yes we all like some idea that is eternal. You do know about God, right? That never ending expanding Universe doesn't get much traction, especially in the winter time when it is already cold enough.
NASA Scientist - Universe seems hardwired to produce life
- Thread starter jem
- Start date
moronic sophistry... on display in support of 1950s random chance did it atheism.
nice work for a anti science troll. and you even got the biggest content free douche left on et to give you a like. what is with lefties...
you all here on et seem to prefer lies to science if it does not fit your worldview?
1. outside the universe is still universe. how the hell would you know what is outside the universe. we don't know ... no scientists on earth knows.
2. by scientific definition you don't get luck to the 120th decimal place. you statement is ignorance manifested in bullshit.
3. there is not plausible pathway that scientists have figure out yet. another ignorant piece of bullshit by you. science has found no current "naturalistic" pathways from non life to life. Why do you keep bullshitting about this year after year.
produce some science... go ahead.
show us according to scientists that how life evolved from non life.
nice work for a anti science troll. and you even got the biggest content free douche left on et to give you a like. what is with lefties...
you all here on et seem to prefer lies to science if it does not fit your worldview?
1. outside the universe is still universe. how the hell would you know what is outside the universe. we don't know ... no scientists on earth knows.
2. by scientific definition you don't get luck to the 120th decimal place. you statement is ignorance manifested in bullshit.
3. there is not plausible pathway that scientists have figure out yet. another ignorant piece of bullshit by you. science has found no current "naturalistic" pathways from non life to life. Why do you keep bullshitting about this year after year.
produce some science... go ahead.
show us according to scientists that how life evolved from non life.
I've obviously heard of God but I have had very little exposure to religion.
It just wasn't part of my household as a kid. I've not experienced anything I could attribute to a deity. Physics can't rule out a deity but I find it difficult to believe in what is described in the bible.
An altruistic and omnipotent God would not tolerate the evil and suffering that we see. Hard to get past that.
religion is an obstacle most church goers had to overcome. The point is, even when we get all scientific, people tend to hope their version of the universe is the one that proves true, and that version like you say has some kind of stable existence for man kind.
Scientists are now able to create intermediate, life/nonlife forms. They are "printing" the puzzle pieces which have gone missing over the eons. There is no sane reason to believe an apple which fell from the tree did not pass through all points between the branch and ground, even if we didn't actually see it fall.
Again, it's not "random chance". It's ordered chance, randomness occurring within a framework of basic physical laws.
what would a nonlife form even look like? Even a rock is teaming with life. Who knows how much life is in an atom?
Interesting thread. Thanks to everyone.
I understand there are 200 parameters needed to have life on earth. Here are 9 of them.
"Here are some of the factors that make Earth what it is:
I understand there are 200 parameters needed to have life on earth. Here are 9 of them.
"Here are some of the factors that make Earth what it is:
- It is at just the right distance from the sun so that water is warm enough to melt, but not so hot as to boil and steam away into space. Water is also able, in this habitable zone, to both evaporate and condense at lower levels in the atmosphere, thus permitting a more even distribution of water and a cycle of water over dry land known as precipitation.
- It is in a “habitable zone” in the galaxy. Radiation and the presence of wandering planetoids make life closer to the center of galaxies unlikely.
- Its orbit is a nearly perfect circle rather than an “eccentric” (i.e., steep or elongated) ellipse such as that of some other planets. Steep, elliptical orbits take a planet relatively close to and then far from the sun, causing great variances in warmth and light. Earth’s almost perfectly circular orbit keeps its distance from the sun’s heat and light relatively constant.
- Its molten core and volcanism generate magnetic fields or belts that protect it from the most harmful rays of the sun. Volcanism also plays a role in helping generate the atmosphere and in cycling rich minerals widely.
- Its sun is just the right kind of star, putting out a fairly steady amount of energy. Other types of stars are more variable in their output, making life impossible due to the extremes in warmth and light.
- Its fairly rapid rotation reduces the daily variation in temperature. It also makes photosynthesis possible since there is enough sunlight all over the planet.
- Its axis is tilted just enough relative to its orbital plane to allow seasonal variations that help complex life, but not so tilted as to make the seasons too extreme.
- Its moon causes tides that are just large enough to permit tidal zones (a great breeding ground for diverse forms of life), but not so severe as to destroy life.
- Two nearby “gas giants” (Jupiter and Saturn) attract and “catch” many wandering asteroids and comets, often keeping them from hitting Earth."
With 100 to 300 billion galaxies in the observable universe, each one containing between 10 million to a trillion stars and up to 400 billion stars in the Milky Way alone, there are many times more stars in the Universe than sand on all the beaches in all the World.
The odds that just 200 parameters would line up once for life to occur in one galaxy on one planet, from those countless trillions of variables made available from all those billions of galaxies , I would think must be pretty good to say the least.
In fact they clearly did.
At least once.
A summary below of this experiment. http://grad.physics.sunysb.edu/~amarch/Walborn.pdf These guys concluded in this double slit experiment paper that the physical mechanism of a polarizer or wave plate are not responsible for causing the interference to disappear. The paper also illustrates a number of facets of QM that I'm going to have to read more than a few times.
http://grad.physics.sunysb.edu/~amarch/
what you just wrote regarding the forms they are developing is not inconsistent with the OP quote.
“If you think of all these little molecules we’re making as Lego blocks, and life as a kind of very complex, organised Lego castle, the fact that Lego blocks are falling out of the sky can’t be a bad thing.”
-
Your ordered chance/randomness speculation is very far fetched given what science has discovered so far. If you read the top scientists in the field they seem to stay away from that speculation and say they are just working on their piece of the pathway right now.
“If you think of all these little molecules we’re making as Lego blocks, and life as a kind of very complex, organised Lego castle, the fact that Lego blocks are falling out of the sky can’t be a bad thing.”
-
Your ordered chance/randomness speculation is very far fetched given what science has discovered so far. If you read the top scientists in the field they seem to stay away from that speculation and say they are just working on their piece of the pathway right now.
Last edited: