Tuesday, May 25, 2010

Exo planets and things I don't understand

Here

Okay, so the drake equation.

Lets talk about why this, astrobiology and theoretical physics piss me off beyond all belief.

So the article I linked basically says that bully planets (see: jupiter/ shit ruining gravity wells on neighboring planets) as well as non circular orbits in many of the recognized exo planets means that the drake equation takes a smack to the balls once again. My opinion? Big freaking deal. The drake equation is overrated.

Firstly, exo planets are found by the light blinking from a star and they are only able to find certain ones at certain distances and blah blah, SOMEHOW they figure out orbits of these planets using 50 million year old light (no chance of distortion in there, right?) but the best pictures of Pluto are, to be honest, exceptionally shitty to date. Something doesn't add up in my mind- there HAS to be a huge margin of error, so to say things as definitively as I am reading them seems a bit extreme.

So lets discuss the impact on the Drake Equation. Yes, the Drake Equation gets kicked in the head. It basically calculates life = liquid water. Yep, that's pretty much it. I understand it's important, but what happens when/if they find life on Mars (which seems likely at this point) or, further to the point, life as we DON'T know it? I'm certain there's a reason we are carbon based and using DNA, but it's equally plausible to use the more volatile RNA and perhaps some other carbon-like base. Life would evolve faster, like viruses, which is always a bonus (but there are some other drawbacks from the less stable RNA).

So is the Drake Equation really reasonable to base all extraterrestrial life probability calculations on? I doubt it. Does it mean it's without use? It helps for liquid water, sure, and this discovery/assertion/whatever you wanna call it means that it's less likely liquid water is as pervasive as we'd hoped or thought.

So I guess an interesting article makes me pissed off because the science behind it is a little retarded. Much like theoretical physics- Einstein makes some assertions, right or wrong, and apparently it's taken at face value. Many hypothesis' have apparently found contradictory evidence to some of Einsteins ideas but had to ditch their hypothesis or alter it to dance around it. Well, suck on this, relativity. So basically theoretical physics makes assumptions on assumptions. GOOD WORK, jackasses. It's like a black hole of stupidity.

How about Astrobiology, the BEST field of science EVER. Basically they say "well, there could be life here but we can't check right now." From here, it's completely scientifically reasonable to make assumptions about how the life is, looks and survives. What a fantastic field, total real life applications and completely testable, if you have several billion dollars and like 20 years of space flight to kill. I can't believe people make a living with this crap, it's like people shitting right in the bed and then having sex with it.

No comments:

Post a Comment