NationStates Jolt Archive


Can Humans Exist?

Greenlander
23-06-2005, 15:35
Taken from another thread...



Can Humans Exist?

Now, for the sake of this discussion we don’t need to bother ourselves with what caused the first spark of life on earth, we only need to acknowledge that it did happen.

We decide to take three classes and combine them altogether for one grand scheme of ‘what we believe’ and how we got here, then surely we will be well rounded in our outlook.

First class, Evolution and Biology. Here we find that the first spark of life happened about 3.5 billion years ago on Earth, that seems to be about 1.5 billion years older than that… Okay, fine and dandy. We take our notes.

Next, we walk on over to our Astronomy and Astro-Physics class, to learn about our Universe. Here we find that the very best measurements of the Universe from it’s measurable expansion and growth rates, and movements and the speed of light etc., etc., etc. shows practically conclusively that the Universe must be between 10-15 billion years of age. Okay, that’s nice, we take our notes and notice that we have between 5 to 10 billion years to make the Earth and start life on it for us to be here! Excellent.

In our next class, Geology and Elements, we find out that nothing on Earth creates Iron, the base metal, the end product of all matter is essentially Iron/Lead. We find that it is ONLY created by the fusion in Stars/Suns? Well how is that possible we say, the planet’s very core is Iron and there’s hundred of thousand of tons of it all over the place?”

“Of course,” they say, “a Star a long time ago must have gone supernova and dispersed this Iron into the cosmos where it sped through the expanding universe for eons before cooling and slowing enough so that it could get stuck in a giant gas cloud and re-condense over time, reforming into a new solar system, taking billions of years to do so, of course.” Well, we might have time, we think, as we add this to our notes… “Okay,” we think a little more hesitantly, perhaps even apprehensively…

But they don’t stop there! No, they then tell us that they think the earth must be THIRD generation at least for it to have as many raw physical heavy elements as it has!?!? "What," we exclaim?!?!

So we run back to the Astronomy guys as fast as we can and ask how fast a Sun burns before it goes supernova? They say, “10 Billion years.” WHAT?!?! “But you said the universe is only 10-15 billion years old,” we say, pointing at our notes, “And we are supposed to be living on a third generation planet,” we say, pointing at more notes!!!

“Is there any other way to burns stars faster we say?” Sure, they say, “They then tell us that it depends on the size of the star, they can burn faster by being bigger, depending on how big the Star is its faster and faster because it uses up fuel faster and faster it last less time. The bigger it is, the faster it burns and uses up it’s fuel faster and goes supernova sooner, thus our problem is solved, we think, relieved.

But no, they won’t stop either. “The bigger it is,” they say, “the faster it burns, but if it’s too big it shears off it's own excess mass, but the maximum size star burns in less than say a quarter hundred million year compared to the normal amount of time we don’t think it will go supernova at all, we think it turns into a black hole then.” (or Neutron Star or White Dwarf) And thus, we notice as we take our notes, it would not disperse the needed elements to form the planet we need and in fact already have. Our problem is back because only supernova star can disperse the needed heavy elements to expalins what we have on Earth.

So, we look at our notes again. To create us, Human life on the Planet Earth, Life needs 3.5 billion years on a 5 billion year old planet, in a planet consisting with enough heavy element’s to suggest that Earth needs to be third generation product of supernova created elements, taking twenty five billion years without a moment to spare, in a Universe that is only 15 billions years old (and probably younger!).

It seems, we can’t exist at all!?! :D



-----
Notes:
I may have, for the sake of brevity summed things up a bit, and jumped from quick conclusions to quick conclusion so that the discussion could progress and keep as many people involved as possible, but since we don’t have the time or space to write everything about how we know what we know, I think that’s more than excusable.

For example, I summed up the time of supernova, condense and supernova again, into a flat 10 billion years, that isn’t so much as a fib as it is a summary of the total elapsed time and ignoring details of how that is thought to be achieved. But my results are sound, as far as nothing otherwise has been proved…

Some links for anyone that might care to look up the various aspects of what I said above:

-The most up to date Universe age measurements is about 13.7 billion years old.
http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/m_uni/uni_101age.html

-The generally accepted age for the Earth and the rest of the solar system is about 4.55 billion years (plus or minus about 1%). This value is derived from several different lines of evidence.
- Ancient rocks exceeding 3.5 billion years in age are found on all of Earth's continents. The oldest rocks on Earth found so far are the Acasta Gneisses in northwestern Canada near Great Slave Lake (4.03 Ga) and the Isua Supracrustal rocks in West Greenland (3.7 to 3.8 Ga), but well-studied rocks nearly as old are also found in the Minnesota River Valley and northern Michigan (3.5-3.7 billion years), in Swaziland (3.4-3.5 billion years), and in Western Australia (3.4-3.6 billion years). [See Editor's Note.] These ancient rocks have been dated by a number of radiometric dating methods and the consistency of the results give scientists confidence that the ages are correct to within a few percent. An interesting feature of these ancient rocks is that they are not from any sort of "primordial crust" but are lava flows and sediments deposited in shallow water, an indication that Earth history began well before these rocks were deposited. In Western Australia, single zircon crystals found in younger sedimentary rocks have radiometric ages of as much as 4.3 billion years, making these tiny crystals the oldest materials to be found on Earth so far. The source rocks for these zircon crystals have not yet been found. The ages measured for Earth's oldest rocks and oldest crystals show that the Earth is at least 4.3 billion years in age but do not reveal the exact age of Earth's formation.

The best age for the Earth (4.54 Ga) is based on old, presumed single-stage leads coupled with the Pb ratios in troilite from iron meteorites, specifically the Canyon Diablo meteorite. In addition, mineral grains (zircon) with U-Pb ages of 4.4 Ga have recently been reported from sedimentary rocks in west-central Australia.
http://pubs.usgs.gov/gip/geotime/age.html

And that matches well with…

-Our Sun belongs to the generation of stars created 4.6 billion years ago, when our galaxy was roughly half its present age.
http://origins.stsci.edu/under/systems.shtml


-Iron:
Iron is a relatively abundant element in the universe. It is found in the sun and many types of stars in considerable quantity. Iron nuclei are very stable. Iron is a vital constituent of plant and animal life, and is the key component of haemoglobin.
http://www.webelements.com/webeleme...ext/Fe/key.html


-Lead is a chemical element in the periodic table that has the symbol Pb and atomic number 82. A soft, heavy, toxic and malleable true metal, lead has a dull gray appearance and is bluish white when freshly cut but tarnishes to dull gray when exposed to air. *snip* Lead is the heaviest stable element.
http://www.portaljuice.com/lead.html

-In astronomy, a metal is any element other than hydrogen or helium. This distinction is significant because hydrogen and helium (together with trace amounts of lithium) are the only elements that occur naturally without the fusion activity of stars. Thus, the metallicity of a galaxy or other object is an indication of past stellar activity.
http://www.portaljuice.com/metal.html
Czardas
23-06-2005, 15:39
<really long post>I'd just like to mention that with a post that long, almost no-one is going to read it. :)

However, you're right. Humans don't exist. They're just action figures I like playing with on that little planet near the sun.
Evilness and Chaos
23-06-2005, 15:47
I think it's fairly obvious that the first generation of stars were just contrary and decided to blow up early.

Now go eat your celery.
Hyridian
23-06-2005, 15:48
*read about first 4 lines*

hmm....very interesting. I will ponder this for a while.

However, you're right. Humans don't exist. They're just action figures I like playing with on that little planet near the sun.

I'm a G.I. Joe.

BANG BANG!!! DIE STUPID *$(#@)# AND YOUR JUST A $%# #@@# PANZIE

MUWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!

i need a life
Non Aligned States
23-06-2005, 15:48
Nonsense Czardas, you are all actually computer simulations I have running at the moment. It is fortunate that Greenlander has found out this obvious typo error in the parameter settings. I am now upgrading him to debugger status for his contribution. See you sentients next update. :grin:
Sarkasis
23-06-2005, 15:51
So we run back to the Astronomy guys as fast as we can and ask how fast a Sun burns before it goes supernova? They say, “10 Billion years.” WHAT?!?! “But you said the universe is only 10-15 billion years old,” we say, pointing at our notes, “And we are supposed to be living on a third generation planet,” we say, pointing at more notes!!!

