The big question about life on other planets: 1000000000000000000000 planets in the universe

[Frannie]

Why do you believe that all intelligent aliens must be humanoid, when most human aliens are morons? Just from the diversity of life on Earth one would conclude your theory is foolish, as the diversity in the universe logically is trillions of times Earth diversity. Your further demand that you know how alien vehicles or transport devises must be built is even more foolish now, isn't it.

How many years did you spend in school to demonstrate this much stupidity

I'm going to hate myself for saying this, but actually Fran, you are wrong. Carbon life is the natural result of the fact that carbon combines so easily in so many ways, and the condition which allow it, liquid water, temperature, gravity, light, etc., that the Earth enjoys, will necessarily be similar anywhere else carbon life develops, so science actually predicts that life will follow certain basic patterns and similarities. So yes, variation, differences, but variations and differences based within a certain framework of biological necessity.

You are wrong, you are basing your ideas on all that you know and making an assumption that all you know is that all there is.

Are you aware that there is life on Earth that uses arsenic?

You are a little child that wants to be the center of the universe, everything great is just like you.

This is foolishness

I'm not talking about life that USES carbon, you idiot, I'm talking about carbon-BASED life. There is no arsenic-based life on Earth. You are honestly worse than talking to a 7 year old.

You are actually claiming in your own dumb way that everything everywhere must be like earth

Tell us what info do you base this on?

Fran, Honey, you have NO IDEA what I am claiming! Just take a pill and go sit down while you are still ahead.

Then tell us why is Carbon a must for all life including the speculative life from other planets.

This ought to be good, and add in do all other planets that have life need to also have Darwin's mythical pond?

Seriously you are too ignorant and childish to know that you are making unsubstantiated claims, stating them as facts with no basis in reality.

On the plus side, at least you know you are a freak

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Then tell us why is Carbon a must for all life including the speculative life from other planets.

Nobody could say with absolute certainty that it is a "must". But it is fair., given what we know, to say that is very likely that any life is carbon based, as it both occurs everywhere and can make the most combinations of molecules. With carbon around in an environment, why would selection produce life based on something else? I suppose you could find some planets with very little carbon. But, if that were the case, there would be very little of all the heavy elements, there. Another obstacle to life. Furthermore, if the heavy elements were in such short supply in a star system, there almost certainly wouldn't be any planets in the system in the first place. So all arrows point the same way, here.

 

[Frannie]

Then tell us why is Carbon a must for all life including the speculative life from other planets.

Nobody could say with absolute certainty that it is a "must". But it is fair., given what we know, to say that is very likely that any life is carbon based, as it both occurs everywhere and can make the most combinations of molecules. With carbon around in an environment, why would selection produce life based on something else? I suppose you could find some planets with very little carbon. But, if that were the case, there would be very little of all the heavy elements, there. Another obstacle to life. Furthermore, if the heavy elements were in such short supply in a star system, there almost certainly wouldn't be any planets in the system in the first place. So all arrows point the same way, here.

There is no reason to even speculate that all life is carbon based...……………

Earth is 1 of unknown trillions of planets

Silicon-based life may be more than just science fiction

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

There is no reason to even speculate that all life is carbon based..

But there is reason to speculate that it may, in fact, all be carbon based, for exactly the reasons I stated.

Earth is 1 of unknown trillions of planets

All with lots of carbon. No heavy elements = no planets.

 

[Frannie]

There is no reason to even speculate that all life is carbon based..

But there is reason to speculate that it may, in fact, all be carbon based, for exactly the reasons I stated.

Earth is 1 of unknown trillions of planets

All with lots of carbon. No heavy elements = no planets.

Which does not mean that life on all the trillions of planets would be the same. In fact such a speculation implies something that science was supposed to have overcome which is the belief that the Earth is center and special in the universe.

It is not

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Which does not mean that life on all the trillions of planets would be the same.

Which speaks to nothing I said. I spoke to one commonality: carbon. You just used a bait and switch parlor trick to transpose that with the concept of "equivalent".

Its hard to imagine selection producing life based on something else with carbon around. How would that work? When people tell you carbon has the most combinations of stable molecules, that's nontrivial. It's not close, really. Selection by natural laws is what it is. Carbon dominates the environment in terms of stable, complex molecules. You cant get around that, unless you lock it all up somewhere.

So you would have a lot of explaining to do, should you hypothesize selection is somehow leaving the carbon behind.

 

[Yarddog]

here is someone who addresses the idea of silicon based life pretty well. sort of interesting

 

[Frannie]

Which does not mean that life on all the trillions of planets would be the same.

Which speaks to nothing I said. I spoke to one commonality: carbon. You just used a bait and switch parlor trick to transpose that with the concept of "equivalent".

