are we alone in the universe?

[mechanicalbrain]

Originally Posted by KenWittlief

it may seem presumtuous at first, but DNA based life is the only form of life in existance on the earth, the moon, on Mars - everywhere we have been able to investigate so far

and its incredibly complex. If simpler life forms could exists then probability says they would have spontaiously been created long before DNA life would, and there would be billions and billions of different life forms - all based on different molecular arrangements

but we find none, nothing here, only DNA life

now if lifeforms other than DNA based can exist, but they are more complex than DNA, then the probability equations hold true for them. They would be even more unlikely to spring into existance spontainously than we were

so (according to statisics) they are not out there either.

However.... i think certian material made today merit attention. there are materials with a "memory" for their shape. i know it may not merit much at first glance but neither would amino acids to an alien. also if their is life like us than they probably wont be the ambasidors for their kind. look at our robotic research is the human race that far a way from giving birth to a mechanical life. and if so will they have a glowing red light that goes back and forth accross their faces. yes deep questions are these. and in responce to the last post the statment was that we didnt know how amino acids were created not DNA.

[KenWittlief]

Originally Posted by mechanicalbrain

...in response to the last post the statment was that we didnt know how amino acids were created not DNA.

it becomes a chicken/egg problem. DNA based single cell organisms can take oxygen, carbon, hydrogen... and build its own amino acids, its own protien strands, and create a complete perfect copy of itself

but anything less than that one cell organism cant - cant build any of the molecules needed

so that puts you back down to random chance - back to the 1E350 probability of it happening at random

it only has to happen at random once, in the right place, and the spark of life is ignited. All life on the planet can be the result of that one spark

but it has to happen spontainiously at least once.

[mechanicalbrain]

first of all viruses can be considered to do those things and what i ment was i was responding to the statement that we didnt know how amino acids were created.

[KenWittlief]

If I understand it correctly, viruses dont reproduce themselves, they infect a DNA based lifeform and cause it to reporduce the virus (RNA strands) instead of reproducing DNA - so a virus could not be first, without DNA cells to reproduce them

most likely a virus is a mutation of a DNA cell that causes DNA cells to become corrupted.

I have to take off and dont know if I will be back online this weekend.

Its not really my intention to convince everyone that my ideas on the webpage are absolutely correct. The main thing is the idea that life is rare, and that possibly the earth contains all the life there is

I know that is a big leap for most people who want to believe in star wars and star trek like galaxies, but science is cold and un-emotional. The facts are what they are.

I did some surfing on the web and found a few other sites that explore the same idea from different angles. As I have time I will update us-spark.com and include links to those sites.

Like the name implies, the concept is a spark, a hope of starting a new way of thinking - a new level of responsibility for humanity.

If it doenst sit well with you for one reason or another, thats ok. Im not thinking in terms of individuals, or of today or tomorrow. The idea of humanity spreading life throughout the galaxy pushes you out into the realm of the universe, into a task that will take millions of people to engage, and might take a million years to accomplish.

[Alan Anderson]

Originally Posted by KenWittlief

it becomes a chicken/egg problem. DNA based single cell organisms can take oxygen, carbon, hydrogen... and build its own amino acids, its own protien strands, and create a complete perfect copy of itself

but anything less than that one cell organism cant - cant build any of the molecules needed

Viruses reproduce just fine with only a fraction of the complexity of a full-blown cell. They can't do it without the proper conditions, but given the appropriate environment they manage. Mitochondria are an interesting example as well, as they appear to be genetically distinct from the cells they inhabit.

Amino acids are easily created in the laboratory using chemicals and processes intended to mimic the young Earth's environment. Some of them combine on their own to form peptides, and given enough time there's a nonzero probability that relatively complex molecules will arise just from random mixing. Hundreds of thousands of years of such mixing is going to yield a lot of potential precursors to life as we know it using non-living processes. It's not much of a stretch to imagine a short chain of RNA that spontaneously duplicates in the presence of the right mix of amino acids.

Why don't we see this happening in the laboratory, or the wild, now? In the lab, there arguably hasn't been enough time for it to occur at random. In the wild, the environment is no longer amenable to such processes.

[KenWittlief]

Originally Posted by Alan Anderson

Viruses reproduce just fine with only a fraction of the complexity of a full-blown cell. They can't do it without the proper conditions, but given the appropriate environment they manage.

maybe Im not understanding this correctly, but from the way I read it, a virus on its own cannot reproduce, there has to be a full (DNA) based cell for it to infect or take over. A virus is like a parasite, it cannot exists (spread) by itself - it needs the higher lifeform (the DNA cell) to propagate

or am I missing something?

http://biology.about.com/library/weekly/aa110900a.htm

[sanddrag]

In fact, the universe is expanding at an accelerating rate, something we are at a total loss to explain, without involking things like anti-gravity particles (something we have never observed).

