The State Of Our Knowledge

[pywakit]

An objective, rational examination of all current scientific knowledge ( math, physics, chemistry, paleontology, experiments, observations, SETI, etc. ) tells us that .....


1. The human form is very special. 'We' are not.

2. There is an astronomically small likelihood that molecular combinations other than DNA produce life.

3. Radio-capable life is extremely rare in the visible/local universe.

4. There is a very high probability that the only radio-capable life is identical in form to us.

5. The ACTUAL universe is infinite.

6. The ACTUAL universe is eternal.

7. The 'big bang' was not a unique event in the universe.

8. The 'big bang' is actually a black hole ( ultra-dense star ) having achieved critical mass.

9. The amount of mass necessary FOR a 'big bang' is equal to the mass that came FROM the 'big bang'.

10. The process is a 'closed loop'. No atom escapes.

11. The process has gone on since 'the beginning of time' .... And will continue forever.

12. The properties of space preclude such events from overlapping.

13. An infinite number of 'big bangs' are occuring as I write this.

14. The observed properties of matter preclude 'infinite' smallness.

15. The observed properties of matter preclude 'infinite' denseness.

16. The observed properties of matter preclude 'infinitely large'.

17. 'Materializing' sub-Planck particles 'borrow' energy from the fabric of space and last about a billionth of a second.

18. Matter above Planck size does not materialize at all ... anywhere within the visible/local universe.

19. Black holes ... and their main effect ( creation of matter/finite universe ) ... are borrowed energy from 'infinite' space.

20. There is no evidence of 'dark matter'. Purely hypothetical.

21. There is no evidence of 'dark energy'. Purely hypothetical.

22. The observed properties of infinite space, and matter preclude 'other' universes from operating under completely different physics.

23. There is an extremely high probability that all 'finite' universes ... infinite in number ... function in exactly the same manner as 'our' universe.

24. Time and space did not begin with the arrival of 'our' universe. ( redundant )

25. Super-physics/super-technology do not exist. Not here. Not anywhere. ( FTL travel )

26. A worm hole harnessed to enable biological species to leap light years is not possible in the physical universe. ( mathematical probability/certainty does not equate to actually existing in the physical universe )

27. Meta-physics do not exist here. Or anywhere. ( alternate dimensions, telepathy, telekinesis, elemental transmutations ... such as turning straw into gold ... super-natural events and occurences, etc. )

28. Time travel is not possible due to the physical constraints ( laws ) of space.

29. The same materials ( atoms ) that comprise 'our' end of the universe comprise the 'other' end too.

30. The visible/local universe is not 'teeming' with life.

31. The current generally accepted theoretical cosmological model of the universe ( THE ONE AND ONLY 'big bang' ) has critical and insurmountable flaws.

32. A variety of circumstances and beliefs are in play that force 'mainstream' science to ignore observations and experimental evidence that contradict the accepted theory.

33. Each new contradictory discovery that can not be ignored by 'mainstream' science is explained 'after the fact' through the use of manufactured 'hypotheticals'.

34. The current 'big bang' model relies ( in part ) on the extremely unlikely future creation of purely speculative 'new' physics.

35. The current 'big bang' model has failed to make a substantive, accurate prediction. Ever.

36. My model solves all the 'problems' inherent in the current model using proven, existing physics.

Recapping ... These rational, logical conclusions are based on every bit of scientific evidence currently available.

They are devoid of dreams, opinions, wishes, agendas, hopes, beliefs, supernatural entities, or any other unproven, or purely speculative, or hypothetical possibility.

This is the state of our knowledge to date.

 

[Big Black Dog]

If I sit down and memorize all of this stuff, is there anything else I need to know to be a complete human life form?

 

[pywakit]

Nope. Lol.

 

[rdean]

An objective, rational examination of all current scientific knowledge ( math, physics, chemistry, paleontology, experiments, observations, SETI, etc. ) tells us that .....


