RE: Did life on earth start in volcanoes?

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

RE: Did life on earth start in volcanoes?

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: Did life on earth start in volcanoes?

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Did life on earth start in volcanoes? - 10/19/2008 4:29:52 AM

corysub

Posts: 1492
Joined: 1/1/2004
Status: offline

Dunno if the science is right but using Volcano's as a metaphor seems perfect. I alway belived that life started with an orgasm that had volcanic eruption type tremors, ground shaking, and than a really big blast!

(in reply to Hippiekinkster)

Profile

Post #: 21

RE: Did life on earth start in volcanoes? - 10/19/2008 7:22:28 AM

Termyn8or

Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline

kit, I could make a chilly chili if there are leftovers to put in the fridge.

Perhaps I do talk about cooking more oft than I should, sometimes more oft than I cook. Maybe that's a good thing though because almost every time I do cook I am in the kitchen for at least four hours and I make a big mess. Not every time, but usually anyway. An eposode is coming though, when it gets cold it will be kash season again.

Sorry about your thread Hippie, they hijacked it and I am just along for the ride. They got box cutters !

T

(in reply to corysub)

Profile

Post #: 22

RE: Did life on earth start in volcanoes? - 10/19/2008 9:39:45 AM

MasterG2kTR

Posts: 6677
Joined: 8/7/2004
From: Wisconsin
Status: offline

Two words....."The Matrix".....'nuff said!....LOL

(in reply to Termyn8or)

Profile

Post #: 23

RE: Did life on earth start in volcanoes? - 10/19/2008 10:14:31 AM

bluepanda

Posts: 328
Joined: 12/12/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hippiekinkster

quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or

Where did you hear about my chili ? The only claim to fame it has is that nobody can get enough of it. Chili science is like art, I can make it hot, oniony, garlicy, beany, meaty, tomatoey, anything you want.

But now that Hippie's thread has been hijacked to oblivion, does anyone want to talk about the OP ?

T

Nah, not really. I'd rather talk about Chili. No beans. No tomatoes. Just meat, chiles, cebollas, aji, y masa harina de maiz. And herbs.

Mr. Ozark, I've read enough of your posts over the years to have a lot of respect for anything you have to say about food. But nonetheless, I'd be a little wary about any chili recipe that came from a thread about volcanoes.

_____________________________

Panda, Panda, burning bright
In the forest of the night
What immortal hand or eye
Made you all black and white and roly-poly like that?

(in reply to Hippiekinkster)

Profile

Post #: 24

RE: Did life on earth start in volcanoes? - 10/19/2008 4:58:42 PM

bipolarber

Posts: 2792
Joined: 9/25/2004
Status: offline

Termy wrote:

"bipo, if you believe that life is derived from outer space fine, but then so is the Earth. Actually if you know what I meant by a class M planet, you see that we do not disagree. There is no way to disprove it therefor it is possible, however, if the building blocks of life are floating around in the vastness of space, from where did they come ?"

Termy:
Way, way, way back at the beginning of the universe, things were a lot simpler. Pretty much all you had was gravity, hydrogen, and a few odd forces of nature. After the big bang, gravity pulled matter together to form stars. These stars lived their lives, buring like furnaces, condensing matter into heavier elements at their cores. Eventually they died, spewing these heavier elements out into space. There, the process began anew, only now there were other elements in the mix... iron for the cores of planets, silica which makes up the bulk of planetary mass, and traces of gold, uranium, for example. There was also carbon, which has all kinds of interesting properties. (A really great book that explains the versitility of carbon as a life giving element, is in Issac Asimov's book of essays on basic chemistry: "Building Blocks of the Universe.")

So...

The Book of Genisis

(revised)

In the beginning, the BIG BANG created the heavens and the Earth.

And the Earth was without form, and void; and the iniest elements were upon the face of the universe.

And the Big Bang exploded and there was light, and X-rays, and all manner of photons, and it was good.

And as the universe expanded, tiny particles formed bigger and bigger particles, until electrons cleaved unto protons and begat hydrogen atoms.

