Live data from Hacker News

Earth was born dry until a cosmic collision made it a blue planet

sciencedaily.com

231–240 of 279 posts

Re: Earth was born dry until a cosmic collision made it a blue planet

#231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My pessimistic side says that the conditions for intelligent life are so implausible that we’re unique, and when we drain the planet dry of easily-accessible fossil fuels we’ve deprived any successor civilization of its opportunity to escape the planet. Basically I fear we’re the universe’s only shot of appreciating and populating the galaxy (or beyond) and we’re on the brink of throwing that away.

> when we drain the planet dry of easily-accessible fossil fuels we’ve deprived any successor civilization of its opportunity to escape the planet. There will be no successor civilization to humans. Earth won't be able to support multicellular life in a few hundred million years due to the sun becoming gradually more luminous over time, resulting in higher surface temperatures that will eventually culminate in a runa…

> Due to human-driven climate change effects this event will certainly happen much sooner (No, it will not. Human driven climate change is drastic, but the Earth has seen far worse events than our anthropogenic carbon emissions. For instance, the Chicxulub impactor at the end of the Cretaceous changed atmospheric conditions overnight, and to a much greater degree than whatever we have cooked up. It was the equivalent of detonating the world's entire nuclear arsenal about a million times over.

Sure, it finished off the dinosaurs. But 66 million years later, we, the descendants of tiny rodent-like mammals, are still here, as are the dinosaur's own descendants, the birds.

Additionally, during the Carboniferous about 300 Mya, both carbon dioxide and oxygen levels were considerably higher than they are today, and life actually thrived. I would say that with the increasing luminosity, there will be at least a decent period on Earth where life returns to that sort of diversity. We are actually still only in an interglacial of an ice age—this has effectively sterilised large tracts of our planet by covering them with ice sheets, or locking permafrost into the soil and making them unavailable for large trees.

Let me be very clear: our emissions—if unchecked—will make life very difficult for us as the rising seas and temperatures scatter millions of people out of coastal cities in the tropics further north and south and cause war, division, strife, and discord like we have never yet seen. But actually bring forward the planet's overall demise? Nearly impossible.

Let's not have the hubris to think we puny humans could remotely affect the planet's geological timeline. If we somehow all disappear simultaneously, most direct evidence that we ever lived will disappear with us–perhaps within a hundred thousand to a million years of erosion and weathering. Our emissions will similarly lurch to a halt and will reach equilibrium within a similar time span. That's all it takes to remove our direct creations from the geological record.

Re: Earth was born dry until a cosmic collision made it a blue planet

#232

Related, a recent study suggests up to 1% of our mantle is water trapped within rock that gets released as subduction increases to higher heat and pressure. This water could account for three times the amount of water on the surface and may represent a whole-Earth water cycle. https://www.bnl.gov/newsroom/news.php?a=111648 I wonder how this ties in with the submitted link about Theia. And it will be interesting if we…

This reminds me of Stephen Baxter's novel "Flood"

Re: Earth was born dry until a cosmic collision made it a blue planet

#233
post #4

This could mean in the Drake equation ne -number of planets capable of life- is very small. A planet has to be hit with a comet big enough to deliver a large amount of water but not so big or fast to destroy it. And be in the Goldilocks zone of the star. Also the mass of the planet would play a part - gravity of more massive ones would be more likely to capture a comet. But again, too massive and I could see that ham…

I recently became addicted to the SpaceSimsx and SimulaVerse. My takeaway is that so many just slight deviations can extinguish life on earth. I used to think of possibility of life in other worlds just in the lens of statistics. There are so many combinations and possibilities that it seems inevitable. But seeing just how perfectly aligned our solar system is makes me really reduce the probable number of chances of…

Well, just keep in mind that its not a "perfect alignment" as this seems to prescribe some kind of intent. It's more a set of requirements that allowed life to not be extinguished so easily. We could never exist in a place where this didn't happen like this, so obviously we have to be here and not some place ealse. So its more that out of the 1 places we have seen that was made like this, we at least know life happened there.

Re: Earth was born dry until a cosmic collision made it a blue planet

#234
post #4

This could mean in the Drake equation ne -number of planets capable of life- is very small. A planet has to be hit with a comet big enough to deliver a large amount of water but not so big or fast to destroy it. And be in the Goldilocks zone of the star. Also the mass of the planet would play a part - gravity of more massive ones would be more likely to capture a comet. But again, too massive and I could see that ham…

The Drake Equation is filled with assumptions, like life must appear on a planet in the Goldilocks zone of a star. The whole equation has only one datapoint to extrapolate from. Tweak the equation's parameters and it will predict universes that only have one civilization per galaxy or worse! We have no way of knowing what those parameters are because we haven't seen other examples. A major reason we are interested in…

Yup

The fundamental problem with the Drake equation is that it's frequentist, not Bayesian

Hence why you get too high sensitivity to parameters you have no way of having an estimate with a small margin of error

We "don't care" about how many civilisations are out there, we care to the point where we can interact with them.

