Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   New life, and new life forms
subbie
Member (Idle past 1255 days)
Posts: 3509
Joined: 02-26-2006


Message 16 of 59 (580390)
09-08-2010 10:48 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by jar
09-08-2010 10:43 PM


Ah, so you're talking temporally, not spatially.
True, as far as that goes. But it at least suggests the possibility of long term continued existence, potentially even beyond the life span of the sun.

Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. -- Thomas Jefferson
We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate
...creationists have a great way to detect fraud and it doesn't take 8 or 40 years or even a scientific degree to spot the fraud--'if it disagrees with the bible then it is wrong'.... -- archaeologist

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by jar, posted 09-08-2010 10:43 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by jar, posted 09-08-2010 10:50 PM subbie has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 17 of 59 (580391)
09-08-2010 10:50 PM
Reply to: Message 16 by subbie
09-08-2010 10:48 PM


But it at least suggests the possibility of long term continued existence, potentially even beyond the life span of the sun.
Huh?

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by subbie, posted 09-08-2010 10:48 PM subbie has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by subbie, posted 09-08-2010 11:00 PM jar has replied

  
subbie
Member (Idle past 1255 days)
Posts: 3509
Joined: 02-26-2006


Message 18 of 59 (580397)
09-08-2010 11:00 PM
Reply to: Message 17 by jar
09-08-2010 10:50 PM


Technology has existed for only the tiniest fraction of the time that life has been here. But technology might allow us to spread life from this planet to others, where it might have a continued existence for longer than the planet does.

Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. -- Thomas Jefferson
We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate
...creationists have a great way to detect fraud and it doesn't take 8 or 40 years or even a scientific degree to spot the fraud--'if it disagrees with the bible then it is wrong'.... -- archaeologist

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by jar, posted 09-08-2010 10:50 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by jar, posted 09-08-2010 11:19 PM subbie has seen this message but not replied

  
Blue Jay
Member (Idle past 2698 days)
Posts: 2843
From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts
Joined: 02-04-2008


Message 19 of 59 (580402)
09-08-2010 11:04 PM
Reply to: Message 14 by crashfrog
09-08-2010 10:45 PM


Hi, Crash.
crashfrog writes:
I think Bluejay is right that other life in the universe is likely to be carbon-based, since (as my organic chemistry textbook reminds me) silicon-based life that tried to respirate would exhale silicon dioxide, which is a solid under Earthlike temperatures and pressures!
I've dabbled in silicon-based life before too. I invented one that had a respiratory system with multiple pores along the underside that would periodically open to allow grains of silica to trickle out. Static forces generated in specialized organs would ensure that the grains clustered near the pores.

-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)
Darwin loves you.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by crashfrog, posted 09-08-2010 10:45 PM crashfrog has not replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 20 of 59 (580407)
09-08-2010 11:19 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by subbie
09-08-2010 11:00 PM


Not sure I see any indications of that, but it still has little to do with what alien life forms might be like.

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by subbie, posted 09-08-2010 11:00 PM subbie has seen this message but not replied

  
Omnivorous
Member
Posts: 3978
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005
Member Rating: 7.3


Message 21 of 59 (580410)
09-08-2010 11:28 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by subbie
09-08-2010 10:44 PM


subbie writes:
Perhaps some intelligent life could be produced only, each individual arising from the same process but never itself reproducing. We might then see neither reproduction nor evolution: some crystalline process where impurity distributions create complex circuits, with intelligence an emergent property of that complexity.
Can you fill that in a bit more? How might something like that work? I'm having a hard time grasping the concept.
I'm tempted to say my intelligence has not adequately emerged for that task.
Imagine a world were thin layers of silicon or other crystalline material are laid down in a confined space--the equivalent of tidal pools, porous rock or clays where organic life may have evolved here. Maybe on our alien planet, the night winds blow dust into micro-craters, and then bake it during the day.
The crystalline substrate generates electricity via some stress: heat, microwave radiation, gravity. The strata are not pure silicon; some of the impurities conduct electricity: where they conduct through and across layers, they sometimes form circuits.
Eventually, enough complexity develops so that feedback processes arise; memory and awareness follow (sure, that's the fuzzy part, just like here).
So individuals are produced but they never reproduce--differences between individuals would be the result of random initial conditions rather than evolution. They might live as long as their planet or star.
In summary, the basic idea is simple. Since we can lay down silicon to create machine logic and memory, we may someday create true machine intelligence and awareness. Perhaps what we will invent happens naturally under dramatically different conditions on other planets.
QED: Intelligence without evolution or reproduction and with nothing to do.
Sounds dull.
Edited by Omnivorous, : -what

Have you ever been to an American wedding? Where's the vodka? Where's the marinated herring?!
-Gogol Bordello
Real things always push back.
-William James

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by subbie, posted 09-08-2010 10:44 PM subbie has seen this message but not replied

  
Omnivorous
Member
Posts: 3978
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005
Member Rating: 7.3


Message 22 of 59 (580422)
09-09-2010 12:09 AM
Reply to: Message 14 by crashfrog
09-08-2010 10:45 PM


I follow you on the sequence implications of heavier elements in our solar system, but I don't see how the timing could make us the first possible intelligent species in the universe.
If the sun is about 4.7 billion years old, and the most distant observed galaxy is at 12.8 billion light years, it seems there would be plenty of time for many intelligent species to evolve before us.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by crashfrog, posted 09-08-2010 10:45 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by crashfrog, posted 09-09-2010 12:35 AM Omnivorous has seen this message but not replied
 Message 28 by onifre, posted 09-09-2010 10:56 AM Omnivorous has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 23 of 59 (580427)
09-09-2010 12:35 AM
Reply to: Message 22 by Omnivorous
09-09-2010 12:09 AM


If the sun is about 4.7 billion years old, and the most distant observed galaxy is at 12.8 billion light years, it seems there would be plenty of time for many intelligent species to evolve before us.
Well, they have to orbit the second star in their neighborhood too, or else how could they have planets?
I guess what I'm saying is, the full life and death of a star seems to be a prerequisite to forming a life-capable star system, so I don't see how there's much time for any other system to have gotten much of a jump on us. The indication (as I recall) is that the last star, the progenitor of the Sun, formed fairly soon after the formation of the universe, but maybe I'm wrong about that. Given the rate of technological advancement in intelligent species, any intelligence with as much as a million years head-start should be engaging in engineering on a galactic scale by now. We should be able to see their public works projects from here.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by Omnivorous, posted 09-09-2010 12:09 AM Omnivorous has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by caffeine, posted 09-09-2010 5:25 AM crashfrog has replied
 Message 31 by xongsmith, posted 09-09-2010 3:08 PM crashfrog has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.7


Message 24 of 59 (580430)
09-09-2010 12:43 AM


Like others have said, looking at features that have independently evolved numerous times on Earth should give us a clue.
I would say that sight is very important. Even in the darkest environments on Earth, such as the deep sea, there are highly adapted eyes. Heck, many of the deep sea organisms produce their own light through chemical bioluminescence. This sight should focus on wavelengths that other organisms would either absorb or emit, so we are talking about infrared through UV more than likely. Wavelengths below infrared can pass through organisms while wavelengths above UV tend to destroy biomolecules that we consider important for survival so they shouldn't be in abundance to begin with. We also know that two eyes is better than one if depth perception is important, and it is also handy to have at least one eye on each side of the body to look out for predators. So much like paired appendages was mentioned above, paired eyes also seem important.
Once you have sensory adaptations you also need a concentration of neural cells to hand that input. Now we are talking about speed, being that impulses will more than likely be chemical in nature and not electrical. Even in the most advanced species on Earth (us, for example) nerve impulses still travel at about 30 m/s, which is pretty slow compared to 3E8 m/s for electrical currents. The closer the neural cells are to the input the faster the reaction to those inputs. Nature here on Earth has shown us how important this is. All but the simplest Earth animals have ganglia of neural cells located near their eyes, noses, ears, etc. Therefore, I would predict that the "advanced" species would have a head of some kind that housed most of the important senses as well as a collection of neural cells to handle those inputs. There is always a niche for a predator that can react quicker to the presence of prey, and there is always selection pressures on prey to outmaneuver the predators.
So I would tend to agree with some sort of symmetry for locomotion, specialized tissues, and a head of some kind to house the most important senses (especially sight) and the brain to run it. Of course, this is for what we would consider to be advanced species. As we all know, millions of species get along just fine without any of these adaptations.

  
caffeine
Member (Idle past 1025 days)
Posts: 1800
From: Prague, Czech Republic
Joined: 10-22-2008


Message 25 of 59 (580446)
09-09-2010 5:25 AM
Reply to: Message 23 by crashfrog
09-09-2010 12:35 AM


I guess what I'm saying is, the full life and death of a star seems to be a prerequisite to forming a life-capable star system, so I don't see how there's much time for any other system to have gotten much of a jump on us. The indication (as I recall) is that the last star, the progenitor of the Sun, formed fairly soon after the formation of the universe, but maybe I'm wrong about that. Given the rate of technological advancement in intelligent species, any intelligence with as much as a million years head-start should be engaging in engineering on a galactic scale by now. We should be able to see their public works projects from here.
Isn't our Sun a third-generation star? Either way, it seem the oldest supernova we've found predates our sun by more time than it's life span, so there might still be plenty of time.
I don't think there's any reason to assume a particular rate of technological development. Remember that you're extrapolating from a sample size of one, and the history of technological development on earth does not conform to any sort of steady pattern.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by crashfrog, posted 09-09-2010 12:35 AM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by crashfrog, posted 09-09-2010 10:41 AM caffeine has replied

  
Artemis Entreri 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4229 days)
Posts: 1194
From: Northern Virginia
Joined: 07-08-2008


Message 26 of 59 (580470)
09-09-2010 8:38 AM


God could have another planet where he created everything on it too, where his intelligent design is very evident in the forms of the alien creatures he created to live on this planet.
maybe there is no planet and he created aliens to live and travel through space.
I mean we are talking about fiction now, right?

