Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 78 (8908 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 05-25-2019 9:26 PM
23 online now:
AZPaul3, JonF (2 members, 21 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WeloTemo
Post Volume:
Total: 852,042 Year: 7,078/19,786 Month: 1,619/1,581 Week: 441/393 Day: 32/43 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Water As An Element of Fine-Tuning
Lammy
Member
Posts: 3607
From: Chicago
Joined: 03-29-2004


Message 4 of 100 (154932)
11-01-2004 2:59 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by RustyShackelford
11-01-2004 2:18 PM


RustyShackelford writes:

I've heard it asserted that life could potentially arise without the presence of water.


Are you refering to a reputable source somewhere or are you refering to someone that was cloud talking?

All life as we know it are water based. Since we haven't encountered a single lifeform that could exist without the presence of water, I really can't see how anyone could propose that "life could potentially arise without the presence of water."

But I've also heard it asserted that, if it wasn't for the fact that water expanded when it froze, the oceans would freeze solid.

This is very true. Marine life as we know it can't live and metabolize in ice. There are a few examples where the creatures hibernates in solid ice until the ice melts... but that's a different story.

The question you should be asking is would there be some kind of life unknown to us that could arise in solid water? Until we encounter one, we just can't know for now.

And, if life can't arise without water, shouldn't the existance of a universal solvent that is the only substance in existance which expands when frozen be considered an element of fine-tuning by an intelligent designer?

Again, you are assuming that life can only arise with the presence of water. This is like saying everybody likes chocolate because I like chocolate.

There is nothing wrong with saying life as we know it can only exist with the presence of water. Again, just because you like chocolate doesn't mean that everybody you don't know don't like chocolate.

Or is the nature of water dependant on the physical laws of our universe?

There's nothing special about the laws of physics in regard to water. Everything follow the same basic laws including water. The difference between water and other solvents is that the water molecule happens to have a strong hydrogen bond property due to its dipole moment and structure. The hydrogen bond, although much weaker than the kinds of bonds that bond atoms together to form molecules (covalent, etc.), is much stronger than most intermolecular forces we know. Because of this, water molecules tend to get into a special formation when they freeze and become less dense than when they were liquid.

Again, I'd like to remind you that you can't make any kind of presumption for other kinds of life that we don't know about simply because we don't know that life as we know it is the only kind of life that can exist. Just because you like chocolate and liking chocolate is what makes you unique doesn't mean that everybody you don't know has to like chocolate as well.

I don't know, which is why I'm asking.......but if water is the only concievable solvent, regardless of varying physical laws, which could expand when frozen, then I'd have to say that the existance of water is one of the stronger arguments for fine-tuning.

How so? Explain to me more!

This message has been edited by Lam, 11-01-2004 03:02 PM


He's not dead. He's electroencephalographically challenged.

The longest word in the English language is pneumonoultramicroscopicsilicovolcanoconiosis.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by RustyShackelford, posted 11-01-2004 2:18 PM RustyShackelford has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by RustyShackelford, posted 11-01-2004 7:02 PM Lammy has responded

    
Lammy
Member
Posts: 3607
From: Chicago
Joined: 03-29-2004


Message 13 of 100 (155093)
11-01-2004 10:00 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by RustyShackelford
11-01-2004 7:02 PM


Rusty writes:

Didn't you just refer to an assertion to the contrary as "cloud-talking"?


Huh?

Of course I can, because we understand exactly what role water plays in our origin and existance and, based on that knowledge, it isn't theoretically likely that life would evolve very far without water.......even if ammonia life arose, it's evolution would come to a dead halt with every ice age. And even if microbes survived until the ice melted, and could start to evolve, the more compliacted (I.E. fragile) marine life which evolved would go extinct at the next ice age, leaving evolution to start over with the microbes again......

Again, you are using what we know of life as we know it to try to apply to everything that we don't know. Just because you like chocolate doesn't mean everybody you don't know also likes chocolate.


He's not dead. He's electroencephalographically challenged.

The longest word in the English language is pneumonoultramicroscopicsilicovolcanoconiosis.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by RustyShackelford, posted 11-01-2004 7:02 PM RustyShackelford has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by RustyShackelford, posted 11-04-2004 12:46 AM Lammy has not yet responded

    
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019