Notices
Results 1 to 16 of 16

Thread: Which came first the Silicon or the Carbon?

  1. #1 Which came first the Silicon or the Carbon? 
    Forum Freshman thequ1ck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    London
    Posts
    26
    Silicon has very similar valency to Carbon, so much so that Silicon
    life forms are entirely possible.
    Baudrillard hypothesised that we are part of a simulacrum, - a copy of
    a copy that is unique in its own right.

    The question is, did Carbon create Silicon or vice versa, or is this all
    part of one big cycle?


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Senior silkworm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    337
    Research Nucleosynthesis. It says that all atoms are constructing by fusion reactions in stars.

    You'll find your answers there.

    And Carbon and Silicon are very different from one another.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Forum Freshman thequ1ck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    London
    Posts
    26
    What if we went under the assumption that nothing existed
    outside of conciousness and that eventually computers would
    simulate life and that those simulations would be detailed enough
    in history and scope to rival human history.

    Information wise, all of conciousness ,that we know of, probably
    amounts to a few terabytes, is all.

    edit. I'm refering to the amount of processed information, not
    the possibilities.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4 Re: Which came first the Silicon or the Carbon? 
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    Quote Originally Posted by thequ1ck
    Silicon has very similar valency to Carbon, so much so that Silicon
    life forms are entirely possible.
    Baudrillard hypothesised that we are part of a simulacrum, - a copy of
    a copy that is unique in its own right.
    You are making two entirely separate points here, and confusing the issue by placing them in juxtaposition.
    Yes, silicon based lifeforms are remotely plausible, but that has no connection with the notion that life is a simulation within a giant computer (silicon chips).
    Quote Originally Posted by thequ1ck
    The question is, did Carbon create Silicon or vice versa, or is this all part of one big cycle?
    Carbon precedes silicon in nucleosynthesis, but you appear to be asking did carbon based life precede silicon based life or vice versa.

    Google for the works of Cairns-Smith, who postulates that life (a replicating genetic structure) began as process involving clay minerals (whose backbone is complex silica sheets) onto which organic molecules, the precursors of DNA, became attached.
    Also examine the later work of Hoyle and Wickramasinghe, who have speculations involving intelligent intervention in the origin of organic life on Earth.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Senior silkworm's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    337
    Oh, I didin't realize that was the implication of this post.

    Si based life forms are likely not possible due to the limited nature of catenating Si bonds versus that of C. Long story short, trees don't have the cleavage rocks do.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    Cairns-Smith would not agree.
    Essentially, the idea is that the first organisms were "naked replicators" - rather than cells. A search for the most suitable candidates for naked replicators appears to strongly suggest clay minerals as the most likely players. Other carbon-based alternatives based on carbon compounds appear to be unattractive by comparison.
    The crystals grow using conventional crystal growth processes, and divide when mechanical stress causes them to break into pieces.

    Information is replicated across the layers of crystals during crystal growth. This information forms the heritable information of the crystals, and acts as the basis for genetic evolution.

    Physical aspects of the crystal act as the phenotype, and cause selection to choose between the genotypes


    Source:http://originoflife.net/crystals/index.html
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7 Re: Which came first the Silicon or the Carbon? 
    Forum Freshman thequ1ck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    London
    Posts
    26
    Yes, you're right and I appologise for the 'wooley thinking'.

    There are several implications here, one that organic life is
    actually the creation of Silicon processing, man made or other.
    It's all a bit Matrix style and too easy to fall into a circular argument.
    (Silicon creates Carbon)

    Another is that we are the ghosts in the silicon machine.
    That Silicon life-forms, initiated by humans are far more capable of
    extending the thousands of years into the future and impacting
    the universe enormously. We are simply the precursors to
    silicon life.
    (Carbon creates Silicon)



    [quote="Ophiolite"]You are making two entirely separate points here, and confusing the issue by placing them in juxtaposition.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    If I say Marshall McLuhan does it have any resonances for you in this context of silicon versus carbon?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Freshman thequ1ck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    London
    Posts
    26
    It didn't but then I'd never heard of the guy. Having read a little about
    his work now (with thanks for pointing me in this direction), I don't
    think it's really relevent to the concept I'm trying to get accross.

    The identification of media as a force for social change is maybe a little
    too pragmatic for me (hence why I posted in philosophy).

    My point is if the 'weight' of conciousness as defined by the 'bulk' of
    information processed, continues to grow at the rate of the last thousand
    years, then we can expect to have a very diverse and more than likely,
    Silicon based conciousnesses on earth within the next few millenium.

    This is a phenomenal rate of progress and one cannot help but wonder
    if it is due to the next chrystalline stage of Carbon or Silicon.


    Quote Originally Posted by Ophiolite
    If I say Marshall McLuhan does it have any resonances for you in this context of silicon versus carbon?
    There's a lot that takes place outside of logic.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    Sorry. I was being very vague. McCluhan's thesis is best summed up in the phrase The medium is the message.

    I wondered if, by focusing on the medium - silicon versus carbon - we were not losing sight of the message - the character of life itself. Just a thought.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Forum Freshman thequ1ck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    London
    Posts
    26
    And what is the character of life if not metaphor through medium's?

    The question is though, are we an echo of another medium , is
    it an echo of us or are we a simple harmonic?

    Quote Originally Posted by Ophiolite
    Sorry. I was being very vague. McCluhan's thesis is best summed up in the phrase The medium is the message.

    I wondered if, by focusing on the medium - silicon versus carbon - we were not losing sight of the message - the character of life itself. Just a thought.
    There's a lot that takes place outside of logic.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12 Not Philosophy 
    New Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    1
    Sorry new did not see date please delete
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,995
    Quote Originally Posted by thequ1ck View Post
    Silicon has very similar valency to Carbon, so much so that Silicon
    life forms are entirely possible.
    People say this occasionally but, sadly, it ain't true. There are all sorts of reasons why silicon does not have the flexibility of forming the range of compounds that carbon does. It is remotely possible that life could develop around on chemistry that is not carbon-based, but there would not be a single element replacing carbon, rather a complex of different elements playing different roles.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Malignant Pimple shlunka's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Dogbox in front of Dywyddyr's house.
    Posts
    1,785
    The Carbon if you're referencing the alphabet.
    "MODERATOR NOTE : We don't entertain trolls here, not even in the trash can. Banned." -Markus Hanke
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    INDIA
    Posts
    548
    Possibly both of them originate from a common matter
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,995
    Well, I suppose they are both the results of a series of fusion reactions that start with hydrogen...
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •