questionposter

Well, it told me I had to pay for the article, and I have no reason to think that source is right over an archive of professional scientists and editors with information provided by the most famous museum in America, and it's not famous for being wrong. Here's the deal: You have your non specific "journal entries" as well as stuff from the infamous wikipedia, and you expect me to believe that over a 65$ book that had a lot of work put into it, more than a few websites and detailed documentaries from BBC who got their information from organizations such as NASA. Oh, I didn't realize it was all for show...

That journal entry simply states it is most common for those animals to be in those lower temperatures, which means even according to that article its possible for those worms to survive higher temperatures but for only brief periods of time. If that is the case, it would be fine according to that quote form my book as it does not specify how long those worms stay in vents.

I really don't see how it could have been wrong, I am directly quoting the book. Finally, I have an answer, and it seems just because it contradicts what you guys were saying before, now your saying it has to be wrong, no matter what source it was from. I bet I could get a signature form every oceanographer on Earth saying that what I quoted was correct and at least psycho would just say all those scientists are frauds. Look, its a rare exception, some things can survive extreme conditions, there's even mold or moss that's in the ice of Antarctica, which is still rare. I really don't see how you guys missed this whole vent ecosystem thing, it's been a pretty big deal to many scientists, even to astronomers. Besides, even if psycho is correct which I don't think he is, it's no excuse for being rude.

If you want to buy the 50-60$ book (thought it might be cheaper by now), I'm sure it's at a book store, maybe even Half-Price books. The info was on page 171. Or you could try amazon, it's probably cheaper there. Maybe they change the covers for different editions, but mine has a cover of a giant jellyfish. And Psycho, your name fits you. I've been pretty patient despite what you've said and now your saying information form the American Museum of Natural History is wrong, just stop already. I'll tell you what...I'll try and see if I can scan it sometime and upload the image(s) to an image hosting site like photoucket.

Found it OCEAN, published by DK Publishing, the first of which was published in 2006 (the EARTH book was 2009-10), with information provided by the American Museum of Natural History says "HEAT-TOLERANT WORM This polychaete worm (. type of segmented worm) was discovered by the Alvin submersible in 1979- and named Alvinella pompejana in its honor. It is the most heat-tolerant animal on Earth, living in water emerging from hydrothermal vents at 570ºF (300ºC)." So, moon was right. But I would agree that it is rare as I realize that most heat from vents travels directly upward. But again, no one has apparently laid out a concrete definition for "complex" life, unless any multi-celled macroscopic life is complex.

That book "Ocean", published by the museum of natural history says there are in fact animals that live around those vents. It says the process of the mantel heating up materials heats the water to temperatures of around 600-800 C. There isn't a lot of details on the vents themselves, so that's fine if heat rises that much and doesn't spread out that all, that's fine, it would make sense as most animals probably wouldn't do good in it, but the reasons I would continue to think there are animals that can survive the vents is because of extremeafiles which could potentially evolve into complex life, and footage from BBC showing complex shrimp-like life forms obtaining nutrients directly of the stream generated by the vents. If someone can find the name of shrimp-like creatures that occupy the vent-ecosystems, I might be able to look it up in the index for more detail, but I'm having trouble finding it. "Vent crab" works, but just "vent"+ any animal doesn't, it needs to be a better name.

As far as I can tell, crabs and shrimps and octopus are complex. If that is incorrect then feel free to say that, unless I find that in the ocean book it says otherwise. The crabs I don't think are too close to the vent, but the shrimp-like organisms are nearly in it. Most of these are small organisms too, it's not like giant things would be able to live in such conditions.

Well, I'm not seeing any links form anyone saying specifically that what I am stating is wrong, all I am seeing is that when I google "vent ecosystems" and watch TV, it's saying life can live in water at least 200 C under more than 100 atmospheres of pressure, so I'm going to go with that or approximately that. I happen to have a book on ocean stuff from 2009-2010 so I'll see that that says

So, in the same post, you stated only simple life can grow around high temperatures, and then linked to websites that even have pictures proving you wrong... Even the water "around" vents is hotter than 100 C and under very great pressure. Planet Earth series is BBC, and not a TV show as far as I know, they are documentary movies.

