[meteorite-list] Did Life Arrive Before the Solar SystemEvenFormed?

From: Gerald Flaherty <grf2_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Wed May 4 22:24:16 2005
Message-ID: <00b101c55119$80a86900$2f01a8c0_at_Dell>

Superior fun read!!!!! Jerry
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sterling K. Webb" <kelly_at_bhil.com>
To: "Meteorite Mailing List" <meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com>; "Marc
Fries" <m.fries_at_gl.ciw.edu>; <MexicoDoug@aol.com>
Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2005 9:58 PM
Subject: Re: [meteorite-list] Did Life Arrive Before the Solar
SystemEvenFormed?


Hi, Humbug and All,

    Humbug right back. You'll notice the press release so politely mentions
that <quote> previous studies have looked into the likelihood that
life-bearing
rocks (typically exceeding 10 kgm's in weight) play a role in the spread of
life
within isolated planetary systems and found "the odds of both meteoroid and
biological transfer are exceedingly low." <unquote>
    They are referring to what is (was?) considered the definite work on the
subject by impact authority Jay Melosh:
<http://www.lpl.arizona.edu/~jmelosh/InterstellarPanspermia.pdf>
who basically said "not in the lifetime of the galaxy" or in other words,
Humbug!
    Melosh's work was an impressive piece of computer simulations. The
problem
with computer simulations is that you have no idea if you're right or
tip-toeing
through the daisies without a reality check.
    At the time of its publication, I posted a fine cranky piece to the
List,
pointing out that AMOR radars all over the world (but particularly New
Zealand
with their lovely view of the South Pole) detect objects that have to have
come
from outside the solar system all the time. Granted, they are less than 1%
of
the tens of thousands detected per year, but that's still one hell of a lot
of
interstellar meteoroids!
    Yes, granted they are small grains, not 10 kilogram transports, but do
you
really think that bacteria chicken out and cancel their flight plans if the
plane doesn't weigh at least 10 kilograms? "You're not getting me up there
in
that thing -- why that rock doesn't weight one kilo much less ten!"
    If there are frequent small interstellar particles, then less frequently
there are larger ones, and even less frequently there are even larger ones,
and
so on. It's called the "power law of mass distribution." And it means that
all
those computer simulations really were only a walk through the daisies...
    Extremophiles just love extremes. Radiodurans clogs up the core of
nuclear
reactors, basking without sun block or dark glasses in a flux that would
kill
you in five seconds or less. There are extremophiles that love the pressure
miles into the Earth's mantle, extremophiles that smack their chops at the
chance to dine on almost any toxic substance known, extremophiles that catch
cold if they're not swimming around in 600-degree fluids. Anything or
anywhere
nasty, there's some little bug that loves it, needs it, and just can't live
without it.
    Commonly, you might think nothing could survive so long or hard a
journey.
I point you to a simple example of survival by endurance: the common tick.
Ticks are complex animal organisms just like we are, not hard durable
one-cellers. But once a momma tick embeds her dormant offspring in the bark
of
a tree limb, the young tick will persist in a state indistinguishable from
death
for 10 years, 30 years, 50 years, 80 years (no one really knows how long),
until
a sweaty warm-blooded mammal walks under the tree and a few molecules of its
pheromones waft up to the tree limb.
    In the 0.5 to 1.0 second that passes from the time your sweaty forehead
moves under the tree limb and your scent starts up slowly toward the limb,
the
50-year "dead" tick will detect those molecules from its burial site inside
the
tree bark, wake up from its "death," get every organ pumped up and working,
bore
through the bark of the limb, and drop straight down with unerring aim onto
the
back of your neck or into your hair if he's fast enough, ready to start
drinking
your blood!
    If the tick misses you, it's dead. It won't get a second shot and
hasn't
the strength to try anything else. If you describe this strategy to most
people
without telling them it's the life of a tick, they will just shake their
heads
and say, "Impossible." But, since there certainly seem to be more than
enough
ticks in this world, this "impossible" scenario must succeed.
   So, I figure that a living (though possibly dormant) cell riding in a
dust
mote that's zipping through the 3 K vacuum and dodging the rare UV photon
and
cosmic rays (even rarer), is a distinct biological option, no more amazing
or
unlikely than that tick. I see him now. He's drifting along, sound asleep
in
his recliner, and waiting for that soft landing in the atmosphere of a
planet he
can eat. Yum. Crunch. And before you know it, there's another blue world
with
a poisonous oxygen atmosphere...
    Since the Universe is almost exactly three times older than the solar
system, this has likely been going on for a long, long time, and I figure
the
whole place is probably thoroughly infested with ubiquitous life, life,
life.
The dam things are everywhere. And it's pointless to call an exterminator.
You'll never get rid of them.


