Search This Blog

Sunday, September 21, 2014

History of the Earth

History of the Earth

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The History of the Earth concerns the development of the planet Earth from its formation to the present day.[1][2] Nearly all branches of natural science have contributed to the understanding of the main events of the Earth's past. The age of Earth is approximately one-third of the age of the universe. An immense amount of biological and geological change has occurred in that time span.

Earth formed around 4.54 billion (4.54×109) years ago by accretion from the solar nebula. Volcanic outgassing probably created the primordial atmosphere, but it contained almost no oxygen and would have been toxic to humans and most modern life. Much of the Earth was molten because of extreme volcanism and frequent collisions with other bodies. One very large collision is thought to have been responsible for tilting the Earth at an angle and forming the Moon. Over time, the planet cooled and formed a solid crust, allowing liquid water to exist on the surface.

The first life forms appeared between 3.8 and 3.5 billion years ago. The earliest evidences for life on Earth are graphite found to be biogenic in 3.7 billion-year-old metasedimentary rocks discovered in Western Greenland[3] and microbial mat fossils found in 3.48 billion-year-old sandstone discovered in Western Australia.[4][5] Photosynthetic life appeared around 2 billion years ago, enriching the atmosphere with oxygen. Life remained mostly small and microscopic until about 580 million years ago, when complex multicellular life arose. During the Cambrian period it experienced a rapid diversification into most major phyla.

Geological change has been constantly occurring on our planet since the time of its formation and biological change since the first appearance of life. Species continuously evolve, taking on new forms, splitting into daughter species, or going extinct in response to an ever-changing planet. The process of plate tectonics has played a major role in the shaping of Earth's oceans and continents, as well as the life they harbor. The biosphere, in turn, has had a significant effect on the atmosphere and other abiotic conditions on the planet, such as the formation of the ozone layer, the proliferation of oxygen, and the creation of soil.

Geologic time scale

The history of the Earth is organized chronologically in a table known as the geologic time scale, which is split into intervals based on stratigraphic analysis.[2][6] A full-time scale can be found at the main article.
The following four timelines show the geologic time scale. The first shows the entire time from the formation of the Earth to the present, but this compresses the most recent eon. Therefore the second scale shows the most recent eon with an expanded scale. The second scale compresses the most recent era, so the most recent era is expanded in the third scale. Since the Quaternary is a very short period with short epochs, it is further expanded in the fourth scale. The second, third, and fourth timelines are therefore each subsections of their preceding timeline as indicated by asterisks. The Holocene (the latest epoch) is too small to be shown clearly on the third timeline on the right, another reason for expanding the fourth scale. The Pleistocene (P) epoch. Q stands for the Quaternary period.
Siderian Rhyacian Orosirian Statherian Calymmian Ectasian Stenian Tonian Cryogenian Ediacaran Eoarchean Paleoarchean Mesoarchean Neoarchean Paleoproterozoic Mesoproterozoic Neoproterozoic Paleozoic Mesozoic Cenozoic Hadean Archean Proterozoic Phanerozoic Precambrian
Cambrian Ordovician Silurian Devonian Carboniferous Permian Triassic Jurassic Cretaceous Paleogene Neogene Quaternary Paleozoic Mesozoic Cenozoic Phanerozoic
Paleocene Eocene Oligocene Miocene Pliocene Pleistocene Holocene Paleogene Neogene Quaternary Cenozoic
Gelasian Calabrian Pleistocene Pleistocene Pleistocene Holocene Quaternary
Millions of Years

Solar System formation


An artist's rendering of a protoplanetary disk

The standard model for the formation of the Solar System (including the Earth) is the solar nebula hypothesis.[7] In this model, the Solar system formed from a large, rotating cloud of interstellar dust and gas called the solar nebula. It was composed of hydrogen and helium created shortly after the Big Bang 13.8 Ga (billion years ago) and heavier elements ejected by supernovae. About 4.5 Ga, the nebula began a contraction that may have been triggered by the shock wave of a nearby supernova.[8] A shock wave would have also made the nebula rotate. As the cloud began to accelerate, its angular momentum, gravity and inertia flattened it into a protoplanetary disk perpendicular to its axis of rotation. Small perturbations due to collisions and the angular momentum of other large debris created the means by which kilometer-sized protoplanets began to form, orbiting the nebular center.[9]

The center of the nebula, not having much angular momentum, collapsed rapidly, the compression heating it until nuclear fusion of hydrogen into helium began. After more contraction, a T Tauri star ignited and evolved into the Sun. Meanwhile, in the outer part of the nebula gravity caused matter to condense around density perturbations and dust particles, and the rest of the protoplanetary disk began separating into rings. In a process known as runaway accretion, successively larger fragments of dust and debris clumped together to form planets.[9] Earth formed in this manner about 4.54 billion years ago (with an uncertainty of 1%)[10][11][12][13] and was largely completed within 10–20 million years.[14] The solar wind of the newly formed T Tauri star cleared out most of the material in the disk that had not already condensed into larger bodies. The same process is expected to produce accretion disks around virtually all newly forming stars in the universe, some of which yield planets.[15]

The proto-Earth grew by accretion until its interior was hot enough to melt the heavy, siderophile metals. Having higher densities than the silicates, these metals sank. This so-called iron catastrophe resulted in the separation of a primitive mantle and a (metallic) core only 10 million years after the Earth began to form, producing the layered structure of Earth and setting up the formation of Earth's magnetic field.[16] J. A. Jacobs [17] was the first to suggest that the inner core—a solid center distinct from the liquid outer core—is freezing and growing out of the liquid outer core due to the gradual cooling of Earth's interior (about 100 degrees Celsius per billion years[18]).

Hadean and Archean Eons

The first eon in Earth's history, the Hadean, begins with the Earth's formation and is followed by the Archean eon at 3.8 Ga.[2]:145 The oldest rocks found on Earth date to about 4.0 Ga, and the oldest detrital zircon crystals in rocks to about 4.4 Ga,[19][20][21] soon after the formation of the Earth's crust and the Earth itself. The giant impact hypothesis for the Moon's formation states that shortly after formation of an initial crust, the proto-Earth was impacted by a smaller protoplanet, which ejected part of the mantle and crust into space and created the Moon.[22][23][24]
From crater counts on other celestial bodies it is inferred that a period of intense meteorite impacts, called the Late Heavy Bombardment, began about 4.1 Ga, and concluded around 3.8 Ga, at the end of the Hadean.[25] In addition, volcanism was severe due to the large heat flow and geothermal gradient.[26] Nevertheless, detrital zircon crystals dated to 4.4 Ga show evidence of having undergone contact with liquid water, suggesting that the planet already had oceans or seas at that time.[19]

By the beginning of the Archean, the Earth had cooled significantly. Most present life forms could not have survived in the Archean atmosphere, which lacked oxygen and an ozone layer. Nevertheless it is believed that primordial life began to evolve by the early Archean, with candidate fossils dated to around 3.5 Ga.[27] Some scientists even speculate that life could have begun during the early Hadean, as far back as 4.4 Ga, surviving the possible Late Heavy Bombardment period in hydrothermal vents below the Earth's surface.[28]

Formation of the Moon


Artist's impression of the enormous collision that probably formed the Moon

Earth's only natural satellite, the Moon, is larger relative to its planet than any other satellite in the solar system.[nb 1] During the Apollo program, rocks from the Moon's surface were brought to Earth. Radiometric dating of these rocks has shown that the Moon is 4.53 ± .01 billion years old,[31], formed at least 30 million years after the solar system.[32] New evidence suggests the Moon formed even later, 4.48 ± 0.02 Ga, or 70–110 million years after the start of the Solar System.[33]

Theories for the formation of the Moon must explain its late formation as well as the following facts. First, the Moon has a low density (3.3 times that of water, compared to 5.5 for the earth[34]) and a small metallic core. Second, there is virtually no water or other volatiles on the moon. Third, the Earth and Moon have the same oxygen isotopic signature (relative abundance of the oxygen isotopes). Of the theories that have been proposed to account for these phenomena, only one is widely accepted: The giant impact hypothesis proposes that the Moon originated after a body the size of Mars (sometimes named Theia[32]) struck the proto-Earth a glancing blow.[1]:256[35][36]

The collision released about 100 million times more energy than the more recent Chicxulub impact that is believed to have caused the extinction of the dinosaurs. It was enough to vaporize some of the Earth's outer layers and melt both bodies.[35][1]:256 A portion of the mantle material was ejected into orbit around the Earth. The giant impact hypothesis predicts that the Moon was depleted of metallic material,[37] explaining its abnormal composition.[38] The ejecta in orbit around the Earth could have condensed into a single body within a couple of weeks. Under the influence of its own gravity, the ejected material became a more spherical body: the Moon.[39]

First continents

Map with color and texture
Geologic map of North America, color-coded by age. The reds and pinks indicate rock from the Archean.

Mantle convection, the process that drives plate tectonics today, is a result of heat flow from the Earth's interior to the Earth's surface.[40]:2 It involves the creation of rigid tectonic plates at mid-oceanic ridges. These plates are destroyed by subduction into the mantle at subduction zones. During the early Archean (about 3.0 Ga) the mantle was much hotter than today, probably around 1600 °C,[41]:82 so convection in the mantle was faster. While a process similar to present day plate tectonics did occur, this would have gone faster too. It is likely that during the Hadean and Archean, subduction zones were more common, and therefore tectonic plates were smaller.[1]:258

The initial crust, formed when the Earth's surface first solidified, totally disappeared from a combination of this fast Hadean plate tectonics and the intense impacts of the Late Heavy Bombardment. However, it is thought that it was basaltic in composition, like today's oceanic crust, because little crustal differentiation had yet taken place.[1]:258 The first larger pieces of continental crust, which is a product of differentiation of lighter elements during partial melting in the lower crust, appeared at the end of the Hadean, about 4.0 Ga. What is left of these first small continents are called cratons. These pieces of late Hadean and early Archean crust form the cores around which today's continents grew.[42]

The oldest rocks on Earth are found in the North American craton of Canada. They are tonalites from about 4.0 Ga. They show traces of metamorphism by high temperature, but also sedimentary grains that have been rounded by erosion during transport by water, showing rivers and seas existed then.[43] Cratons consist primarily of two alternating types of terranes. The first are so-called greenstone belts, consisting of low grade metamorphosed sedimentary rocks. These "greenstones" are similar to the sediments today found in oceanic trenches, above subduction zones. For this reason, greenstones are sometimes seen as evidence for subduction during the Archean. The second type is a complex of felsic magmatic rocks. These rocks are mostly tonalite, trondhjemite or granodiorite, types of rock similar in composition to granite (hence such terranes are called TTG-terranes). TTG-complexes are seen as the relicts of the first continental crust, formed by partial melting in basalt.[44]:Chapter 5

Oceans and atmosphere


Graph showing range of estimated partial pressure of atmospheric oxygen through geologic time [45]

Earth is often described as having had three atmospheres. The first atmosphere, captured from the solar nebula, was composed of light (atmophile) elements from the solar nebula, mostly hydrogen and helium. A combination of the solar wind and Earth's heat would have driven off this atmosphere, as a result of which the atmosphere is now depleted of these elements compared to cosmic abundances.[46] After the impact,[clarification needed] the molten Earth released volatile gases; and later more gases were released by volcanoes, completing a second atmosphere rich in greenhouse gases but poor in oxygen. [1]:256 Finally, the third atmosphere, rich in oxygen, emerged when bacteria began to produce oxygen about 2.8 Ga.[47]:83–84,116–117

In early models for the formation of the atmosphere and ocean, the second atmosphere was formed by outgassing of volatiles from the Earth's interior. Now it is considered likely that many of the volatiles were delivered during accretion by a process known as impact degassing in which incoming bodies vaporize on impact. The ocean and atmosphere would therefore have started to form even as the Earth formed.[48] The new atmosphere probably contained water vapor, carbon dioxide, nitrogen, and smaller amounts of other gases.[49]

Planetesimals at a distance of 1 astronomical unit (AU), the distance of the Earth from the Sun, probably did not contribute any water to the Earth because the solar nebula was too hot for ice to form and the hydration of rocks by water vapor would have taken too long.[48][50] The water must have been supplied by meteorites from the outer asteroid belt and some large planetary embryos from beyond 2.5 AU.[48][51] Comets may also have contributed. Though most comets are today in orbits farther away from the Sun than Neptune, computer simulations show they were originally far more common in the inner parts of the solar system.[43]:130-132

As the planet cooled, clouds formed. Rain created the oceans. Recent evidence suggests the oceans may have begun forming as early as 4.4 Ga.[19] By the start of the Archean eon they already covered the Earth. This early formation has been difficult to explain because of a problem known as the faint young Sun paradox. Stars are known to get brighter as they age, and at the time of its formation the Sun would have been emitting only 70% of its current power. Many models predict that the Earth would have been covered in ice.[52][48] A likely solution is that there was enough carbon dioxide and methane to produce a greenhouse effect. The carbon dioxide would have been produced by volcanoes and the methane by early microbes. Another greenhouse gas, ammonia, would have been ejected by volcanos but quickly destroyed by ultraviolet radiation.[47]:83

Origin of life

One of the reasons for interest in the early atmosphere and ocean is that they form the conditions under which life first arose. There are many models, but little consensus, on how life emerged from non-living chemicals; chemical systems that have been created in the laboratory still fall well short of the minimum complexity for a living organism.[53][54]
The first step in the emergence of life may have been chemical reactions that produced many of the simpler organic compounds, including nucleobases and amino acids, that are the building blocks of life. An experiment in 1953 by Stanley Miller and Harold Urey showed that such molecules could form in an atmosphere of water, methane, ammonia and hydrogen with the aid of sparks to mimic the effect of lightning.[55] Although the atmospheric composition was probably different from the composition used by Miller and Urey, later experiments with more realistic compositions also managed to synthesize organic molecules.[56] Recent computer simulations have even shown that extraterrestrial organic molecules could have formed in the protoplanetary disk before the formation of the Earth.[57]

