• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 10:54
CEST 16:54
KST 23:54
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
Tournament Spotlight: FEL Cracow 20258Power Rank - Esports World Cup 202577RSL Season 1 - Final Week9[ASL19] Finals Recap: Standing Tall15HomeStory Cup 27 - Info & Preview18
Community News
Google Play ASL (Season 20) Announced24BSL Team Wars - Bonyth, Dewalt, Hawk & Sziky teams10Weekly Cups (July 14-20): Final Check-up0Esports World Cup 2025 - Brackets Revealed19Weekly Cups (July 7-13): Classic continues to roll8
StarCraft 2
General
#1: Maru - Greatest Players of All Time Tournament Spotlight: FEL Cracow 2025 Power Rank - Esports World Cup 2025 I offer completely free coaching services What tournaments are world championships?
Tourneys
FEL Cracov 2025 (July 27) - $10,000 live event Esports World Cup 2025 $25,000 Streamerzone StarCraft Pro Series announced $5,000 WardiTV Summer Championship 2025 WardiTV Mondays
Strategy
How did i lose this ZvP, whats the proper response
Custom Maps
External Content
Mutation #239 Bad Weather Mutation # 483 Kill Bot Wars Mutation # 482 Wheel of Misfortune Mutation # 481 Fear and Lava
Brood War
General
Google Play ASL (Season 20) Announced [Update] ShieldBattery: 2025 Redesign Dewalt's Show Matches in China BGH Auto Balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ BW General Discussion
Tourneys
[Megathread] Daily Proleagues [BSL20] Non-Korean Championship 4x BSL + 4x China CSL Xiamen International Invitational [CSLPRO] It's CSLAN Season! - Last Chance
Strategy
Simple Questions, Simple Answers [G] Mineral Boosting Does 1 second matter in StarCraft?
Other Games
General Games
Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Nintendo Switch Thread Total Annihilation Server - TAForever [MMORPG] Tree of Savior (Successor of Ragnarok) Path of Exile
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread UK Politics Mega-thread Stop Killing Games - European Citizens Initiative Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine Russo-Ukrainian War Thread
Fan Clubs
INnoVation Fan Club SKT1 Classic Fan Club!
Media & Entertainment
[\m/] Heavy Metal Thread Anime Discussion Thread Movie Discussion! [Manga] One Piece Korean Music Discussion
Sports
Formula 1 Discussion 2024 - 2025 Football Thread TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023 NBA General Discussion
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Installation of Windows 10 suck at "just a moment" Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
TeamLiquid Team Shirt On Sale The Automated Ban List
Blogs
Ping To Win? Pings And Their…
TrAiDoS
momentary artworks from des…
tankgirl
from making sc maps to makin…
Husyelt
StarCraft improvement
iopq
Socialism Anyone?
GreenHorizons
Eight Anniversary as a TL…
Mizenhauer
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 662 users

Planets that can potentially support life... - Page 22

Forum Index > General Forum
Post a Reply
Prev 1 20 21 22 23 24 43 Next All
ArchAngelSC
Profile Joined April 2012
England706 Posts
April 30 2012 12:49 GMT
#421
On April 30 2012 21:36 Aelfric wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 30 2012 21:19 DaCruise wrote:
On April 30 2012 20:30 ArchAngelSC wrote:
On April 30 2012 18:44 Miyoshino wrote:
The universe was designed for us? That's one of the most random statements I ever hear, lol. How do you even come up with something like that? I mean, there's no evidence for it, but how do you get to such a line of throught? The universe is a big big place and nothing in nature is 'designed' and humans are just nothing in the size of all stuff.


The universe being designed for us is a very widely accepted theory (not saying it's the only one, just one of many). You must still be in your early years of education if you do not know this.


The Earth is designed for us. The universe is NOT!

If it was then why is it so insanely difficult to launch anything, especially people, into space?

If Earth wasnt such a fantastic planet to live on it would be our prison, perhaps for eternity.

Sigh. Earth is not designed for us. We fit in to the earth. If Earth would be designed for us humans would exist as soon as the world exists. Well, it didn't happen that way. Earth seems to be 4,5 billion years old and our evolution took millions of years, billions if we count all the ancestors. We found our way into the earth by adapting to the enviroment arround us and it took time and the process is still going on.

We will adapt to the space with our technology, we are not evolved for space because we never had to survive in that enviroment. Macro evolution takes thousands, millions of years so we can't wait to adapt via biology but our technology and scientific improvements are incredibly fast so we will find our way into space too.


Correct me if I'm wrong but, isn't the whole theory of evolution based on adapting to your surroundings?
Big-t
Profile Joined January 2011
Austria1350 Posts
April 30 2012 12:51 GMT
#422
On April 30 2012 15:39 DyEnasTy wrote:
Only 3.6 times earths gravity? Massive geological/volcanic movement? Super rocky surface? Oh man.....I just cant wait to NOT move there!


