Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Aliens probably long dead, say scientists

... on that score, actually, it's worth bearing in mind that for a whole billion years, life on earth just consisted of a kind of sludge. Not even complex bacteria or anything. Just really basic sludge. It was a really particular and peculiar set of coincidences that caused cells to start to come together.
Not necessarily. It could simply have been part of a slow process towards a certain set of conditions, such as atmospheric conditions. A slow process towards a situation where there is enough potential energy to be gathered in to make the evolution of an energy-gathering-in organism possible.
 
It would be good to know how many times life started on Earth. It seems most scientists think there was a Last Universal Common Ancestor to all living things. But that doesn't mean there weren't others that lost out. I don't quite see how life can evolve just the once. Now that would be staggeringly unlikely. Rather, each stage will likely have had multiple competing candidates.
Life might have only evolved once, we have absolutely no evidence to the contrary. As to how unlikely that is, whether staggering or otherwise, we simply cannot say. The whole point being that we have no idea whatsoever what the probability of life emerging is. Personally I would imagine it's not that unlikely - we're here, after all. But with only a sample size of one, all I can say is that is it definitely possible. Whether it's 1 in X over unit time, or one in X^X over unit time, one cannot say. Just because we're here does not preclude the possibility that the probability of life emerging is spectacularly, vanishingly small. It could like rolling a dice, or it could be like winning the lottery. Until we find definitive evidence of a totally disparate emergence of life, we can only speculate on its likelihood, any assumptions are sheer guesswork.
 
Life might have only evolved once, we have absolutely no evidence to the contrary. As to how unlikely that is, whether staggering or otherwise, we simply cannot say. The whole point being that we have no idea whatsoever what the probability of life emerging is.

Yeah I used to take exactly this line. Now I'm not so certain about the uncertainty. A better understanding of the principles driving biogenesis could generate predictions.
 
Yeah I used to take exactly this line. Now I'm not so certain about the uncertainty. A better understanding of the principles driving biogenesis could generate predictions.
Predictions yes, it's the unequivocality of some arguments I take exception to. Not yours so much, I'm really more venting my frustration with the way these issues are often described in popular science. I think many of the general public equate assertions such as "almost certain" as being equivalent to "certain". Which just riles me a bit. I think more time should be spent teaching probability theory in schools...!
 
What they're saying is fine, perfectly plausible. It doesn't mean for an instant that there is no life out there, they're just saying that most life is probably extinct due to all the many things that can potentially sterilise a planet. This is not the same as saying that life is nowhere else to be found, it's just suggesting that if you visited X many planets that have or had the potential to support life, a large proportion of them may have only the fossilised remains of long dead life on them. None of that precludes the possibility that we've simply not observed evidence of ET life yet - it's a big universe (so I'm told), it would be a bit daft to lose hope just cos the tiny fraction of planets we've analysed appear dead.

I think this is one of those articles that's great clickbait for newspapers, but really only of passing interest in the grand scheme of things.

And as if it wouldn't still be quite cool to land on a planet covered in the leavings of mysterious but long gone alien life. Just knowing there are simple organisms under the ice on some moon somewhere would be mind-blowingly paradigm-shovingly new information, let alone anything more... complex.
 
And as if it wouldn't still be quite cool to land on a planet covered in the leavings of mysterious but long gone alien life. Just knowing there are simple organisms under the ice on some moon somewhere would be mind-blowingly paradigm-shovingly new information, let alone anything more... complex.
I think it would be the greatest discovery of all time, ever, bar none!

Even so much as 1 fossilised bacterium, that's genuinely of extraterrestrial origin, would change everything. Then all the "but surely there just must be life elsewhere!" arguments could finally be answered. With a sample size of only 1 (as in, earth life) it's always possible, no matter how remotely, no matter much we may wish otherwise, that life only exists here. With a sample size of 2, all bets are off - if it happened once it might have only happened once, if it happened twice it would border on absurdity to imagine that it only happened twice.
 
And if it happened twice just within our solar system...

I would still direct people towards Addy Pross's ideas in this book.

This quote from the review sums up the main idea, and it isn't idle speculation - he provides evidence from chemical experiments:

Pross suggests that there are two aspects to the origin of life problem. The first is historical – how did life actually emerge on Earth just over 4 billion years ago? To this, Pross claims we will almost certainly never find a satisfactory answer. The second, more important, question covers the general chemical principles and processes by which life could emerge, and identifying the driving force behind why it should do so in the first place – seemingly in defiance of the laws of thermodynamics.

