OK, (3). I don't see any commonsense issue at all. This is how probability works. When I throw a dice, there are probabilities to get anything from 1 to 6. But as soon as I get 4, all other possibilities vanish at once.
The free fall acceleration doesn't depend on mass because, in old terms, "gravitational mass" equals "inertial mass". Inertial mass is "relativistic mass". Since the inertial mass changes with velocity, for the free fall acceleration not to change the gravitational mass needs to change. Weight is the gravitational mass times the acceleration. Thus, the weight needs to change.
I guess they wouldn't generally eat each other. Rather for each kind the other kind would be just like other non-living natural phenomena -- wind, rain, waves, ...
Wouldn't it be very interesting to have two independent trees of life with opposite chirality with independent evolution and ecology on one planet. Any sci-fi writers around?
AFAIK all surviving life descended from three ancestors: Archaea, Bacteria, and Eukarya. There is evidence that both Eukarya and Bacteria split from Archaea. All is needed then is to strengthen this evidence.
I got one: [2105.11949] Particle detection and tracking with DNA (arxiv.org)
And then, this: DNA-based detector helps scientists hunt for dark matter | Astronomy.com
I remember a study from about 8 years ago showing that relativistic particles in accelerator free fall just like they should, i.e. like everything else in the Earth gravity, with the same acceleration. I think it means that their weight increased accordingly to their relativistic mass.
I have a question about the RNA world (the idea of which is quite attractive to me). Do we consider "first living entities" or the entire world was one living entity, without membranes?
Added: Or, each separate "pond" was a living entity?
We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.