The next stage of complexity could have been reached from at least three possible starting points: self-replication, an organism's ability to produce offspring that are very similar to itself; metabolism, its ability to feed and repair itself; and external cell membranes, which allow food to enter and waste products to leave, but exclude unwanted substances.[58]

Replication first: RNA world


The replicator in virtually all known life is deoxyribonucleic acid. DNA is far more complex than the original replicator and its replication systems are highly elaborate.

Even the simplest members of the three modern domains of life use DNA to record their "recipes" and a complex array of RNA and protein molecules to "read" these instructions and use them for growth, maintenance and self-replication.

The discovery that a kind of RNA molecule called a ribozyme can catalyze both its own replication and the construction of proteins led to the hypothesis that earlier life-forms were based entirely on RNA.[59] They could have formed an RNA world in which there were individuals but no species, as mutations and horizontal gene transfers would have meant that the offspring in each generation were quite likely to have different genomes from those that their parents started with.[60] RNA would later have been replaced by DNA, which is more stable and therefore can build longer genomes, expanding the range of capabilities a single organism can have.[61] Ribozymes remain as the main components of ribosomes, the "protein factories" of modern cells.[62]

Although short, self-replicating RNA molecules have been artificially produced in laboratories,[63] doubts have been raised about whether natural non-biological synthesis of RNA is possible.[64][65][66] The earliest ribozymes may have been formed of simpler nucleic acids such as PNA, TNA or GNA, which would have been replaced later by RNA.[67][68] Other pre-RNA replicators have been posited, including crystals[69]:150 and even quantum systems.[70]

In 2003 it was proposed that porous metal sulfide precipitates would assist RNA synthesis at about 100 °C (212 °F) and ocean-bottom pressures near hydrothermal vents. In this hypothesis, lipid membranes would be the last major cell components to appear and until they did the proto-cells would be confined to the pores.[71]

Metabolism first: iron–sulfur world

Another long-standing hypothesis is that the first life was composed of protein molecules. Amino acids, the building blocks of proteins, are easily synthesized in plausible prebiotic conditions, as are small peptides (polymers of amino acids) that make good catalysts.[72]:295–297 A series of experiments starting in 1997 showed that amino acids and peptides could form in the presence of carbon monoxide and hydrogen sulfide with iron sulfide and nickel sulfide as catalysts. Most of the steps in their assembly required temperatures of about 100 °C (212 °F) and moderate pressures, although one stage required 250 °C (482 °F) and a pressure equivalent to that found under 7 kilometres (4.3 mi) of rock. Hence self-sustaining synthesis of proteins could have occurred near hydrothermal vents.[73]
A difficulty with the metabolism-first scenario is finding a way for organisms to evolve. Without the ability to replicate as individuals, aggregates of molecules would have "compositional genomes" (counts of molecular species in the aggregate) as the target of natural selection. However, a recent model shows that such a system is unable to evolve in response to natural selection.[74]

Membranes first: Lipid world


Cross-section through a liposome

It has been suggested that double-walled "bubbles" of lipids like those that form the external membranes of cells may have been an essential first step.[75] Experiments that simulated the conditions of the early Earth have reported the formation of lipids, and these can spontaneously form liposomes, double-walled "bubbles", and then reproduce themselves. Although they are not intrinsically information-carriers as nucleic acids are, they would be subject to natural selection for longevity and reproduction. Nucleic acids such as RNA might then have formed more easily within the liposomes than they would have outside.[76]

The clay theory

Some clays, notably montmorillonite, have properties that make them plausible accelerators for the emergence of an RNA world: they grow by self-replication of their crystalline pattern, are subject to an analog of natural selection (as the clay "species" that grows fastest in a particular environment rapidly becomes dominant), and can catalyze the formation of RNA molecules.[77] Although this idea has not become the scientific consensus, it still has active supporters.[78]:150–158[69]
Research in 2003 reported that montmorillonite could also accelerate the conversion of fatty acids into "bubbles", and that the bubbles could encapsulate RNA attached to the clay. Bubbles can then grow by absorbing additional lipids and dividing. The formation of the earliest cells may have been aided by similar processes.[79]

A similar hypothesis presents self-replicating iron-rich clays as the progenitors of nucleotides, lipids and amino acids.[80]

Last universal ancestor

It is believed that of this multiplicity of protocells, only one line survived. Current phylogenetic evidence suggests that the last universal ancestor (LUA) lived during the early Archean eon, perhaps 3.5 Ga or earlier.[81][82] This LUA cell is the ancestor of all life on Earth today. It was probably a prokaryote, possessing a cell membrane and probably ribosomes, but lacking a nucleus or membrane-bound organelles such as mitochondria or chloroplasts. Like all modern cells, it used DNA as its genetic code, RNA for information transfer and protein synthesis, and enzymes to catalyze reactions. Some scientists believe that instead of a single organism being the last universal common ancestor, there were populations of organisms exchanging genes by lateral gene transfer.[81]

Proterozoic Eon

The Proterozoic eon lasted from 2.5 Ga to 542 Ma (million years ago).[2]:130 In this time span, cratons grew into continents with modern sizes. The change to an oxygen-rich atmosphere was a crucial development. Life developed from prokaryotes into eukaryotes and multicellular forms. The Proterozoic saw a couple of severe ice ages called snowball Earths. After the last Snowball Earth about 600 Ma, the evolution of life on Earth accelerated. About 580 Ma, the Ediacara biota formed the prelude for the Cambrian Explosion.

Oxygen revolution


Lithified stromatolites on the shores of Lake Thetis, Western Australia. Archean stromatolites are the first direct fossil traces of life on Earth.

A banded iron formation from the 3.15 Ga Moories Group, Barberton Greenstone Belt, South Africa. Red layers represent the times when oxygen was available, gray layers were formed in anoxic circumstances.

The earliest cells absorbed energy and food from the environment around them. They used fermentation, the breakdown of more complex compounds into less complex compounds with less energy, and used the energy so liberated to grow and reproduce. Fermentation can only occur in an anaerobic (oxygen-free) environment. The evolution of photosynthesis made it possible for cells to manufacture their own food.[83]:377

Most of the life that covers the surface of the Earth depends directly or indirectly on photosynthesis. The most common form, oxygenic photosynthesis, turns carbon dioxide, water and sunlight into food. It captures the energy of sunlight in energy-rich molecules such as ATP, which then provide the energy to make sugars. To supply the electrons in the circuit, hydrogen is stripped from water, leaving oxygen as a waste product.[84] Some organisms, including purple bacteria and green sulfur bacteria, use an anoxygenic form of photosynthesis that use alternatives to hydrogen stripped from water as electron donors; examples are hydrogen sulfide, sulfur and iron. Such organisms are mainly restricted to extreme environments such as hot springs and hydrothermal vents.[83]:379–382[85]

The simpler anoxygenic form arose about 3.8 Ga, not long after the appearance of life. The timing of oxygenic photosynthesis is more controversial; it had certainly appeared by about 2.4 Ga, but some researchers put it back as far as 3.2 Ga.[84] The latter "probably increased global productivity by at least two or three orders of magnitude."[86][87] Among the oldest remnants of oxygen-producing lifeforms are fossil stromatolites.[86][87][45]

At first, the released oxygen was bound up with limestone, iron, and other minerals. The oxidized iron appears as red layers in geological strata called banded iron formations that formed in abundance during the Siderian period (between 2500 Ma and 2300 Ma).[2]:133 When most of the exposed readily reacting minerals were oxidized, oxygen finally began to accumulate in the atmosphere. Though each cell only produced a minute amount of oxygen, the combined metabolism of many cells over a vast time transformed Earth’s atmosphere to its current state. This was Earth’s third atmosphere.[88]:50–51[47]:83–84,116–117

Some of the oxygen was stimulated by incoming ultraviolet radiation to form ozone, which collected in a layer near the upper part of the atmosphere. The ozone layer absorbed, and still absorbs, a significant amount of the ultraviolet radiation that once had passed through the atmosphere. It allowed cells to colonize the surface of the ocean and eventually the land: without the ozone layer, ultraviolet radiation bombarding land and sea would have caused unsustainable levels of mutation in exposed cells.[89][43]:219–220

Photosynthesis had another major impact. Oxygen was toxic; much life on Earth probably died out as its levels rose in what is known as the oxygen catastrophe. Resistant forms survived and thrived, and some developed the ability to use oxygen to increase their metabolism and obtain more energy from the same food.[89]

