Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
That is true only if you have a very narrow definition of "Life." And that isn't so simple. We may have no frame of reference for the basis of other thinking minds on other planets.
c
Sorry, I don't do you-tube references. Tell me what you want me to know.
Re: definition of life--
First let me dismiss any possibility of microscopic/unicellular type life from making it here free-loading on a meteorite. [a] How the H did it get onto a meteor in the first place? and (2) how is it supposed to survive the heat of entry thru the atm here? Can't happen.
Let's limit our discussion to "intelligent life." --To be intelligent and to influence anything, it must use energy to do work (W =Fx) If it doesn't do that, it just sits there, unchanging-- ie- can't be "thinking."
Secondly, it must have some sort of "body." Even if that body is just an amorphous mass of molecules. As such, the molecules need to be 3 dimensional, not just planar. To be 3D, they need to rely on atoms that can form bonds in 3D-- like C, Si, etc--valence 4....N (valence 3)can't be the basis because it forms planar molecules (and not enough diversity) and to get 3D then odd angles, energetically less stable and thus less likely would need to be employed...Summary: C based chemistry is most likely. (If you're familiar with Boltzmann & Probabilistic Physics, this would all be obvious.)
Now, we consider reproduction & mutability- these two things allow adaptation to changing environmental conditions. Highly unlikely any life form that can't do these things would long survive, given that the environment is always changing everywhere-- stars are born, live & die. They influence their close neighbors, etc.
While we could imagine a life form that is immortal-- that is an unlikely choice because death "clears the way" for new mutants that improve odds of survival. Immortality is only viable (no pun intended) in an environment with endless space & resources.
As an aside-- it's interesting how probabilities affect life processes. Eg- how many sexes are best? Two. One does not allow enough opportunity for the expression of new mutations with increased survival value in the species. Three or more is unnecessarily complicated. Two is most efficient.
Why does the genetic code rely on 3 base pairs & 4 bases? Because two bases would only allow a binary code-- DNA would have to be 9x longer than it is, and two base pairs to code for an AA would only allow for 4^2 permutations (ie- only 16 different AAs) and not enough diversity in the enzymes. Three pairs allow for 4^3 permutations and redundancy of the code-- improved chances for survival.
I could go on & on, but it all boils down to probabilities and energy efficiency.
Sorry, I don't do you-tube references. Tell me what you want me to know.
Your definition of life is too narrow --- and rejected by most astro-physicists. Perfectly fine definition as life on Earth goes. But you can't assume that life will evolve elsewhere as it did here. It might. It might not. But first you need to define what you mean by "life" --- and that isn't as easy as it sounds on the surface.
But no, I'm not going to do your homework for you. This is not a simple soundbyte answer.
And if we're going to restrict the definition to "intelligent life," then a great deal of Earth's humanity --- including significant swaths of the U.S. Congress --- are not alive.
You doubt that aliens are among us? Have you ever met my ex?
Yeah, I have never been convinced much that aliens could exist here, but I have been to Venice Beach in CA. and I have been to a Walmart in the FL panhandle...I'm beginning to wonder.
Sounds like somebody's been watching too many "My Hero" reruns...
Quote:
Yeah, I have never been convinced much that aliens could exist here, but I have been to Venice Beach in CA. and I have been to a Walmart in the FL panhandle...I'm beginning to wonder.
Life elsewhere will be based on C, N, O & H just like here. It has to do with probabilities, valence numbers, molecular weights, stereochemistry and The Minimum Principle that pervades physics. That doesn't mean they will necessarily have DNA, proteins etc just like us, but it will be close.
I have an issue with this although I am not a scientist.
Why should all environments contain the same elements? Why should all environments create the same bipedal form?
You see, I dont think they would. So, for example, I feel that it is perfectly possible in other environments for high intelligence to be 'packaged' into a smaller space and therefore a smaller being - or a larger one and not necessarily in a bipedal form either.
I know it is a way-out idea but Life may have evolved to not need a body any longer and be pure consciousness. Life might evolve to be silicon-based or some other element with water not necessarily the liquid of choice.
Many laws of physics are based on our environment our energy relationships and our definition of 'light'. Someone elses might be different.
We already know there are other dimensions, maybe they work in different ways. I think you assume too much when logically deducing how and why life exists.
Dr David Jacobs and others think that alien-human hybrids are alredy here and have started to infiltrate our society. They have better mental abilities than normal humans do, which immediately gives them an advantage. The circumstancial evidence for this is through the hypnosis he does on many abductees.
I have an issue with this although I am not a scientist.
Why should all environments contain the same elements?
Because in this universe there are only so many ways quarks can combine to form protons and neutrons, and only so many ways electrons, protons, and neutrons can be combined to form stable elements. And we know what elements are present in the universe because of a century and a half worth of spectrographic analysis of light from the stars and other objects.
Quote:
Many laws of physics are based on our environment our energy relationships and our definition of 'light'. Someone elses might be different.
Not true. You might have different laws of physics in other universes (assuming the multiverse exists), but not in this one.
Im pretty sure they are among us. Lots of people who seem to be living in another world.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
