Panspermia in our Solar System

I was watching Close Encounters of the Third Kind and I started to daydream about having a discussion with Steven Spielberg about aliens.

In one if the bonus features on the Blu Ray box set, Steven Spielberg goes onto say he doesn't believe as much as he used to when he was making the film because with cameras everywhere, why have sightings decreased?

This is around where I start to daydream and I suggest to him to consider looking for aliens in more realistic places. Our Solar System.

Our Solar System has many likely candidates for alien life and I then had an epiphany. With more talk about panspermia creating life on earth, why wouldn't those same meteors or comets spread life elsewhere in our Solar System?

Given what we know about our moons and planets couldn't we determine fairly accurately with detail what life would evovle if the same life harboring meteors and comets were to strict our moons and other planets?

Why do I never hear more serious inquiries into alien life in our solar system with the idea of panspermia say on Titan? Or Venus? Or Mars? Or Enceladus?

With our knowledge of the environments on these moons and planets, how come we don't have a better idea of what could be there, if our amino acids are there too?

I for one disagree with life in our Solar System can only be extremophiles. I think there could be much more.

Thoughts? Any input would be greatly appreciated.

reply to post by game over man


UFO sightings have increased, because of cell phones with cameras. The interest in Hollywood from or for the movie goers has decreased for aliens.

Also we are looking for life in our solar system, because there is only one probe out in interstellar space ATM. Mars, all the other planets we have sent craft too, and their moons, even an asteroid.

reply to post by SixX18


You think UFO sightings have increased post Close Encounters and films on aliens have decreased? Really?

My point being in this thread that how come research on theoretical alien life in our solar system only takes into account potential alien life evolving from the environment and conditions on the planet or moon creating life and not life created through panspermia?

Double post

On the side of panspermia there is some notable scientific work made by Alexander Oparin (a russian biochemist) or the theory of Sir Fred Hoyle (a british astronomer).

Sorry, but I´ll provide a Wkipedia source (but you can find more (and reliable) information on the Net:

en.wikipedia.org...

en.wikipedia.org...

They provide a sound basis for how could life have started here on Earth from "components" that came out from elsewhere.

game over man
My point being in this thread that how come research on theoretical alien life in our solar system only takes into account potential alien life evolving from the environment and conditions on the planet or moon creating life and not life created through panspermia?

While I believe that panspermia may be a viable theory that could explain the presence of life here, it by no means can create life.

Life has to come into being on its own prior to any panspermia, which only distribuites life and does not create it.

I think that one should consider that we know a little about the atmosphere on Earth around the time life began here. It was a high oxygen atmosphere, as I recall, and toxic to what most believe must have been the earliest forms of life, as was the sunlight.

The presence of life here has to therefore be explained - and the explanation includes the idea that life developed far enough underwater to be protected from the atmosphere and the sunlight of the times.

This leads one to wonder how early life could survive it's time in the atmosphere, and in full sun, if it drifted in from outer space?

Harte

reply to post by Harte


Actually, free oxygen (O2) didn't exist when the first life forms on our planet appeared.

The most widely accepted time line is that free oxygen was first produced by prokaryotic and then later eukaryotic organisms that carried out oxygenic photosynthesis, producing oxygen as a waste product.

Evolution Of Earth's Atmosphere

And

The Great Oxygenation Event

reply to post by Harte



You're right, panspermia is distributing life. I just think it's possible there was additional distribution throughout our solar system.

I just watch a lot of documentaries on theoretical alien life and they never mention the word panspermia.

We have extremophiles on Earth, and we use this knowledge to determine life elsewhere in the solar system. A lot if not all moons and planets have craters. Life could be more common in our solar system, than most people think.

reply to post by game over man

The creation of amino acids through violent impacts is expected to happen not only when icy comets laced with simple compounds slam into rocky planets and moons, but when meteorites and other space rocks crash into icy surfaces, such as those found on Saturn's moon, Enceladus, and Jupiter's moon, Europa

It certainly sounds plausible! S&F

game over man
reply to post by Harte

 

You're right, panspermia is distributing life. I just think it's possible there was additional distribution throughout our solar system.

I just watch a lot of documentaries on theoretical alien life and they never mention the word panspermia.

We have extremophiles on Earth, and we use this knowledge to determine life elsewhere in the solar system. A lot if not all moons and planets have craters. Life could be more common in our solar system, than most people think.

IMO, panspermia is a viable means for life to have arrived here. It's not impossible that we might one day find out the truth of this matter one way or the other.

But panspermia is just a dodge, really, because the life distributed by panspermia had to arise somewhere. If somewhere life arose, why shouldn't life arise here and many other places as well?

Harte