You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
....what do you think the reaction would be?
It would be the most significant discovery in the entire history of mankind and yet part of thinks the vast majority of people would probably just shrug their shoulders and feel rather underwhelmed. I imagine the various religious groups would find a way of incorporating the news into their own existing frameworks (rather than the other way around) and quite a few might not even acknowledge the news. Would it change the course of politics; would we start to take our own existence more seriously than we do now and actually evolve our culture beyond the facile level we exist in now?
For me it would be the final nail in the coffin for religion.
For me it would be proof that Eastenders is watched by "life"
Hmmmmmm Enchilada....
Why do you say it would be the most significant discovery in human history? Scientists have long believed that life is out there and I don't think confirmation will have much of an effect.
Long believed with zero proof though. Proof changes everything. We're alone in the universe & Earth is unique vs life exists on other planets. It's just not as dramatic as finding sentient life out there.
It would also give a better understanding of creation of life. If life can come into existence just because of the right conditions, then that really is a problem for religions.
It'll be big news, but not as big as landing on the moon (if you believe that 😉 ).
How is it the "most significant discovery in the entire history of mankind"?
Unless you're a full on religious fruitloop it's just what you'd expect isn't it? Mildly interesting but utterly irrelevant.
TBH, I don't think religions will care, they have kept going despite the obvious for centuries, this discovery won't make one iota of difference to them.
Could open up the possibility of farming it, or growing some sort of algae or fungi like quorn off planet, could help with the food crisis.
In turn of we can grow a good amount of food off planet, we could then turn farm land on earth back into forest or whatever.
Alien bacteria could have medical benefits too.
That would be a pretty big deal.
Trump would nuke them
facts will not be getting in the way of religious belief as the evidence for evolution is overwhelming
life out there will not change their opinion and most folk think its the most likely outcome if not quite inevitable.
you are taking the piss arent you?Could open up the possibility of farming it, or growing some sort of algae or fungi like quorn off planet, could help with the food crisis.
Growing food on a planet a few million miles away is hardly a cost effective solution to a food shortage
I doubt anyone who follows Arab religions or watches Love Island will give a hoot.
Not many left to care I suspect.
It won't change mainstream religion, I reckon. There's still ample room for God in current scientific knowledge. It challenges the literal content of the Bible but that's been pretty heavily challenged over the years anyway.
Theres a food shortage?
Most significant discovery in history of mankind?
Really, it's entirely predictable and rather unsurprising, but you think it is more significant than:
- Rutherfords discovery of the structure of the atom,
- the ability to yield vast amounts of energy from them by breaking them apart
- Watson and Crick discovering DNA
- Darwin explaining evolution
- Galileo pointing out we weren't at the centre of the solar system
All of those turned on their head the conventional thinking, some of them especially the thinking of the church, but you think that confirming bacteria can grow in conditions we would expect bacteria to survive will rock the church to its core? Even if you find sentient life I am sure those who wish to will explain it as being God's work/design.
😯There's still ample room for God in current scientific knowledge.
Where is the great creator accounted for within modern scientific thinking?
What we have is ample room for the religious to continue to believe despite the evidence as their view is faith based and not fact based.
Trump will rename it Planet Trump and claim he owns it and it's part of his plan to make Global warming bigly irrelevant because everyone can stay in one of his hotels there.yourguitarhero - Member
Trump would nuke them
it was copernicus and On the Revolutions of the Heavenly Bodies published mid 1500Galileo pointing out we weren't at the centre of the solar system
Most of the population would shrug and get on with their lives without giving it a second thought.
Although I suppose theres not much I could do. I already dont follow any religion so it wouldnt cast doubt on that and I cant personally go and have a look at the live so not sure what I could/would do differently?
Pales in to insignificance next to the invention of the bicycle
Junkyard - lazarus
Could open up the possibility of farming it, or growing some sort of algae or fungi like quorn off planet, could help with the food crisis.
you are taking the piss arent you?
Growing food on a planet a few million miles away is hardly a cost effective solution to a food shortage
/Sunday pedant mode
They're not planets.
/*
Genuinely I think most of the population would think "is that it?" For generations we've been told via movies and TV that aliens are little green men who are more technically advanced than us or at least vicious little bastards who'll eat you just for the sake of it.
