Very interesting re-framing of fairly mainstream origin(s) of life thoughts. I can't say I'm convinced, but it's certainly a set of constraints that should be considered.
to me a key element for habitability is to have some kind of countinous recycling of elements and volatiles from the lithosphere to the atmosphere and vice versa. Plate tectonics provides that on Earth. Without plate-tectonic driven recycling of elements and gases there would be no way to keep the surface habitable for billions of years as water may freeze or surface soils get nutrient-depleted in a snapshot. Considering that the atmospheres of rocky plates are relatively small reservoirs, they can get filled up or depleted in no time if you don't have some recycling mechanism in place. I don't think that the Th argument is as fundamental as the plate tectonic argument because only plate tectonics can effectively recycle elements. You don't 'just' need an input into the atmosphere from volcanoes but you also need an output from the atmospere into the lithosphere...
Thorium & Uranium isotopes can help in carrying out reactions that would increase the temperature, say to 6000K and in that case, it would be much greater to help with 'urability' as it would help to drive the heat source. Example, if there's lack of volcanic eruptions in any habitable planet, it's temp needs to be high enough to drive urability to enhance conditions for life.
by the way, what's the difference between this scenario and the old Urey experiment? I think they got up to producing abiotically nucleic acids back then...
According to an article published in the Journal of Molecular Biology by Douglas D. Axe, among all the possible amino acid combinations, the probability of generating just one new functional protein by mutation is one in ten to the 74th power. Is DNA life 'bound' to self-generate on any suitable world -- the main assumption SETI makes -- or is this essentially impossible? We should at least try to answer this question first.
We had some volume issues at the beginning due to a mic setting that was incorrect, but if you keep going, it should be fixed in the first 10 minutes or so.
Urability is an effective technique to sidestep the problem, that problem being that Abiogenesis is Impossible and so impossible that an infinite Universe isn't large enough to render Abiogenesis possible, and Abiogenesis is so impossible that a skilled trained educated intelligent Nobel Prize winning scientist cannot accomplish it, Abiogenesis is so impossible that not even God could accomplish that miracle.
So, what is your take how it can be that we are alive? Or are we just a simulation? If so, how can I ask you this question on something called youtube, on a very small planet in a very small solar system, part of a distant wing from the center of a random galaxy in a Local Group, in a distant cluster, from a random supercluster in something that we call the Laniakea Supercluster which on it's own is a small part of the observable universe. It's all so huge that our human minds cannot comprehend how incredibly huge the entire universe is. Thinking that our small solarsystem is the only solar system in the entire universe with life is either ignorant or (going to play the 'emotional card') extremely arrogant. Looking at the math from the Drake Equation. I would say that life is thriving in the entire universe. Just the point is that the distances are soooo huge that we maybe never will find other (intelligent) life outside our own solar system. Let's pretend you are a small fish. Living near the coast of, let's say Ireland, you swim around and you have family and other fish that swim around you. But you don't realize that in the Strait of Gibraltar, very intelligent sea mammals (dolphins) swim around and in the Pacific huge whale sharks swim around. You have no idea about it. But, does that mean that these whale sharks at Oslob are not really there? Or does it mean that you just won't meet them within your own lifespan?
@@djvincekline7338 the Drake Equation is just a guess and hope and desperation. If you want to know about how likely it is that chemistry leading to biochemistry that can be answered scientifically since there are precisely zero abiogenesis events observed by science.
@@sentientflower7891 You didn't give me any answer on my questions. 1. What is your take on the 'fact' that we are alive? 2. Are we just a simulation? 3.If so, how can I ask you this question on something called youtube, on a very small planet in a very small solar system, part of a distant wing from the center of a random galaxy in a Local Group, in a distant cluster, from a random supercluster in something that we call the Laniakea Supercluster which on it's own is a small part of the observable universe? 4.Let's pretend you are a small fish. Living near the coast of, let's say Ireland, you swim around and you have family and other fish that swim around you. But you don't realize that in the Strait of Gibraltar, very intelligent sea mammals (dolphins) swim around and in the Pacific huge whale sharks swim around. You have no idea about it. But, does that mean that these whale sharks at Oslob are not really there? 5. Or does it mean that you just won't meet them within your own lifespan?