First and second generation stars are usually massive and are made of "pure hydrogen" (with some traces of helium in 2nd generation starts). The biggest ones burn out in about 100 million years.

The smaller the star, the longer the lifespan. Some white dwarfs will live for 800 billion years.
Leperous monkeyballs
23-06-2005, 15:52
I think it's fairly obvious that the first generation of stars were just contrary and decided to blow up early.

Now go eat your celery.


Those weren't design flaws... they're just fucking features of Starz ME (says God Gates)
Vetalia
23-06-2005, 15:53
The smaller the star, the longer the lifespan. Some white dwarfs will live for 800 billion years.

I think it has to do with how hot the star is. Can't stars last longer if they burn hotter because they can fuse in to higher elements like iron or carbon?
It's only the big, cool stars that die out quickly.
Wisjersey
23-06-2005, 15:55
The smaller the star, the longer the lifespan. Some white dwarfs will live for 800 billion years.

You mean red dwarfs, don't you? Like Proxima Centauri and Wolf-359 (actually even somewhat less massive than the two)....
Drunk commies deleted
23-06-2005, 15:57
I think it has to do with how hot the star is. Can't stars last longer if they burn hotter because they can fuse in to higher elements like iron or carbon?
It's only the big, cool stars that die out quickly.
Big stars were actually pretty hot. All that gravity fused elements together very efficiently. When Iron and other heavy elements started to form and fuse they actually drained energy away from the stars. Without the heat from all that fusion pushing the star out against it's own gravity it contracteda and fused most all of it's available fuel at once. Boom!
Czardas
23-06-2005, 15:58
Nonsense Czardas, you are all actually computer simulations I have running at the moment. It is fortunate that Greenlander has found out this obvious typo error in the parameter settings. I am now upgrading him to debugger status for his contribution. See you sentients next update. :grin:"You"?

I'm the system admin for your computer! Please!

(And if I'm not, what's the password? See! You don't know it! :D)
I V Stalin
23-06-2005, 15:59
Seeing as how humans don't exist, there are two possibilites. Firstly, you, and everyone else here, must be some other form of life. Probably single-celled organisms (unless there hasn't been the time for them to exist either?).
Secondly, and more interestingly, you don't exist, so you can't have just proved that you don't exist, therefore leaving open the possibility that you do exist, in which case you would indeed be able to prove that you don't exist.
Evilness and Chaos
23-06-2005, 16:01
Seeing as how humans don't exist, there are two possibilites. Firstly, you, and everyone else here, must be some other form of life. Probably single-celled organisms (unless there hasn't been the time for them to exist either?).
Secondly, and more interestingly, you don't exist, so you can't have just proved that you don't exist, therefore leaving open the possibility that you do exist, in which case you would indeed be able to prove that you don't exist.

And so, God disapears in a puff of logic.

QED.
Eutrusca
23-06-2005, 16:02
I'd just like to mention that with a post that long, almost no-one is going to read it. :)
Well, I read it, you twit! :p

Any time you use cross-discipline data to draw conclusions, you're playing with fire. It's only been relatively recently that the apparent discrepency between the age of the oldest stars and the projected age of the universe could be reconciled, and that was in the single discipline of astronomy!
Frangland
23-06-2005, 16:02
*read about first 4 lines*

hmm....very interesting. I will ponder this for a while.



I'm a G.I. Joe.

BANG BANG!!! DIE STUPID *$(#@)# AND YOUR JUST A $%# #@@# PANZIE

MUWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!

i need a life

in that case, i dub myself He-Man.

hehe
The Mindset
23-06-2005, 16:02
Large suns can burn out in 1 billion years or less.
Vetalia
23-06-2005, 16:02
Big stars were actually pretty hot. All that gravity fused elements together very efficiently. When Iron and other heavy elements started to form and fuse they actually drained energy away from the stars. Without the heat from all that fusion pushing the star out against it's own gravity it contracteda and fused most all of it's available fuel at once. Boom!

Wow, I didn't know that. I always figured the bigger stars were less hot than the white dwarf stars and other smaller ones.
The Mindset
23-06-2005, 16:03
I think it has to do with how hot the star is. Can't stars last longer if they burn hotter because they can fuse in to higher elements like iron or carbon?
It's only the big, cool stars that die out quickly.
No, if a star began fusing heavier elements, it'd collapse and go nova.
Wisjersey
23-06-2005, 16:05
I think it has to do with how hot the star is. Can't stars last longer if they burn hotter because they can fuse in to higher elements like iron or carbon?
It's only the big, cool stars that die out quickly.

