What set of conditions are need for life ?

so far

1 An energy source like a star

2 A Goldilocks zone in space

3 A planet of suitable size with a suitable chemical makeup.

4 Billions of years of time

5 Soil erosion and breakdown of elements into oxides

6 Water and a set of elements and chemicals

7 Electromagnetic stimulation via the planets electromagnetic field

8 Electro chemical stimulation via volcanic and atmospheric lightning

9 Constant heat from the star over billions of years

10 Gravity to hold things down

11 An atmosphere to drive weather

12 A magnetic field to protect the atmosphere

I’m after others

Tau.Neutrino said:

What set of conditions are need for life ?

so far

1 An energy source like a star

2 A Goldilocks zone in space

3 A planet of suitable size with a suitable chemical makeup.

4 Billions of years of time

5 Soil erosion and breakdown of elements into oxides

6 Water and a set of elements and chemicals

7 Electromagnetic stimulation via the planets electromagnetic field

8 Electro chemical stimulation via volcanic and atmospheric lightning

9 Constant heat from the star over billions of years

10 Gravity to hold things down

11 An atmosphere to drive weather

12 A magnetic field to protect the atmosphere

I’m after others

Decent sized moon to stabilise rotation

Jupiter type planet to capture comets, asteroids that may hit inner planets

Tau.Neutrino said:

What set of conditions are need for life ?

so far

1 An energy source like a star

2 A Goldilocks zone in space

3 A planet of suitable size with a suitable chemical makeup.

4 Billions of years of time

5 Soil erosion and breakdown of elements into oxides

6 Water and a set of elements and chemicals

7 Electromagnetic stimulation via the planets electromagnetic field

8 Electro chemical stimulation via volcanic and atmospheric lightning

9 Constant heat from the star over billions of years

10 Gravity to hold things down

11 An atmosphere to drive weather

12 A magnetic field to protect the atmosphere

I’m after others

Carbon stupid, you left out carbon
And greenhouse gasses
And I love you Tau

What would be most exciting is life found in our solar system (which is were we are limited to at the moment) that exists in conditions completely different to what we have of Earth, it kinds of goes without saying anyway, no were else is anything like Earth.

need some magic, replicator magic

Cymek said:

What would be most exciting is life found in our solar system (which is were we are limited to at the moment) that exists in conditions completely different to what we have of Earth, it kinds of goes without saying anyway, no were else is anything like Earth.

Fossils on Mars will do, or just any evidence or previous life. If a single sun system has two origins of life in it that populates the drake calculation biggly.

AwesomeO said:

Cymek said:

What would be most exciting is life found in our solar system (which is were we are limited to at the moment) that exists in conditions completely different to what we have of Earth, it kinds of goes without saying anyway, no were else is anything like Earth.

Fossils on Mars will do, or just any evidence or previous life. If a single sun system has two origins of life in it that populates the drake calculation biggly.

Yes

Tau.Neutrino said:

1 An energy source like a star

Well, an energy source, yes. Could be pre-existing local enthalpy, could be geothermal heat.

2 A Goldilocks zone in space

No. Much of life on earth is now known not to depend on surface conditions at all, let alone on being in a particular surface temperature range.

3 A planet of suitable size with a suitable chemical makeup.

For it to be “life as we know it” you’d need at least some of the common volatile elements but that’s a pretty easy reach.
Doesn’t need to be a planet, let alone one of suitable size.

4 Billions of years of time

Life arose on Earth probably within 400 million years of the solidification of the planet.

5 Soil erosion and breakdown of elements into oxides

Not essential.

6 Water and a set of elements and chemicals

Already covered above. Not necessarily water, ammonia could suffice.

7 Electromagnetic stimulation via the planets electromagnetic field

There’s nothing to indicate this is a firm requirement.

8 Electro chemical stimulation via volcanic and atmospheric lightning

There’s nothing to indicate this is a firm requirement.

9 Constant heat from the star over billions of years

Don’t necessarily need a star.

10 Gravity to hold things down

Well gravity exists everywhere so that’s not a barrier.

11 An atmosphere to drive weather

Don’t necessarily need an atmosphere. Life could arise in an ocean underneath a thick layer of ice.

12 A magnetic field to protect the atmosphere

Don’t necessarily need an atmosphere, and for that matter a magnetic field is not needed to protect a thick one. Titan’s magnetic field is pissweak.

dv said:

Don’t necessarily need an atmosphere, and for that matter a magnetic field is not needed to protect a thick one. Titan’s magnetic field is pissweak.

a magnetic is what protects our atmosphere from the solar wind

Venus has a thick atmosphere but lost whatever water it had from the solar wind, as is loosing atmosphere from the solar wind because it has no magnetic field

If life was discovered in our solar system currently alive life that is I wonder how quickly a mission could be put together to study it.
You can’t do anything about the travel time but I wonder if you could fast track the planning and implementation time

Cymek said:

If life was discovered in our solar system currently alive life that is I wonder how quickly a mission could be put together to study it.
You can’t do anything about the travel time but I wonder if you could fast track the planning and implementation time

Would depend on the target.

dv said:

Cymek said:

If life was discovered in our solar system currently alive life that is I wonder how quickly a mission could be put together to study it.
You can’t do anything about the travel time but I wonder if you could fast track the planning and implementation time

Would depend on the target.