Discovering bacterial life just highlights the 'problem' with finding intelligent life on other planets - it's not just distance, it's time - if another race visited earth just 1% of the history of Earth ago they wouldn't have found us and in another 1% we may be gone.
Junkyard, Copernicus suggested it, but it was Galileo that measured/proved it. Much like someone suggesting there might be bacteria on a distant moon, it's all just hypothesis until someone proves it.
Could open up the possibility of farming it, or growing some sort of algae or fungi like quorn off planet, could help with the food crisis.
Imagine the carbon footprint of your 'off world' Quorn snorkers!
At least a huge percentage of those emissions wouldn't affect Earth's ozone.
Work your way down the list of things that science has proven which religions ignore or distort. It's a pretty long list. This would be just another thing to ignore. Proof of intelligent life would be a game changer for many though.
There's many folk would suggest that microbial life on other planets/moons would be pretty bad news. It probably means that "life" is pretty common, and that there is possibly some event ahead of us that will destroy life on earth. (one of the reasons that perhaps there's no detectable complex life in the galaxy) Finding fossilised [i]complex[/i] life would be a end of days scenario.
Wasn't that God fella supposed to have created the universe? That would include anything living in it as well i reckon. Probably no apples on Europa so they havent evolved & disappointed him
- Rutherfords discovery of the structure of the atom,
- the ability to yield vast amounts of energy from them by breaking them apart
- Watson and Crick discovering DNA
- Darwin explaining evolution
- Galileo pointing out we weren't at the centre of the solar system
- Homer discovering a new meal time between breakfast and brunch
All the more reason for us to leave the europaean union and take back control from these faceless microbes
It'd be an ethical dilemma though- offworld colonisation is, on a long enough scale, inevitable and there'll be massive ecological/environmental considerations about that even on a lifeless world.
There's many folk would suggest that microbial life on other planets/moons would be pretty bad news. It probably means that "life" is pretty common, and that there is possibly some event ahead of us that will destroy life on earth. (one of the reasons that perhaps there's no detectable complex life in the galaxy) Finding fossilised complex life would be a end of days scenario.
This is basically the Fermi Paradox. There's a great exploration of it here, well worth a read: https://waitbutwhy.com/2014/05/fermi-paradox.html
Blips of life is the way I see it. Statistically probably billions of billions of planets with intelligent life in the universe, but with near infinite scale and maybe infinite time, none of that life happen to exist at the same time, or if they do they're at impossible distances to detect each other. And then on the scale of things, they don't last more than a blink of the eye.
I watched an interesting programme on BBC4 last week called Aliens: The Big Think.
. I think it's available on catch-up.Professor Martin Rees discusses the modern search for extra-terrestrials, and the theory that our idea of alien life is all wrong: that it's not organic life we should look for out there, but machines.
Also mentioned in the program was Drakes equation and there's a program on BBC4 tonight (11.30pm) about that, as well.
geetee1972 - MemberIf we found microbial life on Europa or Enceladus....
....what do you think the reaction would be?
They need to evolve first ...
As they evolve they will follow the path that we took ...
They need to go through stages of evolution ...
They need to turn into eggs then maggots.
Maggots into pupa. From pupa emerge the first sign of intelligence but at this stage they are zombie like.
Finally, they stop evolving at zombie maggot stage like us.
Yes, welcome to the worthless world of beings ... they are in for a rough ride.
😆
You should take your own advice.
Cougar - Moderator
You should take your own advice.
Ask yourself this question.
Can you see evolution in yourself, us or human in general?
😛
I can't see evolution in myself because I'm in my 40s, not in my six million and forties.
In humans in general, I wonder sometimes.
As they evolve they will follow the path that we took ...
You cannot possibly know that. There are far too many environmental and chemical factors that decide in which direction evolution goes.
Although it would be a momentous discovery (and I for one would be very, very excited), would the discovery of non-sentient life elsewhere in the solar system change anything?
I doubt very much that it would render religion obsolete - look at the nut jobs who insist that dinosaurs are an invention of very wealthy paleontologists, or that such things are nothing more than a test of faith. Sooner or later, some arsehole would want to drill for the inevitable oil resulting from the deaths of billions of tiny carbon-based life.
Right now, I've a very dim view of humanity, collectively.
I doubt they will be very much different, as they still need to go through the stages of being born, aged, illness (assuming they have this stage) and death. 😛mikey74 - Member
As they evolve they will follow the path that we took ...
