And this is how we bring live to other planets. These bacteria will survive somewhere on a planet.
Bacteria on the outside of the International Space Station
21–30 of 81 posts
Re: Bacteria on the outside of the International Space Station
#22What if it is extraterrestrial in origin but also exists on earth (originally coming from elsewhere)? How would they know the difference then?
If the alien organism originally evolved independently of life on Earth, then analyzing its genetic material - its equivalent of DNA - would tell us a lot.
We haven't yet found any organisms on Earth that have evolved independently, so an organism found in space that has a different genetic structure from Earth life would be a good bet for being alien in origin.
An alternative, albeit unlikely, possibility is that Earth life was originally seeded from somewhere else - panspermia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panspermia.
In that case, Earth life and (some) alien life would have a common origin, and we'd have to examine the differences in its DNA to find out more about its history.
Even in that case, it ought to be possible to determine that the organism had branched off from Earth life long enough ago to make it a candidate for alien life.
Re: Bacteria on the outside of the International Space Station
#23Earlier this year, Russian scientists announced that the "Test" experiments had found a range of different organisms that had been brought up from Earth and seemed to be surviving by clinging onto the ISS's hull.
The above quote from the article suggests to me that there is a good chance that some of the bacteria remained on the hull long after the experiments performed by the Russians earlier that year.
Re: Bacteria on the outside of the International Space Station
#24What if it is extraterrestrial in origin but also exists on earth (originally coming from elsewhere)? How would they know the difference then?
If the alien organism originally evolved independently of life on Earth, then analyzing its genetic material - its equivalent of DNA - would tell us a lot. We haven't yet found any organisms on Earth that have evolved independently, so an organism found in space that has a different genetic structure from Earth life would be a good bet for being alien in origin. An alternative, albeit unlikely, possibility is that Ea…
If comets supposedly brought us water why not life? I just read an article yesterday about an asteroid from another solar system[1].
Maybe there was a Prometheus-esque comet with some single celled life in it.
[1]http://time.com/5033026/mysterious-object-confirmed-another-...
Re: Bacteria on the outside of the International Space Station
#25Doesn't the ISS blast human excrement out into space? Maybe that explains the bacteria
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Re: Bacteria on the outside of the International Space Station
#26What if it is extraterrestrial in origin but also exists on earth (originally coming from elsewhere)? How would they know the difference then?
If the alien organism originally evolved independently of life on Earth, then analyzing its genetic material - its equivalent of DNA - would tell us a lot. We haven't yet found any organisms on Earth that have evolved independently, so an organism found in space that has a different genetic structure from Earth life would be a good bet for being alien in origin. An alternative, albeit unlikely, possibility is that Ea…
>An alternative, albeit unlikely, possibility is that Earth life was originally seeded from somewhere else - panspermia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panspermia.
I've seen this hypothesis before. I've also seen the oft repeated assumption that other intelligent life might be out there, more advanced than ours.
Crazy though: what if we are the most advanced life in th universe?
Re: Bacteria on the outside of the International Space Station
#27I can't help but keep wondering if "life originated on Earth" might not be the last geocentrism. It's only speculation at this point but it's one I've harbored for many years. Part of this is because of how common we've found organic materials to be in the universe, and part of it comes from how poorly other geocentric ideas have fared.
There are plausible theories about how life arose on Earth. If you want to assume it came from somewhere else, you either have to invoke some kind of magic, or assume it happened somewhat along the lines that it would have done on Earth, then arrived somehow. It just kicks the can down the road without solving anything, IMO.
The hypothesis that life on Earth originated elsewhere is somewhat independent of abiogenesis, really. At least in my experience, most supporters of the former also support the latter.
Re: Bacteria on the outside of the International Space Station
#28Doesn't the ISS blast human excrement out into space? Maybe that explains the bacteria ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Actually, they ship it down to Earth during the resupply missions.
Re: Bacteria on the outside of the International Space Station
#29Culture it, fill a probe full of canisters of the bacteria, and fire them directly at Europa. Spreading life should be of more importance than preserving the absurd idea of "pristine" environments for the selfish reasons of future scientists not wanting to do 4 minutes extra work determining whether the thing they observe occurred before or after human action changed things (as if such a distinction actually matters in the slightest).
Re: Bacteria on the outside of the International Space Station
#30I can't help but keep wondering if "life originated on Earth" might not be the last geocentrism. It's only speculation at this point but it's one I've harbored for many years. Part of this is because of how common we've found organic materials to be in the universe, and part of it comes from how poorly other geocentric ideas have fared.
Sure, but we aren't holding to this form of biological geocentrism for no reason. We've never seen any definite proof of life on any other planets. Given that science is an evidence-based methodology, it makes sense that we would assume Earth-based life is the only model of life until proven otherwise.
It's worth noting that geocentrism wasn't held onto for no reason either. At least the ancient Greeks had solid logical reasons for believing it: if the Earth orbited the sun, then there would be parallax visible between the stars since the Earth's position among the stars is changing throughout the year. Yet, there is none. Therefore the Earth is fixed in space.
The error of course is that the stars are really unimaginably far away and hence there is parallax but it's practically indiscernible. The Greeks thought the stars being that far away was the less likely answer to the apparent lack of parallax than the Earth simply being the center of the solar system.