We are open by invitation or application only. Application should include your preferred name, age, guild post count, why you want to join, your favorite thing about astronomy, other threads you've joined in this sub-forum, and an opening statement or question.
Your application should be submitted to the guild mule, Beloved Prophet, via PM. You should then post in the application thread (located in this forum) that you have a pending application. If you do not, you may be waiting and go unnoticed for an extensive period of time.
This thread is for conversation, theory and debate. This discussion is not allowed to get heated; it is friendly discussion only. If you disagree with someone, simply agree to disagree and move on. Remain polite at all times and use correct grammar and spelling as much as humanly possible.
Please read the introduction before applying or posting. You may not post if you have not been accepted into this thread and introduced by the moderator(s). Please vote when you have been accepted. All posts should have a default border.
Moderator(s):
Corbin Yalovitsky
Members:
m i s s Rieux
Genrin619
Introduction (Read):
Quote:
Corbin Yalovitsky:
They've just discovered bacteria that thrives at -15°C, which gives some hope to the search for life on icy planets. The permafrost bacterium, Planococcus halocryophilus strain Or1, grows and divides at -15°C and can even remain metabolically active at -25°C. It's pretty fascinating. They believe that this bacterium lives in very thin veins of very salty water. The salt in the permafrost brine veins keeps the water from freezing at the ambient permafrost temperature, creating a habitable but very harsh environment.
Angélique Roux:
And warmer?
Corbin Yalovitsky:
No word yet on when it's too hot for them to survive, but it's very exciting news.
Angélique Roux:
But what would life on other planets prove? What if we came across another inhabited universe? Sorry, philosophical questions. What do you find most amazing if you had to take in account all of it?
Corbin Yalovitsky:
Then we would probably attempt to learn from them. Life on other planets is an exciting prospect because their anatomy would be different from ours. They might even have a biological trait that keeps cancer at bay. In their DNA and genomes, we could possibly find the cure for many rampant diseases and eradicate them from humans. We might also be able to benefit them as well. Plus, discovering an inhabited planet may bring hope that we could live there as well if our planet was ever in danger.
Most amazing? In terms of most amazing sight, any nebula. It's gorgeous and vast. Incredible to see and you never see any two exactly alike.
Angélique Roux:
I found something on my phone the other day about a new star formation. Imagine if we could capture the energy it takes for things like that to happen and harvest it...
Corbin Yalovitsky:
Too much power, I'd imagine. It'd only lead to things like the atom bomb.
Angélique Roux:
Ah. Probably. But if it was used moderately and sparingly?
Corbin Yalovitsky:
Humans aren't capable of moderation, as much as they try. They always want to take things further, push the limit a little more, always more. It's best left out of our reach.
Angélique Roux:
We'd have an endless supply! Because those happen spontaneously, don't they? That’s also true. Same goes for life on other planets though. The governments will probably race each other to see who can reap the most benefits of this new world.
Corbin Yalovitsky:
I think so. I've never really given too much attention to the very beginning of star formations - just when they are appearing. I don't know if it's spontaneous or gradual. That's also very true, about life on other planets. We might end up making things worse, contaminating their planet with our illnesses, pollution, and arrogance. We might wipe them all out. I mean, look at early explorers and Native Americans. Same thing.
Angélique Roux:
Humans are like little children. Don't know when to stop. (They should have incorporated Plato's Republic). Though I think other inhabited planets have their own diseases and such as well. There can't be a perfect world. Religiously, that doesn't make sense. Why would we be kept here as the laughing stock of the cosmic egg?
Corbin Yalovitsky:
Well, now we get into some murky areas. I don't think a perfect one exists, either. But if there is another world, they are not very likely to have the same diseases we do. A common virus that we carry (but are immune to) might be something that effects them in a major way. What might make us a little ill might kill them. They might also have illnesses that effect us in that way. Even if there is a world where the inhabitants suffer almost no diseases and have pristine immune systems, it would still not be perfect. Such a world would most likely be primitive and would suffer other hardships. We can conclude that they'd also be heavily reliant on religion and mysticism, as primitive cultures often are. But that would be the only possible way they would have pristine immune systems other than being hyper advanced.
Angélique Roux:
Makes sense. It's still sad, though. In a way... Like friends you know are out there, but you've never met them and can't be with them, because you might pose a threat.
Corbin Yalovitsky:
There's really no middle ground. Either they're too primitive and thus living off of naturally occurring and - because of this - healthy food sources (which would eliminate many of the health problems people have today - with chemicals, processed food, fillers, etc.) OR they are hyper advanced and have developed inoculations and supplements that keep their immune systems clean and without any bacteria - latent or active. Because of the latter, they'd probably be selectively sterile, reproducing with the help of science rather than physical intimacy to minimize fluid exchange and thus disease and bacteria. Either scenario, our being there and having contact with them might disrupt their entire ecosystem and kill them - whether slowly or quickly like brush fire. It is sad, and it's a scenario that's plagued astronomers since we first endeavored to land on the moon. "If we do find life... what then?"
Angélique Roux:
I think the safest thing to do is somehow communicating with them without disrupting anything. But even the knowledge of them would unsettle many a society here on Earth. Especially religious societies. Although I believe science and religion coexists, the majority (apparently) does not. That might send everyone in doubt of the afterlife and result in depression and complete chaos.
Corbin Yalovitsky:
Then there's the question of how. If we used some sort of technology to communicate, would it be too advanced or too primitive for them to understand?
And would they see the dangers that we might pose? Would they see contact as a threat and attack out of fear of something different or out of understanding the dangers? Would this attack enrage humans and lead to a bigger conflict? In my line of thinking (and Genna's, who taught me all this), according to texts such as the Bible, God created this earth and put humans and animals on it. Then he created solar systems and galaxies, nebulae and black holes, universes and all these things... why? Things we may never see or understand. I believe that the Bible is simply an account of our world. Our coming into being and our history. I think it's foolish to assume that we're the only living creatures in this whole vast creation, just because the Bible never mentioned anything outside of our atmosphere. It never mentioned Saturn or Pluto, but that's because it didn't pertain to us and our faith. The Bible simply accounts religion as it occurred with humans on the earth. I feel that it's possible that somewhere out there are more intelligent entities worshiping the same God by a different name and a different holy text as it was written according to their existence.
Finding life elsewhere should not shake faith, but rather confirm it. There is other life out there with intricate design. Twice should be proof for religion. Once, as in the case of our planet, could be a random outcome from an unpredictable science. But twice? Three times? I chalk that one up to intelligent design.
Math class doesn't teach grammar. Why? It's not relevant to math. But it still exists. Simply the same thing with Religion and the possibility of other life. Just because we can't see it, doesn't mean it's not there. Just because holy texts don't discuss it, doesn't mean a god or other entity didn't create it; it just means that it's not relevant to us and our faith in our religion.
They've just discovered bacteria that thrives at -15°C, which gives some hope to the search for life on icy planets. The permafrost bacterium, Planococcus halocryophilus strain Or1, grows and divides at -15°C and can even remain metabolically active at -25°C. It's pretty fascinating. They believe that this bacterium lives in very thin veins of very salty water. The salt in the permafrost brine veins keeps the water from freezing at the ambient permafrost temperature, creating a habitable but very harsh environment.
Angélique Roux:
And warmer?
Corbin Yalovitsky:
No word yet on when it's too hot for them to survive, but it's very exciting news.
Angélique Roux:
But what would life on other planets prove? What if we came across another inhabited universe? Sorry, philosophical questions. What do you find most amazing if you had to take in account all of it?
Corbin Yalovitsky:
Then we would probably attempt to learn from them. Life on other planets is an exciting prospect because their anatomy would be different from ours. They might even have a biological trait that keeps cancer at bay. In their DNA and genomes, we could possibly find the cure for many rampant diseases and eradicate them from humans. We might also be able to benefit them as well. Plus, discovering an inhabited planet may bring hope that we could live there as well if our planet was ever in danger.
Most amazing? In terms of most amazing sight, any nebula. It's gorgeous and vast. Incredible to see and you never see any two exactly alike.
Angélique Roux:
I found something on my phone the other day about a new star formation. Imagine if we could capture the energy it takes for things like that to happen and harvest it...
Corbin Yalovitsky:
Too much power, I'd imagine. It'd only lead to things like the atom bomb.
Angélique Roux:
Ah. Probably. But if it was used moderately and sparingly?
