Why not?, physicists Luis Anchordoqui and Eugene Chudnovsky of The City University of New York ask. Why should life elsewhere resemble life on Earth?:
It all depends on how you define life. If the key criteria are the ability to encode information, and the ability for those information carriers to self-replicate faster than they disintegrate, then hypothetical monopole particles threaded on cosmic strings – cosmic necklaces – could form the basis of life inside stars, much like DNA and RNA form the basis of life on Earth.
Michelle Starr, “A Strange Form of Life Could Flourish Deep Inside of Stars, Physicists Say” at ScienceAlert
Paper. (open access)
This would seem to be string theory’s contribution to biology: At a time when we haven’t yet located fossil bacteria on Mars (of which there is at least a plausible hope), we are asked to accept that there might be formations within stars that we would not identify as life but really are. String theory is then about as fruitful in biology as it is in cosmology.
Yes, but would those monopoles on cosmic necklaces have the ability to write weird science fiction about solid soft carbon-based life forms hypothetically existing outside stars?
Polistra
No more than an infinite number of monkeys with an infinite number of typewriters. Not a single monkey would be able to load the paper and line it up before typing anything.
As to,
Which is a perfectly good question. But as to this claim,
As to that ‘hypothetical’, it seems to me that physicists, (whom still carry quite a bit of prestige in regards to supposedly putting experimental science ahead of unfounded conjecture), could do a far better job of answering their question, “Why should life elsewhere resemble life on Earth?”, than these physicists did with their “hypothetical monopole particles.”
It seems to me that ‘physicists’ should be the first to appeal to known science rather than appealing to hypotheticals for which they have no experimental evidence.
The same criticism of “hypothetical monopole particles”, (i.e. the criticism that these supposed ‘hypothetical’ particles have no experimental support), applies to the unfounded conjectures of some physicists who postulate various parallel universe and/or multiverse scenarios,. i.e. They have no experimental support either.
As George Ellis and many others have noted, these multiverse theories simply are not science since they are not falsifiable and/or testable.
Where this gets interesting is that, whereas atheists have no experimental evidence supporting their unfounded conjectures for multiverses, Christians, on the other hand, can appeal directly to Special Relativity, General Relativity, and Quantum Mechanics, our most precisely tested theories ever in the history of science, to support their belief that God upholds this universe in its continual existence, as well as to support their belief in a heavenly dimension and in a hellish dimension.
In regards to quantum mechanics we find that a quantum wave, prior to collapse, is mathematically defined as being in a infinite dimensional state,
Moreover, we find that the infinite dimensional Hilbert space takes an infinite amount of information to describe properly.
As should be needless to say, finding that the quantum wave, prior to collapse, is mathematically defined as being in an infinite dimensional, infinite information, state is VERY friendly to the Christian presupposition that God, who is held to be omniscient and omnipresent, is upholding this universe in its continual existence.
Likewise, as mentioned previously, both General Relativity and Special Relativity also support the Christian’s belief in a heavenly dimension and in a hellish dimension.
Specifically, a ‘higher dimensional’ 4-dimensional space is needed for the formulation of General Relativity,
And although it is fairly well known that General Relativity is based upon ‘higher dimensional’ 4-dimensional space, what is less well known is that Special Relativity itself is also based upon a ‘higher dimensional’ 4-dimensional space.
In fact, the higher dimensional nature of special relativity was a discovery that was made before the higher dimensional nature of General Relativity was discovered.
In fact, it was a discovery that was made by one of Einstein math professors in 1908 prior to Einstein’s elucidation of General Relativity in 1915. (In fact, in 1916 Einstein fully acknowledged his indebtedness to Minkowski)
Moreover, these four dimensional spacetimes that undergird both special relativity and general relativity are also comforting to overall Christian concerns in that they reveal two very different eternities to us.
