Asteroid belts could be key to finding intelligent life - Polidicks

[thumb]http://regmedia.co.uk/2012/11/02/asteroid_belt.jpg[/thumb] [QUOTE]A new study suggests that having the right kind of asteroid belt in a solar system could be essential to finding intelligent life in the universe – including here on Earth. A team from NASA and the UK's Royal Astronomical Society has been studying the role of asteroid belts in the evolution of life on Earth and in the wider universe. They concluded that an asteroid belt is important in the development of life, since its material seeds worlds with lots of useful stuff, even if the delivery system leaves a lot to be desired. "Asteroids are thought to be a primary mechanism for distributing water and heavy metals across the Earth's surface, and possibly even the building blocks of life itself," Rebecca Martin, a NASA Sagan Fellow from the University of Colorado told [I]The Register[/I]. "In our own history, if an impact hadn't killed off the dinosaurs, then mammals might not have evolved into intelligent life.""Asteroids are thought to be a primary mechanism for distributing water and heavy metals across the Earth's surface, and possibly even the building blocks of life itself," Rebecca Martin, a NASA Sagan Fellow from the University of Colorado told [I]The Register[/I]. "In our own history, if an impact hadn't killed off the dinosaurs, then mammals might not have evolved into intelligent life."As solar systems form, they frequently acquire an asteroid belt around the "snow line" – the point where it's cold enough for volatile materials such as water to remain solid. But just having an asteroid belt isn't enough in itself; you need a large planet around to make sure the belt isn't too thick or too thin. In our own solar system, Martin explained, Jupiter sits on the edge of the belt, and its gravitational force dissipates the asteroid belt by sending much of the material there either spinning out into space or down into the Sun, with a small amount colliding with the gas giant itself and adding to its mass. Some gas giants, typically those formed early in the life of the solar system, don't have a stable orbit and spiral in towards their sun, scattering the asteroid belt completely. But if the planet is too far from an asteroid belt, then it has no effect and the belt remains packed with material that bombards other planets too frequently for them to recover."Jupiter's really stable," Martin said, "it hasn't moved much more than 0.2 astronomical units (one AU = 92,955,807 miles) since it was formed. During its life 99 per cent of our asteroid belt has been scattered, thanks to its gravity." The team then examined other solar systems to find out if similar conditions could be found elsewhere. Of the 520 giant planets studied, only 19 of them were outside the snow line, and only four per cent have the kind of compact asteroid belt found in our own locale. "Based on our scenario, we should concentrate our efforts to look for complex life in systems that have a giant planet outside of the snow line," [URL="http://www.ras.org.uk/news-and-press/219-news-2012/2183-asteroid-belts-of-just-the-right-size-are-friendly-to-life"]said[/URL] astronomer Mario Livio of the Space Telescope Science Institute. ® [/QUOTE] [URL]http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/11/02/asteroid_belt_finding_life/[/URL]

Very interesting hypothesis another, but have they taken into consideration other forms of life that are not carbon based? For example, if someone could prove that arsenic based life existed that it would have its own tell-tale "snow-line" due to differences in the physical characteristics of the building block minerals? [B]EDIT:[/B] Alright maybe not Arsenic, but non-carbon based lifeforms.. [URL="http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/arsenic_based_life.png"]http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/arsenic_based_life.png[/URL]

[QUOTE=LoneWolf_Recon;38294644]For example, if someone could prove that arsenic based life existed that it would have its own tell-tale "snow-line" due to differences in the physical characteristics of the building block minerals?[/QUOTE] Aww man, brings up bad memories. [url]http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-07-09/scientists-disprove-arsenic-life-form-claim/4118444[/url]

[QUOTE=LoneWolf_Recon;38294644]Very interesting hypothesis another, but have they taken into consideration other forms of life that are not carbon based? For example, if someone could prove that arsenic based life existed that it would have its own tell-tale "snow-line" due to differences in the physical characteristics of the building block minerals? [B]EDIT:[/B] Alright maybe not Arsenic, but non-carbon based lifeforms.. [URL="http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/arsenic_based_life.png"]http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/arsenic_based_life.png[/URL][/QUOTE] That's true, but we only know for sure of one type of lifeform that exists and that's carbon-based life, we shouldn't waste time and money searching for lifeforms that might not exist.

[QUOTE=LoneWolf_Recon;38294644]Very interesting hypothesis another, but have they taken into consideration other forms of life that are not carbon based? For example, if someone could prove that arsenic based life existed that it would have its own tell-tale "snow-line" due to differences in the physical characteristics of the building block minerals? [B]EDIT:[/B] Alright maybe not Arsenic, but non-carbon based lifeforms.. [URL="http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/arsenic_based_life.png"]http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/arsenic_based_life.png[/URL][/QUOTE] Life has its boundaries you know. And even if just carbon based lifeforms, the diversity is huge. I can't even begin to fathom how diverse life gets when you compare two, or three, or four different planets around the Universe. In other words, you shouldn't get your hopes too high for gas-monsters and other, wildly imaginative beasts existing in real life.

