2
$\begingroup$

When scientists explore other planets such as Mars, they look for life derived from water and oxygen (correct me if I am wrong) with a purpose to see whether that planet is habitable for humans or not.

Now, my question is it possible for life to originate in the universe from sources that do not require water, oxygen and carbon as the basic building blocks? If so, does that also mean that with today's science and technology we won't be able to detect such life forms?

This question might be asked earlier, but I guess current knowledge may have an updated answer to this question.

Improve this question
$\endgroup$
9
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ I’m voting to close this question because (a) it's asking about hypothetical non-carbon lifeforms (hypothetical questions are off-topic on this site) and (b) it's therefore not really about astronomy but rather chemistry or biology. $\endgroup$
    – Chappo Hasn't Forgotten
    Commented Jul 19, 2022 at 3:08
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @ChappoHasn'tForgottenMonica so, astronomy does not include exploring life on other planets? Moreover, how do you intend to learn if you don't start by asking hypothetical questions? Now, I know I could have asked this question on Quora, however I believe I can expect an expert answer here than there. $\endgroup$
    – Ed_Gravy
    Commented Jul 19, 2022 at 3:49
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ You might want to check SpaceEx.SE or World building.SE $\endgroup$
    – Nilay Ghosh
    Commented Jul 19, 2022 at 4:34
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Ed_Gravy this part of your question seems to be off-topic in Astronomy SE: "Now, my question is it possible for life to originate in the universe from sources that do not require water, oxygen and carbon as the basic building blocks?" I think if you focus on the scientific methods in use to detect life and ask simply "...are there any that do not require water, oxygen and carbon?" that certainly would be on topic, since it can be answered with facts and doesn't require answers to hypothesize. $\endgroup$
    – uhoh
    Commented Jul 19, 2022 at 21:19
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @uhoh done, please feel free to correct me on this one too, thank you. $\endgroup$
    – Ed_Gravy
    Commented Jul 19, 2022 at 23:19

1 Answer 1

Reset to default
3
$\begingroup$

The very short answer is, we don't know.

Our only experience of life is what we have discovered on Earth.

All life on Earth is based around RNA and DNA.

RNA has been discovered in meteors and elsewhere in space, indicating there is a possibility that life may exist elsewhere in the cosmos. So far we have not found anything resembling life elsewhere.

Recent findings suggest both RNA and DNA are required for life to exist.

Improve this answer
$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ Ribose isn't RNA! en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RNA#Structure $\endgroup$
    – PM 2Ring
    Commented Jul 20, 2022 at 7:15
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Your last sentence is incorrect. The article says merely that RNA and DNA "may have emerged at the same time and both been involved in kickstarting life on the planet" and that "We may never know for sure whether DNA helped RNA to form the first lifeforms on our planet." To say both are required for any lifeform is a misrepresentation of those findings. $\endgroup$
    – Chappo Hasn't Forgotten
    Commented Jul 20, 2022 at 9:18

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .