[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: starship-design: Re: Aliens, why haven't they contact us?

>>Well, these chemicals make certain important biological chemical reactions
>>impossible. Unless the alien bacteria use very different ways to stay alive,
>>they may not be influenced. This is possible, but likely means that the
>>bacteria cannot survive in the climate of our body (which provides only
>>chemicals that are in a specific biological cycle that needs the climate of
>>our body).
>Actually they are tuned to disrupt certian key reactions in the microbe that
>are critical to them and unused in us.  Virtually nothing is leathal or
>healthy to all organisms here.  Owls can eat cyanide without effect.  Dogs
>can be poisoned by chocolate.  Some bacteria are vulnerable to some
>antibiotics, not to others.

We're not talking about multicellular organisms, we're talking about
bacteria. Anything bigger than that should not be able to get trough or
biosuit or missed by a biofilter.

>>Well of course we can't be sure about their chemistry, but in my discussions
>>I assumed that they where based on DNA like we. If not, than all bets (from
>>me) are off. I know too little about the possible chemical reaction-cycles
>>in other systems.
>Not all life forms here do use DNA.  Even those that do have very strange
>variations of chemical and physical variations and tolerances.

Not all? Which life forms don't use DNA?
Bacteria are like humans, they all have similar vulnerabilities. True, some
are can much survive better than others, but these are exceptions.

>>I'd think that one could easely research this question. Just dump a few
>>strange bacteria in a huge colony of "normal" bacteria and see what happens.
>>If the strange bacteria turn out to survive all the time, then indeed you
>>are right, but I strongly doubt that. My guess is that in most of the cases
>>the local bacteria will survive over the foreign bacteria. The locals are
>>usually much better adapted to the local climate (=temperature, chemicals,
>>enemies, friends).
>>I bet that only a few foreign bacteria will have a sufficiently high
>>evolution that they can prosper in a new environment.
>The problem is were not to interested in their lethality to microbes.  Were
>very intersted in their effects on macro-organisms (trees, birds, HUMANS, ...)
>and their effect on biospheres.

Well, I'd guess that a multicellular organism would have better protection
against a bacteria than a single cell organism would. 

>>Huh, this seems to be a paradox. If our bacteria kill theirs, than that
>>would mean our bacteria are stronger. So then, how can their bacteria kill
>>ours when they meet here?
>Doesn't mean anything like that.  Our bacteria here have to deal with
>organisms that they have been preying on for millions-billions of years.
> Their prey has adapted immune responces and other adaptations to resist
>them.  Drop them in an alien ecology and the local life forms have great
>adaptations to fight the local microbes.  None of which are correct for the
>alien earth microbes.  Earth barteria and fungi can run rampant.  The alien
>microbes have the same reaction here.   NO one evolved the right tricks to
>fight them.

But in that case the old prey in the foreign environment would also not have
adapted immune responces against his new enemies. So for that matter both
hunter and prey are equal again, except that the hunters are in a huge
mayority and in a known environment.

>>>We as in humans.  Obviously the current dominent cultures are to recent.
>>>But the Japanise in the late 1800's to the abos walking out of the jungle
>>>today give plenty of data sources.
>>Hmmm, didn't most of them believe in supernatural rather than in facts?
>Some did some didn't.  Whats the point?  Do you expect more sophisticated and
>educated cultures would be less capable of dealing with the unexpected?  They
>are the ones that have to continuously deal with the unexpected.

I indeed suggest that cultures, that have based their world view on facts,
may have more trouble with the unexpected, than cultures that have based
their ideas on beliefs and magic.

>>Oh, you may interact with them, but they first have to grow to the fact that
>>they are not alone out there. Like I wrote you before, one can't force
>>people into new developments.
>Life always forces people into new developments.  People NEVER pregrow into a
>solution before thrown into it.  Lifes about dealing with the unexplained,
>unanticipated problems you were sure could never happen to you.

There's a big difference between being immersed in something completely
unknown and dipping in something that looks familiar.
The latter is what happens most of the times. The former usually is an
exception and causes a lot of trouble to accept for a lot of people. (No
Kyle, don't comment ;)

>Why do you assume cultures and their citizens are so fragile and weak?  

Am I doing that?