those aren't her ideas
they're arthur c clarke's (a meeting with medusa) and arthur conan doyle's (the horror of the heights).
A British satellite expert reckons aliens will be enormous bewildering monsters ideal for depicting on telly science shows, the very sort of programme the government adviser is happy to front. Dr Maggie Aderin-Pocock said extraterrestrials could be football-field-size jellyfish with orange stomaches that float in the skies of …
they're arthur c clarke's (a meeting with medusa) and arthur conan doyle's (the horror of the heights).
On a topic of biology?
That's like asking your barber to defend you in court on a criminal matter. They might be a good at cutting hair, but they are not qualified to practice law.
Aderin-Pocock might be a decent person to discuss satellites, but she's fundamentally unqualified to discuss terrestrial biology, much less astrobiology.
I was also going to call on the stuff stolen from Clarke, but I was thinking Odyssey 3 (I think it's 3 - the aliens living in Jupiter's atmosphere).
Also Heinlein's Starman Jones.
Carl Sagan's 'Cosmos' featured a painting of (and I have to use the word) blobominations in Jupiter's atmosphere, based on work by Sagan and a colleague from Cornell, Ernest Salpeter. They knew the planet's interior was rich in organic molecules and warm, so life wasn't out of the question.
Some people know a lot about things that they aren't professionally involved in. I don't think she's asking (or anyone else is asking on her behalf) that you should consider her argments based on her position. Nowhere does she say: "I'm right about aliens because I work with satellites." She's just putting forward some arguments that can be considered on their own merits. And in an interview where she was asked to do so as far as I can see. Is there anything wrong with what she's saying?
I think you'll find that almost anyone is well qualified to discuss astrobiology. Unless you know of any silicon based lifeform experts who can disprove her ramblings I'd just nod patronisingly and wait for some data to come along and add a small iota of science to the subject.
And in all of human history we haven't met one yet!
So, we're talking about an orangey-coloured rubbery gas-bag-like alien are we? That's been done.
"Why would anyone trust a British satellite expert?
On a topic of biology?"
maybe because she's talking about space biology no? considering her job is all about looking at space I'd say she has a pretty good idea what could grow up there.
That type of ill-logic is why Physicists like to point out that real Sciences don't feel they have to explicitly put the word Science in the name of their field. (Like Computer Science or Social Science do.)
Silica based life, is also not new https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=silicon+based+life&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&client=firefox-beta
That would be a corner of Science where we have absolutely no evidence to base any theory's upon making everything just someone's opinion, or more often something they saw on tv or read in a Sci-fi book.
They key word there being 'Fiction'
A I recall from my biochemistry (MANY moons ago) silicon analogs for DNA becomes more and more unstable the longer the chains become (if you try to replace carbon with silicon.) That restricts the versatility of silicon in extremely large molecules (but then the human DNA appears to have a large amount of redundancy built into it) so the biochemistry would have to be seen before we could explore it.
I thought she stole the idea off the Skylandro in Star Control 2. With the floating gasbags and blinky lights, she's clearly a Star Control 2 fan.
Lets be realistic. Nobody has met an alien (at least without the help of mind altering substances) and therefore nobody really has any idea of whats out there.
by Iain M Banks...
More The Algebraist.
Came here to say that: Sounds very much like a Dweller
The Dwellers were wheel shaped or something?
Sounds more like his companion the littler Hathering or whatever her name was.
There are similar beings in 'Excession', by the same author, inhabiting an artificial world.
Agreed, or an Affront.
"...football-field-size jellyfish with orange stomaches (sic) that float in the skies of Titan while supported by small onion-shaped gas balls under their flaps."
I'll have a bottle of whatever she's drinking, and my friend Harvey will have another carrot juice.
Isn't this just a rehash of Carl Sagan's 'atmospheric beast'?
nah its superintelligent forms of the colour blue.
Douglas Adams definatly had the most original aliens apart from the main cast of course
Can anyone explain how inhaling/exhaling ambient gas from the atmosphere would allow a creature to ascend and descend? I would have thought the creature would need to inhale a gas lighter than the atmospheric gas surrounding it.
I'm guessing the same way a submarine uses water as ballast to dive and surface.
If you inhale air from your top, and exhale air from your bottom*, you should be taking in lighter air and expelling heavier air. The difference may not be much, but if you're large enough and move enough air, plus have an internal mechanism to filter the heavier parts from the lighter parts, it might work.
* WHAT IS all that sniggering!? This is a serious scientific discussion!
And you're wrong.
A submarine uses compressed air to blow out water tanks, replacing water (heavy) with air (lighter).
