Slashdot Mirror
'Hundreds of Worlds' in Milky Way
Raphael Emportu writes "BBC news is reporting
that rocky planets, possibly with conditions suitable for life, may be more common than previously thought in our galaxy, a study has found.
New evidence suggests more than half the Sun-like stars in the Milky Way could have similar planetary systems.
There may also be hundreds of undiscovered worlds in outer parts of our Solar System, astronomers believe.
Future studies of such worlds will radically alter our understanding of how planets are formed, they say."
As long as the temperature of the liquid is sufficiently stable, there are sufficient chemical building blocks and there is not too much current, single cell organisms and then multi cell organisms could emerge..
Depends on how you define "intelligence". Our liquids are certainly teeming with intelligent life. Life itself apparently began in our oceans. Fish are certainly very smart - they feed themselves, find mates, defend territory, build defensive structures, some species live and travel in social groups, etc. These are all signs of "intelligence". Then if you want to cheat a bit and look at the ocean mammals - seals, porpoises, whales, these are extremely intelligent aquatic beings.
Arthur C. Clarke, however, argued that CIVILIZATION, however, could not evolve in an aquatic environment, for the simple reason that you cannot have fire underwater. His interesting theory claims that fire, and our control of fire - has been a driving force in our technology. First the fire we would use for slash and burn agriculture - which while being devastating for the environment over the long term gave many short term advantages to the primitive farmer. Fire to make steam is what drove the industrial revolution. And that same power is still in use today, though we get our "fire" in the form of Uranium, or by burning fossil fuels. Then there is the "fire" from the sky - electricity. Harnessing this particular "fire" would be pretty tricky underwater.
I guess it's an interesting concept to play with, and surely there are many possibilities that we biased, land dwelling humans could never dream of, but I respect Mr. Clarke and his idea. I think it would be difficult for an aquatic civilization to arise here or anywhere else.
Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
There are plenty of volcanoes under the water here on Earth. Could those serve as a source of fire?
Perhaps primitive marine creatures would realize that some sort of algae-like food source grows better in the warmer waters around these "glowing liquid not-water" sources and start building walls around them to hold in that temperature. Sort of like farming - but with algae instead of regular "crops". This would give them a stable food source and they could get to thinking about other things.
Reading code is like reading the dictionary - you have to read half of it before you can go back and understand it.
The probability for intelligence seems to me to be the biggest hurdle. That humans are intelligent at all seems nothing more than a genetic fluke, and not a guaranteed outcome.
However, given our understanding for life, and how it evolved, it would seem that complex life forms would probably NOT be rare at all.
The biggest hurdles for human-like intelligence probably includes the following:
1. Self replicating molecules. I'm not sure how precise the conditions for getting life started are, but it probably isn't something we would see very often.
2. Conditions remaining stable for those molecules for a very long time.
3. Symbiotic relationships developing between organisms. (requirement for multi-cellular life)
4. The creativity mutation. (for lack of a better term.)
In between, it seems that the process of natural selection would be the driving factor, but those 4 items listed are probably the most important 'leaps'.
With regard to the creativity mutation: As I recall, there was a proto-human homonid that DID use tools, but never developed on that tool (The stone axe they used at the beginning of their existance was the same stone axe that they used at the end of their existance) And that period of time wasn't short, something on the order of millions of years where they used the exact stone axe. While they were using a tool, there was no real thought behind it. In that respect, it seems that it was much like a spider's web, a very precise tool for survival but instinct rather than a developed idea.
Out of modpoints but really liked a post? 1BDkF6TtmmeZ3yqXbz9yhdYVqRYnwFoXDj
With regard to the creativity mutation: As I recall, there was a proto-human homonid that DID use tools, but never developed on that tool (The stone axe they used at the beginning of their existance was the same stone axe that they used at the end of their existance) And that period of time wasn't short, something on the order of millions of years where they used the exact stone axe.
I believe the specific hominid you are referring to is Homo Ergaster (Working Man).
While they were using a tool, there was no real thought behind it. In that respect, it seems that it was much like a spider's web, a very precise tool for survival but instinct rather than a developed idea.
I don't know if I agree with that assessment. It seems to me as if H. Ergaster simply progressed as far as his brain would allow, and no farther. A simple hand axe was just the apex of his ability. Looking at H. Ergaster makes me rather worried about the future of our species...after all, we haven't been around nearly as long. What if we run up against an innate limit in our brains, and our technology can proceed no further?
____
~ |rip/\/\aster /\/\onkey
Arthur C. Clarke, however, argued that CIVILIZATION, however, could not evolve in an aquatic environment, for the simple reason that you cannot have fire underwater. His interesting theory claims that fire, and our control of fire - has been a driving force in our technology. First the fire we would use for slash and burn agriculture - which while being devastating for the environment over the long term gave many short term advantages to the primitive farmer. Fire to make steam is what drove the industrial revolution. And that same power is still in use today, though we get our "fire" in the form of Uranium, or by burning fossil fuels. Then there is the "fire" from the sky - electricity. Harnessing this particular "fire" would be pretty tricky underwater.
I always thought that was a pretty uncreative comment from such a create fellow. If you eliminate the need to breathe (artificially) underwater, it's pretty easy to come up with a basic concept of civilization.
Algae farms wouldn't be hard to manage with the most basic of technology. Power could be generated from currents turning water wheels. Heat based power sources could also work, such as sea floor hot spots or something using the differential between the warm sea surface and the cool sea bottom. Hard metals might be all but unworkable, but fabric and bone could be made easily with plant and animal life. That would then allow a relatively firm fabric based cage/pen for herding animals. Transportation obviously wouldn't be in the form of a locomotive, but perhaps a system of rapid current tunnels could be worked out. Or maybe the harnessing of larger sea animals.
I don't know enough to determine the rest, but I think the rudimentary civilization is there; tool use, farming/herding instead of hunting/gathering, and the basics of transportation.
Not necessarily. Look at Conway's life cellular automaton. There are many valid configurations within the game that can never be reached without setting it that way to begin with. They are called 'garden of eden' configurations. And given any particular starting configuration, there are plenty of configurations that won't ever be reached. And if you define 'possible' as 'any condition that can be reached from a given starting condition,' then you have constructed a tautology and have not said anything useful at all. You are basically defining possible as 'that which happens, given enough time.'
Put another way, "given enough time, monkeys will fly out of my ass." Now, evolutionarily speaking, flying monkeys are possible. It is also possible, given enough mechanical force, that my ass could be stretched large enough to fit the wingspan of an average flying monkey. But I really doubt that even if you waited around for an eternity, you'd ever see a monkey fly out of my ass.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton