Life on Europa
Pages
| Author | Topic: Life on Europa |
|---|---|
|
Lifecrafter
Member # 7723
|
written Monday, July 9 2007 19:19
Profile
How would you be affected if it were discovered? How do you think it would affect society as a whole? I just saw "Aliens of the Deep." If you haven't, it deals with deep sea life and the ecosystems around hydrothermal vents. There was much allusion to the teams that were exploring these ecosystems being precursors to teams exploring other planets/satellites in our solar system. There was also a great hope by these scientists that the life that is mainly driven by these vents and not the sun could mean that life is possible beneath the ice on Europa or some other planet that is not necessarily near a star. (One can only guess why they have this hope). They then made the statement that 'this discovery would affect society greatly.' Would it? (I'm mainly speaking of life more on parr with non-human life on our planet as opposed to something like us). Posts: 701 | Registered: Thursday, November 30 2006 08:00 |
|
Guardian
Member # 5360
|
written Monday, July 9 2007 19:29
Profile
Hmmm. One of the things that greatly annoys Nalyd is the assumption that life elsewhere would be anything like life on Earth. Why would they have to breath oxygen? Why would they need out exact temperature range? Why would water be necessary for life? Why would it be even remotely detectable? How do you know it would have cells, or even be made out of separate elements? -------------------- May the fires of Undeath burn in your soul, and consume it. Posts: 1636 | Registered: Wednesday, January 5 2005 08:00 |
|
Law Bringer
Member # 335
|
written Monday, July 9 2007 19:48
Profile
Homepage
Maybe life out there is really weird. The only molecules that have the complexity for life are carbon-based, as far as we know, but that could be because the only life we know is carbon-based. To answer some questions, though, life obviously doesn't need oxygen and can exist in an enormous range of temperatures even on Earth. Water's the big question, though, as the article points out. It has to be compartmentalized because that's what life is, really: self-replicating, self-contained bundles of reactions. Something entirely homogenous can't be alive, and something without cells (or equivalent structures) can't be alive. —Alorael, who thinks life on Europa would change society in that people would go alien-crazy. Research and the media, especially the entertainment media, would explode. Otherwise, life would go on. At least until Jupiter's engineered transformation into another star. That would have some pretty big effects. Posts: 14579 | Registered: Saturday, December 1 2001 08:00 |
|
Lifecrafter
Member # 7723
|
written Monday, July 9 2007 20:25
Profile
I agree with what you said Alo, with this addition: I think that religion would be greatly affected. Maybe in a similar way that I think the teachings of general evolution has affected it. I think it would be the death blow to the faith of a lot of people. The desire to explore is human nature. These folks wanted to find life, though. That is interesting to me. Would you like to see life elsewhere? Why? What would that life do for you that an undiscovered jungle or sea animal would not? Posts: 701 | Registered: Thursday, November 30 2006 08:00 |
|
Agent
Member # 27
|
written Monday, July 9 2007 21:05
Profile
What I wonder is how other life functions and thinks? We believe most animals aren't sentient, but maybe we have similar limitations. Maybe some aliens exist on a different plain of reality or have higher levels of consciousness. I'm not trying to sound philisophical but when I think about other life I don't like to confine myself to three dimensions. Posts: 1233 | Registered: Wednesday, October 3 2001 07:00 |
|
Law Bringer
Member # 2984
|
written Monday, July 9 2007 21:06
Profile
Homepage
quote:What defines life in any case - a self-replicating pattern? I remember reading in some book (may have been Douglas Adams; I doubt it was Neal Stephenson though it sounds like his stuff) about the possibility of aliens finding our pottery and dishes (after we were gone), and concluding that these were the dominant life form. Humans were just a part of the dish reproduction cycle. I may have mangled this idea somewhat. -------------------- Encyclopaedia • Archives • Members • RSS [Topic / Forum] • Blog • Polaris • NaNoWriMo Look on my works, ye mighty, and despair. | I have a love of woodwind instruments. "That damn meddling eskimo." --WKS about Alorael Posts: 8752 | Registered: Wednesday, May 14 2003 07:00 |