For sure

Tau.Neutrino said:

What set of conditions are need for life ?

so far

1 An energy source like a star

2 A Goldilocks zone in space

3 A planet of suitable size with a suitable chemical makeup.

4 Billions of years of time

5 Soil erosion and breakdown of elements into oxides

6 Water and a set of elements and chemicals

7 Electromagnetic stimulation via the planets electromagnetic field

8 Electro chemical stimulation via volcanic and atmospheric lightning

9 Constant heat from the star over billions of years

10 Gravity to hold things down

11 An atmosphere to drive weather

12 A magnetic field to protect the atmosphere

I’m after others

I disagree with most of those. In fact, I disagree with all of those 12.

I still want to try out an experiment to try to generate new life in a large tank, say 50,000 cubic metres, over a period of about a month.

I think it’s fair to assume that such life is carbon-based. Not because alternatives such as life based on silicon-sulfur-phosphorus cannot exist, but because carbon is so darn common in the universe.

So let’s start from the beginning of the list again.

1. Elements carbon and hydrogen, both in large quantities.

2. Small amounts of contaminant elements such as oxygen, nitrogen, phosphorus or sulfur – but not necessarily more than one of these.

3. A location where high temperatures (with or without catalyst) from say lightning or geothermal sources cause rapid polymerisation of carbon and hydrogen.

4. A solvent such as water, methanol, carbon disulfide, tar, etc. that remains liquid.

5. Cool temperatures, perhaps between -100 and 500 degrees C, relatively constant over long periods of time.

6. Geographic variability of environment.

And that’s about all.

For example, I think life could be generated by enclosing a comet in a ziploc bag, and putting it in an orbit hot enough for the Sun to keep its water molten. With an electric spark to generate reactions. No gravity necessary.

Or completely underground. No star or Goldilocks zone necessary.

mollwollfumble said:

Tau.Neutrino said:

What set of conditions are need for life ?

so far

1 An energy source like a star

2 A Goldilocks zone in space

3 A planet of suitable size with a suitable chemical makeup.

4 Billions of years of time

5 Soil erosion and breakdown of elements into oxides

6 Water and a set of elements and chemicals

7 Electromagnetic stimulation via the planets electromagnetic field

8 Electro chemical stimulation via volcanic and atmospheric lightning

9 Constant heat from the star over billions of years

10 Gravity to hold things down

11 An atmosphere to drive weather

12 A magnetic field to protect the atmosphere

I’m after others

I disagree with most of those. In fact, I disagree with all of those 12.

I still want to try out an experiment to try to generate new life in a large tank, say 50,000 cubic metres, over a period of about a month.

I think it’s fair to assume that such life is carbon-based. Not because alternatives such as life based on silicon-sulfur-phosphorus cannot exist, but because carbon is so darn common in the universe.

So let’s start from the beginning of the list again.

1. Elements carbon and hydrogen, both in large quantities.

2. Small amounts of contaminant elements such as oxygen, nitrogen, phosphorus or sulfur – but not necessarily more than one of these.

3. A location where high temperatures (with or without catalyst) from say lightning or geothermal sources cause rapid polymerisation of carbon and hydrogen.

4. A solvent such as water, methanol, carbon disulfide, tar, etc. that remains liquid.

5. Cool temperatures, perhaps between -100 and 500 degrees C, relatively constant over long periods of time.

6. Geographic variability of environment.

And that’s about all.

For example, I think life could be generated by enclosing a comet in a ziploc bag, and putting it in an orbit hot enough for the Sun to keep its water molten. With an electric spark to generate reactions. No gravity necessary.

Or completely underground. No star or Goldilocks zone necessary.

I’m not claiming that any of those six conditions are completely necessary for life. For example:

1. Earth has oxygen not hydrogen in its atmosphere, so life can’t exist on the surface of Earth. Halogens fluorine or chlorine etc. can replace hydrogen, but they’re not free in the atmosphere, either.

2. Not necessarily one of those four O, N, P, S.

3. Other sources of energy – UV radiation and radioactivity – have been proved to be able to replace solar/geothermal.

4. It could be a solvent I haven’t thought of, such as aluminium chloride.

5. That -100 ˚C is pretty well fixed. The upper limit on temperature, though, I’d have to research more. Survival of carbon-based life in the 200 ˚C to 300 ˚C range is already pretty dicey. At the other end, 4,000 ˚C is enough to melt carbon, and I don’t think any carbon-based lifeform could survive that.

6. Theoretically, time-based variability could replace geographic variability, but I’m not buying it.