DOES THE SPARK OF LIFE EXISTS IN PROTOPLANETARY DISKS?

[suhail jalbout]

DOE



------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following article completes my hypothesis "what is the origin of our existence" which I will repost.


DOES THE SPARK OF LIFE EXISTS IN PROTOPLANETARY DISKS?

BY SUHAIL JALBOUT

The mystery of how life sprung from non-living matter has long eluded scientists. Many experiments were conducted in laboratories to produce microscopic life but without success. Scientists simulated lightening, volcano eruptions, and applied powerful laser beams on gases, dust, chemical soup etc. The end result was only to create the building blocks of life. We can thus conclude that the spark of life does not exist on any planet. This implies that microscopic life is created in space and then it seeds the planets by the bombardment of asteroids, comets, meteorite and/or collapsed water-ice rings orbiting planets.

The question that follows is: where is life created in space?

The most logical place is in protoplanetary disks because they form planets where life can thrive on them if favorable conditions are provided for their existence and growth. This implies that the protoplanetary disk contains the organic compounds (the building blocks for life) as well as the spark which is required for the emergence of life.

ORGANIC COMPOUNDS

Geophysicist Fred Cesia, of the university of Chicago, and astrobiologist Scott Sandford, of NASA’s Ames Research Center in California, built a computer model of protoplanetary disk of dust grains. The objective of the study is to test whether organic molecules could have formed in the disk prior to the formation of the planets.25

Their computer study revealed that molecular bonds of compounds with the dust particles could be broken and the atoms could recombine to form complex organic molecules in the protoplanetary disk. However, to create life from these life building blocks, a spark of life is still needed.

THE SPARK OF LIFE

In CERN, the Large Hydron Collider can potentially create microscopic black holes. If this is feasible, then Nano black holes can be created in protoplanetary disks. When a nebula is converted into a sphere with a protoplanetary disk, millions of tons of matter are ejected from the sphere when it ignites to become a star. The speed of the ejected matter is very near to the speed of light. This matter will collide with the material of the protoplanetary disk forming millions of Nano black holes.

Hawking came up with a theory stating that black holes evaporate and release radiation during this process which became known as Hawking Radiation. In Feb 5, 2016, Hawking suggested, in a lecture, to power Earth with mini black holes: “A mountain sized black hole would give off X-rays and gamma-rays at a rate of about 10 million megawatts, enough to power the world’s electricity supply”.26

So what would happen to the Nano black holes in the protoplanetary disk?

A portion of the Nano black holes will evaporate releasing Hawking radiation, while the balance will merge with each other releasing gravitational waves and forming mini black holes. The mini black holes will evaporating after (T1) time releasing also Hawking radiation.

Let us assume that the Nano black holes merge together to form mini black holes. The question now is: how long it will take for Hawking’s mountain sized mini black hole (mBH) to evaporate before the end of the protoplanetary disk life span? The time can be calculated from Hawking equation as follows:27

T1 = 2.097 x 10^67 x (M1/Mo)^3

T1 = the time for the mBH to evaporate (years)

M1 = mass of the mBH. Assume it is double the mass of the Egyptian Great Pyramid (2x6x10^9 Kg)

Mo = solar mass 1.989 x 10^30 Kg.

Substituting the above numbers gives:

T1 = 4.53 x 10^6 years

The estimated life span of protoplanetary disks is 10x10^6 years, This means the mini black holes will evaporate at about 45% of the disk’s life span releasing enormous energy that is thousands of times more than the requirements of our planet.

CONCLUSION

Probably the gravitational waves that are produced during the merge of the Nano black holes plus the released Hawking radiation from the Nano and the mini black holes, during the evaporation process, act as a spark on the existing life building blocks in the protoplanetary disk to create life.



------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[Iron Maiden]

A portion of the Nano black holes will evaporate releasing Hawking radiation, while the balance will merge with each other releasing gravitational waves and forming mini black holes. The mini black holes will evaporating after (T1) time releasing also Hawking radiation.

very vague description, can u elaborate?

