What we still don't know
Astronomer Royal Sir Martin Rees investigates ...


Are we alone? | Why are we here? | Are we real?
Find out more | Home page | Graphical Version


Are we alone?

Programme Contents:
1. Is there anybody out there?
2. Planets like Earth
3. Universal biology
4. Predicting evolution
5. Complexity assured
6. Is someone watching you?



1. Is there anybody out there?
Hear the word ‘alien’ and what might spring to mind is something approaching HG Wells’ vision of a warlike Martian invader from War of the Worlds. His fantastical dreams of dumpy aliens sporting octopod tentacles and camouflage coloured skin have long been inclined to place the topic of alien life well beyond the realm of intelligent discourse and into the world of weird and wacky belief.

But no longer. In Are We Alone?, Martin Rees puts paid to the flights of fantasy and takes us on a journey of unsettling consequence.

Seth Shostak is one of SETI’s (Institute for the Search for Extra Terrestrial Intelligence) leading investigators. He is utterly convinced that there is someone out there. The most compelling evidence is simply in the vast scales of space. There are 10,000 billion billion stars visible from Earth’s telescopes alone, and a conservative estimate places orbiting planets around one in ten of them. Would it not then be very strange if Earth were the only planet out of so many boggling billions to have been a cradle for life?

Peter Ward is a paleontologist at the University of Washington in Seattle. He’s an expert biologist and not given to inventing weird alien creatures. But even he has to admit that life elsewhere is more than likely: ‘When you think there are 400 billion stars in our galaxy alone, and there are billions of galaxies, we now think that virtually every star has a planet, more than one planet, you’re going to have abodes for life almost everywhere. It’s ridiculous to think it happened on this planet and this planet alone. Life is definitely out there.’


top



2. Planets like Earth
If there is life out there, how do we know what to look for? Is it a given that living things must crawl over the surface of their home planets? Not according to Martin Rees, who asks us to drop our parochial notions and imagine underground biospheres or living beings that float in the fogs of dense atmospheres.

This is all very well but we only actually know of life in one place. If we are to search for other life in any meaningful way, life on Earth is our only reference point. Rees takes the trouble to point this out: ‘It makes sense to look at planets which we feel might have resembled the young Earth, because there, in principle, the same processes could have happened, which we believe happened here on Earth.’

One of the undeniable specialities of Earth that makes it a good home for life is that it has liquid water on its surface. Life is inconceivable without it. The chemical reactions that are believed to have originally sparked the evolution of life couldn’t have happened without liquid water. And no lifeform that we know of can live and reproduce if devoid of water.

But a planet can only maintain liquid water if it is just the right distance from its heater – its sun. Too close and water boils off, as it did on Venus. Too far away and it’s all locked up in ice, as it is on Mars.

There are thought to be one million million planets that possess the necessary criteria for having liquid water. Endless potential for life ...


top



3. Universal biology
All living things on Earth are built from the same ingredients. From humans to moulds to humpback whales, we all consist of the same organic compounds – the same raw materials. But why shouldn’t life elsewhere in the cosmos be built from something else? From silicon, which has similar properties to our own carbon, or from titanium perhaps?

Well, although it was once fashionable, that idea is now losing ground. There is reason to believe that the materials of life are universal and inevitable, and produced as a by-product of cosmic processes. These materials are in meteorites, comets and even in interstellar space.

Nasa astrobiologist Lynn Rothschild explains: ‘There is a big overlap between these compounds found in interstellar space and what you would find if we took an earthworm and ground it up. Things like amino acids and the components that go into making nucleic acids. Things like DNA, which really defines life on Earth.’ All this leads scientists to suspect that life on other planets would have started from the very same chemicals as life on Earth did.

Indeed, there is tantalising evidence to suggest that life may be present on Mars. Gases that indicate the presence of living things have turned up in the Martian atmosphere. SETI scientist Seth Shostak can barely hide his excitement: ‘This methane is indicating to us that underneath that dreary, sterile surface, there are some bacteria living there. And that would tell you right away, hey, the next planet out also had biology. Biology is just really common place.’

