Non Carbon based life

[Moontanman]

Does the new Boron bucky ball point to the possibility of boron based life? I know that boron does produce some polymeres and even ring shaped molecules both of which are nesesarry for life. And since carbons ability to make a ball shaped molecule is another manefestation of it's ability to form complex molecules could this property being present in Boron also point towards the possibility of Boron based life? Silicon has long been touted as the best bet for non carbon based life but it's inability to form rings and the large size of the atom have been pointed to as problems for life to be based on silicon. Boron doesn't seem to have these problems. Could boron be the best possiblity for non carbon based life?

 

Michael

[Tormod]

I don't know about it yet but it sounds like a possibility. Exciting news at any rate.

[Moontanman]

It amazes me that so little thought is given to life not as we know it. Of course we aren't sure yet if there is any other life at all much less differnt from ours. Did you hear about the new planet that has been found around Gliese 581? It is only five times as massive as the earth and is in the liquid water zone of the star.

 

Michael

[ronthepon]

If boron would give rise to anything like life, it would probably be less potent in terms of evolution led diversity.

 

Carbon, as compared to boron has an enormous capability of catenation, and the formation of ultra-complex molecules (like enzymes) is more feasible in carbon.

 

However, the picture changes at lower temperatures. When you can have ammonia as a solvent (at that temperature, that is) boron does seem possible.

 

However, boron forms hydrogen briged chains, and thus the molecules that would be involved would not be analogous in any case.

[Moontanman]

If boron would give rise to anything like life, it would probably be less potent in terms of evolution led diversity.

 

Carbon, as compared to boron has an enormous capability of catenation, and the formation of ultra-complex molecules (like enzymes) is more feasible in carbon.

 

However, the picture changes at lower temperatures. When you can have ammonia as a solvent (at that temperature, that is) boron does seem possible.

 

However, boron forms hydrogen briged chains, and thus the molecules that would be involved would not be analogous in any case.

 

Ok, I'm not going to pretend I know all about what you said but it seems I don't know what catenation means for sure. Can you explain what it is and why boron would work better at lower temps?

 

Michael

[Tormod]

It amazes me that so little thought is given to life not as we know it.

 

Uhm...I beg to differ. I personally know a whole bunch of people who work with "life" in it's many varieties. Some of them are biologists, some are astronomers, and some are astrophycisists. Some dabble in exobiology. But not all of them can work with "life NOT as we know it". Yet some of them do.

 

A lot of science is about life not as we know it. Or were you thinking about something else?

[Moontanman]

Uhm...I beg to differ. I personally know a whole bunch of people who work with "life" in it's many varieties. Some of them are biologists, some are astronomers, and some are astrophycisists. Some dabble in exobiology. But not all of them can work with "life NOT as we know it". Yet some of them do.

 

A lot of science is about life not as we know it. Or were you thinking about something else? :)

 

Well I wasn't thinking about extremophiles that live here on earth. I know that feild is being studied by many people. All these organisms are still "life as we know it". Only one person I know has done meaningfull studies of silicon life and came up with the theory that it would be highly unlikely if not impossible due to problems in the nature of silicon and it's compounds. As far as I know no othor studies have been done as thought experiments or mathmatically studied.

 

Michael

[gribbon]

I don't know much about Boron based life, but what about life based on Arsenic, Chlorine, Sulfur and Ammonia? I know Arsenic is toxic to a lot of living things on Earth, but some marine algae incorporate arsenic into complex organic molecules such as arsenosugars and arsenobetaines. I also remember that fungi and bacteria can produce volatile methylated arsenic compounds, and most importantly, both arsenate reduction and arsenite oxidation have been observed in microbes. Even better, some prokaryotes can use arsenate as a terminal electron acceptor during anaerobic growth and I also remember that they can use arsenite as an electron donor as well. :)

 

The chemical properties of Chlorine are similair to those of Oxygen, but unfortunately, it isn't quite as abundant in the Universe, and most of it is trapped in salt compunds anyway. :(

 

Sulphur can form long-chains, but it is too reactive. It shouldn't be dismissed though, as green and purple bacteria (he he, who would have thought you'd get those!:D :shrug: ) have used it in redox reactions.:hyper:

 

Ammonia is damn good alternative, as it has (when liquid) properties similair to water and can be used to dissolve numerous organic molecules and metals. The only problem is that it doesn't have enough surface tenion, it's Hydrogen bonds are too weak, and it isn't very good at concentrating non-polar molecules through the hydrophobic effect. With the right tempertaures and ressures though, it would work.:doh:

 

Alternative biochemistry - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[InfiniteNow]

I know Arsenic is toxic to a lot of living things on Earth, but some marine algae incorporate arsenic into complex organic molecules such as arsenosugars and arsenobetaines. I also remember that fungi and bacteria can produce volatile methylated arsenic compounds, and most importantly, both arsenate reduction and arsenite oxidation have been observed in microbes. Even better, some prokaryotes can use arsenate as a terminal electron acceptor during anaerobic growth and I also remember that they can use arsenite as an electron donor as well.

 

It would seem that you "remember" it word for word from this site:

 

Biochemical Periodic Table - Arsenic

No essential biological function for arsenic has been identified, but marine algae and invertebrates can incorporate arsenic into complex organic molecules such as arsenosugars and arsenobetaines, and fungi and bacteria can produce volatile methylated arsenic compounds. Both microbial arsenate reduction and arsenite oxidation are well documented as detoxification mechanisms. Additionally, some prokaryotes can use arsenate as a terminal electron acceptor during anaerobic growth and others can utilize arsenite as an electron donor to generate energy.

 

 

The last time I accused you of using the words of others as if they were your own, you freaked out and neg repped me with a comment:

You know, it makes sense to have "evidence" to support accusations, and if you can't be bothered to type a few words into a search engine in order to find the article from which you claim I have extracted this info, then I don't know what your doing.

So, this time I followed your advise and did. I even provided a link. :cup:

 

You really should quote your sources. ;)

[Moontanman]

I don't know much about Boron based life, but what about life based on Arsenic, Chlorine, Sulfur and Ammonia? I know Arsenic is toxic to a lot of living things on Earth, but some marine algae incorporate arsenic into complex organic molecules such as arsenosugars and arsenobetaines. I also remember that fungi and bacteria can produce volatile methylated arsenic compounds, and most importantly, both arsenate reduction and arsenite oxidation have been observed in microbes. Even better, some prokaryotes can use arsenate as a terminal electron acceptor during anaerobic growth and I also remember that they can use arsenite as an electron donor as well.

 

The chemical properties of Chlorine are similair to those of Oxygen, but unfortunately, it isn't quite as abundant in the Universe, and most of it is trapped in salt compunds anyway. :(

 

Sulphur can form long-chains, but it is too reactive. It shouldn't be dismissed though, as green and purple bacteria (he he, who would have thought you'd get those!:D :cup: ) have used it in redox reactions.;)

 

Ammonia is damn good alternative, as it has (when liquid) properties similair to water and can be used to dissolve numerous organic molecules and metals. The only problem is that it doesn't have enough surface tenion, it's Hydrogen bonds are too weak, and it isn't very good at concentrating non-polar molecules through the hydrophobic effect. With the right tempertaures and ressures though, it would work.:D

 

 

Your ideas have given me a lot to think about but I have seen a glitch in the non carbon based life concept. When you say arsenic or sulfer based life exactly what chemical do you mean arsenic would replace? Carbon? Oxygen? It looks like you mean ammonia could replace water but what chemical involved in life as we know would sulfer replace? To really understand when we are talking about we need to specify these things. Sulfer has been thought of as a replacement for oxygen on high temperature worlds where sulfer would be a gas. I am interested in reading what you had in mind when you suggested these chemicals as replacements for life as we know it.

 

Michael

[CHADS]

In stars two heliums fuse to make a very unstable form of berylium-8 .. for carbon-12 to form from this a third helium has to fuse ....

 

Becuase of the unstability the chance of this 3rd helium connection is very slim .... but by remarkebly coincidence 'stars' overall nuclear resonances aid the fussion of the 3rd helium were usually it would be inprobable .

 

if a 4th helium will fuse to carbon 12 it creates an oxygen which will burn quick in a star...... but the chances of a forth helium connection is remarkebly below the fussion gradient .. so prevents the likelyhood of carbon being destroyed into oxygen.

 

In short this means that stars preserve the right to create carbon More so than necessery .... Carbon is ideal for making life becuase the four prongs on carbon 12 attract another 4 and all fits togeather like happy Lego...

Hydrogen is so abundant and versitile its obvious it wants to create hydrocarbons .

 

Carbon is the One .. Its Lego .. And Created for complex Evolution.

 

Without carbon, the basis for life would be impossible. While it has been thought that silicon might take the place of carbon in forming a host of similar compounds, it is now not possible to form stable compounds with very long chains of silicon atoms.

 

WHY WOULD STARS JUST BY CHANCE PRESERVE ITS OWN RIGHT TO CREATE THE ESSENTIAL LIFE INGREDIENT AGAINST ODDS OF 10000000^GOOGLE .

 

AMAZING STUFF.

[Moontanman]

In stars two heliums fuse to make a very unstable form of berylium-8 .. for carbon-12 to form from this a third helium has to fuse ....

 

Becuase of the unstability the chance of this 3rd helium connection is very slim .... but by remarkebly coincidence 'stars' overall nuclear resonances aid the fussion of the 3rd helium were usually it would be inprobable .

 

if a 4th helium will fuse to carbon 12 it creates an oxygen which will burn quick in a star...... but the chances of a forth helium connection is remarkebly below the fussion gradient .. so prevents the likelyhood of carbon being destroyed into oxygen.

 

In short this means that stars preserve the right to create carbon More so than necessery .... Carbon is ideal for making life becuase the four prongs on carbon 12 attract another 4 and all fits togeather like happy Lego...

Hydrogen is so abundant and versitile its obvious it wants to create hydrocarbons .

 

Carbon is the One .. Its Lego .. And Created for complex Evolution.

 

Without carbon, the basis for life would be impossible. While it has been thought that silicon might take the place of carbon in forming a host of similar compounds, it is now not possible to form stable compounds with very long chains of silicon atoms.

 

WHY WOULD STARS JUST BY CHANCE PRESERVE ITS OWN RIGHT TO CREATE THE ESSENTIAL LIFE INGREDIENT AGAINST ODDS OF 10000000^GOOGLE .

 

AMAZING STUFF.

 

 

Carbon is ideal for life as we know it, it also happens that carbon life is the only one we know. As far as we know there isn't any other instances of life in the universe than ours. Or it may be that our carbon planet is the only carbon planet and all the rest are based on nitrogen/phosphorus polymers. Carbon might appear to be so perfect because all life we know is made of it. It's like being in the late 1960's and saying that vinyl records are the last thing in musical recording. Of course we know it's Cd's, or is it? Just because vinyl seemed to be perfect for playing music it didn't mean there weren't better alternatives.

Michael

[Jay-qu]

We breathe in oxygen in elemental form and breathe out CO2, this process of respiration gives us energy. For a silicon based lifeform, SiO2 is sand.. breathe in air - cough up sand ?

 

This is not to say that they may breathe in something else instead, but Oxygen makes sense because of its high electronegativity and abundance in the universe.

[Moontanman]

We breathe in oxygen in elemental form and breathe out CO2, this process of respiration gives us energy. For a silicon based lifeform, SiO2 is sand.. breathe in air - cough up sand ?

 

This is not to say that they may breathe in something else instead, but Oxygen makes sense because of its high electronegativity and abundance in the universe.

 

Yes that is one major concern about silicon life although extremophiles on Earth use solids in respiration so you can't rule out silicon on that premise alone.

[Jay-qu]

Yes that is one major concern about silicon life although extremophiles on Earth use solids in respiration so you can't rule out silicon on that premise alone.

True.

 

I dont know about you, but I would have trouble getting excited about life on another planet if all it was only of the single cellular kind.. I think a life-form based on these solid respirations would have trouble forming large enough bodies needed for intelligence (as we know it..)

[gribbon]

This is seriously boring now…

 

Okay then InfyNow, granted the description and wording used is similar to the site you linked to, but it isn’t the same. The only part which is, is this:

 

“fungi and bacteria can produce volatile methylated arsenic compounds”

 

…anyone would describe it like that anyway…

 

What it seems to me, is that we have gotten into a useless Tit for Tat, poke for prod relationship, with you looking for any excuse to chastise me/neg-rep/ infract me, and me losing my patience as a result and neg-repping you when I see you be rude.

 

Here’s a question:

 

Does anyone else see something so dramatically wrong with my behaviour that I require constant pestering with neg reps/infractions/ and pointless, useless arguments that degrade every thread?

 

When you say arsenic or sulfer based life exactly what chemical do you mean arsenic would replace?

 

Arsenic would replace Carbon…

 

It looks like you mean ammonia could replace water but what chemical involved in life as we know would sulfer replace?

 

Ammonia would replace water, Chlorine could replace Oxygen, Silicon could replace Carbon, and Sulphur would also be able to replace Carbon.

 

As for the bit Jay mentioned about silicon respiration requiring creatures to be small, I suspect he may have a point, but I need to look into that…either way, life of any kind is good…

[CHADS]

Why ingest anything!

 

Why breath oxygen or whatever ...... why not hold all essential ingredients inside the being and survive by solar power ... or be born with everything you need to survive inside your body without ever having to take in anything....

 

Sort of like a self sufficient entity that requires nothing to survive and just observes.

 

Maybe thats high level of evolution down the evolutionary road beyond the horizon but carbon can be manipulated and easiily form such complexity .... but other periodic elements find difficulty evolving along a stable curve.

 

The small bacteria found down the mine recently lived on radiation for sustanence .. Imagine what dark creepy life forms can evolve on planets or even huge asteroids from the radiation produced by Nuetron stars!!!Possible?