https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-13053209/NASA-asteroid-sample-originated-ocean-world.html

The first asteroid sample brought back to Earth may have come
from an ancient oceanic world, which may have had suitable
conditions for life.

The initial analysis, conducted in October, determined Bennu
contained large amounts of water and carbon - and scientists
suggested that such asteroids may have delivered the building
blocks for life on Earth.

Now, researchers at the University of Arizona believe Bennu
was part of a water-rich planet that existed billions of
years ago.

The team determined that some of the dark rocks on the
asteroid are coated in a thin crust of brighter material
that has been observed on Saturn's moon Enceladus, which is
believed to have a a global ocean of liquid salty water.

.. . .

Hmmm ... but was that wet world an original part of THIS
solar system, or from elsewhere ? Something kinda exploded
it - a Big Hit perhaps. A more detailed isotopic analysis
may be able to "fingerprint" it as "from here" or not.

Alas we only got surface samples, likely a lot of
interstellar dust mixed in. We'd have to drill or blast
to get a good chunk of the core material.

Many like the idea of "panspermia", but that only defers
the evolution of life, does not answer the "how" question
except for our local neighborhood.

Oh yea, why not "panovaria" ? :-)

In alt.astronomy 68g.1499 <68g.1499@etr6.net> wrote:
> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-13053209/NASA-asteroid-sample-originated-ocean-world.html
>
> The first asteroid sample brought back to Earth may have come
> from an ancient oceanic world, which may have had suitable
> conditions for life.
>
> The initial analysis, conducted in October, determined Bennu
> contained large amounts of water and carbon - and scientists
> suggested that such asteroids may have delivered the building
> blocks for life on Earth.
>
> Now, researchers at the University of Arizona believe Bennu
> was part of a water-rich planet that existed billions of
> years ago.
>
> The team determined that some of the dark rocks on the
> asteroid are coated in a thin crust of brighter material
> that has been observed on Saturn's moon Enceladus, which is
> believed to have a a global ocean of liquid salty water.
>
> . . .
>
> Hmmm ... but was that wet world an original part of THIS
> solar system, or from elsewhere ? Something kinda exploded
> it - a Big Hit perhaps. A more detailed isotopic analysis
> may be able to "fingerprint" it as "from here" or not.
>
> Alas we only got surface samples, likely a lot of
> interstellar dust mixed in. We'd have to drill or blast
> to get a good chunk of the core material.
>
> Many like the idea of "panspermia", but that only defers
> the evolution of life, does not answer the "how" question
> except for our local neighborhood.
>
> Oh yea, why not "panovaria" ? :-)

Someone once wrote something about how many possible states all
the matter and energy in a 1m3 region of space can take.
It's not infinite. The number I *think* I read was something like 10^55.
So in a chunk of space not that very large -- about 12 million LY on a side --
there is a potential for all possible cubic meters of space to be enumerated.
If life pops up anywhere and has the property "that which if it pops up
anywhere will get everywhere" then it's everywhere in a space millions
of times smaller than the visible universe. Alternatively, in the visible
universe there is space for millions of alternative creations.

--
You've been told before that you are not qualified to judge anything.
-- James (Follett) <kingkong@fewpb.net>, 23 Oct 2013

On 2/7/24 4:03 AM, R Kym Horsell wrote:
> In alt.astronomy 68g.1499 <68g.1499@etr6.net> wrote:
>> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-13053209/NASA-asteroid-sample-originated-ocean-world.html
>>
>> The first asteroid sample brought back to Earth may have come
>> from an ancient oceanic world, which may have had suitable
>> conditions for life.
>>
>> The initial analysis, conducted in October, determined Bennu
>> contained large amounts of water and carbon - and scientists
>> suggested that such asteroids may have delivered the building
>> blocks for life on Earth.
>>
>> Now, researchers at the University of Arizona believe Bennu
>> was part of a water-rich planet that existed billions of
>> years ago.
>>
>> The team determined that some of the dark rocks on the
>> asteroid are coated in a thin crust of brighter material
>> that has been observed on Saturn's moon Enceladus, which is
>> believed to have a a global ocean of liquid salty water.
>>
>> . . .
>>
>> Hmmm ... but was that wet world an original part of THIS
>> solar system, or from elsewhere ? Something kinda exploded
>> it - a Big Hit perhaps. A more detailed isotopic analysis
>> may be able to "fingerprint" it as "from here" or not.
>>
>> Alas we only got surface samples, likely a lot of
>> interstellar dust mixed in. We'd have to drill or blast
>> to get a good chunk of the core material.
>>
>> Many like the idea of "panspermia", but that only defers
>> the evolution of life, does not answer the "how" question
>> except for our local neighborhood.
>>
>> Oh yea, why not "panovaria" ? :-)
>
> Someone once wrote something about how many possible states all
> the matter and energy in a 1m3 region of space can take.
> It's not infinite. The number I *think* I read was something like 10^55.
> So in a chunk of space not that very large -- about 12 million LY on a side --
> there is a potential for all possible cubic meters of space to be enumerated.
> If life pops up anywhere and has the property "that which if it pops up
> anywhere will get everywhere" then it's everywhere in a space millions
> of times smaller than the visible universe. Alternatively, in the visible
> universe there is space for millions of alternative creations.

Very optimistic. But I get the creepy feeling
that 'life' is very very VERY rare. "Intelligent"
life vastly more rare than that. With your equation
we should be hip deep in little green/purple/
polka-dot 'men' going back a billion years.

Sorry, no "Star Fleet" or "Federation".

In alt.astronomy 68g.1502 <68g.1502@etr7.net> wrote:
> On 2/7/24 4:03 AM, R Kym Horsell wrote:
>> In alt.astronomy 68g.1499 <68g.1499@etr6.net> wrote:
>>> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-13053209/NASA-asteroid-sample-originated-ocean-world.html
>>>
>>> The first asteroid sample brought back to Earth may have come
>>> from an ancient oceanic world, which may have had suitable
>>> conditions for life.
>>>
>>> The initial analysis, conducted in October, determined Bennu
>>> contained large amounts of water and carbon - and scientists
>>> suggested that such asteroids may have delivered the building
>>> blocks for life on Earth.
>>>
>>> Now, researchers at the University of Arizona believe Bennu
>>> was part of a water-rich planet that existed billions of
>>> years ago.
>>>
>>> The team determined that some of the dark rocks on the
>>> asteroid are coated in a thin crust of brighter material
>>> that has been observed on Saturn's moon Enceladus, which is
>>> believed to have a a global ocean of liquid salty water.
>>>
>>> . . .
>>>
>>> Hmmm ... but was that wet world an original part of THIS
>>> solar system, or from elsewhere ? Something kinda exploded
>>> it - a Big Hit perhaps. A more detailed isotopic analysis
>>> may be able to "fingerprint" it as "from here" or not.
>>>
>>> Alas we only got surface samples, likely a lot of
>>> interstellar dust mixed in. We'd have to drill or blast
>>> to get a good chunk of the core material.
>>>
>>> Many like the idea of "panspermia", but that only defers
>>> the evolution of life, does not answer the "how" question
>>> except for our local neighborhood.
>>>
>>> Oh yea, why not "panovaria" ? :-)
>>
>> Someone once wrote something about how many possible states all
>> the matter and energy in a 1m3 region of space can take.
>> It's not infinite. The number I *think* I read was something like 10^55.
>> So in a chunk of space not that very large -- about 12 million LY on a side --
>> there is a potential for all possible cubic meters of space to be enumerated.
>> If life pops up anywhere and has the property "that which if it pops up
>> anywhere will get everywhere" then it's everywhere in a space millions
>> of times smaller than the visible universe. Alternatively, in the visible
>> universe there is space for millions of alternative creations.
>
>
> Very optimistic. But I get the creepy feeling
> that 'life' is very very VERY rare. "Intelligent"
> life vastly more rare than that. With your equation
> we should be hip deep in little green/purple/
> polka-dot 'men' going back a billion years.
>
> Sorry, no "Star Fleet" or "Federation".

What "equation"? Am I talking to a non scientist? :)

We are hip deep in life. With most "dont look up" folks knowing only
the possibilities in the same room as them, they anyway note that life
on earth emerged very early after "suitable conditions arose",
then proceeded to get everywhere it could from the top of the atm to
dozens of miles underground. From the hottest deserts to ice cold
isolated lakes under the Antarctic ice sheet.
There are billions of tons of life on earth.

If this is your only model it might say a lot of about "life in
the universe".

--
Reservoir Size
(gigatonnes of carbon equiv)

marine biomass 3
mangrove soils 6
plant roots 54
sea floor sediments 150
tropical forests 250
all forests 400
land plants 500
life on earth 550
fossils burned 600
dissolved organics 700
atm 900(ancient -- 1 mn BCE)
surf ocean 1000
top 1m of soil 1500
continental biomass 4400
deep ocean 38000
earth 10^8

R Kym Horsell wrote on 8/2/24 10:11 am:

<Snip>

> What "equation"? Am I talking to a non scientist? :)
>
> We are hip deep in life. With most "dont look up" folks knowing only
> the possibilities in the same room as them, they anyway note that life
> on earth emerged very early after "suitable conditions arose",
> then proceeded to get everywhere it could from the top of the atm to
> dozens of miles underground. From the hottest deserts to ice cold
> isolated lakes under the Antarctic ice sheet.
> There are billions of tons of life on earth.
>
> If this is your only model it might say a lot of about "life in
> the universe".
>
I am really enjoying watching the BBC series "Earth"!!

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt28485477/?ref_=nv_sr_srsg_7_tt_8_nm_0_q_Earth
--
Daniel

On 2/7/24 6:11 PM, R Kym Horsell wrote:
> In alt.astronomy 68g.1502 <68g.1502@etr7.net> wrote:
>> On 2/7/24 4:03 AM, R Kym Horsell wrote:
>>> In alt.astronomy 68g.1499 <68g.1499@etr6.net> wrote:
>>>> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-13053209/NASA-asteroid-sample-originated-ocean-world.html
>>>>
>>>> The first asteroid sample brought back to Earth may have come
>>>> from an ancient oceanic world, which may have had suitable
>>>> conditions for life.
>>>>
>>>> The initial analysis, conducted in October, determined Bennu
>>>> contained large amounts of water and carbon - and scientists
>>>> suggested that such asteroids may have delivered the building
>>>> blocks for life on Earth.
>>>>
>>>> Now, researchers at the University of Arizona believe Bennu
>>>> was part of a water-rich planet that existed billions of
>>>> years ago.
>>>>
>>>> The team determined that some of the dark rocks on the
>>>> asteroid are coated in a thin crust of brighter material
>>>> that has been observed on Saturn's moon Enceladus, which is
>>>> believed to have a a global ocean of liquid salty water.
>>>>
>>>> . . .
>>>>
>>>> Hmmm ... but was that wet world an original part of THIS
>>>> solar system, or from elsewhere ? Something kinda exploded
>>>> it - a Big Hit perhaps. A more detailed isotopic analysis
>>>> may be able to "fingerprint" it as "from here" or not.
>>>>
>>>> Alas we only got surface samples, likely a lot of
>>>> interstellar dust mixed in. We'd have to drill or blast
>>>> to get a good chunk of the core material.
>>>>
>>>> Many like the idea of "panspermia", but that only defers
>>>> the evolution of life, does not answer the "how" question
>>>> except for our local neighborhood.
>>>>
>>>> Oh yea, why not "panovaria" ? :-)
>>>
>>> Someone once wrote something about how many possible states all
>>> the matter and energy in a 1m3 region of space can take.
>>> It's not infinite. The number I *think* I read was something like 10^55.
>>> So in a chunk of space not that very large -- about 12 million LY on a side --
>>> there is a potential for all possible cubic meters of space to be enumerated.
>>> If life pops up anywhere and has the property "that which if it pops up
>>> anywhere will get everywhere" then it's everywhere in a space millions
>>> of times smaller than the visible universe. Alternatively, in the visible
>>> universe there is space for millions of alternative creations.
>>
>>
>> Very optimistic. But I get the creepy feeling
>> that 'life' is very very VERY rare. "Intelligent"
>> life vastly more rare than that. With your equation
>> we should be hip deep in little green/purple/
>> polka-dot 'men' going back a billion years.
>>
>> Sorry, no "Star Fleet" or "Federation".
>
>
> What "equation"? Am I talking to a non scientist? :)

You provided a set of assumptions/numbers to suggest
that life could be plentiful. That's your "equation",
vaguely a different kind of "Drake Equation".

"I *think* I read was something like 10^55. So in
a chunk of space not that very large -- about 12
million LY on a side -- there is a potential for
all possible cubic meters of space to be enumerated.
If life pops up anywhere and has the property "that
which if it pops up anywhere will get everywhere"
then it's everywhere"

Take credit/blame for your own work :-)

HOWEVER - first actual evidence - our "neighborhood" -
nothing much but super/sub-earths that are either
super-hot or very cold or horribly irradiated. Not
very favorable to ANY kind of life emerging - much
less anything WE might recognize as such.

> We are hip deep in life.

Only HERE - and it's ALL THE SAME THING, no completely
novel evolutionary lines with seriously different
biochemistry. You're looking at variation/evolution
of ONE primordial life form. Nothing else has ever
been found - and not for lack of looking anymore.

> With most "dont look up" folks knowing only
> the possibilities in the same room as them, they anyway note that life
> on earth emerged very early after "suitable conditions arose",
> then proceeded to get everywhere it could from the top of the atm to
> dozens of miles underground. From the hottest deserts to ice cold
> isolated lakes under the Antarctic ice sheet.
> There are billions of tons of life on earth.
>
> If this is your only model it might say a lot of about "life in
> the universe".

"Life", to DEVELOP, will need fairly stable conditions
over a fairly long period so all the necessary chems/
structures can form in a coordinated self-supporting
fashion. AFTER it develops then evolution can drive it
in a number of directions over time, from cold algae
goop to extremophiles in boiling waters to, perhaps,
with luck, multi-cellular forms. Once you have the
functional template, something that *works*, much might
be done with it. Also, mutable DNA is only ONE way to
run lifeforms ... more stable, less mutable, chemical
structures could exist, but you wouldn't get nearly as
much evolution/variability.

Again, sorry, no "Federation" because there won't be
anyone to federate with - at least not in this galaxy.
NO reason/evidence to assume otherwise.

In any case, and this was Drake's flaw, you cannot
just use THIS planet to predict the chances of
life anywhere else.

SO - I'm gonna guess at ONE intelligent life form
per galaxy, and that there's no way around lightspeed.
That's still about 250,000,000 intelligent lifeforms,
but they'll never meet/communicate.

In alt.astronomy 68g.1502 <68g.1502@etr7.net> wrote:
> On 2/7/24 6:11 PM, R Kym Horsell wrote:
>> In alt.astronomy 68g.1502 <68g.1502@etr7.net> wrote:
>>> On 2/7/24 4:03 AM, R Kym Horsell wrote:
>>>> In alt.astronomy 68g.1499 <68g.1499@etr6.net> wrote:
>>>>> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-13053209/NASA-asteroid-sample-originated-ocean-world.html
>>>>>
>>>>> The first asteroid sample brought back to Earth may have come
>>>>> from an ancient oceanic world, which may have had suitable
>>>>> conditions for life.
>>>>>
>>>>> The initial analysis, conducted in October, determined Bennu
>>>>> contained large amounts of water and carbon - and scientists
>>>>> suggested that such asteroids may have delivered the building
>>>>> blocks for life on Earth.
>>>>>
>>>>> Now, researchers at the University of Arizona believe Bennu
>>>>> was part of a water-rich planet that existed billions of
>>>>> years ago.
>>>>>
>>>>> The team determined that some of the dark rocks on the
>>>>> asteroid are coated in a thin crust of brighter material
>>>>> that has been observed on Saturn's moon Enceladus, which is
>>>>> believed to have a a global ocean of liquid salty water.
>>>>>
>>>>> . . .
>>>>>
>>>>> Hmmm ... but was that wet world an original part of THIS
>>>>> solar system, or from elsewhere ? Something kinda exploded
>>>>> it - a Big Hit perhaps. A more detailed isotopic analysis
>>>>> may be able to "fingerprint" it as "from here" or not.
>>>>>
>>>>> Alas we only got surface samples, likely a lot of
>>>>> interstellar dust mixed in. We'd have to drill or blast
>>>>> to get a good chunk of the core material.
>>>>>
>>>>> Many like the idea of "panspermia", but that only defers
>>>>> the evolution of life, does not answer the "how" question
>>>>> except for our local neighborhood.
>>>>>
>>>>> Oh yea, why not "panovaria" ? :-)
>>>>
>>>> Someone once wrote something about how many possible states all
>>>> the matter and energy in a 1m3 region of space can take.
>>>> It's not infinite. The number I *think* I read was something like 10^55.
>>>> So in a chunk of space not that very large -- about 12 million LY on a side --
>>>> there is a potential for all possible cubic meters of space to be enumerated.
>>>> If life pops up anywhere and has the property "that which if it pops up
>>>> anywhere will get everywhere" then it's everywhere in a space millions
>>>> of times smaller than the visible universe. Alternatively, in the visible
>>>> universe there is space for millions of alternative creations.
>>>
>>>
>>> Very optimistic. But I get the creepy feeling
>>> that 'life' is very very VERY rare. "Intelligent"
>>> life vastly more rare than that. With your equation
>>> we should be hip deep in little green/purple/
>>> polka-dot 'men' going back a billion years.
>>>
>>> Sorry, no "Star Fleet" or "Federation".
>>
>>
>> What "equation"? Am I talking to a non scientist? :)
>
>
> You provided a set of assumptions/numbers to suggest
> that life could be plentiful. That's your "equation",
> vaguely a different kind of "Drake Equation".
....

Scientists say life is plentiful. Observation.
It started early and got into every niche available. Obsveration.

As I illustrated on another thread, a general simulation of "universes" --
generel in the sense it emcompasses quantum mechanics and chemistry
and -- as so-called "rewrite systems" anything that could be called
a computation -- that compexity has a tendency to snowball even if
creation-type operations or laws are exactly baalnced by destruction-type
operations or laws.

Essentially the setup of the laws allows life to develop and prosper.
And observation tends to support the idea that the same laws operate
pretty much everywhere so what was good for life on earth is
going to be good for other life elsehwere.
Earth has only bee naround 4 bn years but the universe got a 10 bn
year head start.