The eternity for special relativity is found when a hypothetical observer approaches the speed of light. In this scenario, time, as we understand it, would come to a complete stop for that hypothetical observer as he reaches the speed of light.
To grasp the whole concept of time coming to a complete stop at the speed of light a little more easily, imagine moving away from the face of a clock at the speed of light. Would not the hands on the clock stay stationary as you moved away from the face of the clock at the speed of light? Moving away from the face of a clock at the speed of light happens to be the very same ‘thought experiment’ that gave Einstein his breakthrough insight into special relativity. Here is a short clip from a video that gives us a look into Einstein’s breakthrough insight.
That time, as we understand it comes to a complete stop at the speed of light, and yet light moves from point A to point B in our universe, and thus light is obviously not ‘frozen within time, has some fairly profound implications.
The only way it is possible for time not to pass for light, and yet for light to move from point A to point B in our universe, is if light is of a higher dimensional value of time than the temporal time we are currently living in. Otherwise light would simply be ‘frozen within time’ to our temporal frame of reference.
One way for us to more easily understand this higher dimensional framework for time that light exists in is to visualize what would happen if a hypothetical observer approached the speed of light.
In the first part of the following video clip, which was made by two Australian University Physics Professors, we find that the 3-Dimensional world ‘folds and collapses’ into a tunnel shape as a ‘hypothetical’ observer approaches the ‘higher dimension’ of the speed of light.
This effect shown in the preceding video, of the 3-Dimensional folding and collapsing, and all the light concentrating in the direction of travel as someone approaches the speed of light, is known as the ‘headlight effect’.
To give us a better understanding as to what it would be like to exist in a higher dimension, this following video, Dr. Quantum in Flatland, also gives us a small insight as to what it would be like to exist in a higher dimension:
Besides the tunnel curvature to a higher eternal dimension found in special relativity, we also have tunnel curvature to a very different eternal dimension in general relativity. The following video clip is very good for illustrating that tunnel curvature that is found in general relativity.
What makes the eternity of General Relativity profoundly different than the eternity found at Special Relativity, is that entropy, which is the primary reason why our material bodies grow old and eventually die in this temporal universe,,,
,,, is found to be greatest at black holes. As the following article stated,, ‘supermassive black holes are the largest contributor to the observable universe’s entropy.’
The entropy associated with General Relativity, i.e. with Gravity, is simply profoundly different than the entropy associated with Special Relativity, with Light, is. As Roger Penrose explains,
Moreover, Kip Thorne, (in what was basically an extension of Einstein’s original thought experiment that led to General Relativity), explains what would happen to a ‘hypothetical’ observer as descended into a black hole.
Moreover, besides ‘hypothetical’ observers being used as proxies in Special and General Relativity, the Christian can also appeal to testimonies from Near Death experiences to validate that these eternities associated with both Special and General Relativity are, in fact, real, and are not just ‘hypothetical’ eternities.
Specifically, many of the characteristics found in heavenly Near Death Experience testimonies are exactly what we would expect to see from what we now know to be physically true about Special Relativity.
For instance, many times people who have had a Near Death Experience mention that their perception of time was radically altered. In the following video clip, Mickey Robinson gives his Near Death testimony of what it felt like for him to experience a ‘timeless eternity’.
And here are a few more quotes from people who have experienced Near Death, that speak of how their perception of time was radically altered as they were outside of their material body during their NDEs.
As well, Near Death Experiencers also frequently mention going through a tunnel, towards an extremely brilliant light, i.e. ‘headlight effect’, to a higher heavenly dimension:
In the following video, Barbara Springer gives her testimony as to what it felt like for her to go through the tunnel towards ‘the light’:
And in the following audio clip, Vicki Noratuk, who has been blind from birth, (besides being able to ‘miraculously” see for the first time in her life during her Near Death Experience), Vicki also gives testimony of going through a tunnel at a ‘horrifically’ rapid rate of speed:
And in the following quotes, the two Near Death Experiencers both testify that they firmly believed that they were in a higher heavenly dimension that is above this three-dimensional world, and that the reason that they have a very difficult time explaining what their Near Death Experiences actually felt like is because we simply don’t currently have the words to properly describe that higher dimension:
That what we now know to be true from special relativity, (namely that it outlines a ‘timeless’, i.e. eternal, dimension that exists above this temporal dimension), would fit hand and glove with the personal testimonies of people who have had a deep heavenly NDEs is, needless to say, powerful evidence that their testimonies are, in fact, true and that they are accurately describing the ‘reality’ of a higher heavenly dimension, that they experienced first hand, and that they say exists above this temporal dimension.
I would even go so far as to say that such corroboration from ‘non-physicists’, who, in all likelihood, know nothing about the intricacies of special relativity, is a complete scientific verification of the overall validity of their personal NDE testimonies.
Likewise, although not nearly as numerous as heavenly testimonies, there are hellish testimonies from Near Death Experiences that also validate what we know know to be true from General Relativity.
In the following video clip, former atheist professor Howard Storm speaks of what eternity felt like for him in the hellish dimension:
And at the 7:00 minute mark of this video, Ron Reagan gives testimony of falling down a ‘tunnel’ towards hell:
And in this following video, Bill Wiese also speaks of ‘tumbling down’ a tunnel in his transition stage to hell:
And in this following video, Paul Ojeda also speaks of ‘falling’ towards hell at a very fast speed:
It is also interesting to point out that, although Special Relativity can be unified with Quantum Mechanics, that General Relativity simply refuses to ever be mathematically unified with quantum mechanics in any realistic way,
In fact, mathematically speaking, there is found to be an ‘infinite divide’ between General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics that forever prevents them from being unified mathematically.
Professor Jeremy Bernstein states the situation as such, “there remains an irremediable difficulty. Every order reveals new types of infinities, and no finite number of renormalizations renders all the terms in the series finite.”
Moreover, it is not only that Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity have a infinite mathematical divide between them, it is also that Quantum Mechanics and General Relativity contradict each other to the point of literally blowing the universe apart.
And yet, despite both theories contradicting each other to the point of literally blowing the universe apart, the fact remains that quantum mechanics and general relativity are both tested to extreme levels of precision, (in fact, both general relativity and quantum mechanics are consider to be our most successful theories ever in the history of science),
And since quantum mechanics and general relativity are both tested to such an extreme level of precision, (and we can thus have a very high level of confidence that both theories are, in fact, true mathematical descriptions of reality), and since Godel’s incompleteness theorem itself requires something to be ‘outside the circle’ of mathematics,,,,
,,, then it is fairly safe to assume that there must be something very powerful that must be holding the universe together in order to keep it from blowing itself apart. ,,,
For the Christian this theoretical finding from our very best theories in science, (i.e. that something very powerful must be ‘outside the universe’ that is holding this universe together), should not be all that surprising to find out. Christianity, a couple of millennium before the zero/infinity conflict between the two theories was even known about, predicted that Christ is before all things, and in him all things hold together,,,
Dr. William Dembski in this following comment, although he was not directly addressing the ‘infinite’ mathematical conflict between General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics, offers this insight into what the ‘unification’ of infinite God with finite man might look like mathematically:
And if we rightly allow the Agent causality of God ‘back’ into the picture of modern physics, as the Christian founders of modern science originally envisioned,,,, (Isaac Newton, Michael Faraday, James Clerk Maxwell, and Max Planck, to name a few of the Christian founders of modern science),,, and as quantum mechanics itself now empirically demands (with the closing of the free will loophole by Anton Zeilinger and company), rightly allowing the Agent causality of God ‘back’ into physics provides us with a very plausible resolution for the much sought after ‘theory of everything’ in that Christ’s resurrection from the dead provides an empirically backed reconciliation, via the Shroud of Turin, between quantum mechanics and general relativity into the much sought after ‘Theory of Everything”.