[QUOTE=MrEndangered;38294915]Aww man, brings up bad memories. [URL]http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-07-09/scientists-disprove-arsenic-life-form-claim/4118444[/URL][/QUOTE] I'm sorry, to dig that old thing up, but I mean its may be possible that other forms of life exist that aren't carbon based. Call me an optimist but we can't be sure. EDIT: Nevermind, still an interesting article about another clue for finding life with Asteroid belts.

[QUOTE=LoneWolf_Recon;38295055]I'm sorry, to dig that old thing up, but I mean its may be possible that other forms of life exist that aren't carbon based. Call me an optimist but we can't be sure. EDIT: Nevermind, still an interesting article about another clue for finding life with Asteroid belts.[/QUOTE] What makes you so excited about "non-carbon" life, and it possibly existing? Carbon is found all over the Universe. Is the life as we know it not enough for you? I can't blame you though, the television entertainment industry makes it seem so real you must think it's real.

[QUOTE=Gekkosan;38295116]What makes you so excited about "non-carbon" life, and it possibly existing? Carbon is found all over the Universe. Is the life as we know it not enough for you? I can't blame you though, the television entertainment industry makes it seem so real you must think it's real.[/QUOTE] really dude?

[QUOTE=Gekkosan;38295116]What makes you so excited about "non-carbon" life, and it possibly existing? Carbon is found all over the Universe. Is the life as we know it not enough for you? I can't blame you though, the television entertainment industry makes it seem so real you must think it's real.[/QUOTE] I feel sorry for you. Thinking that what we know about life is all there is to it and that there is no room for difference. But I guess i can't blame you, everything seems just much safer when it seems like we know almost everything and everything we don't know is just second-grade information that won't change anything. It's a good argument from Electrocuter that directly searching for these kind of lifeforms before finding lifeforms that live on the same basis that we do is a waste of time and resources. But to be such a smartass knowitall like you currently are, is just saddening and goes against science in every way as well. [QUOTE=Gekkosan;38295043]Life has its boundaries you know.[/QUOTE] And we know of all of these boundaries by living in an infinitely small part of the universe with only one known source of life... how?!

[QUOTE=Gekkosan;38295116]What makes you so excited about "non-carbon" life, and it possibly existing? Carbon is found all over the Universe. Is the life as we know it not enough for you? I can't blame you though, the television entertainment industry makes it seem so real you must think it's real.[/QUOTE] To be honest, yes some television and science fiction influence me. But science fiction inspires people to see if it's science fact. So me saying: "There may be other forms of life", is a testable question. As part of the Scientific process. Sure the answer right now is a "No", but it doesn't mean it can't change, and it doesn't mean that it [U]will[/U] change. I could be right or wrong, time will tell. Also, the dreamers inspire the doers. You know Jules Verne, Arthur C. Clarke and other writers? Their thought provoking writing and ideas inspired alot of inventions, drives towards scientific discoveries and other things that have been brought to reality. Granted some of their stuff may be a bit over the top. Personally I'm just as much of a supporter of the "Tried-And-True" as I am a "Science Fictionist", pushing the envelope of our thought is what drives us to expanding our knowledge either to being wrong or right.

[QUOTE=dgg;38295604]And we know of all of these boundaries by living in an infinitely small part of the universe with only one known source of life... how?![/QUOTE] No we don't know all the boundaries, but we know of creatures living in the bottom of the sea devoid of sunlight for all their lives, we know of animals living in extremely cold surroundings, etc. That's pushing the boundaries alright. But in even more extreme conditions, complex life is much harder to evolve. Like on the surface of the Sun. That's what I meant when I said that life has its boundaries, because it definitely has.

The Andromeda Strain remake had Andromeda as a Sulpher based life form.

[QUOTE=LoneWolf_Recon;38294644]Very interesting hypothesis another, but have they taken into consideration other forms of life that are not carbon based? For example, if someone could prove that arsenic based life existed that it would have its own tell-tale "snow-line" due to differences in the physical characteristics of the building block minerals? [B]EDIT:[/B] Alright maybe not Arsenic, but non-carbon based lifeforms.. [URL="http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/arsenic_based_life.png"]http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/arsenic_based_life.png[/URL][/QUOTE] While it's not been shown that it's impossible for life to have other elements as its base unit in place of carbon, it is fairly evident that it's not very likely. The properties of carbon make it exceptionally good as a material for life to build itself on. The next best candidate is probably silicon, but unfortunately silicon isn't anywhere near as stable as carbon when it comes to building long molecular chains that are the basis for any kind of larger lifeform. I used to think the same thing, wondered how we can even BEGIN to look for life given that it's possible there could be other 'types' of life out there, but after taking organic chemistry in university and looking at the structure of atoms and basically how they work and fit together in bigger units it became very apparent to me (and it was even pointed out in a textbook) that carbon is the only really realistic element that life will be built on.