10 ms·

its only a matter of time we find other living organisms. The odds are staked so high against not finding any.

quickthrower2 8y ago
How do you figure? The distances are tremendous, and it seems like we ate guessing at what the climate is like on the nearest exoplanets. How would we spot life? Wed need probes to travel near the speed of light to have any chance. That's a long way off.
- restalis 8y ago
  I think the comment was made in relation to star's age, as it is one of the oldest in our galaxy. If life requires time to develop, this planet gave it a good shot at that. Also, the planet's climate may have been more favorable to life in the star's heyday, which means that even if nothing living will be around when we'll get there, that still makes it a very promising archeological place.
  - ilove_banh_mi 8y ago
    We should send palaeontologists, not archaeologists.
- aphextron 8y ago
  We have spectroscopy. Complex biological molecules can be identified through spectrographic analysis of starlight passing through the exoplanet’s atmosphere. JWST is equipped with a near infrared spectrograph to do exactly this.
- overcast 8y ago
  Traveling near the speed of light or at it will never happen. Infinite energy / mass problem. Plus everyone back at earth will have aged equivalent to the number of light years away, while it may feel only like a couple weeks on the ship. Unless we develop some type of wormhole technology, we're pretty much confined to our immediate system for any realistic exploration and communications.
restalis 8y ago
Let's say we'd eventually find those other living organisms. What then? (BTW, the odds of that life to be a sentient one are much lower.)
- carry_bit 8y ago
  Start worrying that a great filter might be in our future rather than our past.
- labster 8y ago
  I, for one, plan on eating them. (Not the sentient ones)
- dwaltrip 8y ago
  Start investing more heavily in becoming a space-faring civilization? Also, try to learn about these other life forms.
  - restalis 8y ago
    I argue that space-faring civilization goal should be independent of alien encountering.
    - dwaltrip 8y ago
      I agree. But I imagine it would help some people get more excited about it.
    - marcosdumay 8y ago
      If the Great Filter is ahead of us, becoming a space-faring civilization sooner increases the odds of surviving it. (And that's the main argument for the Great Filter being behind us, it is hard to imagine that we are fighting against astronomical odds to become space-faring.)
      - XorNot 8y ago
        The argument the great filter is ahead of us though is based on the observation that even with slower then light spacetravel, over the timeframes of the existing universe a species could still colonize the entire Milky Way in something like a 100,000 years with von Neumann probes (of which organic life would be a good basis for building one). There should be life everywhere it's possible by technological panspermia - but we don't seem to observe that. What stops elder civilizations from doing this, is the big mystery. Unless of course, as a poster above notes, if we fire up the JWST and discover chlorophyll-fringes in the spectra of just about every rocky planet we can see. That'd imply a lot.
aphextron 8y ago
My recurring dream for the JWST is that we switch it on and get immediately overwhelmed with indirect spectroscopic evidence of biology within multiple exoplanets, ushering in a whole new era of science. Watching that launch will be the most heartstopping moment of my life.
- gorn 8y ago
  I dream to be there during the launch as well. Could you enlighten me on how JWST could find the evidence of life?
  - aphextron 8y ago
    >Could you enlighten me on how JWST could find the evidence of life? Near Infrared Spectroscopy [0]. JWST will be the first instrument in space capable of performing NIR spectroscopy, which will be used to analyze the starlight shining through exoplanets' atmospheres for evidence of biological molecules. [0] https://dms.cosmos.esa.int/COSMOS/doc_fetch.php?id=3372219 https://dms.cosmos.esa.int/COSMOS/doc_fetch.php?id=3372219
- ryanmercer 8y ago
  My recurring dream for the JWST is that it actually ever launches. :( >Watching that launch will be the most heartstopping moment of my life. You got that right. When Elon launched the car I was like "eh this will be just like any other launch" then as the launch started I was perched on the edge of my chair shouting "CLIMB CLIMB CLIMB BABY CLIMB" at my phone. JWST will be one of the most nerve-racking moments of my life if I watch the launch due to it's many delays.
  - bgirard 8y ago
    I can see why people would focus on the risk of a flashy explosion, but I think the real risk will be with the deployment process and having gotten everything right with JWST. ESA launches are very reliably, JWST is a one time design.
tedsanders 8y ago
Citation needed? If the odds of life spontaneously starting and then surviving are really low, then there really may be no other life in our galaxy (<1 trillion stars) or even the observable universe (<1 trillion trillion stars).
- eloff 8y ago
  Citation needed? We have a sample size of just one (our solar system). But we already know that life on Earth began very soon after it cooled enough to have liquid water - that gives us some confidence that it can't be that hard for life to start. We know life's been around on Earth for ~4 billion years, surviving multiple insane climate swings from subtropical vegetation and species living in the Arctic to the entire planet freezing over, multiple massive impacts from space, insane volcanism that people today just would not even recognize as volcanism. Hopefully that means life's somewhat durable.
  - cmrdporcupine 8y ago
    If what you mean by 'life' is bacterium, sure. That's all that was here for 3 billion years. I don't think we'd find that very exciting. Eukaryotes are basically a fluke. The symbiosis event that created Eukaryotes from a random combination of Archaea and Bacteria appears to have happened only _once_ in the entire history of the earth. It's arrogant to assume that life as we know it is both inevitable and inevitably complex in a manner similar to our complexity. A practically infinite universe means potentially infinite diversity, including phenomenon that may not recognize as life at all to us, but should be equally interesting.
    - Balgair 8y ago
      > The symbiosis event that created Eukaryotes from a random combination of Archaea and Bacteria appears to have happened only _once_ in the entire history of the earth. That story is very much in flux still. We're not very certain on how that occurred, let alone how many times over those billions of years.It's linked to the Great Oxygenation Event, likely, but we're still in the very early stages of understanding that era. > A practically infinite universe means potentially infinite diversity, including phenomenon that may not recognize as life at all to us, but should be equally interesting. As is usual in science, it depends. If you are dealing with matter like us, then there are only a few universal solvents (5? I can't find the citation). In those solvents, there are a countable amount of ways that the chemistry will allow for 'life' to 'evolve'. The ways that the life can then evolve are really complicated and diverse, but there does seem to be a evolution/development trade-off, where you have to go through developmental 'keyholes' to get to a new level of complexity. Is that infinite? I've no idea, but it feels like a different ordinal of infinity. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_evolutionary_history_of_life https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_evolutionary_h...
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
russdill 8y ago
Finding living organisms would in general be bad news, but it depends on the type of life. It would tell us about why we don't see a universe filled with intelligent life. It would increase the probability though that the great filter is ahead of us, especially if the life is multi-cellular.
millstone 8y ago
Non-living organisms would be even more interesting!

