From: Spudboy100@aol.com
Date: Sun Jan 27 2002 - 10:19:57 MST
I'm sure that what you have described is what all interested parties are most
concerned with, the identifiable of biotic planets. So if the biology is
chlorophyl, or rhodopsin, this is less important then that such life exists.
One other opinion. The notion that many educated people seem blase' about
life previously existing on Mars (for example) to me seems wrong-headed. If
life was ever demonstrated to have lived on Mars, it would surely alter
humankind's' perspective on the universe. It would be like saying "Oh, I've
always believed in alien intelligence's existing, because I have also
believed in hobgoblins and mermaids."
Dan Clemmensen aptly, noted:
<<It's possible that the test can be made insensitive to the specific
photochemical: Any life based on photosynthesis will leave a dark
spot in the spectrum. The tricky part is to figure out what a lifeless
spectrum should look like for planets of a particular star, so that you
can look for the difference. If someone works out a methodology, it
can be tested on the planets of the Solar system first.>>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:12:01 MST