5 ms·
The problem I see with that line of thinking is that there's a long chain of evolution underpinning that fish living at 10km depth, it didn't pop into existence
by Root_Denied 3y ago
The problem I see with that line of thinking is that there's a long chain of evolution underpinning that fish living at 10km depth, it didn't pop into existence being able to live in that environment.
I do think finding extremophiles in the solar system is a distinct possibility (Titan seems like a good bet) but I'm doubtful any of it will be multicellular.
- giantrobot 3y agoIt's my understanding unicellular life popped up on Earth pretty much as soon as it had a non-lava surface. While Earth seems super friendly today it was incredibly hostile when life formed. Early life on Earth were all what we'd consider extremophiles or at least extreme-adjacent. I'd bet (at least a small amount of money) that life, at least the most basic unicellular life, will pop up wherever the requisite materials exist in environments where they're not immediately destroyed but have enough external energy to facilitate some more energy intensive chemical reactions. Jupiter's atmosphere (to me) seems just as likely a place for life to form as the surface of Titan. It would be harder for us to find that life since the environment is so demanding compared to our level of technology. The surface of Titan or Europa are much easier exploration targets relative to Jupiter's atmosphere.
- andrewflnr 3y agoI broadly agree on the timeline, but "as soon as it had a non-lava surface" is still plus/minus a couple hundred Mya. I do believe temperate conditions were a requirement. I doubt the first cell membranes, for instance, were terribly robust.