If we are looking for non-corporeal life forms, I think we may be relying upon science fiction a little too much. It is true we don't know every thing about nature but one of the necessary properties of living things is that it must use energy and release energy (metabolize). It is hard to imagine a non-physical entity being able to "gather" energy and make use of it to maintain itself or to reproduce or even protect itself. It is also difficult to imagine intellectual activity occurring without a structure of sorts to maintain connections and memory.
I find the whole idea highly unlikely. Mickey D. Schmidt, -----Original Message----- From: Ingrassia, John R. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2003 8:57 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: No life detected in Atacama Desert in Chile I agree. As a non-scientist watching eagerly from the sidelines, I wonder why we even start with the proposition that 'life' would have to be physical in nature at all, rather than some form of energy, or other as yet undiscovered component of our universe. I realize that the physical, organic, carbon based beings may be easiest for us to discover, but surely we don't think that that's everything, do we? == You are subscribed to the Europa Icepick mailing list: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Project information and list (un)subscribe info: http://klx.com/europa/
