|
question on the universe and life (pg. 2)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| tubularbills |
| i want to believe. |
|
|
| - T - |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lomeli
Who's to say that all life forms need air and water to survive? I mean, on this planet it's essential, but it's very much possible that extraterrestrials have their own mechanism for survival in their own world. |
good point.
i think that even if water isn't essential to the chemical reactions there are some good reasons to look for it:
first, water has a high heat capacity so it buffers the cooling effect of space and the heating of the sun (so a good temperature for chemical reactions can exist), and;
second, where liquid water existed it means that the temperature was in that highly productive range of life (33F to 120F)
...on earth of course.
but they're finding life absolutely everywhere on earth. there are bacteria that can handle extreme heat (100s F) and ones that can handle massive amounts of radiation (cooling water in nuclear reactors). so life should be pretty much everywhere in space too. |
|
|
| Domesticated |
The Drake Equation is rubbish. None of the variables used in the equation can be proven/tested/measured, making the result invalid. As per this quote:
"In a 2003 lecture at Caltech, Michael Crichton, a science fiction author, stated that, "Speaking precisely, the Drake equation is literally meaningless, and has nothing to do with science. I take the hard view that science involves the creation of testable hypotheses. The Drake equation cannot be tested and therefore SETI is not science. SETI is unquestionably a religion"
I think the possibility that there may have been intelligent life on Earth prior to the dinosaurs or anything we traditionally see as "the first life on Earth" is a far more interesting concept.
Imagine that by the year 2500 we have destroyed the Earth to the point that all plant, animal and human life is extinguished due to disasters and planetary upheaval. Millions of years pass, and single-celled creatures begin to evolve again, perhaps giving rise to another intelligent race who believe that there were none before them either... |
|
|
| Project-K |
| quote: | Originally posted by Domesticated
I think the possibility that there may have been intelligent life on Earth prior to the dinosaurs or anything we traditionally see as "the first life on Earth" is a far more interesting concept.
Imagine that by the year 2500 we have destroyed the Earth to the point that all plant, animal and human life is extinguished due to disasters and planetary upheaval. Millions of years pass, and single-celled creatures begin to evolve again, perhaps giving rise to another intelligent race who believe that there were none before them either... |
That's interesting but it doesn't account for evidence of the age of the solar system. If something of the sort had occured, then the earth would have to be several billion years older than we currently estimate. |
|
|
| Domesticated |
| quote: | Originally posted by Project-K
That's interesting but it doesn't account for evidence of the age of the solar system. If something of the sort had occured, then the earth would have to be several billion years older than we currently estimate. |
That's the problem with universal history; so much of it is uncertain and probably inaccurate.
On this topic of ancient history and the formation of Earth, this is a great, great book to read:
http://www.amazon.com/Short-History...25662682&sr=8-1
It details Earth's scientific and evolutionary history from beginning to end, all in the one book, and is surprisingly comprehensive. |
|
|
| jupiterone |
enjoying these posts
i'm going to check that book out |
|
|
| stren |
| sure, they were wiped out by Reapers ! |
|
|
| Xan_2v2 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Domesticated
The Drake Equation is rubbish. None of the variables used in the equation can be proven/tested/measured, making the result invalid. As per this quote:
"In a 2003 lecture at Caltech, Michael Crichton, a science fiction author, stated that, "Speaking precisely, the Drake equation is literally meaningless, and has nothing to do with science. I take the hard view that science involves the creation of testable hypotheses. The Drake equation cannot be tested and therefore SETI is not science. SETI is unquestionably a religion"
I think the possibility that there may have been intelligent life on Earth prior to the dinosaurs or anything we traditionally see as "the first life on Earth" is a far more interesting concept.
Imagine that by the year 2500 we have destroyed the Earth to the point that all plant, animal and human life is extinguished due to disasters and planetary upheaval. Millions of years pass, and single-celled creatures begin to evolve again, perhaps giving rise to another intelligent race who believe that there were none before them either... |
yup pretty much, still interesting tho
edit: also I saw recently some article or something saying that we have had a very noticable impact on our environment in terms of the sudden global warming & amount of CO2 in the atmosphere/water & mass extinction of animals, & that would show up in geology (im not frasing this well but you know those lines of strata* or w/e that geolists are all intersted in, basically we have had an enough impact there to make something noticable in future) (wonder if in millions of years we'll just be considered another meteroite hitting the earth) |
|
|
| SYSTEM-J |
| quote: | Originally posted by Domesticated
The Drake Equation is rubbish. None of the variables used in the equation can be proven/tested/measured, making the result invalid. As per this quote:
"In a 2003 lecture at Caltech, Michael Crichton, a science fiction author, stated that, "Speaking precisely, the Drake equation is literally meaningless, and has nothing to do with science. I take the hard view that science involves the creation of testable hypotheses. The Drake equation cannot be tested and therefore SETI is not science. SETI is unquestionably a religion" |
Crichton cites the Drake equation in his novel Sphere, which is well worth reading if you're interested in this kind of thing. Probably his best novel. |
|
|
| Domesticated |
| quote: | Originally posted by SYSTEM-J
Chrichton cites the Drake equation in his novel Sphere, which is well worth reading if you're interested in this kind of thing. Probably his best novel. |
As in Michael Crichton?
I quite enjoyed his book Prey, and also Timeline. It's great the way he actually researches his science before writing. |
|
|
|
|
