SCROLL NEWS / DISCOVERY
Search headlines
Find the stories shaping the conversation.
Results for " planetary " 100 found 🔀 AI-powered Shuffle
Sign in to save shuffle history.
Call for the WHO to declare the climate crisis a public health emergency of international concern
Researchers from Wits Planetary Health Research (Wits PHR), University of the Witwatersrand, and international partner institutions are calling on the World Health Organization (WHO) and its member states ...
Small Antarctic Telescope Makes An Outsized Impact On Exoplanetary Science
ASTEP, the Antarctic Search for Transiting ExoPlanets, a small visible telescope operating at Concordia station, continues making a real impact in characterizing odd new exoplanetary systems.
This week in science: Exoplanetary salt clouds, ancient families and laughter's origin
Hosts from NPR's science podcast Short Wave talk about an exoplanet with pink, salty clouds, the surprising social structure of ancient human relatives and the origins of laughter.
13-year-old Londoner wins top prize at national science fair for his work in asteroid detection
Thirteen-year-old Siddharth Patel, a Grade 7 student at London's Clara Brenton Public School, won the Platinum Prize in Discovery in the junior category for his project, "Automating Asteroid Detection Criteria to Strengthen Citizen Science for Planetary Defense."
Remembering Michael Gaffey
World-renowned asteroid researcher left lasting mark on UND, planetary science and generations of students
ACLM position statement links lifestyle medicine to planetary health
The American College of Lifestyle Medicine (ACLM) has released a new position statement asserting that lifestyle medicine offers a practical, evidence-based framework to address both the chronic disease epidemic and the growing environmental challenges affecting health worldwide.
NASA’s New Horizons Spacecraft Wakes from Hibernation in Good Health
Following its longest hibernation period ever of nearly a year, NASA’s New Horizons spacecraft has emerged in good health and is ready to begin transmitting
Education to Improve the Planet’s Health, and Our Own
As the planet’s health declines, human health increasingly suffers. We can change this trajectory through a global Planetary Health education campaign.
Earth life support systems are flashing red, warns 2026 Planetary Health Check
Human activities continue eroding the planet’s stability, resilience and life-support functions, the third edition of the Planetary Health Check released in September warns. The “scary” part of the 2026 report, says lead co-author Levke Caesar, is that the trends are largely going in the wrong direction. “We still have seven out of the nine planetary […]
Why Is Space So Fascinating?
We all tuned in when the Artemis II crew splashed down off the San Diego coast. Planetary scientist and academic leader Meenakshi Wadhwa shares her thoughts on why space captures our imaginations so well.
Good science requires much more than evidence
Empiricists believe that scientific theories are true only if they make correct empirical predictions: if we can't verify these predictions, then there is no reason to expect that they tell us anything about reality. However, Professor of Philosophy at King's College David Kyle Johnson argues that this is mistaken. In response to Bas van Fraassen, who has written on this subject for the IAI, he argues that we have many reasons for believing a theory to be true, such as it being parsimonious and having large scope — qualities which have been used throughout the history of science as criteria for judging theories. In 2024, Princeton philosopher Bas van Fraassen wrote a short article for IAI News entitled “Science Does not Describe Reality: The Limits and Benefits of Explanation.” At the time, I was working on two projects (a science book and a Great Course) that, when completed, would (among other things) defend science’s ability to describe reality. I wanted to write a response to van Fraassen, but the projects demanded too much of my attention. But now that those projects are complete, I am in a position to explain the objections to van Fraassen’s thesis. Summarizing van Fraassen’s argumentIn a nutshell, his argument is this: What scientists do is make predictions based on theories and then invite others to test to see whether those predictions are borne out. “If theory T is right, result R should happen in experimental condition C.” Many think that running an experiment that shows that R happens in condition C is proof that theory T is true (and should be believed). But, van Fraassen argues, that R happened in condition C is only a reason to think that R happens in condition C. That’s the only observable, or empirical, result we can actually see, so that is all that we are really justified in believing. (The underlying theory that made that prediction still may or may not be true.) That is why he calls those who accept his position “empiricists.”Before I explain what is wrong with this position, let me explain what it gets right. What van Fraassen Gets RightFirst, a theory correctly predicting the results of an experiment is not, strictly speaking, “proof” that the theory is correct. The basic line of reasoning is this:If the theory T is true, result R should happen. Result R did happen. Thus, theory T is true.In other words:“If T then R. R. Thus, T.”This is a deductively invalid, fallacious mode of reasoning, called “affirming the consequent.” Those premises do not guarantee that the conclusion follows. “If I am in Pennsylvania, then I am in the USA. I am in the USA. Thus, I am in Pennsylvania.” Clearly that argument doesn’t guarantee its conclusion; neither does the above argument.However, science is not a deductive method of reasoning; it is an inductive one. And inductive arguments merely try to raise the probability of their conclusion, not “prove” them for certain. Thus, the fact that an experimental result doesn’t prove a theory is true is irrelevant; it’s not supposed to. That is not what scientific reasoning is about.___If the hypothesis that something exists clearly provides the best explanation for what we can observe, then the belief that it exists is what is rational.___Second, it’s also true that a single experimental result doesn’t provide enough justification to believe that a theory is true. Scientists do not come to a consensus about whether a theory is true by looking at a single experiment; they look at all the evidence to determine where the preponderance of evidence points. The mere fact that I am in the USA raises the probability that I am in Pennsylvania, but not nearly enough to conclude that I am in Pennsylvania. However, if I am also regularly encountering people wearing Eagles and Phillies hats and seeing advertisements for Founding Father tours, I probably am. In the same way, a theory successfully predicting the outcome of one experiment is not enough to conclude that it is true; but if a theory makes a wide variety of predictions that are all vindicated by multiple experiments, performed by many different groups and people, all actively trying to prove the theory false (which is what good scientific experiments are designed to do)—that is a good reason to conclude that the theory is true. In other words, if you repeatedly try to prove something false but can’t, that is a very good indication that it isn’t. The problem of underdeterminationIn reply, those whom van Fraassen calls “empiricists” often point to the “problem of underdetermination.” For any given theory that makes successful predictions about what happens in experimental conditions, there are countless other possible theories that make exactly the same predictions—and since they do, the experimental evidence in question is just as much reason to accept any of those theories as it is to accept our original one. Thus, the argument goes, we have no way of knowing whether our original theory is true, or one of the other “predictively equivalent” theories is true. SUGGESTED VIEWING How Occam's Razor changed the world With Johnjoe McFadden As an example of underdetermination, philosophers often offer this example. The evidence of fossils seems to provide reason to conclude that the universe is quite old; ancient fossils are what the “ancient universe” hypothesis predicts. But it’s also possible that God created an ancient-looking universe 200 years ago, complete with a “fake” fossil record for us to find, to make it look old. The existence of fossils is what that theory predicts too. So, the argument goes, the fossil record can’t be used as evidence that the universe is ancient; the fossil record supports the “200-year-old ancient-looking universe” theory just as much. The problem of underdetermination points out that, for any theory with supporting evidence, we could invent another completely different theory that predicts exactly the same evidence, and thus undermine that evidence’s ability to support the original theory.But this “argument from underdetermination” betrays a fundamental misunderstanding of what scientific reasoning is and how it works. To explain, let me use another rather strange (but very real and commonly discussed) philosophical thought experiment called “The Grue Problem.” The “Grue” ProblemSuppose I want to know what color emeralds are, so I observe a few, see that they all appear green, and form the theory that “all emeralds are green.” I thus predict that the next 100 emeralds I find will also appear to be green. And let’s say that happens, and so I thus conclude that my theory that all emeralds are green is true. Now, one might rightly point out that I don’t know for sure that all emeralds are green—I have not seen them all. Maybe some I haven’t found yet are blue. Fair enough. After all, we used to think that all swans were white, until we found some black ones. But let’s say that I go on a quest and collect every emerald in the universe—and, for the sake of the argument, let’s say I can do this, and can even know that I have every one of them. So, I collect them all, look at them all, and verify that they all appear green. Can’t I now rightly conclude that all emeralds are green?Inspired by the problem of underdetermination, a friend might argue that I cannot.Sure, they all appear green now—but there could be another kind of color called “grue.” Something is grue if it is green up to a certain point in time, but then spontaneously turns blue. And there could be an infinite number of “shades” of grue. Something that is one shade of grue will turn blue at noon today, but something that is another shade of grue will turn blue at noon tomorrow, etc. So yes, the emeralds appear green now; and since they haven’t turned blue yet, they are not some “past” shade of grue. But they might be some “future” shade of grue (e.g., they may turn blue at noon tomorrow). And since all future shades of grue are consistent with “being green up to this point in time,” the evidence you have is completely consistent with the notion that all emeralds are some future shade of grue, rather than green. Indeed, that they would appear green until now is what the “some future shade of grue” hypothesis predicts. So, we have just as much reason to conclude that all emeralds are some shade of grue as we do to conclude that they are green.You’re probably thinking “It’s not equally possible that the emeralds are grue; they are obviously green.” You are right! But explaining why your instinctive reaction to my friend’s argument is correct will help inform why van Fraassen’s “empiricist” is wrong and science actually does describe reality.The main mistake my friend makes is in thinking that the “empirical evidence” (of all the emeralds appearing green) is (or even should be) all I am using to draw the conclusion that all emeralds are green. It is not. I am also considering known facts about how colors typically work; things don’t usually change color, and when they do, they don’t do so suddenly, without cause, and all at once. So, even though the simple evidence of the emeralds all appearing green up to this point is consistent with them being some future shade of grue—that is even what the grue hypothesis “predicts”—it is still exceedingly unlikely that they are. The hypothesis that they are green is much more likely. Understanding science refutes the problem of underdetermination The misunderstanding about science that the “empiricist” pointing to “the problem of underdetermination” makes is similar to the one that my friend made. Science is not just about considering experimental evidence; in fact, it’s not even just about considering empirical evidence. As Ernan McMullin and many other philosophers of science have pointed out, the inference that makes science is “inference to the best explanation” (sometimes called “abduction” or “retroduction” by McMullin). While, depending on the circumstances, scientists use many different kinds of reasoning, science as a whole is, simply put, the process of considering multiple competing explanations and comparing them to certain criteria—explanatory criteria (the kinds of things explanations must be and do, by definition, to be a good explanation)—to see which explanation is the best.And these criteria do not deal only with empirical results. Yes, successful predictions raise the probability of a hypothesis, but it’s also the case that the more new assumptions a theory makes, the less likely it is to be true; every new assumption presents an opportunity for the theory to be false. (The fewer assumptions a theory makes, the simpler or “more parsimonious” it is said to be.) Likewise, the more existing evidence a theory contradicts, the less likely it is, because in order for a theory to be true, every piece of evidence it contradicts has to be somehow faulty. (The fewer established theories a new theory contradicts, the more “conservative” it is said to be.) And, obviously, the more something explains, the better explanation it is. (This is called having “scope.”) If a theory raises unanswerable questions, it’s not expanding our understanding, and thus is not wide-scoping. Scientists consider all these things when deciding which theory to accept, because the theory that adheres best to these explanatory criteria is most likely to be true.___the mere fact that a theory’s predictive success is why it “sticks around” or “becomes accepted” in the scientific community is not a reason to be skeptical about its truth.___The reason the grue hypothesis is no good is because it invents an entirely new kind of color—not just a new shade, but an entirely different category of color (a different way colors work)—and thus is not parsimonious. It raises unanswerable questions about how and why emeralds would just spontaneously change from green to blue (and thus does not have wide scope). And it contradicts what is already well established about how color works (and thus is unconservative).The theories that the problem of underdetermination points to do the same thing. Yes, the theory that God created an “ancient-looking universe” (complete with an ancient-looking fossil record) two hundred years ago is also consistent with the empirical evidence (of a fossil record) that presently exists; but that theory is monumentally unparsimonious (it requires many extra assumptions about infinite entities) and not wide-scoping (it raises unanswerable questions about why God would do such a thing). So, I can rationally conclude that it is false.Indeed, the history of science includes many examples of theories that were rejected because they lacked parsimony and/or scope, even before their falsity (and the truth of their competing theory) was confirmed by observation. As I point out in my book, geocentrism was rejected by the scientific community because it lacked parsimony, almost 200 years before the observation of parallax confirmed that the Earth moves around the sun. And the continuum theory of matter was completely rejected by 1860, because it couldn’t explain chemical reactions or organize matter into a periodic table, even though the experiments that eventually confirmed atomic theory weren’t even proposed until the 1870s. Solving the best of a bad lot problemIn response, the “empiricists” are likely to object, this time pointing