What lighter stuff does the alien creature have? Compressed vacuum?
She could secrete water or condense it from the atmosphere. That could work.
But Miek is right. His comment shows how bad this thing is thought through.
I think it could be possible if it actually filtered out certain gases when it inhaled/absorbed gas from the atmosphere. This would allow it to change the density of the air around it directly.
Just a thought.
Well it wouldn't necessarily need to change its boyancy. Not as long as the gradient in atmospheric density is gradual enough to be irrelevant. Birds are able to go up and down without having to change their density. They just need motive force in the appropriate direction. As birds are heavier than air, they need to provide it themselves to go up (and they just use gravity to go down). But a creature that had near-neutral boyancy in the atmosphere would just need to squirt some air upwards or downwards to descend or ascend. I mean sharks don't need to change their density to rise or fall in water, do they? And from the sounds of this, we're talking pretty dense atmospheres.
well fish manage it by dissolving/releasing gas from their body out of/into their swim bladder - no need to inhale or exhale for that at all.
Heat and pressure changes are pretty good at changing a gasses density too,
The creature could turn nutrients into energy and heat the gas inside it, just like our hot air balloons. It could also get some energy from sunlight -if available in big enough amounts- and capture hot gas from rising convection currents; While on the convection current, it could absorb hot air, and that would give it buoyancy when it left the hot current.
If instead of a balloon-like structures it had some kind of hard carapace, it could also use some muscles to decrease its interior pressure. This last method could probably make sense in very dense atmospheres.
Not entirely true; The reletive mass of a submarine when dived is pretty much the same as the displaced water, and only minor changes in ballast are required at constant depth, usually as waste is discharged and food is consumed. To change a submarines depth, internal ballast tanks are used where the surrounding water is flooded in to increase the mass of the boat or pumped out by the ballast pump to decrease the mass of the boat, hence changing the depth.
The only other variable is that the volume of the submarine will change with depth due to the crush effect, thus becoming denser the deeper you wish to dive, therefore requiring de-ballasting on the way down.
I suppose the 'creature' in question would be internally less dense than the atmosphere around it, apart from it's onion shaped balls, which it would presumably blow only if it wanted to get really high!
they could look just like politicians - the lowest form of life on this planet.
The politicians only look like that because they had to fight the lawyers to get to the bottom.
Now then about those jellyfish, sliced thin a little vinegar, chili pepper and perhaps a bit of cucumber... so when do
we dine they get here.
Yeah, I read that too when I was a lad.
But surely it says there are only three civilisations active in the universe at any one time rather than four?
Quick! Someone get hold of Kevin Warwick for the definitive answer.
Perhaps we humans aren't considered a civilisation?
"Perhaps we humans aren't considered a civilisation?"
I was going to make a similar point. Three civilisations ... and us under the loosest possible definition of "civilisation".
Reminds me of all the waffle about Doggerland. A rather soggy expanse of apparently lifeless mud at the bottom of the North Sea.
I seem to remember that the 'professor' responsible for that got his arse kicked by his vice-chancellor for being "over enthusiastic" :)
"Reminds me of all the waffle about Doggerland. A rather soggy expanse of apparently lifeless mud at the bottom of the North Sea."
No. I think you'll find that's Gateshead which is, unfortunately, on the surface.
You mistakenly call Dr Maggie Aderin-Pocock a boffin. Clearly she isn't that, given her talent for shameless self-promotion; but she isn't a trick-cyclist either. I think we need a new catchphrase at El Reg.
I've never seen an actual little green man in SF. (And I've seen and watched a lot.) Now Rutans on the other hand. (Even if what they did was less floating and more been dragged along by an invisible string.)
"I've never seen an actual little green man in SF"
Pah! Kids today! No idea about the classic literature of old. The Mekon was green. And little.
Even Davros was a sort of swampy muddy brownish green. Although he did look more green in the days of black and white telly.
Tell me if I'm wrong but I thought silicon couldn't form long polymers so no chance of DNA like structures made from it, hence all life being carbon based?
Well, that certainly shines a different light on the conspiracy theories, given how many gasbags we have in elected offices.
Yeah, yeah. I'm going.
I've never been to jupiter.. uranus, now..
Silicon based life forms that are completely nonhuman, possibly insectoid? Gosh that will take some imagination! Or you could just get some 60 year old back issues of Fantasy & Science Fiction magazine...which is where I first saw this idea put forth. And, I might add, presented entirely from an alien point of view, which was quite awesome.
I say that if a scientist wants to talk about his neat theories for possible forms of alien life, he should learn to write a decent short story.
Beer, even though my work day is sadly far from over.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2017