If you look at other planets, this one is like heaven. Specially the volcanic movement is very important.
monchi | IdrA | Flash
Miyoshino
Profile Blog Joined February 2012
314 Posts
April 30 2012 12:58 GMT
#423
On April 30 2012 21:49 ArchAngelSC wrote:
Correct me if I'm wrong but, isn't the whole theory of evolution based on adapting to your surroundings?



Life can't evolve in space period. The laws of nature were presicely fine tuned so that in 99.999999999% of the universe it is physically impossible for life to survive there. Almost all of space is a near vacuum that is near absolute zero. Then most stuff besides that are burning hot fusion engines that throw massive amounts of radiation into their surroundings.
Then there are planets but most are either frozen or cooking.

Liquid water is the medium for life. If you designed the universe for life the universe would be one huge blob of liquid water. It's not so it wasn't designed for life. Until you can prove to me the universe is indeed a huge blob of liquid water, I won't believe you when you tell me it was designed for life.
Aelfric
Profile Blog Joined March 2010
Turkey1496 Posts
April 30 2012 13:00 GMT
#424
On April 30 2012 21:49 ArchAngelSC wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 30 2012 21:36 Aelfric wrote:
On April 30 2012 21:19 DaCruise wrote:
On April 30 2012 20:30 ArchAngelSC wrote:
On April 30 2012 18:44 Miyoshino wrote:
The universe was designed for us? That's one of the most random statements I ever hear, lol. How do you even come up with something like that? I mean, there's no evidence for it, but how do you get to such a line of throught? The universe is a big big place and nothing in nature is 'designed' and humans are just nothing in the size of all stuff.


The universe being designed for us is a very widely accepted theory (not saying it's the only one, just one of many). You must still be in your early years of education if you do not know this.


The Earth is designed for us. The universe is NOT!

If it was then why is it so insanely difficult to launch anything, especially people, into space?

If Earth wasnt such a fantastic planet to live on it would be our prison, perhaps for eternity.

Sigh. Earth is not designed for us. We fit in to the earth. If Earth would be designed for us humans would exist as soon as the world exists. Well, it didn't happen that way. Earth seems to be 4,5 billion years old and our evolution took millions of years, billions if we count all the ancestors. We found our way into the earth by adapting to the enviroment arround us and it took time and the process is still going on.

We will adapt to the space with our technology, we are not evolved for space because we never had to survive in that enviroment. Macro evolution takes thousands, millions of years so we can't wait to adapt via biology but our technology and scientific improvements are incredibly fast so we will find our way into space too.


Correct me if I'm wrong but, isn't the whole theory of evolution based on adapting to your surroundings?

Yes. But what i mean is not that we could start "existing" in space. We come to evolve this far, from there we can use our technology to help us. What i mean is if we spend enough time in space maybe we will slowly adapt to non-gravity situations. It doesn't look so possible because i remember reading you can't breed in space because gravity is needed for
zygote to be fetus. But maybe we invent something like artificial gravity.
Tomorrow never comes until its too late...
ArchAngelSC
Profile Joined April 2012
England706 Posts
April 30 2012 13:03 GMT
#425
On April 30 2012 21:58 Miyoshino wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 30 2012 21:49 ArchAngelSC wrote:
Correct me if I'm wrong but, isn't the whole theory of evolution based on adapting to your surroundings?



Life can't evolve in space period. The laws of nature were presicely fine tuned so that in 99.999999999% of the universe it is physically impossible for life to survive there. Almost all of space is a near vacuum that is near absolute zero. Then most stuff besides that are burning hot fusion engines that throw massive amounts of radiation into their surroundings.
Then there are planets but most are either frozen or cooking.

Liquid water is the medium for life. If you designed the universe for life the universe would be one huge blob of liquid water. It's not so it wasn't designed for life. Until you can prove to me the universe is indeed a huge blob of liquid water, I won't believe you when you tell me it was designed for life.


Okay fair enough.

Also I misspoke earlier. When I said "designed for us" I didn't necessarily mean designed for LIFE. Probably should have made that clearer
Nallen
Profile Joined September 2011
United Kingdom134 Posts
April 30 2012 13:10 GMT
#426
On April 30 2012 22:03 ArchAngelSC wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 30 2012 21:58 Miyoshino wrote:
On April 30 2012 21:49 ArchAngelSC wrote:
Correct me if I'm wrong but, isn't the whole theory of evolution based on adapting to your surroundings?



Life can't evolve in space period. The laws of nature were presicely fine tuned so that in 99.999999999% of the universe it is physically impossible for life to survive there. Almost all of space is a near vacuum that is near absolute zero. Then most stuff besides that are burning hot fusion engines that throw massive amounts of radiation into their surroundings.
Then there are planets but most are either frozen or cooking.