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 27 of 59 (580484)
09-09-2010 10:41 AM
Reply to: Message 25 by caffeine
09-09-2010 5:25 AM


I don't think there's any reason to assume a particular rate of technological development.
I guess the only assumption I feel I'm making is that, regardless of how fast technology develops it develops instantaneously over geologic time. And if we're talking about a geologic-scale time different between another life-bearing world and ourselves that's going to represent an inconceivably vast gulf between our technology and theirs.
Remember that you're extrapolating from a sample size of one
Well, we're pretty much all going to do that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by caffeine, posted 09-09-2010 5:25 AM caffeine has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 39 by caffeine, posted 09-10-2010 4:17 AM crashfrog has replied

  
onifre
Member (Idle past 2951 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 28 of 59 (580485)
09-09-2010 10:56 AM
Reply to: Message 22 by Omnivorous
09-09-2010 12:09 AM


tempurature
If the sun is about 4.7 billion years old, and the most distant observed galaxy is at 12.8 billion light years, it seems there would be plenty of time for many intelligent species to evolve before us.
You would have to factor in the core tempurature of the universe, too, as it expands and cools off. Early galaxies may have experienced too high of an ambient temp to sustain life. Just as, in the future, it will be too cold to sustain life.
We may find ourselves in just the right conditions for life in the universe, and any intelligent species would have had to emerge almost at the same time, more or less, as us.
- Oni
Edited by onifre, : No reason given.
Edited by onifre, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by Omnivorous, posted 09-09-2010 12:09 AM Omnivorous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 30 by Omnivorous, posted 09-09-2010 1:41 PM onifre has replied

  
CosmicChimp
Member
Posts: 311
From: Muenchen Bayern Deutschland
Joined: 06-15-2007


Message 29 of 59 (580493)
09-09-2010 12:44 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by subbie
09-08-2010 8:21 PM


This is actually exactly the kind of topic I love. To start with answering the question of life diversity we should consider what sources of energy are available? I can think of a few in these few minutes before I have to go. Electromagnetic, gravitational, kinetic, dark and whatever else I've forgotten. Not sure anyone even knows what dark energy is much less what sort of complexity could be living off of it...
I'll be back for more later, great topic.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by subbie, posted 09-08-2010 8:21 PM subbie has seen this message but not replied

  
Omnivorous
Member
Posts: 3978
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005
Member Rating: 7.3


Message 30 of 59 (580501)
09-09-2010 1:41 PM
Reply to: Message 28 by onifre
09-09-2010 10:56 AM


Re: tempurature
onifre writes:
Omni writes:
If the sun is about 4.7 billion years old, and the most distant observed galaxy is at 12.8 billion light years, it seems there would be plenty of time for many intelligent species to evolve before us.
You would have to factor in the core tempurature of the universe, too, as it expands and cools off. Early galaxies may have experienced too high of an ambient temp to sustain life. Just as, in the future, it will be too cold to sustain life.
We may find ourselves in just the right conditions for life in the universe, and any intelligent species would have had to emerge almost at the same time, more or less, as us.
I don't think there is anything special about our galaxy, sun, or us. Of course, we can't know one way or the other, at least not just yet.
My problem was with thinking of us as serious candidates for the first intelligent species ever due to the sun's age and the heavier element contributions of its predecessor. I don't see any reason to believe we had a head-start over any other post-first generation star system, and surely there must be billions of them.
We can see small bright galaxies about 12.8 billion light years away; I suppose we look much the same from there. Surely those galaxies, like ours, have had time to "mature" and host stars with planets.
My totally worthless intuitive hunch is that intelligence is more likely to have appeared everywhere at about the same time than preferentially in some sectors of our universe: given our own intelligent behavior, it may be tragically fortunate that intelligences arise so far apart and are accelerating away ever faster.
The question of heat would seem more determined by the particular star in question than the universe or galaxy overall, though I can see that stars near galactic centers or in crowded clusters might be too "hot" in the sense of radiation. But if we were sailing through "empty" intergalactic space along with our sun, wouldn't our planetary conditions remain the same, as they are now while we circle the galaxy in our spiral arm?
I'm not disagreeing with crash (or anyone) with any confidence at all; I'm just trying to clarify his argument in my own mind, and so far I can't make it click in a persuasive way. I envy his present academic exposure: it's been years since I did more than skim articles, so I may simply be lacking some basic data that would illuminate the issue for me.
Still, we are discovering planetary systems at an accelerating rate, and life may be as common as dirt.

Have you ever been to an American wedding? Where's the vodka? Where's the marinated herring?!
-Gogol Bordello
Real things always push back.
-William James

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by onifre, posted 09-09-2010 10:56 AM onifre has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 32 by onifre, posted 09-09-2010 3:49 PM Omnivorous has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024