Little Green Aliens

[Xittenn]

I hypothesize that any truly advanced species would at some point attain the qualification of autotroph. This would be either as a consequence of evolution, or as a consequence of advancements in technologies that allow the individual species to modify its homeostasis.

 

Given that, by definition, heterotrophic life is only sustainable when a source of autotrophic life is present, we can conclude an immediate necessity for autotrophic life. As observed here on earth, biological systems are poorly adapted. The inefficient transfer of energy through trophic levels further necessitates a larger population--or at minimal a population with a high turn over--of autotrophic life to sustain a reasonable population of heterotrophs. This being said, any evolved heterotroph that would be willing and capable of performing self modification of homeostasis, would only logically do so to become an autotrophic organism and further its chances of survival.

 

I would further like to conjecture, as a consequence of my former hypothesis, that aliens are in fact highly probably green.

 

So given the highly probabilistic tendency of evolved species towards being autotrophic, I believe that there is an equally large probability that such a species would be green. Species can be chemoautotrophic or photoautotrophic. By a similar argument, as observed with biomass and trophic levels, one could argue that at minimal there must be a sufficiently large population of photoautotrophs. The argument could be stated that the tendency for mineral systems to form both, usable nutrients and free minerals for building the minimum compounds necessary to form a living organism, as well as a diversity of energy providing compounds, is, when combined, probabilistically low. It would ensue that, at some point there may be sufficiently free molecules to build or organize a form of living structure, and that the energy required would be delivered in the form of light. To make a long story short, the aliens most definitely must be green, if this wasn't the intended interpretation of the cliche well . . . . . what was the intention? And also why did they become grey?

 

Future thoughts on the matter:

- when will we be green

- will we develop secondary cell walls

Edited February 3, 2012 by Xittenn

[Moontanman]

It's highly doubtful that any large mobile complex organism could be an autotroph. They just don't have enough surface area to feed an active metabolism. There is a reason why trees don't move around like tree bread in lord of the rings, photosynthesis just can't provide the energy to allow that to happen. Why would they have to be green? why not purple, red, or brown? we have purple, red, brown yellow and bluegreen autotrophs on the earth already...

[md65536]

Interesting idea.

 

I disagree though. I think that if it is not necessary to become autotrophic (and it clearly isn't), then it isn't certain that a species will become autotrophic. It may be an advantage, but I don't think autotrophy is a required criterion for being "truly advanced".

 

Green implies photosynthesis using chlorophyll? Aren't there other ways of obtaining energy? Why wouldn't they be black, and able to absorb a better range of wavelengths? Why not able to change color, and control absorption of light? Why be dependent on light at all? Why not engineer the body to be fusion-powered?

 

It's highly doubtful that any large mobile complex organism could be an autotroph. They just don't have enough surface area to feed an active metabolism.

Yes, but it wouldn't necessarily have to derive all of its energy from light. It wouldn't necessarily have Earth-like metabolism. Mobile light-powered creatures are conceivable. As well, it's conceivable that an organism could have multiple energy sources, and is able to survive on light only in some state of reduced mobility and energy consumption.

 

I think making assumptions about what aliens "must" be like based on what Earth creatures are like, is not very reliable.

 

 

 

[Moontanman]

Yes, but it wouldn't necessarily have to derive all of its energy from light.

 

Then it wouldn't be an autotroph would it?

 

 

It wouldn't necessarily have Earth-like metabolism.

 

That is true.

 

Mobile light-powered creatures are conceivable.

 

I think I'd have to have some evidence of that.

 

 

As well, it's conceivable that an organism could have multiple energy sources, and is able to survive on light only in some state of reduced mobility and energy consumption.

 

Again, it wouldn't be an autotroph then would it?

 

I think making assumptions about what aliens "must" be like based on what Earth creatures are like, is not very reliable.

 

Neither is making wild assumptions about possibilities we have no concept of, earth life is the only data point we have any other comparison is baseless speculation, they could be nuclear powered but speculating that would be kinda hard to back up....

[md65536]

Then it wouldn't be an autotroph would it?

 

Why couldn't it be?

 

 

 

I agree the hypothesis is "highly doubtful" but I don't think that assumptions based on Earth life either support or oppose it. Though, I suppose terrestrial assumptions can be used against other terrestrial assumptions (e.g. if it's assumed that aliens are like trees, then the argument that trees could not produce enough energy for locomotion is applicable).

 

 

 

I think I'd have to have some evidence of that.

The Mars rovers.

I'm not saying that alien life of any kind is plausible, just that the idea is imaginable.

 

 

[Moontanman]

Why couldn't it be?

 

No organism could obtain enough energy for locomotion through photosynthesis exclusively, it would have to be close to 100% efficient, a chemoautotroph might be possible, i am not sure about the energy density for that.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autotroph

 

 

I agree the hypothesis is "highly doubtful" but I don't think that assumptions based on Earth life either support or oppose it. Though, I suppose terrestrial assumptions can be used against other terrestrial assumptions (e.g. if it's assumed that aliens are like trees, then the argument that trees could not produce enough energy for locomotion is applicable).

 

As i said, the efficiency is just not great enough, the energy conversion for light to carbohydrates is just not enough , it's possible it might be dormant most of it's life cycle and store energy to walk around in short bursts but the energy density is why we see no walking trees on earth and I have to assume the same laws of physics apply every where...

 

The Mars rovers.

I'm not saying that alien life of any kind is plausible, just that the idea is imaginable.

 

 

That is a machine, it uses very little energy, doesn't have to support a biological metabolism much less a brain...

[Xittenn]

Natural examples of developmental morphology suggests, that to attain a higher level of efficiency, there will be required a more complex system of delivery. So an advanced species implementing self modified homeostasis would, most probably be developing a more complex system.

 

In my example I would submit, a combined mixotrophy of, photosynthetic epidermis, and an internal chemo-trophic metabolisms. I suggest that maybe the epidermis could excrete organic compounds quickly enough through the vascular system to critical organs and tissues, while being fed by the internal chemo-trophic digestive system. But, for all intents and purposes, one might even argue that being truly mixotroph, and ingesting when necessary or desired, might be best. A greater variety of cells can provide a greater amount of flexibility.

 

Proving that the most preferred photosynthetic pigment would be chlorophyll--universally--would be a life challenge for me, so I just won't do it. Maybe they are grey!

[homie12]

I hypothesize that any truly advanced species would at some point attain the qualification of autotroph. This would be either as a consequence of evolution, or as a consequence of advancements in technologies that allow the individual species to modify its homeostasis.

 

Given that, by definition, heterotrophic life is only sustainable when a source of autotrophic life is present, we can conclude an immediate necessity for autotrophic life. As observed here on earth, biological systems are poorly adapted. The inefficient transfer of energy through trophic levels further necessitates a larger population--or at minimal a population with a high turn over--of autotrophic life to sustain a reasonable population of heterotrophs. This being said, any evolved heterotroph that would be willing and capable of performing self modification of homeostasis, would only logically do so to become an autotrophic organism and further its chances of survival.

 

I would further like to conjecture, as a consequence of my former hypothesis, that aliens are in fact highly probably green.

 

So given the highly probabilistic tendency of evolved species towards being autotrophic, I believe that there is an equally large probability that such a species would be green. Species can be chemoautotrophic or photoautotrophic. By a similar argument, as observed with biomass and trophic levels, one could argue that at minimal there must be a sufficiently large population of photoautotrophs. The argument could be stated that the tendency for mineral systems to form both, usable nutrients and free minerals for building the minimum compounds necessary to form a living organism, as well as a diversity of energy providing compounds, is, when combined, probabilistically low. It would ensue that, at some point there may be sufficiently free molecules to build or organize a form of living structure, and that the energy required would be delivered in the form of light. To make a long story short, the aliens most definitely must be green, if this wasn't the intended interpretation of the cliche well . . . . . what was the intention? And also why did they become grey?

 

Future thoughts on the matter:

- when will we be green

- will we develop secondary cell walls

Is there a legitimate reason for excluding Billy Meier contact notes and or the research by richard dolan as evidence? If not then you will find that all aliens are not little nor green nor men. Is this a question you really want answered? and thanks for discussing what to some is a very sensitive question.

[Xittenn]

Is there a legitimate reason for excluding Billy Meier contact notes and or the research by richard dolan as evidence? If not then you will find that all aliens are not little nor green nor men. Is this a question you really want answered? and thanks for discussing what to some is a very sensitive question.

 

It relates to what I am presently seeking to research--advancements in human cellular morphology, through application of technology, as a means of maintaining homeostatic functionality indefinitely. It's not an attempt to define what an alien should be, but to more clearly define a goal for our evolutionary future. I am unfamiliar with the works of either of Billy Meier or Richard Dolan but I will make it a point to investigate.