And the electrons and Protons and the Hydrogen gas which WAS THE UNIVERSE expanded, and as it did so, it cooled. And as it cooled, gravity mainifested itself and everywhere and drew together clouds of the gas which formed giant swirls called galaxies.

Within each of the galaxies, the clumps of gas continued to swirl into pools and eddies, drawing them into smaller clumps, and these clumps drew in to the point of ignition, and were called STARS. And for the first time, there were lights in the heavens.

These stars were vast, and hot, and used up their fuel quickly, which begat heavier, more complex elements, and those stars exploded, scattering their bounty among the firmament. Those elements were treasure, added to the richness of the next cycle, and the next stars also begat smaller clumps of heavier matter, and these came to be called PLANETS.

One of these planets was the Earth. In it's beginning, the Earth was hot, and violent, but as it cooled, there came a time when rain came from the heavenly atmosphere, and the world was divided into the lands and the seas.

And the air was amonia, and methane and hydrogen, and other trace gases, and the lightining did thunder mightily. And the chemicals did mix within the seas, and taking energy from the lightining, and the sunlight, and (yes, volcanic heat) the chemicals became ever more complex. Until, yea, there came to pass a molecule which could make copies of itself. And this molecule begat more of it's own kind, and they told two friends, and so on, and so on...

The laws of chemistry said: be fruitful and multiply.

Sometimes, the new molecule was slightly different. The ones whose difference was of no value, disappeared, while those that were better, continued- better able to survive in it's ever changing (although very slowly) enviroment.

And so were born ever more complex molecules, until, groups of these molecules came together in a way that we latered defined as cells. These cells became the basis for LIFE.

And groups of these cells gathered together to form ever more complex organisims, until they begat the fish in the sea.

And that, Term, is how you and I came to be here. To get the rest of the story, you can pop in a DVD of Disney's Fantasia, and watch the "Rite of Spring." (Although, keep in mind, Walt's idea of how the dinos dies has been shelved in favor of the asteroid impact theory, simply because it fits the evidence better.)

Thus ends the lesson for today.

(in reply to bluepanda)

Profile

Post #: 25

RE: Did life on earth start in volcanoes? - 10/19/2008 5:29:11 PM

LookieNoNookie

Posts: 12216
Joined: 8/9/2008
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kittinSol

quote:

ORIGINAL: Vendaval
What was going on before the big bang?

A big bong?

(Wait a minute...does that mean Cheech is God?)

(in reply to kittinSol)

Profile

Post #: 26

RE: Did life on earth start in volcanoes? - 10/19/2008 9:04:13 PM

Hippiekinkster

Posts: 5512
Joined: 11/20/2007
From: Liechtenstein
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: bluepanda

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hippiekinkster

quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or

Where did you hear about my chili ? The only claim to fame it has is that nobody can get enough of it. Chili science is like art, I can make it hot, oniony, garlicy, beany, meaty, tomatoey, anything you want.

But now that Hippie's thread has been hijacked to oblivion, does anyone want to talk about the OP ?

T

Nah, not really. I'd rather talk about Chili. No beans. No tomatoes. Just meat, chiles, cebollas, aji, y masa harina de maiz. And herbs.

Mr. Ozark, I've read enough of your posts over the years to have a lot of respect for anything you have to say about food. But nonetheless, I'd be a little wary about any chili recipe that came from a thread about volcanoes.

Haven't seen Ozark in quite a while, amigo.

But you have revealed my evil plot to provide full employment for proctologists!!! Hahahaha

_____________________________

"We are convinced that freedom w/o Socialism is privilege and injustice, and that Socialism w/o freedom is slavery and brutality." Bakunin

“Nothing we do, however virtuous, can be accomplished alone; therefore we are saved by love.” Reinhold Ne

(in reply to bluepanda)

Profile

Post #: 27

RE: Did life on earth start in volcanoes? - 10/20/2008 9:34:32 AM

Termyn8or

Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline

Hippie, you finally got back ! And the hijacks don't seem to have pissed you off. Cool.

bipo, your understanding of the theories of the universe seem at least equal to mine. I have been well aware of this since pre-teen years as it was one of my preferred studies. That's a nice little Genesis there, and pretty much sums it up.

I have a proposed theory that goes a bit beyond. I am not sure how it fits into the OP but after what I have seen in this thread here goes. This is not quite a macro as your Genesis, and it is strictly theoretical. If you know about the birth of stars, maybe you know about the life cycle of stars.

A star forms and after all the collapsing and everything shines brightly and is quite small, some being smaller than some planets. Their energy output is great, and some shine a near bluish color. They are very compact.

As they age though, their chief source of energy of course has always been hydrogen, and still is, but over the millenia some of it gets converted to helium. Whether the total energy output changes is up for debate, but the thing is the star cools and gets yellower, but grows in size.

Now the amount of energy an orbiting planet absorbs from a star is logarythmically(sp) related to distance. We are at 93 million miles right now and it is not changing overnight. However over the millenia our sun will contain more and more helium. This dilutes the fuel somewhat like an EGR valve in a car engine. It burns cooler and more slowly, or at least apparently so. The event of human existence has not been long enough for us to do any meaningful studies on this, but we do know certain things.

The star cools and grows, and regardless of the total energy output we know that if we get closer to it, or it gets closer to us, the energy this planet absorbs will increase exponentially because of simple (well not so simple) geometry.

Therefore I believe that it is possible that at one time there was life on Mercury, when our sun was much smaller and farther away from that satellite. As the star aged it grew, and basically burned all the life off of Mercury. Venus was next. Who knows what form any of this life took, but if my proposed theory is true, there could have been life on Venus for many milennia. But then when the surface temperature gets to 800F as they report, so much for that. Now it's Earth's turn. Our sun is at the perfect distance and puts out exactly the amount of energ we need to survive. That is not due to end for a very long time, but when it does it will be Mars' turn.

H2O will bubble out of every crook and nanny, eventually some things vaporize creating an atmosphere and then Mars gets a chance. We will be burnt to a crisp.

Actually I have decided not to carry that theory on to Jupiter, because of the distance but I could be wrong. The asteroid belt might be engulfed by the sun and with more fuel, could spark the same changes there and make life possible.

One of the things to remember is that everything is soluble in everything. The rate might be immeasurable in a human lifetime, but it is still true. Why would Earth be so different from Mars ? Where did our atmosphere come from ?

Many things we just can't find out. That makes my theory as good as any other.

The big bang, that lightning strike, you weren't there and neither was I. For all we know God could've been throwing his equivalent of snowballs out in the yard. I don't accept that of course, but with no other way to know I can't really reject it. Once in a while does modern science actually prove or disprove an old theory. It happens but not every day.

So now I am thinking about that big red sun, standing on a mountain on Jupiter, thinking how nice the Earth used to be. Or Mars, with an orange sun, learning to live with the different life forms that may spawn. Figuring out which ones are good to eat and which would make better pets. Completely different. An interesting mind fuck to say the least.

And then if we can manage not to destroy ourselves before we get to where we can handle interstellar travel, what would we find ? Other forms of life that developed in completely different ways. Will they hear the tones we hear, will they see the colors we see ? In other words will their hearing range be from 20-20,000 Hz like ours, and will their eyes detect the same spectrum of light that we percieve as light ? Even on our own planet, try to talk to a bat. Their hearing is tuned to very high ultrasonic frequencies. There are more species in the depths of the ocean than we know of as of yet. Some are totally blind, there is no light down there.

That brings up the question of whether or not they would even have eyes or ears. In my opinion, we can't handle it yet. I bet if there are others in the universe they are glad that our technology bogs us down making us unable to explore. The desire is there, but the fantasy world of Star Trek is not likely. It was a good show, a good story but that is all.

In reality people kill because of fear. As much as I don't like to use fiction as an example, look at The Day The Earth Stood Still. Klatoo had a gift for the human race and they thought it was a weapon and shot him. I believe the assessment by the author of human nature was quite correct. We kill what we fear and we fear the unknown.

I don't think we are going to stop killing what we fear, but as long as we fear the unknown we are simply not ready for contact with any ET.

Basically we are either very young as a sentient species or we have a bad case of arrested development. However without anything to compare it with we will never know which.

T

(in reply to Hippiekinkster)

Profile

Post #: 28

RE: Did life on earth start in volcanoes? - 10/20/2008 10:54:01 AM

Dnomyar

Posts: 7933
Joined: 6/27/2005
Status: offline

In Detroit people kill you for your car or jacket or if you look at them ect. Fear has nothing to do with it.

(in reply to Termyn8or)

Profile

Post #: 29

RE: Did life on earth start in volcanoes? - 10/20/2008 11:17:42 AM

Termyn8or

Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline

Wrong Dn, they have to prove they are ruthless to dispell any notion that they night be weak.

T

(in reply to Dnomyar)

Profile

Post #: 30

RE: Did life on earth start in volcanoes? - 10/20/2008 12:28:49 PM

seeksfemslave

Posts: 4011
Joined: 6/16/2006
Status: offline

quote:

And the air was ammonia, and methane and hydrogen, and other trace gases, and the lightining did thunder mightily. And the chemicals did mix within the seas, and taking energy from the lightining, and the sunlight, and (yes, volcanic heat) the chemicals became ever more complex. Until, yea, there came to pass a molecule which could make copies of itself. And this molecule begat more of it's own kind, and they told two friends, and so on, and so on.

Bipolarbar glosses over one miracle, the big bang then waltzes effortlessly to the creation of life from inert matter. In between the universal expansion is allowed to conveniemtly halt so galaxies could form and what 'ave we got ?

Gawd knows but it must be true because if the scientific method can be used to build better mousetraps then its only one small step for it to explain the origin of everything.

< Message edited by seeksfemslave -- 10/20/2008 12:46:45 PM >

(in reply to bipolarber)

Profile

Post #: 31

RE: Did life on earth start in volcanoes? - 10/20/2008 1:04:34 PM

bipolarber

Posts: 2792
Joined: 9/25/2004
Status: offline

Termy wrote:

"One of the things to remember is that everything is soluble in everything. The rate might be immeasurable in a human lifetime, but it is still true. Why would Earth be so different from Mars ? Where did our atmosphere come from ?"

Termy,
I'm not entirely certain what you mean by "everything is soluble in everything"... if you are talking about the basic laws of thermodynamics, you are essentially correct. Everything breaks down unless you put energy back into the system. As the old saying about thermodynamics goes:

1) You can't win the game.
2) You can't break even.
3) You can't get out of the game.

So yeah, as the sun ages, huge changes have happened during our sun's lifetime, and will change drastically again as it ages and moves off main sequence. But the idea that at one time Mercury could have supported life... well, I just don't think that was ever in the cards. It's too close to the sun, is bathed in radiation that would have kept any kind of organic chemistry from forming, (even if the sun had been a blue dwarf... which is doubtful, considering what we know about stellar evolution) and it is far, far too small to have ever held onto an atmosphere.

The sun's mass determines it's classification and output. It also pretty much locks in it's life cycle. Generally, stars never start out smaller and cooler. The rule seems to be that stars collapse inward until they ignite, then remain at that level until they reach old age. At that point, our sun WILL expand, almost out to the asteroid belt, until the energy it's putting out again reaches equilibrium with it's gravitational force (based on the mass it's burned off) and will become a red giant. It's vaugely possible at that point, that worlds like Pluto, or some of the larger Kuiper belt objects might become more Earth-like at that point... and perhaps life will get a start on one or more of them. But, even then, the sun will continue to burn off it's fuel, and eventually collapse into a red or possiby white dwarf. (It lacks the mass to become a neutron star, or a black hole.)

In all, yout theory is interesting, but it's not really following everything we know about the life of the solar system as we understand it. You might try picking up a few good books at your local library on astronomy/cosmology. There are several that lead you though the data we've gathered, and the conclusions we have so far. Make sure to read only the ones that have copyright dates within the last 10 years. Thanks to Hubble, and other orbiting observatories who look at different wavelengths of the EM spectrum, a lot of details we took as rote have had to be re-written... again....

But that's the beauty of science: we keep working toward the truth, sans dogma, sans ego, altering our beliefs as new information becomes available. (Compared to religion, which just makes shit up, claims it's from God, then tortures, kills or casts out anyone who doesn't believe what the "authority" tells them to.)

(in reply to Termyn8or)

Profile

Post #: 32

RE: Did life on earth start in volcanoes? - 10/20/2008 1:13:06 PM

bipolarber

Posts: 2792
Joined: 9/25/2004
Status: offline

Oh, I forgot to answer the other part of your question... "Where did our atmosphere come from?" Well, it's pretty simple really... The Earth is a fairly heavy body... It's central core is made of iron in a liquid state. As metals cool from a molten state, they give off hydrogen. This is what our original atmosphere was composed of: H1. Combining with carbon, you end up with CO2... the carbon dioxide and hydrogen condense out of the atmosphere in the form of rain (highly acidic rain... with a ph level somewhere near battery acid) which became the seas.

As mellinia wore on, the seas became host to complex organic chemistries, as I stated in the earlier posts. Eventually, it was the proto life in the Earth's oceans which reduced the acid levels, and began pouring nitrogen into the air, while also absorbing the bulk of the CO2.... Once life moved out of the oceans, and onto land, then we began to have the atmosphere we have today. All it took was the basic materials the Earth had on hand, and about 3 billion years. Viola!

(in reply to Termyn8or)

Profile

Post #: 33

RE: Did life on earth start in volcanoes? - 10/20/2008 1:34:15 PM

Hippiekinkster

Posts: 5512
Joined: 11/20/2007
From: Liechtenstein
Status: offline

Acually, Term, it's not a log function. Radioactive decay is a log function. It's an inverse square function.

There appears to be insufficient H2O and CO2 on Mars for a useable atmosphere.

Jupiter is a gas giant. Don't think anyone will be standing on its surface.

And if you want to know why interstellar travel is impossible, read "A Tribble's Guide to Space" http://press.princeton.edu/titles/6915.html

_____________________________

"We are convinced that freedom w/o Socialism is privilege and injustice, and that Socialism w/o freedom is slavery and brutality." Bakunin

“Nothing we do, however virtuous, can be accomplished alone; therefore we are saved by love.” Reinhold Ne

(in reply to Termyn8or)

Profile

Post #: 34

RE: Did life on earth start in volcanoes? - 10/20/2008 2:35:07 PM

bipolarber

Posts: 2792
Joined: 9/25/2004
Status: offline

Hippie,

I'd argue with you about the interstellar travel thing.... I doubt it's going to be "Star Trek" but there's no reason why a ship couldn't be built that could either make a trip to another star taking several generations, or via something like an Orion pulse drive, combined with suspended animation of some sort... In fact, we're already getting serious about possible robotic missions to the nearest stars in the next 50 years. (probably earlier.)

(in reply to Hippiekinkster)

Profile

Post #: 35

RE: Did life on earth start in volcanoes? - 10/20/2008 2:43:38 PM

Steponme73

Posts: 552
Joined: 11/9/2007
Status: offline

Life started in a campbells soup can. Everyone knows that. This thing with amino acids and stuff is just out there. They make this stuff up to confuse us. I am curious though what was going on before the big bang....what happens to the universe when it gets stretched out to far? Then do we have a Whoosh Thwop? Where we go back to square one and start over?

(in reply to Hippiekinkster)

Profile

Post #: 36

RE: Did life on earth start in volcanoes? - 10/20/2008 4:19:25 PM

Termyn8or

Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline

Well perhaps everyting I said was not absolutely correct, but yall got me goin here.

Thanks Hipster, that's the term I couldn't think of, inverse square. It just escaped me at the time.

I can't really puport my little theory to include Mercury, it really is too small to hold a real atmosphere as we see it. Or is it ? It could be denser than the average planet and maybe some form of life could have cropped up. However that would have had to have happened when the sun was at it's smallest volume. None of us would see it.

