Who can explain the logic of God?

[BidenPresident]

It is a matter of curiosity, but I think that characterization does a bit of a disservice.

I would rank the origin of life as one of the greatest scientific questions in human history.

Artificial Intelligence shows why the origin of life is not an important scientific question.

 

[Poor Richard Saunders]

We have fossil evidence of complex cellular life, specifically prokaryotes and archae, from almost as soon as the Earth became habitable, after the heavy bombardment phase.

It didn't take a billion years.

So it is habitable when life exists? That seems to be a circular argument.

We have no way of knowing when, how or how many times life started on this planet. What we do know is that there was a lot more room and time for nature to experiment to make life than the time and space man has spent trying. We may stumble on a way to make life but we can't know if that is how it started on earth.

What I am saying is that before I convince myself that it must be easy for complex life to develop anywhere there is a habitable planet, I would like to have better confidence in the conditions and processes for how life self-organized and formed here from simple inert chemicals.

We know that organic molecules can form under a variety of different conditions. The question is what conditions are needed for those molecules to start to reproduce in some fashion. The speculation and science is interesting. The odds of us finding that in a laboratory are long because we have no idea what we are actually looking for.

 

[Cypress]

So it is habitable when life exists? That seems to be a circular argument.

We have no way of knowing when, how or how many times life started on this planet. What we do know is that there was a lot more room and time for nature to experiment to make life than the time and space man has spent trying. We may stumble on a way to make life but we can't know if that is how it started on earth.

We know that organic molecules can form under a variety of different conditions. The question is what conditions are needed for those molecules to start to reproduce in some fashion. The speculation and science is interesting. The odds of us finding that in a laboratory are long because we have no idea what we are actually looking for.

I agree, finding it in the lab is a long shot, but the point of laboratory experiments is to deduce clues about the probable physical and chemical steps that led from inert chemicals to complex cellular life.

The earth, was habitable when the conditions for life as we know it established themselves.

During the late heavy bombardment phase of the proto-earth, the planet was constantly bombarded with asteroids, much of the surface was molten rock, and any life would have been instantly vaporized.

If memory serves me, the late heavy bombardment phase of planetary evolution didn't end until about 3.8 billion years b.p., and we start to find evidence of complex single celled life shortly after that. There are fossils of prokaryotes at 3.5 billion years b.p., and there is even indirect isotopic evidence of life at 3.8 billion years b.p.


A cell is much, much more than a collection of organic molecules. Organic molecules exist throughout the galaxy, on asteroids, on other planets.

We can jump start the production of amino acids spontaneously in the lab. But it is a vast leap to complex cellular life from there. > I was always struck in biology class at the sheer complexity of a single cell, the self-orgenization it practices, the intricate dance of innumerable parts and organelles in creating and transmitting the information it possesses.

 

[Poor Richard Saunders]

I agree, finding it in the lab is a long shot, but the point of laboratory experiments is to deduce clues about the probable physical and chemical steps that led from inert chemicals to complex cellular life.

The earth, was habitable when the conditions for life as we know it establish themselves.

During the late heavy bombardment phase of the proto-earth, the planet was constantly bombarded with asteroids, much of the surface was molten rock, and any life would have been instantly vaporized.

If memory serves me, the late heavy bombardment phase of planetary evolution didn't end until about 3.8 billion years b.p., and we start to find evidence of complex single celled life shortly after that. There are fossils of prokaryotes at 3.8 billion years b.p., and there is even indirect isotopic evidence of life at 3.8 billion years b.p.


A cell is much, much more than a collection of organic molecules. Organic molecules exist throughout the galaxy, on asteroids, on other planets.

We can jump start the production of amino acids spontaneously in the lab. But it is a vast leap to complex cellular life from there. > I was always struck in biology class at the sheer complexity of a single cell, the self-orgenization it practices, the intricate dance of innumerable parts and organelles in creating and transmitting information it possesses.

There is lots of speculation on how life existed prior to the first cellular life. It would make sense that it had to exist without a cellular structure before eventually evolving into cells. One of the more interesting theories I have seen is where a molecule is in an environment where its chemistry alternates between 2 states based on a cyclical change in the environment. This allowed for reproduction of the molecules. Then the cell walls eventually evolved to protect the molecule from a changing environment. (Short version.)

 

[Commander Dutch]

It is a matter of curiosity, but I think that characterization does a bit of a disservice.

I would rank the origin of life as one of the greatest scientific questions in human history.

History is great but academic unless used to shape the future. Is the characterization a disservice to history or to priorities for the future?

If proving there was a divine causal factor, it would certainly be an interesting moment in time. If it's just the Cosmos spontaneously generating life given enough random combinations of materials, I doubt we'll ever know the answer.

Proving it can be done in a lab and understanding the odds of it happening in nature is an important discovery, but it won't answer the question of why. All we'll know is that it can happen. Given the odds of it happening in nature then we can calculate the odds of repeat events. At the moment, our interstellar research is focused on Goldilocks' Zone planets. James Webb might be able to measure the atmospheres of planets/moons in the Zone for signs of life. Oxygen?

Random numbers aren't as pleasing as divine providence except to a small minority of people. Even so, there's a big difference between a galaxy where life exists on 1 per 10,000 planets and on 1 out of 10.

 

[Commander Dutch]

What did i lie about?

Me for starters. Deja vu. Do you forget like Matt or is it the drugs?

 

[Cypress]

History is great but academic unless used to shape the future. Is the characterization a disservice to history or to priorities for the future?

If proving there was a divine causal factor, it would certainly be an interesting moment in time. If it's just the Cosmos spontaneously generating life given enough random combinations of materials, I doubt we'll ever know the answer.

Proving it can be done in a lab and understanding the odds of it happening in nature is an important discovery, but it won't answer the question of why. All we'll know is that it can happen. Given the odds of it happening in nature then we can calculate the odds of repeat events. At the moment, our interstellar research is focused on Goldilocks' Zone planets. James Webb might be able to measure the atmospheres of planets/moons in the Zone for signs of life. Oxygen?

Random numbers aren't as pleasing as divine providence except to a small minority of people. Even so, there's a big difference between a galaxy where life exists on 1 per 10,000 planets and on 1 out of 10.

Maybe it's just the way I think about language, and it's shades of meaning.

What is being fixed for dinner is a matter of curiosity to me.

The origin of life is arguably the most interesting scientific question ever asked.

Hopefully web telescope can detect signs of free oxygen in exoplanets atmospheres. But that just limits us to searching for life that happened to have had our own evolutionary trajectory. Is photosynthesis really inevitable for life?

I read something the other day about a space sail that is on the drawing board which could be driven by solar winds, and possibly carry a probe to alpha Centari in 20 years.

 

[Commander Dutch]

Maybe it's just the way I think about language, and it's shades of meaning.

What is being fixed for dinner is a matter of curiosity to me.

The origin of life is arguably the most interesting scientific question ever asked.

Hopefully web telescope can detect signs of free oxygen in exoplanets atmospheres. But that just limits us to searching for life that happened to have had our own evolutionary trajectory. Is photosynthesis really inevitable for life?

I read something the other day about a space sail that is on the drawing board which could be driven by solar winds, and possibly carry a probe to alpha Centari in 20 years.

Me too! The quest for knowledge is a great one but too many Americans put it lower on their list than sports and outraged political theater on Facebook.

Do you remember that the Apollo 13 astronauts weren't initially carried on the networks because, even in 1970, space exploration had become boring? This The Hill story about the movie characterizes it well:

https://thehill.com/opinion/technol...e-moon-were-boring-until-they-suddenly-werent
...having started their voyage to the moon, the Apollo 13 crew put on a television broadcast that was not picked up by any of the major networks.

The broadcast consisted of stilted dialogue, lame jokes and various objects spinning in microgravity. The Apollo astronauts were great explorers and test pilots but their skills as reality TV stars left a little to be desired.

Sadly, nine months after Apollo 11, watched on live TV by half a billion people, flights to the moon had become boring. Nobody wanted their soap operas or game shows interrupted to watch another pair of heroes bouncing about the lunar surface.



Too many Americans still don't want their soap operas and game shows interrupted. While that's sad in a conversation about the search for knowledge, it's good because it means they are happy. They're lazy, uneducated fuckwads, but still happy.

 

[Commander Dutch]

...I read something the other day about a space sail that is on the drawing board which could be driven by solar winds, and possibly carry a probe to alpha Centari in 20 years.

Twenty years to launch? I can't see how it could be 20 years travel time. Not much light out beyond the Oort Cloud. Maybe an initial boost then an Ion engine?

 

[Taichiliberal]

 

[Cypress]

Twenty years to launch? I can't see how it could be 20 years travel time. Not much light out beyond the Oort Cloud. Maybe an initial boost then an Ion engine?

I am not really sure about the engineering design, but undoubtedly, Newton's first law of mechanics comes into play: a body, once in motion, stays at it's velocity unless acted upon by another force (aka, friction or gravity).
No friction in deep interstellar space.

 

[Commander Dutch]

I am not really sure about the engineering design, but undoubtedly, Newton's first law of mechanics comes into play: a body, once in motion, stays at it's velocity unless acted upon by another force (aka, friction or gravity).
No friction in deep interstellar space.

Agreed. Pretty dark out there too for solar power. The initial launch using both solar and ion power is feasible. Was it this Electric Sail? https://futurism.com/electric-sails-could-allow-us-to-reach-the-farthest-recesses-of-space

a solar sail works by harnessing the photons of light streaming from the Sun. Although photons are massless, they do have momentum, and can transfer it when they bounce off a reflective surface.

In addition to light, the Sun is also blowing off a steady stream of charged particles – the solar wind. A team of engineers from Finland, led by Dr. Pekka Janhunen, has proposed building an electric sail that will use these particles to carry spacecraft out into the Solar System.



Solar Sail: https://interestingengineering.com/nasas-new-solar-sail-could-change-spaceflight-forever

Electric Sail: https://www.space.com/31063-electric-sail-solar-wind-space-exploration.html