The temperature of a star comes from the fusion rate of a star (helium and other stuff 'burns' hotter than hydrogen), and the fusion rate is depended on the mass. Stars exist because of the equillibrium between fusion (ie outward pressure) and gravitational compression (ie inward pressure). When the star runs of out of fuel, it collapses. If it is however massive enough it can build up enough pressure to 'burn' heavier elements. However, as said helium burns hotter and therefor stars will expand subsequently into red giants. This process continues until to iron. Since iron is unfusable, the reaction in the core will cease and the star will collapse. While the core is compressed into a neutron star, a fusion reaction will start in the outlying regions (which aren't fused to completely to iron yet). Not only this will rip apart outer holl of the star in a supernova explosion, but also form elements heavier than iron.
Czardas
23-06-2005, 16:05
Well, I read it, you twit! :pI'm talking about anyone sensible. :p :p :p :D
Fluidics
23-06-2005, 16:09
Well I read the whole thing and I have been forced to conclude that the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy is correct that you are all merely figments of my overactive imagination.
Wisjersey
23-06-2005, 16:13
Well I read the whole thing and I have been forced to conclude that the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy is correct that you are all merely figments of my overactive imagination.

Well, you have a good point there. However, this world is harmless (or, let's say *mostly harmless*) compared to the weird dreams i have at night... :rolleyes:
The Black Forrest
23-06-2005, 16:13
*read about first 4 lines*

hmm....very interesting. I will ponder this for a while.



I'm a G.I. Joe.

BANG BANG!!! DIE STUPID *$(#@)# AND YOUR JUST A $%# #@@# PANZIE

MUWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!

i need a life

Hmmmm what was that joke about a kung-fu grip? :eek: ;)
Hyridian
23-06-2005, 16:15
Hmmmm what was that joke about a kung-fu grip? :eek: ;)

no, it was just my over active imagination coming out. :D
New Sans
23-06-2005, 16:16
Well I read the whole thing and I have been forced to conclude that the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy is correct that you are all merely figments of my overactive imagination.

Well in that case who's up for lunch at the resteraunt at the end of the universe? The non figment over here can pick up the tab.
Eutrusca
23-06-2005, 16:17
I'm talking about anyone sensible. :p :p :p :D
Oh, you're a regular laugh riot, you are! :p
Czardas
23-06-2005, 16:20
Oh, you're a regular laugh riot, you are! :pI do not appreciate sarcasm, except when I use it.
Sarkasis
23-06-2005, 16:23
Since iron is unfusable, the reaction in the core will cease and the star will collapse.
Some of the hottest stars can actually burn (or "flash") iron, but it is a very weird and marginal process involving photon saturation of the iron atoms.

Otherwise, the iron fusion process requires more energy than it releases, so the core goes fubar quite soon. The core temperature goes down, gravity force starts to win against the energy release (as the released photons' pressure act to counterbalance gravity during the star's lifetime). The core collapses and the star dies.

Anyway... during the violent death of a star, extreme nuclear fusion turns iron into all sorts of elements upto uranium. Thus, light elements upto iron are obtained during a 3rd generation star's lifetime, but heavier elements are created "in a bang" -- as a byproduct of the supernovae. These heavy elements are very rare in the universe, when compared to light elements.
Eutrusca
23-06-2005, 16:37
I do not appreciate sarcasm, except when I use it.
You? Sarcasm?? Never! :p
Dancing Penguin
23-06-2005, 16:44
However, you're right. Humans don't exist. They're just action figures I like playing with on that little planet near the sun.
Oh! That's where my box of mint-condition "Evolved Monkey" collectables went to...
Czardas
23-06-2005, 16:47
You? Sarcasm?? Never! :pEutrusca...cut it out. I'm serious now.

Maybe I should bold the "sarcastic" in my signature...
Czardas
23-06-2005, 16:50
Oh! That's where my box of mint-condition "Evolved Monkey" collectables went to...You shouldn't have lent them to me if you wanted them so much! :D
Greenlander
23-06-2005, 17:55
Large suns can burn out in 1 billion years or less.

