0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Wouldn't it seem logical that life originates from the Sun?
Wouldn't one of the first things to test be whether Earth life is bound to a region around the Sun?
I simply cannot understand ...
In the sense that it supplies light for photosynthesis and warmth to keep water liquid on Earth, yes.
What would be the basis for the idea that it started randomly at some point in time and was passed on like a fire?
Wouldn't it be one of the first things to test whether Earth life is bound to a region around the Sun?
Quote from: cleanair on 15/06/2021 18:04:46Wouldn't one of the first things to test be whether Earth life is bound to a region around the Sun?No.Because there's no mechanism by which it could be.(And, of course, we know,by experiment, that neutrinos don't affect people.)
Surprisingly, weak force decoherence times over cellular distances are of the relevant dynamical timescale needed, suggesting that if any force is associated with the global properties in and between neurons (such as consciousness) it is the weak force. This finding concurs with a twenty year old theory that argues for a fundamental link between the weak force, electron neutrino and the biological cell. That theory also predicted the mass of the electron neutrino that is soon to be verified. The consequences for biology and future consciousness theories, of this radical change of paradigm, are considered.
In the Neutrino-biological cell theory of consciousness/life, Neutrinos (from the Sun) would be the origin of life.
Neutrinos would interact with the weak force. Weak force interaction was measured for the first time in 2018 between protons and neutrons. Today's technology is not yet capable of measuring 'weak force' based interaction at the level of Neutrinos.
In general: why would one assume that the Sun is not the giver of life, and that life is something independent of the Solar system?
Quote from: cleanair on 16/06/2021 01:27:57In general: why would one assume that the Sun is not the giver of life, and that life is something independent of the Solar system?No evidence, that's why.
Is the evidence for the origin of life?
From that perspective it is plausible to question why it would be valid to assume that life is something independent from the Solar system?
Is there at least one clue that life is independent from the Solar system?
If not, would it not be logical that life most likely originates from the Sun when the origin would need to lay within the Solar system?
Conclusion: the farthest that even a 🦠 bacteria has traveled (as part of a test) is around the 🌒 Moon.
I think there are tortoises that are near 200 years old. About 6 billion secondsThe speed of the Sun through space is about 200 km/sSo that tortoise has travelled about 1.2E 15 metres
Hi all. To Cleanair: Even if life originated from the sun and had something to do with neutrinos (which seems unlikely), I think the main point people are trying to make is that it doesn't seem to need a steady stream of neutrinos any longer. Mammals evolved from the oceans but land based mammals do not need to live and breath in the water any longer (it would kill them if they tried). There is little reason to think that neutrinos (or the lack of these) will be a problem on Mars, we don't seem to need them for anything now.
Quote from: Bored chemist on 17/06/2021 17:43:41No.Given context, I'm pretty sure what they are talking about is how far away from the Sun life has travelled. In that case, there are probably some deep Solar System probes with a few microbes clinging to them (assuming they survived that long).