Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 113 (8734 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 03-28-2017 8:03 AM
452 online now:
caffeine, jar, PaulK, Percy (Admin), Rrhain, Tangle (6 members, 446 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: timtak
Post Volume:
Total: 802,075 Year: 6,681/21,208 Month: 2,442/2,634 Week: 105/525 Day: 20/60 Hour: 1/7


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev123
4
567Next
Author Topic:   Why Doesn't the Moon Have Life?
crashman
Junior Member (Idle past 3378 days)
Posts: 2
Joined: 09-14-2007


Message 46 of 97 (421728)
09-14-2007 4:30 AM


Extreem Lifeforms
Extreem lifeforms such as those miles under the Pacific Ocean in complete darkness, increadible presure, survive near volcanic vents that emit sulfer and heat. An entire microsystem so bizarre that it begs the question about another moon. That is Europa, a moon of Jupiter that the galileo satellite studied and scientists are almost certain that due to heat generated in the core of the moon caused by the gravitational forces of Jupiter needing it like a loaf of bread and heating it up. The surface is frozen water ice miles thick that shield it from the immense radiation pouring out of Jupiter and creating a sea of liquid water beneath the ice. If their are volcanic vents there too, we can pretty much guess the rest. A follow up mission scheduled to launch in late 2008 will radar map the surface to see if it's ice layer rises and falls an expected 30 meters as it circles jupiter in an ecentric orbit. This is not science fiction and is on NASA's website. Sorry about the poor spelling. If I spent as much time on my spelling as I do with M theory (string) I'd be in much better shape.
Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by bluegenes, posted 09-14-2007 5:54 AM crashman has not yet responded
 Message 53 by Taz, posted 09-28-2007 11:39 PM crashman has not yet responded

    
bluegenes
Member
Posts: 2967
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 47 of 97 (421730)
09-14-2007 5:54 AM
Reply to: Message 46 by crashman
09-14-2007 4:30 AM


Re: Extreem Lifeforms
Hi, Crashman, and welcome to EvC.

It would certainly be very interesting if Europa did have life. Assuming that there was no panspermia involved, the implications of abiogenesis happening twice in the same solar system are that life must be common throughout the universe. And, although multi-cellular life might still be rare, and intelligent organisms even rarer, it would greatly increase the chances of their existence elsewhere.

So even finding traces of extinct microscopic life forms somewhere in the solar system would be the find of the century.

Welcome again, and don't hesitate to start a thread on String or M Theory, if you can put it in terms that non-physicists can understand!

Edited by bluegenes, : No reason given.

Edited by bluegenes, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by crashman, posted 09-14-2007 4:30 AM crashman has not yet responded

  
Archer Opteryx
Member (Idle past 950 days)
Posts: 1811
From: East Asia
Joined: 08-16-2006


Message 48 of 97 (421731)
09-14-2007 5:58 AM
Reply to: Message 7 by jar
06-14-2004 11:53 AM


Re: Life (as we know it)
Jar's point is well taken. A necessary understanding any time we find ourselves talking of the 'right environmental conditions' for life is that we necessarily mean life as we know it. The reason is practical. We just aren't in a position to discuss life as we don't know it.

It's worth noting, though, that as knowledge of biological chemistry grows, the search for life within our solar system increasingly moves farther out from the sun than our own orbit. Mars, Europa, and Titan are the most intriguing possibilities now.

If the right chemical conditions obtain, distance from the sun could be less inhibiting a factor than once thought. Other ways exist in the solar system to gain some heat, ameliorate temperature extremes, and provide UV protection than those our own planet provides. Europa, for example, appears to possess vast liquid oceans under the surface ice.

I'm sure that, whatever we eventually find, Einstein will remain right. The universe is not only stranger than we imagine, it is stranger than we can imagine.


Archer

All species are transitional.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by jar, posted 06-14-2004 11:53 AM jar has not yet responded

  
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 49 of 97 (421733)
09-14-2007 6:07 AM
Reply to: Message 27 by jjsemsch
04-11-2007 5:05 PM


Re: Life on the Moon?
jj writes:

Perhaps your starting assumptions are wrong. You start with the belief that evolution is fact and that life arose from non-life here on Earth. Logically following would be that life spontaneously popped up elsewhere in the universe.

I agree. The only reasonable explanation as to why there is no life on the moon is because God didn't create any there. Why ain't there a house in the middle of an empty field? Because no one built one. Why ain't there life on a desolate moon? Because He didn't make it.

Life has never been observed elsewhere in the universe.

One thing that your logic shows is a good understanding of the argument form: 'proving a point with no proof'; it's a commonly used argument in very high-minded philisophical debates, and only the best minds have been able to understand the deductive reasoning involved in what seems like an impossible set of causes and chain reactions. Congrats.

Why is it that when the evidence contradicts the theory it’s not the theory that changes?

That's not quite how science works, underneath. At the basic, deeper level, is the underlying 'Evilution', a theory that has been secretly in the back of man's mind for thousands of years since the Fall. Darwin, while on a peaceful and solitude retreat around the coast of South America, was able to clear his mind and tap into the subconscious, from whence his theory. Since it hit the mainstream, it has been the building-block assumption of pretty much all of science. Many odd ideas, such as quantum physics, relativity, etc., were introduced as mere fantasies in order to keep the set of assumed principles required for the theory of evilution.

Take quantum physics, for example, with its idea of infintesimally small particles and inherent randomness, it was the only way to reconcile the notion of 'random mutations' with what seemed a simple, steady, Newtonian Universe. The motions are 'random' (allowing for random mutations), but the phenomenon is unobservable in our macro-world, allowing us to go on with defending the theory of evilution whilst not having to deal with any of its obvious ill implications.

Jon

I wonder if any Creos will actually use this filth?


In considering the Origin of Species, it is quite conceivable that a naturalist... might come to the conclusion that each species had not been independently created, but had descended, like varieties, from other species. - Charles Darwin On the Origin of Species
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

En el mundo hay multitud de idiomas, y cada uno tiene su propio significado. - I Corintios 14:10
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

A devout people with its back to the wall can be pushed deeper and deeper into hardening religious nativism, in the end even preferring national suicide to religious compromise. - Colin Wells Sailing from Byzantium


This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by jjsemsch, posted 04-11-2007 5:05 PM jjsemsch has not yet responded

  
nator
Member (Idle past 1995 days)
Posts: 12961
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 50 of 97 (421743)
09-14-2007 7:49 AM


All of these reasons are bull
Everybody knows that the reason there is no life on the Moon is because God didn't put any there.
    
EighteenDelta
Inactive Member


Message 51 of 97 (421777)
09-14-2007 12:47 PM


There are a number of issues I am surprised not to see brought up in this topic.

a) The Moon is mostly composed of silicates and very little iron/nickel. (being mostly crust material from early earth)
b) The Moon lacks a significant magnetosphere. (and the Earth is greatly indebted to the moon for having one.) So the Moon is bombarded with solar winds.
c) The distance of Venus and Mars from the Sun are not the cause of their current conditions. Mars fluctuates from -160 C to 30 C. Venus is hot due to greenhouse conditions(460 C), not proximity to the sun, in fact its hotter that the sun side surface of Mercury(430 C).
d) The Moon is the reason we don't have as extreme axial tilts
e) more to follow, too little sleep, not enough caffeine to focus on this right now.


"Debate is an art form. It is about the winning of arguments. It is not about the discovery of truth. There are certain rules and procedures to debate that really have nothing to do with establishing fact — which creationists have mastered. Some of those rules are: never say anything positive about your own position because it can be attacked, but chip away at what appear to be the weaknesses in your opponent's position. They are good at that. I don't think I could beat the creationists at debate. I can tie them. But in courtrooms they are terrible, because in courtrooms you cannot give speeches. In a courtroom you have to answer direct questions about the positive status of your belief. We destroyed them in Arkansas. On the second day of the two-week trial we had our victory party!"
-Stephen Jay Gould
Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by crashman, posted 09-28-2007 11:33 PM EighteenDelta has responded

  
crashman
Junior Member (Idle past 3378 days)
Posts: 2
Joined: 09-14-2007


Message 52 of 97 (424846)
09-28-2007 11:33 PM
Reply to: Message 51 by EighteenDelta
09-14-2007 12:47 PM