To address this issue, Pross calls on the fundamentally different chemistry of replicating systems. Once a molecule (or set of molecules) can successfully replicate itself and acquires some mechanism for harvesting energy from its surroundings, it can break free from the shackles of the second law of thermodynamics. The system becomes governed by a drive for stability of the population, rather than the individual, and more efficient replicators quickly outcompete their rivals for the available resources. This chemical viewpoint neatly marries the chemical drivers of simple replicating molecules with the biological principle of evolution by natural selection, showing them both to be derived from the same set of rules.

The great thing about principles is that they don't just apply here on Earth. As far as we know, they apply throughout the observable universe.
 
Love the comments under that review. The fury at the mere suggestion that one might break free from the second law of thermodynamics!

If ever there were a sacred thing in science, the second law of thermodynamics would be it!

tbf, Pross doesn't really suggest that one can defy entropy through replication.
 
And if it happened twice just within our solar system...

I would still direct people towards Addy Pross's ideas in this book.

This quote from the review sums up the main idea, and it isn't idle speculation - he provides evidence from chemical experiments:



The great thing about principles is that they don't just apply here on Earth. As far as we know, they apply throughout the observable universe.
I am very passionate about attempts to model the emergence of life, either computationally or practically. Any success in such endeavours, whilst not definitive proof that it has actually occurred elsewhere, would of course massively bolster the case for ET life. Especially if the results of such experimentation threw up other possible forms life could take, which might influence the search for biogenic effects, such how alien life might affect the atmospheric chemistry of its host world.
 
Quite possible many of them would be extinct. If life did evolve elsewhere at roughly the same rate it's entirely possible they'd made the same advances as us but didn't survive them...
 
They're not dead, they've picked up transmissions of Celebrity Big Brother and are now hiding and hope we go away.
 
Quite possible many of them would be extinct. If life did evolve elsewhere at roughly the same rate it's entirely possible they'd made the same advances as us but didn't survive them...
Assuming, of course, they ever developed into complex life in the first place. Whilst the probability of emergence of life itself is an unknown quantity, even if it does arise the progression from simple unicellular to complex multicellular life is far from assured. Most life on earth, in terms of abundance, is unicellular. Single celled life existed on earth quite happily for billions of years, and no one's entirely certain how it made the leap to multicellular life with specialised cells working together in a cooperative fashion (in one organism, as opposed to a cooperative colony model). If it happened here, it could happen elsewhere, but it's quite plausible that the majority of alien life (assuming it exists) is unicellular. If we take earth as a representative model, given the time that life spent here in a purely unicellular form, compared to the time that multicellular life has existed, it would seem quite improbable that we'd stumble upon alien life that similarly made the transition. Any advanced alien visiting earth at any time since the dawn of life here would be far more likely to arrive when there was only single celled life forms to say Hi to.
 
Given that the age of the Milky Way is just over 13 billion years, and it has hundreds of billions of stars within it, it would be surprising if there weren't any traces of extinct life to be found anywhere else in the galaxy but on Earth. Especially since the building blocks of life are all over space.

But that expansive breadth of time and space and opportunity, even within a single galaxy, strikes me as providing more than enough room for multiple solutions to the Fermi Paradox to be true at once, even with multiple technological civilisations existing within the same galaxy at the same time. Electromagnetic emissions can degrade into undetectability over very short distances in galactic terms, being quickly lost in the general noise. If there are aliens wandering the stars, they may not have reached our neighbourhood yet. Perhaps we live in an area of the galaxy of little interest to any presently starfaring civilisations.

Even if some aliens decided billions of years ago to send out Von Neumann probes in an attempt to explore the entire galaxy, that doesn't mean that they succeeded. Once set loose from the clutches of their creators, such probes would be subject to a form of natural selection, and evolution can be a total cunt; here on Earth the vast majority of species that have ever existed are extinct. With the time scales involved, it certainly seems possible that even aliens that go out to establish interstellar colonies could die out, due to any number of internally generated problems.

Of course having said all that, I would expect that the biggest reason why life out there is so hard to find is because it's mostly bacteria-like. If the history of life on Earth is any indicator, multi-cellular life takes a while to get going. And that's just one of the earliest hurdles that would prevent life from significantly reaching out into the stars.
 