1. The human form is very special. 'We' are not.

2. There is an astronomically small likelihood that molecular combinations other than DNA produce life.

3. Radio-capable life is extremely rare in the visible/local universe.

4. There is a very high probability that the only radio-capable life is identical in form to us.

5. The ACTUAL universe is infinite.

6. The ACTUAL universe is eternal.

7. The 'big bang' was not a unique event in the universe.

8. The 'big bang' is actually a black hole ( ultra-dense star ) having achieved critical mass.

9. The amount of mass necessary FOR a 'big bang' is equal to the mass that came FROM the 'big bang'.

10. The process is a 'closed loop'. No atom escapes.

11. The process has gone on since 'the beginning of time' .... And will continue forever.

12. The properties of space preclude such events from overlapping.

13. An infinite number of 'big bangs' are occuring as I write this.

14. The observed properties of matter preclude 'infinite' smallness.

15. The observed properties of matter preclude 'infinite' denseness.

16. The observed properties of matter preclude 'infinitely large'.

17. 'Materializing' sub-Planck particles 'borrow' energy from the fabric of space and last about a billionth of a second.

18. Matter above Planck size does not materialize at all ... anywhere within the visible/local universe.

19. Black holes ... and their main effect ( creation of matter/finite universe ) ... are borrowed energy from 'infinite' space.

20. There is no evidence of 'dark matter'. Purely hypothetical.

21. There is no evidence of 'dark energy'. Purely hypothetical.

22. The observed properties of infinite space, and matter preclude 'other' universes from operating under completely different physics.

23. There is an extremely high probability that all 'finite' universes ... infinite in number ... function in exactly the same manner as 'our' universe.

24. Time and space did not begin with the arrival of 'our' universe. ( redundant )

25. Super-physics/super-technology do not exist. Not here. Not anywhere. ( FTL travel )

26. A worm hole harnessed to enable biological species to leap light years is not possible in the physical universe. ( mathematical probability/certainty does not equate to actually existing in the physical universe )

27. Meta-physics do not exist here. Or anywhere. ( alternate dimensions, telepathy, telekinesis, elemental transmutations ... such as turning straw into gold ... super-natural events and occurences, etc. )

28. Time travel is not possible due to the physical constraints ( laws ) of space.

29. The same materials ( atoms ) that comprise 'our' end of the universe comprise the 'other' end too.

30. The visible/local universe is not 'teeming' with life.

31. The current generally accepted theoretical cosmological model of the universe ( THE ONE AND ONLY 'big bang' ) has critical and insurmountable flaws.

32. A variety of circumstances and beliefs are in play that force 'mainstream' science to ignore observations and experimental evidence that contradict the accepted theory.

33. Each new contradictory discovery that can not be ignored by 'mainstream' science is explained 'after the fact' through the use of manufactured 'hypotheticals'.

34. The current 'big bang' model relies ( in part ) on the extremely unlikely future creation of purely speculative 'new' physics.

35. The current 'big bang' model has failed to make a substantive, accurate prediction. Ever.

36. My model solves all the 'problems' inherent in the current model using proven, existing physics.

Recapping ... These rational, logical conclusions are based on every bit of scientific evidence currently available.

They are devoid of dreams, opinions, wishes, agendas, hopes, beliefs, supernatural entities, or any other unproven, or purely speculative, or hypothetical possibility.

This is the state of our knowledge to date.

1. The human form is very special. 'We' are not.

2. There is an astronomically small likelihood that molecular combinations other than DNA produce life.

3. Radio-capable life is extremely rare in the visible/local universe.

4. There is a very high probability that the only radio-capable life is identical in form to us.

Not very well thought out. We are special. Why would you think we aren't? NOTE: Fossils indicated that some dinosaurs might already have been filling the "niche" we currently inhabit. Standing upright, large brain, opposable thumb.

Some scientist have wondered why silicone based life wouldn't work as well as carbon. Something to consider.

The universe is billions of years old. Radio capable life might be very common,. It's just that when one civilization ends, another doesn't rise for a million years and they have lost that opportunity for communication like strangers in the night. Two lovers passing.

 

[blu]

20 got proved wrong today. 21 will be proved wrong soon. 28 is wrong. 35 is wrong

 

[pywakit]

An objective, rational examination of all current scientific knowledge ( math, physics, chemistry, paleontology, experiments, observations, SETI, etc. ) tells us that .....


1. The human form is very special. 'We' are not.

2. There is an astronomically small likelihood that molecular combinations other than DNA produce life.

3. Radio-capable life is extremely rare in the visible/local universe.

4. There is a very high probability that the only radio-capable life is identical in form to us.

5. The ACTUAL universe is infinite.

6. The ACTUAL universe is eternal.

7. The 'big bang' was not a unique event in the universe.

8. The 'big bang' is actually a black hole ( ultra-dense star ) having achieved critical mass.

9. The amount of mass necessary FOR a 'big bang' is equal to the mass that came FROM the 'big bang'.

10. The process is a 'closed loop'. No atom escapes.

11. The process has gone on since 'the beginning of time' .... And will continue forever.

12. The properties of space preclude such events from overlapping.

13. An infinite number of 'big bangs' are occuring as I write this.

14. The observed properties of matter preclude 'infinite' smallness.

15. The observed properties of matter preclude 'infinite' denseness.

16. The observed properties of matter preclude 'infinitely large'.

17. 'Materializing' sub-Planck particles 'borrow' energy from the fabric of space and last about a billionth of a second.

18. Matter above Planck size does not materialize at all ... anywhere within the visible/local universe.

19. Black holes ... and their main effect ( creation of matter/finite universe ) ... are borrowed energy from 'infinite' space.

20. There is no evidence of 'dark matter'. Purely hypothetical.

21. There is no evidence of 'dark energy'. Purely hypothetical.

22. The observed properties of infinite space, and matter preclude 'other' universes from operating under completely different physics.

23. There is an extremely high probability that all 'finite' universes ... infinite in number ... function in exactly the same manner as 'our' universe.

24. Time and space did not begin with the arrival of 'our' universe. ( redundant )

25. Super-physics/super-technology do not exist. Not here. Not anywhere. ( FTL travel )

26. A worm hole harnessed to enable biological species to leap light years is not possible in the physical universe. ( mathematical probability/certainty does not equate to actually existing in the physical universe )

27. Meta-physics do not exist here. Or anywhere. ( alternate dimensions, telepathy, telekinesis, elemental transmutations ... such as turning straw into gold ... super-natural events and occurences, etc. )

28. Time travel is not possible due to the physical constraints ( laws ) of space.

29. The same materials ( atoms ) that comprise 'our' end of the universe comprise the 'other' end too.

30. The visible/local universe is not 'teeming' with life.

31. The current generally accepted theoretical cosmological model of the universe ( THE ONE AND ONLY 'big bang' ) has critical and insurmountable flaws.

32. A variety of circumstances and beliefs are in play that force 'mainstream' science to ignore observations and experimental evidence that contradict the accepted theory.

33. Each new contradictory discovery that can not be ignored by 'mainstream' science is explained 'after the fact' through the use of manufactured 'hypotheticals'.

34. The current 'big bang' model relies ( in part ) on the extremely unlikely future creation of purely speculative 'new' physics.

35. The current 'big bang' model has failed to make a substantive, accurate prediction. Ever.

36. My model solves all the 'problems' inherent in the current model using proven, existing physics.

Recapping ... These rational, logical conclusions are based on every bit of scientific evidence currently available.

They are devoid of dreams, opinions, wishes, agendas, hopes, beliefs, supernatural entities, or any other unproven, or purely speculative, or hypothetical possibility.

This is the state of our knowledge to date.

1. The human form is very special. 'We' are not.

2. There is an astronomically small likelihood that molecular combinations other than DNA produce life.

3. Radio-capable life is extremely rare in the visible/local universe.

4. There is a very high probability that the only radio-capable life is identical in form to us.

Not very well thought out.

Sorry.

We are special. Why would you think we aren't?

Why would you think we are?

NOTE: Fossils indicated that some dinosaurs might already have been filling the "niche" we currently inhabit. Standing upright, large brain, opposable thumb.

