What'sNEW
 "Self-Sustaining Living Habitats in Extraterrestrial Environments," by R. Wordsworth and C. Cockell, doi:10.1089/ast.2024.0080, Astrobiology [abstract | full text], Nov 2024.
"Temperature, pressure, volatile loss, radiation levels, and nutrient availability all appear to be surmountable obstacles to the survival of photosynthetic life in space or on celestial bodies with thin atmospheres. Biologically generated barriers capable of transmitting visible radiation, blocking ultraviolet, and sustaining temperature gradients of 25–100 K and pressure differences of 10 kPa against the vacuum of space can allow habitable conditions between 1 and 5 astronomical units in the solar system. Hence, ecosystems capable of generating conditions for their own survival are physically plausible, given the known capabilities of biological materials on Earth." These words introduce an analysis by two astrobiologists working under a grant from the Leverhulme Center for Life in the Universe. "...Our focus here is on habitability for photosynthetic life rather than humans, although our conclusions have implications for human life support. We also mostly consider habitability in deep space, although our discussion also applies to more benign environments such as the martian surface." 
I admire the broad scope of this analysis, mentiong terraforming, genetic engineering, and silicon-based life, for example. But I especially appreciate the focus on life-as-we-know-it and its underrateded survival capabilities. For one, Arctic algae under ice grow with sunlight 1,000 times dimmer than sunlight reaching Jupiter. This fact makes it easier to accept the finding of fossilized diatoms and cyanobacteria —photosynthesizers— in meteorites. Frequently, the study opens neglected topics with fresh, quantitative analysis. It is also a useful primer on the general subject of life's potential in the univese. A most welcome study.
 Thanks for
the full article and a live link, coauthor Robin Wordsworth.
 Bacteria: The Space Colonists has related thoughts and links.
A new examination... is one of many postings, with links, about fossilized microbes in meteorites.
Samples of asteroid Ryugu were observed to contain growing bacteria, "even under strict contamination control." But the team from Imperial College London conducting the examination concluded, "Population statistics indicate that the microorganisms originated from terrestrial contamination." The subject will remain open, I hope. Stay tuned.
"Rapid colonization of a space-returned Ryugu sample by terrestrial microorganisms," by Matthew J. Genge et al, doi:10.1111/maps.14288, Meteoritics & Planetary Science, 13 Nov 2024; and commentary:
"Ryugu asteroid sample rapidly colonized by terrestrial life despite strict contamination control," by Justin Jackson, Phys.Org, 22 Nov 2024.
24 Feb 2023: background about Ryugu.
Postscript: I just don't get it. For decades, scientists have found fossilized germs in meteorites. This supports panspermia, the theory that germs from space seeded life on Earth. But meteorites that fall to Earth may get contaminated before they are recovered, or by unsterile handling. There are tests to detect contamination, but samples returned from space, carefully quarantined, could bypass that issue and provide definitive evidence. No disagreement there. Now, such samples have been tested. A fragment of the asteroid Ryugu, carefully quarantined, was seen to contain living bacteria. Yet the examining team decides that the bacteria must be earthly contaminants. The growth curve looks like what earthly bacteria would produce, so, ...earthly bacteria must have produced it! Huh? "The presence of microorganisms within space-returned samples, even those subject to stringent contamination controls is, therefore, not necessarily evidence of an extraterrestrial origin," the article concludes.
The conclusion is nonsense. The presence of living bacteria in a quarantined sample from space is definitely evidence in favor of panspermia. The opportunity for contamination was low, if not absolutely zero. If living bacteria were observed, the burden of proof is transferred to the skeptics. Informed comments are invited.
Postscript 2: On further consideration, I have many doubts about this article. The photos alone are not really adequate for recognizing bacteria. No DNA sequencing was done. The EDS could not detect nitrogen in the bacteria, although bacteria definitely contain nitrogen. No member of the team was a microbiologist. PS 3: Apparently, they really found viable bacteria. But can't Ryugu still be their source? "Bacteria found on a space rock turn out to be Earth-grown," Nature, 21 Nov 2024.
"Integration of horizontally acquired light-harvesting genes into an ancestral regulatory network in the cyanobacterium Acaryochloris marina MBIC11017," by Nikea J. Ulrich and Scott R. Miller, doi:10.1128/mbio.02423-24, Microbial Ecology, 18 Nov 2024.
A question often asked here is, "Where do new genes come from?" The answer is usually horizontal gene transfer. (In cosmic ancestry, HGT is always the ultimate answer.) For evolution among prokaryotes, this rule is now well-observed and accepted.
Robust Software Management [incomplete] states the case for such a system.
"Ancient unicellular organism indicates embryonic development might have existed prior to animals' evolution," University of Geneva via Phys.Org, 06 Nov 2024; re:
"A multicellular developmental program in a close animal relative," by Olivetta, M., Bhickta, C., Chiaruttini, N. et al, doi:10.1038/s41586-024-08115-3, Nature, 06 Nov 2024.
Observations of genetic programs that appear to exist before they are needed have become too numerous to count. Animal embryonic development provides another likely example. Genes that come first completely confound the mainstream theory of evolution. In cosmic ancestry, they are expected.
Metazoan Genes Older Than Metazoa? and Genes Older Than Earth? have many more examples.
The studied rocks are found in a geographic stratum, now well inland in China, that was formed offshore at the time of the melting. The analysis is impressive, and the environmental shift it covers is even more impressive. "Over a mere 10 million years, average global temperatures swung from minus 50 to 120 degrees Fahrenheit."
"Earth underwent a massive, rapid melting period after the last global ice age, new study suggests," Virginia Tech via Phys.Org, 05 Nov 2024; re:
"Lithium isotope evidence for a plumeworld ocean in the aftermath of the Marinoan snowball Earth," by Tian Gan et al, doi:10.1073/pnas.2407419121, PNAS, 05 Nov 2024. (The figure has been adapted.)
A different study conducted in Colorado corroborates a global ice age ending c. 635 Ma.
"Was 'Snowball Earth' a global event? New study delivers best proof yet," University of Colorado at Boulder via Phys.Org, 11 Nov 2024; re:
"Hematite U-Pb dating of Snowball Earth meltwater events," by Liam Courtney-Davies et al, doi:10.1073/pnas.241075912, PNAS, 11 Nov 2024.
Gaia discusses global processes that stabilize (or destabilize) the environment.
Anaximander, the pre-socratic Greek philosopher, was the inventor of science, according to Carlo Rovelli, a physicist and science writer. Born in Miletus in 610 BCE, Anaximander was a disciple of Thales, who thought all things are made or water. Anaximander went further, saying, "Rainwater is water from the sea and rivers that evaporates because of the Sun's heat." This was new because it did not require the agency of the gods. It was consistent with his principle of "necessity," which I understand as cause-and-effect. He thought that Earth was a finite body floating freely in space, and, "The Earth was originally covered in water, which slowly dried up." He thought all animals evolved from fishlike creatures. He was the first thinker to write in prose, not verse. He drew the first map of the (Mediterranean-centered) world.
Rovelli's history of science, ranging from Pythagoras and Parmenides to Schrödinger and Einstein, is affirming, but slightly too optimistic for me. (Occasionally, theories need discarding.) With wide scholarship, he believes that science can prosper without religion, and he speculates about the origin and pervasiveness of religion. Overall, it's a very readable review of the history of western scientific thought. I especially enjoy the boldness and clairvoyance of some early scientists. Anaximander and the Birth of Science, by Carlo Rovelli, Penguin Random House, 28 Feb 2023.
What Difference Does It Make? acknowledges 20th century nihilism and suggests a genetic basis for religion.
"AI scans RNA 'dark matter' and uncovers 70,000 new viruses," by Smriti Mallapaty, Nature, 11 Oct 2024.
"Panspermia versus Abiogenesis: A Clash of Cultures," by Chandra Wickramasinghe, doi:10.31275/20222199, Journal of Scientific Exploration [local pdf], 22 May 2022.
Giordano Bruno by Ingred D. Rowland reminds us that active opposition to unorthodox scientific ideas is not new. With excellent scholarship and fluent translation, Rowland tells the story of this brilliant, difficult, defrocked monk. Born in 1548, educated in Naples, he perfected a system of memorizing that amazed aristocrats and bishops. He lectured and turored in philosophy, science and theology, not omitting his own radical ideas — which got him in trouble with the catholic church. Facing excommunication, he absconded to Paris, Oxford, and various cities in Germany, seldom staying very long. Ultimately he was arrested for heresy in Padua and brought to Rome for trial. He would not abjure his beliefs, such as that God will forgive all sinners, so he was condemned and burned alive in 1600. Rowland's biography is thoroughly researched, engaging, edifying, lyrical, and highly recommended. Among Bruno's unorthodox tenets was that the universe is infinite and contains countless inhabited worlds. He thought that anything less would diminish the grandeur of God. Supporting evidence was sparse, but the basic cosmology, with a spherical Earth orbiting the sun, was at least as old as Aristarchus. Bruno used thought experiments to ask, for example, how could the entire sky rotate around our little world? Soon after he was gone, Galilleo saw that Jupiter had four moons, and the case became much stronger. Interestingly, Kepler thought that Bruno's speculations were more inspired than Galileo's observations. And Galileo, acutely aware of Bruno's fate, did abjure his own beliefs. Giordano Bruno: Philosopher / Heretic, by Ingred D. Rowland, Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 19 Aug 2008.
Thanks for the book, Genevieve Christy.
"Phylogenomic fingerprinting of tempo and functions of horizontal gene transfer within ochrophytes," by Richard G. Dorrell et al, 10.1073/pnas.2009974118, PNAS, 08 Jan 2021; and commentary: Institut Curie, 25 Jan 2021.
Viruses... has lots about HGT.
"Discovery in Tiny Worm Leads to Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine...," The New York Times, 07 Oct 2024.