And most intelligent life in the galaxy; assuming that it's out there, is probably not advanced in such away as to be dicking around with spaceships and radios in the first place. They might content themselves with chisling laws on stelles for hundreds of thousands... even millions of years. There are so many factors that led to me typing this post on a mobile phone and sending across the internet, each may as well be as much a leap as the emergence of mitochondria. For instance how technological can intelligent life that emerges in an ocean world be when building a simple fire is such a tricky proposition. Great poetry maybe, fine songs, but no techno.
 
Perhaps we are being scrutinized, as someone with a microscope studies creatures that swarm and multiply in a drop of water.
WayneTWOTW.jpg
 
Assuming, of course, they ever developed into complex life in the first place. Whilst the probability of emergence of life itself is an unknown quantity, even if it does arise the progression from simple unicellular to complex multicellular life is far from assured. Most life on earth, in terms of abundance, is unicellular. Single celled life existed on earth quite happily for billions of years, and no one's entirely certain how it made the leap to multicellular life with specialised cells working together in a cooperative fashion (in one organism, as opposed to a cooperative colony model). If it happened here, it could happen elsewhere, but it's quite plausible that the majority of alien life (assuming it exists) is unicellular. If we take earth as a representative model, given the time that life spent here in a purely unicellular form, compared to the time that multicellular life has existed, it would seem quite improbable that we'd stumble upon alien life that similarly made the transition. Any advanced alien visiting earth at any time since the dawn of life here would be far more likely to arrive when there was only single celled life forms to say Hi to.

Given the high number of systems with planets in the gold locks zone for life I'd say it's fairly reasonable to assume intelligent life has appeared a few times in a universe this big. The idea that we're the only ones to do that is laughable.
 
Given the high number of systems with planets in the gold locks zone for life I'd say it's fairly reasonable to assume intelligent life has appeared a few times in a universe this big. The idea that we're the only ones to do that is laughable.
But possible.

And given the millions of years it has taken for evolution here, were multicellular life to emerge on another planet they could well be ahead or behind us by a few millions of years .. or many more
 
Given the high number of systems with planets in the gold locks zone for life I'd say it's fairly reasonable to assume intelligent life has appeared a few times in a universe this big. The idea that we're the only ones to do that is laughable.
You might find it laughable, but I would consider that to be dismissive & wholly unscientific. We know that intelligent life arose at least once, but we have absolutely no idea how probable such an event is. Resorting to the argument of "it's a big universe, therefore it must be inevitable" is essentially saying that you dismiss out of hand the possibility, no matter how remote, that there is no other intelligent life. To dismiss a possibility because it appears improbable or unsatisfactory, is anything but scientific.
 
Where does one mark the start of multicellular life, btw? Does the symbiosis that produced mitochondria count?

The symbiosis with mitochondria may have been a necessary condition for multicellular life but there's no reason to think that cells started teaming up as soon as mitochondria became available. There are plenty of single-celled eukaryotes.
 
the best we can hope for is that a friendly, long dead/sublimed species left us some gear on mars. Like a big black obelisk or something cool.
Here, Kimble, if that trope excites you, you should read Pohl's Gateway series. The macguffin is an asteroid with a lot of ships on it left behind by an (apparently) extinct alien race, ships that cannot be reprogrammed for new destinations, but which take human adventurers to all manner of exotic locations.
 


That song terrified me as a child. :(


It used to send chills down my spine, but my sister couldn't listen to it full stop.

Forever Autumn got me. Not scared but it introduced me to melancholy. A bittersweet feeling.



It was the Thunder Child bit that always got me started on the waterworks:



The baddest warship on Earth makes a good fight of it, taking down one of the infernal machines in a moment of hope. HMS Thunder Child striking a blow for humanity! But even that wasn't good enough and she gets abruptly blasted into scrap by the implacable Martians. The best of human artifice with all the loving care and ceremony we put into it, and it barely slows the faceless invaders down.

Yeah, I cried over a ship going down. I was a weird child.
 
It used to send chills down my spine, but my sister couldn't listen to it full stop.

Well, I was only 4.

Sombrely intoned story telling by classically trained actor to powerfully dropped dramatic music describing invasion by implacably hostile alien beings from another world... and the kid starts crying. Well, looking deeply troubled and concerned anyway. Weird thing was I kept trying to listen to it again, like... "this time I won't be scared". Finally did it, yay!
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom