some 

astrobiologists, including me, are skeptical about this idea; however, it is a testable hypothesis 

that deserves consideration. Indeed, Ellen Stofan proposed a Discovery-class space mission to 

drop a boat into Titan's methane seas and sample them. Stofan's mission was turned down, not 

4 
49 

because it lacked scientific merit, but because no one thought it could fit under the Discovery 

cost cap. It will likely be done someday, not necessarily to ·find life, but just to see what is there. 

Remote detection of life as we know it 

Exoplanets 

The search for life as we know it extends to exoplanets, as well. None of the other planets 

in the solar system are truly Earth-like; they differ greatly in their masses, and of course they are 

all at different distances from the Sun. But rocky exoplanets within the liquid water 'habitable 

zones' around their parent stars could conceivably be Earth-like. We will not be able to explore 

them directly, however, at least for the foreseeable future, and so we will have to rely on remote 

life detection techniques. Life that is present at the surface of a planet can modify the planet's 

atmosphere in a way that is remotely detectable, using spectroscopy. This falls within my own 

area of expertise, and so I can report on developments in this area with some degree of 

confidence. 

It was recognized many years ago (Joshua Lederberg, Nature, 1964) that Earth's 

atmosphere is well out of thermodynamic equilibrium and that this is largely due to the presence 

of life. But thermodynamic disequilibrium, by itself, is not necessarily a sign of life. I have just 

argued above that the high availability of free energy in Enceladus' ocean-a sign of 

thermodynamic disequilibrium-could actually indicate that methanogenic life is not present. 

Earth's atmosphere is in extreme disequilibrium for a specific reason: Photosynthetic organisms 

living on its surface produce Oz as a byproduct of using HzO to reduce C02 to organic matter. 

Most of the very large amount ofOz in Earth's atmosphere, 21 percent by volume, was produced 

in this way. At the same time, there are anaerobic (Oz-free) regions on Earth where methanogens 

can produce CH4. Other anaerobic organisms ( denitrifying bacteria) produce nitrous oxide, NzO, 

which is also a reduced gas that can react with Oz. Thus, the simultaneous presence of significant 

quantities of 02 and a reduced gas such as CH4 or N20 remains the best remote biosignature that 

we know of. This realization has not changed substantially for the last 50 years. 

Progress has been made, however, in identifying other, somewhat more ambiguous, 

biosignatures. Some researchers prefer to call these 'biohints'. Our own research group makes 

computer models of Earth's atmosphere during the Archean Eon, which lasted from 3.8 to 2.5 

billion years ago. Oz was not yet abundant during this period, but life was most certainly present 

during most or all of this time. Our models suggest that CH4 should have been abundant during 

this time period, perhaps accompanied by organic haze. So, early Earth could have looked a little 

bit like Titan. We would be able to distinguish an 'Earth' from a 'Titan', however, because the 

'Earth' would be much warmer and its atmosphere would contain HzO and COz, as well. Both of 

these gases are completely frozen out of Titan's atmosphere. 

Significant attention has also been paid to the question of whether Oz by itself could be 

considered a biosignature. This question is motivated by the fact that 0 2 would be much easier to 

spot in Earth's atmosphere than would CH4 or NzO, because of its much higher concentration. 

So, if other Earth-like planets do exist, but not around the very nearest stars, we may well 

encounter this situation. Consequently, theoreticians like myself have spent considerable time 

and energy studying the possibility of false positives for life, i.e., planets that might accumulate 

5 
50 

high levels of atmospheric 0 2 without life being present. I will mention just one of these false 

positives here, because it is the easiest to understand: Suppose that you had a planet like early 

Venus that was initially endowed with lots of water, but that lost that water because it was too 

close to its star, and so it experienced a runaway greenhouse. The H20 would be 

photodissociated by stellar ultraviolet radiation, the hydrogen would escape to space, and 02 

would be left behind. Fortunately, this particular false positive would be easy to identifY, because 

the water would be gone. (Unless, of course, we caught the planet right in the act of losing its 

water. But we would be suspicious of such a planet, anyway, because it would lie within the 

inner edge of its star's habitable zone.) 

I will not bore you with a lengthy discussion of all of the possible false positives, or the 

ways we might have of ruling them in or out. As I said, there is a growing literature on this topic, 

which is available on request. I should say that much of this research has been funded by 

NASA's R&A programs, particularly Exobiology, Habitable Worlds, Emerging Worlds, and the 

NASA Astrobiology Institute. NASA has been forward-looking in funding these programs, 

which are helping to lay the groundwork for the interpretation of future exoplanet spectra. As a 

result, there is now a community of researchers, many of them young (unlike myself), who are 

poised to take advantage of such data when they become available. 

Planets around M stars 

Planets orbiting M stars (dim red-dwarf stars) deserve special mention because they are 

the ones that are most likely to be observed over the next 10-15 years. An Earth-like planet is, by 

definition, roughly Earth-sized, whereas M stars are significantly smaller than the Sun. Thus, Mstar planets create a deeper dip in the star's light when they transit (go in front of) the star. The 

habitable zone of an M star is also much closer to the star (because the star is so dim), and hence 

the probability of a transit is higher. When the planet transits the star, a small amount of the 

star's light passes through the planet's atmosphere, and this can be examined spectroscopically. 

Consequently, M-star planets can be studied with existing and planned space telescopes. Existing 

telescopes (Hubble and Spitzer) have only been able to characterize gas or ice giant planets (hot 

Jupiters and warm Neptunes). But the James Webb Space Telescope (JWST), which launches 

next year, may be able to obtain spectra of a few rocky, habitable-zone planets. This, of course, is 

an extremely exciting prospect. 

Update #2: Another major discovery that was announced after the December Biosignatures 

workshop was the existence of 7 planets orbiting the M star TRAPPIST -1. I will not say much 

about this discovery, as Adam Burgasser (who was on the TRAPPIST team) will presumably 

cover this topic in his testimony. At least three of these planets are within their star's habitable 

zone, and so characterizing these planets spectroscopically has already become a major science 

goal for JWST. This discovery, like the two that follow, was made using ground-based 

telescopes. 

Update #3: A new transiting, habitable-zone planet was announced just last week orbiting the M 

star LHS1140 (J.A. Dittmann eta!., Nature, 2017). This planet was found by the MEarth survey, 

headed by David Charbonneau of Harvard University. The star is roughly twice as massive as 

TRAPPIST-I, weighing in at ~0.15 times the mass of our Sun. This will be another likely target 

forJWST. 

6 
51 

Update #4: There is a rocky planet orbiting within the habitable zone of the nearest star, Proxima 

Centauri. This should actually be update #I, as it was announced at the end of last summer, well 

before the workshop. It caused quite a buzz at the workshop, and we had a talk by one of the codiscoverers, Matteo Broge. Broge works at the European Southern Observatory (ESO) in Chile 

and is a member of the HARPS team. HARPS is a high-resolution spectrograph used for making 

radial-velocity measurements on stars. This discovery is quite unlike the TRAPPIST-I and 

LHS II40 discoveries, because Proxima Centauri b, as the planet is called, does not transit. It 

therefore cannot be observed by JWST in the same way that the TRAPPIST-I planets can. 

Instead, if we wish to characterize this planet spectroscopically, we will have to do direct 

imaging: separating the light reflected by the planet from that emitted by the star. This can be 

done either by placing a coronagraph within the telescope or, if the telescope is in space, by 

placing a stars hade at some distance in front of the telescope to block the light from the star. 

Because Proxima Centauri is an M star, it may be possible to directly image its planet from the 

ground. Broge and his colleagues are designing instruments for one of the 8-m ESO telescopes in 

the hopes of doing this. Whether they will succeed is uncertain, according to him. Within the 

next 10-12 years, however, the astronomers in the US, Europe, and elsewhere hope to build 30-

40 m ground-based telescopes with state-of-the-art coronagraphs, and Broge was optimistic that 

Proxima Centauri b can be studied in this way. 

Direct imaging of Earth-like planets around Sun-like stars 

The ultimate goal in the astronomical search for life is to look for Earth-like planets 

orbiting Sun-like (F-G-K) stars. Such planets are difficult to study in transit because i) the 

probability of a transit is small, and ii) the planet is small compared to the star. Think of it this 

way: an observer looking at the Sun from a great distance would have only a 0.5 percent chance 

of seeing the Earth transit. That means that we would need to look at ~200 Sun-like stars to find 

one that had a transiting Earth-like planet, even if every one of them had such a planet going 

around it. Or, to say this another way, most of the nearby stars probably do have planets (based 

on Kepler), but they remain invisible to us because the plane of their orbit is not within our line 

of sight. We can only observe such planets by using direct imaging. And, for an Earth-like planet 

around a Sun-like star, the contrast ratio (relative brightness) between the star and the planet is 

1010, i.e., the star is 10 billion times brighter. We don't think that we can do this level of 

coronagraphy from the ground; rather, we need a big, direct imaging telescope up in space. 

The good news is that NASA is once again studying such telescopes. (I was involved in 

such a study 12 years ago for TPF-C, Terrestrial Planet Finder-Coronagraph, but the project was 

cancelled after only 6 months.) At the Biosignatures Workshop, Shawn Domagal-Goldman from 

NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center talked about two possible designs for such a telescope. 

The Habitable Planets Explorer (HabEx) would be a 4-to-6 m diameter telescope designed 

specifically for planet-finding. The Large Ultra Violet-Optical-InfraRed space telescope 

(LUVOIR) would be a 9-to-15 m diameter general purpose telescope that could also do 

exoplanets. Both telescopes would be positioned at the Earth-Sun L2 Lagrange point, where 

JWST is slated to operate. It is my great hope to have a telescope fly while I am still around to 

see it. 

7 
52 

Remote detection oflife as we don't know it 

For completeness, I will briefly mention the fourth quadrant of the search for 

extraterrestrial life: searching remotely for life as we don't know it. This quadrant is filled in 

with a '?'in Fig. 1, because it is not particularly well-defined. Sara Seager at MIT and her 

colleague William Bains have speculated in the literature about rocky planets with H2-rich 

atmospheres in which ammonia, NH3, is a byproduct of photosynthesis. They have termed such 

planets "Haber-worlds". Whether or not such planets might exist is unknown. We invited Bains 

to give a talk at the Biosignatures workshop, though, simply because we did not want to be 

exclusionary. I personally would not optimize a space telescope to look for such planets. 

However, if we had a telescope like HabEx or LUVOIR and were using it to make observations, 

I would agree that one should not ignore the possibility of such planets. With a good directimaging telescope, we will simply look at all the nearby planetary systems and see what is there. 

With luck, we may even find evidence for life. But, in any case, we will learn whether Earth is a 

special place in the galaxy, or whether Earth-like planets abound. Sara Seager, whom I just 

defamed earlier in this paragraph, is quite eloquent when she speaks of this search. She calls it 

'the second Copernican revolution'. I agree with her perspective. It is within our power, at this 

time, to make some of the greatest astronomical discoveries ever. I hope that we can find the 

scientific and political will to make it happen. 

With that, I conclude my testimony and I would be happy to address any questions you 

may have. Thank you, Chairman Smith and Committee Members, for your attention. 