Wow, I didn't know that. I always figured the bigger stars were less hot than the white dwarf stars and other smaller ones.

There seems to be some misunderstanding about what I meant by ‘large’ stars. When I used it I meant, large mass stars, not jut big looking stars. An older normal star becomes a ‘red giant’ star before collapsing, but it’s mass is not increased in that phase only it’s volume. A large mass star on the other hand might or might not look big, but it burns faster than a normal star, much, much faster. They frequently do some very strange things as well. However, for to purposes of this thread, I only mentioned them to point out two things, one, they can only get ‘so’ big in the first place, and two, they don’t really fit the bill for explaining what we have on earth in the form of heavy elements.



The temperature of a star comes from the fusion rate of a star (helium and other stuff 'burns' hotter than hydrogen), and the fusion rate is depended on the mass. Stars exist because of the equillibrium between fusion (ie outward pressure) and gravitational compression (ie inward pressure). When the star runs of out of fuel, it collapses. If it is however massive enough it can build up enough pressure to 'burn' heavier elements. However, as said helium burns hotter and therefor stars will expand subsequently into red giants. This process continues until to iron. Since iron is unfusable, the reaction in the core will cease and the star will collapse. While the core is compressed into a neutron star, a fusion reaction will start in the outlying regions (which aren't fused to completely to iron yet). Not only this will rip apart outer holl of the star in a supernova explosion, but also form elements heavier than iron.

Some of the hottest stars can actually burn (or "flash") iron, but it is a very weird and marginal process involving photon saturation of the iron atoms.

Otherwise, the iron fusion process requires more energy than it releases, so the core goes fubar quite soon. The core temperature goes down, gravity force starts to win against the energy release (as the released photons' pressure act to counterbalance gravity during the star's lifetime). The core collapses and the star dies.

Anyway... during the violent death of a star, extreme nuclear fusion turns iron into all sorts of elements upto uranium. Thus, light elements upto iron are obtained during a 3rd generation star's lifetime, but heavier elements are created "in a bang" -- as a byproduct of the supernovae. These heavy elements are very rare in the universe, when compared to light elements.

Two nice posts there, thanks :D

Well, I read it, you twit! :p

Any time you use cross-discipline data to draw conclusions, you're playing with fire. It's only been relatively recently that the apparent discrepency between the age of the oldest stars and the projected age of the universe could be reconciled, and that was in the single discipline of astronomy!

Absolutely true, but so what, it’s too much fun to think of not doing it! Fire is fun!! :p :D :p
Non Aligned States
24-06-2005, 00:39
"You"?

I'm the system admin for your computer! Please!

(And if I'm not, what's the password? See! You don't know it! :D)

Actually, I do know the password. But I'm definitely not going to let your poor attempt at scamming it out of me succeed. Wise to the ways of the haxxors I am =p

And just for that, I'm going to lower your IQ settings by 10 points. Take that! ^^
Gambloshia
24-06-2005, 00:50
Taken from another thread...



Can Humans Exist?

<snip>





Just shut up and accept it!
Greenlander
24-06-2005, 01:16
Just shut up and accept it!


Awww, now where's the fun in that? :(

On the other hand, I've got a pretty good theory that says you couldn't have wrote that and I couldn't have read it :p :D
Zatarack
24-06-2005, 01:22
Nonsense Czardas, you are all actually computer simulations I have running at the moment. It is fortunate that Greenlander has found out this obvious typo error in the parameter settings. I am now upgrading him to debugger status for his contribution. See you sentients next update. :grin:

So, my test in the effects of admin powers for my sentients has caused them to believe they made it. I'll have to study this more
Greenlander
24-06-2005, 03:52
Another idea that occurred to me about this...

What if we are the first, and so far only, sentient race yet in the universe? What if we are so early developers that it was nearly impossible for us to be here, and therefore there would be no reason for other planets or solar systems to have yet developed even advanced life yet, none-the-less space faring species?

So, in effect, we are, or would be, the proverbial ‘Ancients,’ the ‘first comers,’ the ones that will become the seeders of life in the galaxy and universe?