Venus is a different story. I think it quite possible there given what we know. I think when technology allows, we should do anthropological studies there, looking for past life. These changes take a long time and we might have some very interesting surprises. Venus has an atmosphere and I don't doubt that there is some form of life there. I bet if we sent a bunch of cockroaches there they would, at least some of them, survive but then the Venutians would be pissed off if any are left.

Earth, well it is our turn. Of course we are blowing it, but that it human nature.

Now Mars would be next, it is about 0.85 of the mass of the Earth so therefore it could hold an atmosphere if it only had one of any significance. I mean if you weigh 100 lbs. on Earth you would weigh 85 lbs. on Mars. I think that is close enough. The question is what will form it, just like what formed ours ? Almost every heavenly body has a bunch of ice, and there is no reason to believe that Mars is any different. At some point in time the sun's rays simply boil it up to the top, which creates the seas as well as a good part of the atmosphere. There is no reason to think it can't happen there. It is all a matter of absorbing enough (heat) energy.

Actually it seems that these planets are the one that get a chance. Jupiter is not likely to produce any life that we can recognize. Because the gravity, which is due tio the mass of the planet and not likely to change, if you weigh 100 lbs. here you will weigh 1,200 lbs there. Help me Weight Watchers.

As such, any life with mobility and motivity like we have would have to be alot smaller, by the laws of physics. I think a cockroach would survive, but do you want to sign an interplanetary treaty with a cockroach ? It wouldn't happen anyway because we would be all burnt to a crisp.

Sometimes it is not so much what we know but what we learn that we don't know. My little theory could be right and nobody could ever prove it, or it could be wrong but nobody could ever disprove it.

But the idea, just the idea that the planets in our solar system are sort of "standing in line" for their crack at getting life going I think is novel in a way. It might not completely make sense but it does not make nonsense. It is also not the subject of politics :-)

Now to the Termy phase, what if we go to Venus and find relics of a society ? We get the suits or whatever and start in the polar regions, and really if the planet started heating up that's where the Venutians would go. We would get a glimpse of their best technology, and their highest form of advancement.

Indeed what will they find on Earth after the sun burns our useless carcasses off ?

I heard, although this is not recent science, that Venus does not recieve all that much more energy from the sun than we do, but because of the cloud cover it stores it alot more effectively and that's why it is up to 800F. It would be hotter than the Earth, but not this much. So are Al Gore and his cohorts saying that it can happen here ?

Interesting point actually, because by simple geometry (well not so simple) Venus should not be that hot, not at all. The thing is it traps heat. Now to extend this into the future, the atmosphere is at 800F, what temperature would you suppose the core of that planet to be ? Is there a possibility that it will be very benefocial to the sun when it is sucked in and used for fuel ? Will it possibly return the energy it recieved and result in a semi-adibiatic exchange ? Not that it would be all that substantial once you understand radiation of energy and vectors and distances. But something. And add in the asteroid belt as well for fuel.

Maybe by eating us up the sun will give the spark of life to Jupiter one day. Perhaps even Neptune. I really don't think it can go much farther then that. By then the sun will be so big and cool that kids will be surfing on it. Dammit we miss out on everything.

T

(in reply to Steponme73)

Profile

Post #: 37

RE: Did life on earth start in volcanoes? - 10/20/2008 8:59:14 PM

bipolarber

Posts: 2792
Joined: 9/25/2004
Status: offline

Okay, Termy, I think the best way to answer this is to try and do a point by point. Forgive my use of the boldface, but I think I need to alter my responses so it's not too confusing...

quote:

ORIGINAL: Termyn8or

"I can't really puport my little theory to include Mercury, it really is too small to hold a real atmosphere as we see it. Or is it ? It could be denser than the average planet and maybe some form of life could have cropped up. However that would have had to have happened when the sun was at it's smallest volume. None of us would see it."
MESSENGER just flew past Mercury a week ago, it's second orbit past the planet, the first being over six months ago. No, Mercury has NO atmosphere. Google up the photos though, beautiful examples of crater-ray formation!

Venus is a different story. I think it quite possible there given what we know. I think when technology allows, we should do anthropological studies there, looking for past life. These changes take a long time and we might have some very interesting surprises. Venus has an atmosphere and I don't doubt that there is some form of life there. I bet if we sent a bunch of cockroaches there they would, at least some of them, survive but then the Venutians would be pissed off if any are left.
The surface of Venus is over 800 deg. F., and the atmosphere is sulfuric acid. Even the Russian probes, built like fucking tanks, lasted less than half an hour on the surface. I doubt if even one of Star Trek's "Horta" could live there.

Now Mars would be next, it is about 0.85 of the mass of the Earth so therefore it could hold an atmosphere if it only had one of any significance. I mean if you weigh 100 lbs. on Earth you would weigh 85 lbs. on Mars. I think that is close enough. The question is what will form it, just like what formed ours ? Almost every heavenly body has a bunch of ice, and there is no reason to believe that Mars is any different. At some point in time the sun's rays simply boil it up to the top, which creates the seas as well as a good part of the atmosphere. There is no reason to think it can't happen there. It is all a matter of absorbing enough (heat) energy.
Mars, at one time, had a thicker atmosphere. Thick enough that liquid water could form on it's surface. Unfortunately for Mars, it doesn't have a molten iron core, so it doesn't have a magnetic feild to deflect solar radiation. The atmosphere blew off, and the "seas" (actually very shallow ponds) boiled away, as the surface was fried with hard radiation. Life may have formed there early on, but so far, no hard evidence of it has been found. BTW:
Mercury=no ice
Venus= no ice
Jupiter = no ice
Neptune = no ice
Uranus = no ice.

Actually it seems that these planets are the one that get a chance. Jupiter is not likely to produce any life that we can recognize. Because the gravity, which is due tio the mass of the planet and not likely to change, if you weigh 100 lbs. here you will weigh 1,200 lbs there. Help me Weight Watchers.
Gravity is not the problem. Radiation and convection currents that are in the gas giant's turbulent atmosphere are. Any organic chemistry that might start to form in the outer gas layers of Jupiter, would be fried by the radiation, and sucked down into the furnace of the planet's liquid core. There is NO solid surface to any of the gas giants in the outer solar system. They are huge balls of liquid, with gaseous outer layers.

As such, any life with mobility and motivity like we have would have to be alot smaller, by the laws of physics. I think a cockroach would survive, but do you want to sign an interplanetary treaty with a cockroach ? It wouldn't happen anyway because we would be all burnt to a crisp.
Now you're getting it...

Sometimes it is not so much what we know but what we learn that we don't know. My little theory could be right and nobody could ever prove it, or it could be wrong but nobody could ever disprove it.
Aside from comparing it to the known facts, you mean?

But the idea, just the idea that the planets in our solar system are sort of "standing in line" for their crack at getting life going I think is novel in a way. It might not completely make sense but it does not make nonsense. It is also not the subject of politics :-)
It's also not original. The mideval philosopher Bruno first suggested that there may be life on other planets, or that they might be the next worlds that God intends to populate. So, your cutting edge idea actually dates back to 100 years before Gallileo. (and it's still wrong.)

Now to the Termy phase, what if we go to Venus and find relics of a society ? We get the suits or whatever and start in the polar regions, and really if the planet started heating up that's where the Venutians would go. We would get a glimpse of their best technology, and their highest form of advancement.
Venus is hot. Really hot. Africa kinda hot. Tarzan couldn't take that kinda hot. If you had your car on Venus, the tires would melt, and the metal would be glowing a dull red. Getting to the poles makes no difference. And it's always been too close to the sun to have ever been a possible seedbed for life.

Indeed what will they find on Earth after the sun burns our useless carcasses off ?
Nothing. The Earth itself will be consumed in the sun's red giant phase.

I heard, although this is not recent science, that Venus does not recieve all that much more energy from the sun than we do, but because of the cloud cover it stores it alot more effectively and that's why it is up to 800F. It would be hotter than the Earth, but not this much. So are Al Gore and his cohorts saying that it can happen here ?

Interesting point actually, because by simple geometry (well not so simple) Venus should not be that hot, not at all. The thing is it traps heat. Now to extend this into the future, the atmosphere is at 800F, what temperature would you suppose the core of that planet to be ? Is there a possibility that it will be very benefocial to the sun when it is sucked in and used for fuel ? Will it possibly return the energy it recieved and result in a semi-adibiatic exchange ? Not that it would be all that substantial once you understand radiation of energy and vectors and distances. But something. And add in the asteroid belt as well for fuel.
Nope. When the solar system was formed, about 98% of the mass of the solar system ended up in the sun. The other 2% became the planets, and a marginal ammount was blown off into the void when the Sun initally "switched on." Even if the sun drew in every last scrap of matter that surrounded it, the mass wouldn't be increased a significant ammount. The Sun is a BIG ASS mo fo'!

Maybe by eating us up the sun will give the spark of life to Jupiter one day. Perhaps even Neptune. I really don't think it can go much farther then that. By then the sun will be so big and cool that kids will be surfing on it. Dammit we miss out on everything.

T

Ah, "if only wishing made it so."

So much for the pseudo-creationist crap meets Star Trek (actually closer to the pulp stories of the 1930's) I have the feeling that no matter how often I explain things to you, Term, you'll just keep coming up with this stuff... so, feel free to keep having this little fantasy theory, if you get enjoyment out of it, then by all means go for it. But for me, when it comes to science fiction, I like to have the SCIENCE part in there. Otherwise, it's just wish fullfilment fantasy.

...and it certainly isn't astronomy or physics as we know them.

(in reply to Termyn8or)

Profile

Post #: 38

RE: Did life on earth start in volcanoes? - 10/21/2008 8:15:03 AM

Termyn8or

Posts: 18681
Joined: 11/12/2005
Status: offline

Actually I like having my crackpot theories shot down. You took the bait bipo, and that is fine with me. I came up with that theory a very long time ago and over time realized that there were many variables that would make it pretty much unlikely.

It's nice sometimes to muse about things that happened way before our time and that which will happen when we are long gone. Yes bipo, you took the bait, but it was a whole lot better than discussing politics. Really if it didn't seem the thread was getting hijacked to bumfuckt Cuba somewhere I probably wouldn't have brought it up. You reminded me of a few things I had forgotten and I may have learned a thing or two, plus you got the chance to show off a bit. Nothing wrong with that, because we didn't say a bloody word about politics.

ANYTHING but politics.

So with my 35 year old "theory" shot to the ground, what of the volcano ? I seem to have monopolized your time with this novel concept and the OP got brushed aside. Something spewing out of a volcano and getting hit by lightning and eventually we have OMG.....politics LOL.

Tell you what would be another interesting discussion - time travel. Now I believe that it is simply impossible, and those who disagree are not thinking of it correctly. However the ramifications of time travel would make for some very interesting points, possible or not.

That is similar to this subject, we weren't there, we never will be or have been there, and it is all speculation. The OP could be right or wrong and we will never know. Sometimes I wonder where the Hipster finds this stuff. I found it interesting, how about you ? Like I said at least it isn't politics. It's also better than sitting there like a bump on a log. I can only stomach so much politics.

I don't really want to kick off a time travel discussion here, but consider this. If we were to travel back in time to the moment of the origin of life, and say poured bleach into the primordial soup, would we destroy life ? I mean get to THE place and time it all started and stop it. Well then we would cease to exist no ? Therefor if I were to do that then I wouldn't exist so naturally I couldn't do that so it would not be done and I would exist, to do it. Would I be locked into an endless loop of sorts ? Every morning get in the time machine, destroy all life on this planet and then start over and do it again the next day, and the next, and the next ad infinitum.

A tripped out subject to say the least. Think I'll burn one.

T

(in reply to bipolarber)

Profile

Post #: 39