Billions of Planets With Life?

[Meuiama Tsamsiyu (Toruk Makto)]

Not trying to get into an argument here, I see what you are saying, but again, think of the Ort Cloud. ALL that ice. Think of the Earth and how many trillions of gallons of water we have. Hadda come from somewhere.

All the literally billions of billions of solar systems in the billions of billions of galaxies. Even with all that 'empty' space, it is a major item. Water, in whichever form. Read Niri Ti's post about how even some colder and smaller suns might have it in their thin atmospheres.

I love the new things they find in the cosmos on a daily basis. New systems. New planets around studied or new stars. New galaxies in the distant reaches of our reality and imaginations. The possibility of other life forms, no matter how advanced. It is astounding at the possibilities. Thicker air would mean larger bird like creatures like Seze of Pandora. Thinner or wetter might drive creatures from the sky to be land only. Larger world with a more dense gravity... larger creatures to combat the effects of that gravity.

Truly amazing.

[Human No More]

Volume of the solar system (to heliopause): 1.4e+40m^3
Volume of the galaxy: 1.1e+62m^3

Spoiler

i.e.
14000000000000000000000000000000000000000 m^3 vs
1100000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 m^3

Space is big. It can be hard to realise how big. Hydrogen is the most abundant element in the universe, because even at a few particles per m^3 in interstellar space, anything else is so low as to be zero in that medium, which comprises the majority of the galaxy.

[Meuiama Tsamsiyu (Toruk Makto)]

Ergo, the building blocks for ice and water.

[`Eylan Ayfalulukanä]

In space, absent of any strong ionizing source, hydrogen and oxygen will combine to form water. Water is the most abundant compound in the universe. But even that is sparse enough that those water-containing areas would be a pretty hard vacuum by 'Rrtan standards.

[Irtaviš Ačankif]

I might be biased because I'm a creationist (NOTE: Not "creationist" as in the American loaded term with innumerable political connotations), but I really don't believe that spontaneous generation of complex life is a likely event. Evolution really doesn't follow a genetic algorithm as commonly used in computer science, since the individual differences produced by mutations is small compared to the variations in survivability. Therefore, evolution, especially from something spontaneously generated, would likely only find a local maximum in survivability, not continue to evolve towards something that more globally maximizes survivability (like aysute leNa'vi).

In a nutshell, I do expect to find planets out there teeming with viruses and very rudimentary archaebacteria-type organisms, but plants and animals by the billions are out of the question.

Then again, I do not really believe that evolution gave rise to anything bigger than phyla, so...

[`Eylan Ayfalulukanä]

Your worldview and mine are almost exactly the same, ma Uniltìrantokx!

[Meuiama Tsamsiyu (Toruk Makto)]

So you believe then that we are simply a mistake? Evolution did not lead to us? We were always meant to be what we are? I don't buy that.

Evolution is mutation caused by some extremes. Climate shift, let's say to the colder spectrum, creates organisms to bulk up on fats for insulation. On layered hairs for protection from water and wind in order to survive. As the climate bounces back to warm, some of those traits might disappear or turn off as the centuries and milliniums pass.

Other organisms migrate. Therefore moving an entire ecosystem with them, therefore allowing for further mutation to adapt to the new terrains they encounter.

Niri, you might appreciate this. There is a breed of desert lion in the Horn of Africa completely cut off from the others of it's kind due to the geological activity that is going on in that region... they have evolved and are doing pretty well in this new environment. I can't imagine lions doing too well in a rock and sand environment, yet they do. In fact, they are one mountain pass away from being able to taste seafood.

Evolution, to me is mutation. A blast from the sun sheering off a layer of our protective atmosphere, allowing in radiation and therefore blasting the organisms of life below. Forcing them in a cancerous thrust to evolve of perish.

But this is just MY opinion. I do recognize your two opinions as well. It does make the mind wonder...