8 
Saturn's moon Enceladus 

• Methanogenesis: 

C02 + 4 H2 

CH4 + 2 H20 

• Cassini has measured all four 

of these gases within 

Enceladus' plume 

=> there is plenty of chemical 

free energy to support life in the 

moon's surbsurface ocean 
ima Centauri b 

• Proxima Centauri is the 

closest star to Earth, -4 

light years distant 

- Late M 0.1 

- Centauri 

tri 

• The pia Proxim 

Centa b, has a 

minimum mass -1.3 

mes that of Earth 

Proxima Centauri is the small red d

within the red circle. It is too faint to 

seen with the naked eye 
55 

James F. Kasting --Biographical sketch 

James Kasting is an Evan Pugh Professor at Penn State University, where he holds joint 

appointments in the Departments of Geosciences and Meteorology. He earned an undergraduate 

degree in Chemistry and Physics from Harvard University in 1975 and a Ph.D. in Atmospheric 

Sciences from the University of Michigan in 1979. Prior to coming to Penn State in 1988, he 

spent 2 years at the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder, Colorado, and 7 years 

in the Space Science Division at NASA Ames Research Center south of San Francisco. He cochaired the Science and Technology Working Group for NASA's proposed (but later cancelled) 

Terrestrial Planet Finder-Coronagraph in 2005, and he chaired NASA's Exoplanet Exploration 

Program Analysis Group from 2009-2011. His research focuses on the evolution of planetary 

atmospheres and climates and on the question of whether life might exist on planets around other 

stars. 

9 
56 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Dr. Kasting. 

And Dr. Shostak. 

TESTIMONY OF DR. SETH SHOSTAK, 

SENIOR ASTRONOMER, SETI INSTITUTE 

Dr. SHOSTAK. Chairman Smith and Members of the Committee, 

thank you very much. I’m going to talk about the search for intelligent life, unlike what you’re likely to find under the icy crusts of 

Enceladus. There may be life there. There are six other places in 

the solar system where you might find some biology but you’ll need 

a microscope to see it, and it won’t hold up its side of the conversation. 

Let me just say that in the 21st century, there are four things 

that I think are going to be very important that will be remembered a thousand years from now. One, we’re finally understanding 

biology. That’s going to lead to interesting questions like, you 

know, curing a lot of disease but also the issue of designer babies. 

Second, we’re going to be moving into space, something that 

doesn’t sound so attractive if you’re going to go to the moon or 

Mars, not great places, but if you are talking about orbiting space 

colonies, great. Such colonies would serve as an inoculation against 

self-destruction of the human race here on Earth. If we wipe ourselves out, not to worry; there’s still some humans in space. 

The third thing we’re doing, and this is probably the most important, is inventing our successors: generalized artificial intelligence. 

The head of the AI operation at Stanford told me a couple years 

ago—I asked him will we have a machine that can write the great 

American novel by 2050. He looked up at me and said yes, then 

went back to sleep. Okay. 

The fourth thing that we’re going to do is find life in space, and 

that’s philosophically important. It might be important in other 

ways too, but at least philosophically. 

So how are we looking for life? You’ve heard the presentations 

here. There’s a three-way horse race. One, we just go there and 

look. That’s simple exploration. We go to places like Enceladus 

with spacecraft, grab some of the stuff being shot into space, bring 

it back, look at it under a microscope. Go to Mars, look around at 

Mars. That’s where all the big money is. That’s where NASA 

spends its money and the other space agencies around the world. 

The second thing to do is build space-based telescopes that can 

sniff the atmospheres of planets around other stars. Dr. Kasting 

has already alluded to that. Again, that’s hundreds of millions of 

dollars. It’s something we can do in the next 10 years. 

And the third thing we can do is what’s called SETI where we 

try and eavesdrop on signals being broadcast by other societies that 

at least have technology that would allow them to do that. There 

is essentially no federal money for that. 

All right. Let me talk a little bit about SETI. How do we go 

about that? What’s different in the last five years. Certainly, the 

types of objects that we’re pointing our antennas at has changed. 

In the old days, we would look at stars sort of like the sun because 

we know that stars like the sun at least have a planet where we 

have intelligent life, and I leave it to you to determine what’s intelligence. In our field of work, if you can build a radio transmitter, 
57 

you’re intelligent. You can ask the guy next to you whether he can 

do that. 

The second thing that we are doing is improving the equipment. 

So let me just give you an idea. The TRAPPIST–1 system has been 

mentioned here a couple of times. If you were in the TRAPPIST– 

1 system on one of those planets and you looked up in the sky, you 

would see, some of those other seven planets, and they would be 

big. They would be balls in the sky. You go out tonight, look to the 

east and you’ll see Jupiter but it’s just a point of light. Not true 

in TRAPPIST–1. You actually see them. Whereas it takes seven 

months to send a rocket to Mars, you could go from one TRAPPIST–1 world to the next during the course of a weekend. 

What all this means is that there are, to begin with, more planets in the TRAPPIST–1 system that could cook up life. That means 

more chances to win the lottery by cooking up life, and as soon as 

you’ve done that, that life will spread to the other worlds and it 

will spread because meteors will slam into one planet with life and 

carry bacteria or whatever to the next world in just a very short 

period of time. So it will infect all these worlds. If there’s any intelligent life in the TRAPPIST–1 system, that will have colonized essentially all these worlds too. So this could be a mini-federation of 

planets, if you will. This is not just another world with life; this 

is an ecosystem if there’s any life. 

We are using our Allen Telescope Array to look at the TRAPPIST–1 system, and we’re using a situation in which we wait for 

the planets to line up and see if there’s any difference in the 

amount of radio radiation coming our way because at that point 

you’re looking down the communication pipeline between these 

planets. 

Finally, let me just say something about the technology. This experiment will only succeed if we can look at about a million or so 

star systems. That would take thousands of years with the current 

technology. Thanks to improvements mostly in computers, the 

search is speeding up by orders of magnitude. Over the next 20 

years, we will be able to look at about a million other star systems, 

and I’d bet everyone a cup of coffee that we’ll find something. I may 

have to buy a lot of coffee. 

Let me just conclude by saying the funding for all this is very 

limited. It’s all private funding. There is no government money for 

doing this. Even though finding intelligent life would have the 

greatest impact on humanity, there’s no federal funding, and as a 

consequence, the total number of people that work on this problem 

in the entire world is far fewer than the number of people sitting 

in the back row in this room. 

Thank you very much. 

[The prepared statement of Dr. Shostak follows:] 
58 

Written Text for Congressional Testimony 

Advances in the Search for Life 

Seth Shostak, Senior Astronomer, SETI Institute 

189 Bernardo Ave., #200, Mountain View, CA 94043, seth@seti.org 

It is no longer considered foolish to argue that biology could exist on some of the trillion other 

planets in our galaxy. Its discovery would produce a lasting change in our perceptions, 

demonstrating that life is not confined to our world. We would know that biology is not some 

sort of miracle, but a commonplace - an ubiquitous, cosmic infection. 

The discovery of intelligence elsewhere would be of even greater import, as we have always 

considered humans to be special, even the pinnacle of Creation. To Jearn that there are others 

out there - others whose cognitive abilities exceed our own- would be a discovery that would 

recalibrate how our species views itself. It would also have consequences that can be only 

vaguely gauged, in much the way that the discovery of the New World Jed to societal changes 

that were largely unpredictable at the time of its happening. 

However, the search for extraterrestrial intelligence, known by the acronym SETI, has been 

pursued for more than a half century with no unambiguous, positive result. We haven't found 

conclusive proof of any intelligent (or even unintelligent) life beyond the confines of Earth. 

Claims that our planet is being visited by alien beings, while popular with the citizenry, are not 

considered credible by most scientists. 

However, recent developments in both astronomy and technology are accelerating the speed of 

SETI searches, and it is hardly fantastic to suggest that we could find evidence of cosmic 

company within a few decades. 

The belief that life is commonplace 

For most of recorded history, there has been optimism that the heavens are filled with other 

beings. This was true even during the time of the classical Greeks. But hypothesis eventually 

yielded to observation following the invention of the telescope. For four centuries, some of the 

best minds in what was called "natural philosophy" claimed to espy evidence for technically 

advanced inhabitants .on the moon and Mars. None of this was true. 

Today, we have both improved instruments and greater knowledge of the cosmos. While we no 

longer expect to find upright, sentient aliens in our solar system, we still hear claims of possible 

evidence for life. In 1996, researchers at NASA and Stanford University announced that they 
59 

had found fossilized microbes in a meteorite known to come from Mars. However, despite the 

fact that this was a major news item, most members of the astrobiology community regard this 

story with skepticism. Arguably, it has inclined most scientists to be cautious about announcing 

they have discovered life or intelligence elsewhere. But while claims are less common now, they 

have hardly disappeared. 

As example, the dramatic changes in brightness of an object known as "Tabby's star," frrst found 

by NASA's Kepler space telescope two years ago, have been explained as conceivably due to the 

engineering efforts of sophisticated beings. While admitting that this is possible, most scientists 

think a completely natural explanation for the strange behavior of Tabby's star is more likely. 

Resolving this issue will be difficult, given the star's considerable distance (1500 light-years). 

Tabby's star is a good example of the tendency by the public to interpret every puzzling 

astronomical discovery as possibly the consequence of intelligent activity. Fast Radio Bursters 

(FRB's), first observed approximately a decade ago, are short, enormously powerful flashes of 

light and radio waves coming from the sky. Roughly twenty FRB's have been seen, but their 

nature and workings are mysterious. Could they be alien signals? At least one has been traced 

to a galaxy several billion light-years distant, and if it is really due to extraterrestrial activity, 

then the society that produces it wields (or perhaps one should say, wielded) an energy source 

enormously beyond anything within our ken. 

Despite the excitement of these deep space phenomena, as well as other new discoveries that 

might betray biology within our solar system (such as the intriguing ices being spewed into space 

from the Saturnian moon Enceladus), the fact remains that no certain evidence for life- dead or 

alive, microscopic or macroscopic has ever been found. 

Nonetheless, two high-ranking scientists at NASA have opined that we will trip across evidence 

for extraterrestrial biology within two decades. The present author has argued that a similar 

timescale applies to the detection of intelligence. 

Why are researchers optimistic about the chances for discovering life so soon- even intelligent 

life? 

One reason is the very recent evidence that planets and moons suitable for biology are 

bewilderingly common. One of the sturming conclusions from the data collected by the Kepler 

telescope is that the overwhelming majority of stars are orbited by planets. Indeed, we can now 

confidently state that there are roughly a trillion planets in the Milky Way galaxy, and the most 

common type are those that are comparable in size to the Earth. The Hubble telescope has 

shown us that two trillion other galaxies lie within the observable universe. Thus, the total 

number of planets within our purview is greater than the number of grains of dry sand on all 

Earth's beaches. The number of moons will be larger still, a fact of some importance, as moons 

are also possible habitats for life. 

The inevitable implication of the above is that ifbiology is limited to Earth, then our planet is a 

miracle. Experience has cautioned scientists against ascribing observed phenomena to miracles. 

2 
60 

Of course, an abundance of life does not necessarily imply an abundance of sentient life. Some 

biologists have argued that, while microbial life might, indeed, be widespread, intelligence could 

be exceedingly rare. However, given the daunting number of potential habitats, coupled with the 

fact that most stars are billions of years older than our Sun (allowing ample time for evolutionary 

processes to produce complex organisms), such pessimism seems unwarranted. 

Searching for life 

Leaving aside scientifically questionable claims that extraterrestrials are visiting Earth, there are 

three main schemes currently used for discovering extraterrestrial biology: 

1. Find it in situ by, for example, sending robot spacecraft to investigate promising sites on Mars 

or gather samples from ice geysers that spray from two moons of Jupiter and Saturn. These are 

experiments that are possible for NASA or others to do in the coming decade. 

2. Measure the secondary effects of biology in the atmospheres of nearby exoplanets (planets 

around other stars). The detection of abundant oxygen or methane could tip off researchers to 

the presence of biology on other worlds. NASA's new James Webb space telescope might be 

capable of making this type of measurement for the nearer exoplanets, as will very large, groundbased optical telescopes planned for operation within ten years (e.g., the Thirty Meter 

Telescope). 

3. Detect radio or optical (visible light) signals from other star systems. Such signals would 

indicate the presence of technically accomplished inhabitants. This is the approach used by most 

SETI researchers. 