 

[agnostic]

CONCLUSION

Probably the gravitational waves that are produced during the merge of the Nano black holes plus the released Hawking radiation from the Nano and the mini black holes, during the evaporation process, act as a spark on the existing life building blocks in the protoplanetary disk to create life.

Since the topic is not only about pure physics but interest ordinary people, would you please give a an overview (une synthèse) adapted for ordinary people.

 

[Iron Maiden]

Since the topic is not only about pure physics but interest ordinary people, would you please give a an overview (une synthèse) adapted for ordinary people.

tiny blackholes forming in a protoplanet’s disk may emit enough high density radiations to spark life out of matter

 

[suhail jalbout]

very vague description, can u elaborate?

The evaporation time for BHs depends on their mass. The larger the BH the longer is its evaporation time.

Nano BHs have a very small mass and thus they evaporate very quickly. On the other hand, mini BHs are formed when 2 or more mini BHs merging together. Because they have a large mass, they swallow the material in their vicinity and become larger and larger. I believe the maximum time for the evaporation of mini BHs should be less than 50% of the protoplanetary disk life span otherwise solar planets cannot form. The reason why some stars do not have planetary systems is due to the large mass of the mini BHs. They probably consumed a large portion of the protoplanetary disk.

 

[suhail jalbout]

Since the topic is not only about pure physics but interest ordinary people, would you please give a an overview (une synthèse) adapted for ordinary people.

The OP is the continuation of a hypothesis that I published few years ago. I came with the OP after long research to complete. I shall publish in few minutes to give you the background.

 

[Rafidi]

tiny blackholes forming in a protoplanet’s disk may emit enough high density radiations to spark life out of matter

We go back to the basics.

The reason I am not convinced by these concepts, which more or less are imaginative in my estimation and beyond proof, is for the basic reason that all this fiction projects the idea of intent or purposefulness. And this intent or purposefulness to bring something more meaningful out of nothing or rather out of what was preexisting needs a mind or intelligence or a shaper/maker/creator. Until I can observe macro evolution (it should have been a constant continuation if it was heedless or purposeless) and spontaneity in creation or something coming out of nothing, I believe that scientists who are hell bent on proving that something can come from nothing without a mind are in a mission to create a religion of their own and whose prophets they are trying to become.

Shalom.

 

[Dark Angel]

DOE



------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following article completes my hypothesis "what is the origin of our existence" which I will repost.


DOES THE SPARK OF LIFE EXISTS IN PROTOPLANETARY DISKS?

BY SUHAIL JALBOUT

The mystery of how life sprung from non-living matter has long eluded scientists. Many experiments were conducted in laboratories to produce microscopic life but without success. Scientists simulated lightening, volcano eruptions, and applied powerful laser beams on gases, dust, chemical soup etc. The end result was only to create the building blocks of life. We can thus conclude that the spark of life does not exist on any planet. This implies that microscopic life is created in space and then it seeds the planets by the bombardment of asteroids, comets, meteorite and/or collapsed water-ice rings orbiting planets.

The question that follows is: where is life created in space?

The most logical place is in protoplanetary disks because they form planets where life can thrive on them if favorable conditions are provided for their existence and growth. This implies that the protoplanetary disk contains the organic compounds (the building blocks for life) as well as the spark which is required for the emergence of life.

ORGANIC COMPOUNDS

Geophysicist Fred Cesia, of the university of Chicago, and astrobiologist Scott Sandford, of NASA’s Ames Research Center in California, built a computer model of protoplanetary disk of dust grains. The objective of the study is to test whether organic molecules could have formed in the disk prior to the formation of the planets.25

Their computer study revealed that molecular bonds of compounds with the dust particles could be broken and the atoms could recombine to form complex organic molecules in the protoplanetary disk. However, to create life from these life building blocks, a spark of life is still needed.