to the “best of a bad lot” problem. “We have no reason to conclude that an explanation that has been shown to be better than others is true because we have no guarantee that the true theory was among those that we were considering.” If you have a “lot” (a collection) of poor explanations, even the best one is not true.The responses to this problem, however, are numerous. Peter Lipton argues that the set of hypotheses that scientists consider are not just randomly selected and thus unlikely to contain a theory that is true; they use existing knowledge to home in on what is most likely to be true. A doctor trying to explain abdominal pain is not going to bother wondering whether demons are causing it; they are going to stick with things like appendicitis and kidney stones, because they are most likely. Further, despite its name, inference to the best explanation is not just the process of comparing hypotheses and accepting the best one; we also want one that is a good explanation in its own right. If it’s not, we are going to keep looking until we find an explanation that is. And while that process does not guarantee that we will come across the exact truth, it’s very likely that the theory that emerges as the best will be at least approximately true, and thus we will be justified in believing it. And lastly, as I point out in my book, although many theories not based in scientific evidence (like geocentrism and continuum theory) have been completely overturned, science almost always progresses by the refinement of scientifically established theories—not their replacement. (Although our sun is not the center of the universe, heliocentrism was our first step in understanding the Earth’s true place in the universe.) So even if a theory we accept today may not be completely right, accepting it is a step on the journey toward the complete truth. The example of atomic theoryNow, it’s worth pointing out that most empiricists are not skeptical of all scientific theories; they are only skeptical of the ones that hypothesize the existence of “unobservables.” It’s not like they think that round Earth, heliocentrism, and germ theory are just useful (but untrue) “instruments” for making predictions about how to most efficiently navigate the seas, predict planetary motion, and treat diseases. They admit that the Earth actually is round, that the planets revolve around the sun, and that germs exist and cause disease. These facts and entities can be observed; the theories that suggest they exist are true. It’s only when theories start hypothesizing the existence of unobservables—like electrons, or quantum fields—that can’t be observed directly, that we should start doubting the theories’ truth. And to be fair to van Fraassen, in this published work, he doesn’t really say that we should doubt the truth of such theories. Only that scientific reasoning does not rationally force us to accept them as true. Skepticism, or agnosticism, he argues, is warranted. SUGGESTED READING Science is based in metaphor By Andrew Reynolds But the history of atomic theory throws a monkey wrench into that argument. Atoms used to be unobservable; again, scientists first accepted the theory that they exist because it had such grandiose explanatory power. But then atoms were seen with electron microscopes. They thus moved into the category of the observable. But this didn’t substantially change anything about what scientists were justified in believing; it certainly didn’t change any “atomic skeptics’” minds. It just confirmed what everyone already knew! If the hypothesis that something exists clearly provides the best explanation for what we can observe, then the belief that it exists is what is rational. The fact that the thing itself is not technically observable does not make doubting its existence rational.What’s more, the atoms were seen with an electron microscope. But electrons are themselves unobservable. How can an electron microscope reveal an atom if electrons are not real? This leads us to what is famously known as Hilary Putnam’s “miracle argument.” It’s (not) a miraclePhilosopher Hilary Putnam’s miracle argument is somewhat famous. Basically, he argued that a scientific theory being able to repeatedly make successful predictions—even about unobservables—without being at least approximately true would require a “miracle.” In other words, it would be such an improbable occurrence that it could not rationally be believed—the better explanation for why scientific theories about unobservables make the right predictions is because the unobservable entities and structures they hypothesize exist.Van Fraassen has addressed this argument. Indeed, in his original article, where he references Alison Gopnik’s point about orgasms not being “necessary for procreation” even though the desire for orgasm “drives the creation of progeny,” he is pointing to his own argument about how organisms are not naturally selected by evolution to get true beliefs; to the extent that belief-forming processes are selected for, the ones that are selected are the ones that are useful for survival—not the ones that produce true beliefs. In the same way, van Fraassen argues, scientific theories are accepted, not because they are true, but because they aren’t falsified; they make successful predictions; that’s what makes them “stick around.” So, the fact that they make successful predictions (and thus became accepted) is not a reason to think they are true.This argument is similar to C. S. Lewis’s “argument from reason,” which he used to argue against evolution: “The truth of evolution undercuts our ability to know that it is true.” Lewis’ argument famously failed; Elizabeth Anscombe, by Lewis’s own admission, demolished Lewis in a debate on the topic, and I have explained elsewhere why modified versions of the argument fail as well. In short, it’s because it fails to recognize that a belief-forming process can make an organism more likely to survive because it reliably produces true beliefs. It is therefore not the case that beliefs generated by naturally selected belief-forming processes are automatically false or unjustified.In the same way, the reason a theory “sticks around” could be because it’s not falsified, because it “makes correct predictions.” But the reason it makes correct predictions is most likely because it is true. (In pointing this out, I am echoing the arguments of Musgrave, Lipton, Psillos, and Kitcher, who refuted van Fraassen’s argument and analogy long before his 2024 article.) It would be a huge coincidence that it could do so without being true. And that is the point of Putnam’s miracle argument. Thus, contrary to van Fraassen’s suggestion, the mere fact that a theory’s predictive success is why it “sticks around” or “becomes accepted” in the scientific community is not a reason to be skeptical about its truth. ConclusionLet me close by saying something about the fact that empiricists don’t doubt the truth of all scientific theories, just the ones that hypothesize unobservables. In today’s society, this theory is dangerous to espouse publicly. The nuance between being skeptical about all of science, and just the highly technical theories about unobservables, is guaranteed to be lost to the average reader. And there is so much unjustified skepticism and doubt about the findings of science and experts that a headline like “Science Does Not Describe Reality” could easily fuel the anti-science movement, worsen climate change denial and cause the next pandemic.This is why I believe it was important to still respond to van Fraassen’s article, a full two years after he wrote it. Not only, as I have argued, does it represent a philosophically inaccurate view of how scientific reasoning works and what scientific reasoning can do, but it is a dangerous view to boot. It should thus be rejected.
Planetary Health Diet lowers cardiovascular risk in older women
A 20-year study of more than 65,000 postmenopausal women found that higher adherence to the Planetary Health Diet was associated with a lower risk of overall cardiovascular disease, coronary heart disease, stroke and heart failure.