Life on Mars would indeed suggest that life is everywhere.


top



4. Predicting evolution
There has long been a belief amongst professional biologists that if evolution were to be run again from scratch it would throw up a completely different set of lifeforms. Received wisdom has it that the process of evolution is a lawless, chancy business that’s impossible to predict on this or any other planet.

But Simon Conway Morris, a professor in the Department of Earth Sciences in Cambridge University, disagrees. He believes that there are some underlying patterns to the evolutionary process which ‘begin to suggest that we have, if you like, rules of engagement which allow us to predict what evolution will throw up almost anywhere.’

This is an important shift in thinking. Conway Morris has turned what others have ignored as life’s little coincidences into a powerful argument for the inevitability of certain structures.

Take the camera eye as an example. This has evolved separately up to seven times and the compound eye up to four times. What’s more, certain proteins of the eye, called crystallins, have evolved independently 20 to 25 times. To Conway Morris this is compelling evidence that the eye will always evolve. It’s inevitable. And the theory doesn’t just apply to eyes.

Biology is littered with examples of this so-called ‘convergent evolution’ – sex, photosynthesis, flight, crawling on land, fur. All have evolved several times over. If life on other planets is made of the same stuff as us, and we have reason to believe it is, then it will follow the same patterns. We could be surprised to discover alien worlds that are not that dissimilar to our own.


top



5. Complexity assured
Professor Ian Stewart, a mathematician at the University of Warwick, and reproductive biologist Dr Jack Cohen have joined forces to figure out what life might be like if it has evolved on other planets. What they’ve found is that natural selection inevitably throws up a diverse and complex arrangement of living entities.

Because natural selection, the engine of evolution, essentially fits life to its environment, one might expect that a single lifeform would come to dominate its home planet as the single best fit. But Ian Stewart has discovered a mathematical law that states otherwise. The diversity engine is best described by analogy to a pendulum.

A swinging pendulum can suddenly switch from one pattern of swing to a totally different one without apparent interference or warning. What’s going on is that invisible stresses have built up in the system causing rapid change. Similarly, evolution jogs along in the same way for a while, and then passes some threshold that causes it to change state. These state changes are the source of diversity in life, in a pendulum swing, or in just about any system.

What this actually means is that anywhere that life evolves, it will diverge into a complex ecosystem, not unlike our own. ‘These phenomena are universals, they are things that are going to happen anywhere they can happen,’ explains Ian Stewart. The diversity engine is an inevitable drive towards complexity that has other startling implications for alien lifeforms, since, says Stewart, ‘some of them, surely, are going to go right through to intelligent creatures and very intelligent creatures.’


top


6. Is someone watching you?
‘No one would have believed in the last years of the 19th century that this world was being watched keenly and closely by intelligences greater than man’s and yet as mortal as his own.’ These opening lines of HG Wells’ War of the Worlds have a prophetic ring to them.

In recent years, a conviction that alien life is inevitable has bubbled into scientific consciousness. If the conviction is right then there is reason to believe that life might have evolved in one or more of the solar systems that are much older than our own. These biospheres could have had well over a one billion-year or even a two billion-year head start on our own.

Furthermore, if complexity and intelligence are the products of natural universal laws, then at least some of the beings on planets older than our own will have superseded our intelligence. If they have done that, then you’d have thought that they’d know about us. And if so, why can’t we find them? Why aren’t they here? This was the question posed by the Italian physicist Enrico Fermi in 1950.

Professor Simon Conway Morris of Cambridge University has an unsettling take on the ‘Fermi Paradox’: ‘If we ever solve it, it will terrify us, because what will be out there will be so different, so strange, so weird, that I don’t think we’d possibly know how to deal with it. Though I find it a very interesting tension at the moment. Either we’re completely lonely, which is rather dispiriting, or we are surrounded by, for want of a better word, an over-mind, which I think is equally dispiriting.’

Which would you rather?

top


Are we alone? | Why are we here? | Are we real?
Find out more | Home page | Graphical Version