It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Is Our Universe Fine-Tuned for Life? "Protosuns Found Teeming with Prebiotic Molecules"

page: 1
9
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 17 2015 @ 03:36 PM
link   
An international team of Astrophysicists have discovered that complex organic molecule formamide which contains elements necessary for creating life exists in clouds which form Stars and planets , the researchers believe formamide is formed on dust particles within the molecular clouds by a process know as hydrogenation.

One of science's greatest challenges is learning about the origin of life and its precursor molecules. Formamide (NH2CHO) is an excellent candidate for helping to search for answers as it contains four essential elements (nitrogen, hydrogen, carbon and oxygen), and can synthesise amino acids, carbohydrates, nucleic acids and other key compounds for living organisms.
However, this molecule is also abundant in space, mainly in molecular clouds or the concentrations of gas and dust where stars are born. This has been confirmed by an international team of researchers, including Spanish investigators, after searching for formamide in ten star-forming regions.


"This other study demonstrates that complex molecules survive until the later stages of stellar formation, and even continue forming afterwards," López Sepulcre notes, but formamide does have some advantages: "It contains oxygen (another essential element for life) and is a strong candidate as a precursor of prebiotic material, as not only amino acids can be formed from it (which could also be synthesised from CH3CN), but also nucleic acids and bases, or rather genetic material."
"This proves the significance of our study," emphasises the researcher, who sums it up as: "formamide, a significant biomolecule, is already formed in regions where stars like our Sun are born in the very early stages and in relatively high amounts.
www.dailygalaxy.com...


This could be more evidence that shows the ingredients for life are widespread throughout the Galaxy and Universe and where a suitable habitat is found life will evolve and take hold ... we are not alone.



edit on 17-4-2015 by gortex because: (no reason given)




posted on Apr, 17 2015 @ 04:10 PM
link   
a reply to: gortex

I think the fact that we are here, against all odds, indicates that our part of the universe is fine tuned for life.

But it is a big step from simple chemistry to things like life, consciousness and intelligence.

To me, life also implies a diversity of expression and ability for change that is beyond chemistry. When we find an actual mechanism as to how these may occur (without the unreasoned and unreasonable suggestion that "random chance did it") I will happily accede to the notion that life simply 'arose' from the primordial soup.


edit on 17/4/2015 by chr0naut because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 17 2015 @ 04:19 PM
link   
a reply to: gortex
Not sure if you are agreeing or disagreeing with the finely tuned universe? I find it a compelling theory and uses actual emperical evidence rather than theoretical modelling (like its opponents do to discredit it).

Its quit possible something else besides the human race knows how to manipulate elements, genes, and events to excell mutations and evolution through intevention.



posted on Apr, 17 2015 @ 04:20 PM
link   
a reply to: chr0naut




I think the fact that we are here, against all odds, indicates that our part of the universe is fine tuned for life.

What makes our part of the Universe different from the rest ?
Stars and Planets are formed from clouds of dust and gas if the molecules are formed from a known process within those clouds then I think it's reasonable to assume the process is widespread.
Our own beginnings stem from simple chemistry , evolution does the rest.



posted on Apr, 17 2015 @ 04:21 PM
link   
a reply to: luthier




Not sure if you are agreeing or disagreeing with the finely tuned universe?




This could be more evidence that shows the ingredients for life are widespread throughout the Galaxy and Universe and where a suitable habitat is found life will evolve and take hold ... we are not alone.

I thought that would be obvious , I think it's possibly more evidence that life is widespread.

edit on 17-4-2015 by gortex because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 17 2015 @ 04:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: chr0naut




I think the fact that we are here, against all odds, indicates that our part of the universe is fine tuned for life.

What makes our part of the Universe different from the rest ?
Stars and Planets are formed from clouds of dust and gas if the molecules are formed from a known process within those clouds then I think it's reasonable to assume the process is widespread.
Our own beginnings stem from simple chemistry , evolution does the rest.


A lot of people are confused by evolution. Its just a property of physics and tranfers into biological entities. It can be manipulate, excellerated, slowed down, reversed or changed entirely by a number of events including manipulation by an entity( humans gmos, selective breading, grafting etc. It can be changed like gravity or manipulated. Its not a set thing or the only way things even biological are changed. It is an element of physics and organisms that things change as they progress through time.



posted on Apr, 17 2015 @ 04:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: luthier




Not sure if you are agreeing or disagreeing with the finely tuned universe?




This could be more evidence that shows the ingredients for life are widespread throughout the Galaxy and Universe and where a suitable habitat is found life will evolve and take hold ... we are not alone.

I thought that would be obvious , I think it's possibly more evidence that life is widespread.


The finely tuned universe theory doesnt state life only exsists here and if anything this information only aided in the theory.



posted on Apr, 17 2015 @ 04:35 PM
link   
a reply to: luthier




The finely tuned universe theory doesnt state life only exsists here and if anything this information only aided in the theory.

I'm pretty sure that is the point of the OP



posted on Apr, 17 2015 @ 04:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: chr0naut




I think the fact that we are here, against all odds, indicates that our part of the universe is fine tuned for life.

What makes our part of the Universe different from the rest ?
Stars and Planets are formed from clouds of dust and gas if the molecules are formed from a known process within those clouds then I think it's reasonable to assume the process is widespread.
Our own beginnings stem from simple chemistry , evolution does the rest.


I was referring to the observable universe as "our part of the universe". What we have not or cannot observe may have different attributes. There may be many reasons for this from variations in the four (or is it five?) forces, to a different 'handedness' in supersymmetry, to a different chirality of EM, to abundances of exotic particles, to different permittivity of space to different zero point energy to name just a few.


edit on 17/4/2015 by chr0naut because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 17 2015 @ 05:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: luthier




The finely tuned universe theory doesnt state life only exsists here and if anything this information only aided in the theory.

I'm pretty sure that is the point of the OP


Confused is it chemistry and evolution or is it being finely tuned by an entity or previously designed to continue on its own?



posted on Apr, 17 2015 @ 05:04 PM
link   
a reply to: luthier

As I don't believe in a creator I'd go with chemistry and evolution over the other option although a process we don't or can't understand is also a possibility.



posted on Apr, 17 2015 @ 05:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: luthier

As I don't believe in a creator I'd go with chemistry and evolution over the other option although a process we don't or can't understand is also a possibility.


Gocha. The ftu theory does believe in a creator that designed the properties of physics to create life and may also manipulate events to create life to speed up the random process. Much like how we would alter lab expirements for a result.

I think its odd to not think something smarter than us exists. And if it does it can surely manipulate the elements and physics just as we can or at a much higher level. Seeing as we can manipulate nature i would think so could other beings. If we can create new species couldnt something have manipulated this planet?



posted on Apr, 17 2015 @ 05:16 PM
link   
a reply to: luthier




I think its odd to not think something smarter than us exists.

I'm sure there are many out there smarter than us.



And if it does it can surely manipulate the elements and physics just as we can or at a much higher level.

On a small scale quite probably but I don't think an intelligence created the Universe and the properties that govern it , I think it more likely there are many other Universes all with different laws and properties , we live in this one because it is suited to our form of life.



posted on Apr, 17 2015 @ 05:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: gortex
a reply to: luthier




I think its odd to not think something smarter than us exists.

I'm sure there are many out there smarter than us.



And if it does it can surely manipulate the elements and physics just as we can or at a much higher level.

On a small scale quite probably but I don't think an intelligence created the Universe and the properties that govern it , I think it more likely there are many other Universes all with different laws and properties , we live in this one because it is suited to our form of life.


Very possible.
However its completely theoretical wheras the FTU is from emperical data. (of what we currently know and understand) Statistically its almost impossible to create life from a a random series of events...for those circumstances to occur. Thats actual math and science statistics not theoretical physics. It was created by a well respected scientist who is also a theologeon. Much like the Big Bang was created by a priest, as was the groundwork for genetics. Religious people werent always stubborn back woods idiots who believe in literal religious text definitions. Most of sciences greatest achievements and philosophy was layed out by spiritual people. Now its one or the other you have to choose.

There is always something bigger. Maybe we are a tiny lab expirement to an enourmous being. We have the understanding to theoretically terra form a planet. Add some animals we genetically modify to live there and boom give it a billion. Its just as likely as multiple universes.
edit on 17-4-2015 by luthier because: missing context.

edit on 17-4-2015 by luthier because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 17 2015 @ 06:13 PM
link   
Interesting but not surprising, Earth centricity is futile, it is obvious that Earth is not unique in having the potential for life.

We already know that every atom on Earth originated in space and that the solar system is but a speck of sand compared to all the sand in the world in terms of the known universe, and there is likely far beyond that.

The statistics suggest that intelligent life on other planets is highly likely and when research like this appears it adds weight to this.



posted on Apr, 17 2015 @ 06:17 PM
link   
Life? Yes

However, does the fact that life may be relatively ubiquitous in the universe mean that intelligent life is common?
Maybe not.


Consider this:
Intelligence may not be the 'be all and end all" of evolution; "intelligence" may not necessarily mean "highly evolved". For example, some of the most evolutionarily successful organisms on Earth (such as sharks) are less intelligent than humans. Heck, cockroaches have well evolved to be a highly successful organism. "Successful organism" in this case means one that is best equipped to successfully continue the species for countless generations to come.

So life may be everywhere, and evolutionarily advanced life might common, but intelligence may not be.



posted on Apr, 17 2015 @ 06:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: Soylent Green Is People
Life? Yes

However, does the fact that life may be relatively ubiquitous in the universe mean that intelligent life is common?
Maybe not.


Consider this:
Intelligence may not be the 'be all and end all" of evolution; "intelligence" may not necessarily mean "highly evolved". For example, some of the most evolutionarily successful organisms on Earth (such as sharks) are less intelligent than humans. Heck, cockroaches have well evolved to be a highly successful organism. "Successful organism" in this case means one that is best equipped to successfully continue the species for countless generations to come.

So life may be everywhere, and evolutionarily advanced life might common, but intelligence may not be.



Excellent point and a terrific philosophical concept. Sometimes athiests consider themselves the only truly science based thought. When really there are a lot of valid reason based arguments for God(s)/Higher life entitity. Its a good to hear those rare arguments these days.



posted on Apr, 17 2015 @ 07:08 PM
link   
a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

As all we have to go on is our own planet as a template I assume that any inhabited planet out there would have a variety of life resident on it , I also assume that as here there would be a mix of hunter and hunted and from there intelligence is born , the intelligence to hunt or survive , evolution would take care of the rest as it did here so I believe that Intelligence will be common in the Universe given the chance for species to obtain it.

I make a lot of assumptions but I find it hard to believe that intelligence even advanced intelligence would be limited given the sheer number of planets and species that would inhabit them in our solar system alone.



posted on Apr, 18 2015 @ 12:46 AM
link   
a reply to: gortex

What would be the point of a Universe if it was unable to support life?

The Universe would not exist even if it did if there was no life. There would be no consciousness to detect that it was alive and had a need to survive, thus nothing to detect that there was anything. If nothing is able to detect anything then anything is nothing. There would be no reason for a universe to exist if it wasn't able to support life. There is life everywhere, and the places primed for life to succeed will harbor a lust history of selective breeding and evolution (Different from Darwin's theory, but for this post an example). Simple single celled organisms could have easily survived the Big Bang, travel through space, find habitable planets and evolve. That is science and proven. The fact that they survive the Big Bang isn't proven, but they can survive nearly everything else so it's an easy leap to make if everything came from one sungularity. Life was always present, just as all matter was always present.



posted on Apr, 18 2015 @ 02:24 AM
link   
a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

Intelligence is kind of a parasitic evolutionary strategy. That makes it attractive — more results for less energy because you get other species to do most of the work for you. It's a niche, and it's quite probable that species evolve to fill it wherever it appearts. Arguably, there could be several such niches in a given biosphere; to cite the only example of which we know, we aren't the only intelligent species on Earth, just (possibly) the cleverest. Lots of animals, from our fellow primates to parrots and corvids, have found it useful to evolve a degree of intelligence.

I hope we don't have to debate the meaning of 'intelligence'... I cry uncle on that one.



new topics

top topics



 
9
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join