I know this is troubling for you supporters of the status quo.
Too bad. LOL.

On 2/8/24 6:58 AM, R Kym Horsell wrote:
> In alt.astronomy 68g.1502 <68g.1502@etr7.net> wrote:
>> On 2/7/24 6:11 PM, R Kym Horsell wrote:
>>> In alt.astronomy 68g.1502 <68g.1502@etr7.net> wrote:
>>>> On 2/7/24 4:03 AM, R Kym Horsell wrote:
>>>>> In alt.astronomy 68g.1499 <68g.1499@etr6.net> wrote:
>>>>>> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-13053209/NASA-asteroid-sample-originated-ocean-world.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The first asteroid sample brought back to Earth may have come
>>>>>> from an ancient oceanic world, which may have had suitable
>>>>>> conditions for life.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The initial analysis, conducted in October, determined Bennu
>>>>>> contained large amounts of water and carbon - and scientists
>>>>>> suggested that such asteroids may have delivered the building
>>>>>> blocks for life on Earth.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Now, researchers at the University of Arizona believe Bennu
>>>>>> was part of a water-rich planet that existed billions of
>>>>>> years ago.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The team determined that some of the dark rocks on the
>>>>>> asteroid are coated in a thin crust of brighter material
>>>>>> that has been observed on Saturn's moon Enceladus, which is
>>>>>> believed to have a a global ocean of liquid salty water.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> . . .
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hmmm ... but was that wet world an original part of THIS
>>>>>> solar system, or from elsewhere ? Something kinda exploded
>>>>>> it - a Big Hit perhaps. A more detailed isotopic analysis
>>>>>> may be able to "fingerprint" it as "from here" or not.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Alas we only got surface samples, likely a lot of
>>>>>> interstellar dust mixed in. We'd have to drill or blast
>>>>>> to get a good chunk of the core material.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Many like the idea of "panspermia", but that only defers
>>>>>> the evolution of life, does not answer the "how" question
>>>>>> except for our local neighborhood.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Oh yea, why not "panovaria" ? :-)
>>>>>
>>>>> Someone once wrote something about how many possible states all
>>>>> the matter and energy in a 1m3 region of space can take.
>>>>> It's not infinite. The number I *think* I read was something like 10^55.
>>>>> So in a chunk of space not that very large -- about 12 million LY on a side --
>>>>> there is a potential for all possible cubic meters of space to be enumerated.
>>>>> If life pops up anywhere and has the property "that which if it pops up
>>>>> anywhere will get everywhere" then it's everywhere in a space millions
>>>>> of times smaller than the visible universe. Alternatively, in the visible
>>>>> universe there is space for millions of alternative creations.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Very optimistic. But I get the creepy feeling
>>>> that 'life' is very very VERY rare. "Intelligent"
>>>> life vastly more rare than that. With your equation
>>>> we should be hip deep in little green/purple/
>>>> polka-dot 'men' going back a billion years.
>>>>
>>>> Sorry, no "Star Fleet" or "Federation".
>>>
>>>
>>> What "equation"? Am I talking to a non scientist? :)
>>
>>
>> You provided a set of assumptions/numbers to suggest
>> that life could be plentiful. That's your "equation",
>> vaguely a different kind of "Drake Equation".
> ...
>
> Scientists say life is plentiful. Observation.

Scientists GUESS life is plentiful. There are NO
observations to support that assertion however,
not even with our coolest new telescopes. Nothing
but CRAP planets all around us.

> It started early and got into every niche available. Obsveration.

HERE ... not necessarily "there" - or anywhere.

> As I illustrated on another thread, a general simulation of "universes" --
> generel in the sense it emcompasses quantum mechanics and chemistry
> and -- as so-called "rewrite systems" anything that could be called
> a computation -- that compexity has a tendency to snowball even if
> creation-type operations or laws are exactly baalnced by destruction-type
> operations or laws.
>
> Essentially the setup of the laws allows life to develop and prosper.
> And observation tends to support the idea that the same laws operate
> pretty much everywhere so what was good for life on earth is
> going to be good for other life elsehwere.
> Earth has only bee naround 4 bn years but the universe got a 10 bn
> year head start.
>
> I know this is troubling for you supporters of the status quo.
> Too bad. LOL.

I did explain how once you HAVE "life" there's probably (not
surely) a lot to to be done with it. But FIRST you've gotta
HAVE it.

NO sign ANYWHERE else within 1500 light years. NOT very
encouraging.

Oh, also mentioned, "life" - even here - was DEAD STUPID
life for billions of years. The dinos and big amphibs had
a HUGE span of time to get smart ... never did.