We consider this third approach, and the search for intelligence, in what follows. 

While the first SETI experiment was conducted nearly six decades ago, neither it nor any of its 

successors has captured a signal that has been confirmed as having an artificial, extraterrestrial 

origin. Despite this seemingly disappointing track record, it would be a mistake to ascribe this to 

a lack of prey. Because of the need to examine both a large number of stars, over a wide swath 

of the radio spectrum (generally at microwave frequencies, where the universe is relatively 

quiet), these experiments are slow. They go through their observing lists at a rate that's typically 

a handful of star systems each day. 

To put that in context, if we conjecture that there are 100 thousand signaling societies in our 

galaxy, then we will have to scrutinize roughly one million star systems before detecting a 

transmission. This is approximately ten times the total sample of all SETI experiments 

undertaken since 1960. 

However, thanks to rapid advances in computing technology, SETI experiments are becoming 

faster. In the past two decades, the receivers used for such work have improved to the point 

where they can instantaneously seek signals over many tens of millions of radio channels. In the 

next decade, this will become hundreds of millions, or even a billion. 

3 
61 

This stunning advance in capability means that reconnaissance of the myriad star systems of the 

galaxy will become far faster, and within twenty years it's fully possible that the requisite 

examination of a million star systems will occur. It is not the speed of our computers that 

facilitates this promise, but the rapid rate of its increase. 

As example, the SETI Institute is currently using its own antennas- the Allen Telescope Array, 

situated in the Cascade Mountains of Northern California- to search 20,000 nearby, red dwarf 

star systems for signals, and the Breakthrough Listen initiative of the University of California 

intends to eventually reconnoiter a million star systems. These are both searches that are ordersof-magnitude more ambitious than previous efforts. 

In addition, the Allen Telescope Array has been used to examine unusual objects, such as 

Tabby's star, mentioned above, as well as the TRAPPIST 1 system: a red dwarf star known to 

have seven orbiting planets all similar in size to Earth. 

TRAPPIST 1 is an especially interesting system, both because of its properties and the 

opportunity it affords for a "smarter" SETI search. At least three (and perhaps more) of the 

seven planets in this system could have environments conducive to biology. That means that if 

life has sprung up on any of these worlds, it has undoubtedly migrated to some (or all) of the 

others. Even bacteria could manage a pilgrimage from one planet to another given the fact that 

these worlds are so close together (typically separated by a million miles, or only 3 percent the 

distance between Earth and Mars). Microbes could hitchhike on rock kicked up by incoming 

meteors, and infect neighboring worlds. If there's intelligence on any of these planets, it's safe 

to say that it will eventually carpet most, if not all, of the remainder. TRAPPIST 1 offers not 

only multiple worlds on which biology could arise, but the opportunity for a multi-planet 

ecosystem. 

This latter possibility has inspired an unusual experiment. When two of the TRAPPIST 1 planets 

are known to line up as seen from Earth, then the Allen Telescope Array is switched on to 

observe the system. In this arrangement, we are looking down the planet-to-planet 

communication channel between these worlds. Any rise in cosmic static would indicate the 

presence of intelligence. 

This is the type of experiment that, even five years ago, could not have been done simply 

because we lacked the astronomical knowledge that makes it feasible. 

In addition, the SETI Institute has begun a project to search for very short flashes of laser light 

coming from the stars. What distinguishes this effort from other so-called "optical SETI" 

experiments is that, for relatively little investment, it should be possible to search the entire night 

sky, all the time, albeit at relatively low sensitivity. This is a very new development, and one 

that might permit the detection of societies that are not relentlessly targeting Earth with signals. 

Funding and public benefit 

4 
62 

No one knows when - or even if- we will find life beyond Earth. As noted, most researchers, 

including those at NASA, think that such a discovery is imminent, within the lifetime of today' s 

millennials. 

However, discovery is dependent on funding, and for SETI this is a crippling bottleneck. Until 

the early 1990s, there was an ambitious NASA SETI effort, conducted at the Ames Research 

Center and the Jet Propulsion Laboratory. The annual budget, at its peak, was $10 million. 

Today, excepting a grant to the University of California at Berkeley SETI group by Russian 

billionaire Yuri Milner, all SETI is funded by donations from the American public. While 

NASA's budget for solar system exploration is about $1.5 billion, the efforts by the SETI 

Institute to find sentient life is funded at a level that is two thousand times less. This is despite 

the considerable public and academic interest in the question being addressed. The total number 

of people world-wide engaged in SETI is no more than twenty. 

The discovery of intelligent life would undoubtedly have a profound impact on society, and 

indeed, numerous scholarly panels and publications have attempted to gauge what this might be. 

An informal poll of science journalists by the present author asking how they would rate such a 

discovery resulted in a unanimous response that this would be "the biggest news story of all 

time." This despite the fact that whatever intelligence is found will likely be hundreds of lightyears distant or more. Conversation, in any normal sense, will not be possible; the 

communication will be effectively one-way. That needn't diminish its appeal: the writings of the 

classical Greeks and Romans have taken millennia to reach us. They are still interesting. 

But there are benefits to SETI that are tangible and worthy even before, or without, a discovery. 

Young people are invariably captivated by "aliens"- an interest similar to, and as universal as, 

their fascination with dinosaurs. Searching for intelligence in space is an effective hook to 

stimulate their interest in science. This is not hyperbole. The National Academy of Sciences has 

recognized that a large fraction of those who eventually choose science as a career have done so 

because of the fictional depiction of science in film and on TV. And much of this programming 

centers on the existence of beings elsewhere. 

Aside from its appeal to young people, the subject of SETI strongly interests the general public. 

Unlike much modem research, the ideas of SETI are easily comprehended by the non-specialist. 

It is accessible in a way that other projects are not. The hunt for the Higgs boson was important 

and expensive. But few people understood the quest or its significance. 

SETI is exploration. Unlike much science, its premise can't be falsified. We can't prove that the 

aliens aren't out there. Like Captain James Cook, we sail the seas of the cosmos with the hope 

of discovering something new. Despite this uncertainty, SETI has benefits that are tangible and 

worthy before or even without- a discovered signal: namely, interesting the public in science, 

and schooling them in scientific thinking. 

The United States exists because of exploration. We, of all nations, should know its value. 

5 
63 

Biographical Sketch: Seth Shostak 

Seth is the Senior Astronomer at the SET! Institute, in Mountain View, California. He 

has an undergraduate degree in physics from Princeton University, and a doctorate in 

astronomy from the California Institute of Technology. For much of his career, Seth 

conducted radio astronomy research on galaxies, and has published approximately sixty 

papers in professional journals. 

He has written more than five hundred popular magazine, newspaper and Web articles 

on various topics in astronomy, technology, film and television. He lectures on 

astronomy, and gives approximately 60 presentations annually. For a decade, he chaired 

the International Academy of Astronautics' SET! Permanent Committee. 

Every week he hosts the SET! Institute's one-hour science radio show, "Big Picture 

Science" 

Seth has written, edited and contributed to a half dozen books. His most recent tome is 

Confessions of an Alien Hunter: A Scientist's Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence 

(National Geographic), and he is co-author of a college textbook on astrobiology. 
64 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Dr. Shostak. Thank you all for 

your fascinating testimony, and I’ll recognize myself for questions. 

And Dr. Shostak, let me address first a comment and then a 

question to you. The comment is this. I want to, I think for the first 

time publicly, thank you for exposing me about 2 decades ago to 

SETI’s methods of looking for the search for extraterrestrial intelligence when we spent what seemed like a long night at Arecibo, 

but that was my first real exposure, and it sort of set me on the 

track to be continually interested in the subject, so thank you for 

that. 

A couple of questions. One is, just to read from part of your written testimony. ‘‘if we conjecture that there are 100 thousand signaling societies in our galaxy, then we will have to scrutinize 

roughly one million star systems before detecting a transmission. 

This is approximately ten times the total sample of all SETI experiments undertaken since 1960.’’ So we’re just beginning the process. 

We have a long ways to go. 

You mentioned all the different ways we might search for extraterrestrial intelligence. What do you think is the best current 

method being used, is it radio, is it laser? What might it be? And 

what do you recommend? 

Dr. SHOSTAK. Well, it’s obviously hard to forecast what to do to 

succeed. It would be like asking Captain Jim Cook, two weeks out 

of England, what part of the Pacific is best to search for new islands. Obviously we don’t know. But the radio searches are following a trajectory in terms of improvement. That’s very easy to 

predict because it follows Moore’s law. It just follows computer 

technology. And so we know that over the course of the next two 

decades, radio SETI will get at least 100 times faster and maybe 

more. 

So I have a dog in this fight. I seem to think that that is a good 

way, but I have to say, we’re also developing schemes for looking 

for flashing laser lights in the sky. If a laser—if some society out 

there is aiming a laser beam at us a thousandth of a second long 

once every two weeks. nobody on Earth would ever know. We 

wouldn’t know that. And it’s worth looking for that because indeed, 

except for the transmissions we’ve been broadcasting into space 

since the second World War, there’s no way that the aliens could 

know we’re here. If they’re more than 70 light-years away, they 

don’t know that Homo sapiens exist. So maybe they just ping us 

intermittently to see if anybody’s home. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Dr. Shostak. 

Dr. Zurbuchen, let me ask you the next question, which is, the 

Authorization Act that we just signed into law last month directs 

NASA to search for life in the universe, any form, any kind. How 

will NASA implement the directive in the NASA Authorization bill? 

Dr. ZURBUCHEN. Thanks so much for the question. First of all, 

there’s a number—you should know that with me at the leadership 

of the Science Mission Directorate, this is one of the top three priorities that we’re focused on, so it’s a high-level priority that we 

used to integrate research across disciplines. So the way we’ll look 

at it is an interdisciplinary fashion, first of all. The second one is 

to recognize that we already have a series of missions that are in 
65 

development. We’ve talked about them here. Trying to really deploy 

them in a strategic fashion. 

We’re looking of course at the Academy’s input and prioritization 

to help us with that because we think the Academy is exactly the 

right, like you directed, exactly the right voice for us to really exploit these assets the right way. Also, as we go forward and look 

at decadal guidance from other disciplines as they come forward, 

we expect that we’ll also develop perhaps new technologies, new assets that will help in that search. 

Chairman SMITH. Okay. Thank you. 

Dr. Burgasser, you mentioned that the most common type of star 

in our galaxy are the red dwarves, which you study, and those are 

fascinating slides you put up. What is the likelihood that we will 

find life near a red dwarf star? 

Dr. BURGASSER. That is a very challenging question. I can only 

address that these red dwarf stars have a lot going for them in 

terms of being able to search for life on planets around them. They 

are the most numerous. They’re also the nearest stars to our sun. 

It turns out that there are more terrestrial planets per Mdwarf 

than sun-like star. There’re about terrestrial planets on average for 

all these low-mass stars. And the ability to measure their 

atmospheres is enhanced by their small sizes, the stars’ small 

sizes. 

Now, there are things that are not going for small stars. These 

planets are very close to their stars so they are tidally locked, and 

we are still trying to understand what effect that could have on the 

climates of these planets, and they’re also exposed to higher magnetic storms, the kind of magnetic storms we get from the sun but 

actually much more powerful because they are closer to their stars, 

and that may or may not have positive or negative implications for 

development of life on these planets. 

So these are active questions because we’ve only just started 

finding these planets. We are really approaching this from both 

theoretical and observational perspectives to understand what we 

might expect to find, but of course, the best thing to do is actually 

find this evidence and then we can provide an answer. 

Chairman SMITH. And go from there. 

Dr. BURGASSER. Yeah. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you. 

Let me squeeze in a last question maybe directed to Dr. 

Zurbuchen and also Dr. Shostak. Should NASA consider—and I 

think there’s appropriate language in that authorization bill— 

should NASA consider contracting out with organizations that 

might be searching for extraterrestrial intelligence? 