Sterling K. Webb
--------------------------------------------------------

Ron Baalke wrote:

> http://www.universetoday.com/am/publish/lithopanspermia.html
>
> Did Life Arrive Before the Solar System Even Formed?
> Written by Jeff Barbour
> Universe Today
> May 4, 2005
>
> Summary - (May 4, 2005) The theory of panspermia proposes that life
> really gets around, jumping fron planet to planet - or even from star to
> star. Life might be everywhere! Assuming this is true, how do
> single-celled bacteria make the journey through the vacuum of space?
> Easy, they use chunks of rock as space ships, in a process called
> lithopanspermia. And now, researchers from Princeton and the University
> of Michigan think that life carrying rocks might have been right there
> at the beginning of our solar system, keeping their tiny astronauts safe
> and sound, frozen in statis until the planets formed and the right
> conditions let them thaw out, stretch their proteins, and begin a
> process leading from microbe to mankind.
>
> Full Story - Things seem to start simple then get more complex. Life is
> like that. And perhaps nowhere is this notion truer than when we
> investigate the origins of life. Did the earliest single cell
> life-forms coalesce from organic molecules here on Earth? Or is it
> possible that - like dandelions wafting spore above spring grass -
> cosmic winds carry living things from world to world later to take root
> and flourish? And if this is the case, how precisely does such a
> "dia-spora" occur?
>
> 450 years before the common era, Greek philosopher Anaxagoras of Ionia
> proposed that all living things sprung from certain ubiquitous "seeds of
> life". Today's notion of such "seeds" is far more sophisticated than
> anything Anaxagoras could possibly envision - limited as he was to
> simple observations of living things such as budding plant & flowering
> tree, crawling & buzzing insect, loping animal or walking human; not too
> mention natural phenomena like sound, wind, rainbows, earthquakes,
> eclipses, Sun, and Moon. Surprisingly modern in thought, Anaxagoras
> could only guess as to the details...
>
> Some 2300 hundreds years later - during the 1830s - Swedish chemist J?ns
> Jackob Berzelius confirmed that carbon compounds were found in certain
> meteorites "fallen from the heavens". Berzelius himself however, held
> that these carbonates were contaminates originating with the Earth
> itself - but his finding contributed to theories propounded by later
> thinkers including the physician H.E. Richter and physicist Lord Kelvin.
>
> Panspermia received its first real treatment by Hermann von Helmholtz in
> 1879, but it was another Swedish chemist - 1903 Nobel Prize winning
> Svante Arrhenius - who popularized the concept of life originating from
> space in 1908. Perhaps surprisingly, that theory was based on the notion
> that radiation pressure from the Sun - and other stars - "blew" microbes
> about like tiny solar sails - and not as the result of finding carbon
> compounds in stony meteorite.
>
> The theory that simple forms of life travel in ejecta from other worlds
> - embedded in rock blasted from planetary surfaces by the impact of
> large objects - is the basis for "lithopanspermia". There are numerous
> advantages to this hypothesis - simple, hardy forms of life are often
> found in mineral deposits on Earth in forbidding locales. Worlds - such
> as our own or Mars - are occasionally blasted by asteroids and comets
> large enough to hurl rock at speeds exceeding escape velocities. Mineral
> in rocks can shield microbes from shock and radiation (associated with
> impact craters) as well as hard radiation from the Sun as stony meteors
> move through space. The hardiest forms of life also have the ability to
> survive in a cold vacuum by going into stasis - reducing chemical
> interactions to zero while maintaining biological structure well enough
> to later thaw and multiply in more salubrious environs.
>
> In fact several examples of such ejecta are now available on earth for
> scientific analysis. Stony meteors can include some very sophisticated
> forms of organic materials (carbonaceous chondrites have been found that
> include amino and carboxylic acids). Fossilized remnants from Mars in
> particular - though subject to various non-organic interpretations - are
> in the possession of institutions such as NASA. The theory and practice
> of "lithopanspermia" looks very promising - although such a theory can
> only explain where the simplest forms of life come from - and not how it
> originated to begin with.
>
> In a paper entitled "Lithopanspermia in Star Forming Clusters" published
