• jsomae@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    16
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    22 days ago

    My experience with random processes: on large scales, things either happen 0 times or many times. So I find the idea that life exists in only one place pretty implausible.

    • MaxHardwood@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      21 days ago

      That’s the rule for astronomy. If it happens once, it always happens; we just haven’t seen it yet

        • MonkderVierte@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          22 days ago

          By that definition, the first life on earth was not alive the first 1 billion years or so, until the complex process of reproduction was invented. Heck, life doesn’t even have to be mobile, can be fused to a rock, even more so than moss or a stromatolith. Metabolism and maybe reaction to stimuli are imo the only real requirements.

      • jsomae@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        21 days ago

        you may define life however you like; the thing I said still makes sense regardless of definition (0 or many)