Earth and ET Life, and Intelligence - 12/21/04 04:24 PM
Earth and ET Life, and Intelligence
--------------------------
(1) The preoccupation of some humans with possible existence of off-Earth "intelligent life" and their efforts in search of it are,
in our present state of comprehension of the nature of life, futile and pitiful. Our own base life elements, our genes, many of which we
share with many other Earth organisms, fulfil their sole purpose/role which is survival/proliferation, without human-culture-like toolings. Their RNA and protein toolings and chemical communications are, for their purposes, superior to our toolings for our needs and purposes. Human-culture-like traits are just a chance diversion in the course of Earth life evolution.
Other life forms might have occurred elsewhere in the universe and evolved and developed in other modes with other types of toolings and communications. They may also be devoid of human-culture-like traits/capabilities.
In order to plan and conduct an effectual search for ET life it would be wise and prudent to first agree and define the basic nature of life that may be common to all possible forms of life. And as life must evolve from life, and in view of the characteristics of life and death, life in general is most probably a "bubble of energy system", an energy-storing system initiated and maintained by energy to locally halt or reverse the direction of the observed universal thermodynamic drive to a state of ever dissipating order and energy.
(2) A common argument in favor of searching for intelligent ET life is that for examining any phenomenom it is beneficial to have several examples of it, especially if the phenomenom is intelligent and we may be able to exchange information with it.
The answer to this argument is that for a scientific examination of a phenomenom it is beneficial, but not necessary, to have several
examples, and that a huge number of phenomena were scientifically examined successfully without exchange of information between us
and the studied phenomena.
(3) About the relationship between studying the nature of Earth life and the search for intelligent ET life the question arises what is it in the human constitution that prompts most of them to have a different approach to the scientific study of life, especially human's, than to the study of anything else? Is it an apprehension of facing a dismaying realization that humans are, after all, just one of the many organisms on Earth (or in the universe...)?.
Many think that our search for intelligent ET life has much to do with our need to learn more about ourselves and that projects like SETI and exploration of space will prove much more productive for this purpose than any theoretical discussions on 'what is life'.
I posit that the possibility and probability of humans ever finding ET "intelligent" life are extremely small. After all also we are a rare enough random occurrence on Earth. Our difficulty to learn about the nature of our life is not an objective difficulty but an inherent human subjective difficulty of approach and of acceptance of findings. Exploring/understanding the nature of life here and by us has been held-up/hindered by human reticence to learn and face
the findings and their consequences, and enthusiasm for searching life there yonder while the study of it is very hesitating here is one of the symptoms of this reticence.
A determined resolute objective logical examination of Earth life will prove productive, much much more than searching for clues in the wild wild yonder by means that might or fail to deliver clues who knows when and to whom...
(4) I am not suggesting we should'nt look for ET life. I am positing that there is a near zero chance to find an ET intelligent life. We being a rare random mutation on Earth, it is staggering to reflect on the odds of a life evolving in a random energy/chemical constellation followed with a tremendous number of random mutation junctions along the stretch from a single archaic gene or even archaic cell to the rise of intelligent human.
And about our reluctance to face the probable findings re the natrure of life, a most essential, uniquely human, ingrained/inherent need for our kinsmen is some degree of self-esteem, extrapolated to esteem of our family and extended to all humans. This esteem is the basis of human cultures and civilizations which are neatly the creations of human mind and upon which is founded the existence of human individuals and of human communities of all sizes. Now just imagine how this enormous functioning edifice might be shaken, as our self-esteem is shaken when we realize the facts of the basic nature-of-life; we shall be faced with a vital need to re-formulate our culture, to anchor and build our life edifice not on faith/belief as it presently is but on deeply convincing scientific rational/ moral/ethical/social criteria...
(5) The above view is supported by the fact that there are no end of biologists, ecologists, zoologists, botanists, biochemists,
microbiologists, geneticists, and so on and so forth, all of whom investigating mechanisms and other aspects of living systems, but only very few tackling the basic nature of life.
All Earth organisms presently known are genetically interrelated. Most persons with scientific views suggest/accept that life began with individual cell(s), from origin and in manner not yet known. Some persons, myself
included, postulate that per Pasteur's "life comes from life" cells are evolutionary products, preceded by and evolved from not-yet-celled archaic RNA genes associations. In this scenario the yet-unknown is the origin and manner of occurrence of the early gene(s).