Let's think about this. How in the world (haha, maybe "world" is not the right word) , er, what could possibly be making the universe expand at an accelerating rate. To have acceleration you must have force (as far as we know). Gravitational force is really the only thing big enough to move plantes and the such right? But masses have attracting gravitational force which would infer that the universe should be negatively accelerating and eventually reverse and get smaller and ultimately collapse back on itself. So what could possibly be providing the force allowing it to expand (and at an accelerated rate)? Is there a group of even larger masses beyond the universe whose gravity is pulling our universe apart? Perhaps some sort of increidbly large electromagnetic force of some sort?

Also, we talk about how the universe started about 16 billion years ago. It is so funny to talk about things like the universe (which is far as we know is EVERYTHING that exists) in terms of time units from Earth. I wish scientists would develop some sort of univeral time unit for all throughout space, but I have no idea how that would work. Especially when you get into time warpage and stuff like that.

Last, does anyone believe that sending life to other planets could be potentially damaging to our own in the long long run? I don't think you'd want to start life on nearby planets. I'm thinking War of the Worlds but like for reals. What if in 5 billion years they come to attack us (given that we are still here) and destroy us? I think if we plant life in the universe then we should send it really far away. Also, I think we should be able to monitor it, but not leave and evidence as to where it came from. I'm thinking that one day if two intelligent life forms from different planets interacted, it would have very violent results.

For starting life elsewhere, I had once heard something about how the ice caps on Mars could be melted to produce C02 which would warm the planet to make it much more suitable for life. They said something if the technology was available to do it on that large of a scale, it would only take about 20 years to complete. I forget exactly how they thought it could be done though.

[mechanicalbrain]

there is a really good book that talks about the whole ideology of intergalactic war and expansion and it has a lot of firmly rooted ideas its called Jentry's Envy

[KenWittlief]

Originally Posted by sanddrag

Let's think about this. How in the world (haha, maybe "world is not the right word") , er, what could possibly be making the universe expand at an accelerating rate. To have acceleration you must have force (as far as we know). Gravitational force is really the only thing big enough to move plantes and the such right? But masses have attracting gravitational force which would infer that the universe should be negatively accelerating and eventually reverse and get smaller and ultimately collapse back on itself. So what could possibly be providing the force allowing it to expand (and at an accelerated rate)? Is there a group of even larger masses beyond the universe whose gravity is pulling our universe apart? Perhaps some sort of increidbly large electromagnetic force of some sort?

Also, we talk about how the universe started about 16 billion years ago. It is so funny to talk about things like the universe (which is far as we know is EVERYTHING that exists) in terms of time units from Earth. I wish scientists would develop some sort of univeral time unit for all throughout space, but I have no idea how that would work. Especially when you get into time warpage and stuff like that.

Last, does anyone believe that sending life to other planets could be potentially damaging to our own in the long long run? I don't think you'd want to start life on nearby planets. I'm thinking War of the Worlds but like for reals. What if in 5 billion years they come to attack us (given that we are still here) and destroy us? I think if we plant life in the universe then we should send it really far away. Also, I think we should be able to monitor it, but not leave and evidence as to where it came from. I'm thinking that one day if two intelligent life forms from different planets interacted, it would have very violent results.

For starting life elsewhere, I had once heard something about how the ice caps on Mars could be melted to produce C02 which would warm the planet to make it much more suitable for life. They said something if the technology was available to do it on that large of a scale, it would only take about 20 years to complete. I forget exactly how they thought it could be done though.

we have already measured the rate of expansion, and the universe is expanding faster than (for lack of the exactly correct expression) the universal escape velocity. The matter is already expanding out faster than gravity can pull it all back together to make it collapse back in on itself

I dont want to delve into a discussion on how its possible that this expansion is accelerating - physicists dont have a good answer, and neither do I. It is an interesting subject, and theres lots of information out there.

Regarding the dangers of interstellar exploration and colonization, I had considered this as a possible reason why we might have come here from another star system, and decided to erase the tracks as it were.

If our species had a violent history on our previous planet, we might have decided to break the link between the colonies - to keep one from turning against the other

but I tend to think if we are able to pull together as a species to organize something as complex as interstellar travel and colonization, that we would also be able to learn to live with each other, here and everywhere else we travel.

And then there is always the chance that we will send a probe or starship to another system and discover it is already inhabited, that they dont appreciate the intrusion, and they are able to trace the trajectory of the vessel back to its origin and come after us. It is possible, but the whole point of my message is that, based on what science is telling us, its very unlikely that any lifeforms are out there at all.

[sanddrag]

Originally Posted by KenWittlief

If our species had a violent history on our previous planet, we might have decided to break the link between the colonies - to keep one from turning against the other

Wait a minute. Homo sapiens didn't arrive here from another planet. They evolved here beginning with single celled organisms (or so we think). Or maybe I misunderstood you. Are you saying that perhaps homo sapiens perhaps evolved somewhere else and then that "somewhere else" started life in it's most basic forms here on Earth and then it evolved into us? How would we even know about a link to break with our "planters" if we think that we started here by evolving from single celled organisms? Also, it seems reasonable that humans did not learn about space and planets and whatnot until very recently in the history of our species.

EDIT: Also, I just wanted to comment that it seems there is a large amount of people thinking that if there is other intelligent life out there that is looks like us. Due to different conditions even such as different amounts of gravity, it could look totally different. People think intelligent life in the universe would be a lot like humans which probably most likely it would not be. It would be just like thinking everyone in the world speaks English, which most certainly isn't the case.

If intelligent life it found, it will probably be so mind boggling strange that we can't comprehend it.

Finally, I believe that possibly by the end of my lifetime scientists will be able to create life from non-living matter. It is simply a problem of making the most complex (metaphorical) photocopier ever.

[mechanicalbrain]

i think we were created by the mice! okay on a more serious note what happens if we DO come across life and either A) dont recognize it for what it is. or B) the lifeform is so alien from us that we have no point of reference. (yes i know catagory A automatically fits into catagory B)

[Joshua May]

I think that it is almost statistically impossible for Earth to be the only planet that has life on it. Now there may not be other life forms in our galaxy, but there are sure to be some somewhere at some other infinitesimal part of the universe. On the second slide from this powerpoint presentation given by my astronomy professor for next semester really shows how large the universe is when compared to the Earth. Really, the universe is beyond HUGE, and contains billions and billions (if not more) stars, and with many of those stars come planets, however the vast amount of these cannot be seen from Earth.

And I'd also like to bring up another point to add to the discussion. In every case that I have seen, scientists look for signs of water that would be able to sustain alien life. But who says that these life forms are dependent on water? Given a completely different planet with a completely different set of environments, I think it would be possible that the life on that planet would develop so that it actually lives off some completely different natural resources. It could be that a planet is inhabited by life that lives off of Helium in the air and some kind of Jello for food. Then we have a nice planet of squeaky-voiced Bill Cosby aliens.

Also, it may be that alien life forms have or will exist. Given the great amount of time that the universe has been around and probably will be around, all life forms on a planet may have already died out, or are just coming into existence. The possibilities truly are endless.

However, given the size and scope of the universe, I believe it to be very unlikely that we will ever come in contact with any such civilization, because it would take nothing short of science fiction to allow for such beings to travel the great distances of space to just-so-happen to pass by our planet.

My 2.5 cents

[sanddrag]

Maybe we can somehow generate and extremely massive electromagnetic storm so that if any other intelliegent beings are out there we could let them know that we are here. Didn't at one time the US have like 70,000 nukes. Maybe they still do. What if we sent them way out to space and blew them up all at once to make a signal of our presence.

[KenWittlief]

Originally Posted by Joshua May

I think that it is almost statistically impossible for Earth to be the only planet that has life on it. Now there may not be other life forms in our galaxy, but there are sure to be some somewhere at some other infinitesimal part of the universe. On the second slide from this powerpoint presentation given by my astronomy professor for next semester really shows how large the universe is when compared to the Earth. Really, the universe is beyond HUGE, and contains billions and billions (if not more) stars, and with many of those stars come planets, however the vast amount of these cannot be seen from Earth.

this is what I meant when I said the astronomers have not been talking to the bilogists. When Darwin first proposed that single cell organisms could easly assemble themselves in primortal soup I dont think we even knew about atoms and molecules yet (I will have to double check this). To Dawin a single cell organism was simple, a handfull of elements mixed together.

but we know know that a one cell organism is incredibly complex - and we can put a number on that complexity (how many atoms or molecules there are, and how many possible combinations)

so while the universe is very large (1E66 atoms in the universe), the most simple life forms are way more complex (1E350 possible combinations to get one cell correct)

[KenWittlief]

Originally Posted by sanddrag

Wait a minute. Homo sapiens didn't arrive here from another planet. They evolved here beginning with single celled organisms (or so we think). Or maybe I misunderstood you. Are you saying that perhaps homo sapiens perhaps evolved somewhere else and then that "somewhere else" started life in it's most basic forms here on Earth and then it evolved into us?

if there are 10,000 earth like planets in our galaxy, then the odds are 1:10,000 that any given planet is the single origin of life

if we came here from somewhere else, then either we were involved in that transfer (as a species) or it was done by a species more evolved than us, and we were just cargo along for the ride.

But I think if we were going to colonize another star system, I cant think of any reason to send only one-cell organisms. I would send the most complex life forms we could, including humans if humans can survive on the new world.

so from what we know about earths biological history - tens of millions of years of life existed before humans showed up. Therefore, if we came here from somewhere else there must have been a very long program of first seeding the planet with plant and animal life, and then after 50 million years or more we came here too (after the earth was ready) ?

We only assume humans evolved from other lifeforms here on earth, because there is no other explaination based on what we have found here on earth. But if we came here from another world, then we dont know our own history as a species

which would be very strange.

we dont really know. Unless we find a starship buried under the pyramids Im inclined to believe we evolved here, and we are the only life in the galaxy.