Water on Mars!

[NeloAngelo]

Quit saying carbon based you goofball. That has nothing to do with the conversation

not your conversation, maybe. but we are pretty much searching for carbon based life because it's the only thing we understand.

 

 

we can only seek what we know, we might have easily passed over some other form of life because it doesn't fit into the understanding of what we know to be.

 

i mean, why the {censored} else are we looking for water or signs of it instead of chlorine, or ammonia?

[chrispsullivan]

 

is it? what are the chances of the conditions being just right for carbon based life anywhere else in the universe? i'm willing to bet it's slim and none. i believe we are the chance happening of all the right conditions and elements coming together in the chaos that is our universe. in this world of million, billion, SEPTILLION to 1 odds, how is it that hard to fathom that we are the 1 out of a number as unfathomable as a googolplex was when we started counting above a million?

 

 

Are you not familiar with the Drake equation or how many star systems there are in the universe (and that's just the visible universe mind you)?

[NeloAngelo]

 

Are you not familiar with the Drake equation or how many star systems there are in the universe (and that's just the visible universe mind you)?

 

yeah, there's 7 planets with some form of civilized life on them based on my calculations that i filled in with guesstimates because we don't know, and possibly never will know the actual numbers.

[Rear Naked]

 

is it? what are the chances of the conditions being just right for carbon based life anywhere else in the universe? i'm willing to bet it's slim and none. i believe we are the chance happening of all the right conditions and elements coming together in the chaos that is our universe. in this world of million, billion, SEPTILLION to 1 odds, how is it that hard to fathom that we are the 1 out of a number as unfathomable as a googolplex was when we started counting above a million?

 

 

The chances of life on a planet are obviously hard to estimate.

 

Lets just put it into perspective. There are estimated to be 500,000,000 planets in "habitable zone" in our galaxy alone. Extrapolate that to the other 300 billion or so galaxies and you get 150,000,000,000,000,000,000 planets in habitable zone. Of course, this "habitable zone" is just one factor that we use to estimate.

[Rear Naked]

 

not your conversation, maybe. but we are pretty much searching for carbon based life because it's the only thing we understand. we can only seek what we know, we might have easily passed over some other form of life because it doesn't fit into the understanding of what we know to be. i mean, why the {censored} else are we looking for water or signs of it instead of chlorine, or ammonia?

 

 

YOU said life doesn't exist elsewhere. You started the conversation. Of course we look for carbon life. That doesn't mean that other life doesnt exist, like you said it didnt.

[Rear Naked]

yeah, there's 7 planets with some form of civilized life on them based on my calculations that i filled in with guesstimates because we don't know, and possibly never will know the actual numbers.

 

Now its carbon based and CIVILIZED life we're talking about?

 

Keep moving the goal post

[NeloAngelo]

i'm going stand firm on my opinion that this planet was the lucky 1 to have all the proper conditions to sustain life. with all the random occurrences which brought the building blocks to this planet, the conditions caused by said occurrences, the formation and fragmentation of surrounding planets which have a hand in the positioning of our planet, i believe it's entirely possible the same did not happen somewhere else. or it didn't happen properly. which could explain why there are somewhat similar planets which aren't harboring life as we know it.

 

if life is a chemical occurrence, and not all of the chemicals were here to begin with, or ever made it here, we wouldn't be here.

 

if something were to happen to prove me wrong, i will eat crow. but i am forever cynical.

[NeloAngelo]

Now its carbon based and CIVILIZED life we're talking about? Keep moving the goal post

life, civilized life, what's the difference?

 

it's not going to be there whether it's primordial, or fully developed.

 

we WANT to find civilized life, again we can only seek what we know. we WANT to find carbon based life, we want to believe there are planets that can house us so we can move off of this one when we kill it.

[mamberg]

 

is it? what are the chances of the conditions being just right for carbon based life anywhere else in the universe? i'm willing to bet it's slim and none. i believe we are the chance happening of all the right conditions and elements coming together in the chaos that is our universe. in this world of million, billion, SEPTILLION to 1 odds, how is it that hard to fathom that we are the 1 out of a number as unfathomable as a googolplex was when we started counting above a million?

 

 

you know - part of me REALLY hopes you are right - cause that would severely limit the possibility that there are other beings out there as stupid as you.

[NeloAngelo]

 

you know - part of me REALLY hopes you are right - cause that would severely limit the possibility that there are other beings out there as stupid as you.

 

this is where science and religion begin to parallel.

[mamberg]

 

yeah, there's 7 planets with some form of civilized life on them based on my calculations.........

 

 

once again - look at the big brain on Nelo

[NeloAngelo]

 

once again - look at the big brain on Nelo

 

so the drake equation is always absolutely right on because we know all of the conditions, and variables?

 

 

pffft.

 

 

i'm forever cynical. especially when people try and use an idea which was thought of to spur conversation as fact.