When It Comes to Fusion, Materials Matter
Fusion at high temperatures powers the sun and, if harnessed, could provide a potential source of energy here on Earth. But controlling fusion reactions has other benefits. The process also generates subatomic particles called neutrons that are used in a range of applications spanning medicine, research, and national security. Now, scientists at the University of California, Davis (UC Davis), and the Department of Energy’s Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab) have found that the materials surrounding a fusion reaction can dramatically increase how often it occurs, particularly at low energies where fusion is rare. The study was published July 18 in Nature Communications. Their approach sets up a way to study and engineer nuclear reactions within solid materials, opening a new field of “materials-driven fusion.” Instead of designing materials just to survive the harsh conditions of fusion, researchers might be able to design materials that boost the reaction in specific conditions, similar to the way catalysts speed up chemical processes. “It gives you a new knob to turn that you didn’t have before,” said Arun Persaud, head of the Fusion Science & Ion Beam Technology group in Berkeley Lab’s Accelerator Technology & Applied Physics (ATAP) Division. “If we understand this effect better, it opens the door to engineering new materials that would affect the fusion rate under certain conditions. Someday future progress might enable more compact and efficient neutron generators, which have all kinds of applications, like cargo screening, planetary science, and medical therapy and imaging.” In the experiment, researchers used two different methods to pack deuterium, a heavy form of hydrogen atoms that is often used in fusion, into thin foils of palladium and titanium. They then fired a beam of deuterium ions at the foils at different energies and measured how often fusion happened. Then they compared the rates from the different materials and methods with the “bare” fusion reaction (not in a material). The team found that fusion rates depended on how the deuterium was loaded into the metal foils. The biggest effect was at the lowest energies, below 2.5 kiloelectronvolts (keV), where theory predicts fusion rates drop off sharply. Instead, researchers found a surprising plateau: Some samples showed elevated fusion rates roughly a quintillion times higher than bare fusion reactions. (A quintillion is a 1 followed by 18 zeroes.) Researchers are not exactly sure why that’s happening, though they have some ideas and ways to test them. The electrons and defects within the material might partially shield repulsive electrostatic forces between deuterium nuclei, making it easier for them to get close together and fuse. Tuning the electronic structure, defects, and composition of materials could help make nuclear reactions happen more readily. “It comes down to better understanding the mechanism so that we can try to enhance it,” said corresponding author Jeremy Munday, a professor at UC Davis. “We’ve seen that we can increase fusion rates, but what is the limit? Can we bring it to lower temperatures or energies? There’s obviously a lot of interest and excitement about fusion, so if there’s something we can learn about the physics at these lower energy scales, maybe there’s something we can translate to other areas of nuclear science.” The team plans to explore a wider range of materials and continue probing the unexpected fusion plateau at lower energies. Their work establishes a reproducible experimental platform to study how solid materials influence nuclear reactions, creating a new area of research that links fusion science with materials science and chemistry. “The work shows conclusively that the material environment where fusion occurs at low temperatures is an active participant rather than a passive container,” said Cameron Geddes, director of ATAP. “That adds a new dimension to fusion research.” This work was funded by the U.S. Department of Energy’s Advanced Research Projects Agency-Energy (ARPA-E). ### Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab) is committed to groundbreaking research focused on discovery science and solutions for abundant and reliable energy supplies. The lab’s expertise spans materials, chemistry, physics, biology, earth and environmental science, mathematics, and computing. Researchers from around the world rely on the lab’s world-class scientific facilities for their own pioneering research. Founded in 1931 on the belief that the biggest problems are best addressed by teams, Berkeley Lab and its scientists have been recognized with 17 Nobel Prizes. Berkeley Lab is a multiprogram national laboratory managed by the University of California for the U.S. Department of Energy’s Office of Science. DOE’s Office of Science is the single largest supporter of basic research in the physical sciences in the United States, and is working to address some of the most pressing challenges of our time. For more information, please visit energy.gov/science.
Team selected for NASA program to explore potential lunar cave
NASA has selected a Planetary Science Institute–led proposal to investigate whether a potentially large underground cave extends beyond the opening of a lunar pit. Such a cave may one day provide a safe ...
Japanese Astronomical Society ex-president Shigeru Ida joins China’s Westlake
Top planetary scientist will lead young university’s new astronomy department after decades shaping human understanding of the universe.
The Beauty Of Settled Science
Commenters convinced me I made a subtle mis-step in my framing of Psychology Research Is Mostly Fine. My framing emphasized that social priming studies had failed to replicate, but that many other subfields of psychology hadn’t. This naturally led commenters to point to failed replications in other subfields. Although none of these were as bad as social priming, few or none were entirely problem-free. Instead of emphasizing the difference between social priming and other subfields, I should have emphasized the difference between settled science and novel research. Here are some of my favorite psychology findings: The brain is sculpted by reinforcement learning, and a key driver of this learning is a prediction-error-based algorithm located in the nucleus accumbens and implemented through dopamine. Psychedelic drugs exert their effects through 5-HT2A receptors, pointing to a role for these receptors in some sort of construct like the balance between priors and new evidence. Certain cognitive functions are localized to certain brain areas (for example, impulse control to the frontal lobes; linguistic structure to Broca’s area, linguistic meaning to Wernicke’s area. But injure one of these areas, or render a certain function useless (eg a blind person having no more use for their visual cortex), and these mappings can gradually shift - suggesting that neurons are general-purpose compute whose specialization is a contingent fact about convenience and efficiency rather than a necessity. Most personality traits and general capabilities are about 50% genetic and 50% random, with little role for family environment or childhood history, with a few notable exceptions like partisan preference. Recent research complicates this story, but the further you go from this basic picture, the gnarlier the chains of indirect causation you require. Neurons fire together in “brain waves”, whose exact frequency corresponds with the character of consciousness; These divide neurons into natural subpopulations and linked graphs. The gamma rhythm corresponds surprisingly well to items in conscious awareness. GABA receptors seem to be involved in something like relaxation. By hitting different GABA receptors in different ways, you can modulate the exact type of relaxation you produce. Hitting GABA-A directly is too powerful and can cause dangerous levels of sedation, but allosteric modulation of GABA is an incredibly fruitful strategy that underlies drugs from benzos to barbituates to alcohol. If you know your GABA-A subunits, you can target specific subtypes of relaxation; for example, Ambien hits GABA-A1 and induces sleep. Memory divides somewhat fuzzily into bins of immediate-sensory, short-term, and long-term, with separate retrieval and storage functions, and separate systems for declarative vs. procedural learning. These can be harmed selectively, usually by hippocampal injury, so that some patients can remember their life stories but not form new long-term memories, or learn new skills like bike-riding but not new facts. The exact substrate of memory is unclear but seems to involve new synaptic connections between neurons in at least some way. The ability of modern psychology and psychiatry to treat mental illness is real but limited. SSRIs work for half or slightly fewer than half of patients; antipsychotics work with extreme side effects; benzodiazpines work but produce addiction and tolerance in many (not all) people. Most supplements are stuck in Poor Quality Study Replication Crisis Hell, but melatonin and l-theanine stand out as especially