Slashdot Mirror


Life Could Have Evolved 15 Million Years After the Big Bang, Says Cosmologist

KentuckyFC writes "Goldilocks zones are regions around stars that are 'just right' for liquid water and for the chemistry of life as we know it. Now one cosmologist points out that the universe must have been through a Goldilocks epoch, a period in which warm, watery conditions could have existed on almost any planet in the entire cosmos. The key phenomenon here is the cosmic background radiation, the afterglow of the Big Bang which was blazing hot when it first formed. But as the universe expanded, the wavelength of this radiation increased, lowering its energy. Today, it is an icy 3 Kelvin. But somewhere along the way, it must have been between 273 and 300 Kelvin, just right to keep water in liquid form. According to the new calculations, this Goldilocks epoch would have occurred when the universe was about 15 million years old and would have lasted for several million years. And since the first stars had a lifespan of only 3 million years or so, that allows plenty of time for the heavy elements to have formed which are necessary for planet formation and the chemistry of life. Indeed, if live did evolve a this time, it would have predated life on Earth by about 10 billion years."

10 of 312 comments (clear)

  1. Millions of years of life-supporting conditions by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    I wonder if that was long enough to produce lush gardens with apple trees.

    1. Re:Millions of years of life-supporting conditions by tnk1 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I always wondered what the point was with considering panspermia. If life could have appeared anywhere in order to make it to Earth, it could have just as easily originated on Earth to begin with. There's nothing miraculous about Earth, but there is nothing sub-standard about it either.

      It would be interesting to know if terrestrial life started elsewhere, but what problems does that hypothesis solve? The only one I can think of is why all almost all Star Trek aliens look like humans with different foreheads.

    2. Re:Millions of years of life-supporting conditions by femtobyte · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The problem that panspermia theories are supposed to "solve" is the ease or difficulty of "bootstrapping" life --- how likely is it to get self-replicating, self-organizing complex systems out of simpler chemical precursors. In the case that this is "really really unlikely," then panspermia allows the earliest forms of life to occur only in a few rare cases, but then spread to populate more of the universe. On the other hand, this is unnecessary if the initial chances of life formation are reasonable (given a few billion years and a planet-sized cauldron of random chemical soup). So far, scientists in the lab have been able to generate a lot of life precursors (amino acids, etc.) under "early Earth" conditions, but not demonstrate the "leap" to self-replicating systems; however, this may not prove too much, since scientists haven't had a billion years and a planet-sized petri dish array to try everything out.

    3. Re:Millions of years of life-supporting conditions by symbolset · · Score: 5, Funny

      The roads were a lot shorter back then.

      --
      Help stamp out iliturcy.
    4. Re:Millions of years of life-supporting conditions by jd2112 · · Score: 5, Funny

      How could humanoids remain a dominant configuration through billions of years of evolution as depicted in TNG? Seems like various forms would have plenty of time to develop multiple eyeballs etc. Humans are unique among primates in our upright stance, as opposed to the quadrupedal gait found in other primates. Was that supposed to have been baked into the cake in the TNG universe too, or was it considered an inevitable part of developing sapience?

      I always thought Ursula LeGuin's Hainish Universe was a more sensible/plausible premise, where one species seeds itself throughout the local area of the galaxy in various ways in the past few million years - combining its DNA with that of local primates on Earth, for instance, thus humanity's aggressive streak as compared with other intelligent species.

      If I remember correctly, the predominance of humanoid species in Star Trek was due to the low number of non-humanoid actors in the Screen Actors Guild.

      --
      Any insufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology.
  2. This is frightening by JoshuaZ · · Score: 5, Interesting

    This is pretty scary. One of the major unsolved problems right now is the Fermi problem- why we don't see any signs of civilizations other than our own, not just no radio transmissions but no Dyson spheres (and yes, we've looked http://home.fnal.gov/~carrigan/infrared_astronomy/Fermilab_search.htm, stellar uplifting, ringworlds or the like. Whatever is blocking this is the so-called Great Filter https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Filter. Now, some of the Filter could be in our past. It may be tough for life to arise or for multicellular life to arise, etc. However, the more disturbing possibility is that it exists in our future: maybe civilizations before they can spread out manage to wipe themselves out with their technologies, such as through nuclear war, bad nanotech, engineered bioweapons, resource depletion, environmental damage, or something we haven't even thought about before.

    Over the last few years, more and more evidence has suggested that a lot of the obvious filtration events in the past aren't serious filters. For example, we've found that planets are common. This is not only an example of more such evidence, but it suggests that if life got started it would have had billions years more to evolve, meaning that evolutionarily based filters will be substantially less effective. Worse, it undermines one of the easier ways to try and get around a filter, to suggest that the conditions for complex life didn't arise until recently. There are serious problems with that idea already (especially the fact that life on Earth spent hundreds of millions of years in near stasis), and this makes those problems even more severe. If this checks out, it will be strong evidence that a substantial portion of the filter is in the future. If so, it is likely that the Filter is something that is going to happen to us within the next few hundred years, since it gets harder to wipe out a civilization once they spread beyond their initial planet, and most obvious things that would do so are also more noticeable.

    1. Re:This is frightening by wvmarle · · Score: 5, Interesting

      We can probably ignore the sun's background radiation: if an alien civilisation is advanced enough to see our planet next to the sun in visible light (reflection from the sun's rays) they can probably focus enough to pick up our radio signals (the sun's radio frequency waves will not be deflected by the Earth much if at all). The fact that there are radio signals coming from our planet should be the giveaway. No other planet in our solar system is producing such signals. And that's of course assuming this alien entity is using radio waves themselves for communication, and as such thinks it's a good idea to look for radio waves as a sign of the presence of intelligent life.

      Same for this SETI, I don't think we'll ever be able to understand alien signals beyond the mere fact that they are out there.

  3. Re:So Space Whales? by HaeMaker · · Score: 5, Informative

    No. Water is water at 300K at standard pressure. IN space, water is steam without pressure. You need gravity and an atmosphere to create pressure.

  4. Re:Just my opinion by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 5, Funny
    I found this in Panda's Thumb:

    I don’t know about you evilutionists. But to me, these stalactites and stalagmites look very much designed. Only dogmatic Darwin worshipers could be dumb enough to believe that these stalactites and stalagmites would know where to start growing so that eventually meet at a point, conjoin, become a pillar and hold the roof of the cave up.

    There is symmetry in the formations, symmetry means information, symmetry means reduction in disorder, reduction in disorder is reduction in entropy and entropy can not be reduced by random naturalistic mechanistic processes. If these formations are “natural” then they violate the Second Law of Thermodynamics. The pathetic inability of the theory of evolution to account for the cave formations completely disproves any credibility the Big Bang Theory might have. It stretches the credulity of the American Public, 62% of whom don’t believe evolution anyway, that these scientists would confidently see amino acids and methane in planets and moons in the sky, when they cant see that mud-to-stalactite evolution is impossible.

    --
    sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
  5. Well known filter is currently active by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The following is nothing new, but few people want to face up to what it really means for us. The 6th Mass Extinction is well under way, and it has nothing to do with cuddly pandas and (less cuddly) tigers and rhinos disappearing. It's the microscopic life such as oceanic biota, nearly all of it unseen by most people, that's disappearing at a devastating pace like nothing that's ever happened before on this planet.

    We can live without the top-end mammals that make the extinction news on the TV. We can't live without the microbiota. We are not independent of them, they keep the biosphere running and our crops producing, and without the biosphere we are no more.

    The collapse of biodiversity is, on geological scales, vertically downwards, and at some point it simply hits the zero axis. It could happen even more suddenly if a tipping point is reached, because species are inter-dependent. The current decline is not the normal sort of gradually falling curve as seen in the past 5 extinctions. On the biodiversity graph, this event is an abrupt termination of all life. You can't argue with the biodiversity curve.

    We don't really need more Great Filter theories. This one is not a theory, it's measured, and it's quite enough all by itself.