We don't know what causes life.
NASA study finds life-sparking energy source and molecule at Enceladus
71–80 of 212 posts
Re: NASA study finds life-sparking energy source and molecule at Enceladus
#72Earlier quoted context omitted.
Finding a new particle doesn't necessarily threaten strictly up held religious beliefs like finding life somewhere other than this rock
Catholics officially believe in aliens, and that we should save them (if they weren’t visited by Jesus) Jews wouldn’t care either. Don’t know about Muslims, but it’s not threatening to the other Abrahamic religions
Catholics officially believe in aliens, and that we should save them (if they weren’t visited by Jesus)
Reminds me of the punch line to an amusing first-contact cartoon, one that makes the (unstated) previous line easy enough to guess: "Yeah, he comes by every couple of years. We gave him a nice box of chocolates when he first visited. What'd you guys do?"
Re: NASA study finds life-sparking energy source and molecule at Enceladus
#73Earlier quoted context omitted.
So is it because the life signals so far suggest simple life that money isn't really pouring into an expedition? That's my inkling anyway. Turns out us apes are still far more interested in everyday stuff than even life outside our sphere. i.e. I would expect "enthusiasm" to look like discussions on building the infrastructure for multiple missions out there. Communications way points, some basic resource stuff, etc.…
The discovery of even the most base simple lifeform outside Earth would be forever world-changing. Society, religion, mass institutions would be forced to reconcile with this fact. I don't think it's necessarily about money.
The struggle with the religious types is forever that they can't be pinned down in the details: it's not that new information can't be assimilated because it conflicts with doctrine, it's that doctrine, aside from a few very core concepts, is extremely fluid and will seamlessly flow and change to admit the conflicting information without affecting anything of importance.
Re: NASA study finds life-sparking energy source and molecule at Enceladus
#74Earlier quoted context omitted.
absence of evidence is not evidence of absence sorry your life has created this crusade of rhetorically reminding people about the absence is evidence
Not in general, just on this particular point. Because, in my opinion, we as a scientific community are currently flush with the (very cool) unexpected discovery of so many exoplanets and it is somewhat distorting our collective thinking about life and its origins.
We SHOULD (be flush and distorted). We can be realistic AND enthusiastic about it. Some technically challenging work was done and achieved results FAR FAR beyond expectations. That is a result worthy of changing outlook. Before, the outlook was on statistical grounds (the universe is so vast that there has to be). Now this outlook has been justified a billion billion times over. It's certainly time to be far more ambitious and inverse the presumptions that we had before.
I.e. before, "there had to be - some, somewhere" and now, "there is most likely all over the place".
Re: NASA study finds life-sparking energy source and molecule at Enceladus
#75Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would turn your logic around and say, everywhere we are able to look, we find evidence that life is more likely than expected. Until the 1990's it was an open question whether any other star had planets; as soon as we got the tools to test that, we found they were ubiquitous. As soon as we got the right instruments to Mars, we found signs of moving water, methane sources, and complex organic molecules in what is ba…
Great comment! Indeed there is a recent Nature paper that's causing a lot of discussion that is investigating that missing link between the physics of matter and the emergence of the natural selection and evolution processes that give rise to life. this is a really fascinating area! https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-023-06600-9
That link (going from basic chemical to bootstrapped evolution) is an entire field of research. Not one paper now and then. Labs, money, researchers building on each other's work... Just want to point out.
Re: NASA study finds life-sparking energy source and molecule at Enceladus
#76Earlier quoted context omitted.
absence of evidence is not evidence of absence sorry your life has created this crusade of rhetorically reminding people about the absence is evidence
Not in general, just on this particular point. Because, in my opinion, we as a scientific community are currently flush with the (very cool) unexpected discovery of so many exoplanets and it is somewhat distorting our collective thinking about life and its origins.
You can make the less charged argument that expanding the search for life has in every case so far led to extremely interesting scientific discoveries. So as a pragmatic strategy, it has legs regardless of where you stand on the question of life origins.
Re: NASA study finds life-sparking energy source and molecule at Enceladus
#77Earlier quoted context omitted.
These factors are what I call the “trappings of life”. It is a completely open question (and I mean completely ) how likely life is to arise spontaneously when these factors are present. One single instance of life elsewhere or successful abiogenesis in the lab would change that, but we have neither.
I agree it’s an open question, but I think it’s highly likely with lots of circumstantial evidence that life is an evolutionary emergent phenomenon where inorganic material reactions create life. We already know that’s the case in highly controlled environments. We don’t yet have confidence about the exact mechanism on Earth but based on those experiments it’s likely (& generally currently accepted as the most likely…
> I think it’s highly likely with lots of circumstantial evidence that life is an evolutionary emergent phenomenon where inorganic material reactions create life
Out of curiosity, if you reject religion, what other possibilities are there?
Re: NASA study finds life-sparking energy source and molecule at Enceladus
#78I think the title is pushing it a bit. When I see "life-sparking energy source", I think of an inextricable property. Get that and you can spark life. But we have and we couldn't. They're merely ingredients, building blocks, fuel to sustain life as we understand it on Earth, as the article more sensibly admits. The "life-sparking" source itself remains a mystery.
[flagged]
Re: NASA study finds life-sparking energy source and molecule at Enceladus
#79Earlier quoted context omitted.
No is declaring that there is no needle in the haystack. Please actually read my post.
absence of evidence is not evidence of absence sorry your life has created this crusade of rhetorically reminding people about the absence is evidence
Provided you're actively and systematically looking for evidence, then absence of evidence is evidence of absence.
Re: NASA study finds life-sparking energy source and molecule at Enceladus
#80Earlier quoted context omitted.
These factors are what I call the “trappings of life”. It is a completely open question (and I mean completely ) how likely life is to arise spontaneously when these factors are present. One single instance of life elsewhere or successful abiogenesis in the lab would change that, but we have neither.
I agree it’s an open question, but I think it’s highly likely with lots of circumstantial evidence that life is an evolutionary emergent phenomenon where inorganic material reactions create life. We already know that’s the case in highly controlled environments. We don’t yet have confidence about the exact mechanism on Earth but based on those experiments it’s likely (& generally currently accepted as the most likely…
>>>I agree it’s an open question, but I think it’s highly likely with lots of circumstantial evidence that life is an evolutionary emergent phenomenon where inorganic material reactions create life. We already know that’s the case in highly controlled environments.
Did I miss some big announcements? Where has anyone created life from inorganic material reactions in a highly controlled environment?
Serious question, not trolling.
Seems to me that would be an insta-Nobel.