Liquid water is the medium for life. If you designed the universe for life the universe would be one huge blob of liquid water. It's not so it wasn't designed for life. Until you can prove to me the universe is indeed a huge blob of liquid water, I won't believe you when you tell me it was designed for life.


Okay fair enough.

Also I misspoke earlier. When I said "designed for us" I didn't necessarily mean designed for LIFE. Probably should have made that clearer



What did you mean then?
Xpace
Profile Joined March 2011
United States2209 Posts
April 30 2012 13:17 GMT
#427
I'm not going to claim to be an expert at this subject, but isn't it strange that people assume planets that support life must have certain environmental qualities, like water, oxygen, or non-fatal elements (predominantly to humans) in the atmosphere? Why must a planet mimic the qualities of Earth for it to have life? So far we only about our world, is it not possible that life exists on a planet that would, say, incinerate Earth-born creatures if they try to breath? I find it strange that people (or at least the general consensus I know of) have this assumption that any species not from our planet, regardless of its sentience, must be similar to what we simply believe them to be.

I'll refer to this topic:
On April 30 2012 21:58 Miyoshino wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 30 2012 21:49 ArchAngelSC wrote:
Correct me if I'm wrong but, isn't the whole theory of evolution based on adapting to your surroundings?

Life can't evolve in space period. The laws of nature were presicely fine tuned so that in 99.999999999% of the universe it is physically impossible for life to survive there. Almost all of space is a near vacuum that is near absolute zero. Then most stuff besides that are burning hot fusion engines that throw massive amounts of radiation into their surroundings.
Then there are planets but most are either frozen or cooking.

Liquid water is the medium for life. If you designed the universe for life the universe would be one huge blob of liquid water. It's not so it wasn't designed for life. Until you can prove to me the universe is indeed a huge blob of liquid water, I won't believe you when you tell me it was designed for life.


Again, I'm not an expert at the subject, but how are we so sure that absolutely no life can exist in space? Most likely based off of what humans know? Like, if stuff like waterbears (iirc) can be exposed the vacuum of space and come back to Earth and live, isn't there a shot?
Mariella
Profile Joined August 2011
Philippines36 Posts
April 30 2012 13:26 GMT
#428
On April 30 2012 21:11 ArchAngelSC wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 30 2012 20:38 Aelfric wrote:
On April 30 2012 20:30 ArchAngelSC wrote:
On April 30 2012 18:44 Miyoshino wrote:
The universe was designed for us? That's one of the most random statements I ever hear, lol. How do you even come up with something like that? I mean, there's no evidence for it, but how do you get to such a line of throught? The universe is a big big place and nothing in nature is 'designed' and humans are just nothing in the size of all stuff.


The universe being designed for us is a very widely accepted theory (not saying it's the only one, just one of many). You must still be in your early years of education if you do not know this.

It's not a scientific theory. It's just a religious idea. Nothing found in science points out to a universe designed for us yet. We're just in a tiny part of universe that is in order for a tiny bit of a timeline. This part will find it's chaos when the time comes too. The universe is what it is, nothing less nothing more.

Althought i agree with you that it's odd he hasn't heard of this "idea" yet.


Well it just comes down to a persons bias on how you view what your observe. For example, a scientist that believes the evolutionary theory will see something and say "this developed into being like this because it is the best way to be", whereas a scientist who believes the creation theory will see that same thing and say "it was designed like this because this is what is required" and really they're both just as unprovable as each other.


Except that evolution has already been reproduced in a lab, thus proof.
Miyoshino
Profile Blog Joined February 2012
314 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-04-30 13:42:18
April 30 2012 13:36 GMT
#429
If something can survive without liquid water we wouldn't be calling it 'life' but something else.

Just like stuff can survive some conditions into space doesn't mean it can evolve and reproduce there. These extremophiles can't live in space just because they survive exposure to space.

Liquid water is needed for any form of cell metabolism. If it freezes, the crystals will damage cell membranes and organelles. Waterbears go into cryptobiosis. They are basically 'dead' when in that stage. They have no metabolism. They just can come back from that.

This means life can survive on a planet where everything freezes solid for like 10 months and then melts for their 2 months of summer, whatever length their month is. They still need liquid water to do their life things.
Something that's in cryptobiosis permanently is just dead and not coming back.

Now maybe something that is self-organizing can survive without liquid water. There's alternative chemestry where you have silicon and methane or something like that. But I would limit the term 'life' to only organic chemestry based self-organising stuff.
We know our organic chemistry. It is hard to see how something based silicon could do just as well as our carbon stuff. We need liquid water for organic chemistry. That's what we call life.
Even if something based on something else is possible, that's still a way way long shot away from silicon-based multicellular life. It's already a big enough of a challenge to find organic life. So let's find that stuff first. When we do we can speculate about the much rarer occuring alternatives.

