/sci/ - Science & Math

>>15562809
Science is a religion. The current dogma about life is that life can only be carbon-based. Not that long ago, scientists didn't even believe that meteors came from outer space.

>>15562809
Because there is nothing else we can conceive of that can create life. Just like matter just has to be made of protons, if we are looking for matter, it's not foolish to look for protons (presuming we have some sort of proton detecting device), because we can only conceive that as creating matter.
We are looking for the Goldilocks zones because they're the only ones that work. Creation of life requires a very narrow set of characteristics to be present, and those are extremely rare. Otherwise, life would be popping up everywhere.

>>15562809
Nigger, how the fuck do you think we're going to identify exotic lifeforms from a bajillion miles away? We look for earth-like life because unless the ayys decide to announce themselves to us, earth-like life is the /only/ life we could identify with foreseeable technology.

>>15562822
Black swan fallacy.

>i've only seen white swans
>ergo, black swans don't exist

1 of something (in this case, known planets that have biological life) is an incredibly small data set and it is not scientific to make conclusions about it.

>>15562846
>Black swan fallacy.
It's not. Here's the difference.

>Does it theoretically make sense that there could possibly be a Swan that is black?
>Yes it is, hence there is nothing wrong in looking for it.

>Does it theoretically make sense that matter could exist without protons?
>No it doesn't, so we shouldn't look for it

>Does it theoretically make sense that life could exist without carbon?
>No it doesn't, hence no point looking for it.

>muh aliens
>muh star trek
>muh comic bookish soience fiction fantasy life
>>>/lit/sffg/

>>15562854
Explain why it is theoretically inconceivable that life could exist without carbon. Explain why carbon is absolutely necessary as a necessary property of "life."

>>15562809
IT'S NOT GOING TO BE SILICON BASED STOP SAYING IT'S GOING TO BE SILICON BASED IT'S NOT GOING TO BE SILICON BASED

>>15562864
Why

>>15562860
Wrong chemistry i think. Bonds are much less sticky so you'd probably need even lower temperatures than we have.

>>15562809
>Why do scientists limit their search for exoplanets to "planets that might contain earth-like life"?
They don't. I don't think any astrophysicists have been 'limiting their search'. First worlds that were widely accepted were going around a fucking pulsar. The next widely-ballyhood world was 51 Pegasi's hot Jupiter.
Proxima's planet(s) hardly count/s on account that one is simply physically closer so might be a target of a reasonably-timed probe.
In short OP needs to exit the gloryhole and free his hands and mouth before typing here

because those are the only ones where we have even the slightest clue as to what a biosignature would even look like

>>15562809
To find exoplanets to colonize. Humans and earth life are supreme
>>15562867
Silicon doesn’t react as much as carbon does, so it’s harder to get molecular machinery to work

i wonder if a planet exists that was created by a large amount of water in the perfect distance from its star that maybe turned into a ball and compacted from gravity.

>>15562809
We are not special. If life is common in the universe, it will most likely be similar to Earth life. If Earth type life is not common, then we would be some other form of life that is more common. That's why it makes the most sense to search for Earth life as we know it. Copernican Principle/Anthropic Principle or something like that.

>>15562809
Why would I care about a planet that I can't live on?

>>15562809
What is the point of looking for planets that have nothing on them?

>>15562846
Retard fallacy
>we have no evidence that God exists
>thus, God exists

>>15562822
>there is nothing else we can conceive of that can create life.
Just because YOU can't, midwit, doesn't mean WE can't
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Astrobiology

>>15564084
Better link
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypothetical_types_of_biochemistry

>>15562822
>Creation of life requires a very narrow set of characteristics to be present
baseless assumption
>and those are extremely rare.
baseless assumption
>Otherwise, life would be popping up everywhere.
implying it doesn't

>>15562809
It's the most efficient way. Looking for life means looking for animals. Everything about biology tells us that animals need to form out of chemicals and carbon reacts with stuff well at certain gravity and temperatures. We only were just able to detect exoplanets within the last 30 years and still only have a miniscule fraction compared to stars, so we need some way of speeding up the process. It's not feasible to check every single planet when most are just barely visible blips and voyager missions eat up the whole budget.

>>15562809
It's because it's pure propaganda. They are selling you an idea.
The earth is flat and stationary with a dome.

https://youtu.be/UOLLMkAHHQI?t=2477

>>15564158
We are a fluke of the Universe. And, believe it or not, the Universe is laughing behind our back.