[Niri Te]

 Ma Meuiama. I find the story of the lions very interesting. and heartening.  I feel that there are many place where life may only be single celled, but also a fair number of places in the universe where, while they are different from us, there will be very complex critters.
I believe that "Eywa" did a LOT of creating after the universe was set into motion.

[Seze Mune]

So long as we are considering various beliefs and opinions,  I would like to put forth some of my own thoughts (intending no disrespect to anyone else's) ....my own sense is that to suppose that out of the entire universe (known and unknown) there is only ONE planet with so-called sentient life forms on it verges on incredible.

At the same time, we limit our definitions of living things to what we find in our 3-D world.  If various quantum theories are correct in any way, EVERYthing at its basic level exists in five to eleven dimensions, and only where that energy intersects with our 3-D world does it create physicality.  Mind and consciousness can be channeled into the 3-D world but does not have its real life there.  This is one of the major reasons they've been impossible to locate physically.

We are alive because we have consciousness and we conflate that with the data from our physical senses.  Imho, it is a false equation.  Your physical apparatus is the avatar you create as the self-aware spectrum of energy which is you intersects these coordinates. 

You exist in other dimensions as well and you can have a taste of this when you dream.  Remember, though, that the portion of you which interfaces with the 3-D world has to reinterpret the dream data to referents within the 3-D coordinates or your ego-self will not be able to understand it.  This is why dreams can have symbols within symbols.  At deeper levels, the data probably means something more than we can truly comprehend at our present evolutionary level of consciousness.

In other words, there truly is eternal life, and it does not depend upon your body.  Again, imho, there have been many masters who came to remind us of this and in my own understanding, Jesus is one of those.

Just because our physical senses cannot follow an unfolding energetic event doesn't mean the event ends. You could interpret that to mean there is no death, but I mean that in larger ways as well.  Consciousness is creative and must always act upon itself to know itself as consciousness. It unfolds and evolves.  There is a certain kind of consciousness within a single-celled creature.  Who knows why it appears as such in our 3-D world? 

It is my hypothesis that our consciousness forms gestalts, the way cells form organs and then complex bodies.  The cells are not aware (in our terms) that they are part of an organ, nor likewise are the organs aware of the body.  We are not aware that we are as cells in the body of greater gestalts of consciousness, but I think this is what religions hint at.  And imho, this is what the idea of Eywa was trying to convey in a somewhat fumbling (forgive me, James Cameron) sort of way.

To my way of thinking, this is one of those points where religion and science intersect.  As 'Eylan Ayfalulukanä said, "The one thing everyone seems to forget about life though, is that life (as we understand it) runs backwards against the second law of thermodynamics. If there is life out there, some force 'from outside' is driving it, but that is a discussion for the religion/philosophy parts of this 'board."

OK...I'll happily return you to your regular (and more coherent) programming.....      (Man, I'm thinking I should probably NOT post this, but I'll take a deep breath and do it anyway...what did someone once say about fools going where angels fear to tread?)

[`Eylan Ayfalulukanä]

First, on the lions. Lions have the longest 'track' in the fossil record of any single species of mammal. Despite their being highly specialized and adapted predators, they are also able to adapt to a wide variety of different environments. For instance, lions that live in these desert regions are able to get nearly 100 percent of their requirement for water from the body fluids of their prey. In another, completely different (and almost unknown) population of lions living along the 'wilder' parts of the Nile river, the social hierarchy is backwards. Males do most of the hunting (which is almost exclusively for Cape buffalo), while the females raise the cubs. These lions like to live in caves, and may validate certain stories about lions living in caves, in the Middle East.

I composed most of this response while Seze gave his latest response. He touched on some of the ideas I present here. But I will briefly note that I also subscribe to his theory (and one of the better theories that are possible) of unobservable dimensions, and finding the supernatural (and He who created us) among those extra dimensions. It may be that we are never meant to discover these extra dimensions by direct observation, but we can with confidence, theorize (or believe with faith) they exist.

Now about evolution. I have been a believer in 'intelligent design' since before the term was coined. And this is not the 'intelligent design' that has been pushed, as a thinly-veiled cover for Biblical creationism, but rather more along the lines of what Uniltìrantokx te Skxawng believes.

Evolution cannot happen, except in the short-term, because it violates a much more fundamental law of nature: The Second Law of Thermodynamics. Ths law basically states that all complex systems 'run downhill' to less complexity, even if they continue to to become more complex in the short term.

Life does what it does today because a tremendous ability to adapt has been built into it. This 'survival adaption' has worked through all times until now. Now it may be that, in the time life has existed here on earth, a relatively short time as cosmologic time goes, it may be one of these temporary anomalies. However, the fact that we are destroying ourselves, and the world along with it, is proof that even life as we know it will eventually cease to exist.

So then, if we exist as we understand, it is because some outside entity or force wanted us to exist. But instead of poof! just creating us, He 'built' us up from lower life systems, little by little. This is because we are designed to be dependent on other life. Humans (and other higher animals) can derive their survival energy from consuming other living things: plants, animals, or the degraded remains of them. In any case, almost all of life can be said to be based on on the quantum-mechanical-caused change in the size of a magnesium atom that occurs when it changes valence  as a result of absorbing electromagnetic energy (essentially, photosynthesis at the quantum level). Thus, there is a need for life to share common biochemistry. (And I am reminded of the incredible complexity in the body of of a common chicken, while I am tearing it apart and eating it. This is something we are designed to do by the consequences of life. That chicken is more complex than any nonliving thing we know of in the observable universe!) Without this communality, life in its diversity could not exist.

Now, if you take the position that a Creator created all of the world so we could be here, the Creator's ultimate creation, modeled after Himself, you can see that what we observe to be evolution can be just one way he could do it. Evolution apparently occurred, but it is impossible. So in this, we have some of the strongest evidence to support the existence of a 'deity' who created us. I believe that those of us who are scientifically inclined were meant to discover and realize this. This gives us scientific types, who tend to be very fact-based, a legitimate reason to have faith in a Deity we cannot directly observe.

This also has implications in the Avatar world. It would appear that our biochemistry is similar enough to the Na'vi that we can eat each others' food, and hybridize with them. For this to happen, the Na'vi have to be very nearly human, or us, very nearly Na'vi!

[Irtaviš Ačankif]

Except I am not a theistic evolutionist. I actually do believe that God created the phyla with a non-evolutionary method in the sequence dictated in Genesis but then left it alone. Anyway, for Seze Mune, I don't want to bring up our old discussion about the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle, but "eleven dimensions" has nothing to do with quantum theory. It is predicted by string theory and allowed by general relativity.

To E.A. again, I do not think that evolution violates the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics. It is quite arguable that humans are more unordered than, say, the polygonal shapes and strictly programmed behavior of viruses. In addition, the Law is not violated if the environment becomes more unordered compared to the system in question. My cleaning up of the room is only possible because the air gets much more mixed up and the temperature goes up after I clean up, thus making the universe as a whole messier. One of the textbooks I read a few years ago was written by a much more stereotypical creationist (the kind geologists hate) because he is a biologist but not a geologist, but even he agrees in his book that the 2nd Law doesn't disallow evolution.

To S.M. again, I disagree with your view of consciousness. In fact, with regards to free will I am a "hard indeterminist" which basically means that I believe that the mind is both unpredictable and lacking in free will. In my opinion, whenever we make decisions in unpredictable ways, we are victims of quantum effects and line noise. There's nothing supernatural in consciousness itself, though I am a Christian and believe in a supernatural God. When we die, I believe our unsupernatural consciousness is transferred - supernaturally - into a higher state by a supernatural God. It is similar to an ordinary program receiving superuser powers from somebody at a computer terminal - the program itself is still ordinary, but through a computer-ly supernatural process (something ordinary suddenly getting elevated capabilities and disobeying the "laws" of the file system) a supernatural controller gives it powers.