"'Out of the blue' discovery of RNAs that regulate genes wins Nobel," Science, 07 Oct 2024.
"Medicine Nobel awarded for gene-regulating 'microRNAs'," Nature, 07 Oct 2024.
"Cell papers on discovery of microRNA recognized by 2024 Nobel Prize...," Cell, 08 Oct 2024.
Robust Software Management lists some of life's features that dumbfound today's theory of evolution.
06 Jan 2017: Gary Ruvkun, one of the new Nobelists, also has thoughts about panspermia and the origin-of-life.
Consciousness is what makes the mind-body problem really intractable. That's how this little book of two essays begins. The first essay was first published with the same title fifty years ago, and it became influential. Now, in the second essay, "Further Thoughts: The Psychophysical Nexus," Nagel enhances and restates his case for a monistic account of the apparent mind-body dualism. He suggests the two are perhaps ...inseparable aspects of some one thing, for which we do not at present have a concept....
Admittedly, it's not my area. I have never understood exactly what "the problem of consciousness" is. May I innocently suggest that human consciousness is an emergent phenomenon, ultimately, of our genetic programming. This allows us to place consciousness on a separate analytical plane from that of the human body, without denying strict materialism. For an analogy, the programming underlying Conway's Game of Life yields a rich taxonomy of scurrying and flying screen images, yet these would be he impossible to anticipate from even a complete understanding of the programming. Actually, Nagel briefly considers this, yet he prefers a more radical view. Perhaps [conscious states] are emergent, relative to the properties of atoms or molecules. But if they are not, this view would imply that the fundamental constituents of the world, out of which everything is composed, are neither physical nor mental but something more basic. I'm too conservative for that. Still, Nagel is thought-provoking and knows his subject. What Is It Like to Be a Bat? by Thomas Nagel, ISBN:9780197752821, Oxford University Press, 2024.
10 Feb 2013: review of Mind and Cosmos: Why the Materialist Neo-Darwinian Conception of Nature Is Almost Certainly False by Thomas Nagel, 2012.
12 Apr 2023: a glimpse of Conway's Gane of Life with an example of a surprising image (click to animate).
"A landscape of consciousness: Toward a taxonomy of explanations and implications," by Robert Lawrence Kuhn, Progress in Biophysics and Molecular Biology, Aug 2024. Categorizes ~200 different approaches to the subject.
There is certainly room for future generations to clarify the situation in inportant ways. I welcome this admssion in Quanta and Fields, a new book by physicist Sean M. Carroll. He is far more comfortable with quantum theory (QT) than the author of the book I reviewed yesterday. For example, Carroll does not much worry about the difference between observing a phenomenon, and disturbing/affecting it. But the subatomic details of QT get very deep, mathematical discussion. If you are interested and well-informed already, this book will be useful.
Both books acknowledge that QT is incomplete. Whereas Kay thinks the underlying philosophy is entirely nonsensical, Carroll only admits that QT is puzzling. But, as he amply demonstrates, it works! The theory of evolution has the opposite crisis. The underlying philosophy — neo-darwinian mutation and selection — is clear enough, but it doesn't work! Quanta and Fields: The Biggest Ideas in the Universe by Sean M. Carroll, Penguin Random House, 01 May 2024.
Testing Darwinism... explains that the theory of evolution does not pass basic tests.
Quantum Theory has been a secondary preoccupation of mine since I was in college. I have never been satisfied with the prevailing Copenhagen interpretation — and neither has Adam Forrest Kay. His new book forcefully explains why dissatisfaction is warranted, with a thorough history of how the subject developed, and how it took a very wrong and lasting turn. I was surprised to realize that there was murkiness under the science I learned in high school. I originally thought that spin parity could be explained without entanglement. Ultimately I learned that Bell's inequality proves that local hidden variables cannot be the solution. (On this point Kay thinks otherwise, I believe.)
Kay advocates a speculative research avenue to restore clarity and logic to the subject. He starts by noticing another medium that also exhibits both wave and particle phenomena simultaneously, called hydrodynamic quantum analogues (HQA). It would be a return to the "pilot-wave" theory of DeBroglie and Bohm. I entrely support imaginative exploration of this sort, but I did not carefully follow his endorsement of this model. It reminded me of an analogy with gears and vortices of James Clak Maxwell's, when he was a student. For quantum theory, I suspect that the historical success of both wave and particle physics may have blinded us to an underlying physical reality that requires radically new concepts and vocabulary. For history of quantum theory, Kay is excellent. He also digresses to other subjects where science went wrong, such as the phlogiston theory, where he writes, "Because fake problems are hard to solve, the way out is to drop them." I thought immedately of today's theory of evolution, where the hardest questions — how did this or that genetic program originate? — apparently have been dropped. Escape from Shadow Physics: The Quest to End the Dark Ages of Quantum Theory by Adam Forrest Kay, 423 pages, ISBN:1399609599, Basic Books, 18 Jun 2024.
Robust Software Management lists examples of genetic programs that look unaccountable.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||