Well how do you know its mistaken? Because if I just google "vent ecosystems" there's a number of links supporting what I'm saying. http://www.tos.org/oceanography/archive/20-1_fisher.pdf http://seawifs.gsfc.nasa.gov/OCEAN_PLANET/HTML/oceanography_recently_revealed1.html Ok, but that doesn't tell me really why boiling water kills things and not super-heating water.

Well, there is a gene that you can manipulate to double the life-span of the thing you alter it of. Its already been done in worms and I'd imagine there has to be some kind of human testing, at least eventually. And then even before that, it was found that taking in 30-40% less calories a day turned on some kind of survival genes that boosted your immune system and physical health.

I think this has to do with entanglement, because entangled photons can supposedly be "indirectly" observed to send cubits of information and supposedly tests have proven that already, and in the experiment if I remember correctly, you basically crash two isolated photons into each other in certain way so that they are heading away from each other but still entangled, and it was done through a long tube.

Yep, completely true...so how does nature use a dot moving along a circle of infinite right triangles come into play in nature? Why and how does nature an x-unit circle?

Sine waves are derived from a unit circle, nature uses sine waves.

Just what the question says. What the heck about electrons and other sub-atomic particles makes them exactly correspond to a dot moving around a circle of infinite right triangles? Or sound waves even?

So if I graph 3-D patterns like a ripple in a pond or sound waves, instead of it involving something like sin(x^3) and sin(z^3) its sin(x^2+y^3). But how could actual movement 3-D movement in 4 dimensional space be built out of the warping of 2 dimensional things? How could a 2-D thing actually move in a 3 dimensional way? Does x^2 not actually have anything to do with 2 dimensions, is it just coincidence that that's how you find a square or is x^3 coincidentally a unit for a cube? What about x^4units^4? Shouldn't that be a 4th dimensional object? Is space somehow a 2-D plane in every direction? And how is that different than just a plain 3-D object?

Well, just watch "Planet Earth" then. One of those episodes even has footage of living things in the vent system and even in the stream of the vent itself. Well, just watch "Planet Earth" then. One of those episodes even has footage of living things in the vent system and even in the stream of the vent itself.

Well, just watch "Planet Earth" then. One of those episodes even has footage of living things in the vent system and even in the stream of the vent itself.

But the water from those vents is well above 100°C, isn't the water trying to evaporate and move up through the surrounding mass of water if it's above 100°C? What about highly heated water in the atmosphere is that different under water that life could form in the super-heated water of a vent and not water above sea level that isn't nearly as hot? Around the vents the water is moving faster even, or at least has more force. http://dgukenvis.nic.in/artmar1.htm Granted, not every animal in a vent ecosystem feeds directly off of the vents, but the carnivorous animals feed off of animals that do. "The waters around the deep ocean hydrothermal vents as hot as 3800C" "the organisms that are common to vents include various forms of microbes – bacteria and archaea, and macrofauna – mussels, crabs, shrimps, worms, anemones, fish, octopus, snails, limpets and so on. H2S-oxidising bacteria,"

You said I was making myself out to say UV light didn't help life, I fixed that. As you can see, what I meant was that that I knew UV does help life, but thought it was overlooked that too much of it kills things, and it surely would have killed the nascent bacterium that first came about or just inhibited their existance if water didn't block a bit of UV light.

What if you know how to work out more extensively? Or what if you know that working out and doing puzzles reduces the age that things degrade? And have you met more than 1 o2 r old people? There's many who are definitely not just "reserved" and "cautious". I ran into an elderly person in the South who not that later after I met him said "I hate Lincoln...".

So what about non-radioactive elements?

Well if 100% of UV light could penetrate water for 100% of its depth, then bacterium couldn't survive in it. I didn't say it didn't help life, the first life was those (forgot the scientific name) algae that use photosynthesis. But do you really think you'd survive outside if there was no ozone?

You really need to watch the discovery channel more because there's literally animals that jump directly into the stream of the hydro-thermal vents at the base of them. That planet Earth stuff has been around for like almost 10 years, it was this whole big deal about how life in the universe didn't necessarily need light form a star to thrive.

Aren't there extremofiles that live in volcanoes? There's probably bacterium that can survive boiling water too. F. http://arstechnica.c...cama-desert.ars Not only that, but there's whole ecosystems thriving in regions where the water is well above boiling while the pressure is greater than we could possibly handle and chemicals toxic to us are spewing everywhere. http://www.amnh.org/...life_forms.html