Corbin Yalovitsky:
Humans aren't capable of moderation, as much as they try. They always want to take things further, push the limit a little more, always more. It's best left out of our reach.
Angélique Roux:
We'd have an endless supply! Because those happen spontaneously, don't they? That’s also true. Same goes for life on other planets though. The governments will probably race each other to see who can reap the most benefits of this new world.
Corbin Yalovitsky:
I think so. I've never really given too much attention to the very beginning of star formations - just when they are appearing. I don't know if it's spontaneous or gradual. That's also very true, about life on other planets. We might end up making things worse, contaminating their planet with our illnesses, pollution, and arrogance. We might wipe them all out. I mean, look at early explorers and Native Americans. Same thing.
Angélique Roux:
Humans are like little children. Don't know when to stop. (They should have incorporated Plato's Republic). Though I think other inhabited planets have their own diseases and such as well. There can't be a perfect world. Religiously, that doesn't make sense. Why would we be kept here as the laughing stock of the cosmic egg?
Corbin Yalovitsky:
Well, now we get into some murky areas. I don't think a perfect one exists, either. But if there is another world, they are not very likely to have the same diseases we do. A common virus that we carry (but are immune to) might be something that effects them in a major way. What might make us a little ill might kill them. They might also have illnesses that effect us in that way. Even if there is a world where the inhabitants suffer almost no diseases and have pristine immune systems, it would still not be perfect. Such a world would most likely be primitive and would suffer other hardships. We can conclude that they'd also be heavily reliant on religion and mysticism, as primitive cultures often are. But that would be the only possible way they would have pristine immune systems other than being hyper advanced.
Angélique Roux:
Makes sense. It's still sad, though. In a way... Like friends you know are out there, but you've never met them and can't be with them, because you might pose a threat.
Corbin Yalovitsky:
There's really no middle ground. Either they're too primitive and thus living off of naturally occurring and - because of this - healthy food sources (which would eliminate many of the health problems people have today - with chemicals, processed food, fillers, etc.) OR they are hyper advanced and have developed inoculations and supplements that keep their immune systems clean and without any bacteria - latent or active. Because of the latter, they'd probably be selectively sterile, reproducing with the help of science rather than physical intimacy to minimize fluid exchange and thus disease and bacteria. Either scenario, our being there and having contact with them might disrupt their entire ecosystem and kill them - whether slowly or quickly like brush fire. It is sad, and it's a scenario that's plagued astronomers since we first endeavored to land on the moon. "If we do find life... what then?"
Angélique Roux:
I think the safest thing to do is somehow communicating with them without disrupting anything. But even the knowledge of them would unsettle many a society here on Earth. Especially religious societies. Although I believe science and religion coexists, the majority (apparently) does not. That might send everyone in doubt of the afterlife and result in depression and complete chaos.
Corbin Yalovitsky:
Then there's the question of how. If we used some sort of technology to communicate, would it be too advanced or too primitive for them to understand?
And would they see the dangers that we might pose? Would they see contact as a threat and attack out of fear of something different or out of understanding the dangers? Would this attack enrage humans and lead to a bigger conflict? In my line of thinking (and Genna's, who taught me all this), according to texts such as the Bible, God created this earth and put humans and animals on it. Then he created solar systems and galaxies, nebulae and black holes, universes and all these things... why? Things we may never see or understand. I believe that the Bible is simply an account of our world. Our coming into being and our history. I think it's foolish to assume that we're the only living creatures in this whole vast creation, just because the Bible never mentioned anything outside of our atmosphere. It never mentioned Saturn or Pluto, but that's because it didn't pertain to us and our faith. The Bible simply accounts religion as it occurred with humans on the earth. I feel that it's possible that somewhere out there are more intelligent entities worshiping the same God by a different name and a different holy text as it was written according to their existence.
Finding life elsewhere should not shake faith, but rather confirm it. There is other life out there with intricate design. Twice should be proof for religion. Once, as in the case of our planet, could be a random outcome from an unpredictable science. But twice? Three times? I chalk that one up to intelligent design.
Math class doesn't teach grammar. Why? It's not relevant to math. But it still exists. Simply the same thing with Religion and the possibility of other life. Just because we can't see it, doesn't mean it's not there. Just because holy texts don't discuss it, doesn't mean a god or other entity didn't create it; it just means that it's not relevant to us and our faith in our religion.
