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 it possible we look at life sustaining planets incorrectly?

page: 1
4

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 6 2013 @ 02:06 PM
link   
This is my first time posting anything so I am kind of hesitant about doing so. Here we go

A couple of months ago I was reading an article about an arsenic based life form that lived in California's Mono Lake. I know this has been debunked since then, but it got me thinking.
I was thinking though that why is that when people look at planets that they immediately assume that it would take large amounts of H20 and all sorts of stuff to make sure a life form could ever exist. I am no scientist and this is why I am hesitant about posting this. But why can't there be life forms made for their planets. And with the life form I mean anything as simple as germs not walking bipedal big eyed creatures. I mean just anything. Just because we know what it takes for our life forms to exist and flourish on this planet doesn't mean we know what it takes for every planet. Anybody else have any input please feel free to throw it my way! Thanks for your time.

news.nationalgeographic.com...

this is the link to the debunking of the arsenic based life form
edit on 6-12-2013 by VoidWalker because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 6 2013 @ 02:23 PM
link   
reply to post by VoidWalker
 


There are many reasons why we look for life off of our planet the way we do. The number one main reason is:

The type of life we have here on Earth is the only life we know about and know what to look for.

I have no doubt that there may be life out there in the universe that is completely different than anything we have here on Earth. However: how would you know what you are looking at?

How do you prove that something else is life, if whatever signatures they leave is not the same as life here? You can't, at least not at a distance.

Now, if we land on a planet, and discover some sort of plant life, microbes or even a alien business man that walks up and complains about us scorching his alien lawn on touch down, then yes, we'll know right away that we've discovered life that is based on things other than here on Earth, and at that point, we'll see what to look for.

We might even find that right here in our own solar system eventually.

But until we do, they look for what we know. It's not unreasonable to do what we're doing. Life here on Earth is made from the most common, most abundant elements in the universe, so it would make since that there should be life that is a lot like what we have here.



posted on Dec, 6 2013 @ 02:24 PM
link   
reply to post by VoidWalker
 


Taking your title in hand, not your discussion on possible poison planets, we need all the discussion we can get on the possibilities of life on other planets regardless of what level of life we may find there. The current task is getting people used to the concept of life out there.

The more the different ways science can bring that realization to the public's consciousness the better. The shorter the path to recognizing that UFOs are real, as are the triangles, and even more in depth mysteries of the Universe that we have long ignored, the better. (Convoluted sentence but you get the drift.)



posted on Dec, 6 2013 @ 02:26 PM
link   
reply to post by eriktheawful
 


Thank you for your reply! I appreciate your input and thoughts on this subject. It has been bugging me for about a month now and I finally just said heck with it I'll post it up. Once again thank you for taking the time and giving me an easy enough answer to understand.



posted on Dec, 6 2013 @ 02:27 PM
link   
reply to post by Aliensun
 


Right on thanks for the input!



posted on Dec, 6 2013 @ 02:34 PM
link   
reply to post by VoidWalker
 




assume that it would take large amounts of H20 and all sorts of stuff to make sure a life form could ever exist


I do not think that anyone (in the science field) assumes it. It is simply an educated guess taking into account what is understood about life.



I am no scientist


I think you wanted to express that you have no deep knowledge on the field (as a biologist or an exobiologist). Anyone can be a scientist even if he has no specialized knowledge, the only requirement is for the use of the scientific method in the exploration of science and knowledge.



posted on Dec, 6 2013 @ 02:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Panic2k11
 


I stand corrected! Thanks for fixing the hiccups!



posted on Dec, 6 2013 @ 02:42 PM
link   
Think for a second that the Earth and life on it are nothing special. We're just one of billions upon billions of planets in the universe where life appeared and evolved. Also consider that the chemical composition of the Earth is nothing special either - there must be lots of Earth-like planets. Water is fairly common throughout the universe, although it requires certain conditions to stay liquid.

So if life appeared on this planet, using water as one of the required components, it's fairly reasonable to expect that such life also appeared on many other planets out there. While it's interesting to consider life forms that are organised completely different to ours, there's no reason to believe that we're unique and that all (or most) of alien life out there is radically different. We all swim in the same soup, as it were. Chemical elements and chemical reactions are the same in any "solar system" or galaxy, so if live arose here from such and such chemicals, it would've arisen elswhere from the same stuff. In fact, consider that H2O might be uniquely suited to making life possible. It's neutral, a great solvent, and good for carrying nutrients and chemicals around.



posted on Dec, 6 2013 @ 05:06 PM
link   
reply to post by VoidWalker
 

Science goes by what it knows...so far...thus...so far....all life we have found irrespective of it's energy source, location, chemistry etc the one common factor is water. Given how simple and stable a molecule of water is this kind of makes sense.....SO FAR.



posted on Dec, 6 2013 @ 06:17 PM
link   

VoidWalker
This is my first time posting anything so I am kind of hesitant about doing so. Here we go

A couple of months ago I was reading an article about an arsenic based life form that lived in California's Mono Lake. I know this has been debunked since then, but it got me thinking.
I was thinking though that why is that when people look at planets that they immediately assume that it would take large amounts of H20 and all sorts of stuff to make sure a life form could ever exist. I am no scientist and this is why I am hesitant about posting this. But why can't there be life forms made for their planets. And with the life form I mean anything as simple as germs not walking bipedal big eyed creatures. I mean just anything. Just because we know what it takes for our life forms to exist and flourish on this planet doesn't mean we know what it takes for every planet. Anybody else have any input please feel free to throw it my way! Thanks for your time.


Excellent question.

One of the reasons we focus so much on water and places where it can exist as a liquid is because we know for a fact that life needed it here.

We also know what types of things life as we know it does which might make it detectable at interstellar distances.

Water is also one of the most common molecules in the universe as Hydrogen and Oxygen are very common elements so planets in places where water can exist in liquid form are very exciting.

Water is called the "universal solvent" because it is has unique properties that allow for all kinds of chemistry to take place. Particularly organic chemistry.

There aren't a lot of other things which behave like water. It's very hard to imagine say, liquid methane as a surrogate for water, not least of which is that it is only liquid at a temperature where chemical reactions are SLOOOOOOOOWWWWWWWWWWW. Meaning it would take far longer to cook up anything interesting that might lead to life which used liquid methane instead of water.

Think about what purpose water has on our world and in your own body. It's really hard to replace that.

Now, that hasn't stopped some very smart people from thinking about it. There's a whole field of study called "synthetic life studies" which is basically trying to find conditions and probabilities for "life as we DON'T know" it. Those studies have to be done before we know what types of places to look for life as we don't know it. After all, the galaxy and universe are a very big place and there are limited resources to look for life.

That said, there will be plenty of planets with plenty of liquid water and other interesting substances out there that we are likely to be busy for millennia just studying life as we know it in the galaxy and greater universe.
edit on 6-12-2013 by JadeStar because: (no reason given)

edit on 6-12-2013 by JadeStar because: (no reason given)

edit on 6-12-2013 by JadeStar because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 6 2013 @ 06:30 PM
link   

Aliensun
reply to post by VoidWalker
 

\
The more the different ways science can bring that realization to the public's consciousness the better. The shorter the path to recognizing that UFOs are real, as are the triangles,


Meh, Pythagoras figured out triangles were real around 550 BC



posted on Dec, 6 2013 @ 07:08 PM
link   
I think it's been sufficiently covered, but I'll parrot my response anyway. Think of Earth as the control group - We, obviously, are certain that the conditions here on Earth can support life. We apply what we know about Earth as the template to look for life on other planets. Now I suspect if life is found in an unexpected place, then some revisions would be needed and we could broaden the search.



posted on Dec, 7 2013 @ 10:16 PM
link   
reply to post by VoidWalker
 


Chemistry is a big reason. There are certain things that are required for life. Everything on Earth is carbon based, that is not by chance. Carbon is unique in structure. The only other possible base would be Silicon, but it is inferior for a number of reasons.

A solvent is also required for life. The best solvent for life is water. It is unknown if any other solvent could even work, though theoretically possible. Do some research on why water is the universal solvent for life.



new topics

top topics



 
4

log in

join