We find life on Mars - do you care?

[Mr. Kobayashi]

I started a thread (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=566082) a while back on how the world would react to conclusive proof of extraterritorial intelligence - an obviously world-view changing event for pretty much everyone. However, apropos of a program I watched narrated by Hawking (BritDopers, check it out on 4OD, 'Stephen Hawking's Universe', interesting stuff for the cosmology incline), how would you feel about the discovery of life on Mars?

For realism's sake, we're not talking little green men, but instead primitive single-celled organisms found in the Martian soil by one of the rovers we send up there every now and again. The rover can't bring anything back physically, but NASA is certain that it has discovered primitive life.

Personally I'm incline to agree with Hawking - despite its nature, it would be one of the scientific breakthroughs of the century, simply because it can tell us more about how life developed here, or develops at all. There are fewer questions greater in scope, although I'm not sure I'm going to be in the majority here. What say you?

[Gustav]

I don't really see the practical usefulness. What exactly does it tell us about how life develops that we don't already know? We already know life can develop on earth, now we also know it can develop on Mars, ok so what? What would we do with this knowledge? It just seems like a very specialized little tidbit of information.

[DCnDC]

I'd be interested, however my interest level would directly correspond to the type of life found.

Single celled organisms? Meh. I'd read the first couple of articles, then forget about it.

Multicellular organisms? Slightly more.

Something as complex as simple plants? A lot.

Little green men? I'm scared. Hold me.

[Mr. Kobayashi]

I don't really see the practical usefulness. What exactly does it tell us about how life develops that we don't already know? We already know life can develop on earth, now we also know it can develop on Mars, ok so what? What would we do with this knowledge? It just seems like a very specialized little tidbit of information.
I think the idea is that we'll have a greater 'sample size' for life; at the moment Earth is the only known planet to support life, for all we know the only planet in the Orion arm to support life, or even the galaxy - or universe! Very unlikely, but who knows. But with a case study on Mars, our knowledge about life and the processes behind it could be increased immeasurably.

[even sven]

Single cell organisms? I'd read the newspaper article, but I wouldn't really care. We already have tons of single-celled organisms on Earth, and very few of them manage to capture my attention for long. Finding pretty much the same thing in a novel place isn't all that exciting to me.

[Tamerlane]

I think it would be the find of the century AND my reaction would be "pretty interesting." In other words, I think it would be of great importance from a scientific standpoint, but I personally wouldn't get all that excited or worked up about it. To be honest at this point I kind of expect such an announcement.

[Suburban Plankton]

I think it would be the most important news event ever.

One of the most basic philosophical questions we have been asking ourselves forever is "are we alone in the universe?" This wouldn't exactly answer that question, but it would be the first direct evidence that the answer might be something other than "no".

It would also prove to anyone who believes life was created specifically to populate this planet and no other, that they are incorrect.

[Llama Llogophile]

I also expect it to happen at some point in my lifetime, and it will be very exciting. More interesting will be how others react to it.

[Superfluous Parentheses]

Find of the century. If there's life on Mars that's unrelated to ours, chances are it's pretty much everywhere. Could also improve our understanding of abiogenesis.

[Qadgop the Mercotan]

Find of the Century. It would profoundly impact our understanding of how life works, develops, spreads, etc. Intellectually it would be tremendously exciting.

[InterestedObserver]

I think it would be the most important news event ever.

One of the most basic philosophical questions we have been asking ourselves forever is "are we alone in the universe?" This wouldn't exactly answer that question, but it would be the first direct evidence that the answer might be something other than "no".

It would also prove to anyone who believes life was created specifically to populate this planet and no other, that they are incorrect.

This. The implications of finding life, ANY life, beyond the Earth would be beyond just about any other discovery I can think of.

[Surly Chick]

I voted before I read the OP. Since it's not little green men, I want to change my vote from "find of the century" to "pretty interesting."

[septimus]

I wish there was something between "Pretty Interesting" (which might even be applied to, say, the latest Mel Gibson soundbite) and "Find of the Century." If you list the top ten discoveries of the 20th century, they are all rather amazing and important. If the 21st is anything like that "Find of the Century" is phenomenal praise. So I went with just "pretty interesting". (But reconsidering, if the interface allowed I'd change to "Century.")

I don't really see the practical usefulness. What exactly does it tell us about how life develops that we don't already know? We already know life can develop on earth, now we also know it can develop on Mars, ok so what? What would we do with this knowledge? It just seems like a very specialized little tidbit of information.

Will the life be based on protein and DNA? Or something else? Either way, scholarly interest will be enormous. It may take many decades for the new knowledge to actually ... lead to lowered U.S. health insurance premiums, for example :D ... but many people will found the knowledge wonderful and exhilirating just for itself.

(I'm reminded of an acquaintance who complained about money "wasted" on pure science. He had no answer when I asked him to compare it with money "wasted" on NFL. :D )

[Al Bundy]

Sure it would go down as the discovery of the century. And just knowing it could happen will spur more expensive investigation. I don't see any positive effect on my life.

[Colophon]

I'm amazed that anyone could even think of voting for anything other than "find of the century".

I mean, there aren't many bigger questions than "Are we alone in the universe?" To get the answer to that would be probably the biggest discovery humankind has ever made.

[Musicat]

It will cause the bible thumpers to revise their stance on God's Unique Creation, the Earth. They will scramble to find passages that heretofore were ignored, but now will be re-interpreted as predicting it all along.

[Superfluous Parentheses]

It will cause the bible thumpers to revise their stance on God's Unique Creation, the Earth. They will scramble to find passages that heretofore were ignored, but now will be re-interpreted as predicting it all along.

Not all of them. The Catholics like planning ahead (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/11/10/vatican-looks-to-heavens-_n_352971.html)

[Otara]

I think it would partly depend on how the life developed there.

If for instance it was from a meteorite that got transported from earth as has been hypothesised, that would prove that life is very hardy, but wouldnt definitively prove life can develop on a planet other than earth.

Otara

[Paul in Qatar]

It will cause the bible thumpers to revise their stance on God's Unique Creation, the Earth.

Yes, it will, and that will be amusing. (The Koran allows for life elsewhere, BTW.) But it also changes our model of life from "Goldilocks' (only Earth is just right) to 'Life will find a way.'

If there is life on Mars we can presume life exists elsewhere in the Cosmos and perhaps elsewhere in the Solar system.

[hougaswd]

I think it would partly depend on how the life developed there.

If for instance it was from a meteorite that got transported from earth as has been hypothesised, that would prove that life is very hardy, but wouldnt definitively prove life can develop on a planet other than earth.

Otara

Yes.

If the DNA was identical to an Earth organism (current or historical), very interesting.

If the DNA (or other genetic material) was not related, the find of the century at least.

Walt

[Siam Sam]

I voted "Pretty Interesting." If this were the 1990s or 2090s, I would have voted "Find of the Century." No matter the century, something bigger always comes along as it progresses.

[Blank Slate]

It would be very interesting.

Even more interesting would be finding the fossil of a developed species.

[Musicat]

(The Koran allows for life elsewhere, BTW.)Just curious...is there a specific passage you can quote? And does it say, "Mohammed says there is life somewhere else in the Universe," or is it open to multi- or pious-interpretation?

[Blut Aus Nord]

Didn't we already find microorganisms on another planet?

[Evil Captor]

We found what some felt were evidence of microorganisms in Martian meteorites, but IIRC it was a disputed claim ... others said the formations could have been produced by non-organic means. So it's still an open case.

I will not be at all surprised to see evidence of microorganisms in Martian rocks... the Earth devleoped micro-organisms almost as soon as it had settled down sufficiently for organic life to exist. What I will be surprised and dismayed to see will be evidence of multicellular organic life, something beyond sheets of blue-green algae. Once celled microorganisms moved into Earth as soon as it was habitable it took more than two billion years for true multicellular life to evolve. To put that in perpective, ALL the evolution from simple microorganisms like jellyfish to us has taken only half a billion years.

If evidence of multicullular organisms show up on Mars, it will mean that multicellular organisms are commonplace in the universe, which means that intelligence must be a very, very rare ... perhaps nonexistent except for here on Earth ... phenomenon indeed. Else why is there no evidence of intelligent civilizations that have existed long before we did? Its' not like the universe hasnt had 15 billion years to come up with them, and if intelligence is NOT an incredibly rare phenomenon, the universe should be crawling with them. But ... not the least jot or tittle of evidence.

In any event, an interesting phenonemon, for sure.

[Paul in Qatar]

(The Koran allows for life elsewhere, BTW.)Just curious...is there a specific passage you can quote? And does it say, "Mohammed says there is life somewhere else in the Universe," or is it open to multi- or pious-interpretation?

I am sorry to say I cannot provide a cite, except for years or students telling me it is so.

[Musicat]

Didn't we already find microorganisms on another planet?No. Are you thinking about the Antarctica find, a supposed import from Mars on a meterorite? (http://www2.jpl.nasa.gov/snc/nasa1.html)

That requires a great stretch of belief and highly improbable circumstances. A great deal more proof is necessary before this becomes generally accepted.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/space/4096212.html

[Musicat]

Just curious...is there a specific passage you can quote? And does it say, "Mohammed says there is life somewhere else in the Universe," or is it open to multi- or pious-interpretation?

I am sorry to say I cannot provide a cite, except for years or students telling me it is so.Good enough for me. :)

[Oy!]

I think it would partly depend on how the life developed there.

If for instance it was from a meteorite that got transported from earth as has been hypothesised, that would prove that life is very hardy, but wouldnt definitively prove life can develop on a planet other than earth.

Otara

Yes.

If the DNA was identical to an Earth organism (current or historical), very interesting.

If the DNA (or other genetic material) was not related, the find of the century at least.

Walt

This. If it's related to life here, that's big but not HUGE. Finding unrelated life anywhere would be enormous.

But I also agree with Evil Captor that a related but even more important find would be multi-cellular organisms. I don't necessarily agree with his further opinion that finding such on Mars would conclusively establish that intelligence is very rare.

Let's say that I'm a doctor and I'm interested in knowing if there are other doctors, and how many. If I discover a single other person, that's good. It definitely means it's possible that there may be more doctors. If I find out that that person is a college graduate (knowing for the sake of this exercise that all doctors are college graduates before they are doctors) but not a doctor, does that mean that I can expect fewer doctors out there than I could expect if this person had not been a college graduate? I don't think so.

We know right now that there are two really important stages in the development of life. One is life at all, the other is multi-cellular life. We really don't have a lot of information to determine how significant or rare developing sapience is. We can't even really define sapience. Neanderthals were sapient (probably), but what about Homo Erectus? Homo Habilis? What about the hobbits on Flores? The fact is, we don't know how many sapient species Earth has produced thus far.

But we also don't know how firm the line between sapience and technology is. We haven't reached the stars yet. We have no mechanism for doing so. It's by no means a certainty that we ever will. It's possible that civilization is inherently self-destructive. Or maybe just our version of it is. There could be a species like us in every star system, none of them having any means of detecting any of the others.

We're one small, unexceptional star among a hundred billion in our galaxy alone. The chances of another civilization, no matter how high tech, finding us are slim. Finding unrelated multi-cellular life on another planet is a step in the right direction, not the wrong one.

[gonzomax]

http://www.theguardians.com/Microbiology/gm_mbm04.htm Extremophiles have been discovered in terribly unfriendly to life conditions , from deep underground to volcanic vents. It has relaxed our computations on the conditions that are necessary to spawn life.

[Markxxx]

It would be the find of the millenium.