We monkey-people were a random FLUKE four billion years
on - so don't get all proud or anything. We could
disappear ourselves tonight just by someone pushing
a button ....

No "Federation" for you ... sell the uniform on e-Bay.

In alt.astronomy 68g.1502 <68g.1502@exr3.net> wrote:
> On 2/8/24 6:58 AM, R Kym Horsell wrote:
>> In alt.astronomy 68g.1502 <68g.1502@etr7.net> wrote:
>>> On 2/7/24 6:11 PM, R Kym Horsell wrote:
>>>> In alt.astronomy 68g.1502 <68g.1502@etr7.net> wrote:
>>>>> On 2/7/24 4:03 AM, R Kym Horsell wrote:
>>>>>> In alt.astronomy 68g.1499 <68g.1499@etr6.net> wrote:
>>>>>>> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-13053209/NASA-asteroid-sample-originated-ocean-world.html
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The first asteroid sample brought back to Earth may have come
>>>>>>> from an ancient oceanic world, which may have had suitable
>>>>>>> conditions for life.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The initial analysis, conducted in October, determined Bennu
>>>>>>> contained large amounts of water and carbon - and scientists
>>>>>>> suggested that such asteroids may have delivered the building
>>>>>>> blocks for life on Earth.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Now, researchers at the University of Arizona believe Bennu
>>>>>>> was part of a water-rich planet that existed billions of
>>>>>>> years ago.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The team determined that some of the dark rocks on the
>>>>>>> asteroid are coated in a thin crust of brighter material
>>>>>>> that has been observed on Saturn's moon Enceladus, which is
>>>>>>> believed to have a a global ocean of liquid salty water.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> . . .
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hmmm ... but was that wet world an original part of THIS
>>>>>>> solar system, or from elsewhere ? Something kinda exploded
>>>>>>> it - a Big Hit perhaps. A more detailed isotopic analysis
>>>>>>> may be able to "fingerprint" it as "from here" or not.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Alas we only got surface samples, likely a lot of
>>>>>>> interstellar dust mixed in. We'd have to drill or blast
>>>>>>> to get a good chunk of the core material.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Many like the idea of "panspermia", but that only defers
>>>>>>> the evolution of life, does not answer the "how" question
>>>>>>> except for our local neighborhood.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Oh yea, why not "panovaria" ? :-)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Someone once wrote something about how many possible states all
>>>>>> the matter and energy in a 1m3 region of space can take.
>>>>>> It's not infinite. The number I *think* I read was something like 10^55.
>>>>>> So in a chunk of space not that very large -- about 12 million LY on a side --
>>>>>> there is a potential for all possible cubic meters of space to be enumerated.
>>>>>> If life pops up anywhere and has the property "that which if it pops up
>>>>>> anywhere will get everywhere" then it's everywhere in a space millions
>>>>>> of times smaller than the visible universe. Alternatively, in the visible
>>>>>> universe there is space for millions of alternative creations.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Very optimistic. But I get the creepy feeling
>>>>> that 'life' is very very VERY rare. "Intelligent"
>>>>> life vastly more rare than that. With your equation
>>>>> we should be hip deep in little green/purple/
>>>>> polka-dot 'men' going back a billion years.
>>>>>
>>>>> Sorry, no "Star Fleet" or "Federation".
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> What "equation"? Am I talking to a non scientist? :)
>>>
>>>
>>> You provided a set of assumptions/numbers to suggest
>>> that life could be plentiful. That's your "equation",
>>> vaguely a different kind of "Drake Equation".
>> ...
>>
>> Scientists say life is plentiful. Observation.
>
>
> Scientists GUESS life is plentiful. There are NO
> observations to support that assertion however,
> not even with our coolest new telescopes. Nothing
> but CRAP planets all around us.
....

Please try to keep track.
Life is everywhere possible ON EARTH. Observations.

The mass of all life can be estimated from measurement at about 600 gigatonnes
of carbon.

All basic science we all supposedly learned in grade school.

We see the same physical laws appear to apply everywhere for billions years.
Observations.

If there is *NOT* life everywhere else that it is measured to have
what we know are suitable conditions then someone has to show what
is totally peculariar about earth to make it the case it flourished here
but nowhere else.

Kinda a tall order for people that dont really understand the concepts
or technical terms one would think. :)

68g.1502 wrote on 9/2/24 3:55 pm:
> On 2/8/24 6:58 AM, R Kym Horsell wrote:
>> In alt.astronomy 68g.1502 <68g.1502@etr7.net> wrote:
>>> On 2/7/24 6:11 PM, R Kym Horsell wrote:

<Snip>

>>>> What "equation"? Am I talking to a non scientist? :)
>>>
>>>
>>>    You provided a set of assumptions/numbers to suggest
>>>    that life could be plentiful. That's your "equation",
>>>    vaguely a different kind of "Drake Equation".
>> ...
>>
>> Scientists say life is plentiful. Observation.
>
>
>   Scientists GUESS life is plentiful.

