3 ms·
You misunderstand. It isn't that a novel form of primitive life arises then gets eaten; the building-blocks necessary for a novel form of life to arise get eat
by xenadu02 9y ago
You misunderstand.
It isn't that a novel form of primitive life arises then gets eaten; the building-blocks necessary for a novel form of life to arise get eaten before those building-blocks have much chance of interact at all. From what we can tell it would probably take many millions of years of chemical interactions in the appropriate conditions after being seeded with carbon-based molecules from comet/space impacts (since carbon compounds seem to be relatively common).
It seems likely that life will spread and adapt somewhat quickly since it is usually easier to find new resources than enter an arms-race over existing resources. That leaves a very narrow window of time (in evolutionary terms) for life to arise >1 time independently then evolve enough to be on equal footing with the other form(s).
It also seems far more likely that if this very rare event takes place one of two things happen:
1. One form of life has a head-start in the arms race and overtakes the other, completely wiping it out
2. The two forms of life are compatible enough to exchange genetic material because they evolved from the same raw building blocks deposited on the planet; though it mostly fails to produce viable offspring in a few cases the forms successfully cross and the new third form of life successfully outcompetes its progenitor forms.
As for Mars, it seems likely that life never evolved there at all.
The next best explanation seems to be life never got beyond single-cell organisms and struggled to eek out a short existence. Before Mars dried out and/or the massive hemisphere-shattering impact struck and erased what traces of life once existed.