Perhaps we need to develop into what nearly every sci-fi epic story on TV, Movie or Book has, a race called the ‘Founders,’ or the, ‘Ancients,’ the ‘old ones’ etc.

You know what that would mean? That would mean that every race and planet for the rest of creation is going to be spending lots and lots of time trying to find out what we were like and what we knew, and, in the end, they are going to be really, really disappointed :p Because we suck as a 'great and wise ancient race' for them :D LOL


That or God just loves us and gave us a little push to get us started and he has a really funny sense of humor :)
Aeazer
24-06-2005, 03:56
No, humans can't exist. They are corrupt and evil and greedy. They deserve to die.
:mp5: :sniper: :gundge:
Greenlander
24-06-2005, 13:48
Well they can't deserve to die unless they exist now can they? :p
Tsrill
24-06-2005, 14:05
Hmm, interesting thread. I don't know enough astronomy to make an attempt at solving this paradox, but a few things would make me wonder...how well do we know fusion processes? I mean, we can only study them by looking at stars a gazillion lightyears away...then, the universe is not static but expands (or so I have read), now what does this do to the processes involved? Thermodynamics generally say that expanding gas cools down, so was the universe a lot hotter in the beginning?

But well, cogito ergo sum, I think therefore I exist, thus I must exist, right? So either we must find a scientifical explanation for this paradox, or we must denounce the use of logic (because "I think therefore I exist" is only valid if you accept logic/causality as a valid way of reasoning ;) ).

-Tsrill
Czardas
24-06-2005, 14:13
Actually, I do know the password. But I'm definitely not going to let your poor attempt at scamming it out of me succeed. Wise to the ways of the haxxors I am =p

And just for that, I'm going to lower your IQ settings by 10 points. Take that! ^^((Please excuse him. He's delusional and tends to think he controls the universe. Apparently he's under the impression that his computer with all those simulations is actually the real world, when he's far too busy with the fake world to look out the window and smell the fresh air. It's called NSaddiction.))
KIERAN SEXBOY
24-06-2005, 14:15
well there was this one time when i could see through my entire arm! i didnt exist then cuz i could see through my arm. i was told afterwards i was high on marijuana.
Dorksonia
24-06-2005, 14:17
Jeepers..............I thought I was here.......
Evil British Monkeys
24-06-2005, 14:37
So a computer that runs a simulation of life... kinda sucks when that person plays gta on that comp ;)
Jibea
24-06-2005, 14:37
I'm talking about anyone sensible. :p :p :p :D

I read it too :mad:.

I knew people were going to say things like if we do not exist... and we obviously exist.... So predictable. Well anyway... the age of the universe varies anywhere from as early as 9.5 billion to 20ish billion years young.
Non Aligned States
24-06-2005, 14:46
((Please excuse him. He's delusional and tends to think he controls the universe. Apparently he's under the impression that his computer with all those simulations is actually the real world, when he's far too busy with the fake world to look out the window and smell the fresh air. It's called NSaddiction.))

Muahahaha. The reduction on IQ points is working. =p
H N Fiddlebottoms VIII
24-06-2005, 15:15
Well since there is one in this room with me I'd say- wait . . .
Well, folks, it appears that for the first time in my life, I have been wrong. A quuick check of my surrounding environs, and a glance outside (at 10 A.M. nonetheless) has confirmed, for a fact, that Human's don't exist.
Czardas
24-06-2005, 15:25
I read it too :mad:.Well...anyone sensible excluding you. ;)
Greenlander
24-06-2005, 16:55
Error Message: Memory Could Not Be Read... If this is the first time you've seen this message please reboot. If you've seen this message before please contact the system administrator. ~ God






*crickets*


:p :D :p
Shenon
24-06-2005, 17:11
the message you seem to be saying with regards to your evidense, is not necesarily tht humans acan't exist, but that Earth can't exist, a third generation planet in a universe that is only old enough for first or second generation planets/ Oh well, I'd write it off as impossible, That only implies that there's something we don't know about the universe yet and god knows (As I'm sure do any other diety you could care to name) that we already know that there's quite a lot we don't know, one more thing won't hurt. Now why don't we go and try to solve the Darm Matter mystery, or the superfast particle problem, or the black hole conundrum?