Turns out 42 really IS the answer!
14 views
Skip to first unread message
LizR
Apr 15, 2014, 6:54:03 PM4/15/14
to fo...@googlegroups.com
Bill Taylor
Apr 16, 2014, 9:16:07 AM4/16/14
to fo...@googlegroups.com
On Wednesday, April 16, 2014 10:54:03 AM UTC+12, Liz R wrote:
Interestingly, molybdenum is also involved in a subtle argument that
earthly life must have been seeded here by life bits from elsewhere.
The argument is, that molybdenum is very important in so much
of earthly biochemistry, that such biochemistry could only have
developed elsewhere, where there was more of it. Molybdenum
is somewhat of a bottleneck to life here, (as is also phosphorus),
there isn't really enough of it (or them). There is enough of it
to keep life going, so the basic biochemistry doesn't change,
earth is stuck with what it's got now - the keyboard layout is set.
But if there were a plentiful supply, life would cover the whole
planet very thickly:- all the oceans would be sludgy-solid
with it, it would thickly cover the earth's surface,
and probably the top subsurface layers as well.
To some extent this is already the case. On land at least,
but not in the oceans. Has the question ever occurred to you -
why *isn't* the ocean thickly filled with a sludge of plant and
animal life. After disposing of superficial answers about
predators eating too much small stuff, and parts being too
cold or too pressurey, (after all - life will always find a way),
one comes eventually to this - there simply *isn't enough*
molybdenum (or phosphorus) to allow it! Life has been
trying to fill up the world, but virtually all the molybdenum
has been used up!
There is no shortage of anything else - hydrogen, oxygen,
sulphur, nitrogen, iron, chlorine, sodium, potassium etc - we
have oodles of those. But life has expanded to the molybdenum
limits, and this very fact suggests it began in a place where
there was more of it.
Food for thought!
-- Biochemical Bill
Interestingly, molybdenum is also involved in a subtle argument that
earthly life must have been seeded here by life bits from elsewhere.
The argument is, that molybdenum is very important in so much
of earthly biochemistry, that such biochemistry could only have
developed elsewhere, where there was more of it. Molybdenum
is somewhat of a bottleneck to life here, (as is also phosphorus),
there isn't really enough of it (or them). There is enough of it
to keep life going, so the basic biochemistry doesn't change,
earth is stuck with what it's got now - the keyboard layout is set.
But if there were a plentiful supply, life would cover the whole
planet very thickly:- all the oceans would be sludgy-solid
with it, it would thickly cover the earth's surface,
and probably the top subsurface layers as well.
To some extent this is already the case. On land at least,
but not in the oceans. Has the question ever occurred to you -
why *isn't* the ocean thickly filled with a sludge of plant and
animal life. After disposing of superficial answers about
predators eating too much small stuff, and parts being too
cold or too pressurey, (after all - life will always find a way),
one comes eventually to this - there simply *isn't enough*
molybdenum (or phosphorus) to allow it! Life has been
trying to fill up the world, but virtually all the molybdenum
has been used up!
There is no shortage of anything else - hydrogen, oxygen,
sulphur, nitrogen, iron, chlorine, sodium, potassium etc - we
have oodles of those. But life has expanded to the molybdenum
limits, and this very fact suggests it began in a place where
there was more of it.
Food for thought!
-- Biochemical Bill
LizR
Apr 16, 2014, 3:47:43 PM4/16/14
to fo...@googlegroups.com
Thanks Bill that is very interesting!
(It's a bit like the apparently looming problem with touchscreen devices... :)
Bill Taylor
Apr 17, 2014, 8:05:33 AM4/17/14
to fo...@googlegroups.com
On Thursday, April 17, 2014 7:47:43 AM UTC+12, Liz R wrote:
Thanks Bill that is very interesting!
A pleasure!
(beaming)
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages