Would life on Mars change your world view?

[HankB]

Anyone that says dog's don't go to heaven can take their flawed theology and GTFO  .   There's no way to share your life with a dog and think it's only a meat robot with no soul.

[Andiron]

Today I learned I'm Catholic.

Thanks HankB!

[MechAg94]

Funny, but the letters don't look real at all. 

[Perd Hapley]

The notion that extraterrestrial life would somehow invalidate religious teachings (or at least Christian ones) is groundless.

I'm genuinely interested in the theological reasons. I'm just a half-assed Catholic, and my beliefs are probably not in line with the church. However, when I look up into the night sky, my thought is, "God is a pretty smart guy. Why would he waste billions of planets?"

Even if human Earthlings* are the only intelligent critters, that's no reason to believe that a billion empty planets, even habitable ones, are wasted. God doesn't need to put life all over the universe to justify His Creation. If, as the Bible suggests, God has an especial love for the creatures of Earth, that may be all the reason He needs to create all those petty baubles beyond our atmosphere. Just to give us cool stuff to look at, or think about.


*Well, humans and angels.

[MechAg94]

The number of stars in our galaxy is beyond the capacity of the human mind to grasp.
To imagine that our world is the only place where life has sprung would be disheartening.

I also tend to favor the Silurian Hypothesis. It seems every year more and more "ancient" stuff comes to light and some of the explanations for some of the ancient sights so far discovered don't ring for me.
As for what we know, the Earth is some 4.5 billion years old (according to science). The oldest civilization we can confirm is around 50,000 years, (Australian Aborigines). With Mesopotamia being a distant 2nd at about 7500-8000 years old.
That's a lot of time for things to rise and fall between point A and now.

Do you have a link for the 50,000 years?  I would like to see that.

I agree more or less.  I think there is a lot we don't know and I figure there is also a lot we think we know that might not be true. 

[makattak]

The number of stars in our galaxy is beyond the capacity of the human mind to grasp.
To imagine that our world is the only place where life has sprung would be disheartening.

I also tend to favor the Silurian Hypothesis. It seems every year more and more "ancient" stuff comes to light and some of the explanations for some of the ancient sights so far discovered don't ring for me.
As for what we know, the Earth is some 4.5 billion years old (according to science). The oldest civilization we can confirm is around 50,000 years, (Australian Aborigines). With Mesopotamia being a distant 2nd at about 7500-8000 years old.
That's a lot of time for things to rise and fall between point A and now.

I'm not fully versed in the numbers on this, so this is just my poor recollection, but I believe that while there may be billions of stars, it takes more than a planet circling a star, even in the "habitable zone" of the star to provide the conditions for life.

Not only does it have to be in the "habitable zone" of the star for water to exist in liquid form (for life as we know it to exist), the star itself also has to be in a "habitable zone" of the galaxy. The center of the galaxy is theorized to emit radiation that makes anything within the inner radius of the galaxy inhospitable to life. Further, certain areas of the galaxy are lacking a proper mass of elements (like iron, carbon, oxygen, etc...) to form habitable planets.

Effectively, while the may be billions of stars, it may turn out that only a very few are capable of forming planets and even fewer of those planets are capable of supporting life.

The numbers suggest that Earth being unique (at least in this galaxy- I'm not sure how the numbers work as we move universe-wide) is actually a pretty high probability.

[MillCreek]

^^^As our imaging and detection technology has improved, I have been interested to see the list of potentially life-supporting exoplanets increase: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_potentially_habitable_exoplanets

In years past, there was a lot of thought in the astronomy community that Earth may be the only 'Goldilocks' planet where everything was 'just right' for the development of life; I think that concern has lessened considerably in recent years.

[AJ Dual]

I won't be shocked if we find simple life on Mars or Europa, Enceladus etc. I'd be rather surprised if we find multi-cellular complex life anywhere else in the Solar System.

JWST will just be on the cusp of getting exoplanetary atmospheric spectra that could detect ratios of water, oxygen, carbon dioxide, and methane that aren't easily explainable by anything other than life.

There's probably a trillion plus planets in the Milky Way. And billions of those are going to be in the liquid water goldilocks zone.  However, when you factor in all the leaps and chances that have happened on Earth, and if a few of them are 1:1000 odds or worse, Eukaryotes to Prokaryotes, multi-cellular life, complex life, sexual reproduction, selection pressure for brains, then tools, then technology... then you can still run out of planets, and the answer to the Drake Equation can still be N=1...

We're also quite early in the age of the Universe. In terms of how long stars will last, or be around, we're not even 5% of the way into the stelliferous era. And much of the 12-13 billion years of the Universe's evolution hasn't been conducive to life. Waiting on Population II and III stars to get enough heavy elements to form planets and complex chemistry, the galaxies central black holes settling down and clearing out the core so they stopped spewing radiation in all directions, then the 4.3 billion years Earth has taken to come up with us could be about average, granted we've only got one data point, and we don't know if the dinosaurs were arguing about funding DASA. (Dinosaur Aeronautics and Space Agency) Although certain unnatural isotopic ratios would survive to this day if there was a technological civilization on Earth 65 million years ago. So it's probably likely we're the first.

We might be among the first everywhere, the "ancients" charged with farming the galaxy and seeding life elsewhere. Might be our mandate. Being "first" and "alone" is just as profound as finding out we've got neighbors IMO.

[Ben]

We're also quite early in the age of the Universe. In terms of how long stars will last, or be around, we're not even 5% of the way into the stelliferous era. And much of the 12-13 billion years of the Universe's evolution hasn't been conducive to life.

To that, the planets we're looking at as conducive to life are being looked at as conducive to life NOW. The Earth wasn't exactly conducive to our type of life 3 billion years ago. Those Goldilocks planets will come and go over billions and billions of years*. We're talking time frames that none of us can truly comprehend.