[Rear Naked]

 

life, civilized life, what's the difference? it's not going to be there whether it's primordial, or fully developed. we WANT to find civilized life, again we can only seek what we know. we WANT to find carbon based life, we want to believe there are planets that can house us so we can move off of this one when we kill it.

 

 

The difference is in the likelihood of existing. Goddamn dude.

[DVaz]

yeah, there's 7 planets with some form of civilized life on them based on my calculations that i filled in with guesstimates because we don't know, and possibly never will know the actual numbers.

:lol:

I love internet armchair science. Endless hours of amusement.

Care to post your chosen values, data sources, error bars, overall confidence estimate, and whatever 'reasoning' you pulled out of your arse from whatever vague impressions you have about the nature of the universe and everything in it you've discerned from infront of your PC?

[crisis]

is it? what are the chances of the conditions being just right for carbon based life anywhere else in the universe? i'm willing to bet it's slim and none. i believe we are the chance happening of all the right conditions and elements coming together in the chaos that is our universe. in this world of million, billion, SEPTILLION to 1 odds, how is it that hard to fathom that we are the 1 out of a number as unfathomable as a googolplex was when we started counting above a million?

Yep. Firstly the sun and the host planet need to be almost exactly the same size. Gravity would affect the size that the life forms would grow too. They would need to be around the same age as the sun would have to be within 20 - 40 degrees C for similar life to flourish. The host planet will (given it would have to have an almost identical atmosphere) have to have stabilized from its creation. The exact mix of chemicals and conditions would have to occur at exactly the same time in this whole process for there to be even a chance for it to proceed down the path to where we are now. Unfortunately given the natural selection randomness of it all it would end there. And of course for us to even meet it both of our planets would have had to have all this happen within a few hundred years of each other.

So basically whatever may be out there we are never going to meet it.

[guitarcapo]

I wonder what kind of undiscovered elements there are also

 

 

 

Once you get over a certain number on the periodic table, they become very unstable. Doesn't matter where you are in the entire universe.

 

 

Not to say there aren't some weird things out there. I read about a planet that was a solid sphere of compressed carbon....basically an entire planet that was a diamond

[guitarcapo]

Yep. Firstly the sun and the host planet need to be almost exactly the same size. Gravity would affect the size that the life forms would grow too. They would need to be around the same age as the sun would have to be within 20 - 40 degrees C for similar life to flourish. The host planet will (given it would have to have an almost identical atmosphere) have to have stabilized from its creation. The exact mix of chemicals and conditions would have to occur at exactly the same time in this whole process for there to be even a chance for it to proceed down the path to where we are now. Unfortunately given the natural selection randomness of it all it would end there. And of course for us to even meet it both of our planets would have had to have all this happen within a few hundred years of each other. So basically whatever may be out there we are never going to meet it.

 

 

Apparently another key element is to have a single very large moon and a strong magnetic field.. Somehow it stabilizes the weather and atmosphere.

[DVaz]

Yep. Firstly the sun and the host planet need to be almost exactly the same size. Gravity would affect the size that the life forms would grow too. They would need to be around the same age as the sun would have to be within 20 - 40 degrees C for similar life to flourish. The host planet will (given it would have to have an almost identical atmosphere) have to have stabilized from its creation. The exact mix of chemicals and conditions would have to occur at exactly the same time in this whole process for there to be even a chance for it to proceed down the path to where we are now. Unfortunately given the natural selection randomness of it all it would end there. And of course for us to even meet it both of our planets would have had to have all this happen within a few hundred years of each other. So basically whatever may be out there we are never going to meet it.

Because to have life you need a star sized planet thats 20-40 degrees C younger than it.

[Rear Naked]

 

Yep. Firstly the sun and the host planet need to be almost exactly the same size. Gravity would affect the size that the life forms would grow too. They would need to be around the same age as the sun would have to be within 20 - 40 degrees C for similar life to flourish. The host planet will (given it would have to have an almost identical atmosphere) have to have stabilized from its creation. The exact mix of chemicals and conditions would have to occur at exactly the same time in this whole process for there to be even a chance for it to proceed down the path to where we are now. Unfortunately given the natural selection randomness of it all it would end there. And of course for us to even meet it both of our planets would have had to have all this happen within a few hundred years of each other. So basically whatever may be out there we are never going to meet it.

 

 

 

We're talking possibility of life, not the possibility of live extremely similar to earth life.

[DVaz]

 

We're talking possibility of life, not the possibility of live extremely similar to earth life.

 

 

hes not really talking about either.

[karlw]

 

i'm going stand firm on my opinion that this planet was the lucky 1 to have all the proper conditions to sustain life. with all the random occurrences which brought the building blocks to this planet, the conditions caused by said occurrences, the formation and fragmentation of surrounding planets which have a hand in the positioning of our planet, i believe it's entirely possible the same did not happen somewhere else. or it didn't happen properly. which could explain why there are somewhat similar planets which aren't harboring life as we know it. if life is a chemical occurrence, and not all of the chemicals were here to begin with, or ever made it here, we wouldn't be here. if something were to happen to prove me wrong, i will eat crow. but i am forever cynical.

