There is no trace of phosphine in Venus's atmosphere.

Sofia-telescope found no evidence of life on Venus. And there is no phosphine in that planet's atmosphere. So that thing means that Venus is dead. 

But the question is why the first telescope saw phosphine in the Venu's clouds and then that phosphine is gone. The wrong calibration might be the problem. But how telescope couldn't detect that the source of phosphine is in Earth's atmosphere? There was not very much phosphine in Venus. 

So maybe the reason for that trace was some chemical reaction where some volcano released phosphorous into Venus's atmosphere. And then things like lightning caused a reaction where carbon monoxide reacted with phosphorous. 

There is a possibility that the lightning destroyed CO or CO^2 molecules. And then phosphorous could interact with hydrogen forming PH3. So there are no lifeforms in Venus's clouds. 

https://scitechdaily.com/sofia-finds-no-phosphine-a-potential-sign-of-life-on-venus/

https://www.universetoday.com/110007/budget-2015-flying-sofia-telescope-to-be-shelved-for-higher-priority-programs-like-cassini/

"Researchers have uncovered evidence that vast phytoplankton blooms may be lurking beneath Antarctic ice." (ScitechDaily.com/Hidden Ecosystems? NASA’s New Evidence of Vast Life Lurking Beneath Antarctic Ice)

Antarctica is the perfect place for researching isolated ecosystems. 

There is the possibility that hidden ecosystems are lurking inside Antarctica's ice. 

But a search for extraterrestrial lifeforms continues. And Antarctica offers a good place to research the closed ecosystems. When researchers are collecting data from the lakes deep inside the Antarctic ice. 

Also from the ice itself, they can make models of what kind of lifeforms could live in some distant water moon's ocean. Antarctica is also a large freezer. And there can be found the remnants of the first organisms on Earth. 

The thing is that Antarctica is one of the most isolated and sterile areas in the world. There are unique species in those lakes that are not anywhere else. And those organisms can give information about the closed and cold ecosystems. 

Antarctica is hostile to almost all lifeforms that we know. But deep inside ice is lifeforms that don't need sunlight or straight contact with sunlight. Those organisms hunt for organisms that have contact with sunlight. And in that model, the tiniest and most producing organisms are living near the ice's surface. After that the other organisms. That is higher in the food chain are deeper under the ice.

The big question about those closed ecosystems is this. Does the nutrient fall to those lakes through the ice? Or are those lake ecosystems closed? In the last case, all nutrients surround the icy lake. That kind of ecosystem gets its energy from the black smokers or volcanic heat. That kind of ecosystem is always interesting. 

https://scitechdaily.com/hidden-ecosystems-nasas-new-evidence-of-vast-life-lurking-beneath-antarctic-ice/

https://astronomyandtechnology.blogspot.com/

About particles, what is elder than our solar system

About particles, what is elder than our solar system

In the beginning, we must understand that the Sun is not the eldest star in our galaxy, and our galaxy is not probably the eldest of the galaxies in-universe. So when we are thinking about the possibility that the particle that is elder than the Sun has been found on Antarctica, we must realize that the small particles are coming from another solar system all the time. 

Here I mean the grain of sand-sized particles must be most common visitors, and some of them are coming from very long distances. The reality is that the small particles are aways more common than large particles, and that thing means that most visitors in our solar system must be farl smaller that the famous Oamuamua. 

The visitors like Oamuamua and other asteroids are not the most common particles in the Universe, and if the visitor from another solar system would come to our solar system it must have enough energy to win the effect of the solar wind, or otherwise, the particle would be pushed away from our solar system. But because Oamuamua came to our solar system there must be smaller particles, what we cannot see, and what also comes from the long distances. 

So could this type of gran of sand-sized particle drop in the Antarcean, or does it burn in the atmosphere? 

There is no straight answer to that kind of question. We must think the situation that the grain of sand would be covered by the ice layer, which means that this kind of bite of sand can be dropped to the ground, and if that dropping point is Antarctica, that kind of sand bite would contain very important information like minerals from the other solar systems. 

If the stone is elder than the Sun or our solar system, we can try to determine the atomic and isotope structure of the minerals, and also search the possibility to find the remains of cells or other living organisms. And that data can help us to find out, why life has been grown on our planet?

Even if the fossils of bacteria do not exist, the meteorite would tell us about the solar system, which might be destroyed by supernova a long time ago. But also those bacteria or some other organisms might have formed on Earth, and they would be a slip in the void of the rock after it has been dropped on Antarctica.

This kind of thing is a very fascinating opportunity to see what kind of minerals and gasses would be in the other solar systems. But first, we must find the particle, what we can prove come from another solar system, and one of the best proof is that the meteorite, what researchers are observing would contain a certain level of some isotopes. 

If we would have some fossils of the living cells, we could use C-14 or some other radioactive method for making those determinations. But if the bite does not contain organic material the only way to determine the age is to find out the isotope structure of the bite. That structure tells something about the origin of the meteorite. Problem is that those things, that the researchers can find out are directional, and the thing is that we don't know all asteroids in our solar system. 

The moons of planet Mars, Phobos, and Deimos are unique, so-called carbon asteroids. They are opening the eyes of the astronomers, that there could be single asteroids in our solar system, which might be different than others. And there could be more about this kind of carbon-asteroids, which are far smaller than those two asteroids. The relativity of elements can be unique in some asteroids, and when we are thinking about the protons and electrons, those nucleoids or sub-atomic particles are formed during the Big Bang. 

And that thing tells also something, about the conditions, where the particle has been formed. If the materials are containing metals like iron and nickel, that tells that it could be from a similar planet, what Earth is. If that kind of planet has been destructed in the supernova explosion, this means that the planet could have some kind of lifeforms. 

https://bigthink.com/surprising-science/solar-system-formation