On Sat, Sep 29, 2012 at 8:29 PM, Craig Weinberg <whatsons...@gmail.com>wrote:
> > > On Saturday, September 29, 2012 1:41:25 PM UTC-4, stathisp wrote: > >> On Sun, Sep 30, 2012 at 1:49 AM, Craig Weinberg <whats...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> >> But >> >> leaving that obvious fact aside, the other obvious fact is that >> >> evolution has used organic chemistry to make self-replicators because >> >> that was the easiest way to do it. Do you imagine that if it were easy >> >> to evolve steel claws which helped predators catch prey that steel >> >> claws would not have evolved? What would have prevented their >> >> evolution, divine intervention? >> > >> > >> > You are assuming that there are other options though. Maybe there are, >> but >> > we don't know that for sure yet. If there were, it seems like there >> would be >> > either multiple kinds of biology in the history of the world, or >> individual >> > species which have mutated to exploit the variety of inorganic >> compounds in >> > the universe available. What prevented their evolution is the same >> thing >> > that creates thermodynamic irreversibility out of reversible quantum >> wave >> > functions. The universe is an event, not a machine. When something >> happens, >> > the whole universe is changed, and maybe that change becomes the active >> > arrow of qualitative progress. Organic chemistry got there first, >> therefore >> > that door may be closed - unless we, as biological agents, open a new >> one. >> >> Iron is already present in haemoglobin and myoglobin. For that matter, >> silicon may also be an essential micronutrient for bone health >> (http://www.spritzer.com.my/**WebLITE/Applications/news/** >> uploaded/docs/Dietary%**20Silicon%202004.pdf<http://www.spritzer.com.my/WebLITE/Applications/news/uploaded/docs/Dietary%20Silicon%202004.pdf>). >> >> What prevents these elements from being utilised in a different way? >> Would it disprove your entire theory if we found an animal living in >> some forgotten hole that had steel claws? >> >> > Organisms can utilize inorganic minerals, sure. Salt would be a better > example as we can actually eat it in its pure form and we actually need to > eat it. But that's completely different than a living cell made of salt and > iron that eats sand. The problem is that the theory that there is no reason > why this might not be possible doesn't seem to correspond to the reality > that all we have ever seen is a very narrow category of basic biologically > active substances. It's not that I have a theory that there couldn't be > inorganic life, it is just that the universe seems very heavily invested in > the appearance that such a thing is not merely unlikely or impossible, but > that it is the antithesis of life. > Craig, you have judged the whole universe (and all the possibilities it entails) based on a sample size of one (life on earth). You might appreciate this short story: http://www.eastoftheweb.com/short-stories/UBooks/TheyMade.shtml Jason -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en.
