The search for life in outer space has always been based on the assumption that they are similar to us in their most basic features. We always assumed that they would be similar to us in terms of their atomic composition: carbon, oxygen, hydrogen and nitrogen. These are the four most common types of atoms in our body, followed by phosphorus and sulfur
to the news item published yesterday on the Hadaan website
"Dear Roy," the biology professor opened the e-mail he sent me, "I hope you were not hurt in the fire in Carmel. No miracle helped extinguish it, but maybe that's because a miracle happened today in another place: in the science of biology."
A bombastic start to the letter? Definitely. But the sequel justifies every word, because the new research attached to the e-mail, and published today in the most prestigious scientific journal Science, could cause an earthquake in biology as we know it today, and change the way we search for life on other planets.
The search for life in outer space has always been based on the assumption that they are similar to us in their most basic features. This does not mean that they must have two hands, two legs and one head. We always assumed that they would be similar to us in terms of their atomic composition: carbon, oxygen, hydrogen and nitrogen. These are the four most common types of atoms in our body, followed by phosphorus and sulfur. Every living organism, we thought, should be based on the same creature template, from a bacterium to a cow.
No more.
Another known truth was that the chemical element arsenic is toxic to almost all life forms known to us. The arsenic atoms impersonate the phosphorus atoms, penetrate the living cells and replace the phosphorus. The result, inevitably, is death.
No more.
The new study published today examines a new type of bacteria found in a lake in California. These bacteria are forced to live in environmental conditions rich in arsenic, but manage to survive and even thrive. The accepted opinion was that they have some mechanism that prevents the penetration of arsenic inside the bacteria. But it turns out that the exact opposite is true: the bacteria feed on the arsenic and assimilate it into them. And not only that, but it is also able to replace the phosphorus in DNA, in the genetic code of the bacteria.
And this is where every biologist's legs start to shake, and the salivary glands start to work even harder. DNA that does not contain phosphorus? Who has heard of such a thing? Such creatures are contrary to everything we knew about life. These are real aliens. The most basic DNA structure does not change. At least that's what we thought. But if it can change and receive foreign and unusual atoms in place of phosphorus, who guarantees us that similar bacteria cannot also live on Venus, Titan or Jupiter? If the DNA is able to undergo such radical evolution, perhaps the bacteria can also develop a new type of DNA based on exotic elements such as bismuth or antimony, or any other element that exists in abundance on those planets?
Until now, we have concentrated especially on the search for planets that contain water, hydrogen, nitrogen and carbon. From here on, the sky is the limit. If life can adapt to its environment to such an extent that it changes its DNA structure, we may find on different planets creatures based on silicon and living in extreme temperatures. Where should we look? What should we look for? Does this mean that life exists almost everywhere in outer space?
Like any great discovery in science, this one's power also lies in the many new questions it opens up for us. This is the point of view of the optimistic scientist. The pessimistic - and more thoughtful - scientist may think otherwise.
First, there is a chance that the arsenic did not replace the phosphorus in the DNA, but only attached to the DNA as a foreign additive, which for some unknown reason is not harmful. This doesn't seem like a very likely possibility, but it exists and should be considered.
Second, the scientific community has been fantasizing about the possibility of living things based on elements like silicon for many years. Only five years ago, it was suggested that there might be life on Titan, the largest moon of the planet Saturn, that instead of being based on water (like all creatures on Earth), would be based on the toxic chemical methane. This opinion has been seriously considered, and evidence for and against is examined. That is, the scientific community is ready to accept the possibility of the existence of creatures very different from us out there. The only question that remains is: what next?
Because what helps us to know that they might be different, if we don't know exactly how they are different? How can we discover them in the vast expanses of space if we do not know exactly what their chemical composition is, what they eat and what they excrete? How can we find a needle in a haystack, if we don't even know what the needle we're looking for looks like?
These are all questions that will need to be answered in the future. But for today, it is enough to know that the science of biology has changed with the new discovery, and that the many questions it opens up may one day lead to a better understanding of life on the surface of our small, muddy planet, and perhaps also in the vastness of outer space.
post Scriptum.
Thanks to Nir Lahav who drew my attention to the press conference that NASA organized this evening, in which the news of the discovery was announced.
<< My first column...
15 תגובות
Hello everyone,
In my humble opinion, there is no proof of the existence of extraterrestrials in this discovery. Whoever said that the media inflated the issue is indeed right. But on the other hand, this discovery does strengthen the belief that life can exist in other places in the universe, and also multiplies the range of possibilities for this, just as all the research on extremophiles of various kinds does.
I agree with Michael that being careful and checking the data before publishing any response is a better and correct course of action for NASA (and for every scientist and layman as well), but I also agree with Gillian and Hanan that indeed in some cases in the past NASA has censored a lot of information, and much is hidden on this issue.
But Gillian and Hanan must understand that it is not the role of the scientist to deal with politics and international interests, and I also think that usually scientists are not very good at this... They need to be put something on a petri dish that they can examine in the laboratory!
Therefore, hypothetically, if the same scientist left the laboratory one day and met a flying saucer on the grass with an extraterrestrial coming out of it, then came back and the saucer lifted off and disappeared, it might change the personal perception of that scientist (and it doesn't necessarily either), but it wouldn't change anything for science , because there is no evidence that the case happened.
