|
|
|
|
|
|
by eks391
14 days ago
|
|
|
I almost agreed with your comment, but then I remembered there are countless planets with conditions unsuitable for life (as we know life). We have found a couple planets that are optimisticly closer to Earth conditions, but very few, and there is usually some characteristic that makes it a stretch still. With that said, if Earth was compared to a super computer, the initial conditions and perturbations (weights and biases, or probabilistic inference) are very important, as most planets that are also performing ~10^38 ops/sec will never succesfully manufacture biochemistry/life. |
|
|
If you allow me to exercise some creative liberty with language, it's almost as if gravity is just launching countless trillions of parallel instances of the same computation, with nearly all possible initial starting conditions. Some of those initial conditions allow the local compute capacity to "descend" into finding more and more optimal ways to increase entropy and heat dissipation by exploiting local energy gradients (i.e., life).
In terms of the frequency of life, I'd expect basic microscopic life to be somewhat common, as it's "just" a way of exploiting geochemical energy gradients for local entropy maintenance. That doesn't necessarily even mean fully functioning cells, genetic codes, etc. It really just means molecular compounds or assemblies that exploit or create energy gradients. However, generally once that's kicked off, it's reasonable to consider that this generally would lead to the kinds of selection pressures that favor the development of what we'd know as basic cellular machinery and replication.
However, complex life I would expect to be almost vanishingly rare. The Earth only managed to figure it out a single time so far as we know (generating eukaryotes from bacteria/archaea) in billions of years. How many other planets feature roughly the same chemical computation which just never explored the right niche of chemical possibility to give rise to that complexity? This suggests to me the universe must expend unbelievably vast amounts of computation to overcome the threshold to complex life. I don't think it'd be unreasonable to assume that it requires thousands of separate "planetary computers", each with basic life, for only a single one to generate something like complex life (eukaryotes or equivalent), and that's to say nothing of the millions or billions of planets that don't generate any life at all.