Really? Dinosaurs lived for 100s of millions of years. Never built a radio. Never even built a wheel. Homosapiens did it in less than 300,000 years.

Some scientist have wondered why silicone based life wouldn't work as well as carbon. Something to consider.

Why? It's pure speculation. I could just as easily speculate that fairies run the universe. There is no evidence of silicone based life anywhere, and we have plenty of nice spots right here in our own solar system where silicone based life could flourish.

The universe is billions of years old. Radio capable life might be very common,. It's just that when one civilization ends, another doesn't rise for a million years and they have lost that opportunity for communication like strangers in the night. Two lovers passing.

I'm thinking you can't grasp the actual size of our galaxy, let alone the number of stars within 8 billion light years. If radio life was common, as you suggest, then SETI would have had an earful from the moment it was switched on. Oddly, the scientists at SETI made the same hypothesises you have, and they were pretty darn certain we would catch a signal FORTY FIVE TO FIFTY YEARS AGO.

 

[pywakit]

20 got proved wrong today. 21 will be proved wrong soon. 28 is wrong. 35 is wrong

Proved is a rather strong word. There are many reasons for astrophysicists to want to make such a claim. This evidence is not 'conclusive' regardless of how much they want to believe it. There are still many other possible reasons for the results. Including reasons they simply haven't thought of yet.

That said, the new evidence certainly lends credence to the theory. So let's put a strongly worded disclaimer on #20. Ok?

I must disagree with you on #21. Please provide your evidence. I can find none.

Are you aware that time travel ( #28 ) is also FTL travel, and to do so you must calculate the exact location in time AND the corresponding point in space you wish to travel to?

This from another forum ... Yes, I wrote it.

Time travel is impossible.

It is irrelevant whether or not the physics suggests it is possible.

Here's the most critical reason why.

The sun is moving THROUGH space relative to the galactic arm at around 20 kilometers per second.

Our galactic spiral arm is moving THROUGH space at about 220 kilometers per second relative to the center of the galaxy.

Earth is moving THROUGH space relative to the sun at about 30 kilometers per second.

Earth is spinning at about .5 kilometer per second at the equator.

We do not 'take' space along with us. We move THROUGH it.

If you were to travel back in time just 1 second in the past, you would find yourself at a completely different location.

Perhaps a couple hundred kilometers underground. Or out in space.

10 minutes in the past puts you a hell of a long way from Earth.

Not only does your machine have to transport you through time, but it must move you physically to another location.

500 years in the past? 34,689,600,000 kilometers from your starting location.

Hmmmm. Wonder what the energy requirements are to move 200 pounds about 35 billion kilometers instantaneously?

Better make sure your airbag is functional, and buckle your seatbelt. Tight.

Good luck!

Darn it. I made another error. Multiply that 35 billion by 550 kps. That's the speed of the Milky Way galaxy, relative to the cosmic backround radiation.

Hmmm. Let's see. That would be about 19,250,000,000,000 kilometers from your original location in space on that 500 year journey into the past.

I'm going to say that is about 20 lightyears. Instantaneously. My math is probably not very accurate. But you get the point.

Interesting, isn't it that time travel is also faster-than-light travel.

Hope the other end of your worm hole has GPS.

Not looking very promising .....

Mathematical probability/certainty does not equate to ACTUAL reality.

As far as #35 goes the adjective is 'substantive'. Why do you think they are freaking out over supermassive black holes? Even if Hawking's hypothesis ( untested still, after 30 plus years ) were true, there are a host of other problems with it. And where exactly did they say the BB got it's mass?

Would you care to provide a 'substantive prediction' correctly made by the current BB model? I don't think it predicted isotropic/homogenous space. I don't think it predicted supermassive black holes. I don't think it predicted CMBR. I don't think it predicted hydrogen/helium levels. I don't think it predicted merging black holes.

 

[midcan5]

What we know now.

We think we know.
We live a short time.
We are alive now.
We breath.
We age and change.
We learn.
We don't learn.
We believe something.
We don't believe something.
We like pleasure.
We don't like pain.
We eat.
We defecate.
We pollute.
We get sick.
We sleep.
We dream.
We have sex.
We enjoy children.
We love certain things.
We hate certain things.
We see change.
We will die.
The earth is small.
The universe large.
The sun will die.
We think we know.

 

[uscitizen]

Everything you know is wrong!

 

[☭proletarian☭]

An objective, rational examination of all current scientific knowledge ( math, physics, chemistry, paleontology, experiments, observations, SETI, etc. ) tells us that .....


1. The human form is very special.

How so?

'We' are not

No? I happen to think our techonolgy, science, and philosophy is quite special.

2. There is an astronomically small likelihood that molecular combinations other than DNA produce life.

How do you figure?

3. Radio-capable life is extremely rare in the visible/local universe.

clarify

4. There is a very high probability that the only radio-capable life is identical in form to us.

how do you figure?

5. The ACTUAL universe is infinite.

Where'd you hear that?

6. The ACTUAL universe is eternal.

perhaps, but that's a theory and not an uncontested one

7. The 'big bang' was not a unique event in the universe.

According to who?

8. The 'big bang' is actually a black hole ( ultra-dense star ) having achieved critical mass.

That's one theory

9. The amount of mass necessary FOR a 'big bang' is equal to the mass that came FROM the 'big bang'.

Maybe the mass necessary for a big bang like our own. You are aware that, according to Lambda-Colt theory, the sum total of the universe is 0, right?

11. The process has gone on since 'the beginning of time' .... And will continue forever.

Again, that's not uncontested

13. An infinite number of 'big bangs' are occuring as I write this.

Multiverse theory has yet to be 'proven'
\

18. Matter above Planck size does not materialize at all ... anywhere within the visible/local universe.

That it's yet to be seen doesn't mean it's impossible

19. Black holes ... and their main effect ( creation of matter/finite universe ) ... are borrowed energy from 'infinite' space.

Source?

20. There is no evidence of 'dark matter'. Purely hypothetical.

Not quite. Google it.

21. There is no evidence of 'dark energy'. Purely hypothetical.

Theoretical, not hypothetical

22. The observed properties of infinite space, and matter preclude 'other' universes from operating under completely different physics.

How do you figure?

23. There is an extremely high probability that all 'finite' universes ... infinite in number ... function in exactly the same manner as 'our' universe.

Probability is meaningless in an infinite set of samples- everything has a 100% chance of occurring.

)

27. Meta-physics do not exist here. Or anywhere. ( alternate dimensions, telepathy, telekinesis, elemental transmutations ... such as turning straw into gold ... super-natural events and occurences, etc. )

Metaphysics is philosophy and does not 'exist' or 'not exist'

28. Time travel is not possible due to the physical constraints ( laws ) of space.

Some very educated and highly intelligent scientists disagree

29. The same materials ( atoms ) that comprise 'our' end of the universe comprise the 'other' end too.

What other end?

31. The current generally accepted theoretical cosmological model of the universe ( THE ONE AND ONLY 'big bang' ) has critical and insurmountable flaws.

Such as?

34. The current 'big bang' model relies ( in part ) on the extremely unlikely future creation of purely speculative 'new' physics.

35. The current 'big bang' model has failed to make a substantive, accurate prediction. Ever.

It's official. You have no idea what you're speaking about: Google BCBR and Red Shift

36. My model solves all the 'problems' inherent in the current model using proven, existing physics.

I highly doubt that; if that were true, it's be published in BAS and not on USMB

Recapping ... These rational, logical conclusions are based on every bit of scientific evidence currently available.

That was almost funny

 

[pywakit]

An objective, rational examination of all current scientific knowledge ( math, physics, chemistry, paleontology, experiments, observations, SETI, etc. ) tells us that .....

1. The human form is very special.

How so?

From the standpoint of technological development.

'We' are not

No? I happen to think our techonolgy, science, and philosophy is quite special.

From the standpoint of ( any ) religious beliefs.

How do you figure?

The evidence around us. In our solar system. In our universe. SETI.

clarify

SETI fully expected to detect a signal within the first few years. That presumption was based on purely speculative 'wishes' by Drake and others. There was no evidence of other molecular chains producing life, let alone RF capable life. Assuming all life would evolve to RF capability was another entirely speculative assumption not born out by the evidence in front of us.

how do you figure?

An estimated 7 billion species ( past and present ) have existed on Earth over the last 3.5 billion years. A very high percntage had 10s of millions, if not 100s of millions of years to achieve RF capability. All failed but one. Even species extremely close to us ... homo erectus and neanderthal barely got beyond fire. And if not for .00000000000001% of homosapiens, we still would not have the wheel.

Where'd you hear that?

Einstein. And observed properties of space. Astronomical data.

perhaps, but that's a theory and not an uncontested one

Only contested by those incapable of correlating all available information on the universe unfiltered by biased eyes and thought processes.

According to who?

Me. And many other respected scientists.

That's one theory

Yes. Magic is another.

Maybe the mass necessary for a big bang like our own. You are aware that, according to Lambda-Colt theory, the sum total of the universe is 0, right?

Define 'the universe'. Our finite local one, or the infinite one?

Again, that's not uncontested

True. However, there is a direct relationship between religious beliefs, and those 'contesting' this understanding of our universe.

Multiverse theory has yet to be 'proven'

And it may never be to your satisfaction. We will never be able to actually 'witness' other finite localized universes. But the evidence mounts for an 'infinite' multiverse universe.
\

That it's yet to be seen doesn't mean it's impossible

'Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence' is only valid if there is an 'absence of evidence'. We have a plethora of evidence.

Source?

Materializing sub-planck particles are strong evidence of energy inherent in the fabric of space.

Not quite. Google it.

Concede this point. But the evidence is still not conclusive. Change this one to highly probable.

Theoretical, not hypothetical

'Highly speculative' = hypothetical. There could just as easily be other rational explanations for the observed phenomena.

How do you figure?

The observed properties of space. The math. The physics. Photon studies.

Probability is meaningless in an infinite set of samples- everything has a 100% chance of occurring.

Incorrect. Mathematical probability/certainty does not equate to 'actual existence'.

Metaphysics is philosophy and does not 'exist' or 'not exist'

The physical evidence of 3.5 billion years would strongly suggest that it's a false premise.

Some very educated and highly intelligent scientists disagree

They ignore the evidence. Mathematical probability/certainty does not equate ....

What other end?[/QUOTE

]

A euphemism. There is no other 'end'. All information gathered to date tells us that the same laws of physics apply across our local universe.

Such as?

Requires 'magic' and as yet uninvented 'super physics'. No explanation of where mass for BB came from. Does not adequately explain isotropy, CMBR, average temperature, hydrogen/helium levels.

10s of thousands of the greatest minds in the world using the most sophisticated tools every devised by Man are no closer to achieving this now than when they started 90 years ago.

It's official. You have no idea what you're speaking about: Google BCBR and Red Shift

The operative word was 'substantive'. There could just as easily be other explanations for the few 'correct predictions'.

36. My model solves all the 'problems' inherent in the current model using proven, existing physics.

I highly doubt that; if that were true, it's be published in BAS and not on USMB

Illogical reasoning. You offer no rebuttal other than opinion. New ideas take time to be accepted. This one will take time, too.

Recapping ... These rational, logical conclusions are based on every bit of scientific evidence currently available.

That was almost funny

Glad you were amused. The state of our knowledge is not static. We add to it daily. It is subject to change.

My apologies for my lack of comptuer literacy. You will have to refresh your own memory on the original points which did not copy to this message.

 

[pywakit]

Everything you know is wrong!

Wish I knew her ....

Lol.

 

[Old Rocks]

I believe it was Arthur C. Clarke that stated, " The universe is not only stranger than you imagine, it is stranger than you can imagine".

Now I grew up on Asimov, Clarke, and Heinlien. And the stories of the exploration of the various planets. Then came the first probes to reach the planets, and they proved to be much more varied and stranger than anything that we had even hypothesized in science fiction.

The universe will be the same. And your 'state of knowledge' will look as revelant as stone age tribes mythology.

 

[pywakit]

I believe it was Arthur C. Clarke that stated, " The universe is not only stranger than you imagine, it is stranger than you can imagine".

Now I grew up on Asimov, Clarke, and Heinlien. And the stories of the exploration of the various planets. Then came the first probes to reach the planets, and they proved to be much more varied and stranger than anything that we had even hypothesized in science fiction.

The universe will be the same. And your 'state of knowledge' will look as revelant as stone age tribes mythology.

I also grew up with them. I hope you are right. The one difference between mythology and my 'state of knowledge' is that mythology has zero evidence to back it up. I have quite a bit of physical evidence to back up what I say. Observations. Experiments. Math. Physics. Astrophysics. Paleontology. Chemistry. Electromagnetism. Etc.

No. It's not quite the same as mythology.

Oh. By the way. Correct me if I am wrong. Don't we still use Newton's Law of Gravity? And Einstein's General Theory of Relativity? I don't think those little bits of knowledge will become quaint mythology anytime soon ...

Some things ... once you learn them ... you've learned them. Don't think we are going to improve much on Newton. Or Einstein. Not to say that we might not develop 'super physics' one day. But we will never be able to shut off gravity. Or change E=mc2.

 

[Old Rocks]

Newton did not describe gravity, he only described the mathematical consequences of gravity. Einsteins Reletivity will stand as well as Newton's equations have. At some point, we will find physical phenomona that Reletiviy will not accurately describe, and someone will think of a new model to cover these phenomona.

I simply cannot see DNA being the only solution to replication of organisms. Too many possible bifurcations in the development starting at abiogenisis.

Perhaps not mythology, but to someone even one hundred years from now, far to simplistic in many statements, and simply wrong in most.

 

[pywakit]

Newton did not describe gravity, he only described the mathematical consequences of gravity. Einsteins Reletivity will stand as well as Newton's equations have. At some point, we will find physical phenomona that Reletiviy will not accurately describe, and someone will think of a new model to cover these phenomona.

I simply cannot see DNA being the only solution to replication of organisms. Too many possible bifurcations in the development starting at abiogenisis.

Perhaps not mythology, but to someone even one hundred years from now, far to simplistic in many statements, and simply wrong in most.

Thank you for correcting me on Newton. Can't disagree with the rest of the first paragraph.

I would agree with you but for the evidence on the DNA point. Life clearly doesn't flourish on any other planets, or moons around here ... intelligent, radio capable life anyway. Single cell creatures must evolve to multi, etc. Here on earth, we have about as advantagous a conditions as you could ask for. In about 3.5 billion years, the only way life exists is with DNA. Other possible combinations had every chance to do the same, and it is a safe bet that any and all combinations came together many many times. Zero success. Only DNA out of who knows how many 'attempts'. If all these combinations were allowed in the physical universe ... the one we are getting quite familiar with, SETI would had heard a signal from the ( therefore ) trillions of intelligent species out there in the first year of operation. Just like they expected to.

Lol. I suppose I could have called it "Relections from Puget Sound". It is just a 'Well, this is what we know ... at this point in time. Always subject to new information, and therefore change.'

But feel free to find other flaws ... I'm always willing to admit when I'm wrong. I hope! Lol.

 

[Diuretic]

"Nothing really matters".

Really, it doesn't. Just relax, enjoy yourself, do no harm. Be a good person.

 

[Old Rocks]

Newton did not describe gravity, he only described the mathematical consequences of gravity. Einsteins Reletivity will stand as well as Newton's equations have. At some point, we will find physical phenomona that Reletiviy will not accurately describe, and someone will think of a new model to cover these phenomona.

I simply cannot see DNA being the only solution to replication of organisms. Too many possible bifurcations in the development starting at abiogenisis.

Perhaps not mythology, but to someone even one hundred years from now, far to simplistic in many statements, and simply wrong in most.

Thank you for correcting me on Newton. Can't disagree with the rest of the first paragraph.

I would agree with you but for the evidence on the DNA point. Life clearly doesn't flourish on any other planets, or moons around here ... intelligent, radio capable life anyway. Single cell creatures must evolve to multi, etc. Here on earth, we have about as advantagous a conditions as you could ask for. In about 3.5 billion years, the only way life exists is with DNA. Other possible combinations had every chance to do the same, and it is a safe bet that any and all combinations came together many many times. Zero success. Only DNA out of who knows how many 'attempts'. If all these combinations were allowed in the physical universe ... the one we are getting quite familiar with, SETI would had heard a signal from the ( therefore ) trillions of intelligent species out there in the first year of operation. Just like they expected to.

Lol. I suppose I could have called it "Relections from Puget Sound". It is just a 'Well, this is what we know ... at this point in time. Always subject to new information, and therefore change.'

But feel free to find other flaws ... I'm always willing to admit when I'm wrong. I hope! Lol.

Sometimes I come on too strong with my opinions.

One of the reasons that I find it unlikely that DNA is the only path to a technological species is the jolt that the creatures of the rift zones gave to both the biological and geological community. Nobody had even imagined the life that we found there, and the way that it worked.

 

[pywakit]

Newton did not describe gravity, he only described the mathematical consequences of gravity. Einsteins Reletivity will stand as well as Newton's equations have. At some point, we will find physical phenomona that Reletiviy will not accurately describe, and someone will think of a new model to cover these phenomona.

I simply cannot see DNA being the only solution to replication of organisms. Too many possible bifurcations in the development starting at abiogenisis.

Perhaps not mythology, but to someone even one hundred years from now, far to simplistic in many statements, and simply wrong in most.

Thank you for correcting me on Newton. Can't disagree with the rest of the first paragraph.

I would agree with you but for the evidence on the DNA point. Life clearly doesn't flourish on any other planets, or moons around here ... intelligent, radio capable life anyway. Single cell creatures must evolve to multi, etc. Here on earth, we have about as advantagous a conditions as you could ask for. In about 3.5 billion years, the only way life exists is with DNA. Other possible combinations had every chance to do the same, and it is a safe bet that any and all combinations came together many many times. Zero success. Only DNA out of who knows how many 'attempts'. If all these combinations were allowed in the physical universe ... the one we are getting quite familiar with, SETI would had heard a signal from the ( therefore ) trillions of intelligent species out there in the first year of operation. Just like they expected to.

Lol. I suppose I could have called it "Relections from Puget Sound". It is just a 'Well, this is what we know ... at this point in time. Always subject to new information, and therefore change.'

But feel free to find other flaws ... I'm always willing to admit when I'm wrong. I hope! Lol.

Sometimes I come on too strong with my opinions.

One of the reasons that I find it unlikely that DNA is the only path to a technological species is the jolt that the creatures of the rift zones gave to both the biological and geological community. Nobody had even imagined the life that we found there, and the way that it worked.

You are patient. Yes. DNA's tenacity is legendary. But remember, it took 3.8 billion years, and around 7 billion tries to get homosapiens. Once a species finds it's niche, it stops evolving ... or almost anyway. Our branch of the DNA tree was a very happy accident. There are/were 7 billion prior, and present examples of this. Sharks have cruised the oceans for 350 million years essentially unchanged. This is no accident. The life at the great rift will never get to radio-capable. They are happy right where they are. It is a safe bet that life is also 350 million years old ....

 

[Old Rocks]

You are patient. Yes. DNA's tenacity is legendary. But remember, it took 3.8 billion years, and around 7 billion tries to get homosapiens. Once a species finds it's niche, it stops evolving ... or almost anyway. Our branch of the DNA tree was a very happy accident. There are/were 7 billion prior, and present examples of this. Sharks have cruised the oceans for 350 million years essentially unchanged. This is no accident. The life at the great rift will never get to radio-capable. They are happy right where they are. It is a safe bet that life is also 350 million years old ....

But once started, a non-DNA based life would be subjected to the same evolutionary pressures as the life that came before us was.

And, no, I cannot imagine what the alternative base would be. More into geology than biology. Hope someone on the board has enough knowledge in this area to present some alternatives.