Dr. SHOSTAK. I think my answer’s a foregone conclusion. 

Chairman SMITH. Yes. 

Dr. SHOSTAK. Yes. No, I think so, and for several reasons. One, 

of course it would be more interesting to find it, I think, than— 

with all deference to the astrobiologists here, I think it would be 

very interesting, particularly to the public. The public’s very interested in life but mostly in the intelligent variety. I make that statement without numbers here but I think that’s true. And the other 

thing is, it would be philosophically very consequential. There are 

other possible sequelae. You could indeed maybe understand some-
66 

thing they’re saying in which case you’re in touch with a society 

far more advanced than ours. I don’t know what the consequences 

of that might be. I don’t even think that it’s very likely we would 

understand anything. But simply to know you’re not the only kid 

on the block I think is—that’s exploration that I think is worth 

doing. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Dr. Shostak. 

The gentlewoman from Texas, the Ranking Member, Ms. Johnson, is recognized for her questions. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

I guess I will point this question to each of the panel members. 

How important do you think the sustained federal support for research of core science disciplines such as biology, geology, chemistry, physics and astronomy to the success of interdisciplinary 

fields of astrobiology, and to what extent would the budget cuts 

have on the impact of this research that’s in progress now for 

search for life? What are the challenges to us? 

Dr. ZURBUCHEN. Let me answer the first part of your question 

of just how important it is, and I really do believe that to answer 

this question, is there life out there, is really a complex—it’s not 

a yes-no kind of answer. The way to think about that is not that 

it’s—it’s really opening up a new areas of research with entirely 

new research questions that we’ve never seen. The way we do answer these questions, each one of those questions, whether it’s hydrogen and the plumes of Enceladus relates to fundamental science 

that is underlying that, so how important is it to have this fundamental science is essential. It’s the tools we use in every one of 

those questions to actually unlock the unknown. 

Dr. BURGASSER. And so I will echo your comment that this is a 

fundamentally interdisciplinary nature. I’m actually teaching a 

writing course. Let me give out a shout-out to my students who 

have to watch this next week. And we bring together areas across 

the science disciplines but also beyond the science disciplines. Congressman Bera mentioned that this is a disruptive question that 

we’re asking, are we alone, and so it doesn’t just touch on science 

but it also touches on philosophy, legal issues, all kinds of issues. 

So at its core, we really need to have a very broad-based knowledge 

sort of system to understand both the question and also when we 

answer that question, what does it mean for humanity. 

Dr. KASTING. If I could just add that of course you need the support of the basic sciences at the basic level but we’re also seeing 

the need for more coordination between planetary science and astronomy because those used to be—they are two separate divisions 

within NASA but with exoplanets, we share a common goal of understanding those planets, and so, you know, I’ve been happy to see 

that the two divisions in NASA have talking to each other, and I 

think that’s very important in making progress in the future. 

Dr. SHOSTAK. Well, I support what has been said here. Clearly, 

it is interdisciplinary, and it’s also exciting science. It’s also comprehensible science to Mr. and Mrs. Front Porch, if you will. If you 

ask your neighbor, hey, what do you think about the Europeans 

spending billions of dollars to find the Higgs Boson? Well, that’s 

fundamentally important, but I doubt that they understand what 

it’s about nor do they probably want to spend that kind of money. 
67 

I don’t know. But this is exploration when you talk about 

astrobiology. It’s something everybody understands right away. It’s 

also exciting science, and not to do it, I mean, it would be like if 

you’re a European country in 1500 and somebody says do you think 

it’s worth investing in some ships and some crews and send them 

around the world and see if we can map the globe? Obviously it 

was worthwhile. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Thanks to all of you. 

Of course, research to me is the door to the future. My concern 

is that each year we go through whether we’re going to cut back 

on NASA research, and I wonder whether this will have an impact 

to focus more strongly on this. I don’t want an either-or. But it 

seems that to do another is to neglect the other. How do you think 

we can continue forth with both bodies of research, and what is the 

importance? 

Dr. BURGASSER. I’ll take a stab at that. You know, I think we 

have to listen to our citizenry and understand that these are questions that excite, inspire and drive interest not just in astronomy 

but across STEM fields and keeps us competitive at the world 

stage, and so an investment in NASA is going to have incredible 

returns down the road across all fields of technology, of biomedical 

science, of new materials, and you know, I leave it up to your esteemed colleagues to decide where these budgets land. 

Ms. JOHNSON. It’s dangerous. 

Dr. BURGASSER. But it is certainly critically important to realize 

that this is investment in our future on many levels. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you very much. We’ve learned so much, 

and I want to see it keep going, but I am concerned. Thank you. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Ms. Johnson. 

And the gentleman from Louisiana, Mr. Higgins, is recognized 

for questions. 

Mr. HIGGINS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Dr. Shostak, it’s been stated for decades that some species of 

cetaceans—whales and dolphins—are recognized for their intelligence. Would you agree with that general assessment? 

Dr. SHOSTAK. Yes, clearly they have a higher encephalization 

quotient. That’s a lot of Greek, but what it means is their brain 

volume relative to their body volume is higher than any other critters on this planet other than our simian friends and ourselves. So 

by that measure, they are clever. They also can recognize themselves in a mirror. They know that when they look in a mirror, 

they’re seeing themselves, something your dog can’t do. 

Mr. HIGGINS. Is it generally accepted that these creatures have 

a means by which to communicate with each other? 

Dr. SHOSTAK. There are people that think that. I’m not one of 

them. I knew John Lilly a little bit, and Gerrit Verschuur is another guy who thinks that the cetaceans can communicate by ESP. 

I think that there’s a great experiment being run that disproves 

the notion of ESP. It’s called Las Vegas. 

Mr. HIGGINS. I would agree with you there. 

But they do vocalize, do they not? 

Dr. SHOSTAK. They do, and in fact, a sort of a statistical analysis 

of the sounds they make shows or at least seems to indicate that 

it’s a language. It’s not just barking, if you will. So yes, they are 
68 

clever, they are quite clever, but you will note that their level of 

technology leaves something to be desired. That may be partly a 

consequence of living underwater where it’s hard to smelt metals 

and so forth and so on. But I don’t think that the cetaceans are 

comparable to humans. 

Mr. HIGGINS. I bring this up because a research scientist by the 

name of Lawrence Doyle at the SETI Institute has studied information theory and patterns in animal communication as a means of 

understanding how to detect signals from the noise we hear from 

space, and I’d like your comment on that. Within your comment is 

my own personal consideration that should intelligent life ever be 

discovered, whether or not that’s, you know, a realistic perspective 

is subject to debate, I’m sure, but should intelligent life in the cosmos ever be discovered, if for decades we’ve been unable to communicate with dolphins and whales, how should we ever expect to 

communicate with intelligent life if it would be discovered across 

the cosmos, and how does that relate to Lawrence Doyle’s research? 

Dr. SHOSTAK. Well, I certainly agree that the fact that we can’t 

communicate with any other species on this planet may indeed incline you to think that we would never be able to find it elsewhere. 

I think what it might show is that we might not understand anything being sent but, you know, the way we do this experiment is 

not by listening for patterns in any signals, messages, such as, 

’’here’s the value of pi,’’ or ’’here’s the Fibonacci series’’ (if you’re 

a Dan Brown fan). None of that. We are simply looking at the nature of the signal, the kind of signal that transmitters make without regard to the message. The message would be much, much 

harder to find in any case, the bits such things as what language 

they use if they use any language, how they’ve encoded their information, the things that separate whale communication, for example, from human communication, all that is sort of, if you will, literally below the radar. So what we are doing is just trying to and 

find the technology they use. This signal is due to a transmitter. 

What they’re saying is not something we’ll know right away, and 

maybe never. 

Mr. HIGGINS. And that would describe Lawrence Doyle’s work? 

Dr. SHOSTAK. He’s interested in finding out if you have a big 

brain, do you start using language. At what point do you start 

using language? I have to say that he has found statistical indications that the dolphins are using language, also in many other species he claims, even in ants. I have to say I’ve never been impressed by ants’ intelligence, but on the other hand, maybe they’re 

not impressed by mine. 

Mr. HIGGINS. I think that’s an excellent time to yield back, Mr. 

Chairman. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Higgins. 

And the gentleman from California, Mr. Bera, is recognized. 

Mr. BERA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This is a great hearing, 

right? I mean, it is a seminal question, particularly again if we 

want to stimulate our next generation to really, you know, get interested in science. I mean, it’s very easily understandable. You 

suggest that it’s not Higgs Boson, it’s ‘‘are we alone?’’, that search 

for life which any student can grasp and any individual can grasp, 
69 

and it opens up philosophy, it opens up, you know, humanity, et 

cetera. 

You know, Dr. Shostak, you talked about three different methods: direct exploration, space-based telescopes or looking for signals. I don’t think it’s either-or, right? These are all complementary 

modalities that work off of each other and feed into the body of 

knowledge. Given the vastness of space—and my question would 

be, you know, we don’t have the funding to do everything and look 

at every piece of information that’s coming in so some of—you 

know, with the internet and the interconnectedness of the world 

now is that citizen scientist, those citizen astronomers. What are 

some thoughts and ideas of how NASA and other agencies including SETI can use that, you know, that mass of humanity in a strategic way to get folks to look for those signals or look at the vastness of space but then also to encourage our young people, you 

know, so classrooms of students might actually be part of this 

search for life. 

We’ll start with—— 

Dr. ZURBUCHEN. So I agree with your notion entirely and also 

that there are opportunities and that we can do that. You know, 

one of the coolest things right now when I was doing my Ph.D. on 

a different continent. My computer at night was working for his organization with SETI at home, right, because my computer was 

tied in, many of my colleagues basically gave our CPU power away 

for that. I think right now we have many opportunities. Whenever 

Juno flies by Jupiter, you know, there’s thousands of people the 

next day taking the new imagery, you know, of all ages, you know, 

children of all ages taking the imagery with wonder and turning 

art—turning them into art, really analyzing them, sometimes actually finding exciting science in doing so. So at NASA we’re really 

excited about these citizen science type of projects, and we actively 

look for collaborations in areas also we’re currently throughout the 

decadal process and otherwise our funding emphasis is not high. 

You should know that last week I was in a meeting I think with 

you, Dr. Shostak. We were in a room, you know, where we talked 

about all aspects of search for life, and every time we come back, 

we want to, you know—as we make progress, we look at it again 

are we doing—putting the money at the right place. The reason 

we’re so excited about search for life right now is we’re really driving up the S curve but the slope is enormous right now of the 

progress we’re making, and this is one of the most fruitful, really 

civilization-scale questions we can address, so that’s why we’re so 

excited. 

Mr. BERA. Dr. Burgasser? 

Dr. BURGASSER. Yeah, thank you for asking that question. I 

think it is important to recognize that the decadal process in this 

is one of the ways that we as scientists, a very diverse group of scientists, come together and identify what are the main ways that 

we can address some of these outstanding questions, and that’s an 

important process because it’s a competitive process but it’s also a 

consensual process and so we kind of come together on this. 

I wanted to touch on your engagement with community in terms 

of the science itself, and certainly the citizen science programs such 

as Planet Hunters and Exoplanet Explorers, Background World, 
70 

SETI at Home have engaged a lot of the public to this work, and 

they have contributed to discoveries, and that’s one of the amazing 

accessibility parts of this kind of research. 

But I should also say that the importance of this work being publicly funded also means that the data and the research that we 

produce is immediately available to the public, and I have been 

able to work with a diverse group of students from minority-serving schools, from low-funded schools in San Diego, and researchers 

across the world to actually work on the raw data to find these 

planets, and so that’s one of the ways that we really engage the 

public at large is that they can actually really do the research because they are using data that’s funded by the public. 

Mr. BERA. Dr. Kasting? 

Dr. KASTING. I think it’s been great that the public has been able 

to get directly involved in SETI, and I think that’s generated a lot 

of interest. SETI—as I said in my written testimony, SETI got 

started before the search for simple life because the technology is 

actually simpler than the search for simple life, and you know, it’s 

very—it’s more difficult to get the general public directly involved 

in the search for simple life because you need big space-based telescopes and big ground-based telescopes so there’s a role for the 

public but there’s also a role for government in the search for life. 

Mr. BERA. So it looks like I’m out of time, but Dr. Shostak, if you 

want—— 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you. 

Dr. SHOSTAK. Oh, just one thing. First, I’m slightly embarrassed. 

SETI at Home is not our project. It’s University of CaliforniaBerkeley. But here’s something that hasn’t been mentioned, and 

that is the National Academy of Sciences has recognized that a 

very high percentage of people who go into science go into science 

because of what they’ve seen on television and in the movies, and 

so they have a project, they have an office down in Irvine, California, near Hollywood, and they in fact—whenever they hear of a 

new film being made about space, they will bring in some scientists 

to try to get the science right. Personally, I don’t think that makes 

any difference in the appeal, but the facts are that that sort of informal exposure to science has a tremendous effect. 

Mr. BERA. Thank you. I’ll yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Bera. 

The gentleman from Florida, Mr. Posey, is recognized for his 

questions. 

Mr. POSEY. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Dr. Zurbuchen, we often characterize investments in basic scientific research as paying off in technical advances that will eventually impact our day-to-day lives here on Earth. Can you point to 

some recent examples of breakthroughs in the astrobiology field 

that have had that type of impact? 

Dr. ZURBUCHEN. I am sure there are examples, and I will return 

with questions for the record. I can give you examples that I encountered just recently in astrophysics in general. For example, 

look at some of the mirrors that were developed for X-ray optics 

that relate to this research, mirrors that are of course raising incident mirrors that are done at Marshall in Alabama, and these mirrors are subject of tremendous interest from the biomedical space 
71 

because of the fact that of course we want to focus X-rays also in 

medical application and spin-offs of a variety of, you know, characters of foci can be formed with that. They’re in negotiations right 

now so there’s not a big company right there. 

But we have ample ones of these, you know, stories that are 

forming around our research, and that’s also why we’re so excited 

about—you know, I’ve been a part of hundreds of start-ups in my 

previous job as an innovation leader at the university I worked before, and I really believe in it, but I will get back on good examples 

that are recent and are related to this. 

Mr. POSEY. Thank you. 

Any of the others care to comment on what you see coming from 

research in the next three to five years? 

Dr. KASTING. Could I just take a stab at that? I don’t actually 

know practical things that come out in the next three to five years 

but my colleague Sara Seiger at MIT, who’s an astronomer, sometimes calls the search for life the second Copernican revolution, 

and so Copernicus figured out that the Earth goes around the sun 

rather than vice versa. We are looking to see whether we’re alone 

in the universe and whether life is common, and you know, I’m not 

sure there were practical things at the time that came out of the 

Copernican revolution but nevertheless, it changed mankind, and 

so could this search. 

Dr. SHOSTAK. I might also point out in 1920 if you talked to 

physicists that were worrying about quantum mechanics and they 

themselves would have said there’s absolutely no practical application of any of this, and now everybody carries quantum mechanics 

around in their pockets. 

Mr. POSEY. You know, we just had the March for Science all over 

the world, and of course, a lot of people think there’s only one answer to all scientists and all science, and that’s whatever they 

think, and I remind them that until Galileo, 100 percent of the 

world’s scientists swore the Earth was flat and, you know, you 

have to ask those questions. You have to question what some consider as fact. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Posey. 

And the gentleman from Virginia, Mr. Beyer, is recognized. 

Mr. BEYER. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, thank you for holding this 

very bipartisan hearing. It’s very exciting. And thank you all for 

being here. 

Dr. Shostak, I was reading about METI rather than SETI, the 

Messaging to Extraterrestrial Intelligence, and one of the things 

they said was, they defined—they said that we were not a communicative civilization because we don’t practice such activities as 

purposeful and regular transmission of interstellar messages. 

Should we be a communicative civilization? 

Dr. SHOSTAK. Well, that’s really up to you. I mean, there are people who think that we ought to take the initiative, send signals into 

space and see what comes back, if anything. I point out that this 

has been done in the past, mostly as demo experiments. You know, 

even the records on the Voyager spacecraft and the plaques on the 

Pioneer spacecraft are designed in case any Klingons ever pick 
72 

these things up, which they never will, but, you know, they get a 

greeting card from Earth. 

I don’t agree with those who think that this would be dangerous. 

There are people who say that. Even Stephen Hawking has made 

that comment. Because you obviously tip of the aliens that we’re 

here, and who knows what they really are like. Obviously we don’t 

know anything about alien sociology, and maybe they would just 

come to Earth and incinerate the planet on a bet. I don’t worry 

about that personally, but you might say that’s not good enough. 

Let me simply point out that we have been transmitting into 

space willy-nilly since the war, and it’s mostly TV and FM radio, 

it’s mostly radar. It’s mostly radar. So if you’re paranoid and you’re 

worried about this, if you think maybe it’s not a good idea to let 

anybody who’s out there know that we’re here, then you better be 

prepared to shut down the radars at Reagan Airport, and I don’t 

think you want to do that. 

Mr. BEYER. You mentioned the 70 light-years as sort of the—is 

that because that’s when radar and—— 

Dr. SHOSTAK. Yes, and also FM radio, but yes, radar, television 

and radar are the things that go out—you know, they go right 

through the ionosphere, and radar transmitters tend to be very 

powerful. If you were looking at the Earth from one of these nearby 

planets that we’ve talked about here and you had a big antenna, 

you know, as big as this building, you could pick up our radars. 

Mr. BEYER. You mentioned a number of times the philosophical 

and theological consequences of discovering life, and obviously 

there’s lots and lots in the science fiction literature and films and 

stuff about how people react, overreact, go crazy. Are there philosophers or theologians thinking about this, writing about it trying to 

anticipate what it would be like? 

Dr. SHOSTAK. There are. There’s a lot of research. And normally 

what they do is, try and look for an historical precedent for this. 

I guess it’s sort of lawyerly to do that. And they say okay, what 

in history has happened that would give us some clue as to what 

the public’s reaction or organized religion’s reaction would be. But 

there is really no very good precedent for this. 

When I tell people at cocktail parties—not that I get invited to 

many—but if I tell people what I do for a living, they’ll frequently 

ask well, if you found a signal, you wouldn’t tell us, the government would shut you down, right? And I said the government 

doesn’t even know what we’re doing. I don’t think they would shut 

us down. We’ve gotten false alarms in the past. There was no interest by the government. My mom didn’t even call. Nobody was interested, only the New York Times. They were interested. 

But they think that the public couldn’t handle this news. I think 

that that is totally false. If you were to pick up a newspaper—you 

won’t do that—open your browser tomorrow and find news that 

we’d found a signal coming from 800 light-years away, I doubt that 

you would say I’m not going to work today, I’m going to riot in the 

streets. 

Mr. BEYER. We ran SETI at Home for years with my kids and 

all the different computers, and now we’re looking for Riemann 

prime numbers, I guess, because the SETI thing has shut down, 

which—— 
73 

Dr. SHOSTAK. We could always use more prime numbers. 

Mr. BEYER. Yeah, we haven’t found any prime numbers yet either. 

I have talked to scientists, though, who say we’ve been looking 

for so long, you mentioned 100 million planets, and they almost 

argue that because we haven’t heard anything that there must be 

nothing there. 

Dr. SHOSTAK. No, that’s a false argument. Look, that’s like going 

to Africa, looking for big mammals with long noses that can pick 

up peanuts, and quitting after you’ve examined one city block’s 

worth of real estate. That’s equivalent to the fraction of our own 

galaxy that we’ve looked at. There’re roughly a trillion planets in 

our galaxy. There’re two trillion other galaxies we can see, each 

with a trillion planets. To say oh, well, it’s all sterile is a bit selfcentered. 

Mr. BEYER. Dr. Kasting, in looking at Enceladus’s plume, how 

fast are the gases escaping? Is there any—is this something that 

will go on for millions of years? 

Dr. KASTING. My understanding is that plume will keep going. 

You know, there are four stripes on Enceladus’ south pole called 

the tiger stripes, and the plume is coming out form there. So this 

plume has been there for the ten years that Cassini has been up. 

You know, what you want to do is actually try to encounter that 

plume at slower velocities. It’s a spacecraft moving fast through it 

that makes it difficult to measure. So it would be nice to go back 

and go through that plume. I think it will be there and go through 

it more slowly. 

Mr. BEYER. And very quickly, I’m familiar with the binary stars 

where the one rotates around the other. When you get to the triple 

star system with Alpha Centauri, are they—what’s the planetary 

motion or the star motion that goes along with three of them? 

Dr. KASTING. The two bright ones, Alpha and Beta Centauri, are 

close together and orbit pretty quickly. Proxima Centauri, the M 

star which has the planet around it, is far away and it’s actually 

not even entirely certain that it’s gravitationally bound. 

Mr. BEYER. Okay. Interesting. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Beyer. 

The gentleman from Oklahoma, Mr. Lucas, is recognized. 

Mr. LUCAS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I agree with my colleagues. This is a fascinating topic. It’s caught the attention of our 

constituents back home, and from that perspective, let me ask the 

panel: we’ve invested on the federal level, whether it was Hubble 

before and the first generation of space telescopes that caught the 

public’s imagination or the money we’re spending on James Webb, 

our European friends and a number of folks in Chile and a variety 

of other places spent substantial monies that can be used in the 

exoplanet search work. Visit with me for a moment about the technical requirements if we are successful in finding a blip, a squeak, 

a whatever, how we go forward with the next generation, what is 

required to go to the next generation. Do we ultimately have to tie 

every telescope that’s on the surface of the planet together computer-wise to create that field to observe from? Where do we go in 
74 

the next generation, which if we encounter something that’s defined as a likely, the public will become very enthusiastic for? 

Dr. ZURBUCHEN. It’s my belief that most of the technologies that 

we’re going to deploy to answer this question have not yet been invented. I really believe that what’s going to happen as we go forward and look, for example, at microbial life in the solar system 

or we look at exoplanets and look at the first emissions of 

atmospheres using James Webb and other telescopes we’re building 

now, there’s innovators right now that are developing next-generation highly sensitive spectroscopy type of tools that even within a 

few years will be proposed to one of our announcements of opportunity at NASA or elsewhere, and really will cause that kind of 

rapid rush forward that is really typical of this kind of research. 

So for me, that’s one of the amazing parts of this research is that 

it causes so much innovation. 

You know, the first planet around another star was announced 

in 1995, you know. It’s a little bit over 20 years. Look where we 

are today. Look at the tools we’re using today. We never knew to 

look at dwarves as, you know, we didn’t know how, right, and so 

this is where kind of the motherlode is of this. So for me, it’s really 

that progress that makes it so exciting. Yes, there will be a lot of 

innovation. 

Dr. KASTING. Could I make a comment on that? 

Mr. LUCAS. Yes. 

Dr. KASTING. We’ve heard about James Webb Space Telescope, 

which is this huge, wonderful telescope that’s going up next year, 

but James Webb will only be able to take spectra of the transiting 

planets, which is a small fraction of the planets out there. Most of 

the nearby stars, the planets don’t transit. So what we really need 

is big, direct imaging telescopes of the same size as JWST or 

maybe even a little larger but specially equipped with 

coronagraphs or star shades to block out the light from the stars 

so that you can see the planets orbiting around it, and so that’s my 

own personal interest. I think that’s where we have the best chance 

of finding life. 

Dr. SHOSTAK. In the case of intelligent life, of course, every telescope in the world would be aimed in the direction from which the 

signal’s coming. You can be sure of that. But in terms of what’s 

coming down the pike for instrumentation, the Europeans, mostly 

the Europeans are building what’s called the square kilometer 

array, both in South Africa and western Australia, and that’s an 

instrument that’s 10 times larger than Arecibo, which is already 10 

times larger than what we’re using. So that kind of thing would 

allow us to follow up and find other signals coming from other 

places. Usually in astronomy, if you find one of thing, that means 

you’re going to find a lot more rather quickly, partially because you 

know what you’re looking for. 

Mr. LUCAS. Doctor? 

Dr. BURGASSER. Thank you, and I want to thank you for asking 

that question. I want to tack on to the technology development that 

we can’t even anticipate at this point just the techniques that have 

been developed to find these planets were things that were not anticipated early on. So the Spitzer Space Telescope, which I mentioned was central for discovery in the TRAPPIST planets, when it 
75 

was launched, it was not designed to do what we did with it. It was 

not designed to look for exoplanets and measure these transits and 

yet it’s been one of the most successful outcomes of that mission. 

And so I think when you give people tools, they discover new ways 

to use them and ways that we may not anticipate that could actually do more with the investments in these facilities than we could 

have expected. 

Mr. LUCAS. Thank you very much. Your comments present optimism that’s very vast and it’s fascinating to think that we have our 

echo chamber out 70 years, so to speak, light-years. 

With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Lucas. 

And the gentleman from California, Mr. Rohrabacher, is recognized. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Let me first apologize that I came in late. As 

you know, we have several hearings scheduled at the same time. 

I will be looking at your testimony, your written testimony, and I 

want to thank the Chairman. We have a Chairman who’s a visionary, and we’re lucky to have him there to be able to touch on things 

like this. I might say that other chairmen that I’ve served under 

were not quite as willing to go into these type of areas because 

they were afraid of ridicule. I mean, you can see it—‘‘Oh, they’re 

out searching for aliens in outer space,’’ and we need to have a very 

serious discussion on your mission and what’s going on, and let me 

just note that I have been a long-time supporter personally of developing telescopes of deep space missions as well as astronomy in 

general, knowing that with astronomy we can determine truths 

that are happening out there that affect our knowledge even of molecular structure and how it works on the land. So I will have to 

tell you that they didn’t have to twist my arm in order to get my 

support for those projects. 

First of all, let me just ask this. I have a 12-year-old son, and 

he would just die if I did not ask this question. With what we know 

now and how you have now just expanded our understanding of 

how far reality goes out from our planet, with that in mind, here’s 

my son now: Is time travel possible? 

Dr. SHOSTAK. If you’re willing to go to the future. That you can 

do, and you’re doing it right now. Going to the past seems to violate some basic tenets of physics. 

There’s a book out about time travel, a new one your son may 

want to read, and it’s—I think it’s by Glike, the same guy who—— 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. But actually some of the things you’re doing 

now and you’re studying will give us understanding maybe 100 

years from now on something that may be an incredible breakthrough for humankind like the idea that it’s possible to have time 

travel. 

Dr. SHOSTAK. Well, one should never discount the possibility of 

new physics that changes one’s attitude, but at the moment I 

would bet against it. 

Dr. KASTING. If I could comment, I don’t know about time travel 

but I always thought that travel to other stars was impossible but, 

you know, there’s a private group out in California called Breakthrough that is studying Project Starshot. They want to send a 
76 

spacecraft to Alpha Centauri and so that’s something that I never 

thought was going to happen but, you know, it’s not impossible. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Not impossible? 

Dr. BURGASSER. Now, time travel I would hedge against. I think 

I agree with Dr. Shostak. But certainly the excitement about space 

travel, that’s something that is very recent, and honestly technologically very possible. 

Dr. ZURBUCHEN. The short answer is, I don’t know, but the one 

thing I’ve learned in looking at science is never discount options. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. Now, again, I’m going to have a plebian approach to my questions, and that is, I watch the History channel, 

and I watch various things that are presented about things that we 

may have spotted on things like Mars where there are objects that 

appear to be walls. Are all of those objects, have you just written 

them off and they’re not products of other civilizations? 

Dr. SHOSTAK. I think it’s safe to say they are not. I get emails 

and phone calls every day from people who claim they have good 

evidence of aliens visiting the solar system, and I wish it were true. 

I wish it were convincing. It would be job security for me, after all. 

But if you look at most of these claimed artifacts found on Mars 

by people who go through, for example, the Rover photos and so 

forth, I mean, they find, you know, little statuettes, they find critters like lizards, they find oceangoing creatures. They also—there’s 

also a Nazi helmet. This may be news to you that the Wehrmacht 

actually went to Mars. All of this are examples of pareidolia, which 

is to say like looking up in the clouds, you can see almost anything 

you want. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. You rule out that any of these things, objects 

that we see are indicative of some lifeform? 

Dr. SHOSTAK. There may be life on Mars but I don’t think it’s 

manifested in these images. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. What about you, sir? 

Dr. KASTING. I agree with what Seth said, and the images are 

not convincing. I don’t see as many as Seth does, but I’m interested 

in looking for Mars in the subsurface—looking for life in the subsurface. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. And? 

Dr. BURGASSER. Yeah, I would also say I’m not convinced. I 

mean, we do—we have evolved as a species to have incredible pattern recognition powers and so we find patterns in lots of things. 

Outstanding claims require outstanding evidence. 

Dr. ZURBUCHEN. Same here. Basically, I’ve been personally involved in more than one of these instances where something comes 

up and we attempt to deploy great scientists to go look at this. In 

some cases, it’s just a camera effect. You know, you look at your 

own pictures and you see kind of weird things just because of how 

a camera works and sometimes it’s like what he says, you know. 

It’s the lion in the clouds, that type of thing. 

Mr. ROHRABACHER. I know we’re getting a great deal of understanding from your labor and your effort that you’re putting in to 

this project, a great deal of better understanding of the nature of 

the universe, and we appreciate that and we appreciate your advice 

to us on how to be realistic about that as well. So thank you very 

much. 
77 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Rohrabacher. 

The gentleman from California, Mr. McNerney, is recognized. 

Mr. MCNERNEY. Well, again, I thank the Chairman for holding 

this hearing. 

Dr. Shostak, about SETI, you mentioned that SETI’s getting better at identifying targets and improving—and the equipment to be 

used is also improving. Could you elaborate on what’s improving in 

terms of the detection and the equipment that’s used to survey? 

Dr. SHOSTAK. Yes. To some extent, there’s an improvement simply in raw sensitivity so that you can find weaker signals, but that 

depends on having lots of antennas. That means putting up lots of 

physical structure. Aluminum hasn’t gotten a whole lot cheaper in 

the last 20 years. So that’s a very slow improvement there. 

The big improvement is in the receiver technology where instead 

of looking at one star at a time, which is what we’ve done—when 

I say look at a star, of course you’re assuming there may be planets 

around it that have somebody with a radio transmitter. Instead of 

looking at one at a time, you could in fact look at tens, hundreds, 

even thousands of stars at a time with enough computer processing 

capability, and of course, that capability is coming down the pike. 

The other thing that we’re beginning to deploy is what’s called 

machine learning. This is where you use massive computing power 

to search for all kinds of patterns in the signals. Today we have 

sort of a dedicated machine that looks for one kind of pattern. It’s 

sort of akin to having hearing where you can only hear one note. 

You’re not going to really get a lot out of a symphony, but if you 

can, you know, use machine learning in this case to broaden the 

kind of thing you could recognize, then that will also speed up the 

search. 

Mr. MCNERNEY. Let’s—and I’m not sure who to ask this question, but what’s the risk of contaminating other planets with— 

nearby planets, Mars and so on, with Earth biology? 

Dr. ZURBUCHEN. For missions to places where we expect that 

could harbor life or any organism such as Mars or Europa, we use 

strict protocols referred to as planetary protection, and so basically 

what we do is go look at it in both ways. The first one is, we don’t 

want to destroy an experiment so we actually take, you know, tremendous efforts to make sure that we don’t bring a lot of our life 

there or organisms and so we don’t destroy an experiment. The 

other thing, we also want to make sure if we found something and 

brought it back, and that’s going to be important once we start 

bringing back samples from places like Mars and so forth, we want 

to make sure that if there was life in there that it’s not kind of the 

equivalent of a really lethal virus. So, you know, the kind of mechanisms that we would use for such bacteria or viruses, we would 

use in this context so we have mechanisms that we use for every 

one of those missions, both classification and also how we actually 

build the missions and land them and so forth. 

Mr. MCNERNEY. Dr. Kasting? 

Dr. KASTING. Could I add a comment to that? I mentioned in my 

testimony that Cassini is going to crash into Saturn at the end of 

the summer. NASA’s doing that intentionally for planetary protection reasons because they don’t want—after they lose control of 
78 

Cassini, they don’t want it to crash into one of Saturn’s moons or 

the rings. 

Mr. MCNERNEY. Another question is, I mean, with all the new 

information on exoplanets, is there a way to classify all this information or are we still sort of ad hoc trying to figure out how to put 

these things into some sort of order? 

Dr. BURGASSER. So there are several groups in the exoplanet 

community that have gotten together to develop websites, databases that organizes information. I mentioned earlier in my testimony the University of Puerto Rico at Arecibo have built a laboratory, and they’ve developed criteria to assess the habitability of 

various planets. There are a number of great resources that compile the data on these 3,000-plus exoplanets, and again, those resources are publicly available, and so I often have my students do 

research projects to explore these catalogs and come up with their 

own measures of habitability and potential for life. 

Mr. MCNERNEY. So is the—I mean, for someone that’s not immersed in this issue, is there an ability to go to that resource and 

understand what’s happening or is it still pretty foggy? 

Dr. BURGASSER. No, and what I can do is, I can put in the written testimony some of these resources, but they actually have sort 

of demonstrations on how to use the data. They’re extremely well 

designed, and they have gotten a lot of interest from the public. 

Mr. MCNERNEY. Very good. 

All right, Mr. Chairman. I’ll yield back. Thank you. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Mr. McNerney. 

Oh, without objection, the Ranking Member, Ms. Johnson, is recognized for an additional question or two. 

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. This really 

has been an exciting hearing, especially as we look toward the future, and I’m sorry Mr. Rohrabacher had to leave. Speaking of his 

12-year-old son, it really is a thing that excites young men, young 

people when we can look to the future and start to explore the unknown, and in 30 years we might know a whole lot more than we 

know now, and my question really is to the panel here. What do 

we do as a Congress to make sure that in 30 years, we’re on top 

of what’s going on in the universe? How do we move forward? How 

well equipped will we make sure that our young minds are stimulated and interested in this area? I’m so grateful for those who 

came before us who made it possible for today, and thanks to all 

of you, but we have a challenge, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Ms. Johnson. 

Let me respond very quickly, and I think most members know 

that we are fortunate to have within our Committee’s jurisdiction 

STEM education or many aspects of STEM education, and in fact, 

I believe the first two bills that President Trump signed last month 

were two STEM bills that were produced by this Committee, and 

I was over there for the bill signing. And we will continue to go 

in that direction. 

The other thing I think that is good news for us is that most 

agencies had their budgets cut. NASA was one of the few agencies 

that did not incur any cuts, so we have an Administration, I think, 

and a Congress who is very interested in space and what’s out 

there. 
79 

Let me thank our witnesses again today. You all have just been 

fascinating and informative, and we appreciate your taking the 

time to be here. Clearly, on the basis of the questions you were 

asked, there is interest across all members in what you’re doing 

and the different things that you’re doing as well. We heard things 

today we haven’t heard before, and that’s always enough to keep 

us going and have future hearings on the subject as well. 