@@djvincekline7338 those aren't relevant questions at all. Yes, life does exist on the Earth. No, we aren't ever going to find life on any sort anywhere else, nor shall it find us. Abiogenesis is Impossible so how life came to exist on the Earth is a mystery. There is no reason to imagine that life exist anywhere else in the Universe, nor does it exist. The Earth is alone.
¿Quién os dice que es mejor buscar a los extraterrestres en el espacio que buscarlos en el pasado de este planeta? A decir verdad, ya no tenéis que buscar mas, todo lo he encontrado yo en lo que nos ha llegado de la misma prehistoria, y lo tenéis en mi canal; Solo tenéis que cogerlo. Debéis saber que, la civilización que nos interesa, ya sabe que estamos aquí, y no la encontrareis en ningún planeta.
Assuming the conventional thinking of distances, random chemical Evolution and everything began in a big bang is totally superficial and inadequate to explain the simplest Forms of e-Pi-i Omnidirectional-dimensional cause-effect self-defining Actuality, then the First Principle Observation of WYSIWYG QM-TIME Completeness Conception would show the growth from seed scenario, projection-drawing log-antilog interference positioning-location system Quantum Operator Logic Fields Chemical Bonding and the likely Recursion to the Mean Bio-logically of Absolute Zero-infinity reference-framing.., a kind of Sublimation-Tunnelling holographic distribution of coherence-cohesion resonance objectives in Totality.
It's called science. we discussed hypothesis and build on them to create theories. The computer that you are using to read this is based on technologies that was developed using the same concepts.
Excellent. One of the best talks I've heard from the SETI Institute.
Vous avez raison. C'est une discussion fascinante et du plus haut intérêt. A regarder deux fois !
Thank you for this option to re-watch these talks. I live in the UK, and our timeline is different from you! Not always easy to catch you.
Respect from Russia, Saint-Petersburg!
📺
Very interesting re-framing of fairly mainstream origin(s) of life thoughts. I can't say I'm convinced, but it's certainly a set of constraints that should be considered.
Great talk! Sounds plausible.
to me a key element for habitability is to have some kind of countinous recycling of elements and volatiles from the lithosphere to the atmosphere and vice versa. Plate tectonics provides that on Earth. Without plate-tectonic driven recycling of elements and gases there would be no way to keep the surface habitable for billions of years as water may freeze or surface soils get nutrient-depleted in a snapshot. Considering that the atmospheres of rocky plates are relatively small reservoirs, they can get filled up or depleted in no time if you don't have some recycling mechanism in place. I don't think that the Th argument is as fundamental as the plate tectonic argument because only plate tectonics can effectively recycle elements. You don't 'just' need an input into the atmosphere from volcanoes but you also need an output from the atmospere into the lithosphere...
Thorium & Uranium isotopes can help in carrying out reactions that would increase the temperature, say to 6000K and in that case, it would be much greater to help with 'urability' as it would help to drive the heat source. Example, if there's lack of volcanic eruptions in any habitable planet, it's temp needs to be high enough to drive urability to enhance conditions for life.
Finally a live session! Without zoom 😄
by the way, what's the difference between this scenario and the old Urey experiment? I think they got up to producing abiotically nucleic acids back then...
No. The Miller Urey experiment produced tar with a set of molecules which are so useless to life that if you set an e coli in that setup it would die.
Wouldn't a cyclotron be too hot? I was exploring the use of one for DNA memory storage at Seagate but physicists told me it would be too hot.
According to an article published in the Journal of Molecular Biology by Douglas D. Axe, among all the possible amino acid combinations, the probability of generating just one new
functional protein by mutation is one in ten to the 74th power. Is DNA life 'bound' to self-generate on any suitable world -- the main assumption SETI makes -- or is this essentially impossible? We should at least try to answer this question first.
The volume is so low it is hard to hear. I'm sure it was very interesting if it could be heard.
We had some volume issues at the beginning due to a mic setting that was incorrect, but if you keep going, it should be fixed in the first 10 minutes or so.
Leicester, UK. Been following for 12+ years. Only 75k subscribers :(
Life of God begins as a ROOT of ☘️🌵 Plants. Javalin like structure. Om .
