Path: ...!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!news2.arglkargh.de!news.karotte.org!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail
From: Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com>
Newsgroups: rec.bicycles.tech
Subject: Re: Bicyclist decapitated
Date: Tue, 30 Apr 2024 09:27:06 -0700
Lines: 92
Message-ID: <jl523j5hqch1btlg35mg510ge9us5jlqu0@4ax.com>
References: <v0hm4i$13vh$1@dont-email.me> <pjro2jp9b6mi3m8pf61k7d6pockghceevo@4ax.com> <v0ipqs$bp76$2@dont-email.me> <53fq2jhilk6oedbglp8bj1t7h7olvg7nom@4ax.com> <v0jod7$imeb$1@dont-email.me> <fl4t2jhj8clmir6pddqkdh0ftip2p7ir07@4ax.com> <v0m831$17i67$1@dont-email.me> <ad3u2j1k0qt686jtopldv5secnu7a92i9t@4ax.com> <v0oh9b$1r98l$2@dont-email.me> <gaa03jhhku913b90o7klrllsvn8mmhbkif@4ax.com> <v0pjh7$233td$2@dont-email.me> <slrnv31u19.jno.theise@panix2.panix.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: individual.net OLZDjiKhMeEYyZrAVU6dcgRtSH9yGaNI1HOMHc3PEAyq/LgiE7
Cancel-Lock: sha1:/o/yV7yPZdMjCRO9cWo+IJdiVRo= sha256:/PKQmllpcUNuCFu8jUGrnMkNKLApZ8So4lCBpCw87o0=
User-Agent: ForteAgent/8.00.32.1272
Bytes: 5454

On Tue, 30 Apr 2024 13:54:49 -0000 (UTC), Ted Heise <theise@panix.com>
wrote:

>On Mon, 29 Apr 2024 22:03:17 -0400,
>  Frank Krygowski <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>  On 4/29/2024 7:46 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>> > On Mon, 29 Apr 2024 12:18:50 -0400, Frank Krygowski
>> > <frkrygow@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>> >> On 4/28/2024 11:40 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>> >>>   I beg to partially differ.  If we assume that all the 
>> >>> known elements are present in roughly the same distributions 
>> >>> throughout the universe, there's a good chance that 
>> >>> self-replicating life processes will be built using the same 
>> >>> elements as on planet Earth.  "Carbon atoms are unique 
>> >>> because they can bond together to form very long, durable 
>> >>> chains that can have branches or rings of various sizes and 
>> >>> often contain thousands of carbon atoms." 
>> >>> <https://www.nature.com/articles/139290a0.pdf> The emergence 
>> >>> of life is possible with comparatively inferior elements but 
>> >>> the main building block will mostly likely be a stable atom 
>> >>> that will build the strongest and move versatile bonds to 
>> >>> other atoms.
>> > 
>> >> Agreed. I confess to low talent for chemistry. But I've not 
>> >> yet heard of a detailed proposal for a chemistry of life 
>> >> built on anything but carbon.
>> >>
>> >> If someone here has such a proposal, I'd happily run it by 
>> >> the chemists in our family.
>> > 
>> > Did you search for "silicon based life"?  There is quite a bit 
>> > on the possible existence of Silicon based life: 
>> > <https://www.google.com/search?q=possibility+of+silicon+based+life>
>> 
>>  I've read about the possibilities of silicon for decades now, 
>>  but I've never seen details on exactly how it would form the 
>>  hugely complex molecules necessary for life, let alone 
>>  self-replicate them.
>> 
>>  Those are the details I'd like to run by the chemists I know.
>> 
>>  Most of the articles I find on quick search say silicon based 
>>  life _may_ be possible, but is highly unlikely.
>
>My initial impression was that silicon could possibly substitute 
>for oxygen given it's immediately adjacent to carbon in the same 
>periodic table family--but that perhaps steric effects could be a 
>barrier (due to silicon's relatively larger size, with a 3rd 
>valence electron shell).
>
>However, this relatively recent article...
>
>  https://www.mdpi.com/2075-1729/10/6/84
>
>...titled "On the Potential of Silicon as a Building Block for 
>Life" makes a reasonable case of it being improbable--at least in 
>settings with water present (due to favored formation of silicas).

Nice article and close to what Frank was looking for.  It's not a
research paper but rather a research summary, which reports on the
current state of research in the area (planetary science).  

A few comments:

The PDF version is much easier to read (47 pages):
<https://mdpi-res.com/d_attachment/life/life-10-00084/article_deploy/life-10-00084.pdf?version=1591790960>
So far, I just skimmed the contents but will try to read it later this
week.

Reviewer comments are useful:
<https://www.mdpi.com/2075-1729/10/6/84/review_report>
Well, the first review is interesting:
<https://susy.mdpi.com/user/review/displayFile/12379177/SJO1iGHh?file=author-coverletter&report=7448275>
The 2nd review, not so interesting:
<https://susy.mdpi.com/user/review/displayFile/12495084/9kmnwXot?file=author-coverletter&report=7541150>
No PDF is provided so you'll need something that can read MS Word DOCX
files such as LibreOffice Writer.

One problem with such discussions is that it's much easier to disprove
something than to prove it.  To prove something correct, it is
necessary to prove ALL the claims.  If one claim suspected of being
wrong, all the other claims become suspect and are likely to be
summarily dismissed as also wrong.  That makes disproving something
much easier as only one false or suspect claim is all that's necessary
for the house of cards to collapse.


-- 
Jeff Liebermann                 jeffl@cruzio.com
PO Box 272      http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
Skype: JeffLiebermann      AE6KS    831-336-2558