[John Cuthber]

Some of that investigation might not take long

 

"Beginning in 1975, Meier says he began his official contacts ("official" in that evidence was to be provided publicly, unlike earlier contacts), communicating both directly (face-to-face) and by telepathy with a core group of the Pleiadians/Plejaren, or Errans as he also refers to them (Erra being their home planet), who gave their names as "Ptaah", "Semjase",[9] "Quetzal" and "Pleja",[10] among numerous others. According to Meier himself in the video documentary 'Contact', he says that his first contact with extraterrestrials began on January 28, 1975."

 

from Wiki

[Xittenn]

Well, I feel satisfied with my investigation. : D

[md65536]

Well, I feel satisfied with my investigation. : D

 

Well I think the original conjecture is interesting and logical and something that I hadn't considered before.

 

However I'd be more satisfied with a statement something along the lines of: If there exists sufficiently advanced extraterrestrial life, and conjecturing that such life would become autotrophic, and assuming that this would likely entail the use of chlorophyll for photosynthesis, it is likely that some of that life would be green. I think this better captures the multiplicity and enormity of the assumptions that go into the idea.

 

 

[Xittenn]

Well I think the original conjecture is interesting and logical and something that I hadn't considered before.

 

However I'd be more satisfied with a statement something along the lines of: If there exists sufficiently advanced extraterrestrial life, and conjecturing that such life would become autotrophic, and assuming that this would likely entail the use of chlorophyll for photosynthesis, it is likely that some of that life would be green. I think this better captures the multiplicity and enormity of the assumptions that go into the idea.

 

Exactly why I incorporated it. I thank you for you excellent feedback, very insightful!

[homie12]

Some of that investigation might not take long

 

"Beginning in 1975, Meier says he began his official contacts ("official" in that evidence was to be provided publicly, unlike earlier contacts), communicating both directly (face-to-face) and by telepathy with a core group of the Pleiadians/Plejaren, or Errans as he also refers to them (Erra being their home planet), who gave their names as "Ptaah", "Semjase",[9] "Quetzal" and "Pleja",[10] among numerous others. According to Meier himself in the video documentary 'Contact', he says that his first contact with extraterrestrials began on January 28, 1975."

 

from Wiki

Well john you do me proud. Using wiki is a bit cheap but u got some major points correct. If you see it through by reading dolan or meier. It will change your view of the universe, if i assume the standard model is pretty much your idea of it. and thanks john

 

good man for having the courage. Most will not even open a cover or read a homepage of richards or billy's.

 

Exactly why I incorporated it. I thank you for you excellent feedback, very insightful!

 

ya and sorry for going in the wrong direction with your thread. Its yours and i got a little presumptive.

[Xittenn]

Well john you do me proud. Using wiki is a bit cheap but u got some major points correct. If you see it through by reading dolan or meier. It will change your view of the universe, if i assume the standard model is pretty much your idea of it. and thanks john

 

good man for having the courage. Most will not even open a cover or read a homepage of richards or billy's.

 

Honestly I won't be one of them, but that has more to do with the fact that I lack the interest. There are plenty of incredulous things that I pursue but aliens are not one of them. I am a big fan of science fiction movies however, and aliens in film are always fun!

 

ya and sorry for going in the wrong direction with your thread. Its yours and i got a little presumptive.

 

I'm not worried about it! Have fun . . . .

Edited February 13, 2012 by Xittenn

[homie12]

Honestly I won't be one of them, but that has more to do with the fact that I lack the interest. There are plenty of incredulous things that I pursue but aliens are not one of them. I am a big fan of science fiction movies however, and aliens in film are always fun!

 

 

 

I'm not worried about it! Have fun . . . .

 

oh please please this wont take long http://keyholepublishing.com/dolan.html the truth is more fantastic than fiction richard dolan is an academic historian so he speaks with the discipline of mainstream

[Xittenn]

oh please please this wont take long http://keyholepublishing.com/dolan.html the truth is more fantastic than fiction richard dolan is an academic historian so he speaks with the discipline of mainstream

 

I'll take a look, I am open minded, I'm just very busy so I have to choose what is more important. It's still one of those see it to believe it!

[homie12]

I'll take a look, I am open minded, I'm just very busy so I have to choose what is more important. It's still one of those see it to believe it!

well he has an impressive academic pedigree but he has documents from freredom of info act and other military and government sources

 

No organism could obtain enough energy for locomotion through photosynthesis exclusively, it would have to be close to 100% efficient, a chemoautotroph might be possible, i am not sure about the energy density for that.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autotroph

 

 

 

 

As i said, the efficiency is just not great enough, the energy conversion for light to carbohydrates is just not enough , it's possible it might be dormant most of it's life cycle and store energy to walk around in short bursts but the energy density is why we see no walking trees on earth and I have to assume the same laws of physics apply every where...

 

 

 

 

That is a machine, it uses very little energy, doesn't have to support a biological metabolism much less a brain...

 

"(e.g. if it's assumed that aliens are like trees", theres no reason to assume this paradigm strictly

[Xittenn]

I don't think the primary reason for photosynthetic species not moving is their inability to procure sufficient energy; although this is a restricting factor in how a species that are photosynthetic expresses themselves morphologically. Phytoplankton are photoautotrophic and are mobile! Trees don't move because they are made up mostly of dead cells that are composed of a stiff material called lignin. I can mentally conceive of species that can satisfy the conditions of being phototrophic and mobile. I am surprised that there aren't popular varieties of insect like phototrophs that might carry a butterfly like appearance. Another possibility might be a highly limited wake time.

Edited February 13, 2012 by Xittenn

[homie12]

http://www4.zippyshare.com/v/18169547/file.html shes a Timmor

[Moontanman]

I don't think the primary reason for photosynthetic species not moving is their inability to procure sufficient energy; although this is a restricting factor in how a species that are photosynthetic expresses themselves morphologically. Phytoplankton are photoautotrophic and are mobile! Trees don't move because they are made up mostly of dead cells that are composed of a stiff material called lignin. I can mentally conceive of species that can satisfy the conditions of being phototrophic and mobile. I am surprised that there aren't popular varieties of insect like phototrophs that might carry a butterfly like appearance. Another possibility might be a highly limited wake time.

 

 

You are forgetting the cube square law. A tiny phytoplankton is much easier to power than something as big as a human being. a single microorganism has surface to volume ratio several orders of magnitude different than a human being. a human sized creature just can't carry around enough surface area to make it's energy from sunlight... Also it's necessary to point out that phytoplankton drift with the currents, much if not most of their movement is simply drifting along with the current not actively moving around like a fish and many of them can eat other organisms if they get the chance as well. it's just not a viable comparison...

Edited February 14, 2012 by Moontanman

[Xittenn]

You are forgetting the cube square law. A tiny phytoplankton is much easier to power than something as big as a human being. a single microorganism has surface to volume ratio several orders of magnitude different than a human being. a human sized creature just can't carry around enough surface area to make it's energy from sunlight... Also it's necessary to point out that phytoplankton drift with the currents, much if not most of their movement is simply drifting along with the current not actively moving around like a fish and many of them can eat other organisms if they get the chance as well. it's just not a viable comparison...

 

My first statements were made in the context of my later statements--contained in the same paragraph--about the butterfly like creatures. So I apologize if it sounded like I was implying that a human would achieve the same functionality, because I wasn't. I don't know what the right combination is, which is why this is the pursuit of a research topic, as opposed to a direct preposition toward advancement. Maximizing surface area is definitely a point of interest. Maybe you have some thoughts that go beyond the very simple? I know that I don't at the moment. Thanks Moontanman!

[Moontanman]

My first statements were made in the context of my later statements--contained in the same paragraph--about the butterfly like creatures. So I apologize if it sounded like I was implying that a human would achieve the same functionality, because I wasn't. I don't know what the right combination is, which is why this is the pursuit of a research topic, as opposed to a direct preposition toward advancement. Maximizing surface area is definitely a point of interest. Maybe you have some thoughts that go beyond the very simple? I know that I don't at the moment. Thanks Moontanman!

 

 

I honestly can't figure a way around the cube square law, it's the same reason you can't scale a six foot human up to twelve feet tall. I could see a possible combination organism with a sessile asexual stage that stores energy then gives to it's sexual stage which is motile but doesn't produce it's own energy. The sessile stage could be a tree like organism that has a human sized (more or less, probably a little less) sexual stage that feeds from it's parent stage but that is just food chain that is non predatory...

[Xittenn]

Maybe a photosynthetic process that synthesizes an enzyme that catalyzes the human electron transport chain, making it more efficient. This sort of increase in efficiency, maybe in combination with a chemotrophic metabolic process, and a more basic precursor energy form, could keep me busy for some time!