Rethinking History

[muneshyne21]

Now this is an awesome revelation! When the universe was smaller and hotter, planets anywhere could have been habitable. Can you imagine?! Life everywhere with potential to evolve and being in close proximity to each other? Of course everything slowly died off when the things cooled down and spread out.

What if we’ve misunderstood our place in the universe? A Harvard astronomer thinks we have.

 

[Scienceguy Labs]

Pretty cool thought about the early universe. But just as planets would have been closer, so too would have been stars, super novas, comets, asteroids, gamma rays, black holes, anti-matter, intense gravitational forces, etc. The early universe probably would have been a very inhospitable place for life to exist. Most likely, life evolved best where it was best suited to do so. Just my thoughts.

As far as our place in the universe....we are very insignificant...tiny organisms on a "pale blue dot" in a vast expanse.

 

[palandri]

In the latest episode of NASA's Unexplained Files, a couple of things got my attention.

Space junk is a always a problem, it can reflect light and becomes a UFO. Even the moon had what they called moon pigeons, which are actually unknown objects orbiting the moon. There was one object that shuttle astronauts took movies of that they called a space eel. This one they couldn't be explain away. One of the astronauts swears it had internal motion causing it to move like a snake. Can something live in the vacuum of space?

They touched on the Titan probe, which makes moons look interesting.with its mountains, lakes and streams of liquid methane.

Lastly they talked about the first Viking lander on Mars and the tests they did to detect life. One of the test was devised by Gilbert Levin, where the soil sample was mixed with a radioactive nutrient. If something in the soil sample metabolized it a radioactive gas would be produced. The soil sample did produce radioactive gas, but NASA downplayed the results due to no organics being found in the soil. Gilbert Levin still claims his test was a valid one.

 

[Scienceguy Labs]

Is everybody watching COSMOS right now?

 

[palandri]

Is everybody watching COSMOS right now?

I watched the earlier Carl Sagan version and I am recording the new one right now.

 

[micallan_17]

am missing it :crying:

 

[muneshyne21]

Pretty cool thought about the early universe. But just as planets would have been closer, so too would have been stars, super novas, comets, asteroids, gamma rays, black holes, anti-matter, intense gravitational forces, etc. The early universe probably would have been a very inhospitable place for life to exist. Most likely, life evolved best where it was best suited to do so. Just my thoughts.

The whole point is that if there was enough heat then a planet wouldnt even need a sun or it could be much further away. Things being closer is still a relative term. A few light years between stuff would be plenty of space. Of course a more compact universe would be like a space mosh pit so a planet would have a tougher time going unscathed for extended periods of time. Still, although there are more dangers, there are also way more potential habitable planets so the odds would be much more favorable as a whole.

 

[Scienceguy Labs]

I get what you are saying. In a more compact universe, maybe life would have evolved to depend on residual heat left over from the big bang as opposed to direct contact with radiant energy from a nearby star...similar to the variety of deep sea creatures living near underwater volcanic vents. Is it the moon Titan that scientists have pinned their hopes on for finding this sort of life living beneath its icy surface??

On another note, the first episode of COSMOS was pretty good...not as poetic and moving as Sagan's, but still a great introduction to the series. Look forward to more.

 

[palandri]

You're thinking of Jupiter's moon Europa that has an ocean under the ice.

Cosmos was ok.

 

[Scienceguy Labs]

Yep. Thanks.

Yeah. I was a little disappointed, but I think it was because I had such high expectations. I'm hoping the rest will be better.

 

[muneshyne21]

I think Titan is also of interest because its atmosphere has a bunch of nitrogen like our planet. Am I thinking of another moon?

Yay, Cosmos is on Hulu! I can watch it now.

 

[Scienceguy Labs]

I think Titan is also of interest because its atmosphere has a bunch of nitrogen like our planet. Am I thinking of another moon?

Yay, Cosmos is on Hulu! I can watch it now.

I've heard Titan named before as being of interest. According to Wiki, its atmosphere is "organonitrogen" and the moon itself is made of rock and water ice. Pretty interesting.

Keep your expectations low about the first episode of Cosmos 2014....just think of it as a broad intro into what lies ahead in the series. It should get better once it gets more specific. Having said all that, I did like it.

 

[palandri]

I think Titan is also of interest because its atmosphere has a bunch of nitrogen like our planet. Am I thinking of another moon?

Yay, Cosmos is on Hulu! I can watch it now.

That's Titan, it has a dense atmosphere, plus it has mountains, lakes and streams, which you don't normally find on other moons. The problem with the lakes and stream is they're made of liquid methane.

 

[N_LaRUE]

Yep. Thanks.

Yeah. I was a little disappointed, but I think it was because I had such high expectations. I'm hoping the rest will be better.

I haven't seen it but then I never saw the original either. I think people shouldn't have the same expectations as Neil is different than Carl. Also at the time of the first one we were a lot less jaded I think.

 

[N_LaRUE]

Now this is an awesome revelation! When the universe was smaller and hotter, planets anywhere could have been habitable. Can you imagine?! Life everywhere with potential to evolve and being in close proximity to each other? Of course everything slowly died off when the things cooled down and spread out.

What if we?€™ve misunderstood our place in the universe? A Harvard astronomer thinks we have.

So I read the article and I understand where the astromonmer is coming from. However, it is speculation. I'm not saying it isn't possible I'm just saying we'll probably never know for certain. I'm not sure why they think this should make us 'rethink' our place in the universe. For anyone to think we're the only living planet in a universe this size is simple silly. Depressing would be if we're the only intelilgent forms of life. I use intelligence loosely here.

I tend to believe life is more abundant than what we think but it's probably more microscopic over anything else. It's possible a metorite crashing onto Earth had life on it and started it things here. We don't know. Life on a planet like ours would have to have the right conditions. Also as I already stated, we know that 'intelligent' life, one that can actually 'make' things like radios and so on is very rare. Of course, going by speculation, there's still possible 'billions' of planets that could have intelligent life on it. We may never know though.

When I originally saw your link I thought it was about something different. I thought it was about physical location.

 

[muneshyne21]

For anyone to think we're the only living planet in a universe this size is simple silly.

N_LaRue you'd be amazed at how many people still think the world is flat...Even in a 1000 person poll in American you will still get 5-15% of those people that think so. That's pretty high considering all the scientific data mankind has collected over the years proving otherwise. To me, the "rethinking" has more to do with the understanding of when life was capable of starting. Instead of it being toward the later half of the big bang, it could have started much much earlier. Basically when Oxygen was created, water could be possible and life was possible "shortly" afterwards.

 

[N_LaRUE]

N_LaRue you'd be amazed at how many people still think the world is flat...Even in a 1000 person poll in American you will still get 5-15% of those people that think so. That's pretty high considering all the scientific data mankind has collected over the years proving otherwise.

I think you'd be surprised at the results I know in accordance to polls on science. If you check out Pew Research Center | Nonpartisan, non-advocacy public opinion polling and demographic research you get to learn all kinds of wacky things that people think.

46% of the US are creationists when it comes to evolution. I don't recall the numbers for the next ones but I know, most would discard scientific evidence if it's conflict with their religious beliefs, a larger percentage than make me comfortable don't know that the Earth rotates every 24 hours or that the Earth goes around the sun in 365 days. Sadly, it's not just the US with this problem but it appears to be an increasing one everywhere. People just don't seem to care about science as much as they should. I tend to think it goes with the 'nothing' new attitude that is rather prevalent these days or just pure human laziness. You just get used to everything not realising the ingenuity behind it or the science and learning that's needed. The sad reality is that we continually dumb down important titles like engineer and people seem to think an engineer is a simple job rather than the complex one it really is.

To me, the "rethinking" has more to do with the understanding of when life was capable of starting. Instead of it being toward the later half of the big bang, it could have started much much earlier. Basically when Oxygen was created, water could be possible and life was possible "shortly" afterwards.

I'm all for finding out if it's possible. I'm not discrediting the idea, I'm just saying more evidence is needed for it to be right. That's science.

