Timeline for Why would life on a different planet use DNA?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
7 events
when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Dec 3, 2017 at 18:25 | history | edited | Egor Hans | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 150 characters in body
|
Dec 3, 2017 at 18:21 | comment | added | Egor Hans | @HenningM. Thanks for pointing me towards the difference, but I'll probably stick to Panspermia as Pseudo-panspermia is basically what another answer states. As of the links, though, that's probably a good idea. | |
Dec 3, 2017 at 18:14 | comment | added | Henning M. | You might want to change Panspermia to Pseudo-panspermia and include some links or just say that the hypothesis is there (just not the most supported one). And Statistics say that it should be only a 2 pair system with Panspermia, migt be even true for Pseudo-panspermia, but we only have one sample there. Some changes in proteine encoding will happen in the next billion years though. | |
Dec 3, 2017 at 18:04 | history | edited | Brythan | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 3 characters in body
|
Dec 3, 2017 at 18:04 | comment | added | Brythan | "Most supported" based on what? I've heard the hypothesis previously, so I'm certainly not claiming that it is unique to you. However, deep sea vents is what I would think of as "most supported" to be the first life. That said, the criterion is plausibility rather than "most supported" -- so this doesn't invalidate the rest of your answer. | |
Dec 3, 2017 at 17:34 | review | First posts | |||
Dec 3, 2017 at 18:05 | |||||
Dec 3, 2017 at 17:29 | history | answered | Egor Hans | CC BY-SA 3.0 |