🚲 🔋
nice low energy video
Urability is an effective technique to sidestep the problem, that problem being that Abiogenesis is Impossible and so impossible that an infinite Universe isn't large enough to render Abiogenesis possible, and Abiogenesis is so impossible that a skilled trained educated intelligent Nobel Prize winning scientist cannot accomplish it, Abiogenesis is so impossible that not even God could accomplish that miracle.
So, what is your take how it can be that we are alive? Or are we just a simulation? If so, how can I ask you this question on something called youtube, on a very small planet in a very small solar system, part of a distant wing from the center of a random galaxy in a Local Group, in a distant cluster, from a random supercluster in something that we call the Laniakea Supercluster which on it's own is a small part of the observable universe. It's all so huge that our human minds cannot comprehend how incredibly huge the entire universe is. Thinking that our small solarsystem is the only solar system in the entire universe with life is either ignorant or (going to play the 'emotional card') extremely arrogant. Looking at the math from the Drake Equation. I would say that life is thriving in the entire universe. Just the point is that the distances are soooo huge that we maybe never will find other (intelligent) life outside our own solar system. Let's pretend you are a small fish. Living near the coast of, let's say Ireland, you swim around and you have family and other fish that swim around you. But you don't realize that in the Strait of Gibraltar, very intelligent sea mammals (dolphins) swim around and in the Pacific huge whale sharks swim around. You have no idea about it. But, does that mean that these whale sharks at Oslob are not really there? Or does it mean that you just won't meet them within your own lifespan?
@@djvincekline7338 the Drake Equation is just a guess and hope and desperation. If you want to know about how likely it is that chemistry leading to biochemistry that can be answered scientifically since there are precisely zero abiogenesis events observed by science.
@@sentientflower7891 You didn't give me any answer on my questions. 1. What is your take on the 'fact' that we are alive? 2. Are we just a simulation? 3.If so, how can I ask you this question on something called youtube, on a very small planet in a very small solar system, part of a distant wing from the center of a random galaxy in a Local Group, in a distant cluster, from a random supercluster in something that we call the Laniakea Supercluster which on it's own is a small part of the observable universe? 4.Let's pretend you are a small fish. Living near the coast of, let's say Ireland, you swim around and you have family and other fish that swim around you. But you don't realize that in the Strait of Gibraltar, very intelligent sea mammals (dolphins) swim around and in the Pacific huge whale sharks swim around. You have no idea about it. But, does that mean that these whale sharks at Oslob are not really there? 5. Or does it mean that you just won't meet them within your own lifespan?
@@djvincekline7338 those aren't relevant questions at all. Yes, life does exist on the Earth. No, we aren't ever going to find life on any sort anywhere else, nor shall it find us.
Abiogenesis is Impossible so how life came to exist on the Earth is a mystery. There is no reason to imagine that life exist anywhere else in the Universe, nor does it exist. The Earth is alone.
¿Quién os dice que es mejor buscar a los extraterrestres en el espacio que buscarlos en el pasado de este planeta?
A decir verdad, ya no tenéis que buscar mas, todo lo he encontrado yo en lo que nos ha llegado de la misma prehistoria, y lo tenéis en mi canal; Solo tenéis que cogerlo.
Debéis saber que, la civilización que nos interesa, ya sabe que estamos aquí, y no la encontrareis en ningún planeta.
Assuming the conventional thinking of distances, random chemical Evolution and everything began in a big bang is totally superficial and inadequate to explain the simplest Forms of e-Pi-i Omnidirectional-dimensional cause-effect self-defining Actuality, then the First Principle Observation of WYSIWYG QM-TIME Completeness Conception would show the growth from seed scenario, projection-drawing log-antilog interference positioning-location system Quantum Operator Logic Fields Chemical Bonding and the likely Recursion to the Mean Bio-logically of Absolute Zero-infinity reference-framing.., a kind of Sublimation-Tunnelling holographic distribution of coherence-cohesion resonance objectives in Totality.
Ha! They have not yet figured out how life begn on earth. This is missinformation at best.
It's called science. we discussed hypothesis and build on them to create theories. The computer that you are using to read this is based on technologies that was developed using the same concepts.
intelligent sheeps are the worst