quote:A seminal work for the theory of intelligent design, this book provides a scientific critique of the prevailing paradigmatic theories of chemical evolution. The authors include Discovery fellows Charles Thaxton and Walter Bradley, and they conclude that the prebiotic soup from which the first cell supposedly arose is a myth. The Miller-Urey experiments employed an unrealistic gas mixture, and there is no geological evidence for its existence in Earth's distant past. The "soup" faces a myriad of other problems, such as inevitable rapid destruction at the hands of radiation.
In other words, the book is out-of-date hogwash. Strangely, I doubt that it goes anywhere useful or even half-way valid.
Care to comment on why you think this book has any real value?
Care to comment on why you think this book has any real value?
Since you probably won't be getting a reply on this, let me supply a generic answer.
It validates their belief, but you'll never see them admit it. Science escapes them.
Now, on to your original post:
It orbits its star every 13 days.
It circles its star 14 times closer than the Earth orbits the sun.
Gravity is 1.6 times as strong as the Earth's -- so a 150-pound person would feel like 240 pounds on 581 C.
Astronomers previously found a Neptune-sized planet circling the star Gliese 581, as well as evidence of a third planet about eight times the mass of Earth.
I wonder, just as an exercise of the imagination and if there is indeed any kind of life on the planet, what kind of creatures might live in the dim, red light of a red dwarf. Doesn't a star enter a red dwarf stage near the end of its billions-of-years life? All those eons in which to evolve. An interesting thought.
BTW, if you get a chance, please contact me at my old Netscape email address (don't forget the numbers 0165). I tried to send one to your old address, but it got sent back.
Does anyone have any thoughts of non-carbon based life?
I think our view on life is flawed, carbon is just another element, its nothing special. Other atoms can also make 4 bonds, they would probably just need a fluid other than water to be comfortable in. Our planets temp and pressure are perfect for carbon compounds, but another planets temp and pressure could be perfect for something else, maybe the next 4 bond making atom in that group (i don't remember the table too well)
Doesn't a star enter a red dwarf stage near the end of its billions-of-years life?
Nope. Stars with, say, half the Sun's mass or less are born as "red dwarfs" - spectral class K or M stars - and stay that way for a very, very long time. Back when I first learned astronomy, the idea that stars evolved to red dwarfs was still around - you may have read the same books I did.
This should make for interesting reading then. I ran across it about a week ago while researching a story I'm writing for a creative writing class.
Genesis 2 17 But of the ponderosa pine, thou shalt not eat of it; for in the day that thou shinniest thereof thou shalt sorely learn of thy nakedness. 18 And we all live happily ever after.
I see that lyx2no supplied you with a source of info, probably better than what I had in mind.
Your comment made me think of extremophiles such as the ones that live around volcanic vents in the ocean. Looking at the range of environments on Earth where life survives and thrives, and the multitude of forms life takes, makes the imagination pale.
You're right, Coragyps. I wasn't sure, and it seems my information was a bit outdated. Thanks for setting me straight.
Your comment that red dwarfs can remain in that stage for a long time, though, makes the scenario I outlined still intriguing - a long span of time in which evolution is allowed to operate. The mind boggles.
Does anyone have any thoughts of non-carbon based life?
There are other chemicals that can form similar but different compounds, and those differences could be enough different to prevent life. One of the problems is distribution and another is the forming of the more complex molecules. Carbon has an advantage in that there are a number of space born compounds that are "pre-biotic" - almost what we call "organic" molecules because they are found in (gasp) organisms.
Do a google search on "PAH Space" -- with "I feel lucky" I got
This can jump-start carbon based life, while other compounds don't have that advantage.
Why should life need water?
Life needs lubrication and flexibility for movement, multicellular life need a transport medium, and it helps to have a compound with a slight electrical bias to dissolve compounds.
Enjoy.
... as you are new here, some posting tips:
type [qs]quotes are easy[/qs] and it becomes:
quotes are easy
or type [quote]quotes are easy[/quote] and it becomes:
quote:quotes are easy
also check out (help) links on any formating questions when in the reply window.
If you use the message reply buttons (there's one at the bottom right of each message):
... your message is linked to the one you are replying to (adds clarity). You can also look at the way a post is formated with the "peek" button next to it.
It circles its star 14 times closer than the Earth orbits the sun.
Gravity is 1.6 times as strong as the Earth's -- so a 150-pound person would feel like 240 pounds on 581 C.
Astronomers previously found a Neptune-sized planet circling the star Gliese 581, as well as evidence of a third planet about eight times the mass of Earth.
Yeah, not necessarily out of the zone, but still rather alien for life we know. It might not make much difference to waterborn life.
Enjoy
BTW, if you get a chance, please contact me at my old Netscape email address (don't forget the numbers 0165). I tried to send one to your old address, but it got sent back.
click on "to share" in the sig and my email addy is listed. I don't use netscape anymore, and AOL finally dissed the old netscape board and the website they had hosted (and promised to let you keep).
This is really just a generic reply. Looking at the size versus mass two possibilities suggest themselves. Firstly, with so hiag a mass it might be the crushed core of a much larger body. This would definitely effect the possibilities for life. Secondly it has much higher quantities of elements from the more massive end of the chart. Either way it seems to me that we are talking "exotic" lifeforms.
™ Version 4.0 Beta