Going backwords in time to either the pre-cell life scenario or to a pre-cell-ex-machina life scenario, to a pre-Pasteur scenario, there most probably occured a constellation in which the combination of energy flow/balance plus combined presence of RNA- or pre-RNA type oligomer with its entourage of associated predecessor molecules
happened to be in an energhetic direction favourable to replication of the oligomer, initiating life in the form of an archaic gene.
The probable above scenarios raise the question if life is a unique or rare random "energy bubble" phenomenon only on Earth, where so far
we have not found life unrelated to us, or in the universe?, or if life is a universally ubiquitous phenomenom of energy bubbles.
6) There were two similar revolutionary evolutions in the history of Earth's Life Evolution:
The first was celling of the pre-celled archaic genes-associations plus their (nucleolus like?) retinues and plus their support and
environmental menues. The revolutionary aspect of this evolution was being no longer at the mercy of all environmental circumstances but,
instead, controling most of them. (Some genes associations celled without their essential menues, becoming viruses that exploit their
rich relatives). The following Darwinian evolution of poly-celled life has been a continuation and an extension of this revolutionary evolution.
The second, recent, revolutionary evolution has been initiated, in a similar vein, by some primates that adapted from life in semi- or
tropical forests to life on plains. As their changed living posture and circumstances led to modified perceptive/adaptive capabilities and to language communications, humans have gradually
replaced physiological adaptation to changing circumstances with self-evolving cultures/civilizations for control and modification of their circumstances. This is essentially similar to life's earlier celling evolution, but with culture functioning for humans in lieu of RNA and protein toolings that function for in-cell genomes.
Human cultural aspects, ALL cultural aspects, function for individual humans and for human communities of ALL sizes and all phenotypes
(distinct ethnic/national/cultural communities) in the same manner and for the same ends as biological systems function in cells. This is plainly in accord with the fractal nature of Earth life. The edifice of humankind's cooperative existence is based, though, on
faith/belief that induces/convince humans to cooperate in building and maintaining the human edifice, and the faith/belief is based on
the self-esteem of humans.
I posit that with the evolving fresh comprehension of the nature of life and of our culture we must actively participate in a worldwide effort to undergo the third revolutionary evolution, namely to replace
the faith/belief basis of culture with a scientifically rational foundation of values based on deep conviction.
end. DH.
--------------------------
(1) The preoccupation of some humans with possible existence of off-Earth "intelligent life" and their efforts in search of it are,
in our present state of comprehension of the nature of life, futile and pitiful. Our own base life elements, our genes, many of which we
share with many other Earth organisms, fulfil their sole purpose/role which is survival/proliferation, without human-culture-like toolings. Their RNA and protein toolings and chemical communications are, for their purposes, superior to our toolings for our needs and purposes. Human-culture-like traits are just a chance diversion in the course of Earth life evolution.
Other life forms might have occurred elsewhere in the universe and evolved and developed in other modes with other types of toolings and communications. They may also be devoid of human-culture-like traits/capabilities.
In order to plan and conduct an effectual search for ET life it would be wise and prudent to first agree and define the basic nature of life that may be common to all possible forms of life. And as life must evolve from life, and in view of the characteristics of life and death, life in general is most probably a "bubble of energy system", an energy-storing system initiated and maintained by energy to locally halt or reverse the direction of the observed universal thermodynamic drive to a state of ever dissipating order and energy.
(2) A common argument in favor of searching for intelligent ET life is that for examining any phenomenom it is beneficial to have several examples of it, especially if the phenomenom is intelligent and we may be able to exchange information with it.
The answer to this argument is that for a scientific examination of a phenomenom it is beneficial, but not necessary, to have several
examples, and that a huge number of phenomena were scientifically examined successfully without exchange of information between us
and the studied phenomena.
(3) About the relationship between studying the nature of Earth life and the search for intelligent ET life the question arises what is it in the human constitution that prompts most of them to have a different approach to the scientific study of life, especially human's, than to the study of anything else? Is it an apprehension of facing a dismaying realization that humans are, after all, just one of the many organisms on Earth (or in the universe...)?.
Many think that our search for intelligent ET life has much to do with our need to learn more about ourselves and that projects like SETI and exploration of space will prove much more productive for this purpose than any theoretical discussions on 'what is life'.
I posit that the possibility and probability of humans ever finding ET "intelligent" life are extremely small. After all also we are a rare enough random occurrence on Earth. Our difficulty to learn about the nature of our life is not an objective difficulty but an inherent human subjective difficulty of approach and of acceptance of findings. Exploring/understanding the nature of life here and by us has been held-up/hindered by human reticence to learn and face
the findings and their consequences, and enthusiasm for searching life there yonder while the study of it is very hesitating here is one of the symptoms of this reticence.
A determined resolute objective logical examination of Earth life will prove productive, much much more than searching for clues in the wild wild yonder by means that might or fail to deliver clues who knows when and to whom...
(4) I am not suggesting we should'nt look for ET life. I am positing that there is a near zero chance to find an ET intelligent life. We being a rare random mutation on Earth, it is staggering to reflect on the odds of a life evolving in a random energy/chemical constellation followed with a tremendous number of random mutation junctions along the stretch from a single archaic gene or even archaic cell to the rise of intelligent human.
And about our reluctance to face the probable findings re the natrure of life, a most essential, uniquely human, ingrained/inherent need for our kinsmen is some degree of self-esteem, extrapolated to esteem of our family and extended to all humans. This esteem is the basis of human cultures and civilizations which are neatly the creations of human mind and upon which is founded the existence of human individuals and of human communities of all sizes. Now just imagine how this enormous functioning edifice might be shaken, as our self-esteem is shaken when we realize the facts of the basic nature-of-life; we shall be faced with a vital need to re-formulate our culture, to anchor and build our life edifice not on faith/belief as it presently is but on deeply convincing scientific rational/ moral/ethical/social criteria...
(5) The above view is supported by the fact that there are no end of biologists, ecologists, zoologists, botanists, biochemists,
microbiologists, geneticists, and so on and so forth, all of whom investigating mechanisms and other aspects of living systems, but only very few tackling the basic nature of life.
All Earth organisms presently known are genetically interrelated. Most persons with scientific views suggest/accept that life began with individual cell(s), from origin and in manner not yet known. Some persons, myself
included, postulate that per Pasteur's "life comes from life" cells are evolutionary products, preceded by and evolved from not-yet-celled archaic RNA genes associations. In this scenario the yet-unknown is the origin and manner of occurrence of the early gene(s).
Going backwords in time to either the pre-cell life scenario or to a pre-cell-ex-machina life scenario, to a pre-Pasteur scenario, there most probably occured a constellation in which the combination of energy flow/balance plus combined presence of RNA- or pre-RNA type oligomer with its entourage of associated predecessor molecules
happened to be in an energhetic direction favourable to replication of the oligomer, initiating life in the form of an archaic gene.
The probable above scenarios raise the question if life is a unique or rare random "energy bubble" phenomenon only on Earth, where so far
we have not found life unrelated to us, or in the universe?, or if life is a universally ubiquitous phenomenom of energy bubbles.
6) There were two similar revolutionary evolutions in the history of Earth's Life Evolution:
The first was celling of the pre-celled archaic genes-associations plus their (nucleolus like?) retinues and plus their support and
environmental menues. The revolutionary aspect of this evolution was being no longer at the mercy of all environmental circumstances but,
instead, controling most of them. (Some genes associations celled without their essential menues, becoming viruses that exploit their
rich relatives). The following Darwinian evolution of poly-celled life has been a continuation and an extension of this revolutionary evolution.
The second, recent, revolutionary evolution has been initiated, in a similar vein, by some primates that adapted from life in semi- or
tropical forests to life on plains. As their changed living posture and circumstances led to modified perceptive/adaptive capabilities and to language communications, humans have gradually
replaced physiological adaptation to changing circumstances with self-evolving cultures/civilizations for control and modification of their circumstances. This is essentially similar to life's earlier celling evolution, but with culture functioning for humans in lieu of RNA and protein toolings that function for in-cell genomes.
Human cultural aspects, ALL cultural aspects, function for individual humans and for human communities of ALL sizes and all phenotypes
(distinct ethnic/national/cultural communities) in the same manner and for the same ends as biological systems function in cells. This is plainly in accord with the fractal nature of Earth life. The edifice of humankind's cooperative existence is based, though, on
faith/belief that induces/convince humans to cooperate in building and maintaining the human edifice, and the faith/belief is based on
the self-esteem of humans.
I posit that with the evolving fresh comprehension of the nature of life and of our culture we must actively participate in a worldwide effort to undergo the third revolutionary evolution, namely to replace
the faith/belief basis of culture with a scientifically rational foundation of values based on deep conviction.
end. DH.