It's not just that we 'favour' organic chemistry because that's what we are made of. It is in the nature of organic chemistry itself.
We know what complex molecules can occur and how likely they are to arise. We can even observe what is out there in space up to a limited amount. The odds are not good for non-carbon based complex self-reproducing structures.
Also, carbon is much more common in the universe than silicon is anyway.
DarkPlasmaBall
Profile Blog Joined March 2010
United States44313 Posts
April 30 2012 13:38 GMT
#430
On April 30 2012 22:26 Mariella wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 30 2012 21:11 ArchAngelSC wrote:
On April 30 2012 20:38 Aelfric wrote:
On April 30 2012 20:30 ArchAngelSC wrote:
On April 30 2012 18:44 Miyoshino wrote:
The universe was designed for us? That's one of the most random statements I ever hear, lol. How do you even come up with something like that? I mean, there's no evidence for it, but how do you get to such a line of throught? The universe is a big big place and nothing in nature is 'designed' and humans are just nothing in the size of all stuff.


The universe being designed for us is a very widely accepted theory (not saying it's the only one, just one of many). You must still be in your early years of education if you do not know this.

It's not a scientific theory. It's just a religious idea. Nothing found in science points out to a universe designed for us yet. We're just in a tiny part of universe that is in order for a tiny bit of a timeline. This part will find it's chaos when the time comes too. The universe is what it is, nothing less nothing more.

Althought i agree with you that it's odd he hasn't heard of this "idea" yet.


Well it just comes down to a persons bias on how you view what your observe. For example, a scientist that believes the evolutionary theory will see something and say "this developed into being like this because it is the best way to be", whereas a scientist who believes the creation theory will see that same thing and say "it was designed like this because this is what is required" and really they're both just as unprovable as each other.


Except that evolution has already been reproduced in a lab, thus proof.


And the very fact that he's equivocating between scientists "believing the evolutionary theory " and scientists who believe "the creation theory" means he doesn't quite understand that it's already been universally accepted by the experts that evolution is a fact (due to countless observable facts), and that scientific theory is not the same as colloquial theory.

And yet *he's* the one who said:

On April 30 2012 20:30 ArchAngelSC wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 30 2012 18:44 Miyoshino wrote:
The universe was designed for us? That's one of the most random statements I ever hear, lol. How do you even come up with something like that? I mean, there's no evidence for it, but how do you get to such a line of throught? The universe is a big big place and nothing in nature is 'designed' and humans are just nothing in the size of all stuff.


The universe being designed for us is a very widely accepted theory (not saying it's the only one, just one of many). You must still be in your early years of education if you do not know this.



Oh dear -.-'

Mixing science and religion Here we go again x.x
"There is nothing more satisfying than looking at a crowd of people and helping them get what I love." ~Day[9] Daily #100
Bladilein
Profile Joined April 2012
7 Posts
April 30 2012 13:41 GMT
#431
we should also mention that creation isn't a scientific theory, it is at best a hypothesis, and a bad one after all...

Apart from that, cool news! =D

ArchAngelSC
Profile Joined April 2012
England706 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-04-30 14:32:27
April 30 2012 13:44 GMT
#432
On April 30 2012 22:26 Mariella wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 30 2012 21:11 ArchAngelSC wrote:
On April 30 2012 20:38 Aelfric wrote:
On April 30 2012 20:30 ArchAngelSC wrote:
On April 30 2012 18:44 Miyoshino wrote:
The universe was designed for us? That's one of the most random statements I ever hear, lol. How do you even come up with something like that? I mean, there's no evidence for it, but how do you get to such a line of throught? The universe is a big big place and nothing in nature is 'designed' and humans are just nothing in the size of all stuff.


The universe being designed for us is a very widely accepted theory (not saying it's the only one, just one of many). You must still be in your early years of education if you do not know this.

It's not a scientific theory. It's just a religious idea. Nothing found in science points out to a universe designed for us yet. We're just in a tiny part of universe that is in order for a tiny bit of a timeline. This part will find it's chaos when the time comes too. The universe is what it is, nothing less nothing more.

Althought i agree with you that it's odd he hasn't heard of this "idea" yet.


Well it just comes down to a persons bias on how you view what your observe. For example, a scientist that believes the evolutionary theory will see something and say "this developed into being like this because it is the best way to be", whereas a scientist who believes the creation theory will see that same thing and say "it was designed like this because this is what is required" and really they're both just as unprovable as each other.


Except that evolution has already been reproduced in a lab, thus proof.