*And of course, we're basing "Goldilocks" on life as we know it. Life may spring up in ways we just don't yet understand.

[AJ Dual]

To that, the planets we're looking at as conducive to life are being looked at as conducive to life NOW. The Earth wasn't exactly conducive to our type of life 3 billion years ago. Those Goldilocks planets will come and go over billions and billions of years*. We're talking time frames that none of us can truly comprehend.

*And of course, we're basing "Goldilocks" on life as we know it. Life may spring up in ways we just don't yet understand.

I'm in the camp that "Life as we know it" will probably revolve around the liquid point of water, carbon chemistry DNA/RNA etc.  There isn't another "water hole" of good chemistry that provides an analogue for the needed complexity. The other candidates are all too cold and slow, or too hot and high pressure and energetic for lasting structures.

And further, that if there's any other intelligent tool-using life that's got a chance at creating technology and making it to space, it'll be terrestrial, oxygen atmosphere etc. and must have something like hands and eyes. Because they'll need fire. They'll need complexity, and they'll need eyes to see what's above them out in space to want to go there.

If we find them first, we'll be the advanced ones, hopefully we're kind and have empathy still.

And they might look like a polar bear crossed with a squid, due to a completely different selection process and evolutionary pressures, but I'd wager a biologist wouldn't be shocked by what they see of them under a microscope, and an engineer won't be shocked by their technology, both only mildly bemused by the minor details IMO.

[AZRedhawk44]

Aside from what we percieve as "life" and "inert" objects, I wouldn't be surprised if, at some point humanity becomes trans-stellar, we discover something that is neither alive nor inert.  Unquantifiable by our metrics, yet impressive and meriting our respect anyways.

[MechAg94]

I'm in the camp that "Life as we know it" will probably revolve around the liquid point of water, carbon chemistry DNA/RNA etc.  There isn't another "water hole" of good chemistry that provides an analogue for the needed complexity. The other candidates are all too cold and slow, or too hot and high pressure and energetic for lasting structures.

And further, that if there's any other intelligent tool-using life that's got a chance at creating technology and making it to space, it'll be terrestrial, oxygen atmosphere etc. and must have something like hands and eyes. Because they'll need fire. They'll need complexity, and they'll need eyes to see what's above them out in space to want to go there.

If we find them first, we'll be the advanced ones, hopefully we're kind and have empathy still.

And they might look like a polar bear crossed with a squid, due to a completely different selection process and evolutionary pressures, but I'd wager a biologist wouldn't be shocked by what they see of them under a microscope, and an engineer won't be shocked by their technology, both only mildly bemused by the minor details IMO.

On the technology, I am not sure about that.  I think there would be a lot of "Why didn't we think of that" type moments involving different ways to come to the same solution.  They might also have different needs which mean pursuing certain technologies further.  I think that would go both directions. 

As far as anything else, who knows.  We only recently got high resolution pictures of Pluto and realized there were things we didn't know.  That was just a quick pass by a newer probe with a better camera.  Who knows what we will find when we have the capability to fly out there and put boots on the ground. 

[Perd Hapley]

On the technology, I am not sure about that.  I think there would be a lot of "Why didn't we think of that" type moments involving different ways to come to the same solution.  They might also have different needs which mean pursuing certain technologies further.  I think that would go both directions. 

As far as anything else, who knows.  We only recently got high resolution pictures of Pluto and realized there were things we didn't know.  That was just a quick pass by a newer probe with a better camera.  Who knows what we will find when we have the capability to fly out there and put boots on the ground. 

I predict we'll find a Starbucks, a CVS, and somebody selling CBD and essential oils.

[makattak]

I predict we'll find a Starbucks, a CVS, and somebody selling CBD and essential oils.

Are you kidding me? Do you know how long it takes to travel in space?

We'll find a Blockbuster, a Sears, and someone selling Tupperware and Encyclopedias.

[MechAg94]

Are you kidding me? Do you know how long it takes to travel in space?

We'll find a Blockbuster, a Sears, and someone selling Tupperware and Encyclopedias.

No Bibles?

[RoadKingLarry]

No Bibles?

Jehovah's Witnesses.

[charby]

I'd be curious who the ET's worship as their god.

[MechAg94]

I'd be curious who the ET's worship as their god.

God of course.  Duh.

[charby]

God of course.  Duh.

Just like the indigenous people of the Americas?

[MechAg94]

Just like the indigenous people of the Americas?

Their version of same once translated.  Don't people say Allah means "God" in English?

[RoadKingLarry]

Of course we can't forget Dejah Thoris...

https://video.search.yahoo.com/yhs/search?hsimp=yhs-att_001&hspart=att&p=Deja+thoris#id=1&vid=3c86b6337caac34e9359247fd2a1c9ad&action=view

[Ron]

Yes it would change.

Currently we only can confirm biological life in one place, it would then change to two places.

It wouldn't surprise me if God has biological life all over the universe ... or that only earth has life.

Other life bearing places are a factually unknown and only exist in the realm of conjecture as far as we know, now.

All we have are imaginations and probabilities based upon very limited information as inputs.

I suspect we won't find et life in my lifetime but it would be fascinating if we did.

[charby]

Their version of same once translated.  Don't people say Allah means "God" in English?

I can't think of very many indigenous American nations that practiced Monotheism before the Europeans showed up. 

[MechAg94]

I can't think of very many indigenous American nations that practiced Monotheism before the Europeans showed up.  

So that translates to aliens how?  

I like the C.S. Lewis idea in Out of the Silent Plant.  

[charby]

So that translates to aliens how?  

That a civilization removed from Western Christianity, may have different god or gods or entirely different belief system then your own.