Originally posted by Cenright
"Reason for it beign so hard to conceptualize is because you have always been tought the water ways and there has never been prove to support anyother type of life"
-87x
Whingo.
-
See, those are the right conditions for life, as we know it, on Earth to be. But, as Anti said "there are an infinite number of worlds". And those worlds might contain a life form unimaginable by human minds. Remember, there are only 5 kingdoms of living organisms on Earth. Who knows what lie out in the unseen cosmos.
"Reason for it beign so hard to conceptualize is because you have always been tought the water ways and there has never been prove to support anyother type of life"
-87x
Whingo. -
Gahhhh. so confusing
Losing brain stuff
Brain hurt. Can't not think forword
*falls down and starts to drool*
I think that somewhere in the universe there are planets where other beings have evolved to the type of enviroment that they live in, but here we are just begging the chain of events that could posssibly determine what way we destroy ourselves (if we do) in the future.
But the other planets in our solar system have (probably) microorganisms living and evolving in a way that lets them to adapt to their enviroment. But, we were first to acttually sprout life because of the chopice factors that helped creat our planet. So say for instance in a few hunderd, thousand years life we be advanced enough on possibly habital( planets like our own) will be just expirincing what we did thousands of years ago. Causing like a dinosaur age or something.
Then think of the awsome irony. By the time anouther might have evolved enough to expirince space-travel they see our "doomed lifes and such and think that there "might of been" life on our Panet
Comment
-
The commoness yet uniqueness of water makes it #1. It is embedded into physics itself. Let's pretend that there is another substace that works like water.
If there was, we would see it ON EARTH because of its commoness. The other galaxies still have to follow the "Universal Laws of Physics" There can be variation in the variables, but they can NOT break the rules, just as our system can NOT break the rules.
This means that although their "habitable life conditions" might be completely different, they still have to follow physics, and there must be a basic chemical of life.
That chemical for US is water. The formation of water is a basic process that is easily done by the universe itself (in habitable conditions of course).
There are only a certain amount of different atoms on the periodic table. These only make compounds a certain way. The life chemical has to be one of simplicity or it defeats its own purpose. THERE ARE NO "DIFFERENT PERIODIC TABLES FOR DIFFERENT GALAXIES".
There might be a few compounds that are used less or more, but Water is the same whether it is here or anywhere else. It is made from the same UNIVERSAL atoms. And therefore, there is no substituteComment
-
The math in the beginning is all wrong. If there is an infinite number of planets and we assume that, say every trillionth or so is inhabited, then there are an infinite number of inhabited planets. If you were to say that there are, say, 500 inhabited planets, out of an infinite number, you are still making that assumption that you get a finite result from an infinite set.
It's like prime number theory, there are an infinate number of numbers, and there are a certain amount of numbers that are prime as well. Well as you go towards infinity, the prime numbers get further and further apart, but there is still an infinite number of primes.
As for the evolution business, supposing the universe is relatively infinite, no matter the odds of creation, it is a certainty.Comment
-
i am so thankful to anticrombie for making a thread with a meaningful thought provoking substance unlike pyramids which are fun indeed but extremely pointlessOriginally posted by 87xComment
-
Well, here's how I interpeted the text. Yes, Cenright, you may be right, probably are, in fact, and less than 1 planet in every 10,000 supports life. However, under the assumption that the Universe is infinite, that would mean that there are an infinite amount of planets, and therefore an infinite amount of planets that support life.Comment
-
Except infinity isnt a number, and you should not treat it as one.
You cant divide by it. I mean, try it: Infinty divided by infinity IS FUCKING INFINITY STILL.
Therefore, an infinite number of wordls are inhabited, and an infinite amount of organisms exist.
Or maybe fewer.
Signature subject to change.
THE ZERRRRRG.Comment
-
infinity divided by infinity is not necessarily infinity, but is rather dependant on the context from which it is derived.Originally posted by QreepyBORISComment
-
I need some powdered water where all I have to do is wadd water.... That'd be sweet...Originally posted by CenrightComment
-
I just finished my collection an hour ago, sadly I got the trilogy of four, before relizing that there is a five set one.It\'s not the size of the wand that counts, it\'s the magic in the stick!Comment
-
very true thanks to our pal L'Hospital (Lopeytall...its french)...good old AP calc and the stupid things we do...dividing infinity by 0 and by infinity and 0 by 0...point is infinity divided by infinty can be any number...check L'Hospital if you donr believe meOriginally posted by VxDxOriginally posted by VxDxComment
-
-
Correct Anticrombie. Yet if the creation of life is still on a time frame. Let me explain.
It all starts with the big bang. All the mass which later forms into galaxies and stars and planets comes from one explosion, all galaxies are flying away from each other (which has been proven by Red and Blue shift). The explosion would create a massive gravity well, so... all galaxies would eventually slow down from going away from each other, stop, and then start getting pulled back.
This is only if the BIG BANG actually started it.
If there was a big bang, It seems you would have to have a finite amount of mass in the beginning, and therefore a finite amount of planets.(see lined section for the argument flaw.)
This means that if it does in fact come back together, it starts the process all over. This means that our infinite amount of time for our "life odds" to set in and produce life is broken up by finite amount of time. This means that with our long odds, it might have taken a few cycles of the big bang just to produce us. It might only happen every few thousand big bangs. Maybe that life is produced only every few big bangs. (Big Bang might be more than a few tri/quad/pentillion years or more.)
IF there was an infinite amount of space and planets, There would be a near infinite amount of distance between life-seed planets. Since we don't have an infinite amount of time to find them, there is almost an infinitely small chance that we will find any others.
_______________________________________________________
WHAT MESSES THE AGRUMENT UP AND PATCHES A FEW THINGS UP
For the big bang explosion:
(The Problem)
The main problem with my argument is that you can fit an infinite amount of mass in an infinite amount of space. And therefore have an infinite amount of energy to fuel the infinite explosion.
The infinite explosion would have caused an infinately large gravity well which would have cause an infinitely strong pull which would have equalized the infinitely strong shove outward, meaning the mass would have stop to stop at one time soon and get pulled back in. This would take time for the "explosion push" to be counteracted. It happened before the gravity well happened, giving it a head start, but the REaction would finally pull it back, even if it was moving away.
(The Fix)
The Infinite explosion happened for a finite amount of time. The infinite gravity well is happening for a longer amount of finite time. This means that the gravity well WILL over come the explosion force. Going by equal energy amounts, the gravity well should run out just as the mass all comes back together.
____________________________________________
Then comes the bible.
(Don't worry. I'm leaving it out of this debate. This is a science debate.)Comment
-
Thank you, for the love of...uh, someone. By the time that was finished I'd be banned from FFR and have about 10,000 angry priests and rabbis beating a path to my door.Then comes the bible.
(Don't worry. I'm leaving it out of this debate. This is a science debate.)
And you really explained that very well, btw. This is very interesting so far. And so far, not one flame (amazing, innit?)Comment
-
Cen, life wasnt produced from the big bang...i dont see why the big bang needs a finite amount of mass...i dont believe there are a finite number of planets...it cannot be, even if space goes on forever, which cant be proven, there is no way there are an infinite number of planets...think about it...i mean cen's arguement proves mine, infinte energy, infinte mass, infinte time...infinty does not even exist, so nothing pertaining to it canOriginally posted by VxDxComment
Comment