So thank you all for being here. We stand adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 11:36 a.m., the Committee was adjourned.] 

(81) 

Appendix I 

ANSWERS TO POST-HEARING QUESTIONS
82 

ANSWERS TO POST-HEARING QUESTIONS

Responses by Dr. Thomas Zurbuchen 
83 

discovered, as well as the potential for Earth contamination to be introduced. Additionally, 

we expect astronauts on Mars to be able to analyze orders of magnitude more samples than 

get returned, and selecting samples with minimal Earth contamination will be important to 

assure the highest chance to detect signs of Martian life. Careful selection will also enhance 

other aspects of scientific quality in the samples that are selected to be returned to Earth. 

Continued robotic exploration of Mars will ensure that areas of the planet not as readily 

accessible to human crews do not go unexplored. 

NASA recognizes there are inherent risks as well as benefits of involving humans directly in 

the search for life, and our planetary protection and mission planning teams are actively 

working together to evaluate mitigation strategies. We currently do not know whether the 

Martian enviromnent contains biohazards that might cause problems for astronauts or affect 

the enviromnent of the Earth. Under consideration is using sterilized teleoperated robots to 

explore those areas where contamination from human explorers is a concern for the 

enviromnent of Mars, or where Earth contamination could interfere with the detection of 

possible Martian biohazards. 

3. The Curiosity rover was only partially sterilized before going to Mars. How has partial 

sterilization affected the choice of areas Curiosity is able to explore in terms of addressing 

scientific objectives related to the search for life? What is the planetary protection category 

for the Mars 2020 rover? How does such a classification affect the regions of Mars the rover 

can study and the science it can do? 

Answer: Curiosity's primary mission is to assess whether Mars ever was, or is still today, 

an enviromnent able to support microbial life. Because it was not carrying instruments 

designed to search for evidence of extant Martian life, Curiosity was designated planetary 

protection Category Na and subject to a biological contamination limit. The Curiosity 

rover complied with planetary protection requirements to carry a total of no more than 

300,000 bacterial spores on any surface from which the spores could get into the Martian 

enviromnent. The categorization of the mission and the resulting restrictions have not 

inhibited its ability to meet its primary science objectives. 

If in the future, a site in Gale crater becomes identified as potentially a Special Region 

(where terrestrial microbial life might propagate), then Curiosity would be precluded from 

entering the site until further study determines the site is not at risk for contamination. 

NASA has designated the Mars 2020 mission as Planetary Protection Category V: 

Restricted Earth Return, due to the presence of hardware intended to cache samples for 

future return to Earth, and appropriate requirements are being implemented accordingly. 

These include designing the sample collection hardware to meet stringent limits on Earth 
84 

biological contamination introduced into samples collected for future return. As was the 

case for Curiosity, the primary constraint for the Mars 2020 mission is the restriction from 

landing in, entering, or creating, a Special Region on Mars. This should not affect the 

science results, as the Mars 2020 Science Definition Team report concluded that the primary 

mission objective of exploring an ancient environment does not require the mission to 

access Special Regions. 

4. With the recent announcement from NASA of a potential second observation of plume 

activity on Europa, is there a push to alter the scientific goal of the NASA Europa Clipper 

mission to include life detection? How would such a decision be made? Is it possible to add 

life detection instruments to the spacecraft at this point in its development? 

Answer: The ultimate aim of Europa Clipper is to determine if Europa is habitable, 

possessing all three of the ingredients necessary for life: liquid water, chemical ingredients 

for building biomolecules, and energy sources sufficient to support life. The nine 

instruments that NASA has selected for the mission will physically characterize the 

subsurface ocean, interrogate the surface for evidence of materials convected from the 

subsurface ocean, and chemically characterize that material. If the Europa Clipper 

encounters a plume, it would be able to make similar measurements to what Cassini was 

able to do at Enceladus. Analysis of a sample spewed directly from the subsurface ocean 

would prove more definitive information on the potential habitability of Europa. 

Even though some of the nine instruments have limited capability to detect biomarkers, 

searching for life is easier if done by a lander on the surface or directly accessing the 

subsurface ocean. A lander payload would need to be designed to detect likely dilute 

evidence oflife that has been lofted to the surface from the ocean deep below. 

5. Last month, NASA announced that Cassini composition measurements revealed the 

presence of molecular hydrogen in the plume material spewing from the surface of 

Enceladus, thus providing an "independent line of evidence that hydrothermal activity is 

taking place in the Enceladus ocean." As you know, hydrothermal activity provides a 

necessary chemical energy source for life. What future verification and confirmation 

activities will logically flow from discoveries such as this and how can excitement be 

sustained until those activities can be undertaken? 

Answer: Cassini has completed its data gathering at Enceladus, and the mission will reach 

its dramatic conclusion this September. But the analysis of Cassini data is far from 

complete. It will continue for years, fueling scientific advancements and refining our 

understanding ofEnceladus. Coupling this work with research on hydrothermal systems on 

Earth is a proactive path forward, and the planetary science and Earth oceanographic 

communities are beginning to work together. 
85 

The information Europa Clipper will provide about Europa's ocean will be highly relevant 

to Enceladus and our search for life on Ocean Worlds. It is not unreasonable to surmise that 

the geophysics ofEnceladus responsible for the observed hydrothermal activity is also 

operating on Europa. The scientific community is excited to confirm this activity on Europa 

and perhaps find evidence that some form of life is taking advantage of that hydrothermal 

energy source. 

No further observations of Enceladus and its ocean will be possible until a new mission is 

launched. Such a mission is one of seven candidate destinations currently under 

competition in NASA's New Frontiers Program. Initial selections are expected this fall. 

6. What is the status of the NASA Nexus for Exoplanet System Science (NExSS) initiative? 

What results have come from the initiative and what plans does NASA have for NExSS 

over the coming years? 

Answer: NExSS is a NASA research coordination network dedicated to the study of 

planetary habitability. The goals ofNExSS are to investigate the diversity of 

exoplanets and to learn how their history, geology, and climate interact to create the 

conditions for life. NExSS is overseen by representatives from NASA HQ, three coleads, and a Steering Committee composed of the Principal Investigators (Pis) of 18 

funded proposal teams selected to be the founding members ofNExSS. These 

investigators are drawn from a diverse range of scientific backgrounds including 

astrophysics, Earth science, heliophysics, and planetary science and lead 

interdisciplinary teams ranging in size from 3 to over 50 members. Specifically, 

major areas of research focus include exoplanet detection, characterization, planetary 

formation processes, climatic evolution, paleoclimate and biogeochemistry, as well as 

microbiology, astrobiology, and the emergence oflife. Moreover, NExSS supports 

two cross-team NASA Postdoctoral Program (NPP) Fellows, as well as a NASA 

Postdoctoral Management Program (NPMP) Fellow based at NASA Ames Research 

Center. 

In the past year, Affiliate members have also been added to the NExSS network; these 

are individuals or groups whose research interests and vision are aligned with those of 

NExSS but who currently do not belong to any of the PI-led teams. Affiliates are 

invited to participate in NExSS's webinar series, attended conferences and workshops 

and contribute to science, data, and policy products in order to facilitate wider 

community engagement. 

To date, NExSS has supported three 'Workshops Without Walls' (WwW) focused on 

the interior evolution of potentially habitable planets, the effect of 'space weather' on 

long-term planetary habitability, and the detection of remote biosignatures. 

Participants and speakers have attended in-person but also via web link as the input 

and active engagement of remote participants has been emphasized to ensure 

representation from the wider local and international community. Products from these 

workshops have included white papers, new collaborations, and the identification of 
86 

new questions, topics and research avenues. NExSS's most recent workshop resulted 

in a total of five review papers on the science and technology of remote searches for 

signs of life on exoplanets. These documents are currently in the stage of community 

comment and feedback, facilitated through NExSS's online infrastructure, in 

preparation for eventual submission to Astrobiology journal. 

It can be difficult to quantifY the effectiveness of research coordination networks as 

many of the successes of these initiatives cannot be easily measured. For example, 

NExSS's Pis note that several collaborative activities such as student exchanges, 

winter/summer schools, invited talks at department seminars and colloquia, as well as 

joint grant proposals have arisen from their interactions with the NExSS community. 

Furthermore, organization is currently underway for NExSS's flagship meeting 

entitled Habitable Worlds 2017: A Systems Science Workshop, which will be held in 

November 2017 in Laramie, WY. This workshop will deviate slightly from the 

traditional format of science conferences in that emphasis on 'breakout' sessions on 

topics suggested by the participants are prioritized alongside talks and presentations. 

The workshop will seek to address broad questions pertaining to planetary habitability 

including what conditions are needed for habitability, how those conditions arise, and 

how we can best search for them. 

NExSS began as an experiment in cross divisional cooperation and interdisciplinary 

research focused on habitability and the search for life beyond our solar system. The 

program has met our expectations and continues to build its impact and reach. As long 

as it enhances the science, feeds into our missions, and remains productive, NASA 

will continue to support the system science approach for studying exoplanets. 

7. What is the status ofNASA's plans for a future mission to return cached samples collected 

by the Mars 2020 rover so they can be studied by researchers on Earth? You mention in 

your statement that NASA is "exploring opportunities to partner with industry to leverage 

their future missions to advance decadal survey science objectives." Can you expand on 

that? When can we expect to get more details on when and how cached samples from Mars 

will be returned to Earth? 

~: NASA has been studying concepts for returning samples collected by the Mars 

2020 rover in the context of a larger Mars exploration architecture assessment, which was 

called for in the FYI 7 NASA Transition Authorization Act (PL 115-I 0). Consistent with the 

direction in the NASA Transition Authorization Act, this assessment would be conducted by 

the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine and would use the 

strategies and priorities described in the NRC Vision and Voyages for Planetary Science in 

the Decade 2013-2022 [the Planetary Science Decadal Survey] as a starting point. This 

assessment, which would consider opportunities for collaboration with commercial and 

international partners, would feed into the Administration's future Mars planning. 
87 

8. How do scientific and technological advances in astrobiology impact the way NASA sets its 

broader astrophysics science goals? In your view, are any changes to this process needed? 

Answer: NASA recently created the Nexus for Exoplanet System Science (NExSS) 

research coordination network to leverage research investments in many fields to 

understand how planetary processes lead to potentially habitable exoplanets, as well as 

how the planet stars and neighbor planets interact to support life. This "system 

science" approach will help scientists better understand how biology interacts with the 

atmosphere, geology, oceans, and interior of a planet, and how these interactions are 

affected by the host star. This in tum help us better understand how to look for life on 

exoplanets. For instance, Earth-observing satellites has given us a wealth of information 

on the atmosphere of our home world, which we have utilized to 'groundtruth' the models 

and techniques that astrophysicists will use to analyze the atmospheres of other planets. 

Scientific and technological advances in astrobiology will be incorporated into the 

upcoming 2020 Decadal Science Survey and will be used to set priorities for the next 

decade of astrophysics research. NASA believes that this process is working well and does 

not need to be changed. 
88 

Responses by Dr. Adam Burgasser 

HOUSE COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY 

"Advances in the Search for Life" 

Dr. Adam Burgasser, Professor of Physics, University of California, San Diego and UCSD 

Center for Astrophysics and Space Science; Fulbright Scholar 

Question submitted by Ranking Member Eddie Bernice Johnson. House Committee on Science. 

Space and Technology 

l. How do scientific and technological advances in astrobiology impact the way NASA sets its 

broader astrophysics science goals? In your view, are there changes to this process needed? 