I'd love to read up on that if you could provide a link
kef
Profile Joined September 2010
283 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-04-30 13:56:10
April 30 2012 13:54 GMT
#433
On April 30 2012 22:17 Xpace wrote:
I'm not going to claim to be an expert at this subject, but isn't it strange that people assume planets that support life must have certain environmental qualities, like water, oxygen, or non-fatal elements (predominantly to humans) in the atmosphere? Why must a planet mimic the qualities of Earth for it to have life? So far we only about our world, is it not possible that life exists on a planet that would, say, incinerate Earth-born creatures if they try to breath? I find it strange that people (or at least the general consensus I know of) have this assumption that any species not from our planet, regardless of its sentience, must be similar to what we simply believe them to be.

I'll refer to this topic:
Show nested quote +
On April 30 2012 21:58 Miyoshino wrote:
On April 30 2012 21:49 ArchAngelSC wrote:
Correct me if I'm wrong but, isn't the whole theory of evolution based on adapting to your surroundings?

Life can't evolve in space period. The laws of nature were presicely fine tuned so that in 99.999999999% of the universe it is physically impossible for life to survive there. Almost all of space is a near vacuum that is near absolute zero. Then most stuff besides that are burning hot fusion engines that throw massive amounts of radiation into their surroundings.
Then there are planets but most are either frozen or cooking.

Liquid water is the medium for life. If you designed the universe for life the universe would be one huge blob of liquid water. It's not so it wasn't designed for life. Until you can prove to me the universe is indeed a huge blob of liquid water, I won't believe you when you tell me it was designed for life.


Again, I'm not an expert at the subject, but how are we so sure that absolutely no life can exist in space? Most likely based off of what humans know? Like, if stuff like waterbears (iirc) can be exposed the vacuum of space and come back to Earth and live, isn't there a shot?


That's an incredibly complex question, and although I used to think the same thing, as I've studied biochemistry at the university level (my major), I've learned that the answer to "Could life evolve in space?" is "Almost definitely not." Now that's not to say "absolutely not" because science has a way of surprising us, but the idea that life as complex as animal life could evolve in space is basically impossible. Maybe through genetic engineering life could be able to exist in space, but naturally, certainly not.

Life (in the scientific sense) is basically a series of complex chemical reactions that have increased in complexity via the mechanism we call evolution over billions of years to the point where we are now. In order for there to be a series of chemical reactions like those that life evolved from there needs to be certain conditions. If you study chemistry, you'll learn that water has some very unique properties that arise from its chemical structure- properties such as high amounts of hydrogen bonding which lead to things like high surface tension, a specific crystalline structure that results in solid ice being less dense than liquid ice, etc. which our form of life needs to exist. The specific phase (liquid) of water, the presence of certain biological precursors ("organic" compounds or their precursors), and the correct temperature were all necessary for there to be the complex reactions that life arose from, and on Earth, it just so happened that all the right conditions were present at the same time for life to arise.

In vacuum, water is either frozen or gaseous- because pressure is so low, there is no liquid state. Chemical reactions cannot occur if particles do not come into contact (which is rare in a vacuum). Chemical reactions cannot occur if the specific reactants don't come into contact. Chemical reactions cannot occur quick enough (if even at all) if temperatures are too low, and if temperatures are high (such as near a star) the resulting organic products would literally burn up.

I could go on for a long time, but it's really difficult to explain it all in a short amount of time, especially to someone who doesn't have a decent biology/chemistry/biochemistry background. Suffice it to say that given what we know about life today, it could not evolve in space, and actually requires very specific conditions (such as those on Earth for complex life or possibly Mars for less complex life) to arise. Anything else is conjecture at this point.
There are two kinds of people in this world: people who say there are two kinds of people in the world and people who know the first group of people are full of shit.
Warillions
Profile Joined November 2010
United States215 Posts
April 30 2012 13:56 GMT
#434
On April 30 2012 20:30 ArchAngelSC wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 30 2012 18:44 Miyoshino wrote:
The universe was designed for us? That's one of the most random statements I ever hear, lol. How do you even come up with something like that? I mean, there's no evidence for it, but how do you get to such a line of throught? The universe is a big big place and nothing in nature is 'designed' and humans are just nothing in the size of all stuff.


The universe being designed for us is a very widely accepted theory (not saying it's the only one, just one of many). You must still be in your early years of education if you do not know this.

you verbally attack him to validate your statement.
ArchAngelSC
Profile Joined April 2012
England706 Posts
April 30 2012 13:59 GMT
#435
On April 30 2012 22:56 Warillions wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 30 2012 20:30 ArchAngelSC wrote:
On April 30 2012 18:44 Miyoshino wrote:
The universe was designed for us? That's one of the most random statements I ever hear, lol. How do you even come up with something like that? I mean, there's no evidence for it, but how do you get to such a line of throught? The universe is a big big place and nothing in nature is 'designed' and humans are just nothing in the size of all stuff.


