Non Carbon based life

[Moontanman]

Does the new Boron bucky ball point to the possibility of boron based life? I know that boron does produce some polymeres and even ring shaped molecules both of which are nesesarry for life. And since carbons ability to make a ball shaped molecule is another manefestation of it's ability to form complex molecules could this property being present in Boron also point towards the possibility of Boron based life? Silicon has long been touted as the best bet for non carbon based life but it's inability to form rings and the large size of the atom have been pointed to as problems for life to be based on silicon. Boron doesn't seem to have these problems. Could boron be the best possiblity for non carbon based life?

Michael

[Tormod]

I don't know about it yet but it sounds like a possibility. Exciting news at any rate.

[Moontanman]

It amazes me that so little thought is given to life not as we know it. Of course we aren't sure yet if there is any other life at all much less differnt from ours. Did you hear about the new planet that has been found around Gliese 581? It is only five times as massive as the earth and is in the liquid water zone of the star.

Michael

[ronthepon]

If boron would give rise to anything like life, it would probably be less potent in terms of evolution led diversity.

Carbon, as compared to boron has an enormous capability of catenation, and the formation of ultra-complex molecules (like enzymes) is more feasible in carbon.

However, the picture changes at lower temperatures. When you can have ammonia as a solvent (at that temperature, that is) boron does seem possible.

However, boron forms hydrogen briged chains, and thus the molecules that would be involved would not be analogous in any case.

[Moontanman]

Originally Posted by ronthepon

If boron would give rise to anything like life, it would probably be less potent in terms of evolution led diversity.

Carbon, as compared to boron has an enormous capability of catenation, and the formation of ultra-complex molecules (like enzymes) is more feasible in carbon.

However, the picture changes at lower temperatures. When you can have ammonia as a solvent (at that temperature, that is) boron does seem possible.

However, boron forms hydrogen briged chains, and thus the molecules that would be involved would not be analogous in any case.

Ok, I'm not going to pretend I know all about what you said but it seems I don't know what catenation means for sure. Can you explain what it is and why boron would work better at lower temps?

Michael

[Tormod]

Originally Posted by Moontanman

It amazes me that so little thought is given to life not as we know it.

Uhm...I beg to differ. I personally know a whole bunch of people who work with "life" in it's many varieties. Some of them are biologists, some are astronomers, and some are astrophycisists. Some dabble in exobiology. But not all of them can work with "life NOT as we know it". Yet some of them do.

A lot of science is about life not as we know it. Or were you thinking about something else?

[Moontanman]

Originally Posted by Tormod

Uhm...I beg to differ. I personally know a whole bunch of people who work with "life" in it's many varieties. Some of them are biologists, some are astronomers, and some are astrophycisists. Some dabble in exobiology. But not all of them can work with "life NOT as we know it". Yet some of them do.

A lot of science is about life not as we know it. Or were you thinking about something else?

Well I wasn't thinking about extremophiles that live here on earth. I know that feild is being studied by many people. All these organisms are still "life as we know it". Only one person I know has done meaningfull studies of silicon life and came up with the theory that it would be highly unlikely if not impossible due to problems in the nature of silicon and it's compounds. As far as I know no othor studies have been done as thought experiments or mathmatically studied.

Michael

[gribbon]

I don't know much about Boron based life, but what about life based on Arsenic, Chlorine, Sulfur and Ammonia? I know Arsenic is toxic to a lot of living things on Earth, but some marine algae incorporate arsenic into complex organic molecules such as arsenosugars and arsenobetaines. I also remember that fungi and bacteria can produce volatile methylated arsenic compounds, and most importantly, both arsenate reduction and arsenite oxidation have been observed in microbes. Even better, some prokaryotes can use arsenate as a terminal electron acceptor during anaerobic growth and I also remember that they can use arsenite as an electron donor as well.

The chemical properties of Chlorine are similair to those of Oxygen, but unfortunately, it isn't quite as abundant in the Universe, and most of it is trapped in salt compunds anyway.