How do you figure? The distances are tremendous, and it seems like we ate guessing at what the climate is like on the nearest exoplanets. How would we spot life? Wed need probes to travel near the speed of light to have any chance. That's a long way off.

restalis 8y ago
I think the comment was made in relation to star's age, as it is one of the oldest in our galaxy. If life requires time to develop, this planet gave it a good shot at that. Also, the planet's climate may have been more favorable to life in the star's heyday, which means that even if nothing living will be around when we'll get there, that still makes it a very promising archeological place.
- ilove_banh_mi 8y ago
  We should send palaeontologists, not archaeologists.
aphextron 8y ago
We have spectroscopy. Complex biological molecules can be identified through spectrographic analysis of starlight passing through the exoplanet’s atmosphere. JWST is equipped with a near infrared spectrograph to do exactly this.
overcast 8y ago
Traveling near the speed of light or at it will never happen. Infinite energy / mass problem. Plus everyone back at earth will have aged equivalent to the number of light years away, while it may feel only like a couple weeks on the ship. Unless we develop some type of wormhole technology, we're pretty much confined to our immediate system for any realistic exploration and communications.

restalis 8y ago

Let's say we'd eventually find those other living organisms. What then? (BTW, the odds of that life to be a sentient one are much lower.)

carry_bit 8y ago
Start worrying that a great filter might be in our future rather than our past.
labster 8y ago
I, for one, plan on eating them. (Not the sentient ones)
dwaltrip 8y ago
Start investing more heavily in becoming a space-faring civilization? Also, try to learn about these other life forms.
- restalis 8y ago
  I argue that space-faring civilization goal should be independent of alien encountering.
  - dwaltrip 8y ago
    I agree. But I imagine it would help some people get more excited about it.
  - marcosdumay 8y ago
    If the Great Filter is ahead of us, becoming a space-faring civilization sooner increases the odds of surviving it. (And that's the main argument for the Great Filter being behind us, it is hard to imagine that we are fighting against astronomical odds to become space-faring.)
    - XorNot 8y ago
      The argument the great filter is ahead of us though is based on the observation that even with slower then light spacetravel, over the timeframes of the existing universe a species could still colonize the entire Milky Way in something like a 100,000 years with von Neumann probes (of which organic life would be a good basis for building one). There should be life everywhere it's possible by technological panspermia - but we don't seem to observe that. What stops elder civilizations from doing this, is the big mystery. Unless of course, as a poster above notes, if we fire up the JWST and discover chlorophyll-fringes in the spectra of just about every rocky planet we can see. That'd imply a lot.

aphextron 8y ago

My recurring dream for the JWST is that we switch it on and get immediately overwhelmed with indirect spectroscopic evidence of biology within multiple exoplanets, ushering in a whole new era of science. Watching that launch will be the most heartstopping moment of my life.

gorn 8y ago
I dream to be there during the launch as well. Could you enlighten me on how JWST could find the evidence of life?
- aphextron 8y ago
  >Could you enlighten me on how JWST could find the evidence of life? Near Infrared Spectroscopy [0]. JWST will be the first instrument in space capable of performing NIR spectroscopy, which will be used to analyze the starlight shining through exoplanets' atmospheres for evidence of biological molecules. [0] https://dms.cosmos.esa.int/COSMOS/doc_fetch.php?id=3372219 https://dms.cosmos.esa.int/COSMOS/doc_fetch.php?id=3372219
ryanmercer 8y ago
My recurring dream for the JWST is that it actually ever launches. :( >Watching that launch will be the most heartstopping moment of my life. You got that right. When Elon launched the car I was like "eh this will be just like any other launch" then as the launch started I was perched on the edge of my chair shouting "CLIMB CLIMB CLIMB BABY CLIMB" at my phone. JWST will be one of the most nerve-racking moments of my life if I watch the launch due to it's many delays.
- bgirard 8y ago
  I can see why people would focus on the risk of a flashy explosion, but I think the real risk will be with the deployment process and having gotten everything right with JWST. ESA launches are very reliably, JWST is a one time design.

tedsanders 8y ago

Citation needed? If the odds of life spontaneously starting and then surviving are really low, then there really may be no other life in our galaxy (<1 trillion stars) or even the observable universe (<1 trillion trillion stars).

eloff 8y ago
Citation needed? We have a sample size of just one (our solar system). But we already know that life on Earth began very soon after it cooled enough to have liquid water - that gives us some confidence that it can't be that hard for life to start. We know life's been around on Earth for ~4 billion years, surviving multiple insane climate swings from subtropical vegetation and species living in the Arctic to the entire planet freezing over, multiple massive impacts from space, insane volcanism that people today just would not even recognize as volcanism. Hopefully that means life's somewhat durable.
- cmrdporcupine 8y ago
  If what you mean by 'life' is bacterium, sure. That's all that was here for 3 billion years. I don't think we'd find that very exciting. Eukaryotes are basically a fluke. The symbiosis event that created Eukaryotes from a random combination of Archaea and Bacteria appears to have happened only _once_ in the entire history of the earth. It's arrogant to assume that life as we know it is both inevitable and inevitably complex in a manner similar to our complexity. A practically infinite universe means potentially infinite diversity, including phenomenon that may not recognize as life at all to us, but should be equally interesting.
  - Balgair 8y ago
    > The symbiosis event that created Eukaryotes from a random combination of Archaea and Bacteria appears to have happened only _once_ in the entire history of the earth. That story is very much in flux still. We're not very certain on how that occurred, let alone how many times over those billions of years.It's linked to the Great Oxygenation Event, likely, but we're still in the very early stages of understanding that era. > A practically infinite universe means potentially infinite diversity, including phenomenon that may not recognize as life at all to us, but should be equally interesting. As is usual in science, it depends. If you are dealing with matter like us, then there are only a few universal solvents (5? I can't find the citation). In those solvents, there are a countable amount of ways that the chemistry will allow for 'life' to 'evolve'. The ways that the life can then evolve are really complicated and diverse, but there does seem to be a evolution/development trade-off, where you have to go through developmental 'keyholes' to get to a new level of complexity. Is that infinite? I've no idea, but it feels like a different ordinal of infinity. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_evolutionary_history_of_life https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_evolutionary_h...

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

russdill 8y ago

Finding living organisms would in general be bad news, but it depends on the type of life. It would tell us about why we don't see a universe filled with intelligent life. It would increase the probability though that the great filter is ahead of us, especially if the life is multi-cellular.

millstone 8y ago

Non-living organisms would be even more interesting!