Of course you'd have to be able to bring it back or someone would dispute it. Second you would have to determain, did life get to Earth from Mars? Or did somehow this life on Mars come from the Earth? Or was it deposited by something else? If so, what?

But it would at least say, "OK we're not alone." It would also give a good clue to seeing how life in general develops. If it has a DNA structure similar to Earth life, then it's an important thing. If it has something totally different, well it's even a better find.

It would open up a whole new host of questions. Science hesistates to advance further on guesses only. It's like String Theory. Right now we have applications of it, lots of them, since we can't prove it, and aren't likely to prove it, to scientific standards it remains simmering on the back burner. If you could find a way to prove strings, you could get much more money for research.

Right now it's like "Why waste money looking for life?" And that makes sense to a degree not to divert funds from projects on the Earth to be "chasing rainbows" so to speak. But if we knew something was out there, it'd be easier to justify the research and money

[Dallas Jones]

It would be pretty interesting. It all depends upon if that life is significantlly different from life on Earth. It only becomes the greatest discovery of all time if that life has little in common with Earth life.

My opinion is that it will not be much different. There is surely life on Mars and it is probably much like primitive life here.

Is it really a separate case of abiogenesis or a case of cross planet seeding via meteorite, comet or other method?

It will interesting if something completely unlike life we know is found. If it is different it increases the likelyhood of life spontaneously arising in other parts of the universe, perhaps as a fundamental characteristic of matter.

If it is the same or similar kind of life then, hey maybe the solar system is infected with this particular strain of DNA based life and we still don't know if life could have started independently around another star or if what we have here is unique.

[MeanOldLady]

I'm amazed that anyone could even think of voting for anything other than "find of the century".

I mean, there aren't many bigger questions than "Are we alone in the universe?" To get the answer to that would be probably the biggest discovery humankind has ever made.

It will cause the bible thumpers to revise their stance on God's Unique Creation, the Earth. They will scramble to find passages that heretofore were ignored, but now will be re-interpreted as predicting it all along.These were my two immediate responses.

It will cause the bible thumpers to revise their stance on God's Unique Creation, the Earth. They will scramble to find passages that heretofore were ignored, but now will be re-interpreted as predicting it all along.

Not all of them. The Catholics like planning ahead (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/11/10/vatican-looks-to-heavens-_n_352971.html)*Shakes fist*

[Maiira]

I'd be interested, however my interest level would directly correspond to the type of life found.

Single celled organisms? Meh. I'd read the first couple of articles, then forget about it.

Multicellular organisms? Slightly more.

Something as complex as simple plants? A lot.

Little green men? I'm scared. Hold me.

I think this fits what I was going to say best. Though my fear would be more for the little green men than for us (well, maybe a little bit would be for us). We as a species have had a rather unfortunate tendency to exploit newly discovered beings, and I don't think that tendency has entirely gone away within the last half century.

[Antigen]

Find of the Century. It would profoundly impact our understanding of how life works, develops, spreads, etc. Intellectually it would be tremendously exciting.

Exactly. As of right now, all we know about life is what we have on this planet. Life elsewhere will be huge, whether it's the same as stuff on Earth or radically different. Both possibilities are so exciting!

[Lumpy]

If the negative could be demonstrated, that would also be extremely significant, if discouraging. If someday we find underground aquifers of liquid water on Mars, and they prove to be completely sterile, that would be an astonishing blow to the belief that life is ubiquitous.

[septimus]

If the negative could be demonstrated, that would also be extremely significant, if discouraging. If someday we find underground aquifers of liquid water on Mars, and they prove to be completely sterile, that would be an astonishing blow to the belief that life is ubiquitous.

If Mars is suitable for life that might only encourage the search. Much of the belief in life's prevalance is based on a large-number argument. If stars have on average as few as .001 suitable planets each and the chance for life on a suitable planet is only 1 in a million, that still multiplies out to 50 trillion planets with life in the observable universe.