THE SPARK OF LIFE

In CERN, the Large Hydron Collider can potentially create microscopic black holes. If this is feasible, then Nano black holes can be created in protoplanetary disks. When a nebula is converted into a sphere with a protoplanetary disk, millions of tons of matter are ejected from the sphere when it ignites to become a star. The speed of the ejected matter is very near to the speed of light. This matter will collide with the material of the protoplanetary disk forming millions of Nano black holes.

Hawking came up with a theory stating that black holes evaporate and release radiation during this process which became known as Hawking Radiation. In Feb 5, 2016, Hawking suggested, in a lecture, to power Earth with mini black holes: “A mountain sized black hole would give off X-rays and gamma-rays at a rate of about 10 million megawatts, enough to power the world’s electricity supply”.26

So what would happen to the Nano black holes in the protoplanetary disk?

A portion of the Nano black holes will evaporate releasing Hawking radiation, while the balance will merge with each other releasing gravitational waves and forming mini black holes. The mini black holes will evaporating after (T1) time releasing also Hawking radiation.

Let us assume that the Nano black holes merge together to form mini black holes. The question now is: how long it will take for Hawking’s mountain sized mini black hole (mBH) to evaporate before the end of the protoplanetary disk life span? The time can be calculated from Hawking equation as follows:27

T1 = 2.097 x 10^67 x (M1/Mo)^3

T1 = the time for the mBH to evaporate (years)

M1 = mass of the mBH. Assume it is double the mass of the Egyptian Great Pyramid (2x6x10^9 Kg)

Mo = solar mass 1.989 x 10^30 Kg.

Substituting the above numbers gives:

T1 = 4.53 x 10^6 years

The estimated life span of protoplanetary disks is 10x10^6 years, This means the mini black holes will evaporate at about 45% of the disk’s life span releasing enormous energy that is thousands of times more than the requirements of our planet.

CONCLUSION

Probably the gravitational waves that are produced during the merge of the Nano black holes plus the released Hawking radiation from the Nano and the mini black holes, during the evaporation process, act as a spark on the existing life building blocks in the protoplanetary disk to create life.



------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

wrong conclusion.

 

[agnostic]

I believe that scientists who are hell bent on proving that something can come from nothing without a mind are in a mission to create a religion of their own and whose prophets they are trying to become.

1. No one in this thread has denied nor approved the existence of a super "mind" behind the universe and behind the creation of life
2. Many religious and even scientific beliefs happened to be wrong and therefore corrected and updated

 

[Iron Maiden]

We go back to the basics.

The reason I am not convinced by these concepts, which more or less are imaginative in my estimation and beyond proof, is for the basic reason that all this fiction projects the idea of intent or purposefulness. And this intent or purposefulness to bring something more meaningful out of nothing or rather out of what was preexisting needs a mind or intelligence or a shaper/maker/creator. Until I can observe macro evolution (it should have been a constant continuation if it was heedless or purposeless) and spontaneity in creation or something coming out of nothing, I believe that scientists who are hell bent on proving that something can come from nothing without a mind are in a mission to create a religion of their own and whose prophets they are trying to become.

Shalom.

first off let me say that you are trying to take away from the seriousness of such iodeas by calling them “imaginative” as if they’re the product of some kids who like to delve into fairytale stories. look around you, every piece of equipment and medical knowledge has been “imagined” by people with vivid imaginations and scientific curiosity. your belittling attempt sadly did not pass.

if you’re waiting to see a lizard evolve wings and hunt down eagles in order to entertain that life, maybe just maybe, came out from a chemical process and wasn't bestowed by the almighty creator who has very specific rules and timetables for how a human should behave, then you are just being deceived by your own mind into protecting your already established set of ideas and comfort zones.

before arguing and demanding to see macro evolution process unfold before your eyes go and read abt what is evolution and how dna/rna work.

there is already a thread why plenty of examples and very rich discussions you might enjoy that

 

[Iron Maiden]

1. No one in this thread has denied nor approved the existence of a super "mind" behind the universe and behind the creation of life
2. Many religious and even scientific beliefs happened to be wrong and therefore corrected and updated

1- oh we have denied and argued abt these points countless times
2- you are right, except its a much much harder to get religious people to a) accept that their teaching might be wrong and b) do something to rectify wat is wrong.
whereas when proven wrong a scientific postulate disappears into the depths if mordor only to be ised from time to time by silly goblins nobody cares abt.