> April 29, 2005, cosmologists Fred C. Adams of the University of Michigan
> Center for Theoretical Physics and David Spergel of the Department of
> Astrophysical Sciences of Princeton University discuss the probability
> of carbonaceous chondrite distribution of microbial life within early
> star clusters. According to the duo, "the chances of biological material
> spreading from one system to another is greatly enhanced ... due to the
> close proximity of the systems and low relative velocities."
>
> According to the authors, previous studies have looked into the
> likelihood that life-bearing rocks (typically exceeding 10 kgs in
> weight) play a role in the spread of life within isolated planetary
> systems and found "the odds of both meteroid and biological transfer are
> exceedingly low." However "odds of transfer increase in more crowded
> environments" and "Since the time scale for planet formation and the
> time that young stars are expected to live in birth clusters are roughly
> comparable, about 10 - 30 million years, debris from planet formation
> has a good chance of being transferred from one solar system to another."
>
> Ultimately Fred and David conclude "young star clusters provide an
> efficient means of transferring rocky material from solar system to
> solar system. If any system in the birth aggregate supports life, then
> many other systems in the cluster can capture life bearing rocks."
>
> To arrive at this conclusion, the duo performed "a series of numerical
> calculations to estimate the distribution of ejection speeds for rocks"
> based on size and mass. They also considered the dynamics of early star
> forming groups and clusters. This was essential to help determine rock
> recapture rates by planets in neighboring systems. Finally they had to
> make certain assumptions about the frequency of life-encapsulated
> materials and the survivability of life-forms embedded within them. All
> this led up to a sense of "the expected number of successful
> lithopanspermia events per cluster."
>
> Based on methods used to arrive at this conclusion and thinking only in
> terms of present distances between solar systems, the duo estimated the
> probability that Earth has exported life to other systems. Over the age
> of life on Earth (some 4.0 Byr) Fred and David estimate that the Earth
> has ejected some 40 billion life-bearing stones. Of the estimated 10
> bio-stones per annum, nearly 1 (0.9) will land on a planet suitable for
> further growth and proliferation.
>
> Most cosmologists tend to address the "hard-science questions" of the
> origin of the Universe as a whole. Fred says that "exobiology is
> intrinsically interesting" to him and that he and "David were summer
> students together in New York in 1981" where they worked on "issues
> related to planetary atmospheres and climate, issues that are close to
> questions of exobiology." Fred also says that he "spends a healthy
> fraction of research time on problems associated with star and planet
> formation." Fred acknowledges David's special role in thinking "up the
> idea of looking at panspermia in clusters; when we talked about it, it
> became clear that we had all the pieces of the puzzle. We just had to
> put them together."
>
> This interdisciplinary approach to cosmology and exobiology also led
> Fred and David to look at the question of lithopanspermia between
> clusters themselves. Again using methods developed to explore the
> proliferation of life within clusters, and later applied to the
> exportation of life from the Earth itself to other non-solar system
> planets, Fred and David were able to conclude that "a young cluster is
> more likely to capture life from outside than to give rise to life
> spontaneously." And "Once seeded, the cluster provides an effective
> amplification mechanism to infect other members" within that cluster
> itself.
>
> Ultimately however, Fred and David can not answer the question of where
> and under what conditions the first seeds of life took form. In fact,
> they are willing to admit that "if the spontaneous origin of life were
> sufficiently common, there would be no need for any panspermia mechanism
> to explain the presence of life."
>
> But according to Fred and David, once life gets a foothold somewhere, it
> manages to get around quite handily.
> ______________________________________________
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com
> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list


______________________________________________
Meteorite-list mailing list
Meteorite-list_at_meteoritecentral.com
http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
Received on Wed 04 May 2005 10:24:01 PM PDT