As mentioned, it has several assumptions. "Rate of birth of sun like stars" means nothing. You can "always" have an exception for life that will throw the data off: "star too bright but with a hot Jupiter tidally locked in front of your moon, shielding it" etc

Re: Earth was born dry until a cosmic collision made it a blue planet

#235
post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At the moment, rapid and massive expansion seems likely with tech only just on the horizon. Enough AI and robotics for an autonomous factory may be a mirage (such mirages have (metaphorically) happened before), but it seems like it's on the horizon. Even with relatively mundane growth assumptions, that can go from "species inventing writing" to "Dyson sphere completed, is now sending out seeds to every accessible gal…

Cmon the number of hypothetical extrapolations based on no data in these statements is beyond superstition to something like delusion

I think its the fact that if we really wanted to, we could probably make it happen already today. On a scale of a couple hundred million years, its possible we could reach most of our own galaxy, which is a small slice of time in the life span of the Milky Way. So the question remains, why hasn't this already happened, or has it?

Re: Earth was born dry until a cosmic collision made it a blue planet

#236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My pessimistic side says that the conditions for intelligent life are so implausible that we’re unique, and when we drain the planet dry of easily-accessible fossil fuels we’ve deprived any successor civilization of its opportunity to escape the planet. Basically I fear we’re the universe’s only shot of appreciating and populating the galaxy (or beyond) and we’re on the brink of throwing that away.

> when we drain the planet dry of easily-accessible fossil fuels we’ve deprived any successor civilization of its opportunity to escape the planet. There will be no successor civilization to humans. Earth won't be able to support multicellular life in a few hundred million years due to the sun becoming gradually more luminous over time, resulting in higher surface temperatures that will eventually culminate in a runa…

> There will be no successor civilization to humans. Earth won't be able to support multicellular life in a few hundred million years due to the sun becoming gradually more luminous over time

Modern humans have only been around for Over the course of 100s of millions of years, as the sun's increasing luminosity becomes an issue, I'd have to assume we could create some sort of atmospheric solar shield to reflect or absorb a lot of the energy. Of course you can only postpone the inevitable (red giant).

Assuming the evolutionary lineage of our species survives a few hundred more million years (which seems rather doubtful), then it's not going to be homo sapiens any more - we'll have evolved into successor species that may be barely recognizable. If you go BACK in time 100M years, our ancestor was some mouse-like animal.

Re: Earth was born dry until a cosmic collision made it a blue planet

#237
post #225
post #178

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not against piracy, and I love Anna's Archive... but publicly linking directly to a pirate source for something like this seems wrong. Could've just linked the Wikipedia page and let people acquire however they prefer. Anyway, sounds interesting, gunna add that to my list

It's 45 years old and the author is deceased. I assume you would be untroubled by a link to a copy of Macbeth . Where do you draw the line?

An obvious line would be when copyright expires. In fact, drawing that line is exactly what copyright expiry is intended to do.

Re: Earth was born dry until a cosmic collision made it a blue planet

#238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The Drake Equation is filled with assumptions, like life must appear on a planet in the Goldilocks zone of a star. The whole equation has only one datapoint to extrapolate from. Tweak the equation's parameters and it will predict universes that only have one civilization per galaxy or worse! We have no way of knowing what those parameters are because we haven't seen other examples. A major reason we are interested in…

Yup The fundamental problem with the Drake equation is that it's frequentist, not Bayesian Hence why you get too high sensitivity to parameters you have no way of having an estimate with a small margin of error We "don't care" about how many civilisations are out there, we care to the point where we can interact with them. As mentioned, it has several assumptions. "Rate of birth of sun like stars" means nothing. You…

> star too bright but with a hot Jupiter tidally locked in front of your moon, shielding it

It seems unlikely that such exceptions would amount to more than part of a reasonable margin of error.

Re: Earth was born dry until a cosmic collision made it a blue planet

#239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even if you only had a handful of civilizations, the sheer time that has passed and size of the universe should mean that life should still be alot more apparent. With sublight velocities achievable today, I recall it would only take around a million years for a Von Newmann probe to cover the entire galaxy. Such a probe is quite conceivable, so why isn't there more evidence of such probes everywhere? Another point I…

> With sublight velocities achievable today, I recall it would only take around a million years for a Von Newmann probe to cover the entire galaxy. Such a probe is quite conceivable, so why isn't there more evidence of such probes everywhere? What are the incentives to build and deploy such a thing though? We as a civilization fail to fund things that have a ROI of more than a few years, how are you going to fund som…

Exactly. Some of the biggest explanatory factors for the Fermi paradox are likely to be economics and politics: interstellar travel is unreasonably expensive, unimaginably slow, and has negative ROI unless your time horizons are beyond anything that's ever been used on Earth.

Consider that in some countries on Earth, we can't even get consensus that obtaining energy directly from the Sun via solar panels is a good idea.

Re: Earth was born dry until a cosmic collision made it a blue planet

#240
post #227
post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's 45 years old and the author is deceased. I assume you would be untroubled by a link to a copy of Macbeth . Where do you draw the line?

Well I don't really have a line, but that doesn't mean I'm going to go linking directly to such sources in public - not everyone agrees with my stance on copyright. Those who do can easily go find it themselves. Also Macbeth was written 400 years ago. Let's not pretend this is a fair comparison. This author has been dead only 20 years - it might be that their partner is still alive and needs that money, or their chil…

Why won't anyone think of the publishers and the book stores!

Amazon is hanging on by a thread, and piracy is stealing their cut.

Post reply on HN