Directed Panspermia: Spreading Life To Other Planets. Can We? Should We?
Vložit
- čas přidán 28. 05. 2024
- Get a Wonderful Person Tee: teespring.com/stores/whatdamath
More cool designs are on Amazon: amzn.to/3QFIrFX
Alternatively, PayPal donations can be sent here: paypal.me/whatdamath
Hello and welcome! My name is Anton and in this video, we will talk about directed panspermia
Links:
arxiv.org/abs/1303.6739
www.hou.usra.edu/meetings/lps...
journals.plos.org/plosgenetic...
www.universetoday.com/166559/...
Biomining: • Experiment Shows We Co...
Japanese panspermia mission: • Japanese Space Mission...
#panspermia #aliens #astronomy
0:00 New study on panspermia: which planets could be most likely?
1:53 Why this study may not make sense
2:35 How this idea started
3:10 Can anything survive in space?
4:00 Controversial paper suggesting panspermia did happen
5:10 Other panspermia studies
6:10 How to avoid ethical issues and potential targets
8:01 How do we do it though?
9:40 What propulsion could be used
10:40 DNA issues
12:00 Good news about life surviving longterm
12:50 100 million years old bacteria?
14:00 How to increase chances of success
14:50 Conclusions
Support this channel on Patreon to help me make this a full time job:
/ whatdamath
Bitcoin/Ethereum to spare? Donate them here to help this channel grow!
bc1qnkl3nk0zt7w0xzrgur9pnkcduj7a3xxllcn7d4
or ETH: 0x60f088B10b03115405d313f964BeA93eF0Bd3DbF
Space Engine is available for free here: spaceengine.org
Enjoy and please subscribe.
Twitter: / whatdamath
Facebook: / whatdamath
Twitch: / whatdamath
The hardware used to record these videos:
New Camera: amzn.to/34DUUlv
CPU: amzn.to/2LZFQCJ
Video Card: amzn.to/2M1W26C
Motherboard: amzn.to/2JYGiQQ
RAM: amzn.to/2Mwy2t4
PSU: amzn.to/2LZcrIH
Case: amzn.to/2MwJZz4
Microphone: amzn.to/2t5jTv0
Mixer: amzn.to/2JOL0oF
Recording and Editing: amzn.to/2LX6uvU
Some of the above are affiliate links, meaning I would get a (very small) percentage of the price paid.
Thank you to all Patreon supporters of this channel
Special thanks also goes to all the wonderful supporters of the channel through CZcams Memberships
Credits:
Silver Spoon Sokpop CC BY-SA 3.0 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pansper...
Bob Goldstein, UNC Chapel Hill bio.unc.edu/people/faculty/gol... CC BY-SA 3.0 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nematod...
Joelmills CC BY-SA 3.0 en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nematod...
Frank Fox - www.mikro-foto.de CC BY-SA 3.0 de
Bob Goldstein and Vicky Madden, UNC Chapel Hill - tardigrades.bio.unc.edu/pictur... CC BY-SA 3.0
Licenses used:
creativecommons.org/licenses/...
creativecommons.org/licenses/...
creativecommons.org/licenses/...
creativecommons.org/licenses/...
creativecommons.org/licenses/...
creativecommons.org/licenses/...
creativecommons.org/licenses/...
creativecommons.org/licenses/... - Věda a technologie
If history is a guide we will spread it with us no matter if we want to or not. Where we go, life will follow with us.
Pretty much. Its not even just with hitchikers like rats and insects, our own bodies are filled with 'foreign' bacteria that can end up on another planet (feces, blood, etc.)
It entertains us to pretend we have a choice, though.
Then the Q is "How far can we go?". An experiment still in the running.
At the end of the day, we are still life.
Life is spreading itself
Especially rats. Rats love to follow us everywhere.
Yeah definitely. Misery loves company.
😄👍
😂🤣
Anton said we are going to be toasted in half a billion years... Don't worry, we wont have to wait that long. They are working pretty hard at getting rid of humanity right now! hehe ;^)
@@hankyou Sadly correct.
@@hankyou Incorrect. Civilization - probably. Human - nope, there is too much of us to just get rid of.
There was an old STAR TREK TNGen episode where they found a message in our Human DNA put there by some extinct elder Race, and as it turned out was in common with the Vulcans, Klingons, Romulans, Cardassians that were all then 'seeded' by them from this progenitor stock.
And that episode is the theme for the current season of Star Trek Discovery.
It appears to be Season 6, Episode 20: "The Chase"
Which TNG episode was this?
@@WilliamFord972 TNG The Chase. Season 6 Episode 20
The best line in that episode was from the klingon: "if she wasn't already dead, I'd kill her!"
Foliage, grass, trees, weeds, molds, fungi… If they had a say they would definitely want to spread their seeds where they can.
Yeah. And scientists are eager to find life outside earth....
4:36 😂 I was listening to you while preparing dinner, and my daughter heard that and gave me the strangest look on her face. Well done Anton
Tardigrades: To infinity and beeyoooonnd!
You're appreciated Anton, especially the last year or two. Stay wonderful
Hey Anton! I just want to say thank you for your daily uploads, they really put some order into my chaotic days. Me and my family sometimes sit down to watch them together too! Take care and see ya tomorrow ❤
Where ever we go, we give a raft (unintentionally) to a whole host of organisms and vermin. So I have no doubt we will bring a lot of familiar life with us.
Some people are so concerned about whether we SHOULD that they never stopped to think about whether we COULD!
sure we could. we've sent probes to almost every body in our system, so we could easily attach a 'bio-sample' to any of them and drop it off
I appreciate you
Is that backaswards, or is it a joke?
@@stockholm1752 the backaswards is the joke ;)
Thank you Ian Malcolm!
I thought about this idea over 30 years ago as a teenager. It’s nice someone else had a similar thought. Anton is awesome for sticking to the facts.
You too? It’s like it’s everywhere!!
Send the colony ships now!!
It's either *US* or the *BUGS!*
(want to know more?)
*Desire to know more intensifies*
If Denise Richards is the baseline, I'm in!
Ender’s Game reference?
@@goldenwarrior1186 starship troopers
Edit - I was totally picturing the Formics in my head when I was typing. 🐜
For Democracy!
The thing I love about the concept of panspermia is that people just assume it stopped…
@dowpman1 "The thing I love about the concept of panspermia is that people just assume it stopped…"
The assumption is that it ever existed.
Who assumed that?
@Packhorse-bh8qn earth has been dispersing fungal spores into space for millions of years. Including spores that can survive deep freeze indefinitely and fungal species which can metabolise rock. It's not up for debate whether it happens the debate is over our specific origins
@@ReformsquaI also think it likely happens within a solar system but yet we still have no proof of this so I would think it's a leap of logic to say that panspermia definitely happens as in most context we're talking about interstellar panspermia, of which we have no proof it's even possible, let alone happens all the time.
@@Packhorse-bh8qn correct
We can and will argue forever, but we will still do it. The arguing might help avoid harming indigenous life.
Of course by the time it physically arrived, the natives would capture it at the edge of their solar system to study it.
there will not be any indigenous alien life.
@@1st1anarkissedThat’s assuming the natives have the technology to escape their planet
Sounds very likely to happen, well put
No. We are far from the technology to even accurately gauge if a planet has life, thus we have no right or business spreading random life to other places disrupting it. We find life in new unexpected places on Earth still ALL THE TIME. We are hundreds perhaps thousands of years from doing so on other planets appropriately.
Completely agree!
So do I. 👍
I strongly disagree. Biospheres are easily detected.And if the only life is bacterial, it isn't worth preservation. Plus a biosphere wouldn't necessarily destroy alien bacteria, they might end up thriving instead. I saw we should terraform every single baren body out there. any pre existing biospheres should be carefully studdied with dna being kept of every single alien creature just in case we do accidentally whipe out a species.
@dragnothlecoona Not worth preserving?! *We* evolved from bacteria and archaea, so if some 👽 had thought that way 3 bya, we wouldn't be here today.
@@dragnothlecoona *All* biospheres are worth preserving pristine, as are environments in which original life may arise in the future.
I'm kinda meh on this idea. It doesn't really matter if our version of "life" continues on elsewhere, it is primarily our civilization and society that we treasure. On balance, I would be for this, if only because if we _are_ able to keep our society (in whatever form it might have taken over the years) for millions of years, it might give us someone to meet in our far future.
if Fermi were the Dalai Lama, he might say, "Be the life that you want to find in the Universe."
No, I value life FAR more than our civilization or society. We are merely a tool to spread life. Genitals, if you will.
For sure you don't have pets
Thank you for your hard work Anton this channel has certainly broaden my horizons in astrophysics and science❤❤❤ this video title is going to get a lot of feedback in my opinion. We should send out an offer to every one of our politicians to be the first to go😂😂😂
My first reaction: Yay!
My second thought 🤔: Do we really want to seed the universe with relatively unintelligent, narcissistic grifters, who make the Ferengi look like saints?
Nobody, human or non-human, has the right to destroy existing ecosystems or prevent new, original life from arising on habitable worlds. We are alive here today only because our 🌳 of life had the chance to spring into existence thanks to early 🌎 being free from extraterrestrial seeds. Seeding inhabited worlds can destroy the native species, and seeding objects that are or may become habitable precludes native species ever springing into being there.
What we *should* do is terraform worlds that neither are nor have a significant chance to become habitable, and seed them with life. After all, letting our 🌳 of life die with the 🌞 is pretty much the most unethical thing we could do.
Nobody, human or non-human, has the right to destroy existing ecosystems or prevent new, original life from arising on habitable worlds. We are alive here today only because our 🌳 of life had the chance to spring into existence thanks to early 🌎 being free from extraterrestrial seeds.
Seeding inhabited worlds can destroy the native species, and seeding objects that are or may become habitable precludes native species ever springing into being there.
I will have always considered it a possibility that a very advanced civilization realizes that it's difficult for life to start, so they decided to seed the Galaxy with something that would be capable of development, such as for example of virus or bacteria. This would give anything a head start as soon as the conditions were viable.
And you are wrong about it, because it is proven that ethically mature civilizations would never do that.
@@eternisedDragon7 How do you prove what the ethical system would be of a hypothetical civilization. This is nonesense.
or... that advanced civilization will actually be us, inhabitants of planet Earth.
@@eternisedDragon7you have no refuting points? Just “your wrong I’m right”? Yeah okay…
@@junodeer Of course I have them. Just check out the other comment responses I put up in this comment section to find them.
I've always wanted a programme of sending piles of random organic gunk to other planets. Just like buckets of wet mud, full of bacteria and microorganisms or whatever. Just to see if anything happens.
For all we know, that might be all it takes to terraform another world. That and time, I guess.
Required for proper terraforming. So yes, let's DO IT!
Except that terraforming is a crime.
@@eternisedDragon7😂
@@eternisedDragon7what? nobody ever said it was illegal!
Hahaha “made in China” was actually really funny man. More spontaneous Anton humor, hope it means you’re starting to feel well again. Thanks as always.
I think we could use it as a way to terraform other planets, but we should start with planets in our own solar system first so we can directly observe the effects.
Let's not forget about the time dillatation either. Depending on the terminal speed this solar sail could reach and cruise at for the majority of the journey, the subjective time of individual capsules may be considerably shorter, making the survival of these organisms more likely as well. I would LIVE to see a launch of some similar project to a confirmed dead world (like those protoplanetary discs) in my lifetime
Movie suggestion:
Humans seeded Kepler 452-B billions of years ago by sending a small drone. Humans died out from civil war. Keplerites developed into an advance civilization. They sent a seeding drone to a small blue marble in the nearby cosmos. Keplerites wiped out by civil war. Humans evolved and currently question whether they should seed a potential Earth 2.0….. 🤔🤔
Pretty sure rocking up to any planet with an atmosphere and in habitable zone and flushing the septic tank would do the trick. Getting there is the hard part.
Worked for Earth. Lol 👽
You always have interesting videos. Keep it up
Hey, just a simple thanks Anton. I get to look forward to your channel and you basically ALWAYS have a video. That means you work your ass off. When I'm a little better off, I'll spend some money on your channel and charity.
Good channel, good content, you're a good dude, and I genuinely thank you.
A sterile universe benefits nobody.
Except all the wild animals that then don't have to be mercilessly and helplessly be subjected to exo-biospheres in gruesome survival of the fittest conditions.
@@eternisedDragon7 everything you see and touch is a product of natural selection. There is no right and wrong when it comes to self preservation.
It would be wise to say that a lack of self preservation is a genetic defect that is naturally corrected by itself. There is not point in sparing foreign life that doesnt benefit us. It wouldnt spare us.
@@eternisedDragon7 what are you even talking about?
A universe doesn't have to benefit anything at all
@@charlieinslidell its more fun with life tho. plus intelligent life can do some wild stuff so the universe could benefit in a way.
Yes. Unequivocally. How do we know we ourselves are not a product of such a practice. Complex life and even more so, sentient life is exceedingly rare.
To use valuation of something solely based on its rarity as basis for moral reasoning is axiomatically flawed. The biblical hell is even more rare but that doesn't mean we should create examples in its image in the real world. Besides this, such an argument about rarity defeats itself as soon as life had become normal or abundant and lose the rarity argument or may even have to become rarer again.
Unequivocally 🤨? Nobody, human or non-human, has the right to destroy existing ecosystems or prevent new, original life from arising on habitable worlds. We are alive here today only because our 🌳 of life had the chance to spring into existence thanks to early 🌎 being free from extraterrestrial seeds. Seeding inhabited worlds can destroy the native species, and seeding objects that are or may become habitable precludes native species ever springing into being there.
What we *should* do is terraform worlds that neither are nor have a significant chance to become habitable, and seed them with life. After all, letting our 🌳 of life die with the 🌞 is pretty much the most unethical thing we could do.
Unequivocally 🤨? Nobody, human or non-human, has the right to destroy existing ecosystems or prevent new, original life from arising on habitable worlds.
We are alive here today only because our of life had the chance to spring into existence thanks to early being free from extraterrestrial seeds.
Thank you for all you do, Anton.
I am not against directed panspermia. I do feel that we need to consider very carefully any possible negative consequences before we do!
Our own solar system should be explored first for signs of seeding. Life on Europa or another place should give us pause. If it has earth DNA we can figure someone has already done the jobl
If it is non-earth type life, we will need to think carefully again.
If there is no other life, then we consider directed panspermia!
Finally addressing Panspermia in an intelligent manner. Science and time will prove Panspermia is the most probable way life started on Earth and other planets. Alien life will look similar to humans and other life on Earth. To the naysayers, never say never. Best episode, yet. Thank you, Anton.
Never say never and never follow crude ideas.
@@holdinmuhl4959but you’re automatically assuming panspermia is without a doubt the explanation?
Thus you are saying never, to all the other options.
Panspermia, even if true, is not an answer to how life was started. Furthermore if true, life on other worlds wouldn't look like life here as it has had BILLIONS of years to diverge. Another point; we are quite close to the formation of the universe (13.8 bya) and Earth formed 4.5 billion years ago. You're proposing that life began and evolved somewhere else, somehow left it's own world, and traveled to our planet on just the first 10 billion years instead of simply evolving here? Occam's Razor ffs.
@@filonin2 Careful where you swing that thing -- I believe Occam accidentally sliced an artery and bled out.
@@filonin2, Top Astronomers Gather to Confront Possibility They Were Very Wrong About the Universe. That’s the latest headline I saw the other day. You have your opinion based on scientists who are claiming they are wrong, time and time, again. Your theory is only your theory. I have my theory and neither one is correct OR wrong. Time will bear out the truth. I’m just relieved that Anton finally addressed this theory, whether you care to believe it or not. Let the scientists keep rewriting the text books.
Planets that have no life but can support life, yes. 😊
That depends on what you consider life and what kind of biodiversity you're talking about. A planet with nothing but bacteria? Seed away! A planet with a biosphere that is likely to fail due to low biodiversity? I'd say add species that can adapt and bolster it.
@@francois853 I'm not seeding a world with bacterial life. Are you insane? You'd blow up the perfect opportunity to witness evolution without the impact of human intervention. You'd alter the course of evolution for the native biology. It's poor form.
Wonderful as always Anton. Thank you. 🤘😉
ive always thought about this question thanks for the video anton
Follow the prime directive.
Yes it is our duty to keep life going
If you thought deeper about it, you'd find out that there is very important conditions that must be met, or otherwise there is no duty to keep life going, for if it would just live miserably.
@@eternisedDragon7 Depends what kind of life you introduce to a planet, it could adapt to the environment, and potentially thrive and terraform the planet (over a very long time)
Nobody, human or non-human, has the right to destroy existing ecosystems or prevent new, original life from arising on habitable worlds. We are alive here today only because our 🌳 of life had the chance to spring into existence thanks to early 🌎 being free from extraterrestrial seeds. Seeding inhabited worlds can destroy the native species, and seeding objects that are or may become habitable precludes native species ever springing into being there.
What we *should* do is terraform worlds that neither are nor have a significant chance to become habitable, and seed them with life. After all, letting our 🌳 of life die with the 🌞 is pretty much the most unethical thing we could do.
@@TristanLaguz No, you are mistaken, because to add extreme amounts of misery to the universe doesn't make the anyway inevitable any better, and that's what forcing octillions of animals into survival of the fittest would do, and if you have doubts about that, then e.g. read the wild animal suffering Wikipedia page or think deeper about the topic. Humanity has to accept macro-ethical red lines.
Love you Anton💕
Some intelligent aliens 4 billion years ago:
we are nowhere near in our understanding of biology to take on such responsibility and risk
how so?
What is the risk? A few germs get hit by an asteroid?
@@pauloakes6952 The Earth life destroys all existing life on the target planet, as mentioned in the video you commented on.
@@filonin2 That's kind of the point we're terraforming the host planet for our needs
@@JcoleMc No, not even remotely the point. As Anton mentions a few times, the thought experiment is almost entirely about the preservation and proliferation of life.
And with that goal in mind, you can see the problem. If there is a chance your mission exterminates indigenous, novel, alien life, then you've really screwed up.
This was exactly what I was thinking after watching an old video of yours about Fermi's paradox
Yes. I firmly believe this to be our destiny. If we can't find life in our cosmic neighborhood, it's up to us to change that. This galaxy is our sandbox.
Nobody, human or non-human, has the right to destroy existing ecosystems or prevent new, original life from arising on habitable worlds. We are alive here today only because our 🌳 of life had the chance to spring into existence thanks to early 🌎 being free from extraterrestrial seeds. Seeding inhabited worlds can destroy the native species, and seeding objects that are or may become habitable precludes native species ever springing into being there.
What we *should* do is terraform worlds that neither are nor have a significant chance to become habitable, and seed them with life. After all, letting our 🌳 of life die with the 🌞 is pretty much the most unethical thing we could do.
@@TristanLaguz Yes, indeed I think that's what's gonna happen. Alien life would be harvested and spread as well. Life is life.
Yes.
Life is precious to only exist in earth. Even simple life.
Precious and temporary. Life is an energy dissipation interval. The more complex, the shorter the time the necessary contingencies required to support it will exist.
@@coweatsman Very well put. 👍
Nobody, human or non-human, has the right to destroy existing ecosystems or prevent new, original life from forming on habitable worlds. We are alive here today only because our 🌳 of life had the chance to spring into existence thanks to early 🌎 being free from extraterrestrial seeds. Seeding inhabited worlds can destroy the native species, and seeding uninhabited habitable worlds precludes native species ever springing into being there. What we *should* do is terraform uninhabit*able* worlds and seed them with life. After all, letting our 🌳 of life die with the 🌞 is pretty much the most unethical thing we could do.
Nobody, human or non-human, has the right to destroy existing ecosystems or prevent new, original life from forming on habitable worlds. We are alive here today only because our 🌳 of life had the chance to spring into existence thanks to early 🌎 being free from extraterrestrial seeds. Seeding inhabited worlds can destroy the native species, and seeding uninhabited habitable worlds precludes native species ever springing into being there. What we *should* do is terraform uninhabit*able* worlds and seed them with life. After all, letting our 🌳 of life die with the 🌞 is pretty much the most unethical thing we could do.
If you seed an inhabited world, you risk harming the native species. If you seed a *yet* uninhabited world or nebula that is or may get habitable, you destroy the chances of new, original life ever forming there. Hence, seeding objects that are or are likely to become habitable would be a grave crime worthy only of a virus-minded species.
We have a massive responsibility to keep life going in the universe. Unless we find someone who has more responsibility than us.
Apparently you don't know that most living organisms in the wild overall mainly suffer. Look it up and educate yourself about it before you apply your cognitive dissonance to a decision question you lack qualifications for.
If we send life somewhere else that does not mean it will be us. Are these organisms a good representation of our intention? “For that, I’m out!”
Thank you, Anton.
Not only we SHOULD, I think it is a moral obligation to spread life. Earth life, so that it can evolve further and perhaps create more conscienceness around the galaxy. It would be such a waste if life ended on our planet.
Nobody, human or non-human, has the right to destroy existing ecosystems or prevent new, original life from forming on habitable worlds. We are alive here today only because our 🌳 of life had the chance to spring into existence thanks to early 🌎 being free from extraterrestrial seeds. Seeding inhabited worlds can destroy the native species, and seeding uninhabited habitable worlds precludes native species ever springing into being there. What we *should* do is terraform uninhabit*able* worlds and seed them with life. After all, letting our 🌳 of life die with the 🌞 is pretty much the most unethical thing we could do.
If you seed an inhabited world, you risk harming the native species. If you seed a *yet* uninhabited world or nebula that is or may get habitable, you destroy the chances of new, original life ever forming there. Hence, seeding objects that are or are likely to become habitable would be a grave crime worthy only of a virus-minded species.
Moral obligation! 🤦
No one, human or non-human, has the right to destroy existing ecosystems or prevent new, original life from forming on habitable worlds. We are alive here today only because our 🌳 of life had the chance to spring into existence thanks to early 🌎 being free from extraterrestrial seeds. Seeding inhabited worlds can destroy the native species, and seeding uninhabited habitable worlds precludes native species ever springing into being there. What we *should* do is terraform uninhabit*able* worlds and seed them with life. After all, letting our 🌳 of life die with the 🌞 is pretty much the most unethical thing we could do.
It would contaminate our search for other life.
Not if we know specifically where we seed
But... who cares? If life on another planet is not more than a bacterial mat, which would take billions of years to evolve with a close to zero probability, why not use it for something more advanced and reliable?
Eh, yes and no. It’s really hard to know.
Is not a question if we should, we will, no matter how you see this issue, we might already have unintentionally in those places we put a lander on, impossible to be 100% sure those landers had no bacteria and nothing survived the travel
But eventually it will happen and we will confirm it, if we dont erase ourselves first that is
We're not talking about planets in the solar system. It is assumed we ill terraform them.
@@filonin2 terraforming is for losers,real civilizations take apart those planets to build enormous megastructures to live in
@@filonin2 Except you have nut jobs who oppose that just as there are those who oppose spending money on space exploration/infrastructure development while there are challenges on earth that need to be solved.
The first type of life would have to be a simple primary producer like cyanobacteria or something capable of chemosynthesis. A fungus might make a good choice. Tardigrades are plant eaters so the plant would need to be established first.
Mailman here working looooong hours love these videos just need em to be 1-2 hours long lol 😂
My dad was a mailman and now he's retired
mailman delivering pansperima to all the worlds
Are you kidding. We cannot resist the urge to spread life. That is in our very DNA.
Really? Is there a secret code?
I "spread life" at least twice a week, gotta keep the pipes clean
@@holdinmuhl4959well the life that doesn't spread kinda, doesn't spread..
It just sits there and eventually goes extinct.
The fact that we are still here means we are coded to spread.
I can, and you have an immoral standpoint on the matter if you're for it.
It's not in my DNA.
"Be fruitful and multiply" : not only we should, but this is our mission to expand life and conciousness across the universe, starting by our solar system, then our galaxy.
“The meek shall inherit the universe.” ~ Orange Catholic Bible
"Hot House," by Brian Aldiss (1962) is a GREAT read that kinda covers it.
I was just talking about this. Yes we should seed life as best we can. In the hopes it will evolve and prosper. We are obligated to as an intelligent species and the only life we found so far.
Bio-ethicist Asher Soryl knows better and would disagree vehemently with you about this.
It's not like the universe is hurting for space. Humanity spreading life will likely only affect our galaxy ever. Let's just try it and see if it can work. If it does, it vastly opens up the possibility of cultivating radically different organisms that could help humanity or other sapient life in the future.
No let's not at all ever try such gruesome crime.
@@eternisedDragon7 crime implies a victim? Having failed to anthropomorphize a victim, I see no reason why we shouldn't go out there and get everything dirty so to speak.
For instance, I would not feel the least bit guilty introducing earth bacteria or even tardigrades to Mars for example, the planet is proven dead. There is no life there and fossils do not want sympathy. If we find macrobiology beneath the ice of Saturn's moons, a case could be made for isolation and preservation. Microbiology might warrant an extended study, but eventually, we will need the water as we expand. I do not weep for the 99.9% who die when I wash my hands.
If we encounter intelligent life out there in the galaxy, I am still in favor of reaching out and meeting them. The dark forest theory can get ****ed, I am not afraid to do the work necessary to make friends.
@eternisedDragon7 how is it a crime? Bacteria can't feel anyways!
@@nicefloweytheoverseer7632 Guess what bacteria over millions of years evolve into in evolution.
It is our responsibility to spread life. It is such a narrow widow. Water Bears for all!
No it isn't if it would only dominantly add to the suffering that is ever experienced. Creating hells by recklessly playing god is an atrocity beyond good and evil and an irredeemable crime, and that is what wild animals' horrible living conditions would factually be like. All animals need energy to live and this requires work and species in an arms race to the bottom are forced to work harder and harder or they die out, so ultimately it steers towards dominance of pain in wild biospheres.
@@eternisedDragon7 It's a gift that needs to be shared. Individually life is pain but useless without consciousness.I love life, most I know do as well. Give life a chance because, like I said, the window is small.
@@Mr-Neven An extensive amount of natural suffering has been described as an unavoidable consequence of Darwinian evolution and the pervasiveness of reproductive strategies which favor producing large numbers of offspring, with a low amount of parental care and of which only a small number survive to adulthood, the rest dying in painful ways, has led some to argue that suffering dominates happiness in nature.
@@eternisedDragon7 I am glad we all have our own perception of the universe. BTW large mammals normally don't have a lot of offspring and a also have short fertility timescales. I also don't feel that being prayed upon is suffering. Circle of Life is beautiful to me.
As far as we've come since civilization started 10,000 years ago, and the fact that the more we learn the faster we learn, we'd probably figure most of this out given 300,000,000 years more.
As a biochemist, it’s funny to hear “DNA degrades extremely fast.” I know you’re referring to astronomical timescales, but on the scale of daily life-at least as far as most (but not all) research is concerned-DNA is extremely stable.
Just wanted to say that i hugely appreciate that you take your information from actual science articles. Can't explain how much it eases me to see such a professional type of youtuber, and knowing that when I come to your channel I can relatively safely rely on the information provided. Keep up the good work man! Much love from Sweden
Yup, our seeds were planted on this planet long ago and the alien farmers will soon be back to harvest their crop!
Ha Ha
The reapers are coming to harvest the organics
Just like they did with the Dinosaurs.
@@ddrowdy2 Yup, crop rotation.
damn yall
I say we should spread life to other worlds. For if we are alone, why should we be the first and last to think and be
And I know of superior arguments for why we must not do such.
We hold the mantle of responsibility.
It is going to be a necessity for humans to colonize other planets, to avoid facing certain doom on earth ❤️👍
But this is a much different thing than panspermia.
Terrible rhetoric. Earth is by far our best chance and earth doesn’t have to be doomed
I believe we should, as soon as it's practical to do so. Moreover, I think it's our duty to do so.
If we can't go everywhere ourselves yet , then we owe it to Darwinian natural selection that has been ongoing here for millions of years - to send successful representatives of evolution here on Earth.
You never know, it might even turn out that it's our purpose to do so. To send our most successful, the strongest and the fittest.
Thats what I was thinking. I strongly agree, we are obliged to do everything in our capacity to increase the survival chance of the great gift that is life. Just for the reason that it would be a waste & shame if it were to go extinct, and there wouldn't be anything or anyone around anymore to experience and admire the beauty that is the universe we are part of. Personally, I wasn't raised religiously so this isn't the motivation for me, but I do think that a great multimillenial life-spreading project could be the next thing that brings humankind together spiritually, in a similar way the building of the pyramids or cathedrals did before our time. And although Im no Christian, honestly, "go hither and multiply" truely seems like a purpose of ours on a deep level that should maybe be taken to the next step, as we, human caretakers of the world spread all life (so explicitly NOT just spread humankind with its extractive and exploitative nature) to other planets, not for our own benefit but for the preservation of that life itself, in all of its forms. So no matter which way you view this, whether you're agnostic (like I), spiritual, Christian or other, in my view all moral arguments point into the directrion that we have a duty to spread life to other planets and star systems.
@@thomasdam9916 thank you Thomas and I read and understand your reply.
It seems to me to be a no brainer. It's harsh out there, there is an enormous amount of vacant real estate. We are just a small gear in an enormous machine. We should send everything we can in every direction as soon as possible. I wouldn't even bother picking and choosing what exactly because I think we would be a really poor judge of what would have the most chance of success.
They would be Earthlings, nonetheless.
The movie Last and First Men 2020 is a fun meditative piece of art that some of you might enjoy. I came for the music and feel in love with the intriguing scifi story. It was composed and directed by the late Icelandic composer Jóhann Jóhannsson.
Life and the planet's development were fundamentally intertwined. My question would be if advanced life dies quick and kills the planet with absurd feedback loops or if it's additional genetic tools allow it to adapt to fill the niches available and balance the planetary environment more quickly. The quickest way to get answers to that sort of question is to take a planet that we verify is totally dead and go get real gross dumping all sorts of extremophiles adapted to it's absurd conditions, same with venus clouds, and see if complex modern life introduced is able to terraform them.
Humans need to realise that our behaviour is nature. Therefore, scientific discovery in all fields is nature. We tend to think we "interfere" with nature... but we only are nature. We shouldn't distance ourselves from it because we think we're above it. I hope we have the humility to accept ourselves fully as nature.
I also adopt this stance.
Agreed! The distinction between natural and artificial only exists in our minds. In reality everything is natural.
@laurensdorival235 Artificial is nature, too. Everything you can think of is all nature.
We’re OF nature. Saying “fully as nature” would infer we couldn’t see beyond it. But humans(some more than others) are very capable abstract thinkers. We modify, extend, or regulate natural phenomena into something artificial. Meaning our technology/art is produced creatively.