Its hard to imagine selection producing life based on something else with carbon around. How would that work? When people tell you carbon has the most combinations of stable molecules, that's nontrivial. It's not close, really. Selection by natural laws is what it is. Carbon dominates the environment in terms of stable, complex molecules. You cant get around that, unless you lock it all up somewhere.

So you would have a lot of explaining to do, should you hypothesize selection is somehow leaving the carbon behind.

Again you are unconsciously labeling the Earth the center of the universe in that everything everywhere is like it is here. There exist no where in science any basis for this. There are more planets in the universe than there are grains of sand on the Earth (unconfirmed), separated by trillions and trillions of miles, the odds that everything evolved the same is actually impossible. I am not sure how any adult could come to any different conclusion

 

[westwall]

True, they don't. What makes you think there can't be an advanced creature that evolved in a ocean?

That is the problem with us humans. Ultimately we are narrow minded and think a creature must look like us to be advanced.

That simply is not factual.

At some point, technology involves the use of fire. That pretty much precludes creatures that live underwater.

When you apply logic to these issues, it rules out a lot of our fantasies.

Why? For mankind to advance he needs to manufacture things in a vacuum. He can't live in it, but he needs it.

Like I said, our views on technology are fairly limited. Who's to say an oceanic culture could not use lava as a replacement for fire?

How are you going to make bronze or steel without fire? No creature is going to advance past the stone age without the ability to use fire.

You need heat to make bronze or steel. Heat from lava would work just fine.

Yeah, that's a practical solution. Just wait for a volcano to erupt.

There are volcanic eruptions on the sea floor that are continuous.

 

[Yarddog]

I'm going to hate myself for saying this, but actually Fran, you are wrong. Carbon life is the natural result of the fact that carbon combines so easily in so many ways, and the condition which allow it, liquid water, temperature, gravity, light, etc., that the Earth enjoys, will necessarily be similar anywhere else carbon life develops, so science actually predicts that life will follow certain basic patterns and similarities. So yes, variation, differences, but variations and differences based within a certain framework of biological necessity.

You are wrong, you are basing your ideas on all that you know and making an assumption that all you know is that all there is.

Are you aware that there is life on Earth that uses arsenic?

You are a little child that wants to be the center of the universe, everything great is just like you.

This is foolishness

I'm not talking about life that USES carbon, you idiot, I'm talking about carbon-BASED life. There is no arsenic-based life on Earth. You are honestly worse than talking to a 7 year old.

You are actually claiming in your own dumb way that everything everywhere must be like earth

Tell us what info do you base this on?

Fran, Honey, you have NO IDEA what I am claiming! Just take a pill and go sit down while you are still ahead.

Then tell us why is Carbon a must for all life including the speculative life from other planets.

This ought to be good, and add in do all other planets that have life need to also have Darwin's mythical pond?

Seriously you are too ignorant and childish to know that you are making unsubstantiated claims, stating them as facts with no basis in reality.

On the plus side, at least you know you are a freak

There is alway a chance that there is something we have not seen before here, yes, but from what I could see in the video I posted, silicon based molecules are more limited than carbon based ones and whereas carbon type molecules commonly form long chains and double bonds, silicon molecules are very limited.

Unless of course there are some exceptions to that somewhere in the universe

 

[bripat9643]

At some point, technology involves the use of fire. That pretty much precludes creatures that live underwater.

When you apply logic to these issues, it rules out a lot of our fantasies.

Why? For mankind to advance he needs to manufacture things in a vacuum. He can't live in it, but he needs it.

Like I said, our views on technology are fairly limited. Who's to say an oceanic culture could not use lava as a replacement for fire?

How are you going to make bronze or steel without fire? No creature is going to advance past the stone age without the ability to use fire.

You need heat to make bronze or steel. Heat from lava would work just fine.

Yeah, that's a practical solution. Just wait for a volcano to erupt.

There are volcanic eruptions on the sea floor that are continuous.

How would an intelligent life form even get near them? Keep in mind that the melting point of iron is 2795.0 degrees Fahrenheit. Then, where would they get the carbon to make steel?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Again you are unconsciously labeling the Earth the center of the universe in that everything everywhere is like it is here.

Heavy elements are made in every star. That's a fact everywhere. And they are made in set proportions. And heavy elements are why we have planets. These are all facts based on the laws of nature that hold everywhere. Your silly attempt to frame this as "viewing the earth as the center of the universe" discredits you.

No heavy elements = no planets. Everywhere there are heavy elements, there is lots of carbon. These are simple facts. You can and will find varying levels of carbon in start systems, but it won't vary by much.