|
Law Bringer
Member # 6785
|
written Monday, July 9 2007 21:28
Profile
It depends upon the level of life compared to man. Microorganisms while being a likely proof of independent evolution aren't as damaging to some religious faiths as aliens with equal or greater intelligence to man. Just think about the holy wars that could occur when we find a non-human religous group pushing their religion on us. Posts: 4643 | Registered: Friday, February 10 2006 08:00 |
|
Lifecrafter
Member # 7723
|
written Monday, July 9 2007 21:42
Profile
Self-replicating, metabolizing for energy, responsive to stimuli. If it doesn't do these I don't see how it could really be considered life. EDIT: On second thought I could see life just being responsive to stimuli and not growing, metabolizing, or replicating. [ Monday, July 09, 2007 21:49: Message edited by: Stillness ] Posts: 701 | Registered: Thursday, November 30 2006 08:00 |
|
Warrior
Member # 7745
|
written Monday, July 9 2007 22:48
Profile
There was an article in New Scientist about what alien life could possibly be, there are even theories that they could be gas-based or silicon-based. http://space.newscientist.com/article/mg19426071.200-life--but-not-as-we-know-it.html You might need to be a subscriber to read, not sure. Posts: 59 | Registered: Thursday, December 7 2006 08:00 |
|
By Committee
Member # 4233
|
written Tuesday, July 10 2007 04:50
Profile
quote:Don't count faith out just yet. After all, if it can weather the discovery that the world is round and that it circles the sun, it surely can weather the discovery of extraterrestrial deep sea creatures under the icy surface of a moon. "Sure, there may be other bastards out there, but we're God's special bastards!" :D We're already fractured into hundreds of different faiths and sects - why should the introduction of additional life out there stir that up too much? As for life, my understanding was that it probably would have to be carbon-based and rely on oxygen to some extent, owing to all that Krebs cycle stuff I've mostly forgotten from 10th grade biology. Not that all organisms rely on ATP or whatever, but I assume that only particular molecules/atoms are suitable for the exchange of ions/anions and whatnot for everthing to stay "alive"/in motion. Am I way off the mark here? [ Tuesday, July 10, 2007 04:52: Message edited by: Drew ] Posts: 2242 | Registered: Saturday, April 10 2004 07:00 |
|
Infiltrator
Member # 4248
|
written Tuesday, July 10 2007 05:13
Profile
I just read from one science-magazine that there could be hydrogen-peroxide-based life on Mars. They claimed that this theory explains why the Viking probe that landed on Mars (was it at 1976?) found signs of life in its first test, but all the signs of life disappeared in successive tests. I'm not the right person to explain the theory, but the central idea was that hydrogen-peroxide-based digestion is ideal for gathering moisture from the dry environment on Mars; however, such organisms are only suited to dealing with small amounts of water, and so the excess of it kills them. And the Viking's tests to find life were (if my memory serves me right) based around trying to grow local microbes in a host of water. Then again, Viking was not very sensiteive probe. The article mentioned someone made a test with similar equipment in Arizona desert (not sure about this, my name memory sucks), and failed to find life, even though they knew there was some. Personally, I consider it highly likely that Europa contains life. But then again, you're talking to a person who has seriously considered the idea of suns being alive... EDIT: I don't think faith and religion will go anywhere untill something very drastic happens to the very nature of human life. If your faith is bothered by the idea of extraterrestrial life, well, it's your problem. Actually, I consider it highly likely that the finding of alien life will spark as many new religions it will destroy. [ Tuesday, July 10, 2007 05:19: Message edited by: Frozen Feet ] -------------------- I have nothing more to do in this world, so I can go & pester the inhabitants of the next one with a pure concscience. Posts: 617 | Registered: Tuesday, April 13 2004 07:00 |
|
Lifecrafter
Member # 7723
|
written Tuesday, July 10 2007 05:23
Profile
As a Christian I'm certainly not counting faith out. But, religion is not as important to people as it was 200 years ago, especially in western society. And it's still declining. I think such a discovery would speed that trend. I think we'd see a more rapid decline in morals and a general feeling of uneasiness about what else lies beyond our skies. Posts: 701 | Registered: Thursday, November 30 2006 08:00 |
|
Lifecrafter
Member # 7723
|
written Tuesday, July 10 2007 05:30
Profile
quote:Why? Posts: 701 | Registered: Thursday, November 30 2006 08:00 |
|
Warrior
Member # 1668
|
written Tuesday, July 10 2007 05:42
Profile
quote:I'm pretty sure that responsiveness to stimuli, while a necessary criterion for life, isn't sufficient to define it. Too many inanimate objects (e.g. a fire traveling towards an oxygen source, or software programs capable of responding to inputs) would meet included. The standard definition of life is that members of a population must evince seven characteristics: Organization Growth Adaptation Homeostasis Metabolism Responsiveness Adaptation Of course, the question of whether and how viruses, prions, and obligate intracellular parasites (like Rickettsia) fit into our understanding of life is still a difficult one. quote:Do you mean to suggest that the decline in the importance of faith would directly bring about a decline in morals? I didn't realize that one had anything to do with the other. [edited to avoid double post] [ Tuesday, July 10, 2007 05:46: Message edited by: wary wanderer ] -------------------- "Mongo only pawn in game of life" -- Mongo Posts: 75 | Registered: Monday, August 5 2002 07:00 |
|
Off With Their Heads
Member # 4045
|
written Tuesday, July 10 2007 06:04
Profile
Homepage
quote:I was under the impression that the usual answer is that none of those things are alive. quote:I don't know much of anything about biochemistry, but I've been told that silicon has similar properties to carbon when put under high pressure (like that on Jupiter) — see the periodic table to note that Si is right under C and therefore we might expect some similarities. At the very least, silicon-based life-forms might be possible. quote:I think such a discovery would cause wacky evangelicals to get their knickers in a knot, but I don't think that normal religious people would be affected at all. A clockmaker god could have created the universe to grow life all over the place, and there's no particular reason to believe that we're unique. If you have to believe that life was created, there's no reason to believe that it was only created once. The discovery of the Americas didn't lead to mass panic and hysteria, so I don't know why this would lead to more uneasiness, and I seriously doubt that many people's morals would be affected (because why? Only a few people's faith would be shaken, and only a few people's faith plays a significant role in their morals). -------------------- Arancaytar: Every time you ask people to compare TM and Kel, you endanger the poor, fluffy kittens. Smoo: Get ready to face the walls! Ephesos: In conclusion, yarr. Kelandon's Pink and Pretty Page!!: the authorized location for all things by me The Archive of all released BoE scenarios ever Posts: 7968 | Registered: Saturday, February 28 2004 08:00 |
|
Warrior
Member # 4638
|
written Tuesday, July 10 2007 06:08
Profile
I think all this talk about life subsisting in a medium other than water is rather disappointing. It is unlikely that a methane or ammonia based organism would be very tasty when you eat it, so really what is the point of searching for such life forms. Although, I guess the methane ones might have a bang when you chomp down on them. NASA should spend time trying to find organisms that taste like chicken, only better. -------------------- You are asleep. Be careful what you pretend to be because you are what you pretend to be. So it goes. Posts: 93 | Registered: Tuesday, June 29 2004 07:00 |
|
Warrior
Member # 1668
|
written Tuesday, July 10 2007 06:20
Profile
Originally written by Kelandon: quote:The standard answer for virus/prion is that they are not alive, but prokaryotic organisms like Rickettsia are tougher, since they have more in common with other living prokaryotes than not. And it's never been entirely clear to me how viruses fail to meet the seven criteria. -------------------- "Mongo only pawn in game of life" -- Mongo Posts: 75 | Registered: Monday, August 5 2002 07:00 |
|
Infiltrator
Member # 4248
|
written Tuesday, July 10 2007 06:22
Profile
quote:The thought first crossed my mind when my father explained there was ice, and an ocean under the ice, in Europa. I didn't know a thing about volchanic vents back then, but simply the presence of water was enough to make me consider it. After that, I've seen several documents about those afore mentioned deep-sea beings, as well as read several articles about life in extreme conditions, such as bacteria living in extremely alcaline environments and sustaining themselves by dissolving iron. In my knowledge, the possible conditions on Europa are similar to these extremist examples, and if life manages to reside in such places down here on earth, why wouldn't it do so on Europa? Now, a much more interesting question would have been why I have considered suns being alive. The train of thought started when me and my father were planting trees - we pondered whether life could form out of simply hydrogen and helium. Well, as the two cannot form complex molecules we figured that A) such a creature would likely depend on physical phenomena instead of chemical ones and B) that it would likely appear cloud-like and/or round, being held together only by gravity. Thinking about the metablolism of the creature, we considered fusion to be the most likely source of energy. It isn't that hard to draw lines from that, isn't it? -------------------- I have nothing more to do in this world, so I can go & pester the inhabitants of the next one with a pure concscience. Posts: 617 | Registered: Tuesday, April 13 2004 07:00 |
|
Lifecrafter
Member # 7723
|
written Tuesday, July 10 2007 06:22
Profile
You listed Adaptation twice. I'm assuming reproduction should go there. And I wonder if adaptation and responsiveness are redundant, unless adaptation is strictly over periods of generations. In which case I could envisage a being that does not adapt, reproduce, grow, or metabolize. I reckon I'd need to see homeostasis and organization. I'm not saying that a thing with those three would necessarily be alive, but that would be enough. Let's say the whole human race got a disease that stopped reproduction. That would knock out adaptation. We'd still be living. I could imagine a being that doesn't grow or metabolize as well. It could have some self-sustaining energy source. Yes there is a link between faith and morals. The decline of both is not coincidence. Posts: 701 | Registered: Thursday, November 30 2006 08:00 |
|
By Committee
Member # 4233
|
written Tuesday, July 10 2007 06:44
Profile
There is a correlation between faith and morals, but I would posit that there's not a dependency. What is most important to a moral system is that there is some great authority that dictates what is what, whether that authority be a mythical deity or a man-made government. I prefer the latter, because at least in most cases there's a paper trail. EDIT: Also, on your reproductive argument, I imagine you'd have to consider what is intrinsic to the life form; a disease preventing reproduction would be an externality, and thus not a calculable consideration in determining that humans are alive. [ Tuesday, July 10, 2007 06:47: Message edited by: Drew ] Posts: 2242 | Registered: Saturday, April 10 2004 07:00 |
|
Shaper
Member # 73
|
written Tuesday, July 10 2007 06:59
Profile
quote:No there isn't. -------------------- My Myspace, with some of my audial and visual art The Lyceum - The Headquarters of the Blades designing community The Louvre - The Blades of Avernum graphics database Alexandria - The Blades of Exile Scenario database BoE Webring - Self explanatory Polaris - Free porn here Odd Todd - Fun for the unemployed (and everyone else too) They Might Be Giants - Four websites for one of the greatest bands in existance -------------------- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Posts: 2957 | Registered: Thursday, October 4 2001 07:00 |
|
Electric Sheep One
Member # 3431
|
written Tuesday, July 10 2007 07:04
Profile
Before deciding on what properties would imply that something is alive, I'd like to know better what we want the property of being alive to imply. Why do we want to know whether something is alive or not? If it is only in order to know whether or not we get to lurch around the lab cackling 'It's alive!', then the definition of life only depends upon how much we want to lurch. Set the bar low, and cackle away, if that's what you want. If on the other hand you never want to have to admit that humans have created life in a lab, set the bar as high as you can. If there is any other issue than cackling rights at stake, then that issue needs to be mentioned, in order to decide what constitutes life. Is the real issue, for instance, whether or not something will poke us back if we poke it? Or whether or not its spores will spawn on earth and blight our crops? Or whether we can understand its literature? Of course, once we mention any such particular implication of life, the discussion of life as such will immediately be replaced by a discussion of poking reactions, spore proliferation, or inter-species communication. I think that's the right way to go, though. I think 'life' as a concept is sort of like Mona Lisa's smile. From a distance it's a fine topic for discussion, but up close it dissolves into brushstrokes. That's not to say 'life' is a meaningless term; just that it has its limits. 