You cannot possibly know that. There are far too many environmental and chemical factors that decide in which direction evolution goes.
Apart from the basic chemical building blocks, it's unlikely they will be have any similar proteins or nucleic acid chains to earth life, so we probably can't eat them. However, they may be able to use us as a food source and we won't have any immunity or defences at all. Yum.
chewkw - MemberCan you see evolution in yourself
I think some of us are clearly a bit further along than others
How? Immune to diseases? 😛Northwind - Member
chewkw - Member
Can you see evolution in yourself
I think some of us are clearly a bit further along than others
How? Immune to diseases?
Well yes, some people are immune to certain diseases, by some random genetic mutation.
And you can see evolution in action with viruses, the common cold for example.. And why is there a new flu vaccine every year? 😉
I think most scientific and technological breakthroughs overestimated in the short term (due to the hype) and underestimated in the long term (because it takes time to fully understand the discovery).
I'd imagine finding life on another planet would follow a similar path.
Though I don't see any reason why religion would be affected unless we discover human beings on another planet.
Whilst I agree it would be momentous, I think we would end up watching/fannying about with it so much we would affect its evolution and destroy it.
I also agree that the universe as we know it seems to be so large that statistically there would have to be self-aware beings such as us, but that time has meant that they are in a similar evolution stage as us (so cant travel to find others) or that their evolution got to a stage which they died out . . . . ( which I think we will do )
I think there will be solar systems far older than ours and therefore will have civilisations more advanced than ours.
But the theory behind the Fermi paradox suggests that civilisations can only become so advanced before they end up wiping themselves out. On that basis, the existence of civilisations far more advanced than our own is unlikely.
But the theory behind the Fermi paradox suggests that civilisations can only become so advanced before they end up wiping themselves out.
That's not what I read...
My understanding is basically the Fermi paradox is that there's so many galaxy's out there that statistically there must be conditions for life like ours or more advanced.
In which case 'where are they?'... There's no signs, at least none we're capable of measuring yet.
So as mentioned previously it might suggest that indeed species don't survive long enough to advance much beyond where we are, given the very short time we've been around and the vast distances involved, there might well be other intelligent life, it's just we'll never see it, and they us.
and maybr the clever ones that are potentially contactable aren't giving their position away to every psychopathic cylon within a thousand lightyears...by pinging them with radio eaves.
Fermi Paradox explained:
I doubt very much that it would render religion obsolete - look at the nut jobs who insist that dinosaurs are an invention of very wealthy paleontologists, or that such things are nothing more than a test of faith.
Exactly, it's the stock answer along with it's not meant to be read literally (well that bit isn't but the other bits really should be)
It will do bugger all to those who truly belive as not beliving is thew worst thing in their world.
You can try and squeeze religion into science, doesn't mean it fits or is right.
But the theory behind the Fermi paradox suggests that...On that basis, the existence of civilisations far more advanced than our own is unlikely.
It's only [i]one[/i] of the reasons why there seem to be less life than expected.
It would be the most significant discovery in the entire history of mankind
Lol no, far far from it.
The discovery of extra-terrestrial sentient life would be right up there but not microbial life.
It's only one of the reasons why there seem to be less life than expected.
Indeed, but it's a one theory that seems to be widely espoused these days.
Mikey, someone linked an explanation of the Fermi Paradox on the last page. Yours is not the only explanation it comes up with.
Lol no, far far from it.
The discovery of extra-terrestrial sentient life would be right up there but not microbial life.
As it stands, Earth is unique. The only place in the universe where life exists. Finding microbial life on another world changes that and the likelihood of intelligent life existing elsewhere. It's a massive step closer to answering the question are we alone.
Mikey, someone linked an explanation of the Fermi Paradox on the last page. Yours is not the only explanation it comes up with.
Read up more widely on the subject. It's a common theory these days. When Fermi first theorised, it was nothing more than a vague statement, which people have since expanded upon.
It's a massive step closer to answering the question are we alone.
Most people are already satisfied that we're not, I think.
As it stands, Earth is unique. The only place in the universe where life exists.
From where you stand the earth is unique, we don't have enough of a view to say if it is or not.
The statement is we do not know if this is the only planet with life on it, we do not know if we are alone. It's not something you can ever prove really.
Most people are already satisfied that we're not, I think
Discovering planets in the Goldilocks zone is one thing, life however, is another.
Discovering is only us finding out something else is out there....
As I said it's all about your perspective
These "planets" are they flat, like earth?
Never mind all that. Main thing is to get Liam Fox up there right away. Negotiating with simple unicellular extraterrestrial life but not as we know it, he might have a chance of striking some kind of deal. Or we could just send him anyway...
Discovering planets in the Goldilocks zone is one thing, life however, is another.
I wasn't talking about the planet discoveries. I meant purely on stastical terms.
The Earth is 4.5bn years old, the oceans formed 4.4bn years ago and there's evidence to suggest that life formed in those oceans as early as 4bn years ago.
Even if we consider that we're only one (as yet) control sample, it's safe to say that life started here very early in the planet's history and took three billions years to evolve into the earliest known multicellular life forms. Estimates suggest that in all that time, there have been over five billion distinct species.
The subterranean oceans of the satellites of Jupiter or Saturn will be colder, with less readily available energy (unless of course we discover geothermal activity on these moons, which in itself creates problems with highly localised evolution) creates some problems for evolution. My cynicism the other day notwithstanding, it's a hugely exciting area of research.
Lol no, far far from it.The discovery of extra-terrestrial sentient life would be right up there but not microbial life.
I'm genuinely surprised that so many people profess that they would regard the confirmation of microbial life somewhere other than earth to be a fairly lowly discovery. Of course I agree that finding evidence of intelligent life would be far more monumental but a second genesis, particularly in the solar system, would change our beliefs far beyond almost anything else we’ve discovered so far. Note I use the word ‘belief’ here rather than understanding. They are quite different I think.
It’s also terribly ironic (given the number of refutations against religious faith) that the basis for such a blasé attitude towards the discovery of life elsewhere appears to be itself based on a notion of ‘faith’, i.e. a complete trust in something (or someone) without any supporting evidence. This is not like how people claim that the belief in dark matter or dark energy is based on faith, since we have data that supports this hypothesis.
So far we have not one iota of evidence for any kind of life anywhere other than on earth. So accepting that we cannot possible be the only genesis, that life must exist somewhere else, is based on faith. Perhaps it is a faith derived from logic, i.e. it’s not logical to conclude that we are the only life in the universe as the chance appear to be remote, but it is still faith since no data or mathematical modelling exists to support the hypothesis. If we could demonstrate how life began, if we could replicate it, then mathematically we could begin to posit that statistically speaking, life is inevitable given the right conditions.
If we found microbial life on Europa or Enceladus, that would turn the hypothesis into fact and our modelling for life elsewhere would cease to be based purely on faith; it would become fact and for that reason alone it would be monumental.
One other point about the degree to which intelligent life can continue; from the reading I’ve done, the most interesting (and perhaps troubling) theory is indeed the notion that in this universe at least, the opportunity for intelligent life to prosper is limited. The idea suggests there might be a delta between the speed with which intelligence evolves and the rate at which the host planet’s resources are consumed. The result is that at some point before a species’ technology has evolved sufficiently to free it from the constraints of the host planet, that host planets resources expire and the species dies out (or else in the competition for resources, the species self-destructs).
This evolution represents the transition from a Type 1 to a Type 2 civilisation and is one of the possible explanations for the Fermi Paradox.
Most people are already satisfied that we're not, I think.
But without proof, this isn't any different to any other unproven belief. A bit like religion really.
A little while ago there was no proof that planets existed around other stars. Now we take it for granted. That discovery didn't make much a difference to most people but I think, over the long term, discovery of extra terrestrial life will make a huge difference to our outlook as a race.
unless of course we discover geothermal activity on these moons, which in itself creates problems with highly localised evolution
Are those not just the 'spark' needed to get life started though? Organisms evolve into more complex life and become self contained, like mammals for eg, we need water to survive but were not aquatic
Very well written post GeeTee1972, enjoyed reading that.
I'm genuinely surprised that so many people profess that they would regard the confirmation of microbial life somewhere other than earth to be a fairly lowly discovery.
I think really massive scientific discoveries require a leap in imagination or a big change in our world view not just an extension of existing knowledge.
We already know that microbial life can survive in pretty extreme conditions on Earth so it's not really a leap in imagination to think of it existing on other planets.
