Forums for Conway's Game of Life
https://conwaylife.com/forums/
Do you think density will matter much?MathAndCode wrote: February 10th, 2021, 1:04 pm So in that case, I believe that atmospheric volume will be proportional to the planet's mass—unless the atmosphere would be more dense in planets with higher surface gravity.
Yes. For organisms that need to get oxygen from the atmosphere, making the atmosphere twice as dense will have the same effect as doubling the proportion of the atmosphere that is oxygen; for organisms that need to get carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, making the atmosphere twice as dense will have the same effect as doubling the proportion of the atmosphere that is carbon dioxide; etc….
I could only find a single physics stack exchange thread about gravity and air density. Do you think that the air density will be 20% higher (because of 20% higher gravity)?MathAndCode wrote: February 10th, 2021, 1:11 pm Yes. For organisms that need to get oxygen from the atmosphere, making the atmosphere twice as dense will have the same effect as doubling the proportion of the atmosphere that is oxygen; for organisms that need to get carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, making the atmosphere twice as dense will have the same effect as doubling the proportion of the atmosphere that is carbon dioxide; etc….
That makes sense. In that case, the alien planet's atmosphere will be slightly over twice as massive as Earth's.Schiaparelliorbust wrote: February 10th, 2021, 1:27 pmI could only find a single physics stack exchange thread about gravity and air density. Do you think that the air density will be 20% higher (because of 20% higher gravity)?
Did you multiply its surface area by gravity to get that?MathAndCode wrote: February 10th, 2021, 1:32 pm That makes sense. In that case, the alien planet's atmosphere will be slightly over twice as massive as Earth's.
We would have to multiply by surface gravity (or radius) twice in order to get that because more surface gravity makes the atmosphere both thicker and denser.Schiaparelliorbust wrote: February 10th, 2021, 1:39 pmDid you multiply its surface area by gravity to get that?
Then did you multiply by it twice or something else?MathAndCode wrote: February 10th, 2021, 2:04 pm We would have to multiply by surface gravity (or radius) twice in order to get that because more surface gravity makes the atmosphere both thicker and denser.
Yes, or one could simply raise the radius relative to Earth to the power of four.Schiaparelliorbust wrote: February 10th, 2021, 2:11 pmThen did you multiply by it twice or something else?
Ok, thanks. What should we do now?MathAndCode wrote: February 10th, 2021, 2:15 pm Yes, or one could simply raise the radius relative to Earth to the power of four.
That tells us that the oxygenation of the alien planet will likely take about twice as long as the oxygenation of Earth, so we can resume working on the timeline.
Is around 620 million years good?MathAndCode wrote: February 10th, 2021, 2:33 pm That tells us that the oxygenation of the alien planet will likely take about twice as long as the oxygenation of Earth, so we can resume working on the timeline.
Yes, that sounds good—although keep in mind that oxygen won't start accumulating in the atmosphere right away because it will be absorbed by other things first.
620 million years is the time between when oxygen starts accumulating in the atmosphere and where it reaches an end point. Actually where should we define that end point?MathAndCode wrote: February 10th, 2021, 3:10 pm Yes, that sounds good—although keep in mind that oxygen won't start accumulating in the atmosphere right away because it will be absorbed by other things first.
Let's define it at 20% concentration, like on Earth.Schiaparelliorbust wrote: February 10th, 2021, 4:52 pm620 million years is the time between when oxygen starts accumulating in the atmosphere and where it reaches an end point. Actually where should we define that end point?
There's are at least two problems with that:MathAndCode wrote: February 10th, 2021, 4:56 pm Let's define it at 20% concentration, like on Earth.
Where would you propose? One third?Schiaparelliorbust wrote: February 10th, 2021, 5:03 pm1)Oxygen levels have been much higher and lower over the past few hundreds of millions of years. 20% is kind of arbitrary.
Enough organisms evolve to use it to get energy to cancel out the photosynthesizers.Schiaparelliorbust wrote: February 10th, 2021, 5:03 pm2)What mechanism do you propose for oxygen to just stop accumulating more?
Not sure. On the Wikipedia chart it actually rises until its peak in the Carboniferous, but its rise does slow down around the Cambrian explosion at a bit under 20%.
Do you think we need multicellular organisms to achieve balance?MathAndCode wrote: February 10th, 2021, 5:57 pm Enough organisms evolve to use it to get energy to cancel out the photosynthesizers.
Yes, but I think that multicellular organisms are likely to arise anyway.Schiaparelliorbust wrote: February 10th, 2021, 6:04 pmDo you think we need multicellular organisms to achieve balance?
Let's wait until we have organisms with nervous systems before considering that. Right now, we don't even have multicellular organisms.FUNNYMAN2 wrote: February 10th, 2021, 10:17 pm We now need the complex psychology in this, don't we? Depending on the envirronement, the being creates different behaviors through its experiencing. So what would yall suggest?
We could have an even more ancient supercontinent that breaks apart flooding the oceans with minerals along with there being a lot of oxygen to speed up multicellular organism diversification. Are we at this stage now?MathAndCode wrote: February 10th, 2021, 6:17 pm Yes, but I think that multicellular organisms are likely to arise anyway.
The minerals would likely absorb some of the oxygen since many of them likely would not have been completely oxidized beforehand. However, according to Biblaridion's series, the cause of the diversification in the Cambrian Explosion was the emergence of predation, so something similar could happen here.Schiaparelliorbust wrote: February 11th, 2021, 10:42 amWe could have an even more ancient supercontinent that breaks apart flooding the oceans with minerals along with there being a lot of oxygen to speed up multicellular organism diversification. Are we at this stage now?
Well yeah I was thinking about predation. It will probably arise once multicellular organisms start moving, albeit slowly at first. Can oxidized minerals still be useful?MathAndCode wrote: February 11th, 2021, 12:30 pm The minerals would likely absorb some of the oxygen since many of them likely would not have been completely oxidized beforehand. However, according to Biblaridion's series, the cause of the diversification in the Cambrian Explosion was the emergence of predation, so something similar could happen here.
Yes. For example, the organisms should still be to use transition metals inside to form coordination complexes.Schiaparelliorbust wrote: February 11th, 2021, 3:01 pmWell yeah I was thinking about predation. It will probably arise once multicellular organisms start moving, albeit slowly at first. Can oxidized minerals still be useful?