Microscopic remnants from what researchers believe to be an extraterrestrial object that landed on Earth nearly a decade ago were recently discovered in the Pacific Ocean.
According to Harvard professor Avi Loeb, who spoke with Fox News about the discovery, scientists have recovered 50 microscopic spherules that look like specs of dust and weigh a total of 35 milligrams.
The remnants were discovered during what Loeb described as a “historic” expedition off the coast of Papua New Guinea. In 2014, Loeb says he witnessed a “runaway fireball” that exploded in Earth’s lower atmosphere before its debris fell into the planet’s ocean.
The object was labeled “IM1” by researchers, and Loeb shared that it is “quite unusual” as it is tougher and has a material strength “higher than all the space rocks that” have been cut by NASA.
“Given IM1’s high speed and anomalous material strength, its source must have been a natural environment different from the solar system or an extraterrestrial technological civilization,” he shared in the exclusive interview with Fox News.
The debris collected by Loeb and his team of scientists is so small it can’t be properly observed with the naked eye. But, through the lens of a microscope, the team learned of their spherical and “perfectly round” shape.
The objects not only have a peculiar shape but also appear to look like molten raindrops.
Loeb compared them to blood droplets that he hopes will point him to the object they originated from.
“This could be the first time humans put their hands on interstellar material,” Loeb said. “This has never been done before. We never received a package at our doorstep from a cosmic neighbor.”
The material was collected off the ocean floor with what could be called a giant magnet. Loeb shared that the objects only appeared along the path the “fireball” took through our atmosphere.
Loeb has been documenting his findings in a series of Medium essays. He shared in his latest that when the expedition comes to a close this week, he will sit down with his teams and analyze the collected materials before sharing what he finds in a paper submitted to a peer-reviewed journal.
“The interpretation will be left to follow-up papers,” he wrote in the essay. “In response to the nay-sayers we say nothing other than show our data in our first publication. One cannot argue with facts, only with interpretations.”
Related
Related