Snowball Earth

The natural evolution of the Sun made it progressively more luminous during the Archean and Proterozoic eons; the Sun's luminosity increases 6% every billion years.[43]:165 As a result, the Earth began to receive more heat from the Sun in the Proterozoic eon. However, the Earth did not get warmer. Instead, the geological record seems to suggest it cooled dramatically during the early Proterozoic. Glacial deposits found in South Africa date back to 2.2 Ga, at which time, based on paleomagnetic evidence, they must have been located near the equator. Thus, this glaciation, known as the Makganyene glaciation, may have been global. Some scientists suggest this and following Proterozoic ice ages were so severe that the planet was totally frozen over from the poles to the equator, a hypothesis called Snowball Earth.[90]
The ice age around 2.3 Ga could have been directly caused by the increased oxygen concentration in the atmosphere, which caused the decrease of methane (CH4) in the atmosphere. Methane is a strong greenhouse gas, but with oxygen it reacts to form CO2, a less effective greenhouse gas.[43]:172 When free oxygen became available in the atmosphere, the concentration of methane could have decreased dramatically, enough to counter the effect of the increasing heat flow from the Sun.[91]

Emergence of eukaryotes


Chloroplasts in the cells of a moss

Modern taxonomy classifies life into three domains. The time of the origin of these domains is uncertain. The Bacteria domain probably first split off from the other forms of life (sometimes called Neomura), but this supposition is controversial. Soon after this, by 2 Ga,[92] the Neomura split into the Archaea and the Eukarya. Eukaryotic cells (Eukarya) are larger and more complex than prokaryotic cells (Bacteria and Archaea), and the origin of that complexity is only now becoming known.

Around this time, the first proto-mitochondrion was formed. A bacterial cell related to today’s Rickettsia,[93] which had evolved to metabolize oxygen, entered a larger prokaryotic cell, which lacked that capability. Perhaps the large cell attempted to digest the smaller one but failed (possibly due to the evolution of prey defenses). The smaller cell may have tried to parasitize the larger one. In any case, the smaller cell survived inside the larger cell. Using oxygen, it metabolized the larger cell’s waste products and derived more energy. Part of this excess energy was returned to the host. The smaller cell replicated inside the larger one. Soon, a stable symbiosis developed between the large cell and the smaller cells inside it. Over time, the host cell acquired some of the genes of the smaller cells, and the two kinds became dependent on each other: the larger cell could not survive without the energy produced by the smaller ones, and these in turn could not survive without the raw materials provided by the larger cell. The whole cell is now considered a single organism, and the smaller cells are classified as organelles called mitochondria.[94]

A similar event occurred with photosynthetic cyanobacteria[95] entering large heterotrophic cells and becoming chloroplasts.[88]:60–61[96]:536–539 Probably as a result of these changes, a line of cells capable of photosynthesis split off from the other eukaryotes more than 1 billion years ago. There were probably several such inclusion events. Besides the well-established endosymbiotic theory of the cellular origin of mitochondria and chloroplasts, there are theories that cells led to peroxisomes, spirochetes led to cilia and flagella, and that perhaps a DNA virus led to the cell nucleus,[97],[98] though none of them are widely accepted.[99]

Archaeans, bacteria, and eukaryotes continued to diversify and to become more complex and better adapted to their environments. Each domain repeatedly split into multiple lineages, although little is known about the history of the archaea and bacteria. Around 1.1 Ga, the supercontinent Rodinia was assembling.[100][101] The plant, animal, and fungi lines had split, though they still existed as solitary cells. Some of these lived in colonies, and gradually a division of labor began to take place; for instance, cells on the periphery might have started to assume different roles from those in the interior. Although the division between a colony with specialized cells and a multicellular organism is not always clear, around 1 billion years ago[102] the first multicellular plants emerged, probably green algae.[103] Possibly by around 900 Ma[96]:488 true multicellularity had also evolved in animals.

At first it probably resembled today’s sponges, which have totipotent cells that allow a disrupted organism to reassemble itself.[96]:483-487 As the division of labor was completed in all lines of multicellular organisms, cells became more specialized and more dependent on each other; isolated cells would die.

Supercontinents in the Proterozoic


A reconstruction of Pannotia (550 Ma).

Reconstructions of tectonic plate movement in the past 250 million years (the Cenozoic and Mesozoic eras) can be made reliably using fitting of continental margins, ocean floor magnetic anomalies and paleomagnetic poles. No ocean crust dates back further than that, so earlier reconstructions are more difficult. Paleomagnetic poles are supplemented by geologic evidence such as orogenic belts, which mark the edges of ancient plates, and past distributions of flora and fauna. The further back in time, the scarcer and harder to interpret the data get and the more diverse the reconstructions.[104]:370

Throughout the history of the Earth, there have been times when continents collided and formed a supercontinent, which later broke up into new continents. About 1000 to 830 Ma, most continental mass was united in the supercontinent Rodinia.[104]:370[105] Rodinia may have been preceded by Early-Middle Proterozoic continents called Nuna and Columbia.[104]:374[106][107]

