Jump to content

Narrowband

The Drake equation


popeye85

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, ronin said:

Do we even know what we are looking for?

Well there lies just one of the problems we face. We only have one sample of life - our carbon based life on this one planet.

Before we can start deciding how many lifeforms are out there, we need a lot more samples. The fact that we don't even know how life can actually be is not a good starting point. We may think we know what drives atoms to ultimately become self aware, but the reality of it is we have absolutely no idea about that one aspect alone. Atoms have indeed become self aware - how can that be ?  ..  another deep mystery of the universe we're really only just beginning to notice.

Assuming life is limited to being carbon based is another mistake we're making, not to mention assuming that life can only exist and evolve within a set temperature range.

It's all still currently based on assumptions rather than science.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 31
  • Created
  • Last Reply

The other issue with life is timescales an intelligence that processes information at a much slower rate perhaps a millionth or more of a firing neuron would not even be noticed but they might watch the universe from beginning to end their lifetime.

Alan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Pippy said:

Assuming life is limited to being carbon based is another mistake we're making,

I'm not at all happy with that ! I hope you do not include me in that we ! Do you mean the other wes in this thread or all the wes of humanity ! :)

We, I mean me and Isaac Asimov, have not been making that mistake for a long time now :) but I admit that he does a better job than me in "Not as we know it - the chemistry of life" and other writings. It is a shame that his non-fiction writings are not standard reading in schools.

Even so, Isaac notwithstanding ( he does a good job of contriving) carbon is still the best contender over the others including silicon for very good scientific reasons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I believe the Drake equation was never intended as a standard scientific truth in the same way as Newton's laws are; it was just a quick discussion point on which to hang the SETI agenda and get people talking back at some conference in the early 1960s. Other have added extra terms since in the light of new astronomy or biochemistry. One of the hardest terms to quantify is the fraction of planets with life where intelligent life develops...

I am not a biologist by trade but I understand that current thinking divides cells into 3 types; prokaryotes (bacteria), archea (primitive bacteria) and eukaryotes (all higher life from yeast to man). Bacteria and Archea are very similar in that both have no defined nucleus, just a single strand of DNA. There are big differences in their biochemistry and cell wall features however. It is likely that Archea developed first and mutated into bacteria. Eukaryotes have a much more advanced biochemistry with separate nuclear structures and energy generation features. They are supposed to have been created when a bacteria absorbed an Archea and somehow harmonized the biochemistries of both. ; the archea look very like some structures in eukaryotes. I believe the current DNA evidence suggests this happened only ONCE, at least in a fashion that led to a viable and improved organism that had an advantage. Considering the billions upon billions of both bacteria and archea that must have been around this makes the probability of higher life very small indeed, and might explain Professor Fermi's famous retort!

Comments from biochemists appreciated...I might not have the latest facts; it's a subject that changes fast.

RL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.