We are obligated to spread life, imo
edit:(some of you should rethink your own relationship with nature, humans are not evil)
Absolutely, question is only in what way, how much, and leaving a few worlds empty, just for the reason of diversifying where life exitsts. It is disturbing we still haven't found actual sign of life anywhere else. This is a major threat to us and life in general considering how much and how long it went into making US.
I think the meaning of life is literally 'spread it around'
No
We should send rouches the species can survive almost everywhere
No we're not
Yes. Send all current politicians,celebrities and influencers. I'm even willing to contribute financially.
Yeeeeeah… let’s get seeding!!! Grab some trowels, people!! We’re goin growin! 🌱 🤣
Probably the only notable achievement we will ever pull off. SEND IT!!
It would be among humanity's greatest ethical achievements if we can withhold ourselves from any such endeavors actually, so you have it completely wrong.
@@eternisedDragon7 There is nothing great or ethical about allowing life on earth to eventually burn up in the sun just as there is nothing great about suicide.
What are you saying?
Thanks Anton! Are we "land-centric?" Out of farming, hunter-gatherer, primates, maybe we assume dirt should be below us. I wonder if we leave these "gravity-wells" (planets), maybe living in space is a better next location. Life began near white smokers in the hydrosphere, oceans. We evolved 'higher' by crawling out onto land in the atmosphere. Perhaps our next evolutionary step is to rise off these gravity wells with atmosphere and live in space! Plus, Science and engineering is about starting from a blank piece of paper, not adding on top of 10,000 random details around us. Any planet, we are building on top of details. In space we begin with the ultimate blank paper, the vacuum. And, our minds and consciousnesses are the electrical signals in our meat brains, not the meat brain, it just provides shape for our conscious signals. So maybe AI, electrical conscious signals in plastic and metal will be the aliens we find in space. Not meat based Aliens.
But our bodies are designed that way... we have to put in a massive amount of physical and mental training that continues while you are livinf in space, power and assistance from machines and overseeing people just to survive in space. Astronaunts get scary and unknown effects from going to space because we didn't evolve to survive there. when we have people in space, we have to emulate aspects of earth for them.
No! We should not knowingly spread life to other planets, But there's a strong possibility, we already have
He's not even considering the solar system as they are all dead rocks and we will inevitably cover them in our life to the fullest extent possible.
Why not? How is it more moral to not spread life into the universe?
I'm no cosmologist or astrophysicist, but I did study ecology and have written about Earth-centred sacrality. A lot of people in my circle tend to disparage the idea of sending life to other planets because they associate it with a Promethean and masculinist desire for conquest, especially if it comes from the transhumanist side. I don't agree, at least not if we can propagate life respectfully and continue to recall our beautiful and storied home. In my view, people who are against space travel are anti-Earth since to colonise the universe, especially if our planet is in jeopardy, is to take our home upon our backs. Doing this would continue the great narrative of life.
It is not certain, whether the bacteria found a kilometer or so under the ocean floor was actually dormant in the ancient mud. It can be an oligotroph, which lives off scarce resources (food and energy). The oligotrophs go around the scarcity issue by growing and multiplying very slowly. They may lay dormant for extended periods of time and are active every now and then when conditions are right. Also, lying so deep away even from the sea floor means that carbon 14 (an important isotope for carbon dating) is almost absent. At these depths in the Earth crust, cosmic radiation may be somewhat mitigated, but radioactive decay of heavy elements may play a more important part, so preservation of fossilized DNA matter is not guaranteed.
I’ve always had a problem with looking for life on other planets because we’re gonna put it on there if we choose to , anyway, so it doesn’t matter
Humanity will never do that; my infohazards will ensure this.
Why not? 👍 Life forms have come to this planet since it's beginning. We're all interconnected.
Ethics should be secondary when its a matter of survival. Life should spread to other planets and if planet Earth can have a hand on that, it would be an honor and a service for life itself.
Whether life should spread to other planets is a question of ethics.
What is ethic? Can we really base any decision on something that has such a different meaning, depending on who defines it.
@@CjqNslXUcMSpreading life to other planets is objectively the most ethical thing we could do. It’s our obligation as DNA. Get real.
Agreed a hundredfold. Space is less lonely when it has company.
@@jamesgabor9284 You can't derive an ethical position from a descriptive fact. That's a category error. The fact that living organisms try to procreate in no way morally obliges anyone to procreate.
As a life form I’m biased to make more of myself. So yes.
And as philosopher king I'm biased towards the moral truth, so no.
I hope we can develop to the point where we have this option and then go for it.
Be careful what you wish for.
This reminds me of the 3 Body Problem series of books. We didn't like it when a technologically advanced civilization did it to us. Other civilizations might envy our Goldilocks setup here on Earth and can take it from us. We have been observing other planets today for thousands of years in their past but in our present as their light reaches us. Thousands of years might pass as we shoot our sperm, and it travels to these other planets (funny mental picture, lol). Someone might be living there, hiding in the dark forest from us. Then, we introduce ourselves to them with a massive money shot. Not cool...
YES!!!!
I've been saying for years that if we determine that a planet (or moon) does not have detectable life, we need to put it there. Unleash the water bears!!!
Definitely need to spread life as far as we can
We have no choice -- we will and must do this if we accept the need for change and evolution over time
And because we will have reached ethical maturity, we will abandon such projects entirely because nothing good can come from them.