After the break-up of Rodinia about 800 Ma, the continents may have formed another short-lived supercontinent, Pannotia, around 550 Ma. The hypothetical supercontinent is sometimes referred to as Pannotia or Vendia.[108]:321–322 The evidence for it is a phase of continental collision known as the Pan-African orogeny, which joined the continental masses of current-day Africa, South America, Antarctica and Australia. The existence of Pannotia depends on the timing of the rifting between Gondwana (which included most of the landmass now in the Southern Hemisphere, as well as the Arabian Peninsula and the Indian subcontinent) and Laurentia (roughly equivalent to current-day North America).[104]:374 It is at least certain that by the end of the Proterozoic eon, most of the continental mass lay united in a position around the south pole.[109]

Late Proterozoic climate and life


A 580 million year old fossil of Spriggina floundensi, an animal from the Ediacaran period. Such life forms could have been ancestors to the many new forms that originated in the Cambrian Explosion.

The end of the Proterozoic saw at least two Snowball Earths, so severe that the surface of the oceans may have been completely frozen. This happened about 716.5 and 635 Ma, in the Cryogenian period.[110] The intensity and mechanism of both glaciations are still under investigation and harder to explain than the early Proterozoic Snowball Earth.[111] Most paleoclimatologists think the cold episodes were linked to the formation of the supercontinent Rodinia.[112] Because Rodinia was centered on the equator, rates of chemical weathering increased and carbon dioxide (CO2) was taken from the atmosphere. Because CO2 is an important greenhouse gas, climates cooled globally.[citation needed] In the same way, during the Snowball Earths most of the continental surface was covered with permafrost, which decreased chemical weathering again, leading to the end of the glaciations. An alternative hypothesis is that enough carbon dioxide escaped through volcanic outgassing that the resulting greenhouse effect raised global temperatures.[112] Increased volcanic activity resulted from the break-up of Rodinia at about the same time.

The Cryogenian period was followed by the Ediacaran period, which was characterized by a rapid development of new multicellular lifeforms.[113] Whether there is a connection between the end of the severe ice ages and the increase in diversity of life is not clear, but it does not seem coincidental. The new forms of life, called Ediacara biota, were larger and more diverse than ever. Though the taxonomy of most Ediacaran life forms is unclear, some were ancestors of groups of modern life.[114] Important developments were the origin of muscular and neural cells. None of the Ediacaran fossils had hard body parts like skeletons. These first appear after the boundary between the Proterozoic and Phanerozoic eons or Ediacaran and Cambrian periods.

Phanerozoic Eon

The Phanerozoic is the current eon on Earth, which started approximately 542 million years ago. It consists of three eras: The Paleozoic, Mesozoic, and Cenozoic,[6] and is the time when multi-cellular life greatly diversified into almost all of the organisms known today.[115]

Paleozoic Era

The Paleozoic era (meaning: era of old life forms) was the first and longest era of the Phanerozoic eon, lasting from 542 to 251 Ma.[6] During the Paleozoic, many modern groups of life came into existence. Life colonized the land, first plants, then animals. Life usually evolved slowly. At times, however, there are sudden radiations of new species or mass extinctions. These bursts of evolution were often caused by unexpected changes in the environment resulting from natural disasters such as volcanic activity, meteorite impacts or climate changes.
The continents formed at the break-up of Pannotia and Rodinia at the end of the Proterozoic would slowly move together again during the Paleozoic. This would eventually result in phases of mountain building that created the supercontinent Pangaea in the late Paleozoic.

Cambrian explosion


Trilobites first appeared during the Cambrian period and were among the most widespread and diverse groups of Paleozoic organisms.

The rate of the evolution of life as recorded by fossils accelerated in the Cambrian period (542–488 Ma).[6] The sudden emergence of many new species, phyla, and forms in this period is called the Cambrian Explosion. The biological fomenting in the Cambrian Explosion was unpreceded before and since that time.[43]:229 Whereas the Ediacaran life forms appear yet primitive and not easy to put in any modern group, at the end of the Cambrian most modern phyla were already present. The development of hard body parts such as shells, skeletons or exoskeletons in animals like molluscs, echinoderms, crinoids and arthropods (a well-known group of arthropods from the lower Paleozoic are the trilobites) made the preservation and fossilization of such life forms easier than those of their Proterozoic ancestors. For this reason, much more is known about life in and after the Cambrian than about that of older periods. Some of these Cambrian groups appear complex but are quite different from modern life; examples are Anomalocaris and Haikouichthys.

During the Cambrian, the first vertebrate animals, among them the first fishes, had appeared.[96]:357 A creature that could have been the ancestor of the fishes, or was probably closely related to it, was Pikaia. It had a primitive notochord, a structure that could have developed into a vertebral column later. The first fishes with jaws (Gnathostomata) appeared during the next geological period, the Ordovician. The colonisation of new niches resulted in massive body sizes. In this way, fishes with increasing sizes evolved during the early Paleozoic, such as the titanic placoderm Dunkleosteus, which could grow 7 meters long.

