Comments on: Bacteria Survive & Reproduce in Gravity 400,000X Stronger Than Earth's

By: Craiglsj

Craiglsj — Fri, 29 Apr 2011 17:10:35 +0000

Somehow my addendum got lost. I played upon my original post to imagine a cell level thin neural net on a brown dwarf which “moves” the entire star over time by shifting mass. An intelligent star!

By: Craiglsj

Craiglsj — Fri, 29 Apr 2011 16:48:30 +0000

Clockwork: I agree. We humans have preconceived notions of what is and isn’t life. Given we have only one example in the whole universe to date, its not wrong per se for us to look for what looks like us. At the same time we need to understand life, and for that matter intelligence, may look nothing like we expect.

By: Clockwork Kumquat

Clockwork Kumquat — Fri, 29 Apr 2011 15:03:24 +0000

Chris – Well, Atwas911 -did- just make a very important point about how humanity needs to step up the whole “thinking outside the box” thing in regards to what constitutes life and its survival in conditions we would consider impossible. It is just that he made that point by using himself as an uncannily accurate example of what he calls our “God child” complex.

The human species is not the center of the universe, as all of us believe the great majority of the time. As the only life form we have thus far discovered with the penchant for curiosity, experimentation, and analysis of the other life forms around us, it would seem that it is our responsibility to be open to the idea that “life” can be expressed in infinite ways, and that we not limit ourselves to searching for life that resembles ourselves or any of our inborn notions of superiority.

[ /armchair science rant]

By: Chris

Chris — Thu, 28 Apr 2011 18:19:07 +0000

Atwas911 – Could that have been a more pointless and unwarranted trolling? (could i have been more predictable in responding?)

By: Atwas911

Atwas911 — Thu, 28 Apr 2011 15:43:20 +0000

Totally not surprised at all.

We once thought the floor of the deepest parts of the oceans were totally uninhabitable for life.. We demanded that it was impossible for anything to live at such depths and pressures.

Then.. we actually went down and found that our original ideas couldn’t have been further from the truth, and that infact life was abundant and thriving.

Just as i’m sure its the same with the majority of the other planets in our viewing range..

Just another example of relative stupid cultures with “God Child” complexes demanding they know something when in fact they know very little…

Less than a single grain of sand worth of information in the nearly endless beach of knowledge and facts that the collective universe holds..

Oh but we’re the children of “gods”.. We’re important… We know it all..

By: John Lerch

John Lerch — Thu, 28 Apr 2011 13:40:20 +0000

They seemed to have failed to compare the spread of density of the cell organelles to the density of water. IOW if most of the organelles have density 1 like water, the net force on the bacteria is zero. Of course that won’t happen, but no doubt that is the determinant of which bacteria can survive and/or reproduce and which won’t.

By: Craiglsj

Craiglsj — Thu, 28 Apr 2011 11:41:42 +0000

Iowa…I didn’t think they were. I was just stating, and hoping someone might be able to point me to the information which indicates as such.

By: Iowa

Iowa — Wed, 27 Apr 2011 23:14:56 +0000

They’re not talking about “advanced” life.

By: Craiglsj

Craiglsj — Wed, 27 Apr 2011 20:14:00 +0000

Life on a brown dwarf star, huh? It sounds like science fiction. While bacterial life may survive under such gravity, more complex life seems unlikely. I seem to remember reading a paper/article once which suggested a maximum gravity for complex life because of the increasing energy demands to maintain said life in increasing gravities. Has anyone else heard this?