|
question on the universe and life (pg. 3)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| elFreak |
| black people like popeye's |
|
|
| SYSTEM-J |
| quote: | Originally posted by Domesticated
As in Michael Crichton? |
Yeah... spelling mistake.
| quote: | | I quite enjoyed his book Prey, and also Timeline. It's great the way he actually researches his science before writing. |
The hard science behind his novels usually makes them interesting, but less interesting is the way he integrates the fact into the fiction. It's safe to say he's not a master of narrative discourse levels. I've read almost all his novels, but I stopped caring after State of Fear because he always uses the same ty devices to represent himself and the reader in the narrative. And his use of free indirect discourse to disguise the fact he's essentially copying and pasting large chunks from textbooks is just clumsy and lazy.
Thankfully Sphere is largely free of such problems. |
|
|
| Sykonee |
About Mars:
That planet was probably more 'Earth-like' a couple billion years ago than Earth was at that point. The sun was much hotter then, so it could remain warm enough for liquid water to flow, plus it was still geologically active, and a stable magnetic field is very handy in protecting life from cosmic radiation. Unfortunately for Mars, it's essentially a single-plate planet, meaning unlike Earth and Venus (which have both pretty much turned themselves inside-out a few times over), it wouldn't have stood much of a chance in maintaining a molten interior, thus a stable magnetic field.
Frankly, I'm more curious about life potentially existing on ice-moons like Europa or Enceladus. Heck, even Titan would be an interesting possibility, if life as we know it could arise under different chemistry. |
|
|
| Domesticated |
| quote: | Originally posted by Sykonee
Unfortunately for Mars, it's essentially a single-plate planet, meaning unlike Earth and Venus (which have both pretty much turned themselves inside-out a few times over), it wouldn't have stood much of a chance in maintaining a molten interior, thus a stable magnetic field. |
On this; apparently the Earth has reversed its magnetic polarity several times in history due to movement in the core, which has resulted in ice ages and other planet-wide disasters.
Hope it doesn't happen again soon. :gsmile:
If nothing else, the Bill Bryson book I mentioned impressed upon me how tenuous the human race's existence here on Earth is. Bryson raises several plausible scenarios on how we could all be wiped out, such as errant asteroids, global warming, an eruption in Yellowstone National Park, another ice age, disease, a dimming of the sun, etcetera.
Though I think the Drake Equation is crap, I believe that it is correct it surmising that when intelligent life does develop, it does not survive for long, perhaps only a million years or so. |
|
|
| - T - |
| quote: | | Originally posted by Xan_2v2 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) |
there's no question that human made chemicals have changed the geology. drastically even.
far more important than global warming (imo) is the chemical changes to rock, soil and the oceans (and the diatoms in the oceans) as a result of CO2. the past 100yrs+ we've been pouring acid over the whole planet. rocks and minerals are being dissolved from land and falling out of solution at the bottom of the ocean.. |
|
|
| diesel_tron3000 |
in all probability there is definitely life out there somewhere in the universe...
carbon based organisms...silicon based...germanium based...group 14 elements offer the best building block for organisms for a variety of reasons. more interesting is the fact that carbon's electron affinity is better suited to the operation of life over silicon
blood is red when you bleed because of the iron molecules that transport oxygen. other animals use copper molecules to transport blood. their blood is a blue green when they bleed.
the possibilities are pretty much endless. mess around with the atmospheric pressure and you get something else. change the contents of the atmosphere and you get something else.
but it's mucccccchhhhhh more complicated than we will ever know...until we meet some alienSSSSS:eyes: :eyes: :eyes: |
|
|
| Project-K |
| quote: | Originally posted by Domesticated
Though I think the Drake Equation is crap, I believe that it is correct it surmising that when intelligent life does develop, it does not survive for long, perhaps only a million years or so. |
That's ridiculous because it assumes that all intelligent life is like humans, which is in itself a completely arbitrary assumption. |
|
|
| Domesticated |
| quote: | Originally posted by Project-K
That's ridiculous because it assumes that all intelligent life is like humans, which is in itself a completely arbitrary assumption. |
Incorrect. It assumes that any intelligent, highly dominant species will:
a) Be unable to live in harmony with the planet and maintain homeostasis, therefore driving themselves to extinction.
b) By natural causes, completely separate of said race's actions, the planet will undergo catastrophic transformations that will render life impossible.
My assumption is that such disasters happen with such frequency that any intelligent race will be unable to evolve, become aware of such dangers and develop preventative/defensive technology in time to avert a said disaster.
It will be still be hundreds, if not thousands of years before we have the technology to prevent meteorite strikes or volcano eruptions, and in that time we may already be wiped out. |
|
|
| Vlad |
| youre all newbs, god did it in 8 days. |
|
|
| Xan_2v2 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Domesticated
Incorrect. It assumes that any intelligent, highly dominant species will:
a) Be unable to live in harmony with the planet and maintain homeostasis, therefore driving themselves to extinction.
b) By natural causes, completely separate of said race's actions, the planet will undergo catastrophic transformations that will render life impossible.
My assumption is that such disasters happen with such frequency that any intelligent race will be unable to evolve, become aware of such dangers and develop preventative/defensive technology in time to avert a said disaster.
It will be still be hundreds, if not thousands of years before we have the technology to prevent meteorite strikes or volcano eruptions, and in that time we may already be wiped out. |
for the meteorites they've figured out a low tech way to deal with meteroites as long as they are detected early enough (more good news the ones that are a threat are easier to detect), all it would take is a little nudge early on to shift its course, an idea was to just have a probe fly along side it for a while & its own tiny gravity would be enough, or deliver a payload without needing any holywood stars with drilling equipment :D |
|
|
| Allied Nations |
| i want me some martian water |
|
|
|
|