The universe being designed for us is a very widely accepted theory (not saying it's the only one, just one of many). You must still be in your early years of education if you do not know this.

you verbally attack him to validate your statement.


It was not intended as a verbal attack, nor is a verbal attack going to make the statement any more or less true. So I'm not sure why you'd say that lol.

It was just simply that if he doesn't know that it's a very common theory then he can't have had much education yet as anyone who is well educated should know about it.
Aelfric
Profile Blog Joined March 2010
Turkey1496 Posts
April 30 2012 14:17 GMT
#436
On April 30 2012 22:54 kef wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 30 2012 22:17 Xpace wrote:
I'm not going to claim to be an expert at this subject, but isn't it strange that people assume planets that support life must have certain environmental qualities, like water, oxygen, or non-fatal elements (predominantly to humans) in the atmosphere? Why must a planet mimic the qualities of Earth for it to have life? So far we only about our world, is it not possible that life exists on a planet that would, say, incinerate Earth-born creatures if they try to breath? I find it strange that people (or at least the general consensus I know of) have this assumption that any species not from our planet, regardless of its sentience, must be similar to what we simply believe them to be.

I'll refer to this topic:
On April 30 2012 21:58 Miyoshino wrote:
On April 30 2012 21:49 ArchAngelSC wrote:
Correct me if I'm wrong but, isn't the whole theory of evolution based on adapting to your surroundings?

Life can't evolve in space period. The laws of nature were presicely fine tuned so that in 99.999999999% of the universe it is physically impossible for life to survive there. Almost all of space is a near vacuum that is near absolute zero. Then most stuff besides that are burning hot fusion engines that throw massive amounts of radiation into their surroundings.
Then there are planets but most are either frozen or cooking.

Liquid water is the medium for life. If you designed the universe for life the universe would be one huge blob of liquid water. It's not so it wasn't designed for life. Until you can prove to me the universe is indeed a huge blob of liquid water, I won't believe you when you tell me it was designed for life.


Again, I'm not an expert at the subject, but how are we so sure that absolutely no life can exist in space? Most likely based off of what humans know? Like, if stuff like waterbears (iirc) can be exposed the vacuum of space and come back to Earth and live, isn't there a shot?


That's an incredibly complex question, and although I used to think the same thing, as I've studied biochemistry at the university level (my major), I've learned that the answer to "Could life evolve in space?" is "Almost definitely not." Now that's not to say "absolutely not" because science has a way of surprising us, but the idea that life as complex as animal life could evolve in space is basically impossible. Maybe through genetic engineering life could be able to exist in space, but naturally, certainly not.

Life (in the scientific sense) is basically a series of complex chemical reactions that have increased in complexity via the mechanism we call evolution over billions of years to the point where we are now. In order for there to be a series of chemical reactions like those that life evolved from there needs to be certain conditions. If you study chemistry, you'll learn that water has some very unique properties that arise from its chemical structure- properties such as high amounts of hydrogen bonding which lead to things like high surface tension, a specific crystalline structure that results in solid ice being less dense than liquid ice, etc. which our form of life needs to exist. The specific phase (liquid) of water, the presence of certain biological precursors ("organic" compounds or their precursors), and the correct temperature were all necessary for there to be the complex reactions that life arose from, and on Earth, it just so happened that all the right conditions were present at the same time for life to arise.

In vacuum, water is either frozen or gaseous- because pressure is so low, there is no liquid state. Chemical reactions cannot occur if particles do not come into contact (which is rare in a vacuum). Chemical reactions cannot occur if the specific reactants don't come into contact. Chemical reactions cannot occur quick enough (if even at all) if temperatures are too low, and if temperatures are high (such as near a star) the resulting organic products would literally burn up.

I could go on for a long time, but it's really difficult to explain it all in a short amount of time, especially to someone who doesn't have a decent biology/chemistry/biochemistry background. Suffice it to say that given what we know about life today, it could not evolve in space, and actually requires very specific conditions (such as those on Earth for complex life or possibly Mars for less complex life) to arise. Anything else is conjecture at this point.


I know that we are getting out of thread's context here but what do you think about abiogenesis?
Tomorrow never comes until its too late...
kef
Profile Joined September 2010
283 Posts
April 30 2012 15:21 GMT
#437
On April 30 2012 23:17 Aelfric wrote:
Show nested quote +
On April 30 2012 22:54 kef wrote:
On April 30 2012 22:17 Xpace wrote:
I'm not going to claim to be an expert at this subject, but isn't it strange that people assume planets that support life must have certain environmental qualities, like water, oxygen, or non-fatal elements (predominantly to humans) in the atmosphere? Why must a planet mimic the qualities of Earth for it to have life? So far we only about our world, is it not possible that life exists on a planet that would, say, incinerate Earth-born creatures if they try to breath? I find it strange that people (or at least the general consensus I know of) have this assumption that any species not from our planet, regardless of its sentience, must be similar to what we simply believe them to be.