Organisms evolve into more complex life and become self contained
I may be wrong, but evolution doesn't just happen does it? Isn't it a result of outside factors meaning that certain mutations are more likely to survive and pass on those mutations. If those ecosystems are perfectly balanced and never change, those microbes in the moons of Saturn won't evolve into anything else. They'll remain happy little microbes for all eternity.
If it were the same or similar to life on Earth, this would be fascinating and joyous, but it would not overturn anything. We already know that this is possible and possibly likely.
If it were a compeltely different concept of self replicating organism, this would be intellectually incredible, but again not do much for the fundamentals of society.
Contact with an alien civilization, the proverbial spaceship on the White House lawn, THAT is the bombshell I'm looking forward to 🙂 We might be disappointed though. The known laws of physics seem to suggest that long distance interstellar travel in a sensible time frame is not really possible or practical - it's only science fiction that makes us think these problems can be overcome. And it only does that as a plot device.
I suspect the lack of aliens on Earth is because of that.
If those ecosystems are perfectly balanced and never change, those microbes in the moons of Saturn won't evolve into anything else. They'll remain happy little microbes for all eternity.
No, cos there's always competition with other individuals. A positive mutation will allow you to out-compete your neighbours and prosper even if the environment stays the same.
I think it would be incredible.
As geetee has posted above, there is a great deal of difference between a statistical model of how likely we expect life to be in the universe and actual concrete evidence of life occurring elsewhere. It would be an extraordinary discovery.
the known laws of physics seem to suggest that long distance interstellar travel in a sensible time frame is not really possible or practical - it's only science fiction that makes us think these problems can be overcome. And it only does that as a plot device.I suspect the lack of aliens on Earth is because of that.
Yes, but it still doesn't explain the lack of Von Neumann probes or the fact that we've never detected a Type II civilization (which should be fairly easy to spot with telescopes)
If we found life elsewhere in the solar system it might go some way to answering questions about whether the "Great Filter" is ahead or behind us.
back to the original statement, "if..."
imho we wont
Are those not just the 'spark' needed to get life started though? Organisms evolve into more complex life and become self contained, like mammals for eg, we need water to survive but were not aquatic
Ordinarily, yes but you need to consider that geothermal vents would be highly localised pockets of energy, in an otherwise very cold sea with very little background heat energy to support life. Moreover, the locations of any geothermal vents wouldn't be fixed, as they do on Earth, these vents would periodically 'move' over time or shut down completely depending on the underlying vulcanism. On Earth, continental drift means that geothermal vents are never in a fixed position for long.
We already know that microbial life can survive in pretty extreme conditions on Earth so it's not really a leap in imagination to think of it existing on other planets.
This is true, but it still resides purely in our imagination; there's not data to suggest it's true.
That said I think you make an excellent point about the delta between orthodoxy and radical discovery; perhaps discovering life that is based on entirely new biochemistry that hadn't previously been anticipated would do that (though keep in mind that there are already several models for alternatives to carbon based biochemistry).
Of course, perhaps the most radical discovery would indeed be technology based life, i.e. encoded or simulated life rather than bio-mechanical life, but then we are back into the discovery of intelligent life versus non-intelligent life, which would indeed be a whole order of magnitude more incredible.
or the fact that we've never detected a Type II civilization (which should be fairly easy to spot with telescopes)
Well not one that we have recognised as such; have you been following he developments with 'Tabby's Star'/'Boyajian Star'? No one is saying it's aliens of course but it's fascinating nevertheless and illustrates the difficulty of being able to recognise what might be right in front of you.
Very well written post GeeTee1972, enjoyed reading that.
That was unexpected but thank you all the same!
You'd be talking about a different lifeform, though - life on earth is essentially built out of four primary metabolites - protein, nucelic acids, carbohydrates, and fat. If the extraterrestial microbe was also made from identical building blocks, that in itself would be hugely significant, but not offer great scope for directly learning anything new.Spin - MemberI'm genuinely surprised that so many people profess that they would regard the confirmation of microbial life somewhere other than earth to be a fairly lowly discovery.
I think really massive scientific discoveries require a leap in imagination or a big change in our world view not just an extension of existing knowledge.
If it were different, though, even subtly so, then we would have new metabolism / replication / structures for life - it would be earth-stopping for science.
Philosophically speaking it might not be the best news in the world, as others have said. Only a microbe, though, so we'd still be in with a chance of having escaped The Great Filter.