Lets DO IT!! I don't even care, humans are known for being a chaotic element in the universe, if anything. Lets spread the love!
Honestly yeah. Big supporter of this; If nothing else was living there, then why not give life a chance?
@@brickch4pel NO! It's a crime, you fools! Check out the wild animal suffering Wikipedia page and educate yourselves before risking instigating people towards astronomical scale crimes.
Just because we could, doesn't mean we should.
Let the planets form on their own, in their own way.
what if there are planets that can host life but not create it? the solar system is 4,5 Billion years old, has had 3 habitable planets at one point, not to mention the countless icy moons that can house subsurface oceans. none of these have had life, as far as we know. what if the only limiting factor is pure chance? why should we not just seed life there? otherwise they're just dead rocks...
WTF? What kind of hippism is that?
Didn't you watch Starship Troopers? Do you *WANT* arachnids from Klendathu to nuke Buenos Aires?
So I take it you live in a natural cave?
@@vapormissile if they try, we just introduce them to some democracy and freedom
Great video
There are two kinds of people. Those who see ethical problems in bringing earth life to worlds that may already have life...and those who have no problem in invading territory on their own planet, whether it's inhabited or not.
It's not really that.. it's simply the case that life will find a way to spread. Life that doesn't spread doesn't stay life for long.
This is a very strange 2 kinds of people suggestion
3 kinds actually: Those that understand that the creation of wild biospheres dominantly produces unutterable extents of misery and ought not to happen ever.
@@eternisedDragon7 you should stop breathing biosphere, perhaps? Giga lib
@@eternisedDragon7 quitter's talk
Humanity should not pollute space.
You call it pollution, I call it population, let's just shake hands and meet at colonization.
Given the apparent absence of intelligent life in the galaxy, one could argue we have a moral and ethical obligation to preserve and spread it.
Apparent, but we wouldn't be able to detect ourselves if we were a few light years away.
Also, radio waves are most likely not used by advanced civilizations.
I think we need to first better understand the very first life on earth and how life can form overall, as I do not think sending organisms would be viable because of the whole interstellar journey combined with the possibility of significant changes to the destination planet while en route. However sending a catalyst of sorts, something that with enough understanding we believe should allow the first organisms to form would be the way to go. This way any life that evolves there evolves in a way that would be endemic to that planet, as evolution tailors life for that planet. I think that would be more likely to succeed, especially if widely distributed and again, specific to what is known to be on the destination that could support life, though not necessarily life from earth.
You could ship my Ex wives to other planets. I'm not sure that could be considered "intelligent life."
How many? There might be a deeper problem afloat
You will die alone
We're gonna need a bigger shuttle
Send mine as well. It's a long trip, the poor woman will need someone to talk to
hey man, you're the one who chose to marry each of them so are they really the problem😂
There’s one thing common to your ex wives you seem to be missing. Perhaps they are not the problem.
I believe this is our purpose
No, you are completely wrong. It'd be a horrendous crime, and I have proof of it.
No your genes arent that important to the universe
I don't understand why people believe things that are definitely not true, just because there's a "possibility".
@@dennisestenson7820 I don't understand why people believe things are impossible, when there is a possibility.
it's what humans and all other lifeforms do. humans specifically find beauty in it, purpose. we understand it even more than the other animals. to continue the self-replicating cycle.
It's not an ethical issue. Go for it!
I'm sorry but you couldn't possibly have been more wrong about that.
It'd be unethical not to, especially if we can. There's very little risk of a body being inhabited when we get there. We should try to seed every body with some suitable type of life, or self replicating robots with some inbuilt capacity to change
The answer is: NO!
Don't like humans?
If we cannot live sustainably on Earth, there's no future for us in space. First things first!
"The current magma energy project is assessing the engineering feasibility of extracting thermal energy directly from crustal magma bodies. The estimated size of the U.S. resource (50,000 to 500,000 quads) suggests a considerable potential impact on future power generation. In a previous seven-year study, we concluded that there are no insurmountable barriers that would invalidate the magma energy concept." (Nasa/Sandia Labs, 1982.)
p.s. Global energy demand today is approx 600 quads, projected to rise to 900 quads over the next 30 years. (IEA, 2020.)
Hurling some genetically engineered fungus at Mars seems like an act of desperation! Some sort of memorial. If our legacy isn't securing the existence of life on earth, count me out!
Well said
It is a fact that the Earth will be destroyed. Sending something out while we have enough of a civilization to do so is mandatory
@@warlok363 No, it's our obligation to ensure that it doesn't happen.
@@eternisedDragon7 the sun is going to boil the oceans in a billion years
@@warlok363 You see, I've studied astrophysics and cosmology for years and knew this already, and yet my opinion is correct nonetheless. We cannot travel away anyway and even if we could, we shouldn't do so because of the microbial contamination that comes with it and outlasts us there as well and constitutes yet another microbial interplanetary contamination source risking unprecedented extents of suffering for octillions of animals if it triggered exo-biospheres.
Depends on the life we spread and what life is already present. There are arguments to be made for suberting extremely simple life and working towards preserving that life on a less hospitable planet.
A solar sail we can propel, but we cannot decelerate it.
The higher the speed we send something, the higher the risk nothing survives the impact on arrival.