- #1
shlegminitism
- 1
- 0
Here's a question, though I'm not sure if it is suited to the biology section, since it might overlap physics and Earth science. Hell, i don't know; I'm an English major :rofl:
Forgive me if i make any foolish assumptions.
To what extent has the Earth's mass affected the types of life that have formed?
If the Earth were 20% larger (or smaller), but was formed under the same circumstances, same habitable climate, etc., would things be very different than they are now?
Just wondering how significant the Earth's mass was to all of this. I guess I'm assuming that if the mass was larger, gravity would exert a stronger pull and we might just have beefier legs? I'm also assuming that life (those first tiny single and mult-icellular critters) came to be and evolved in a way that was ideal in relation to the mass of this planet, and that if the mass were different, then other critters would have come to be that are slightly different, but similar in function. Any Idears?
Forgive me if i make any foolish assumptions.
To what extent has the Earth's mass affected the types of life that have formed?
If the Earth were 20% larger (or smaller), but was formed under the same circumstances, same habitable climate, etc., would things be very different than they are now?
Just wondering how significant the Earth's mass was to all of this. I guess I'm assuming that if the mass was larger, gravity would exert a stronger pull and we might just have beefier legs? I'm also assuming that life (those first tiny single and mult-icellular critters) came to be and evolved in a way that was ideal in relation to the mass of this planet, and that if the mass were different, then other critters would have come to be that are slightly different, but similar in function. Any Idears?