promising. Psychotherapy works with moderate effect size, but (with a few exceptions) seems to be more about the relationship with the provider than the details of the therapy itself. Mental hospitalization can sometimes defuse immediate crises but work less well than mental hospitals would like, with some studies showing overall negative effects. Schizophrenia is mostly genetic, but risk also increases with prenatal infection (especially rubella) and obstetric complications; there is suggestive evidence for roles of social stress and drug use (with psychedelics and marijuana making things worse, and nicotine if anything making things better). Bipolar and schizophrenia are so closely linked on a pathophysiological level that it seems like they might be the same disease; on the clinical level, they do seem to follow two separate courses/prognoses but can sometimes surprise clinicians by eg someone who seemed condemned to permanent schizophrenia unexpectedly recovering. The brain’s native reinforcement learning algorithms cash out in the phenomena of classical and operant conditioning; different reinforcement schedules reinforce at different levels, which can be exploited by bad actors to make especially compelling products (eg slot machines). None of these are immune to doubt. A few are speculative; one or two are genuinely unorthodox. But they’re all a step above one p = 0.049 paper that might not replicate. If they get overturned, they’ll be overturned by the same sort of genuine scientific shift that replaced Ptolemy with Copernicus or Lamarck with Darwin, not some sort of sordid discovery about someone entering random numbers into a spreadsheet. In 2008, Eliezer Yudkowsky wrote about The Beauty Of Settled Science: If you only care about scientific issues that are controversial, you will end up with a head stuffed full of garbage. The media thinks that only the cutting edge of science is worth reporting on. How often do you see headlines like “General Relativity still governing planetary orbits” or “Phlogiston theory remains false”? So, by the time anything is solid science, it is no longer a breaking headline. “Newsworthy” science is often based on the thinnest of evidence and wrong half the time—if it were not on the uttermost fringes of the scientific frontier, it would not be breaking news. Scientific controversies are problems so difficult that even people who’ve spent years mastering the field can still fool themselves. That’s what makes for the heated arguments that attract all the media attention. Worse, if you aren’t in the field and part of the game, controversies aren’t even fun. Don’t be embarrassed to read elementary science textbooks, either. If you want to pretend to be sophisticated, go find a play to sneer at. If you just want to have fun, remember that simplicity is at the core of scientific beauty [...] A steady diet of science news is bad for you: You are what you eat, and if you eat only science reporting on fluid situations, without a solid textbook now and then, your brain will turn to liquid. Psychology isn’t centrally the new paper in Annals Of Recently-Breaking News saying that an n=5 study showing that large portion sizes increase support for terrorism. Psychology is centrally ideas like brain waves, GABA receptors, reinforcement learning, twin studies, and connectionism. People who think differently are worrying too much about BREAKING NEWS!!!, and should stop. The key distinction isn’t “recent research in social psychology” vs. “recent research in cognitive/bio/behavioral psychology”, as my essay last week unfortunately implied. It’s recent research in general vs. the deposit of settled science, battle-tested hypotheses, and carefully-earmarked speculation. And part of the reason social priming in particular was such a disaster was that it defied that heuristic, building itself up over hundreds of studies until it approached or even entered the pantheon of settled science - before collapsing (5-HTTLPR was also sort of like this). This isn’t a claim that settled science is always right - Freud was “settled science” for a long time - just that there’s an intuitive distinction between the level of credence you should have in the existence of power posing vs. the existence of Broca’s Area. (I compounded this error by calling the last post “Psychology Research Is Mostly Fine”, which suggested I was talking about the new research rather than the settled science. I actually meant to distinguish between research-psychology-the-field vs. clinical-psychology-aka-therapy, but this framing unintentionally pushed against the point I wanted to make) Some commenters on the previous article understood this point, but challenged its weight. It’s very cool, they said, to know how many neurons are in which brain lobe, but the main way that Psychology affected their lives was through bad clickbait studies used to buttress dumb policies; some p = 0.049 study says that exposure to microaggressions makes minorities’ brains shrivel into raisins, and now their company has to implement punitive DEI or be sued for hazardous work conditions. I won’t dispute this as an accurate description of how the sausage gets made, but it’s worth examining the trains of thought that connect this observation to a campaign against psychology in general: The dumb woke psychology was wrong and bad, and I don’t have good heuristics for distinguishing dumb woke psychology from other psychology, so I’m going to assume it’s all wrong and bad. The dumb woke psychology was wrong and bad; it seems useful to punish/discredit psychology as a whole to assist my campaign against it, so for propaganda purposes I will try to discredit psychology as a whole. To people in the first camp, my response is: come on, your heuristics aren’t that bad. “Microaggressions makes minorities’ brains shrivel up like raisins” is in the woke category; “the hippocampal theta rhythm seems to be associated with both memory and pathfinding, suggesting an unexpected yet surprisingly compelling relationship between the two” is in the not-woke category, don’t play dumb here. To people in the second camp, my response is: deliberately exaggerated propaganda campaigns are bad and this is a confession, not an excuse. Inability to view science through anything but a political lens was what got us into this problem; doubling down on it is a temporary solution but a recipe for permanent disaster. If you pronounce entire fields of science to be acceptable collateral damage in your campaign against bad political actors, you will alienate not just scientists but patients, clinicians, and general lovers of truth. Instead, you can say the thing you mean - that woke partisans shouldn’t try to occupy and exploit the otherwise-noble science of psychology for their own political gain - and wage the same campaign with a halo rather than a comic-book-villain goatee. From the font of oracular wisdom that is Weird Sun Twitter: [ Vessel Of Spirit@VesselOfSpirit i love you all conditionally but i love the good part of you unconditionally. even if it becomes a very small part 2:11 AM · Jan 22, 2015 1 Reply · 5 Reposts · 29 Likes ](https://x.com/VesselOfSpirit/status/558084551772471298) This is how I feel about psychology1, too, but with a touch more optimism. The good part of psychology is enormous, a hoard of endless treasures. You just have to look past the headlines! 1 To play devil’s advocate - should one always be so magnamious? Astrology? Phrenology? These seem different in that their entire orientation was flawed from the start; they didn’t simply fail to find the correct constellation-personality connections, the whole project of searching for connections between constellations and personality was doomed from the start. More difficult might be asking the same question about education research, which is notoriously bad. I don’t know enough about education research to know if there’s some settled science of correct and enlightening results lurking in the background beyond the day-to-day froth of poorly-conducted and politically-motivated studies. I think if it’s 90% bad, 10% good, it’s correct to call it bad as a compact way of communicating a useful truth; I think psychology is better than that, but admit it’s a tough judgment call.
Planetary crises deepen global health inequality, paper warns
The global inequality in health opportunities is being further heightened by the triple planetary crisis—climate change, biodiversity loss and environmental pollution. Addressing it is more than a question ...
Scientists Create Hexagonal Packed Ice At Extreme Pressures
One of the problems with planetary science is that you generally cannot easily investigate the exact conditions in their interior, so you’re left to extrapolate what is happening inside them …
GTA 6 Fan Spends 3 Months Charting the Planetary Positions for Every Rockstar Trailer Drop Since 2007 to Predict Trailer 3 Release Date
The hype for GTA 6 has led fans down some excessively deep rabbit holes in an effort to predict the game's marketing cycle, most recently when Trailer 3 will be released. This latest fan theory, though, comes direct from the stars.
When science answers to politics
The White House Office of Management and Budget has proposed new rules that would require political appointees, not scientists, to decide which research…
GREX-PLUS Science Book v2
GREX-PLUS (Galaxy Reionization EXplorer and PLanetary Universe Spectrometer) is a mission candidate for a JAXA strategic L-class mission to be launched in the 2030s
American Geophysical Union’s 2026 Eugene Shoemaker Lecture
Award: The American Geophysical Union’s Eugene Shoemaker Lecture is presented annually and recognizes excellence in planetary exploration.
At 25, the big shift: why we are sure humans heat the planet - Futura-Sciences
The Early Hints: From Wild Theories to Alarming Accuracy The idea of planetary warming isn’t new—although it once sounded more like science fiction than established fact. Back in the 1960s, a handful of pioneering researchers began suggesting that greenhouse gas emissions from human activity could warm the climate. At the...
SpaceX: What can scientists learn from a Falcon 9 rocket hitting the Moon?
While the collision was an accident, it is a unique scientific gift for planetary geologists that could provide important data for future space missions.
Heliophysics Education Community meeting presentation
Presentation | Grades 6-12+ | This presentation by Dr. Jared Espley explains how the Sun sends a stream of charged particles called the solar wind.
Scientific American Starts Sober but Quickly Relapses
A proposal by University of Washington planetary scientist David Catling addresses what origin-of-life researchers call the phosphate problem.
HIT Brings Aerospace Science Popularization Books and Metaverse Courses to Multiple Schools
Harbin Institute of Technology (HIT) HARBIN, China, Oct. 12, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- "Through science popularization books and metaverse courses, I followed digital humans to disassemble the structure of planetary rovers...
Keys to future human exploration, past planetary conditions hide under surface of moon, Mars
Purdue research to discover what materials and potential resources beneath the Martian and lunar surfaces are important for plans to one day put humans on either planet.
From Science to Policy: Planetary Solutions in Action
Report translating breakthrough science into actionable policy for planetary health
'We're rapidly running out of time': 7 of Earth's 9 life support systems already breached, and the situation is getting worse, report warns
Our planet has had its annual health check, and the prognosis is pretty grim. Despite breached planetary boundaries, however, scientists argue that Earth can still have a safe and sustainable future.
Next Generation of Planetary Scientists Learn Public Engagement Skills
FORCE is a world-class laboratory that uses high-pressure experimental equipment to recreate the extreme conditions found deep within Earth and other planetary bodies, enabling researchers to better understand how planets form, evolve, and behave under immense pressures.
SpaceX: What can scientists learn from a Falcon 9 rocket hitting the Moon?
While the collision was an accident, it is a unique scientific gift for planetary geologists that could provide important data for future space missions.
Planetary Health Check 2026 finds mounting pressures across Earth's life support systems
Seven breached Planetary Boundaries continue to worsen as record ocean heat, droughts, floods, wildfires and extreme heat reveal an Earth system under strain, according to the latest Planetary Health ...
‘Weird’ science: U of A grad helped get asteroid named after Al Yankovic
“Weird Al” Yankovic now has an asteroid named after him, thanks to the efforts of a planetary scientist with deep connections to the University of Arizona.
Planetary crisis heightens global inequality of health opportunities
The worldwide inequality of health opportunities is being further heightened by the triple planetary crisis - climate change, loss of biodiversity and environmental pollution.
Planetary Science Analysis and Assessment Group Support
Earlier this year it was announced that NASA’s Planetary Science Division to cease financial support for planetary science Analysis/Assessment Groups (AGs), effective the end of April 2026.
UNE launches new Institute of Public and Planetary Health in honor of David Evans Shaw
Rooted in science and inspired by UNE’s mission to improve the health of people, communities, and the natural world, the David Evans Shaw Institute of Public and Planetary Health brings together expertise UNE's broad expertise to address complex, interconnected challenges, from coastal resilience and climate change to aging populations and mental health.
We Could Seed Alien Life Elsewhere in the Universe—But We’ll Never Undo the Devastating Consequences, Scientists Caution
This “would be equivalent to a planetary invasion,” expert warns.
In Scotland, NASA Scientists Search for Clues About Mars’ Past
NASA's Goddard Instrument Field Team hauled equipment up and down the cliffs of Scotland's Clachtoll region on a quest to better understand Earth – and Mars.
The Apophis encounter in 2029: A rare opportunity for planetary science and defense
The near-Earth asteroid Apophis will make an extremely close flyby of Earth on April 13, 2029, at a distance of approximately 38,000 km—an event that occurs on average only once every 7,500 years, offering an unprecedented opportunity for planetary science and planetary defense. However, significant uncertainties remain regarding the physical parameters of Apophis, such as its shape, spin state, internal structure, and material composition, and predictions of tidal effects—including potential orbital changes, spin acceleration, surface material displacement, and dust ejection during the flyby—are highly dependent on model assumptions. Although multiple nations have planned exploration missions, how to coordinate global observational resources within the limited time window, optimize rapid-response mission architectures, and translate scientific understanding into effective planetary defense strategies remain critical challenges to be addressed.
NASA Field-Tests AI Fleet Capability for Science, Exploration
In this field test, a fleet of three robots worked together, and researchers assessed the fleet’s ability to act like an independent science team.
NASA PICASSO Awards
NASA has made 10 new awards through the Planetary Instrument Concepts for the Advancement of Solar System Observations (PICASSO) program.
Should Scientists Have Research "Reserves" on the Moon?
The worlds of the Solar System offer up exciting and (so far) mostly pristine places for planetary scientists to study. As space missions continue to travel to Mars, Europa, asteroids, and other worlds, questions keep coming up about keeping them safe for continued exploration and observations.
Scientists warn of record heat, threats to climate monitoring
Planetary heating is intensifying and key climate indicators are deteriorating, top scientists said Thursday, warning
Medical School ‘A’ Marks UConn Health Sustainability Progress
Significant energy savings highlight gains since last Earth Day, while the UConn School of Medicine makes the grade on the 2026 Planetary Health Report Card
Scientists think alien life might be hiding in patterns
A new study proposes detecting life in space by spotting patterns across many planets instead of focusing on one at a time. If life spreads and changes planetary environments, it could leave behind statistical clues linking planets together. These patterns may reveal life even when traditional biosignatures are unclear or misleading. The method could help scientists prioritize which planets are most likely to host life.