I was gunna suggest "Scientists HYPOTHESISE life is plentiful."
--
Daniel

On 2/9/24 3:39 AM, R Kym Horsell wrote:
> In alt.astronomy 68g.1502 <68g.1502@exr3.net> wrote:
>> On 2/8/24 6:58 AM, R Kym Horsell wrote:
>>> In alt.astronomy 68g.1502 <68g.1502@etr7.net> wrote:
>>>> On 2/7/24 6:11 PM, R Kym Horsell wrote:
>>>>> In alt.astronomy 68g.1502 <68g.1502@etr7.net> wrote:
>>>>>> On 2/7/24 4:03 AM, R Kym Horsell wrote:
>>>>>>> In alt.astronomy 68g.1499 <68g.1499@etr6.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>> https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-13053209/NASA-asteroid-sample-originated-ocean-world.html
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The first asteroid sample brought back to Earth may have come
>>>>>>>> from an ancient oceanic world, which may have had suitable
>>>>>>>> conditions for life.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The initial analysis, conducted in October, determined Bennu
>>>>>>>> contained large amounts of water and carbon - and scientists
>>>>>>>> suggested that such asteroids may have delivered the building
>>>>>>>> blocks for life on Earth.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Now, researchers at the University of Arizona believe Bennu
>>>>>>>> was part of a water-rich planet that existed billions of
>>>>>>>> years ago.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The team determined that some of the dark rocks on the
>>>>>>>> asteroid are coated in a thin crust of brighter material
>>>>>>>> that has been observed on Saturn's moon Enceladus, which is
>>>>>>>> believed to have a a global ocean of liquid salty water.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> . . .
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hmmm ... but was that wet world an original part of THIS
>>>>>>>> solar system, or from elsewhere ? Something kinda exploded
>>>>>>>> it - a Big Hit perhaps. A more detailed isotopic analysis
>>>>>>>> may be able to "fingerprint" it as "from here" or not.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Alas we only got surface samples, likely a lot of
>>>>>>>> interstellar dust mixed in. We'd have to drill or blast
>>>>>>>> to get a good chunk of the core material.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Many like the idea of "panspermia", but that only defers
>>>>>>>> the evolution of life, does not answer the "how" question
>>>>>>>> except for our local neighborhood.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Oh yea, why not "panovaria" ? :-)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Someone once wrote something about how many possible states all
>>>>>>> the matter and energy in a 1m3 region of space can take.
>>>>>>> It's not infinite. The number I *think* I read was something like 10^55.
>>>>>>> So in a chunk of space not that very large -- about 12 million LY on a side --
>>>>>>> there is a potential for all possible cubic meters of space to be enumerated.
>>>>>>> If life pops up anywhere and has the property "that which if it pops up
>>>>>>> anywhere will get everywhere" then it's everywhere in a space millions
>>>>>>> of times smaller than the visible universe. Alternatively, in the visible
>>>>>>> universe there is space for millions of alternative creations.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Very optimistic. But I get the creepy feeling
>>>>>> that 'life' is very very VERY rare. "Intelligent"
>>>>>> life vastly more rare than that. With your equation
>>>>>> we should be hip deep in little green/purple/
>>>>>> polka-dot 'men' going back a billion years.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sorry, no "Star Fleet" or "Federation".
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> What "equation"? Am I talking to a non scientist? :)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> You provided a set of assumptions/numbers to suggest
>>>> that life could be plentiful. That's your "equation",
>>>> vaguely a different kind of "Drake Equation".
>>> ...
>>>
>>> Scientists say life is plentiful. Observation.
>>
>>
>> Scientists GUESS life is plentiful. There are NO
>> observations to support that assertion however,
>> not even with our coolest new telescopes. Nothing
>> but CRAP planets all around us.
> ...
>
> Please try to keep track.
> Life is everywhere possible ON EARTH. Observations.

But you extended that from "on earth" to EVERYWHERE.

> The mass of all life can be estimated from measurement at about 600 gigatonnes
> of carbon.
>
> All basic science we all supposedly learned in grade school.
>
> We see the same physical laws appear to apply everywhere for billions years.
> Observations.
>
> If there is *NOT* life everywhere else that it is measured to have
> what we know are suitable conditions then someone has to show what
> is totally peculariar about earth to make it the case it flourished here
> but nowhere else.

So ... you want people to prove a negative .....

