What if science never discovers what made life?

[Raider5678]

What if we're alone in the universe, and billions of years from now they still have no idea how life possibly began.

Would humans eventually just give up and say something or another made us, or would they still claim random coincidence?

 

I'm not trying to discuss the possibility of God here.

Just what conclusions humanity would come to if it encountered a mystery it couldn't solve.

Edited March 24, 2017 by Raider5678

[CharonY]

There is basically an unlimited amount of things that we don't know. Including things that we don't know that we know. It is part of the scientific enterprise to look for them and, at times, not coming up with an answer. We keep pushing boundaries, but ultimately that is all we can hope for. I do not see why the origin of life would take a special spot in that regard.

[Raider5678]

There is basically an unlimited amount of things that we don't know. Including things that we don't know that we know. It is part of the scientific enterprise to look for them and, at times, not coming up with an answer. We keep pushing boundaries, but ultimately that is all we can hope for. I do not see why the origin of life would take a special spot in that regard.

I think it does.

The question about the origin of life has spawned a large number of religions, perhaps being one of the most influential questions ever asked.

[Prometheus]

Feynman, as ever, puts it well:

 

[CharonY]

I think it does.

The question about the origin of life has spawned a large number of religions, perhaps being one of the most influential questions ever asked.

 

That has little to do with the science behind it, though. People choose to believe in things without scientific evidence already. How does it change from the situation as it is right now?

[Raider5678]

 

That has little to do with the science behind it, though. People choose to believe in things without scientific evidence already. How does it change from the situation as it is right now?

I know this isn't science.

Which is why it's in philosophy.

[CharonY]

Then what relevance does it have whether science figure out how it may have worked?

[Raider5678]

Then what relevance does it have whether science figure out how it may have worked?

It's philosophy.

I'm wondering if there will be an increase in religion if science can't discover what made life.

I'm not advocating whether science has to do anything, nor that it has any relevance in any way at all. I never claimed this.

[CharonY]

And I ask again, what would be different from the current situation? And why do you think would it lead to an increase?

[Sensei]

What if we're alone in the universe, and billions of years from now they still have no idea how life possibly began.

Let me quote myself:

 

In environment with the right conditions (presence of enough high and enough low temperature, presence of clouds and thunderbolts),

with the right chemical composition (CO2 or CO, CH4, H2O, N2 or NH3 or HCN),

there will be created amino acids, like in Miller-Urey experiment

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MillerUrey_experiment

 

"Other experiments

This experiment inspired many others. In 1961, Joan Oró found that the nucleotide base adenine could be made from hydrogen cyanide (HCN) and ammonia in a water solution. His experiment produced a large amount of adenine, the molecules of which were formed from 5 molecules of HCN.[15] Also, many amino acids are formed from HCN and ammonia under these conditions.[16] Experiments conducted later showed that the other RNA and DNA nucleobases could be obtained through simulated prebiotic chemistry with a reducing atmosphere.[17]"

 

Two amino acids, join together through a peptide bond:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peptide_bond

[Raider5678]

And I ask again, what would be different from the current situation? And why do you think would it lead to an increase?

Because we haven't been able to look into genetics as much now as compared to the past 1000 years.

If a few billion years go by, and we can do just about everything else, yet science still can't prove life can appear by chance, some people will use this as an excuse for religion.

It's pretty straight forward.

[Phi for All]

Because we haven't been able to look into genetics as much now as compared to the past 1000 years.

If a few billion years go by, and we can do just about everything else, yet science still can't prove life can appear by chance, some people will use this as an excuse for religion.

It's pretty straight forward.

 

In order to know that Earth holds the only life, in that billion years we would have searched all over for it. And in the process, we would be seeding the galaxies system by system with life. In all that time, I can also assume there was nothing else that suggested religion might be more of an explanation than it is now.

 

After a billion years of pretty much what we have now evidence-wise, why would religion seem like a better answer?

[Raider5678]

 

In order to know that Earth holds the only life, in that billion years we would have searched all over for it. And in the process, we would be seeding the galaxies system by system with life. In all that time, I can also assume there was nothing else that suggested religion might be more of an explanation than it is now.

 

After a billion years of pretty much what we have now evidence-wise, why would religion seem like a better answer?

Because right now it seems like we'll discover what created life. Or at least that it's possible.

If in billions of years, we have discovered nothing, that's comparably greater then just a few decades of having discovered nothing.

In a billion years, I'm going to make the logical assumption that if we don't wipe ourselves out, we'll be a lot more technologically advanced. Agree?

And if in all that, scientists can't no matter how hard they try prove that life could just happen, a lot more people are going to feel that it was created rather then just by chance. Already now, there are(albeit very few. very few) who are religious because after a few decades science still can't answer what caused life.

Given a few billion years, it would be logical to assume that more will probably lean with the theory we were created simply because finding a reason life exists is so hard to find.

[Phi for All]

Because right now it seems like we'll discover what created life. Or at least that it's possible.

If in billions of years, we have discovered nothing, that's comparably greater then just a few decades of having discovered nothing.

In a billion years, I'm going to make the logical assumption that if we don't wipe ourselves out, we'll be a lot more technologically advanced. Agree?

And if in all that, scientists can't no matter how hard they try prove that life could just happen, a lot more people are going to feel that it was created rather then just by chance. Already now, there are(albeit very few. very few) who are religious because after a few decades science still can't answer what caused life.

Given a few billion years, it would be logical to assume that more will probably lean with the theory we were created simply because finding a reason life exists is so hard to find.

 

I get that part. But if there's no further evidence for religion (we're talking about a deity really, a creator) than there is right now, a billion years later, why would people turn that way? And unless you posit that we're able to comb the entire universe in a billion years, there would still be places left to look, which would lend encouragement for one of the last theories left to us, that something unique(?) from an unknown part of the universe interacted with Earth in a one-off event that resulted in life as we know it.

 

Still no need for a creator.

[CharonY]

Because we haven't been able to look into genetics as much now as compared to the past 1000 years.

If a few billion years go by, and we can do just about everything else, yet science still can't prove life can appear by chance, some people will use this as an excuse for religion.

It's pretty straight forward.

 

Again, people use all kind of beliefs as basis for religion. I do not see evidence that people ever used relative knowledge to do so. At best it would be a weak justification, but only after people already decided to believe in something. Take evolution, for example. Some religions (such as Catholicism) integrated it into their belief system. Others (such as creationists) just deny it. The level of evidence does not play a role (and it does not get much more firm than that).

 

So lack of evidence is unlikely to hold a lot of sway either way.

[Bender]

You could reverse the question: if after billions of years, we still didn't have the faintest evidence of any god existing, will people stop believing in a creator?

 

Another way to reverse the question: if in a couple of decades, we manage to replicate the origin of life under conditions prevalent on Earth at the time, will people stop believing in a creator?

[Velocity_Boy]

What if we're alone in the universe, and billions of years from now they still have no idea how life possibly began.

Would humans eventually just give up and say something or another made us, or would they still claim random coincidence?

 

I'm not trying to discuss the possibility of God here.

Just what conclusions humanity would come to if it encountered a mystery it couldn't solve.

 

 

You are of course correct in claiming that science still has no viable theory on how Abiogenesis may have occured billions of years ago.

 

And I doubt it ever will discern the answer. I am a scientist, a biologist, but not an advocate of that idea.

 

That said, I highly doubt anybodys who is an atheist, materialist scientist and is trying to unravel the machinations of Abiogenesis will throw up his hands and suddenly accept God as the Creator, just because he cannot find the answer. If you are a non-believer, it takes more than failed experiments or theories to fostering belief in gods. As men of science, they should need tangible proof.

Of course I've no doubt that the godists and creationists are loving the fact that science cannot prove Abiogenesis. An they use it to bolster their argument. It is indeed, their finest argument.

 

Lastly, I sadly confess that I highly doubt we will be around millions of years from now. So there will be no chance for scientists living then to convert if Abiogenesis had not been proven yet. LOL

[Bender]

Of course I've no doubt that the godists and creationists are loving the fact that science cannot prove Abiogenesis. An they use it to bolster their argument. It is indeed, their finest argument.

Creationists probably couldn't care less. They already discard heaps of evidence regarding evolution. One more step will be as easily discarded.

[John Cuthber]

Imagine the OP's question had been asked 200 years ago.

The same discussion would take place and presumably Raider would still believe that, we would stop looking for "the answer".
Well, we haven't so far.

Why imagine the next billion years will be different?
Incidentally, in a billion years "we" will look back at today's humans from roughly the same perspective that people today look at pond slime which renders the question a bit meaningless- but that's philosophy for you.

[Raider5678]

Imagine the OP's question had been asked 200 years ago.

The same discussion would take place and presumably Raider would still believe that, we would stop looking for "the answer".

Well, we haven't so far.

Why imagine the next billion years will be different?

Incidentally, in a billion years "we" will look back at today's humans from roughly the same perspective that people today look at pond slime which renders the question a bit meaningless- but that's philosophy for you.

I don't believe we'll stop looking for the answer.

[Ten oz]

Because right now it seems like we'll discover what created life. Or at least that it's possible.

If in billions of years, we have discovered nothing, that's comparably greater then just a few decades of having discovered nothing.

In a billion years, I'm going to make the logical assumption that if we don't wipe ourselves out, we'll be a lot more technologically advanced. Agree?

And if in all that, scientists can't no matter how hard they try prove that life could just happen, a lot more people are going to feel that it was created rather then just by chance. Already now, there are(albeit very few. very few) who are religious because after a few decades science still can't answer what caused life.

Given a few billion years, it would be logical to assume that more will probably lean with the theory we were created simply because finding a reason life exists is so hard to find.

The overwhelming majority of people, basically everyone, is surrounded in their homes by things they cannot explain the creation of. Even the most educated amongst us cannot explain the process required for everthing in a home. For some it might be the exact temps required to turn Silica and ash into glass while others may not know the galvanizing process used to protect screws & nails. Yet none of us would argue the answer can't be known or that god must be responsible. Understanding that everything that exists has a process enabling existence is a basic concept we understand for seemingly everything. Personnally understanding the process for all things isn't needed 99.9% of the time. People don't understand have their laptops work yet no defaults to thinking it is magic.

 

Why must the process that created life be different? When it comes to that question every layperson needs a universal answer than can be easily explained. Life exists and that fact in and of itself is overwhelming proof that life can be created. Even if we asssume god created it there still must be a process god used to do so. Meaning a process exists and is responsible. The inclusion of a god figure isn't neccessary. To our knowledge only we humans make stainless steel. Would another intelligent lifeform need to learn about humans and understand us for they themselves to learn how to make stainless steel? Whether or not that intelligence figured out how to make stainless steel has no baring on human existence. Learning how life can be created or where in the universe it have sprouted up exists separate from the concept of god.

 

Btw, god is a lifeform. A lifeform seeding life on a planet is already within our ability. We could put life on Mars if we so chose. God as a lifeform making other lifeforms doesn't actually to get to the question of where all life comes from does it? For that question to be answered we would need to go all the way back to a point when zero lifeforms, inculding god(s), existed. Life from absolutely no life and not life from an already highly intelligent/powerful life.

[Raider5678]

The overwhelming majority of people, basically everyone, is surrounded in their homes by things they cannot explain the creation of. Even the most educated amongst us cannot explain the process required for everthing in a home. For some it might be the exact temps required to turn Silica and ash into glass while others may not know the galvanizing process used to protect screws & nails. Yet none of us would argue the answer can't be known or that god must be responsible. Understanding that everything that exists has a process enabling existence is a basic concept we understand for seemingly everything. Personnally understanding the process for all things isn't needed 99.9% of the time. People don't understand have their laptops work yet no defaults to thinking it is magic.

This is because we know that someone knows.

If a laptop fell from the sky 2000 years ago, when nobody knew what it was, and it was playing music, don't you think they would think it was magic?

[Ten oz]

This is because we know that someone knows.

If a laptop fell from the sky 2000 years ago, when nobody knew what it was, and it was playing music, don't you think they would think it was magic?

Billions believe in various gods despite no one knowing. Plus as I pointed out God, if real, is living and as such doesn't explain how life can come from no life at all.

[Raider5678]

Billions believe in various gods despite no one knowing. Plus as I pointed out God, if real, is living and as such doesn't explain how life can come from no life at all.

Supernatural.

I know, to you seems like a shitty excuse, and in reality it is.

The idea that we can't understand it because it's a different reality is far fetched.

I get it. So honestly, you're completely right.

For you.

[Ten oz]

Supernatural.

I know, to you seems like a shitty excuse, and in reality it is.

The idea that we can't understand it because it's a different reality is far fetched.

I get it. So honestly, you're completely right.

For you.

Supernatural just means beyond scientific understanding. Lightning was once supernatural. It doesn't mean that something is beyond a process. If there is an all powerful god that entity still must do something to make life happen. Even if what a god does is manifest amino acid with its thoughts there is still something that happens. Still an assembling of atoms to molecules under specific conditions. The proof is undeniable because we are alive and are made of our biology. If we were made by god we had to have been of our biology by god.

 

As for where god comes from I understand many believe god always was. And that is fine. However if god always was than that means there has always been life which means life was never created. Humans were made, life on earth was made, but life in general has always existed if we accept that god always existed. Which would mean there simple is no answer to the question.

 

Attempting to answer the question however has been benefitial to society. Learning what we have about our biology and DNA has helped develop medicine, investigate crime, help families have children, and etc. So to answer your question regarding "what if science never discovers what made life" to journey has proven itself valuable. Nikola Tesla's quest for wireles engery transmission contributed to radio control and radar technologies. Much is achieved as byproduct of scientific research.