Now that is really off topic...

[Meuiama Tsamsiyu (Toruk Makto)]

Though it is way off topic from the beginning of this thread I am going to add my two cents on the flush of religion thrust into the topic.

I am atheist. I do not believe in any God. In any Deity, in any profit. If I were forced at gun point to choose a religion right now it would be Eywa for the simple fact that in theory, the Na'vi can talk to their God. I absolutely loath any form of organized religion for the fact that it is corrupt and feeds on the simple minded masses, is manipulable and therefore, fanaticism flourishes within all forms of it from Mormon and Christianity to the Muslim sector and all other forms.

I DO however want to think there is something beyond this world. That this life is a stepping stone to something better. However, Heaven, not likely.

I strongly believe in evolutionary change from the beginning, and life's mutation. I strongly believe that there is a maelstrom of life out there in our own Solar System, Galaxy and the universe.

I am going to stop now, having said my personal opinion with an apology to any who I may have offended by saying my beliefs above.

[Niri Te]

  Ma Meuiama,
  NAH, you're cool with me,  it is good to know from simple statement rather than argument, who the Christians, Jews, Athiests, Muslim's, Buddhists, and others are, so as to know of any possible "Editorial slant" in the posts of different people on this site are.
Niri Te

[Irtaviš Ačankif]

Exactly. I don't hate athiests or evolutionists any more than people who disagree with string theory  the genesis of life is something that is very hard to verify or find evidence for, so it is really hard to say, "evolutionists are all pseudoscientists" or "creationists are all dogmatic morons.'.

[`Eylan Ayfalulukanä]

To E.A. again, I do not think that evolution violates the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics. It is quite arguable that humans are more unordered than, say, the polygonal shapes and strictly programmed behavior of viruses. In addition, the Law is not violated if the environment becomes more unordered compared to the system in question. My cleaning up of the room is only possible because the air gets much more mixed up and the temperature goes up after I clean up, thus making the universe as a whole messier. One of the textbooks I read a few years ago was written by a much more stereotypical creationist (the kind geologists hate) because he is a biologist but not a geologist, but even he agrees in his book that the 2nd Law doesn't disallow evolution.

In the bigger picture, the second law of thermodynamics disallows evolution, or anything that resembles it (that is completely natural). What it doesn't disallow is statistical pertubations caused by 'randomness', 'noise' or 'uncertainty' (take your pick or substitute something similar). Systems can run 'uphill' to more ordered/complex/higher energy states in the short term. But in the long term, they will break down. The viruses you mention will cease to infect cells when cells are no longer around (they are more complex than viruses) to infect. The viruses themselves will eventually break down into their component elements. Even the elements will eventually succumb to protonic decay. The heat in your room is another 'pertubation', that will dissipate quite quickly. In the meantime, it can be discussed (maybe in a new thread) whether life as we know it here is one of these pertubations, or is being driven 'supernaturally'.

To S.M. again, I disagree with your view of consciousness. In fact, with regards to free will I am a "hard indeterminist" which basically means that I believe that the mind is both unpredictable and lacking in free will. In my opinion, whenever we make decisions in unpredictable ways, we are victims of quantum effects and line noise. There's nothing supernatural in consciousness itself, though I am a Christian and believe in a supernatural God.
Now that is really off topic...

And yes, I think we have gotten significantly off topic!

[Seze Mune]

I'm not sure we're that much off topic.      After all, the topic is about the possibility of life amongst billions of planets, and we're discussing how life might occur on those planets.  That we've toddled off into the realm of religion only means that science doesn't have adequate ways of explaining life, imo, buckyballs nothwithstanding.