 

[Rafidi]

first off let me say that you are trying to take away from the seriousness of such iodeas by calling them “imaginative” as if they’re the product of some kids who like to delve into fairytale stories. look around you, every piece of equipment and medical knowledge has been “imagined” by people with vivid imaginations and scientific curiosity. your belittling attempt sadly did not pass.

if you’re waiting to see a lizard evolve wings and hunt down eagles in order to entertain that life, maybe just maybe, came out from a chemical process and wasn't bestowed by the almighty creator who has very specific rules and timetables for how a human should behave, then you are just being deceived by your own mind into protecting your already established set of ideas and comfort zones.

before arguing and demanding to see macro evolution process unfold before your eyes go and read abt what is evolution and how dna/rna work.

there is already a thread why plenty of examples and very rich discussions you might enjoy that

Your analogy is so out of place.

If you can imagine and replicate a medical equipment. Then imagine and replicate whatever scientific dogma you have come about to imagine as the basis for our existence. Secondly, chemical processes and the laws of physics do not negate that someone is behind them - an intelligent mind.

 

[Rafidi]

1. No one in this thread has denied nor approved the existence of a super "mind" behind the universe and behind the creation of life
2. Many religious and even scientific beliefs happened to be wrong and therefore corrected and updated

You should read again and comprehend.

 

[Iron Maiden]

Your analogy is so out of place.

If you can imagine and replicate a medical equipment. Then imagine and replicate whatever scientific dogma you have come about to imagine as the basis for our existence. Secondly, chemical processes and the laws of physics do not negate that someone is behind them - an intelligent mind.

1- which analogy?

2- you just proved my point, why are you downplaying a possible chemical explanation for how matter became life that you just said could have been used by this intelligent mind to spread life?

what i am getting at is that you are ok with the chemistry as long as one says tis the work of the almighty, but when the same process is used by itself in a totally neutral setting you belittle the explanation.

note that this is just a hypothesis that the OP postulated and worked on

 

[Rafidi]

1- which analogy?

2- you just proved my point, why are you downplaying a possible chemical explanation for how matter became life that you just said could have been used by this intelligent mind to spread life?

what i am getting at is that you are ok with the chemistry as long as one says tis the work of the almighty, but when the same process is used by itself in a totally neutral setting you belittle the explanation.

note that this is just a hypothesis that the OP postulated and worked on

The analogy of likening creation or the origin of it or trying to explain it to envisioning medical equipment and creating them. Funny enough, imagining the equipment needed someone to first do the imagination. And for that reason, God is referred to as al Musawwer in the Quran. Then after picturing the idea or concept, the creation can start and the process be followed.

And to reply your second point. Your or science's explanation about the "how" is always falling short of explaining the "why". You can perfectly explain or imagine certain scenarios. But there idea of "things falling into place and at the right time and then making sense" needs a mover with intent. And that is what you have taken out of the equation.

In any case, it would be nice for you to believe the possibility of some high density or powerful laser like beams bringing us back to life from our decayed state, since such scenario could have started it all from the beginning and today it all makes perfect sense and we are all here debating about how it all started; which we haven't yet figured out . Even if you dont believe in the Creator who makes things fall into place and in the right ways nd at the right time, since you believe in certain processes that take place in a sensible manner, you may at least give benefit to doubt and accept the possibility that some day when we all die, some chemical processes can take place over a long period of time for you to rise again. How about that?

 

[HalaMadrid]

There's no chance life--at least human life--came from something natural like matter. It definitely was created by something with a sick sense of humor that is taking bets on how quickly a species this stupid will destroy itself and everything around it.