This runs into Fermi's Paradox: If life is so common why haven't aliens made their presence known here? (Possibly because they're interested only in intelligent life? :smack:)

It will cause the bible thumpers to revise their stance on God's Unique Creation, the Earth.

Since 64% of Americans believe aliens have contacted Earthlings and 45% of Americans believe God created Man within the last few thousand years, I'm not sure of this. Simple arithmetic would prove at least 9% of Americans already believe both in alien life and an Adam-Eve story, and one can safely guess the number is much larger.

[ralph124c]

I suspect we will find evidence of ancient life on Mars. But life most likely died out long ago-anything alive now will probably be bacterial.
Which raises the question: how can we be sure that any bacteria we find are not of earth origin?

[Little Nemo]

I think "it's the find of the century" might be underselling the importance of it. Arguably, it would be the most important event in human history.

[Musicat]

This runs into Fermi's Paradox: If life is so common why haven't aliens made their presence known here? (Possibly because they're interested only in intelligent life? :smack:)Distance, my friend. Incredible distance.

[FuzzyOgre]

Discovery of a life time. Greatest discovery in the history of humanity.

As for those only vaguely interested in single celled life, you must be informed that the differences between types of them are utterly significant. Prokaryotes and Eukaryotes are both single celled, but divide complex creatures from the simple ones. How alien life fit into that would be earth shaking.

[sleeping]

Definitely interesting, but whether it's find of the century depends the organism's structure. If it's similar to the prokaryotes found on earth...meh.

[BigT]

I just think "find of the century" is overblown. I think it may be big news for a few years, even decades, but it will fall back to being unimportant unless more life is discovered. There's just not a lot you can do with a single sample.

[Bricker]

Find of the century at a minimum. Surely that would cause us to seek a manned mission to Mars, so that these samples could be studied, and we could determine (1) if they even have DNA, and (2) if the DNA has anything in common with ours. No matter what the answers are, it will be a huge leap forward in our understanding.

[Bricker]

Definitely interesting, but whether it's find of the century depends the organism's structure. If it's similar to the prokaryotes found on earth...meh.

Meh?!?

Even a highly primitive prokaryote surviving on, say, copper sulfate would be beyond amazing, because we could analyze the monomeric nucleotides and discover what, if any, similarity to Earth-based life existed.

[Chronos]

I suspect we will find evidence of ancient life on Mars. But life most likely died out long ago-anything alive now will probably be bacterial.
Which raises the question: how can we be sure that any bacteria we find are not of earth origin?All life on Earth uses the same genetic code: In other words, we all translate from sequences of DNA bases to sequences of amino acids in proteins according to the same rules. But even if alien life that's not related to us uses DNA and proteins at all (no way to even estimate the odds), the odds are far beyond astronomical that they'd use the same genetic code that we do. As in, even if the Universe is absolutely teeming with life, I would still not believe that you'd find any two unrelated lifeforms anywhere in the entire observable Universe who coincidentally had the same genetic code.

[capybara]

My first thought was about sailors fighting in the dance hall. Oh man, look at those cave-men go. It's the freakiest show. Take a look at the lawman beating up the wrong guy.
The real answer is-- holy shit, find of the millennium, or two. My mind is blown into bitty pieces.

[Steophan]

I'd expect there to be something resembling life there, but unless it's extremely similar to terrestrial life how will the rover recognise it? Also, not that excited, as I'd need something larger to feel "not alone".
Finding FTL travel, that would be the find of the century.

[control-z]

Find of the century. I'm convinced there must be life on other planets (if not our solar system then others) but the first discovery will definitely be historic.

[Lumpy]

Find of the century. I'm convinced there must be life on other planets (if not our solar system then others) but the first discovery will definitely be historic.Except that we know that meteoroids have transferred material from Mars to Earth, and possibly vice-versa. So it if turned out there was microbial Martian life that clearly shared a common ancestor with Earth life, you'd still have a single instance of life, just located on two adjacent planets. That's why I only voted "pretty interesting".