> Kinda a tall order for people that dont really understand the concepts
> or technical terms one would think. :)

You are into magical thinking. We HAVE a fair amount
of data on "nearby" solar systems - NO CHANCE of any
life remotely as we know it. The worlds are JUST
HORRIBLE. Probing for "intelligent" signals has also
been a big fail (though there are timing issues).

Based on this, I am gonna stick to my original theme
that life is VERY VERY rare. We could very well be
the ONLY blob of life in this entire galaxy.

In alt.astronomy Daniel65 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
> 68g.1502 wrote on 9/2/24 3:55 pm:
....
>>> Scientists say life is plentiful. Observation.
>> Scientists GUESS life is plentiful.
> I was gunna suggest "Scientists HYPOTHESISE life is plentiful."

Yes. A prediction based on what you know is an hypothesis.
We know e.g. carbon-based life on earth is plentiful.
Looking through our telescopes we see carbon everywhere out in space.
We see the same laws of chemistry operating.
Everywhere that is the same as what we know should have a good
prospect of life.
So life "out there" should be everywhere the conditions we know are right.
If they aren't then we have some rewriting of what we know to do. :)

More interesting than mundane carbon-based life are other kinds of life
we dont know.
Chemistry follows certain mathematical rules. Those same rules can
apply way outside of carbon chemistry or even way outside of chemistry.

E.g. if we write a computer simulation of life is that "alive"?

I'm pretty sure in the 90s there were already simulations of the
chemistry of simple cells - 10s of 1000s of chemical reactions involved
of course -- that were detailed enough to follow the growth and
fissioning of yeast even getting the 90 min time to fission correct.

Quite a few people working in the area of A-Life argue that anything
that "looks" alive "is" alive. OK. Maybe a bit contentious. :)

But given it's only the mathematical properties of organic chemistry that
decide whether life is present then we might easily argue that
computer programs can be alive, and anything from magnetic fields to
balls of plasma might also under some conditions be alive.

--
Study Finds: Psychedelic Drugs Not Connected to Mental Health Issues
Geek Infinite, 10 Mar 2015 11:07Z
A new research indicates that there is no connection between Psychedelic
drugs and mental health issues. Psychedelic drugs are mainly used to alter
cognition and perception.

Study Finds: Psychedelic Drugs Not WEEEEEEE! Connected to Mental Health Issues
Geek Infinite, 10 Mar 2015 11:07Z
A new research MAN, MY HANDS ARE BIG AND GRAY TODAY! indicates that there is no
no no no connection between Psychedelic drugs and mental health health issues.
Issues. Mental health. Issues. Psychedelic drugs drugs are WEEEEEEEE! mainly
WOW! LOOK AT THAT! used to alter cognition annnnnnnnnd perceppptttion.

R Kym Horsell wrote on 9/2/24 10:56 pm:
> In alt.astronomy Daniel65 <daniel47@nomail.afraid.org> wrote:
>> 68g.1502 wrote on 9/2/24 3:55 pm:
> ...
>>>> Scientists say life is plentiful. Observation.
>>> Scientists GUESS life is plentiful.
>> I was gunna suggest "Scientists HYPOTHESISE life is plentiful."
>
> Yes. A prediction based on what you know is an hypothesis. We know
> e.g. carbon-based life on earth is plentiful. Looking through our
> telescopes we see carbon everywhere out in space. We see the same
> laws of chemistry operating. Everywhere that is the same as what we
> know should have a good prospect of life. So life "out there" should
> be everywhere the conditions we know are right. If they aren't then
> we have some rewriting of what we know to do. :)
>
> More interesting than mundane carbon-based life are other kinds of
> life we dont know. Chemistry follows certain mathematical rules.
> Those same rules can apply way outside of carbon chemistry or even
> way outside of chemistry.
>
> E.g. if we write a computer simulation of life is that "alive"?

As I understand it, ALL CURRENT life forms ARE Carbon-based ....
however, some time ago I read that Scientists had theorised the
Silicon-based life-forms were possible ..... but I don't think they were
referring to AI or computer simulation of life!! ;-P

> I'm pretty sure in the 90s there were already simulations of the
> chemistry of simple cells - 10s of 1000s of chemical reactions
> involved of course -- that were detailed enough to follow the growth
> and fissioning of yeast even getting the 90 min time to fission
> correct.
>
> Quite a few people working in the area of A-Life argue that anything
> that "looks" alive "is" alive. OK. Maybe a bit contentious. :)

Pigs A@#$!! VERY contentious!!

> But given it's only the mathematical properties of organic chemistry
> that decide whether life is present then we might easily argue that
> computer programs can be alive, and anything from magnetic fields to
> balls of plasma might also under some conditions be alive.

So, the next thing 'they' will be suggesting is that the images on my
VCR-tapes ARE Alive!! You know, magnetic bits and all!! ;-P
--
Daniel