XPost: rec.arts.sf.science, rec.arts.sf.written
From: genew@telus.net
On Mon, 30 Apr 2018 20:48:49 -0400, J. Clarke
wrote:
>On Mon, 30 Apr 2018 11:29:59 -0700, Gene Wirchenko
>wrote:
>
>>On Sun, 29 Apr 2018 18:57:24 -0500, Cryptoengineer
>> wrote:
>>
>>[snip]
>>
>>>We have limited resources for searching. We do know one type of
>>>environment where life can arise, and its not a rare one. Can you
>>>present an argument for looking elsewhere, and suggest what we
>>>should look for?
>>
>> We already know about that one.
>>
>> Thinking about how *else* life could arise can help us understand
>>our case. (Just as knowing more than one language helps one
>>understand one's own language better.)
>>
>> One idea of mine is to look for systems that have chemicals
>>converting back and forth. (As with the oxygen - carbon dioxide cycle
>>in Earth's biosphere.) This is, of course, no guarantee of life, but
>>it is a start.
>
>Do you know of a method that will let us tell that "chemicals are
>converting back and forth" at interstellar distances?
Of course not. I am no expert in the area. That I do not know
the details does not mean that the approach could not work, but the
devil is in the details. If a scientist makes it work, kudos to the
scientist.
>> Another is to look at the differences between how life works with
>>various organisms on Earth and see what else seems reasonable. IIRC,
>>Earth life has some interesting kludges. Why are they there? If the
>>kludges were not there, what differences would result?
>>
>> I am no expert in the area, and for all I know, these are already
>>being done, and those who know more may well be able to suggest other
>>ideas.
Sincerely,
Gene Wirchenko
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
