Fermi Paradox: Alien Life and The Phosphorus Conveyor Problem [Click] I think I may have posted this or something similar a few days ago, but it certainly bears consideration; I had assumed that phosphorus was more or less evenly distributed in the galaxy. I have also come to be of the opinion that plate tectonics is also necessary to cycle various elements and water, and that this requires a large moon close enough to strongly affect the planet’s mantle. ——Alan
Plate tectonics is (are?) important in a lot of ways.So one of the big questions becomes, how many if any other planets have this phenomenon?
It occurs to me that the number of special circumstances that are, seemingly, necessary for life to begin, and more that need to obtain for life to thrive, and still more for life to develop intelligence that it ends up being indistinguishable from the anthropic principle.
Coming at this from a different angle, the biochemistry in which I have my PhD, I reach a similar conclusion. Even the simplest forms of life are so incredibly complex that the chance of it arising by chance are miniscule. Even given billions of Earth-like planets in the galaxy, the odds are it happened only once. If you look at the hundred billion galaxies in the universe, the odds change, but we'll never be aware of life in distant galaxies.
When I started college (Chemistry major) the new theoretical approach, with atomic orbitals and suchlike, had taken hold in the first semester of inorganic chemistry. The second semester, organic chemistry, and quantitative analysis were taught by a professor nearing retirement, and he taught them as he had learned them at UC Berkeley in the 1930's. In Organic Chemistry he would often write "lasso formulas" for reactions, and emphasized to us that they were simply mnemonic devices, not reaction mechanisms. When I went to state college, organic chemistry was two semesters taught in the new fashion and they tried to make me take both, but I talked them into letting me just take the second semester, which proved to be an easy A. While the students who had taken the first of the two semesters were trying to figure reactions out from what little they knew about organic reaction mechanisms, I already knew what actually happened, so writing the mechanisms was easy as pie. In those days Biochemistry was not a separate major from Organic Chemistry, and DNA hadn't worked its way into the undergraduate curriculum, either in biology or chemistry (all that stuff happened when I was in graduate school or maybe a little before). But Mr. Watson's admonition that we could know WHAT happened while understanding that we really didn't know HOW it happened has stuck with me all these years. It seems the same approach can be applied to the Fermi Paradox. One of my pet notions is that use of quantum entanglement could produce the illusion of faster than light travel, or maybe the "real" thing. ----Alan
Cute!
ReplyDelete----Alan
New 3D cosmic map raises questions over future of universe, scientists say [Click] Doesn’t seem to fit current undersandings of dark matter.
ReplyDelete—Alan
Joe Blogs video: Russian Oil Refineries Face 3 Million Drone Attacks in 2024 as Ukraine & West Target Russian Oil [Click]
ReplyDelete—Alan
Blue sky today, I estimate 25-30% cloud cover, fair weather cumulus. Fresh snow on the mountains, down to the second range of foothills.
ReplyDelete----ALAN
BBC: Why we have co-evolved with technology [Click]
ReplyDelete—Alan
Fermi Paradox: Alien Life and The Phosphorus Conveyor Problem [Click] I think I may have posted this or something similar a few days ago, but it certainly bears consideration; I had assumed that phosphorus was more or less evenly distributed in the galaxy. I have also come to be of the opinion that plate tectonics is also necessary to cycle various elements and water, and that this requires a large moon close enough to strongly affect the planet’s mantle.
ReplyDelete——Alan
Plate tectonics is (are?) important in a lot of ways.So one of the big questions becomes, how many if any other planets have this phenomenon?
DeleteIt occurs to me that the number of special circumstances that are, seemingly, necessary for life to begin, and more that need to obtain for life to thrive, and still more for life to develop intelligence that it ends up being indistinguishable from the anthropic principle.
Coming at this from a different angle, the biochemistry in which I have my PhD, I reach a similar conclusion. Even the simplest forms of life are so incredibly complex that the chance of it arising by chance are miniscule. Even given billions of Earth-like planets in the galaxy, the odds are it happened only once. If you look at the hundred billion galaxies in the universe, the odds change, but we'll never be aware of life in distant galaxies.
DeleteAs I recall, more than 600 exoplanets have so far been discovered, and not a one of them has a moon like ours.
Delete----Alan
When I started college (Chemistry major) the new theoretical approach, with atomic orbitals and suchlike, had taken hold in the first semester of inorganic chemistry. The second semester, organic chemistry, and quantitative analysis were taught by a professor nearing retirement, and he taught them as he had learned them at UC Berkeley in the 1930's. In Organic Chemistry he would often write "lasso formulas" for reactions, and emphasized to us that they were simply mnemonic devices, not reaction mechanisms. When I went to state college, organic chemistry was two semesters taught in the new fashion and they tried to make me take both, but I talked them into letting me just take the second semester, which proved to be an easy A. While the students who had taken the first of the two semesters were trying to figure reactions out from what little they knew about organic reaction mechanisms, I already knew what actually happened, so writing the mechanisms was easy as pie. In those days Biochemistry was not a separate major from Organic Chemistry, and DNA hadn't worked its way into the undergraduate curriculum, either in biology or chemistry (all that stuff happened when I was in graduate school or maybe a little before). But Mr. Watson's admonition that we could know WHAT happened while understanding that we really didn't know HOW it happened has stuck with me all these years. It seems the same approach can be applied to the Fermi Paradox. One of my pet notions is that use of quantum entanglement could produce the illusion of faster than light travel, or maybe the "real" thing.
Delete----Alan
{listener}
ReplyDeleteVery interesting indeed!
Fam has begun to arrive. There may be 15 of us yet.
May you have good weather!
ReplyDelete---Alan