So the work ahead of you is to hypothesize a way for all the carbon to be locked up in an environment, while selection works with what is remaining to it.

 

[Frannie]

You are wrong, you are basing your ideas on all that you know and making an assumption that all you know is that all there is.

Are you aware that there is life on Earth that uses arsenic?

You are a little child that wants to be the center of the universe, everything great is just like you.

This is foolishness

I'm not talking about life that USES carbon, you idiot, I'm talking about carbon-BASED life. There is no arsenic-based life on Earth. You are honestly worse than talking to a 7 year old.

You are actually claiming in your own dumb way that everything everywhere must be like earth

Tell us what info do you base this on?

Fran, Honey, you have NO IDEA what I am claiming! Just take a pill and go sit down while you are still ahead.

Then tell us why is Carbon a must for all life including the speculative life from other planets.

This ought to be good, and add in do all other planets that have life need to also have Darwin's mythical pond?

Seriously you are too ignorant and childish to know that you are making unsubstantiated claims, stating them as facts with no basis in reality.

On the plus side, at least you know you are a freak

There is alway a chance that there is something we have not seen before here, yes, but from what I could see in the video I posted, silicon based molecules are more limited than carbon based ones and whereas carbon type molecules commonly form long chains and double bonds, silicon molecules are very limited.

Unless of course there are some exceptions to that somewhere in the universe

There are no rules to make exceptions for in the universe concerning life structure. All rules apply only to Earth

 

[Frannie]

Again you are unconsciously labeling the Earth the center of the universe in that everything everywhere is like it is here.

Heavy elements are made in every star. Thats a fact everywhere. And they are made in set proportions. And heavy elements are why we have planets. These are all facts based on the laws of nature that hold everywhere. Your silly attempt to frame this as "viewing the earth as the center of the universe" discredits you.

Stars do not make elements they are made up of them, fusion only happens at the surface not in the centers

 

[Frannie]

Why? For mankind to advance he needs to manufacture things in a vacuum. He can't live in it, but he needs it.

Like I said, our views on technology are fairly limited. Who's to say an oceanic culture could not use lava as a replacement for fire?

How are you going to make bronze or steel without fire? No creature is going to advance past the stone age without the ability to use fire.

You need heat to make bronze or steel. Heat from lava would work just fine.

Yeah, that's a practical solution. Just wait for a volcano to erupt.

There are volcanic eruptions on the sea floor that are continuous.

How would an intelligent life form even get near them? Keep in mind that the melting point of iron is 2795.0 degrees Fahrenheit. Then, where would they get the carbon to make steel?

Plasma fusion gravitational bubble

 

[Yarddog]

Again you are unconsciously labeling the Earth the center of the universe in that everything everywhere is like it is here.

Heavy elements are made in every star. Thats a fact everywhere. And they are made in set proportions. And heavy elements are why we have planets. These are all facts based on the laws of nature that hold everywhere. Your silly attempt to frame this as "viewing the earth as the center of the universe" discredits you.

it seems right that there would be no planets .... at least solid ones, without heavy elements. Unless the laws of gravity and inertia are different somewhere else, but I dont see how that could be

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Stars do not make elements they are made up of them, fusion only happens at the surface not in the centers

That appears to be completely irrelevant, and i have no idea why you said it.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

it seems right that there would be no planets .... at least solid ones, without heavy elements. Unless the laws of gravity and inertia are different somewhere else, but I dont see how that could be

Which, they aren't. Thats our working assumption. It has to be. If we dont assume a uniformtiarian, deterministic universe, then cause and effect and observation lose all meaning.

 

[Frannie]

Stars do not make elements they are made up of them, fusion only happens at the surface not in the centers

That appears to be completely irrelevant, and i have no idea why you said it.

Stars explode and the pieces form new stars. There is no known way to make matter. Matter and energy are in flux but constant in volume

Not sure why entropy eludes you

 

[westwall]

Why? For mankind to advance he needs to manufacture things in a vacuum. He can't live in it, but he needs it.

Like I said, our views on technology are fairly limited. Who's to say an oceanic culture could not use lava as a replacement for fire?

How are you going to make bronze or steel without fire? No creature is going to advance past the stone age without the ability to use fire.

You need heat to make bronze or steel. Heat from lava would work just fine.

Yeah, that's a practical solution. Just wait for a volcano to erupt.

There are volcanic eruptions on the sea floor that are continuous.

How would an intelligent life form even get near them? Keep in mind that the melting point of iron is 2795.0 degrees Fahrenheit. Then, where would they get the carbon to make steel?

I have no idea, but then I am not one of them.

The point is that there are many different types of creatures in the universe possible.