USRA Contributes Planetary Science Expertise to NASA-IBM Lunar Foundation Model
Open-source artificial intelligence model combines diverse lunar datasets to support scientific analysis of the MoonThe NASA-IBM model reproduces patterns of lunar ice prospectivity (scaled from blue to yellow), shown at four locations (left) near the Moon’s pole. Top row: reference ice prospectivity map of Mons Mouton near the lunar south pol...
Curiosity Blog, Sols 4968-4974: Rock Climbing Towards the Discontinuity
Written by Lucy Lim, Planetary Scientist at NASA’s Goddard Space Flight Center
The Politics of the Planetary
The French philosopher Guy Debord and Danish painter Asger Jorn built their book Mémoires (1959) out of a collage of purloined material. Newspaper clippings, magazine advertisements, cartoons, cutups of maps…
‘Planetary boundaries’ necessary for flourishing of life have been massively breached, scientists warn
New report shows key indicators of Earth’s health are ‘outside the safe operating space’ as climate disaster looms
A single rare meteorite has revealed the chemical fingerprint of a Moon-sized world that once orbited the young Sun before being destroyed in a catastrophic collision — a lost planet science never knew existed until it landed as a rock
A one-pound rock found in the Sahara in 2019 has become evidence for something much larger than itself: a vanished planetary body from the first years of the
The Latest Planetary Health Check Shows We’ve Breached 7 Of Earth’s 9 Planetary Boundaries
The crisis is overwhelming, but we know what we need to do to fix it.
Save NASA Science returns to Capitol Hill
The 2026 Day of Action brought more than 130 space advocates from 34 states and the District of Columbia to the nation’s capital to advocate for space.
How Dante's Inferno modeled a planetary impact 500 years before modern science
New research reveals that Dante Alighieri's Inferno wasn't just a masterpiece of literature: it was a gedankenexperiment in impact physics. From multi-ring craters to shockwaves that reshaped the globe, ...
Amendment 60: Final 2025 Due Date Extended for C.2 Solar System Science
C.2 Solar System Science solicits proposals for research, data analysis, data preservation, and tools that support investigations to help ascertain the
An Interview with Planetary Politics Director at New America Heela Rasool-Ayub
Heela Rasool-Ayub is director of the Planetary Politics initiative at New America. Before joining us for “Can the Energy Crisis Finally Unite Us?,” co-presented by Thomas Mann House and Zócalo Public Square in partnership with ASU Global Futures Laboratory and the Palisadian-Post, she joined us for a chat about economist Joseph Stiglitz, Afghan food, and the highlands of Ethiopia.
Lava-Covered Planets Are Defying a Key Rule of Planetary Science
Researchers developed a model showing how lava-covered planets close to their stars can hold onto their atmospheres, which could help guide the search for life beyond our solar system. Some planets orbit so close to their stars that intense radiation should strip away their atmospheres. Yet several of these scorching, lava-covered worlds still retain thick
Correction to C.4 Planetary Science Enabling Facilities
C.4 The Planetary Science Enabling Facilities (PSEF) was recently added to ROSES-25. It solicits proposals for experimental and analytical research facilities
Announcing our new STEP Grant winners: A Solar System shadow-tracker,…
Three groups of scientists will receive crowdfunded support to further the scientific exploration of space.
Strange Milky Way planetary system leaves scientists puzzled
Scientists are documenting a planetary system in the Milky Way galaxy that is so starkly dissimilar to our own solar system that they are struggling to find the proper terminology to describe it.
The world's oyster reefs could add $12 trillion to planetary health each year—if they were better managed
A new study shows that the world's oyster reefs are a precious resource that's vastly underestimated and underutilized. The authors set out to calculate the reefs' potential gross ecosystem product (GEP), ...
Planetary Health Diet May Lower Obesity Risk at Menopause
The planetary health and low-insulinemic diets — rich in plants and whole grains and low in red and processed meats and fried foods — can aid weight management during menopause, a recent study shows.
'We may need to think differently': Star system with 'backward' planet moving the wrong way around its star has scientists puzzled
A newly discovered exoplanet orbits its star backward, and it's a mystery why. The system and others like it could shed light on how some complex planetary systems form.
Planetary Science Institute enters new era under Amanda Hendrix
The Planetary Science Institute is entering a new chapter under the leadership of Director and Chief Executive Officer Amanda Hendrix, who took over the Tucson-based nonprofit in May 2025 following
Once the Solar System's Ninth Planet, Pluto Was Reclassified 20 Years Ago. Here's Why Planetary Scientists and the Public Alike Love the Small Icy Body
Pluto is now the most well known of the outer worlds beyond Neptune—and the darling of the solar system
Scientists say this diet could save people and the planet. It’s more doable than you think.
National Geographic senior editor Sarah Gibbens spent a week on the planetary health diet—developed by scientists to curb both chronic disease and climate change.
This Alien Solar System Doesn’t Follow the Rules – and Scientists Are Intrigued
The LHS 1903 system defies expectations with a rocky outer planet, prompting new ideas about how planets form and evolve.
USRA Contributes Planetary Science Expertise to NASA-IBM Lunar Foundation Model
/PRNewswire/ -- Universities Space Research Association (USRA) contributed planetary science expertise, lunar dataset development, and scientific evaluation to...
Utah Helicopter Flights Test NASA’s DAVINCI Mission to Venus
To prepare their spacecraft for Venus, NASA's DAVINCI scientists traveled to the most Venus-like place on Earth.
2026 State of the Climate Report Shows a Planet Reaching Its Limits
The seventh edition of an annual report analyzing Earth’s "planetary vital signs” indicates that Earth systems are rapidly destabilizing, some at an accelerating rate. The report, published today in BioScience, analyzed 16 of these signs, including greenhouse gas emissions levels, ocean heat content and acidity, the mass of major ice sheets, the number of hot days, Earth's surface temperature, and more.
NASA’s New Horizons Spacecraft Wakes from Hibernation in Good Health
Following its longest hibernation period ever of nearly a year, NASA’s New Horizons spacecraft has emerged in good health and is ready to begin transmitting
Curiosity Blog, Sols 4975-4981: Happy 14th Landing Anniversary
By Susanne P. Schwenzer, Professor of Planetary Mineralogy at The Open University, UK
Media invitation: Europlanet Science Congress (EPSC) 2026
The Europlanet Science Congress (EPSC) 2026 will be held in hybrid format at the Amare arts venue in The Hague, Netherlands, and online, from 6–11 September 2026. EPSC2026 covers the full spectrum of planetary research and technology across over 125 scientific sessions, keynotes, debates and community events. Around 1200 planetary scientists from over 40 countries in Europe and around the world are expected to attend the conference.
Earth Has Breached 7 Of 9 Planetary Boundaries, Scientists Warn
Seven of Earth's nine planetary boundaries have now been breached, with scientists warning that growing pressure on climate, biodiversity, freshwater and other natural systems is increasing the risk of irreversible environmental changes.
