New Paradigm About The Existence Of Life example essay topic

Robert DonlanEnglish Comp 1102 Dr. TakacsParadigms on the Existence of Life paradigm can be defined simply as a set of rules laid out to establish a basis for scientific studies. The idea of a paradigm is set in place only when the community accepts it as the paradigm. There are many paradigms in place. Take for instance the paradigm of gravity.

An established paradigm could be defined that gravity always pulls toward the center of the object, and that everything has gravity of some sort. This is a well known, and established series of rules that allow for the study of physics on the basis that gravity will always pull towards the center. There are many established paradigms. Gravity is one of the probably thousands that exist in order to direct the studies of the scientific world. The paradigm is established through numerous studies, and countless experiments. These paradigms allow for advancement in science, but perhaps can be seen as a hindrance in advancement of ideas, and theories.

The idea of life within our solar system could be constituted as a paradigm, and it perhaps is in need of revision in order to expand the horizon of our idea of living creatures. There is a simple series of rules that define where life can thrive, but perhaps we are not seeing the entire picture. Paradigms take time to establish. It's not easy to establish a new paradigm.

Scientists sometimes are stubborn to change, simply due to the fact that a new paradigm might dismiss all prior works that a lifetime of study produced. The advancement is good, but sometimes on the basis of paradigms, is sluggish. The concept of living organisms as far as it can be established through a series of rules, or a paradigm. If it is living it needs certain nutrients. A living creature needs water. Therefore anyplace without sufficient amounts of water would not be very hospitable for life forms.

A living creature needs breathable atmosphere, which would mean a large supply of oxygen in its gaseous form, in order to keep the blood rich in oxygen to carry nutrients through out the body. Another rule would be that the creature would have to be able to eat something that has some nutritional value. If a place were to exist without sustenance on the basis that we qualify sustenance then life would probably not be possible. Now the question that is posed is "Could life thrive on other planets in our solar system?" To this people would say, "no". This is simply based on the series of rules that qualifies the existence of life in the known world. These beliefs have one flaw.

They are theory, much like everything else in science. Theory is only theory, and therefore cannot be defined as the end all be all, or a law. The existence of life could be possible if another theory was to be invoked. Hypothetically speaking, a crater in mars had microbes of life in it. These creatures were unlike any that we had ever seen. Perhaps the creature is not carbon based, like everything on earth.

This idea of different elementally based creatures has been proposed before. Its not a radically absurd thought too. If everything on earth is carbon based, what's not to say that perhaps in other worlds that boron, or chlorine is the base element in all life? Who's to say that is wrong? This is where the anomaly exists.

The idea of life is simply limited to a single planet that exists within our planet. Our planet is merely a single "Cheerio" floating around in big giant bowl of billions of "Cheerio's" and milk. The paradigm that is established is so limited in its basis. We can only ask so many questions like "is there water?" or "is there oxygen?" The nonexistence of these things denies the very existence of life, as we know it.

The problem with the idea of a paradigm is that you are on the inside of the box trying to look out. If you take the paradigm, and begin to stretch it, the box will give and eventually form a new bigger different box. Say that for advancement the box is completely ignored, and the basis of the experimentation is done with no regard to the paradigm. Then, it could be inferred that the idea of a paradigm as a basis of testing might be useless because the perception of the experiment is skewed by the established paradigm, much like how the sun distorts into different colors as it passes through more atmosphere during the sunrise, and sunset. The only way to discover new things is to think "outside the box".

The paradigm is the box. It is restricting thought in certain aspects of science. It allows for a basis, but also restricts by only allow a jump from that base to another, which may be hard to see, or do, especially from looking on the inside out. By using this paradigm, the expansion is limited due to the strict guidelines setup within the rules. Questions, such as "Is there life on Jupiter?" cannot be taken seriously due to the extent of our knowledge base about the planet and the rules that allow life to exist. The extent of the knowledge base is far indeed, but perhaps there are simple things that can be looked over, since they do not fit the mold of the known.

For instance if an organism was found on Venus then the whole paradigm that defines what has to be present for life would be expanded. This organism would have to survive in a largely carbon dioxide environment and without a known source of water. This would have to allow the paradigm to have new rules established within it. The interaction with the existing paradigm is rather limited. There have been notions about life on other planets based on evidence of rocks coming from the moon with supposed fossilized microbes on it. There have been no real claims based on this object though.

Perhaps its because the existing paradigm doesn't allow such a situation to show the result of life being present on the crater. It is inferred that perhaps a massive asteroid hit earth, and some of the debris went into orbit, and some of that debris ended up on the moon. These explanations allow for the existence of the paradigm, but perhaps little instances like these will help to create a new paradigm about the existence of life. The paradigm of the basic needs of living organisms is very strict.

That is why even things like Viruses cannot really be classified as living things. Perhaps the existing paradigms established have shut the eyes of scientists to a world of existing life forms that we never knew existed. The existing laws set in place seemed to have ruled out life in our solar system, as far as could be told. Yet, maybe there is a simple anomaly that exists within the paradigm largely accepted by the scientific community that doesn't allow for the realization of possible life in other forms, or without confining to the existing paradigm. Still insufficient evidence has been brought forward to prove this paradigm otherwise.

So it shall remain as the basis of knowledge within the search for life within our solar system and beyond.