Science advances in small steps each time... that's why people who have experienced a reality different from what science knows, feel frustrated. It remains for them to either wait for science to discover this in the future (and not sure if in their lifetime) or they can try to push for the promotion of awareness and research on this reality (perhaps by writing talkbacks...)
What about the evidence for vanadium-based life discovered in the salt mine in Bolivia?
Hanan:
What about serious information about the press conference?
For Alien 9 and 10:
I didn't know that local foreigners are still active at 3 in the morning and still manage to write 2 comments 8 minutes apart. Indeed - an international achievement for the local alien.
Maybe NASA will hold a press conference - we thought aliens were intelligent and here we were wrong...
I also recommend reading this beautiful article:
http://www.ynet.co.il/articles/0,7340,L-3993619,00.html
Hanan, by the way, when are you supposed to land? We all hope it happens soon. Successfully.
Hanan:
'Therefore - if someone is looking for extraterrestrials, there is a high probability that they will be similar to the creatures living here, than that they will be similar to something "undefined".'
Stop it, you are not "undefined" - you are defined as an "alien".
and N.B. Michael - NASA has a long history of cover-ups, hiding information, publishing false information and much more...
To call the NASA people serious people who always check before publishing, it is true, but not so true and not always true... all with limited warranty.
It must be remembered that NASA is also responsible for classified experiments that will not be published and for information that they sometimes had to sue for, only to find out after years of lawsuits that "they lost the material" - see the cover-up regarding the "Kakesburg Incident" 1964 for example...
Very interesting, thank you
Well, Hanan, there is no disagreement between you. Remove from DNA all the materials it is made of and simply call a completely different compound DNA. Most logical! But why not call the substance that goes in instead of carbon called carbon? If the meaning of the words is changed freely then it is allowed to do that as well, isn't it?
Hanan:
Do you really think that NASA should have already addressed the press conference that was held the other day?
You have to remember that the people at NASA are usually serious people who check things before they express an opinion about them.
So NASA "continues" to ignore! During all the years that have passed since yesterday until today, she continued and continued to ignore! Heavens! Instead of trying to steal the show from the advertisers and instead of talking without knowing - NASA people are simply trying to digest the data!
I wonder, by the way, if someone gave them the necessary data.
By the way - I was not at that press conference and I did not read about it.
Maybe you can tell me something about her?
Perhaps you can also explain to me, assuming that it is, as you say, something that is not a recognized scientific organization, on what do you base your confidence that this is, after all, a true scientific discovery?
What prevents a double of Jacob Meridor from holding such a press conference?
Michael:
We don't have to agree on every word and in every case - where did you see a disagreement.
Gilly claims that the idea of carbon-based life doesn't have to be like that. I think so too.
I claim that it does not have to be like that, but it does not matter if it is arsenic, silicon or carbon - the global structure, i.e. the hereditary material (DNA and RNA) are universal and it does not matter if parts of them have been replaced with arsenic, or another material. No hereditary material other than DNA or RNA has yet been found.
There is no reason to assume that this is the case in the entire universe, but at least (as I claimed), I believe (in my galactic neighborhood) that in our galactic neighborhood, the panspermia process works perfectly and that living beings will have the same genetic base, and therefore the same master plan and hence similar morphologies.
Therefore - if someone is looking for extraterrestrials, there is a high probability that they will be similar to the creatures living here, than that they will be similar to something "undefined".
Hanan and Gillian:
I suggest you settle the dispute between you.
One claims that it is clearly so and the other claims that it is clearly the opposite.
The truth is that those whose eyes are in their heads see that nothing is clear.
I'm sorry, but I can't see where the great "miracle" claimed by the biology professor (his honor is in his place) - on the contrary, it is a real miracle (of the least successful kind) that the square and fixed approach according to which all life in the universe must be carbon-based like us, no passed away. It is very unfortunate to see how scientists and academics are captive in their beliefs and fixed on mantras they learned from their teachers (and those from their teachers and so on), and are not capable of progressive and healthy thinking.
1. The media, as usual, inflated the story to unusual proportions. The discovery is unusual, but of course it is not about anything extraterrestrial or beyond the family of extremophilic bacteria. I mean - not exactly "like her scream"
2. NASA at the same time continues to ignore a press conference held yesterday in which a meteorite was presented, in the core of the ice found in it, apparently the remains of extraterrestrial microorganisms were discovered. This discovery is also being completely ignored by the scientific establishment, if only for the reason that the meteorite is in private hands and the credit for the discovery is neither NASA nor a recognized scientific organization.
3. The subject of the red rains in India is also somewhat ignored, even though in the above case, there is a very high probability that the organisms found in it are indeed of extraterrestrial origin - something that supports the theory of panspermia.
4. If life in the universe is based on DNA (regardless of its internal composition), then there is a high probability (and I am deliberately ignoring the topic of UFOs and aliens, which in my personal opinion have long been visited here), that life in the universe will actually be similar to life on Earth. If we all create the same master plan (DNA/RNA), then we all have the same basic programming. Therefore, all the talk about "we don't know what to look for, or talk about extraterrestrials that will look so unusual that we won't be able to identify them, is nothing more than a mental exercise that has no research basis." There is a much higher probability that the life in the universe - at least in our galactic neighborhood - is all DNA/RNA based and therefore all have a similar morphology and genome.
Hanan Sabat
http://WWW.EURA.ORG.IL