Scientists at NASA seems to be miopic in their view of life. Just because life on earth needs water does not mean life any where needs water. May be there is life at other places and even on earth might be living off some thing else than water and oxygen. What do you think?
2006-07-10 05:47:02 · 11 answers · asked by quest 1 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Astronomy & Space
i agree but that is not the point that scientist look for. the thing is water is a very stable compound and contains oxygen and hydrogen which r the 2 basic elements for any organic matter(life is all organic matter) to exist.
2006-07-10 06:50:17 · answer #1 · answered by jivdex 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's not that scientists simply refuse to consider that life can be based on something other than water. A search for water-based life is the most practical course because (a) we can find water by finding hydrogen, and (b) we are more likely to recognize water-based organisms *as living*. We could be looking smack at organisms based on some other molecule and not know, given how far away we are, that we are seeing something alive.
The basic methodology, I think, is to try to find life in more or less familiar forms, based on more or less familiar systems, and observe the specific forms life takes under conditions different from Earth. Once we have a better idea of the available spectrum of life, as it were, *then* we can look for similar patterns in non-aqueous systems.
In other words, we are giving the problem a chance to be relatively easy before we go tramping off in search of the really difficult solutions.
2006-07-10 06:23:19 · answer #2 · answered by nardhelain 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
We need water to live. And all the life form in earth need water and exists because of water presence. When we search for water obviously we search our form of life. Starting point. It is a smart move. They also look for carbon and other things.
2006-07-10 07:13:39 · answer #3 · answered by Dr M 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
interior the image voltaic equipment that's fullyyt Earth that shows indicators of existence. so as that they preserve on with the a million get mutually we've the following in the international and that (so a procedures as all of us understand) required water to start up. so that you seem interior the most obtrusive places first of all. they don't rule out different procedures existence would have formed yet accurate this second the scarce aspects are placed into the likely places to discover it, if there have been thousands of probes going into area different ideas will be pursued, yet there are not. and they have not got here upon the different places with existence besides, so even the water theory must be wobbly.
2016-10-14 07:42:54 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
because human life needs water to survive. scientists base their searches for extraterrestrial life on the same factors. they believe that the requirements for life are universal, and thus begin the search with water. if a planet has water, they believe life can exist there. the whole basis of science depends on human and earth life.
2006-07-10 05:52:53 · answer #5 · answered by kalrissian23 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
life like that found on our planet needs water. it's possible there is other life that doesn't need water, but it's a good way to find the most probable sites of life before we start searching under every rock in the galaxy
2006-07-10 05:52:49 · answer #6 · answered by shiara_blade 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Actually life has been postulated to be based on other chemicals, like ammonia.
It would be illogical and onerous for scientist to consider every form of life possible. It needs to be narrowed down. We know how water based life works and can theorize how ammonia based life might work, so we go with these. We cannot immagine how gasoline based life would work and also find no evidence of gasoline soaked worlds. So we go with what we know and what we can theorize.
2006-07-10 05:52:18 · answer #7 · answered by ksjazzguitar 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
They have to narrow down their search somehow. Since you can't really detect bacteria from space, it is easier to try to find concentrations of water first (by detecting hydrogen), and then search that smaller, wet area for life. Since all forms of life that we are familar with needs water to function, this is not a bad assumption.
2006-07-10 06:10:31 · answer #8 · answered by Randy G 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I agree! There may be life on Venus. Just because we can't live in extreme temperatures doesn't mean other life forms can't.
2006-07-10 05:50:48 · answer #9 · answered by songbird 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
because it is easier to detect water and thus a possibilty of life, than just randomly searching for life.
2006-07-10 06:24:55 · answer #10 · answered by JCCCMA 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