The big question about life on other planets: 1000000000000000000000 planets in the universe

[toobfreak]

Because most models only have the cores of a "standard planet" lasting from 2-3 billion years before it solidifies.

Standard models? Boy, what is proven wrong more often than our standard models? Of all the exoplanets we have actually found, we are discovering that most rocky worlds tend to be LARGER than the Earth--- much larger. The Earth is a rather puny thing as far as typical rocky worlds are concerned. So planets capable of holding magnetic fields for many billions of years must be rather commonplace across the galaxy.

 

[Mushroom]

RUBBISH. After the surface of the Earth sufficiently cooled and solidified, it took life here only about 200,000 years to emerge as prokaryotes, and only about another 1.5 billion years for eukaryotes, mitochondrial organelles and chloroplasts (the beginnings of multicellular, specialized cellular life) to emerge.

You are aware that we do not know that, right? That original "Earth Mark I" vanished about 4.5 gya. And your timeline is more than a little off. eukaryotes evolved around 2.1–1.6 gya, not the 3+ gya you are claiming. And it was about 3.5 gya that blue-green algae developed, almost a billion years after your "200,000 year" claim.

Go back and look at some science books. I doubt you will find any that claim that blue-green algae (prokaryotes) evolved some 4.49 gya.

 

[Mushroom]

So planets capable of holding magnetic fields for many billions of years must be rather commonplace across the galaxy.

True, Mars had one for billions of years, as did Venus. But both are cold now.

The Earth is largely a lucky accident, which is why our core will still be active when the planet is absorbed by the sun in a few billion more years.

 

[Mushroom]

Standard models? Boy, what is proven wrong more often than our standard models?

So you just react all scientific beliefs, and just make your own up as you go along. Got it.

 

[Uncensored2008]

You just commemted on how all of our observations and theory all point to the occurrence of such an event.

Yet still, scientists don't insist with any real certainty that the Universe started as a singularity.

We only know that there was rapid inflation from an earlier, ultradense state. And no, the evidence is not just theoretical. We took a picture of it.

Correlation is not causality.

I commented on the fact that mathematical data suggests a universe that pulses. The idea that this means a singularity is pure speculation.

 

[toobfreak]

You are aware that we do not know that, right? That original "Earth Mark I" vanished about 4.5 gya.

Yes, that impact reset the clock all over from the beginning, so you don't get to ADD that time to that coming after.

And your timeline is more than a little off. eukaryotes evolved around 2.1–1.6 gya, not the 3+ gya you are claiming.

Eukaryotes emerged a little over 2 billion years ago, about 1.6 billion years after the first prokaryotes.

And it was about 3.5 gya that blue-green algae developed, almost a billion years after your "200,000 year" claim.

I said nothing about algae much less its emerging just 200,000 years after the Earth cooled. You better go back and learn to read. That first life likely appeared on the ocean floor in the form of chemoautotrophs. Cyanobacteria like blue-green algae did not appear in the historical record until long after the first prokaryotes, about 3.4 billion years ago, which is again, just a little over a billion years since the surface could first support life, all of which conflicts with your original claim as stated.

 

[toobfreak]

True, Mars had one for billions of years, as did Venus. But both are cold now.

Yet Mercury still has one and it is smaller than some of our moons!

The Earth is largely a lucky accident,

How the fuck would you know that? Now you are just talking out of your ass.

which is why our core will still be active when the planet is absorbed by the sun in a few billion more years.

Several billion years. No one can say if our field will last that long.

 

[toobfreak]

So you just react all scientific beliefs, and just make your own up as you go along. Got it.

No, jackass, I'm just noting the obvious, that none of our models are ever very accurate to what we EXPECT, and scientists are continually surprised by what we have found as we have gone farther and farther out into space.

 

[Mushroom]

Eukaryotes emerged a little over 2 billion years ago, about 1.6 billion years after the first prokaryotes.

OK, now I have absolutely no idea where you are trying to go with this timeline. It really is skewed all over the place. That there means that according to what you just said, prokaryotes evolved at around 3.6 gya (2 gya + 1.6 gya). Which is about a billion years off of your first claim of 200kya after the formation of the planet (4.5gya-299kya).

Look, if you want to be taken seriously, how about sticking to a common timeline and not constantly shift it around at a whim?

 

[Mushroom]

Yet Mercury still has one and it is smaller than some of our moons!

Only because of tidal forces. Just as many of the moons around the gas giants. It is no longer alive because of the core itself. It is because of outside influence.

And no one can say if our field will last that long? What in the hell do you think makes our magnetic field? Fairies and happy thoughts?

You shift your own timelines at a whim, you fail to grasp some basic aspects of science, and toss insults because somebody does not agree with you. Good thing I no longer take you seriously.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I commented on the fact that mathematical data suggests a universe that pulses. The idea that this means a singularity is pure speculation.

It is speculation,no doubt.

 

[sealybobo]

It is speculation,no doubt.

This is what pisses me off about people who think there is no other life out there.

So we take a telescope and we look at another star. What do we see? Let's try this. Let's go to another star and look at our solar system. What do we see?

We don't see earth. So anyone who was looking at our solar system would see Jupiter and Saturn, maybe Neptune and Uranus and say, "no life there"

Scientists have discovered a new object orbiting a Sun-like star that had been missed by previous searches.

Extrasolar Planets News

Extrasolar Planet News. Astronomers discover extrasolar planets in a nearby star system. Could extrasolar planets support life? Images, full-text articles. Free.

www.sciencedaily.com

 

[ding]

What in the hell do you think makes our magnetic field?

Nuclear reactors?

 

[Mushroom]

This is what pisses me off about people who think there is no other life out there.

Actually, I believe life is not all that uncommon. But what likely is not out there is what most would call "Intelligent Life". No Klingons or Borg waiting behind the next nebula. I doubt that more than a handful of planets in the Milky Way Galaxy can meet all the requirements for life to evolve much past the simple aquatic multi-cellular stage.

 

[ding]

Several billion years. No one can say if our field will last that long.

It depends on who's right about the core.

 

[Unkotare]

This is what pisses me off about people who think there is no other life out there.
...

People don't know that there is other life out there. No one does.

 

[Unkotare]

You’re the king of doing that. Thinking something proves something it doesn’t.

If he's the king, you're the queen.

 

[Mushroom]

It depends on who's right about the core.

And most estimates range from 50-90 billion years. Which is a period of time significantly past the roughly 7.5 billion years when the sun will swallow the Earth.

We know that through a happy chance of fate, that our planet has a core that is roughly double that is a "traditional" planet of our size. And that additional injection of core is what gives us such a strong field, and why it will last long past any others. It is more than just the placement of a planet inside the "Goldilocks Zone", there are a great many things that have to happen in order to have life develop, and mature to anything past pond scum.

 

[Unkotare]

And most estimates range from 50-90 billion years. Which is a period of time significantly past the roughly 7.5 billion years when the sun will swallow the Earth.

We know that through a happy chance of fate, that our planet has a core that is roughly double that is a "traditional" planet of our size. And that additional injection of core is what gives us such a strong field, and why it will last long past any others. It is more than just the placement of a planet inside the "Goldilocks Zone", there are a great many things that have to happen in order to have life develop, and mature to anything past pond scum.

Like Sealybobo.

 

[ding]

And most estimates range from 50-90 billion years. Which is a period of time significantly past the roughly 7.5 billion years when the sun will swallow the Earth.

We know that through a happy chance of fate, that our planet has a core that is roughly double that is a "traditional" planet of our size. And that additional injection of core is what gives us such a strong field, and why it will last long past any others. It is more than just the placement of a planet inside the "Goldilocks Zone", there are a great many things that have to happen in order to have life develop, and mature to anything past pond scum.

It's been awhile since I looked into it but that range isn't what I remember seeing.