Nor does it adequately describe consciousness, either.  All any of us knows of consciousness is our own perception of ours and others' consciousness.  Regarding that topic, if one sets me up as an authority, then one may feel a need to disagree with my thoughts and  perceptions. I have no desire to set myself up as an authority for anyone else on the topic. My views need be valid for myself, only. For that reason, there is really no need to agree or disagree with me.  Your own views are valid for you, as Niri Te's are for her, and 'Eylan's are for him, etc.  I do not view any of us as wrong.  Just different.

My definitions of life are somewhat more expansive than most peoples' because I believe that conscious life does exist without the vehicle of a physical body (Christians who believe in eternal life after death may be familiar with this concept, though my ideas are not based on religion); if our criteria for life on other planets requires a physical vehicle, then it's likely we will not find it.  We don't have any way to measure life without a physical vehicle, so far as I know.

Exactly. I don't hate athiests or evolutionists any more than people who disagree with string theory   the genesis of life is something that is very hard to verify or find evidence for, so it is really hard to say, "evolutionists are all pseudoscientists" or "creationists are all dogmatic morons.'.

As for my statement about quantum theory and five to eleven dimensions, you are technically correct that I should have specifically mentioned 'string' theories.  That doesn't invalidate my multidimensional concept, it only tinkers with the writing on the box.

Ma M. Tsamsiyu, since I don't believe the current God concepts promulgated by many religions, I might be considered a-theistic by some. I do believe in the existence of consciousnesses beyond the ability of humans to comprehend, and I believe religion in its various forms is an attempt to deal with an intuitive recognition of this. Different religions appear to me as different classrooms in this regard, and we each should have the freedom to choose our own classroom. I do not believe in anything I'd label supernatural because to me there isn't anything supernatural.  Just because I don't understand it and can't explain it, that doesn't make it supernatural to me.  Heck, if that were all it took, quantum theory would be supernatural because no one really understands it. 

I have no intention of claiming to be 'right' over anyone else's understanding of this topic.  To each, his/her own.   

I would like to say more about your comments on organized religions, but that really does get us off on a divergent topic.  If anyone wants to tackle that one in another thread, be my guest.  

[`Eylan Ayfalulukanä]

I'm not sure we're that much off topic.      After all, the topic is about the possibility of life amongst billions of planets, and we're discussing how life might occur on those planets.  That we've toddled off into the realm of religion only means that science doesn't have adequate ways of explaining life, imo, buckyballs nothwithstanding.

Nor does it adequately describe consciousness, either.  All any of us knows of consciousness is our own perception of ours and others' consciousness.  Regarding that topic, if one sets me up as an authority, then one may feel a need to disagree with my thoughts and  perceptions. I have no desire to set myself up as an authority for anyone else on the topic. My views need be valid for myself, only. For that reason, there is really no need to agree or disagree with me.  Your own views are valid for you, as Niri Te's are for her, and 'Eylan's are for him, etc.  I do not view any of us as wrong.  Just different.

The fact that we have a conscience is strong proof that there is more to like than the physical part of we experience here. There is no rational scientific explanation as to why we are conscious, and why our consciousness is unique to us. In that respect, because they can bond their consciousnesses through tsaheylu the Na'vi are even more aware of the individuality of their individual consciousnesses.

My definitions of life are somewhat more expansive than most peoples' because I believe that conscious life does exist without the vehicle of a physical body (Christians who believe in eternal life after death may be familiar with this concept, though my ideas are not based on religion); if our criteria for life on other planets requires a physical vehicle, then it's likely we will not find it.  We don't have any way to measure life without a physical vehicle, so far as I know.

This is a good lead-in to 'quantum reality', which is very different from quantum physics. This theory, advanced by a good friend of mine, is that our consciousness is part of the 'false vacuum' that fills the cosmos, and is not normally detectable. Thus, a mechanism exists by which we ourselves can exist forever, and even take on other lifeforms. (I wish I could be a lion!) This could all be described by mathematics, but we can't observe it enough to come up with suitable maths.

[Human No More]

The woo is strong in this thread