 

[Scienceguy Labs]

I think about those numbers every day. As a fifth grade science teacher, I see, first-hand, how cultural ignorance and scientific illiteracy influences young people. In my classes, while I do have a specific curriculum to teach, my main goal is to create skeptical, scientific thinkers who pay attention to observations and seek out evidence before making critical belief decisions. We have a special word we use when we encounter a questionable claim...VEETO. It stands for "Valid Explanations are based on Evidence, Testing, and Observation". After around a month of VEETOing everything, the kids take the idea out of the classroom and into their home. Very soon after, I start to inevitably get the Santa Claus, Jesus, Easter Bunny, etc questions. I never answer with a yes or no, but I do ask if there is evidence, can you test that evidence, and can you observe the phenomenon in question. They are left to make their own decision. It's quite a feeling when I see "lights" going off in my students' heads. Now, I know that I am up against years of cultural/home beliefs and ideas, but if I can successfully end the year with 10% of my fifth graders leaving as scientific thinkers, I am a happy person. I'd always love to have more, but in the cultural where I live, 10% is a really good number. So, I am trying to do my part to change those really unfortunate poll results.

 

[N_LaRUE]

I think about those numbers every day. As a fifth grade science teacher, I see, first-hand, how cultural ignorance and scientific illiteracy influences young people. In my classes, while I do have a specific curriculum to teach, my main goal is to create skeptical, scientific thinkers who pay attention to observations and seek out evidence before making critical belief decisions. We have a special word we use when we encounter a questionable claim...VEETO. It stands for "Valid Explanations are based on Evidence, Testing, and Observation". After around a month of VEETOing everything, the kids take the idea out of the classroom and into their home. Very soon after, I start to inevitably get the Santa Claus, Jesus, Easter Bunny, etc questions. I never answer with a yes or no, but I do ask if there is evidence, can you test that evidence, and can you observe the phenomenon in question. They are left to make their own decision. It's quite a feeling when I see "lights" going off in my students' heads. Now, I know that I am up against years of cultural/home beliefs and ideas, but if I can successfully end the year with 10% of my fifth graders leaving as scientific thinkers, I am a happy person. I'd always love to have more, but in the cultural where I live, 10% is a really good number. So, I am trying to do my part to change those really unfortunate poll results.

The sad part is the numbers haven't changed much in 30 years either. Scary.

I don't envy your position. Being a science teacher has got to be one of the hardest jobs these days. It's not only the students you need to concern yourself with it's the parents and then the school board. It's a horrible situation. Are you in the US or elsewhere?

I'm a little concerned that 5th graders still believe in Santa and the bunny though... (I'll keep my opinions on religion out of this or things will only go downhill quick)

Even though you think it's only 10% you have put one thing into their heads. It may not manifest itself immediately but possibly later in life and that is to question everything. That to me is something. I applaud your efforts. Maybe there is some hope.

When it comes to belief in anything, I tend to believe the internet is one of the greatest things we have because it allows access to information. Even though there's a lot of bad stuff out there there is also a lot of good. If it does anything it will make people wonder. To me, that's important and good.

 

[Scienceguy Labs]

Ha ha...yeah, I have to walk a fine line every day, but it's worth it. Plus, it gets my students into the habit of asking questions, which, culturally, they are largely taught not to do. I've had a few unhappy parents...simply because they see their control over their children's thoughts being chipped away. I think they also feel their beliefs and teachings being challenged. I totally understand and respect that, but at the same time, I have to do those things in order to do my job. Having said all of that, I have really good relationships with my parents. I get a feeling that, even though I challenge some points of view, I answer a lot of uncomfortable questions for my parents....so they can continue through their life avoiding them. Ha ha
Yeah. Not trying to voice my opinions on religion. The students just always go that route when they begin to learn how to properly question things. Whether they remain religious or not is none of my business. I just want my students to make informed decisions based on reasoning, not culture, tradition, or upbringing.
And thanks. I appreciate your kind words, and I agree that the internet is a wealth of knowledge if properly used. Problem is, most people use the internet to follow Lady Gaga and play Minecraft, not learn about Richard Feynman or Newton.
Oh...and I'm in Northwest Arkansas, US.