'Life' is a useful concept, as long as you don't have to ask too closely what it means. Perhaps that's true of all concepts. -------------------- We're not doing cool. We're doing pretty. Posts: 3335 | Registered: Thursday, September 4 2003 07:00 |
|
Lifecrafter
Member # 6700
|
written Tuesday, July 10 2007 07:36
Profile
Homepage
Arthur C. Clarke was the prophet and herald of the modern era. -- Life on other planets? I do often wonder why God created the universe at its infinite size if its sole inhabitants can only see a fraction of a percent of it. What would said life be like? No idea. Probably both different and similar to that with which we are familiar. I mean... we've found some oddly alien stuff living in our oceans... -- Though religion defines mores, mores do not demand religion. Stillness, decline in morality has come due to the destruction of the definition of our society's mores; and the decline will continue until our society either destroys itself or actually defines a stable set of mores. I'd rant, but I don't feel like helping this thread go off-topic. -------------------- The Silent Assassin believes there must be life beyond the stars. Seriously... what kind of life is a life of stardom? No privacy, and you get criticized for throwing oatmeal cream pies at people. -------------------- -Lenar Labs What's Your Destiny? Ushmushmeifa: Lenar's power is almighty and ineffable. All hail lord Noric, god of... well, something important, I'm sure. Posts: 735 | Registered: Monday, January 16 2006 08:00 |
|
Lifecrafter
Member # 7723
|
written Tuesday, July 10 2007 07:57
Profile
I initially meant the traditional definition SoT. Although finding a virus on Europa would be quite interesting. Your question is really why I started the thread though. What would life in outerspace do for you? Why are some scientists so eager to find it? I said only that there was a link, not dependancy. We naturally have a conscience. It tends to go astray without proper guidance though. People start to set their own standards as it suits them. Hence the decline in morals we see. Increasing disregard for human life, lowering of sexual standards, breakdown of the family unit, lowering of standards of what is considered publically acceptable behavior, etc are all around us. I can see it in just a few decades of being around. I don't know how anyone could not see it. If you start talking about the past century then the difference is glaring. Posts: 701 | Registered: Thursday, November 30 2006 08:00 |
|
By Committee
Member # 4233
|
written Tuesday, July 10 2007 09:37
Profile
If anything, the "decline in morals" exposes the flaw in reliance on religious doctrine as their source. Given that religion depends on belief in a mythological deity in order to inspire fear sufficient to reinforce "moral" behavior, is it surprising that an increasing lack of belief in the Church of Our Fathers would cause those individuals to question what the Church is saying? I think this underscores the importance of the role government/the social contract plays as the basis for morality. The difficulty is that unlike a mythical deity, the government is neither omnipotent nor omniscient. However, the upshot is that it's real. I have a big problem with arbitrary determinations of what "proper" guidance is. While I agree that having two loving parents around to raise a child is probably ideal, the rest of what you generally refer to as a "lowering of standards" is completely relative to your own religious worldview, which is just as arbitrary as mine until you can prove that the authority you rely on is capital-T True. In the mean time, I think that I will continue to abide by the laws we have more or less legitimately agreed to, and celebrate the U.S.'s continuous march toward true liberty and equality, which I think are perhaps the most important moral values of them all. Posts: 2242 | Registered: Saturday, April 10 2004 07:00 |