[meteorite-list] Astrobiologists Find Stuff

From: Count Deiro <countdeiro_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2013 22:30:56 -0700 (GMT-07:00)
Message-ID: <27596122.1363239056565.JavaMail.root_at_wamui-haziran.atl.sa.earthlink.net>

Jeez! Sterling,

I would hope that those who have read the suggested assignment in your post would read something a bit more current than my hero Issac's half a century old treastise. They might as well read Genesis.

Best personal regards,

Count Deiro
IMCA 3536

-----Original Message-----
>From: "Sterling K. Webb" <sterling_k_webb at sbcglobal.net>
>Sent: Mar 13, 2013 9:46 PM
>To: Richard Montgomery <rickmont at earthlink.net>, Michael Mulgrew <mikestang at gmail.com>, Mark Ford <mark.ford at southernscientific.co.uk>, Meteorite List <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
>Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Astrobiologists Find Stuff
>
>Guys, List,
>
>What life needs is a source of energy that can be
>stored and utilized when needed. Without these
>energy exchanges there is no life. That's why you
>have to eat breakfast.
>
>This energetic system requires elements that are
>cosmically abundant, on planets large and cool
>enough to retain a gaseous reservoir of a reactive
>element (called an atmosphere) and a fluid reservoir
>of a working solvent to facilitate and participate in
>those reactions (called an ocean).
>
>There are many possible systems of energy
>exchange, but their LIKELIHOOD depends on
>the cosmic abundance of the elements involved
>and the likelihood of their entering into
>combinations with other common elements.
>
>If you grab a fistful of solar nebula you have
>hydrogen, helium, and as impurities, oxygen and
>nitrogen, BUT the oxygen and nitrogen combine
>easily with hydrogen, so you end up with an
>atmosphere of hydrogen, helium, with ammonia
>and methane as impurities.
>
>We represent a CHON life system, but fluorine is
>more energetic than oxygen and yields more bang
>for the buck. So, why don't we have a CHFN life
>system? The reason is that fluorine grabs on so
>tight it can't be split off again with the energies
>available at a planetary surface. Ammonia is a
>better solvent than water but its liquid range of
>fluid temperatures is so narrow that it would make
>a lousy ocean.
>
>The reactive elements for life are all right there on the
>periodic chart in a stack: fluorine, oxygen, chlorine,
>bromine, iodine. At first blush, life could be based on
>any of them, but some are more unlikely than others.
>
>Since I don't want to write twenty pages of chemistry,
>I suggest you go the link given below;
>http://www.bestebooksworld.com/showeBook.asp?link=24235
>and download the PDF of this little 1957 book, "Only
>A Trillion." Read Chapter Six, "Planets Have An Air About
>Them," by Isaac Asimov who, being both a chemist by
>trade and a better writer than I, can explain the whole
>range of possible life systems and how they might work
>in a marvelous fashion.
>
>
>Sterling K. Webb
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>----- Original Message -----
>From: "Richard Montgomery" <rickmont at earthlink.net>
>To: "Michael Mulgrew" <mikestang at gmail.com>; "Mark Ford"
><mark.ford at southernscientific.co.uk>; "Meteorite List"
><meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
>Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2013 7:16 PM
>Subject: [meteorite-list] Astrobiologists Find Stuff
>
>
>> Michael M and List,
>>
>> First, apologies to be so Sci-Fi...not the intention. If I had a
>> better rocker I'd probably be knocked off of it for remotely, even
>> slightltly suggesting this, especially to this credentialed List; best
>> a slap upside-the-head to get me back to reality...
>>
>> Meanwhile, here goes....it falls into the X-curiousity factor of all
>> equations: how can we rule out everything that hasn't already been
>> ruled in? To wit: given what we know about
>> Life-to-develop-needs-100%-water, what don't we know? Is our
>> silly-human insignificance bound only by what we currently know and
>> entertain as possibilities?
>>
>> This is NOT an endoresment for rice-paddy science; nor a support for
>> the previous thread. I've just always wondered why we assume that all
>> elemental progressions are known.
>>
>> Big stew out there! I really would like to hear from you
>> heavy-weights...it'll rest better when I read.
>>
>> Sincerely, and good thing I'm not a B-movie producer,
>> Richard Montgomery
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Michael Mulgrew" <mikestang at gmail.com>
>> To: "Mark Ford" <mark.ford at southernscientific.co.uk>; "Meteorite List"
>> <meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com>
>> Sent: Wednesday, March 13, 2013 9:28 AM
>> Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Astrobiologists Find Ancient
>> FossilsinFireballFragments
>>
>>
>>> Considering our current understanding of what it takes for life to
>>> develop, i.e. water is 100% absolutely necessary, I would say the
>>> recent evidence of Mars' wet past increases the chances of
>>> extraterrestrial life discovery by much, much more than "a tiny tiny
>>> amount".
>>>
>>> Michael in so. Cal.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 9:03 AM, Mark Ford
>>> <mark.ford at southernscientific.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Sure and I don't deny finding water or evidence of it is very
>>>> exciting, but what I question, is 'the building blocks of life
>>>> claim'. This is pure hype. Sure water and amino acids are essential
>>>> for life, but I would question exactly how certain life is to evolve
>>>> when water alone is present. The answer is it's massively more
>>>> complex than just having flowing water. So finding water does not
>>>> immediately mean there is any life. From some of the recent press
>>>> and Nasa coverage, you would get the impression that finding water
>>>> on Mars automatically means the hunt for extraterrestrial life is
>>>> nearly over, but the truth is very far from it! It just makes it a
>>>> tiny tiny amount more likely..
>>>>
>>>> Mark
>>> ______________________________________________
>>>
>>> Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
>>> Meteorite-list mailing list
>>> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>>> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>>>
>>
>> ______________________________________________
>>
>> Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
>> Meteorite-list mailing list
>> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>
>______________________________________________
>
>Visit the Archives at http://www.meteorite-list-archives.com
>Meteorite-list mailing list
>Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
>http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Received on Thu 14 Mar 2013 01:30:56 AM PDT