(Viewed 892 times)

[Chicago Astronomer - Astro Joe]

Did Life Arrive Before the Solar System Even Formed?

May 4, 2005 - The theory of panspermia proposes that life really gets around, jumping fron planet to planet - or even from star to star. Life might be everywhere! Assuming this is true, how do single-celled bacteria make the journey through the vacuum of space? Easy, they use chunks of rock as space ships, in a process called lithopanspermia. And now, researchers from Princeton and the University of Michigan think that life carrying rocks might have been right there at the beginning of our solar system, keeping their tiny astronauts safe and sound, frozen in statis until the planets formed and the right conditions let them thaw out, stretch their proteins, and begin a process leading from microbe to mankind.

More from Universe Today: www.universetoday.com/am/publish/lithopanspermia.html?452005
------------

I think that this is quite plausable.

[Centaur]

Interesting, but that just removes the question of the initial formation of reproducible chemical systems ("life") to earlier events on some other planet. Ocham's Razor, an important principle of the scientific method, suggests that the simplest explanation is usually the correct one. The simplest explanation is that chemicals developed the ability to reproduce right here on Earth. That is emminently plausible. It may seem mundane. It may not seem intriguing. Nevertheless, Hooray for us Earthlings!

[Maddad]

I am unsure of the applicability of Occaman's Razor to the question of the origin of life.

Panspermia does not address this question. It suggests instead a mechanism for moving life from location to another after life has already started.

If life is very likely to originate from the original conditions, then it will also have started in a bazillion other locations as well. Because we have a well understood mechanism for moving biological materials from one place to another, early life on Earth would have many different origins.

If life is extremely unlikely to spontaneously arise in any one location, then we had better hope that panspermia functions as advertised. Someday I'd like to meet ET. Can't do that if he doesn't exist.

[Centaur]

Ahhhh, so it's a matter of what we'd like. Be careful what you wish for; you might get it. That hoped for ET may look upon us as vermin.

Why should we want panspermia to actually work if we already exist? Unless you are referring to the possibility of our descendents colonizing other planets.

[Maddad]

This is why: www.maddad.org/seti.htm

[Centaur]

I'm not certain what that link had to do with panspermia. Although it nicely explained your interest in ET's. Thank you for providing it. I have no objection to SETI. It may be a worthwhile endeavor, whether or not signals are ever received. I applaud you for your effort. I would only object to signals being sent outward that might serve as dinner bells.

As Columbus' ships were passing, the natives waved them ashore. Huge mistake. The native Filipinos were more wary of Magellan and instinctively did what they could to stave off disaster. I have to wonder how the Neanderthals reacted to us before we wiped them out. That's not to mention what we have done to less related species. Genes are selfish. And we are more closely related to blades of grass than any potential ET's.

Many people no longer accept the concept of a benificent diety looking over everyone's welfare. However, some of those same folks want to believe that kind ET's are out there who will share their wisdom and some idealistic notions of righteousness. But all that would be needed to wipe us out would be a single ET race that has proven fit enough to survive by accomplishing a series of ethnic cleansings against any potential competitors. I wouldn't worry about that, however. If intelligent ET's were really out there, one of those species would have wiped us out by now and we would not be holding this discussion.

Be glad that humans like Newton and Darwin have shown us the ways of nature without the intervention of ET's. I would not be proud to live as an Eloi. Don't be surprised if our civilization continues to progress and colonizes the galaxy before any other lifeform develops the technology of spaceflight.

[Centaur]

Here's a link to an article suggesting that Earth may have been a suitable place for the initiation of life much earlier than previously thought.
dsc.discovery.com/news/briefs/20050502/earlyearth.html?msn=dsc_news

[Chicago Astronomer - Astro Joe]

That is in contrast to religious fundimentalists who believe that the Earth has only been in existance for only 6 thousand years!...

And the Eloi again..heh heh...I like the Eloi, especially Weena... ;D

[Maddad]

Centaur said:

Many people no longer accept the concept of a benificent diety looking over everyone's welfare. However, some of those same folks want to believe that kind ET's are out there who will share their wisdom and some idealistic notions of righteousness.

It may be something as simple as ethics (different from morality). Ethics speaks to universal application. If ET were to use Earth for his own benefit at the detriment of earthlings, then ethics says that it would be Ok for a superET could do the same to ET. He might not like that idea so well.

[Maddad]

Centaur said:

Here's a link to an article suggesting that Earth may have been a suitable place for the initiation of life much earlier than previously thought.
dsc.discovery.com/news/briefs/20050502/earlyearth.html?msn=dsc_news

I am uncomfortable with two interpretations in this article. One is that 4.4 billion years is a very long time. I did a researched paper on oxygen starvation as a minor theory in the extinction of the dinosaurs in which I debunked the idea that oxygen levels fell in the last 500,000 years before the KT extinction. The researchers who made the claim did it from analyzing oxygen levels in 65 million year-old amber. The problem with this approach is that amber is permeable enouh to oxygen that none of the oxygen in the sample would be the same oxygen as was in the original sample.

Zicrons will have a much lower oxygen permeability, but they will also have had 70 times as long to diffuse.

The second problem I have is the crystalization temperature of zicrons. The size of the crystals will be related to the speed of the cooling, but otherwise they will all crystalize at the same temperature. The article's contention that the crystals show evidence of crystalization at a much lower temperature than expected is . . . I don't know. Something's wrong with that line of reasoning.

[Centaur]

Good. A skeptic. I love it. ;D I hope you send your objections to both the magazine Science and DiscoveryChannel.com. It would be great to see them printed.

[Chicago Astronomer - Astro Joe]

"The church says the Earth is flat, but I know that it is round, for I have seen the shadow on the moon, and I have more faith in a shadow than in the church."

--Ferdinand Magellan, (1480-1521), Portuguese navigator: discoverer of the Straits of Magellan 1520 and the Philippines 1521.

-----

Amen!

[Centaur]

Chicago said:

"The church says the Earth is flat, but I know that it is round, for I have seen the shadow on the moon, and I have more faith in a shadow than in the church."

--Ferdinand Magellan, (1480-1521), Portuguese navigator: discoverer of the Straits of Magellan 1520 and the Philippines 1521.

-----

Amen!

Interesting, Joe, but could you tell us more about your source for that quote. The medieval Catholic church embraced the science of Aristotle. He offered proofs of the Earth's spherical shape, including the Earth's shadow falling on the Moon during a lunar eclipse. The only controversy was over whether the Sun or the Earth should be considered at the center of a dynamic system.

[Chicago Astronomer - Astro Joe]

That quote was sent to me sometime ago by a Chicago Astronomer newsletter reader, and I found it interesting.

I kept it, and since you mentioned Magellan, I thought I would post it in homage.

A google seach attributes the quote to Magallan with an armload of referrences...

[Centaur]

Joe, I still suspect that quote is apocryphal. For over two-thousand years educated people in the western world have been taught that the Earth's surface is spherical. I'm not normally one to defend the church, but they did most of the teaching during the Middle Ages. Yes, early in the Middle Ages a few churchmen reverted to the idea of a flat Earth. But by the late Middle Ages such a notion had been pretty much abandoned.

Magellan was a pious Catholic. On what occasion would he have made such a remark? It was principally a rebuke of faith in church doctrine. While attempting to raise money for a fleet, it's hard to imagine him offending churchmen or god-fearing noblemen.

Here are links pointing to the origin of misinformation regarding belief in a flat Earth.

www.textbookleague.org/26flat.htm

www.sparrowdancer.com/perception.html