 

 

I agree. Even with the HUGE numbers out there, we have a (IMO) very unique set of circumstances here on earth.

[Jerry_L]

[video=youtube;csDTob-P52U]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=csDTob-P52U&feature=related

[OverDriven]

 

i'm going stand firm on my opinion that this planet was the lucky 1 to have all the proper conditions to sustain life. with all the random occurrences which brought the building blocks to this planet, the conditions caused by said occurrences, the formation and fragmentation of surrounding planets which have a hand in the positioning of our planet, i believe it's entirely possible the same did not happen somewhere else. or it didn't happen properly. which could explain why there are somewhat similar planets which aren't harboring life as we know it. if life is a chemical occurrence, and not all of the chemicals were here to begin with, or ever made it here, we wouldn't be here. if something were to happen to prove me wrong, i will eat crow. but i am forever cynical.

 

 

If you really believe this then you simply don't have a grasp on the vastness of the universe. Maybe this will help:

 

 

 

We are not unique. To think so is to deny math, science and logic.

[DVaz]

 

I agree. Even with the HUGE numbers out there, we have a (IMO) very unique set of circumstances here on earth.

 

 

This attitude confuses the ever living {censored} out of me.

 

People thinking that earth is unique, or extremely rare.

 

In about 20 measly years of looking we have found about 1000 extrasolar planets, all of which are in our local neighbourhood, in this galaxy. The most distant is about 20,000Ly; 1/5th of the way across the galaxy. You need look no further than about 30ly for the best candidates for liquid water and therefore the possibility of life.

 

Now this is based on a few detection methods, but these are the main 2.

 

- The gravitational influence of the planet on the star makes the star appear to wobble. We see that wobble and discern the orbit and approximate mass of the planet (some/a lot of the time). (this is the radial velocity method)

- Transit - the planet passes infront of the star, and it dims very slightly

 

Now, both of these methods have selection biases that tend to find very large planets very close to the star first. Thats why for a long time all we would see where 'Hot Jupiters' (I prefer 'Icarus planets', but apparently hot jupiter stuck): gas giants, many larger than jupiter, many in closer orbits than Mercury.

 

We have started to find terrestrial (rocky) planets, though. Generally they are 'super-earths'; rocky, but very large, as the detection methods bias heavily toward large planets.

 

We have also found at least 6 confirmed and dozens of potential planets that might be earth like (in the Kepler project).

 

Thats an incredible success rate for earth-like planets, in a couple of decades of looking, and with methods that are terrible at finding earth like planets. The maths of figuring out how many there really are is near impossible to do with any confidence, but common sense tells you that there are much more out there than we are capable of seeing at the moment, and we are seeing rather a lot of them.

 

Then consider the under-observation based on the fact that europa, right here in the solar system, might support life. Mars might have once upon a time, and even titan is an outside chance for something very simple (has the most liquid water of any body in the solar system). We dont have a chance of finding anything like Europa in another solar system now. None. But how many of them might there be? Moons heated by gravitational tidal effects can orbit any gas giant, at any distance from the star. They dont even need a star, they could just as easily be rogue planets.

 

Speaking of rogues, there are plausible ideas around that a planet with no star at all can harbour life. Look it up.

 

Then theres earth. As I mentioned before, life on this planet keeps on surprising us with where it can survive. From pitch black to boiling hot water to permafrost, there is life absolutely everywhere on earth. There are even things on earth that can survive in the vacuum and radiation of space (tardigrades for one). Read about Extremophiles. Theres something that can survive nearly anything.

 

As for stable conditions and precise atmospheric composition: have you any idea how much that has changed over the last 4 billion years on earth alone? Do people that say 'you need the right amount of oxygen' or whatever not realise that all the oxygen in earths atmosphere is there because of life, not the other way around? Youre looking at a planet thats been re-formed by the life thats been on it for billions of years. It started as a hot, toxic, barren rock, no oxygen, {censored}loads of CO2, and plenty more that would make it look like hell, and along come a few self replicating proteins, and the rest is history.

 

Things you probably do need:

Water

Magnetic field (or other barrier to solar wind and radiation, like a massive ice sheet)

Day-night cycle

Moderately dense atmosphere. Composition is actually very flexible and subject to much debate.

Some other stuff that I forget

 

But if you think that the current evidence suggests that in a universe that has the order of 10^22 stars that earth-like planets will be incredibly rare, then you're not keeping up to date with findings. For earth to be actually unique is looking completely absurd at this point.

[Cougar Hunter]

I was only able to come up with 4 or 5 life sustaining planets in existence (depending on whether we count the silicon trimaxian lifeforms on Phaelon)