Answer: NASA is continually working with its scientists and researchers in the broader 

community to set and evaluate astrophysics science goals in the face of new research, new 

technological advances, and new opportunities. On a decadal timescale, the NASA Decadal 

Survey sets mission priorities of 10-20 year timescales based on current/likely technological 

capabilities; current scientific understanding in astrobiology, astrophysics and planetary 

science; and administrative priorities. This is a community-led effort, with researchers from 

various institutions, areas of expertise, and career status contributing either directly through 

committee service or in an advisory capacity through contributions of white papers. 

Planning for the 2020 Decadal Survey is already underway. 

Another example of community participation is the Exoplanet Exploration Program 

Analysis Group (ExoP AG), which is responsible for soliciting and coordinating community 

input into the development and execution of NASA's Exoplanet Exploration Program 

(ExEP). ExoP AG serves as a community-based, interdisciplinary forum for soliciting and 

coordinating community analysis and input in support of the Exoplanet Exploration 

Program objectives and of their implications-for architecture planning and activity 

prioritization and for future exploration. It provides findings of analyses to the NASA 

Astrophysics Division Director. In-person ExoPAG community meetings occur twice a 

year, and additional meetings (in-person or virtual) occur when specific recommendations 

are solicited (e.g., in preparation for the Decadal Survey). These meetings are open to the 

public. The next ExoPAG meeting is scheduled June 18th in Mountainview, CA; see 

https:// exoplanets. nasa. gov I exepl events/. 

In both cases, scientific and technological advances directly influence NASA's scientific 

priorities in the astrophysics realm through the scientists involved in these activities. Given 

the considerable degree of community engagement and immediate public dissemination of 

white papers and committee reports 

(e.g., https:l/exoplanets.nasa.gov/exep/resources/documents/exopagFoundingDocumentsL), I 

personally feel this process is functioning well and no changes are immediately necessary. 
89 

Responses by Dr. James Kasting 

HOUSE COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY 

"Advances in the Search for Life" 

Dr. James Kasting, Chair, Planning Committee, Workshop on the Search for Life Across Space 

and Time, National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine, Evan Pugh Professor of 

Geosciences, Pennsylvania State University 

Question submitted by Ranking Member Eddie Bernice Johnson House Committee on Science. 

Space, and Technology 

1. What is the current understanding of how life got its start on Earth and how does and how 

should this understanding inform astrobiology research and mission development in NASA? 

Answer: Thank you for this question. It is a cogent one. I do no direct research on the origin 

oflife myself, but I have been going to origin oflife meetings for the past 35 years, and I 

have some understanding of the basic issues. My most fundamental observation is this: there 

is no scientific consensus about how life originated. Rather, it is one of the biggest unsolved 

problems in all of science. This does not mean, however, that we do not have hypotheses. In 

fact, there are scores of hypotheses dating back to the 1938 publication of Alexander 

Oparin's book: The Origin of Life. I will not attempt to summarize all the different ideas 

here. I will point out, though, that there are two main classes of ideas: 1) information first, 

sometimes called 'RNA first', and 2) metabolism first. Let me briefly describe how these 

work. 

1) The information first hypothesis is based on the view that RNA was the first molecule 

that had the ability to store genetic information. Today, genetic information is stored by 

DNA, not RNA. But (double-stranded) DNA is closely related to (single-stranded) RNA, 

and virtually all biologists agree that RNA preceded DNA as a genetic material. Because it 

is single-stranded, RNA can also catalyze biochemical reactions-a task that today is mostly 

carried out by (single-stranded) proteins. Many biologists now postulate the existence of an 

'RNA World', in which RNA performed all of the tasks that today are carried out by RNA, 

DNA, and proteins. Some biologists think that the first living system was an RNA organism 

like those envisioned in the RNA World. The difficult part of this hypothesis is to figure out 

how RNA was formed in the first place. RNA is a rather complicated biomolecule, with four 

different nucleic acid bases attached to ribose backbones and then strung together in chains 

using tri-phosphate linkages. Critics of this hypothesis argue that this biochemistry is too 

complex to have been present in the first living system, and that something simpler, but still 

'alive', must have preceded it. 

2) By contrast, the metabolism first hypothesis is based on the idea, universally accepted by 

biologists, that living organisms need to have a source of energy to power their metabolism. 

Humans, along with other animals and plants, power their metabolisms with respiration 

(reacting organic matter with oxygen to make carbon dioxide and water). Microorganisms 

are much more diverse in their metabolisms. Some use respiration, as we do, but others 
90 

others employ a variety of other chemical reactions, including fermentation, sulfate 

reduction, and methanogenesis, just to name a few. The metabolism first hypothesis 

postulates that life arose spontaneously as a consequence oflarge thermodynamic free 

energy gradients. Primitive organisms tapped these gradients to drive their metabolisms. A 

commonly cited example of where such a process may have occurred is an environment 

similar to midocean ridge hydrothermal vents, where today organisms use abundant carbon 

dioxide and hydrogen to make methane. (This is a particular version of the methanogenesis 

reaction, mentioned above.) This hypothesis has many attractive features, and indeed I favor 

it myself. Critics, though, argue that in the absence of RNA, there is no known genetic 

mechanism for passing information down from one organism to the next. Biologists have 

thought hard about this problem, but no one has demons(rated a convincing genetic 

mechanism to bridge the gap between the abiotic world and the RNA World. 

This somewhat lengthy reply does not directly answer your question about how life 

originated, but it outlines some of the possibilities. Future NASA space missions may help 

us choose between these competing hypotheses. Continued study of Europa and Enceladus 

may shed additional light on the question of whether large free energy gradients exist in 

their subsurface oceans. In my written and oral testimony, I mentioned that new 

measurements ofEnceladus' plume by the Cassini spacecraft indicated that large free 

energy gradients may exist for the methanogenesis reaction described above. This 

conclusion rests on a single measurement, though, and few astrobiologists would consider it 

to be definitive. More studies of plumes on Enceladus and Europa are needed, along with 

analyses of the material that wells up between the cracks on both of these icy moons. 

A second way in which NASA space missions can address the origin of life issue is by 

telling us if it happened more than once. I am thinking here primarily of proposed large, 

direct-imaging space telescopes that can be used to find and spectroscopically characterize 

Earth-like planets around nearby stars. Such telescopes were also mentioned in my 

testimony. Some critics of both sets of hypotheses about the origin of life say that it is much 

too difficult a process to have happened by itself. Rather, it could only have happened at the 

hand of a divine Creator. It is difficult or impossible to prove such critics wrong. But by 

identifYing signs of life on other Earth-like planets, we could at least answer the question of 

whether it happened more than once. To those of us with a scientific bent, this would 

suggest that the origin of life is a natural process that occurs whenever the conditions, e.g., 

large free energy gradients and the presence of liquid water, are favorable. Conversely, if we 

find lots of Earth-like planets, but no evidence for extraterrestrial life, that would lend 

credence to the views of those who argue that life on Earth is unique. Continued exploration 

of our solar system, combined with telescopic observation of nearby exoplanets, may help 

us answer this question. 
91 

2. How do scientific and technological advances in astrobiology impact the way NASA sets its 

broader astrophysics science goals? In your view, are any changes to this process needed? 

Answer: Your question mentions astrophysics explicitly, as opposed to planetary science, 

so I will confine my answer to this area. As you probably know, Astronomy & Astrophysics 

and Planetary Science represent separate divisions within NASA's Space Science 

Directorate, and the scientific issues and technologies developed in these two areas are quite 

different. 

The main tool used by astrobiologists within the Astronomy & Astrophysics Division at 

NASA is space telescopes. In my view, the scientific goals and technological needs of 

astrobiology fit right into the broader astrophysics science goals. One example is NASA's 

James Webb Space Telescope (JWST), which launches next year. JWST was designed 

primarily as a general purpose telescope for doing astrophysics. This gigantic (6.5-m) 

telescope will be used to study star formation, stellar disks, and many other phenomena that 

interest astronomers. At the same time, JWST will give us the best spectra yet of transiting 

exoplanets (planets that pass directly in front of their parent star). This is of great interest to 

planetary scientists and to astrobiologists, as it will provide information about exoplanet 

atmospheres, and it may provide indirect evidence for life. 

A second way in which astrobiology science goals overlap with the interests of general 

astronomers is in the development of technology for future direct imaging telescopes. I keep 

coming back to this topic, because this is my own scientific passion. Such telescopes will 

use either a coronagraph or a starshade to block out the light from a star and look for 

reflected light from the planets orbiting around it. They will allow us to search for planets of 

all types around many of the nearby stars. They will observe many more planets than JWST, 

because the planets do not need to transit their parent star. A direct imaging telescope like 

HabEx (mentioned in my written testimony) would allow us to see all of the planets from 

Venus out to Saturn if we were looking at our own solar system from afar. So, it will at once 

allow us to learn the nature of planetary systems around most of the nearby stars. At the 

same time, it will also allow us to take spectra of the atmospheres of the most interesting 

exoplanets, those that lie within the liquid water habitable zone of their star. This is the 

information we need to look for signs oflife. So, such a telescope would satisfY the desires 

of astrobiologists, as well as astronomers who are interested in the planets themselves. 

So, to summarize, while the scientific goals of astrobiologists and astrophysicists are not 

necessarily the same, the tools they hope to develop are not that different. The NASA 

Astronomy & Astrophysics Division, under the leadership of Paul Hertz, is doing an 

excellent job of pursuing these new technologies, including those needed for direct imaging 

of exoplanets. To get such missions approved, astrobiologists will first need to get the 

support of the broader astronomical community, via the upcoming Astronomy & 

Astrophysics decadal survey. What they will need next is money. I hope that Congress 

recognizes the pioneering science being carried out presently by NASA 

astronomers/astrobiologists and that it provides them the resources to do even more such 

science in the future. 
92 

Responses by Dr. Seth Shostak 

Æ 

HOUSE COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE, SPACE, AND TECHNOLOGY 

"Advances in the Search for Life" 

Dr. Seth Shostak, Senior Astronomer, SET! Institute 

Question submitted by Ranking Member Eddie Bernice Johnson, House Committee on Science 

Space. and Technology 

1. How do scientific and technological advances in astrobiology impact the way NASA sets its 

broader astrophysics science goals? In your view, are any changes to this process needed? 

~: As in any scientific discipline, advances in one area affect others. Astrobiology is a 

· relatively small tile in the larger mosaic of research, but its influence is to promote new 

instrumentation and studies in other areas, and to benefit from them. As obvious example, 

the development of very large optical telescopes is at least partially motivated by the 

seductive possibility of using them to "sniff' the atmospheres of exoplanets, one of the most 

promising ways to learn of planets with life. The construction of these telescopes is usually 

justified by the contributions they can make to cosmology- which is, of course, the 

province of some of the largest puzzles in science (dark matter, dark energy). But for the 

public, and for astrobiologists, it's the possibility of examining planets for sigos of life that 

is appealing. 

In general, the collaboration between NASA astrobiology and astrophysics functions well, 

at least from an outsider's perspective. I think there are two areas where change could be 

beneficial: (1) the length of competitive grants is too short. The researchers I know spend 

about one-fourth of their time writing grants, of which usually one in six are actually 

funded. That results in a very inefficient research effort, and one that, given the international 

competition in science today, should be ameliorated. Longer grants would mean a higher 

percentage of a scientist's time spent doing science. (2) While NASA has an extensive effort 

to probe the solar system for life, as well as a highly regarded astrobiology institute, the one 

aspect of this field in which it is no longer a participant is SETI. Despite my obvious bias in 

this matter, I think that this is more than regrettable. The public's interest in extraterrestrial 

life is greatest for intelligent life, and a modest NASA program could add a missing piece to 

the agency's tapestry of astrobiology research. We spend hundreds of millions of dollars and 

more to look for microbes on Mars and the moons of Jupiter and Saturn. For an additional 

one percent, NASA could also search for the type of life that would calibrate humanity's 

place in the cosmos, and bend the arc of our future.