You heard about the NASA conference, may be you watched it and later on all the comments in the news. All the news showed disappointment,some of them found the conference a bit ridiculously. A bacterium, not a real alien!
I think, that was a very important discovery. We always assume to be the 'top invention' of the universe. So all the more or less intelligent forms of alien life has to be similar to us. See all the science fiction movies (I like them)
But this bacterium shows us that nature has different ways to build living cells. So the life here on earth is only one of millions of different ways to do that.
How often are there mistakes in growing cells. And may be after many attempt one of those 'mistakes' is the one that has a better chance to survive then the ancestors.
Are we one of those 'mistakes'? Alga and later on plants have been long before us on earth. The chlorophyll (what makes a leaf green) is there metabolism mediator. This molecule has in it's center one magnesium atom.
Plants produce oxygen. When there was enough oxygen in the atmosphere some thing happened similar to the change in that bacterium: the magnesium atom was replaced with an iron atom. The basic 'bricks' to build chlorophyll and our hemoglobin are the same. But now that basic substance for all metabolism was able to bind oxygen instead of CO2. A much more efficient metabolism was developing.
There must be endless tries to change cells. And suddenly there is a new form to outlive the old one.
That takes millions of tries and when the environment is right, there is a success. Our life here on earth is to short to overlook failure and success of these tries. That means we are not the end of the line.
About Nature and things I see, I am wondering about, specifically about us.
Saturday, December 4, 2010
Thursday, December 2, 2010
An extra, has to do with human nature
What a battle right now in the USA! I am not a politician, neither tied up to any party, but used to have my own thoughts.
This hick-hack there has to do with nature too: with human nature, especially with greed. You know Dagobert Duck, that guy sitting on a pile of gold and panicked by the idea one piece got lost.
Let's do the math. Assume the upper 2% get there tax cut. What will they do? Buy some (more) diamonds, another property, may be an island in the Caribbean or a suite in Dubai. Probably they will buy some more stocks to make more money. Or they keep it like Dagobert Duck.
On the other hand, let's give hundred dollar every month to let's say to ten million of now unemployed workers, to those who lost their job because of the Wall Street scandal. That makes one billion a month, twelve billion a year, less then the tax cut for the upper two percent. Important is, what these people will do with that extra money. They will spend it, right there, where it came from: in the US. They pay their bills, their mortgage or even the things they have already charged their cards with.
That makes twelve billion pumped in to the economy every year. Business can recover, hire some people, companies will grow. And who makes the money out of it? Of course the upper two percent with their stocks and investments.
You think I am a communist? Oh no, there will always be some rich and some poor people. That's human nature.
But right now the only thing is to get the economy going again. Both sides are important. There must be some one who can invest, but there must be some one who does the work, the real work that makes the money. No one can eat gold or paper (stocks). If there are fewer and fewer people that do the basic work the 'uppers' have to come down and have to plant there own potatoes. Do they know, where potatoes come from?
This hick-hack there has to do with nature too: with human nature, especially with greed. You know Dagobert Duck, that guy sitting on a pile of gold and panicked by the idea one piece got lost.
Let's do the math. Assume the upper 2% get there tax cut. What will they do? Buy some (more) diamonds, another property, may be an island in the Caribbean or a suite in Dubai. Probably they will buy some more stocks to make more money. Or they keep it like Dagobert Duck.
On the other hand, let's give hundred dollar every month to let's say to ten million of now unemployed workers, to those who lost their job because of the Wall Street scandal. That makes one billion a month, twelve billion a year, less then the tax cut for the upper two percent. Important is, what these people will do with that extra money. They will spend it, right there, where it came from: in the US. They pay their bills, their mortgage or even the things they have already charged their cards with.
That makes twelve billion pumped in to the economy every year. Business can recover, hire some people, companies will grow. And who makes the money out of it? Of course the upper two percent with their stocks and investments.
You think I am a communist? Oh no, there will always be some rich and some poor people. That's human nature.
But right now the only thing is to get the economy going again. Both sides are important. There must be some one who can invest, but there must be some one who does the work, the real work that makes the money. No one can eat gold or paper (stocks). If there are fewer and fewer people that do the basic work the 'uppers' have to come down and have to plant there own potatoes. Do they know, where potatoes come from?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)