I'll refer to this topic:
On April 30 2012 21:58 Miyoshino wrote:
On April 30 2012 21:49 ArchAngelSC wrote:
Correct me if I'm wrong but, isn't the whole theory of evolution based on adapting to your surroundings?

Life can't evolve in space period. The laws of nature were presicely fine tuned so that in 99.999999999% of the universe it is physically impossible for life to survive there. Almost all of space is a near vacuum that is near absolute zero. Then most stuff besides that are burning hot fusion engines that throw massive amounts of radiation into their surroundings.
Then there are planets but most are either frozen or cooking.

Liquid water is the medium for life. If you designed the universe for life the universe would be one huge blob of liquid water. It's not so it wasn't designed for life. Until you can prove to me the universe is indeed a huge blob of liquid water, I won't believe you when you tell me it was designed for life.


Again, I'm not an expert at the subject, but how are we so sure that absolutely no life can exist in space? Most likely based off of what humans know? Like, if stuff like waterbears (iirc) can be exposed the vacuum of space and come back to Earth and live, isn't there a shot?


That's an incredibly complex question, and although I used to think the same thing, as I've studied biochemistry at the university level (my major), I've learned that the answer to "Could life evolve in space?" is "Almost definitely not." Now that's not to say "absolutely not" because science has a way of surprising us, but the idea that life as complex as animal life could evolve in space is basically impossible. Maybe through genetic engineering life could be able to exist in space, but naturally, certainly not.

Life (in the scientific sense) is basically a series of complex chemical reactions that have increased in complexity via the mechanism we call evolution over billions of years to the point where we are now. In order for there to be a series of chemical reactions like those that life evolved from there needs to be certain conditions. If you study chemistry, you'll learn that water has some very unique properties that arise from its chemical structure- properties such as high amounts of hydrogen bonding which lead to things like high surface tension, a specific crystalline structure that results in solid ice being less dense than liquid ice, etc. which our form of life needs to exist. The specific phase (liquid) of water, the presence of certain biological precursors ("organic" compounds or their precursors), and the correct temperature were all necessary for there to be the complex reactions that life arose from, and on Earth, it just so happened that all the right conditions were present at the same time for life to arise.

In vacuum, water is either frozen or gaseous- because pressure is so low, there is no liquid state. Chemical reactions cannot occur if particles do not come into contact (which is rare in a vacuum). Chemical reactions cannot occur if the specific reactants don't come into contact. Chemical reactions cannot occur quick enough (if even at all) if temperatures are too low, and if temperatures are high (such as near a star) the resulting organic products would literally burn up.

I could go on for a long time, but it's really difficult to explain it all in a short amount of time, especially to someone who doesn't have a decent biology/chemistry/biochemistry background. Suffice it to say that given what we know about life today, it could not evolve in space, and actually requires very specific conditions (such as those on Earth for complex life or possibly Mars for less complex life) to arise. Anything else is conjecture at this point.


I know that we are getting out of thread's context here but what do you think about abiogenesis?


AFAIK it's the most sound explanation for the beginning of life. The propagation of efficiently reproducing processes is a universal constant.

Also, ArchAngelSC, I'm not sure you have any idea what you're talking about. That's not supposed to be an insult, just an observation. The environment came first, life evolved out of it because it was the right environment for life to arise. Life wouldn't have arisen on Earth if the Earth was like Pluto- we know this because there is no life on Pluto.
There are two kinds of people in this world: people who say there are two kinds of people in the world and people who know the first group of people are full of shit.
Gescom
Profile Joined February 2010
Canada3396 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-04-30 15:25:20
April 30 2012 15:25 GMT
#438
On April 30 2012 22:36 Miyoshino wrote:
If something can survive without liquid water we wouldn't be calling it 'life' but something else.

Just like stuff can survive some conditions into space doesn't mean it can evolve and reproduce there. These extremophiles can't live in space just because they survive exposure to space.

Liquid water is needed for any form of cell metabolism. If it freezes, the crystals will damage cell membranes and organelles. Waterbears go into cryptobiosis. They are basically 'dead' when in that stage. They have no metabolism. They just can come back from that.

This means life can survive on a planet where everything freezes solid for like 10 months and then melts for their 2 months of summer, whatever length their month is. They still need liquid water to do their life things.
Something that's in cryptobiosis permanently is just dead and not coming back.

Now maybe something that is self-organizing can survive without liquid water. There's alternative chemestry where you have silicon and methane or something like that. But I would limit the term 'life' to only organic chemestry based self-organising stuff.
We know our organic chemistry. It is hard to see how something based silicon could do just as well as our carbon stuff. We need liquid water for organic chemistry. That's what we call life.
Even if something based on something else is possible, that's still a way way long shot away from silicon-based multicellular life. It's already a big enough of a challenge to find organic life. So let's find that stuff first. When we do we can speculate about the much rarer occuring alternatives.