Science 4 Everyone: How far away is Earth compared to other planets and the sun?
What is planetary conjunction? Storm Team4 meteorologist Ryan Miller explains how big planets are and how close they actually are to each other.
NASA Headquarters Opening: Program Scientist Opportunity in the Planetary Science Division
NASA’s Science Mission Directorate has an immediate need for one or more scientists with expertise in planetary science to serve as Program Scientists in the Planetary Science Division
New book offers tips to translate climate science into political gains
At a time when climate politics in the United States and globally remain deeply polarized, Will Hackman, a climate advocate and political operative, argues that the climate movement needs a new language — one rooted less in doom, guilt and abstract planetary crisis, and more in people’s everyday lives, health, safety, costs and communities. In […]
Why NASA’s Cheapest Missions Produce the Least Science
To say NASA has been undergoing some massive administrative changes lately is a huge understatement. One of the more concerning ones, according to a new paper at the 57th Lunar and Planetary Science Conference by Ari Koeppel and Casey Dreier of the Planetary Society, is the trend towards the Silicon Valley mindset of “move fast and break things” - which they argue doesn’t work very well when it comes to producing valuable science.
When science answers to politics
The White House Office of Management and Budget has proposed new rules that would require political appointees, not scientists, to decide which research…
Center for Human and Planetary Health celebrates second anniversary
Over 150 people attended the event focused on combatting climate change and protecting human health.
New book offers tips to translate climate science into political gains
At a time when climate politics in the United States and globally remain deeply polarized, Will Hackman, a climate advocate and political operative, argues that the climate movement needs a new language — one rooted less in doom, guilt and abstract planetary crisis, and more in people’s everyday lives, health, safety, costs and communities. In […]
How the European Space Agency became the quiet power in planetary science and what its institutional model reveals about building consensus across 22 nations
The European Space Agency's 22-nation consensus model appears slow and bureaucratic, but it has produced one of the most quietly productive planetary science programs on Earth. Understanding its institutional design reveals how distributed commitment, geographic return, and mandatory science funding create missions that survive political disruptions no single nation's program could weather.
Aligning patient and planetary health: planetary health diet adherence and inflammatory bowel disease prognosis across Western and Eastern cohorts
npj Science of Food - Aligning patient and planetary health: planetary health diet adherence and inflammatory bowel disease prognosis across Western and Eastern cohorts
Amendment 65: New Opportunity: C.4 Planetary Science Enabling Facilities
C.4 The Planetary Science Enabling Facilities (PSEF) program element solicits proposals for experimental and analytical research facilities to be made
Research Suggests This Plant-Forward Diet May Lower Heart Disease Risk After Menopause
The Planetary Health Diet may help protect your heart after menopause. Here’s what the new study found and how this plant-forward eating plan works.
Popular science
Isaiah Keys has beaten the odds, and is asking for help with keeping him on a winning streak. Keys, Warren High School freshman, could be the next student to tour The Planetary Society in California with Bill Nye The Science Guy, as well as appear in Reader’s Digest and receive $20,000 to invest in his […]
Pluto Planetary Science is the Gift that Keeps on Giving
Something's wetting the surface of dwarf planet Pluto along the northern edge of Sputnik Planitia, and planetary scientists have found a good explanation for it. A recent study of new Horizons images taken during the 2015 flyby revealed evidence that liquid nitrogen is rising up through cracks in Sputnik Planitia. That's the giant heart-shaped glacial basin we see in all the Pluto images taken by the spacecraft.
Magic in Store: This month, a witchy business will put you in the right spirit
Abby Minnich is a planetary scientist who puts complex concepts into plain language. “I like to connect with the earth,” she said. “Trying to figure out how things came to be. I would say that is my purpose, almost, trying to figure it out and sharing it.” Which leads her to visit metaphysical shops like […]
Defying Planetary Science Expectations, Trans-Neptunian Object 2002 XV93 Somehow Has An Atmosphere
Future observations are necessary to understand how this is possible.
Scientists “truly astonished” by discovery that challenges Earth’s origin story
A new study suggests Earth formed almost entirely from material in the inner Solar System, challenging the idea that water-rich material from beyond Jupiter played a major role. If correct, Earth’s water may have been present much closer to the young Sun than scientists previously thought.
NASA directive might increase the odds of contaminating Mars
The new push loosens U.S. regulations for sterilizing spacecraft bound for the Red Planet, and calls for modernizing the science of “planetary protection”
The Bulletin wins the Miwon Peace Prize
The Bulletin is honored to be awarded the 2026 Miwon Peace Prize for raising global awareness of existential risks and using scientific rigor to warn humanity about planetary threats.
Planetary genealogy: Milky Way worlds belong to 1 of 2 ‘families,’ scientists find
"There is a genetic link between planetary systems and their stars, and that, depending on the star around which they are born, this link also determines their fate."
Earth’s mantle may be hiding an ocean’s worth of water 410 miles down - Futura-Sciences
An estimated 4.4 billion years ago, a series of planetary collisions delivered the vast majority of Earth’s water budget to a world whose surface was still a bubbling, glowing ocean of molten rock. As this global magma ocean slowly cooled and crystallized over millions of years into the planet’s first...
Scientists Turned Earth’s Radio Waves into Music. Listen to the Eerie Sounds Made by Lightning and Solar Storms
Lightning, auroras and polar winds become an eerie album of planetary sound.
“Something out of Science Fiction” – Astronomers Discover a Star That Glows a Bizarre Shade of Green
A star’s color usually reflects its temperature, but white dwarfs can break that pattern, with models revealing unexpected shades of green, pink, and purple. A star that has drawn in rocky debris from its planetary system would appear chartreuse green to the human eye, according to new calculations by University of Warwick astronomers. As far
Exploring the solar system through Cornell's image library
This year marks the forty-sixth anniversary of the Spacecraft Planetary Image Facility's technical research and outreach activities.
"The Science of Artemis": An Interview with David Kring on This Week in Space
Washington, D.C.--August 26, 2026. Dr. David Kring, Principal Scientist at Universities Space Research Association’s Lunar and Planetary Institute recently spoke on the “Science of Artemis” on This Week in Space . Attached is a video of his interview. https://twit.tv/shows/this-week-in-space/episodes/224?autostart=false
Artemis II Moon Flyby: Lunar Science Results Highlighted
More than 800 gigabytes of Artemis II lunar science data – some of it previously unreleased – was released today, posted to NASA’s Planetary Data System. Most of the images from the mission were previously made public – although this Oct. 7 release is the official data archive with high resolution imagery and robust metadata. […]