Sulphur can form long-chains, but it is too reactive. It shouldn't be dismissed though, as green and purple bacteria (he he, who would have thought you'd get those! ) have used it in redox reactions.

Ammonia is damn good alternative, as it has (when liquid) properties similair to water and can be used to dissolve numerous organic molecules and metals. The only problem is that it doesn't have enough surface tenion, it's Hydrogen bonds are too weak, and it isn't very good at concentrating non-polar molecules through the hydrophobic effect. With the right tempertaures and ressures though, it would work.

Alternative biochemistry - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[InfiniteNow]

Originally Posted by gribbon

I know Arsenic is toxic to a lot of living things on Earth, but some marine algae incorporate arsenic into complex organic molecules such as arsenosugars and arsenobetaines. I also remember that fungi and bacteria can produce volatile methylated arsenic compounds, and most importantly, both arsenate reduction and arsenite oxidation have been observed in microbes. Even better, some prokaryotes can use arsenate as a terminal electron acceptor during anaerobic growth and I also remember that they can use arsenite as an electron donor as well.

It would seem that you "remember" it word for word from this site:

Biochemical Periodic Table - Arsenic

No essential biological function for arsenic has been identified, but marine algae and invertebrates can incorporate arsenic into complex organic molecules such as arsenosugars and arsenobetaines, and fungi and bacteria can produce volatile methylated arsenic compounds. Both microbial arsenate reduction and arsenite oxidation are well documented as detoxification mechanisms. Additionally, some prokaryotes can use arsenate as a terminal electron acceptor during anaerobic growth and others can utilize arsenite as an electron donor to generate energy.

The last time I accused you of using the words of others as if they were your own, you freaked out and neg repped me with a comment:

Originally Posted by gribbon in neg rep to iNow

You know, it makes sense to have "evidence" to support accusations, and if you can't be bothered to type a few words into a search engine in order to find the article from which you claim I have extracted this info, then I don't know what your doing.

So, this time I followed your advise and did. I even provided a link.

You really should quote your sources.

[Moontanman]

Originally Posted by gribbon

I don't know much about Boron based life, but what about life based on Arsenic, Chlorine, Sulfur and Ammonia? I know Arsenic is toxic to a lot of living things on Earth, but some marine algae incorporate arsenic into complex organic molecules such as arsenosugars and arsenobetaines. I also remember that fungi and bacteria can produce volatile methylated arsenic compounds, and most importantly, both arsenate reduction and arsenite oxidation have been observed in microbes. Even better, some prokaryotes can use arsenate as a terminal electron acceptor during anaerobic growth and I also remember that they can use arsenite as an electron donor as well.

The chemical properties of Chlorine are similair to those of Oxygen, but unfortunately, it isn't quite as abundant in the Universe, and most of it is trapped in salt compunds anyway.

Sulphur can form long-chains, but it is too reactive. It shouldn't be dismissed though, as green and purple bacteria (he he, who would have thought you'd get those! ) have used it in redox reactions.

Ammonia is damn good alternative, as it has (when liquid) properties similair to water and can be used to dissolve numerous organic molecules and metals. The only problem is that it doesn't have enough surface tenion, it's Hydrogen bonds are too weak, and it isn't very good at concentrating non-polar molecules through the hydrophobic effect. With the right tempertaures and ressures though, it would work.

Your ideas have given me a lot to think about but I have seen a glitch in the non carbon based life concept. When you say arsenic or sulfer based life exactly what chemical do you mean arsenic would replace? Carbon? Oxygen? It looks like you mean ammonia could replace water but what chemical involved in life as we know would sulfer replace? To really understand when we are talking about we need to specify these things. Sulfer has been thought of as a replacement for oxygen on high temperature worlds where sulfer would be a gas. I am interested in reading what you had in mind when you suggested these chemicals as replacements for life as we know it.

Michael