Our Moon,, The Moon.. No chance
Most theorists believe that the moon was created as the result of a collision 4 billion years ago with a proto-earth and a planet approximately the density of mars hitting a glancing blow across it, as our chaotic solar system was still forming. According to computer simulations, some of Los Alamos research computers (some of the most powerful in the world), it would have resulted in the total sanitation of both protoworlds with complete destruction of the other body and 1/5 to 1/3 of the proto-earth being ejected into the orbit of the new Earth as a kind of ring. It was unstable and only remained for at most a few thousand years as the main body was rained down upon and the circulating fragments were congealed with gravity causing the more dense elements to sink to the nuclease of both bodies. This new body. Our Moon, further stabilized our orbit making it more conducive to life. The moon has nothing a carbon or silicon life form of any simplicity would find necesary for even the remote chance of life.Unless we are to assume that life starts at its most complex form and grown more simplistic over time as it developes, the idea that any intelegent life stands very little chance of starting there.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by EighteenDelta, posted 09-14-2007 12:47 PM EighteenDelta has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 55 by EighteenDelta, posted 10-01-2007 12:15 PM crashman has not yet responded

    
Taz
Member (Idle past 644 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 53 of 97 (424847)
09-28-2007 11:39 PM
Reply to: Message 46 by crashman
09-14-2007 4:30 AM


Re: Extreem Lifeforms
We have a name for what you described. They're called the Domain Archaea.


Disclaimer:

Occasionally, owing to the deficiency of the English language, I have used he/him/his meaning he or she/him or her/his or her in order to avoid awkwardness of style.

He, him, and his are not intended as exclusively masculine pronouns. They may refer to either sex or to both sexes!


This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by crashman, posted 09-14-2007 4:30 AM crashman has not yet responded

  
Scoopy
Junior Member (Idle past 3373 days)
Posts: 18
From: Springfield, Oregon
Joined: 09-30-2007


Message 54 of 97 (425220)
10-01-2007 12:01 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Mission for Truth
06-13-2004 7:19 PM


I read somewhere that if the earth's tilt was a few degrees off or it was a few miles closer or further from the sun, nothing would survive, it would be too cold or too hot. I don't remember where I read that but that would explain why the moon has no life.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Mission for Truth, posted 06-13-2004 7:19 PM Mission for Truth has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 56 by EighteenDelta, posted 10-01-2007 12:25 PM Scoopy has responded
 Message 57 by Vacate, posted 10-01-2007 12:39 PM Scoopy has responded

  
EighteenDelta
Inactive Member


Message 55 of 97 (425221)
10-01-2007 12:15 PM
Reply to: Message 52 by crashman
09-28-2007 11:33 PM


Re: Our Moon,, The Moon.. No chance
That's part of the long explanation that I was planning to explore with "a)". Saved me the time, thank you.

-x


"Debate is an art form. It is about the winning of arguments. It is not about the discovery of truth. There are certain rules and procedures to debate that really have nothing to do with establishing fact — which creationists have mastered. Some of those rules are: never say anything positive about your own position because it can be attacked, but chip away at what appear to be the weaknesses in your opponent's position. They are good at that. I don't think I could beat the creationists at debate. I can tie them. But in courtrooms they are terrible, because in courtrooms you cannot give speeches. In a courtroom you have to answer direct questions about the positive status of your belief. We destroyed them in Arkansas. On the second day of the two-week trial we had our victory party!"
-Stephen Jay Gould
This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by crashman, posted 09-28-2007 11:33 PM crashman has not yet responded

  
EighteenDelta
Inactive Member


Message 56 of 97 (425225)
10-01-2007 12:25 PM
Reply to: Message 54 by Scoopy
10-01-2007 12:01 PM


The Earth-Sun distance changes quite a bit throughout the year, since our revolutions around the sun are elliptical and not circular. The Earths Distance from the Sun is defined as 1 AU +/- 0.04 AU, and an AU is about 150 million km, that means 6 million km difference from closest to furthest.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astronomical_unit

The earths tilt is in fact off, about 23 1/2 degrees (not a coincidence this matches the tropic of Cancer and tropic of Capricorn) This is the reason for the seasons...

Edited by EighteenDelta, : added content


"Debate is an art form. It is about the winning of arguments. It is not about the discovery of truth. There are certain rules and procedures to debate that really have nothing to do with establishing fact — which creationists have mastered. Some of those rules are: never say anything positive about your own position because it can be attacked, but chip away at what appear to be the weaknesses in your opponent's position. They are good at that. I don't think I could beat the creationists at debate. I can tie them. But in courtrooms they are terrible, because in courtrooms you cannot give speeches. In a courtroom you have to answer direct questions about the positive status of your belief. We destroyed them in Arkansas. On the second day of the two-week trial we had our victory party!"
-Stephen Jay Gould
This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by Scoopy, posted 10-01-2007 12:01 PM Scoopy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 58 by Scoopy, posted 10-01-2007 12:42 PM EighteenDelta has responded

  
Vacate
Member (Idle past 1953 days)
Posts: 565
Joined: 10-01-2006


Message 57 of 97 (425229)
10-01-2007 12:39 PM
Reply to: Message 54 by Scoopy
10-01-2007 12:01 PM


I read somewhere that if the earth's tilt was a few degrees off or it was a few miles closer or further from the sun, nothing would survive, it would be too cold or too hot.

The tilt of the Earth's axis is the cause for our seasons. You may be correct about a change in the tilt could result in no life - I haven't done any reading on the subject. A quick search did show that scientists have looked into the possibility that it has changed - one possible explanation for glacial cycles. (Changes in Earth's tilt control when glacial cycles end)

A few mile change closer or further from the sun would make little difference however. Our normal trip around the sun takes us from 147.5 million kilometers (Perihelion) to 152.5 million kilometers (Apehilion). A small change would not have much effect.

I don't remember where I read that but that would explain why the moon has no life.

Its possible that the axial tilt would be a factor, I can't really comment.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by Scoopy, posted 10-01-2007 12:01 PM Scoopy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 89 by Scoopy, posted 10-03-2007 7:39 AM Vacate has not yet responded

  
Scoopy
Junior Member (Idle past 3373 days)
Posts: 18
From: Springfield, Oregon
Joined: 09-30-2007


Message 58 of 97 (425232)
10-01-2007 12:42 PM
Reply to: Message 56 by EighteenDelta
10-01-2007 12:25 PM


what I'm talking about is the center of the earth to be further or closer to the sun... I know that we are in an eliptical pattern and I know that the tilt is off, I'm just saying if the average distance was increased or decreased, we would be in deep trouble.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by EighteenDelta, posted 10-01-2007 12:25 PM EighteenDelta has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 59 by EighteenDelta, posted 10-01-2007 12:59 PM Scoopy has responded
 Message 61 by ringo, posted 10-01-2007 1:51 PM Scoopy has not yet responded

  
EighteenDelta
Inactive Member


Message 59 of 97 (425237)
10-01-2007 12:59 PM
Reply to: Message 58 by Scoopy
10-01-2007 12:42 PM


I think you are confusing reality with Sci-Fi Telivision programming.

Meltdown

Sci-Fi = Bad science


This message is a reply to:
 Message 58 by Scoopy, posted 10-01-2007 12:42 PM Scoopy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 60 by Scoopy, posted 10-01-2007 1:41 PM EighteenDelta has responded

  
Scoopy
Junior Member (Idle past 3373 days)
Posts: 18
From: Springfield, Oregon
Joined: 09-30-2007


Message 60 of 97 (425243)
10-01-2007 1:41 PM
Reply to: Message 59 by EighteenDelta
10-01-2007 12:59 PM


I was just repeating what I had read in a science textbook, that's all. I'm not confused at all.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by EighteenDelta, posted 10-01-2007 12:59 PM EighteenDelta has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 62 by Taz, posted 10-01-2007 7:01 PM Scoopy has responded
 Message 63 by EighteenDelta, posted 10-01-2007 7:35 PM Scoopy has not yet responded

  
Prev123
4
567Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017