To give us a small glimpse of the power that was involved in Christ’s resurrection from the dead, the following recent article found that, ”it would take 34 Thousand Billion Watts of VUV radiations to make the image on the shroud. This output of electromagnetic energy remains beyond human technology.”
Verse:
Thus in conclusion, although the physicists in the OP asked a perfectly good question, “Why should life elsewhere resemble life on Earth?”, they failed to take into full consideration what is now known to be true to us from physics and relied, almost completely, on unfounded conjecture. i.e. ‘hypothetical monopole particles” That unfounded conjecture should, for physicists, be very troubling.
And yet, when taking into full consideration what is now known to be true from physics, we find that ‘life elsewhere’, specifically ‘eternal life’, is very different from life on earth and that ‘life elsewhere’ conforms exactly to what Christians have presupposed all along. Namely, that there are two very different eternities facing us when we die.
Of supplemental note. Advances in quantum biology, besides falsifying Darwinian materialism, now offer compelling evidence that humans have a transcendent component to their being that is capable of living beyond the death of our material, temporal, bodies.
As Stuart Hameroff states in the following article, “the quantum information,,, isn’t destroyed. It can’t be destroyed.,,, it’s possible that this quantum information can exist outside the body. Perhaps indefinitely as a soul.”
Verse:
Oh my. Loool.
How could we identify something that we could not identify?
It would be an information inaccesible for us.
Naturalist = philosophically retarded creature.
Thanks Denyse for another day of ‘News’!
That would be an untestable hypothesis = not SCIENCE = but philosophy.
“We know there is life out there by knowing we will never know it”. Looool.
What catches my attention here is the usual ploy of those who are not serious about the truth. The ploy they use is to get you paying attention to something that is completely indiscoverable: that is, they direct your focus to that which cannot be seen. It’s either the multiverse (beyond the possibility of detection by definition), or undiscovered fossil remains (Darwin), or, string theory (an infinite number of possible ‘backgrounds’), or, now, “life” inside of stars (who’s going to be the first to explore this possibility first-hand?).
It’s the stuff of “imagination.” Is this what is supposed to lead us to truth? Imagination is of use in reaching out for knowledge and gaining it; however, it should be an “imagination” that seeks grounding in the real world. It is precisely this failure to ground ideas in the things of nature–discoverable nature, that provides the clue we need to know that we’re dealing with something that borders on pseudo-science.
PaV
Atheism is the enemy of truth.
The more we veer away from God, the more are we stuck in la-la-land .
Because science is not practiced in a vacuum. It is an endeavor tainted by the philosophical views of the humans (NOT brains) engaging in it.
And mainstream philosophy today is atheistic materialism. Which is blatantly false, therefore corrupt and incoherent.
Science (real science) needs to divorce itself from the materialist cult to keep flourishing and bearing fruit.
It is no coincidence what the atheist cult leads into. Their language speaks for itself: illusions, failed perceptions, cheated by evolution, imaginations, unreachable truth, mental prison, nihilism.
And: materialism is NOT science.
Science is free of ontological presuppositions (or it should be, but materialists enjoy making people believe that one and the other are the same, so they can enjoy the perks of societal approval/ fluent money income/ power).
I find that “old wives’ tales” and pseudo-science have the same thing in common: they’re unfalsifiable.
Where I live, a number of years ago people were telling me that if someone has their bright lights on, that you shouldn’t “flash” your bright lights as a signal to them because they will “shoot you.”
Now, how do you “falsify” something like that? You would have to risk being “shot at” for that to happen. So, the “old wives’ tale” remains. I, of course, thought this through and seeing myself in a Catch-22 said I was going to “flash” my bright lights the next time it was warranted. Obviously, I’m writing you about it. Nothing happened. Now, years later, no one talks about this any more. I suppose the number of “brave souls” grew large over this time.
Again, lack of falsifiability.