It's not just that we 'favour' organic chemistry because that's what we are made of. It is in the nature of organic chemistry itself.
We know what complex molecules can occur and how likely they are to arise. We can even observe what is out there in space up to a limited amount. The odds are not good for non-carbon based complex self-reproducing structures.
Also, carbon is much more common in the universe than silicon is anyway.

In something as vast as space, why be concerned with 'bad odds'? Even at 0.01%, it will still exist thousands of times over.
Jaedong Hyuk || Bisu Jangbi || Fantasy Flash
Kingsky
Profile Blog Joined October 2010
Singapore298 Posts
April 30 2012 15:32 GMT
#439
we areee not ready . what if we see them and they see us back AND THEIR ZERGGGGG
Why do people hate the Colossus? Because the Colossus is like banksters from Wall Street: “too big to fail”. - TheDwF
Monsen
Profile Joined December 2002
Germany2548 Posts
Last Edited: 2012-04-30 15:40:32
April 30 2012 15:39 GMT
#440
On May 01 2012 00:32 Kingsky wrote:
we areee not ready . what if we see them and they see us back AND THEIR ZERGGGGG


We're Terrans, lol.


stiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiim
11 years and counting- TL #680
Prev 1 20 21 22 23 24 43 Next All
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
14:00
Bracket Day 2 - Final
LiquipediaDiscussion
FEL
09:00
Cracow 2025
Lambo vs GeraldLIVE!
Clem vs SKillous
Reynor vs TBD
RotterdaM1845
ComeBackTV 1532
IndyStarCraft 542
WardiTV356
CranKy Ducklings195
Rex144
3DClanTV 72
LiquipediaDiscussion
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
RotterdaM 1845
IndyStarCraft 542
Rex 144
BRAT_OK 83
MindelVK 23
StarCraft: Brood War
Britney 47692
Barracks 1861
EffOrt 1430
Larva 1083
Stork 866
BeSt 618
firebathero 430
Soulkey 264
Hyun 153
Rush 149
[ Show more ]
Dewaltoss 105
Sharp 98
sorry 67
sSak 59
Shinee 55
Movie 51
Sea.KH 51
Free 46
sas.Sziky 39
zelot 35
Shine 33
yabsab 17
Terrorterran 6
Dota 2
Gorgc5322
qojqva3579
XcaliburYe411
420jenkins280
LuMiX1
Counter-Strike
fl0m2327
sgares404
oskar171
Heroes of the Storm
Khaldor575
Other Games
B2W.Neo1742
Beastyqt1626
Hui .298
DeMusliM225
Fuzer 161
QueenE69
KnowMe63
Organizations
Other Games
BasetradeTV38
StarCraft: Brood War
Kim Chul Min (afreeca) 7
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 17 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• HeavenSC 54
• poizon28 12
• Dystopia_ 1
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• sooper7s
• intothetv
• Migwel
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
StarCraft: Brood War
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
• BSLYoutube
Dota 2
• C_a_k_e 3596
• WagamamaTV715
League of Legends
• Nemesis2895
• Jankos1449
Upcoming Events
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
3h 6m
Bonyth vs Zhanhun
Dewalt vs Mihu
Hawk vs Sziky
Sziky vs QiaoGege
Mihu vs Hawk
Zhanhun vs Dewalt
Fengzi vs Bonyth
Wardi Open
20h 6m
Sparkling Tuna Cup
1d 19h
WardiTV European League
2 days
Online Event
2 days
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
3 days
The PondCast
3 days
Replay Cast
4 days
Korean StarCraft League
5 days
CranKy Ducklings
5 days
[ Show More ]
Sparkling Tuna Cup
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

CSLPRO Last Chance 2025
Esports World Cup 2025
Murky Cup #2

Ongoing

Copa Latinoamericana 4
Jiahua Invitational
BSL 20 Non-Korean Championship
BSL 20 Team Wars
FEL Cracov 2025
CC Div. A S7
Underdog Cup #2
IEM Cologne 2025
FISSURE Playground #1
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 7
IEM Dallas 2025
PGL Astana 2025
Asian Champions League '25

Upcoming

ASL Season 20: Qualifier #1
ASL Season 20: Qualifier #2
ASL Season 20
CSLPRO Chat StarLAN 3
BSL Season 21
RSL Revival: Season 2
Maestros of the Game
SEL Season 2 Championship
WardiTV Summer 2025
uThermal 2v2 Main Event
HCC Europe
ESL Pro League S22
StarSeries Fall 2025
FISSURE Playground #2
BLAST Open Fall 2025
BLAST Open Fall Qual
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.