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.

 

Finding life in the universe

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 11:08 AM
link   
So we continue to scan the sky for planets which may be in a habitable zone from their respective stars but I'm going to use Kepler B as a volunteer for this scenario. Kepler B is 600 some odd light years from Earth and contains a planet in the habitable zone. My question is, what makes scientists think the only life that could exist in the universe is in this habitable zone? I would find it hard to believe in the vast universe we could deduce such a claim from studying 2 plants right next to each other(Earth/Mars) in the vastness of space. Either life should be everywhere or there is more to this puzzle then meets the eye.

Is it possible this habitable zone has more to do with location in the time continuum more than anything else? Our clocks are completely reliant on our suns clock. Earth's clock differs from Mars etc.. Perhaps other planets look lifeless to us simply because anything on it would be living in a different time.

If Kepler B's resonating frequency(possibly among other parameters) is identical to earth I feel that is the only way we could ever have contact.

Thoughts?
edit on 14-3-2012 by libertytoall because: (no reason given)




posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 07:23 PM
link   
I think it is just that they are going with what we know. The only forms of life that we are aware of exist on Earth.

Is it possible that life exists in other areas of the universe in extreme heat or cold? Absolutely. But based on our experience. It seems likely, our best chance for finding extraterrestrial life, is to look at planets with similar properties to Earth.



posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 07:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by libertytoall
So we continue to scan the sky for planets which may be in a habitable zone from their respective stars but I'm going to use Kepler B as a volunteer for this scenario. Kepler B is 600 some odd light years from Earth and contains a planet in the habitable zone. My question is, what makes scientists think the only life that could exist in the universe is in this habitable zone? I would find it hard to believe in the vast universe we could deduce such a claim from studying 2 plants right next to each other(Earth/Mars) in the vastness of space. Either life should be everywhere or there is more to this puzzle then meets the eye.

Is it possible this habitable zone has more to do with location in the time continuum more than anything else? Our clocks are completely reliant on our suns clock. Earth's clock differs from Mars etc.. Perhaps other planets look lifeless to us simply because anything on it would be living in a different time.

If Kepler B's resonating frequency(possibly among other parameters) is identical to earth I feel that is the only way we could ever have contact.

Thoughts?
edit on 14-3-2012 by libertytoall because: (no reason given)


Earth clock is in sync with Mars, we are from the same star. There is a point to be made about the age of stars and what we know of the evolutionary time period from single cell life. Now if you want to get chemically deep, then no, we look for life where similar chemical reactions and bonds can take place like they do here. To hypothesize of different chemical bonds in different environments then that can only really be studied in situ.

Now one can take a teaspoon from anywhere on earth and find signatures of life, not just organics, but life or precursors, or excretion of life. In all of the extraterrestrial samples we have verified as being such zero signatures of life have been found or detected. Barely 'organic' molecules have been detected but that is just a carbon atom bound to hydrogen, hardly life.

Had a longer explanation in a previous thread I'm not looking up, in a nut shell we have to look for what may be a possible chemical environment for us to look (from a distance, only being able to analyze light spectrum signatures of chemical compounds that are reflected of the bodies from their star), for life as we can recognize as such.



posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 08:00 PM
link   
reply to post by libertytoall
 


Another way to look at the definition of habitable zone is habitable by us or more simply may allow liquid water.

Many scientists would consider the moons of Jupiter to be a viable place to search for life yet these moons are well outside of our star's habitable zone.



posted on Mar, 14 2012 @ 08:53 PM
link   
I understand what the definition of a "habitable zone" is. The point I was trying to raise is whether we're being lied to and withheld from knowing the truth about other life in the universe or if scientists are missing something vital in their egos and understanding of the universe and in that will never find life.

Either we're being told lies and the truth concealed or scientists have no clue how the universe works on a complex scale. I mean the universe should be crawling with aliens, but nothing... Lies? Deception? If you truly feel we have NOT made any contact with aliens then it must be the following scenario. Even though scientists act and think they have this solid scientific understanding of the universe, they may never gain the knowledge of how to find alien life because they're actually still clueless as to how the universe works; came to be; and will age.

What if all aliens exist in extra dimensions? Then what? They actually could be on Mars right next to us but we wouldn't see them. They may even be able to see and visit us but not the other way around...



new topics

top topics
 
1

log in

join