Mars - this is how it went down. (just for fun/argument sake)

  • Thread starter Thread starter offtheleft
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Mars
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the idea that Mars may have once supported life, based on the notion that Earth's distance from the Sun could have been similar to Mars' in the past. Participants debate the implications of the universe's expansion, clarifying that it does not affect the solar system's structure or planetary orbits. Some contributors suggest that life could exist in extreme conditions, while others emphasize the importance of understanding established physics before forming theories. The conversation highlights the need for education in astronomy and physics to engage meaningfully in such discussions. Overall, the thread encourages exploration of ideas while grounding them in scientific principles.
offtheleft
Messages
130
Reaction score
1
I'm probably going to get flamed hard for this but, I just want to see what type of reaction I'd get. BUT, in leu of recent events regarding Mars, I thought I'd start this fun little thread.

In my completely uneducated, far-out opinion: Mars possessed life in the past. Some eon's ago, obviously before evolution brought forth humans on Earth. You may asking your self something like, "What are you smoking?" Well, I think I might hold a pretty reasonable argument. If all of this has been though of already and brought up, here especially. Well, maybe I am on drugs. Kidding. Okay, I'll get started!

Where is Earth in our solar system? The Sun, Mercury, Venus, EARTH, Mars, etc, etc... Okay, so far we can tell I passed science class in fourth grade. Considering the distances from the Sun, Venus is to close and Mars is to far. Yes! Its way to hot on Venus and too cold on Mars. It's quite nice here on Earth, I think.

Taking into consideration that the universe is expanding, our solar system along with it. Perhaps maybe, just maybe that, said eon's ago Earth was the distance from the Sun as Venus is today? And, oh baby I'm going to say it, Mars is where Earth was! With that taken into consideration, Mars could have habitable. Habitable enough to possesses life. Life in which we have not discovered, yet!

Hey, with all the discoveries going on up there, I'm not ruling any of this out. It does make a bit of sense but it's all in my head and my "completely uneducated, far-out opinion" as stated before.

Now, before posting this I had much more planned to throw into this post. After 9 hours of physical labor with the lack of food or a break, some of it had slipped my mind. I think I provided ample information in order to start a nice debate.

Tell me what you think!

- Giuseppe


p.s. I want to see some math involved with some theories. Heh, have fun and be nice to me. I'm still new.

:)
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
offtheleft said:
Taking into consideration that the universe is expanding, our solar system along with it. Perhaps maybe, just maybe that, said eon's ago Earth was the distance from the Sun as Venus is today? And, oh baby I'm going to say it, Mars is where Earth was! With that taken into consideration, Mars could have habitable. Habitable enough to possesses life. Life in which we have not discovered, yet!

Unfortunately for this idea, the expansion of the Universe does not cause the solar system to expand. The orbits of the planets are the same today as they were when the planets formed.
 
Wallace said:
Unfortunately for this idea, the expansion of the Universe does not cause the solar system to expand. The orbits of the planets are the same today as they were when the planets formed.

Now, that's not going to make Velikowski happy!
 
Wallace said:
Unfortunately for this idea, the expansion of the Universe does not cause the solar system to expand. The orbits of the planets are the same today as they were when the planets formed.

offtheleft, forgive me but I'm going to ask something here that is completely off-topic.

Wallace, wouldn't the magnitude of the planetary orbits (e.g. in Earth's case, the distance traveled around the sun over a year) eventually decrease over time (millions and millions of years)? I'm sorry to be using such simple language, but I don't know the correct terminology. In layman's terms, won't the sun's gravity eventually "suck us in" so to speak? I'm just asking, since I find this all very interesting and being a first year physics major I know absolutely nothing about astronomy as yet. Hope you don't mind...
 
No, gravity does not "suck us in". Gravity is what causes the planets to move in ellipses rather than in a straight line.
 
offtheleft, one can also say that somewhere in thousand stars, and thousands of planets revolving around these stars, there may exist a planet as nice as ours, maybe it has people "now". Your say??

Or since our star(sun) is expanding, at sometime(in future) other planets will be at the optimum distance as our's(earth) to support human life(guess i shoud pack my bags 8->).

Hey i noticed your statement, "Mars is where Earth was!", its not the location of Earth which is important, but the distance from sun.

One more possibility, why should we limit the the life to only Earth like atmospheric conditions. Why can't we have some organism with normal body temperature at, say, 90 degree celcius, maybe living at pressure of 10 bars, Pluto like environment, or maybe at Mar's environment in some other galaxy??

In my opinion, possibilities should not be ruled out, but rather than searching for stupid aliens(what if they are evil?? :-ss), we better keep ourself busy at solving our own problem, say, melting arctic

i think some sea bed creatures live in extreme conditions, i dunno, i am just shooting in dark.
 
Regarding the expansion of the universe, I included the solar system. I must have been ill-informed. Like I said, This is for fun.
 
HallsofIvy said:
No, gravity does not "suck us in". Gravity is what causes the planets to move in ellipses rather than in a straight line.

I understand that part, but wouldn't the circumference (?) of the ellipse become smaller over time?
 
Im no physicist but I think that it is unlikely that all the planets are at just the right angular velocity and mass to keep them in an unchanging orbit

Also, isn't gravity a force? All that energy swinging planets around has got to come from somewhere
 
  • #10
OSalcido said:
Im no physicist but I think that it is unlikely that all the planets are at just the right angular velocity and mass to keep them in an unchanging orbit
It requires no such thing. A planet could have a wide range of angular velocities or masses and maintain a stable orbit. They would be different orbits, but they would all be stable.
Also, isn't gravity a force? All that energy swinging planets around has got to come from somewhere

The total energy of a planet in orbit is constant and unchanging. No energy is expended in its orbit, so no energy source is needed to maintain the orbit.
 
  • #11
This thread has run its course.

The short answer is no, it simply does not work that way.


My recommendation for you is that before you get caught up in day dreams about how you think things work, pick up a bit of physics. You must understand that mankind has been accumulating knowledge of our universe for over 400yrs. Contributions to this body of knowledge have made by some of the greatest minds known to mind kind. You simply cannot formulate a meaningful theory without some familiarity with the basic laws of physics.


Don't give up, use these forums as a source of answers to your questions. Keep thinking, but guide your thoughts with education.
 
  • #12
As a side note, the overall expansion of the universe does not affect the solar system because the solar system is gravitationally bound.

- Warren
 
Back
Top