The diversity of life forms did not increase greatly because of a series of mass extinctions that define widespread biostratigraphic units called biomeres.[116] After each extinction pulse, the continental shelf regions were repopulated by similar life forms that may have been evolving slowly elsewhere.[117] By the late Cambrian, the trilobites had reached their greatest diversity and dominated nearly all fossil assemblages.[118]:34

Paleozoic tectonics, paleogeography and climate


Pangaea was a supercontinent that existed from about 300 to 180 Ma. The outlines of the modern continents and other landmasses are indicated on this map.

At the end of the Proterozoic, the supercontinent Pannotia had broken apart in the smaller continents Laurentia, Baltica, Siberia and Gondwana.[119] During periods when continents move apart, more oceanic crust is formed by volcanic activity. Because young volcanic crust is relatively hotter and less dense than old oceanic crust, the ocean floors rise during such periods. This causes the sea level to rise. Therefore, in the first half of the Paleozoic, large areas of the continents were below sea level.
Early Paleozoic climates were warmer than today, but the end of the Ordovician saw a short ice age during which glaciers covered the south pole, where the huge continent Gondwana was situated.
Traces of glaciation from this period are only found on former Gondwana. During the Late Ordovician ice age, a few mass extinctions took place, in which many brachiopods, trilobites, Bryozoa and corals disappeared. These marine species could probably not contend with the decreasing temperature of the sea water.[120] After the extinctions new species evolved, more diverse and better adapted. They would fill the niches left by the extinct species.

The continents Laurentia and Baltica collided between 450 and 400 Ma, during the Caledonian Orogeny, to form Laurussia (also known as Euramerica).[121] Traces of the mountain belt this collision caused can be found in Scandinavia, Scotland, and the northern Appalachians. In the Devonian period (416–359 Ma)[6] Gondwana and Siberia began to move towards Laurussia. The collision of Siberia with Laurussia caused the Uralian Orogeny, the collision of Gondwana with Laurussia is called the Variscan or Hercynian Orogeny in Europe or the Alleghenian Orogeny in North America. The latter phase took place during the Carboniferous period (359–299 Ma)[6] and resulted in the formation of the last supercontinent, Pangaea.[44]

Colonization of land


Artist's conception of Devonian flora

Oxygen accumulation from photosynthesis resulted in the formation of an ozone layer that absorbed much of the Sun’s ultraviolet radiation, meaning unicellular organisms that reached land were less likely to die, and prokaryotes began to multiply and become better adapted to survival out of the water. Prokaryote lineages[122] had probably colonized the land as early as 2.6 Ga[123] even before the origin of the eukaryotes. For a long time, the land remained barren of multicellular organisms. The supercontinent Pannotia formed around 600 Ma and then broke apart a short 50 million years later.[124] Fish, the earliest vertebrates, evolved in the oceans around 530 Ma.[96]:354 A major extinction event occurred near the end of the Cambrian period,[125] which ended 488 Ma.[126]

Several hundred million years ago, plants (probably resembling algae) and fungi started growing at the edges of the water, and then out of it.[127]:138–140 The oldest fossils of land fungi and plants date to 480–460 Ma, though molecular evidence suggests the fungi may have colonized the land as early as 1000 Ma and the plants 700 Ma.[128] Initially remaining close to the water’s edge, mutations and variations resulted in further colonization of this new environment. The timing of the first animals to leave the oceans is not precisely known: the oldest clear evidence is of arthropods on land around 450 Ma,[129] perhaps thriving and becoming better adapted due to the vast food source provided by the terrestrial plants. There is also unconfirmed evidence that arthropods may have appeared on land as early as 530 Ma.[130]

Evolution of tetrapods


Tiktaalik, a fish with limb-like fins and a predecessor of tetrapods. Reconstruction from fossils about 375 million years old.

At the end of the Ordovician period, 443 Ma,[6] additional extinction events occurred, perhaps due to a concurrent ice age.[120] Around 380 to 375 Ma, the first tetrapods evolved from fish.[131] Fins evolved to become limbs that the first tetrapods used to lift their heads out of the water to breathe air. This would let them live in oxygen-poor water, or pursue small prey in shallow water.[131] They may have later ventured on land for brief periods. Eventually, some of them became so well adapted to terrestrial life that they spent their adult lives on land, although they hatched in the water and returned to lay their eggs. This was the origin of the amphibians. About 365 Ma, another period of extinction occurred, perhaps as a result of global cooling.[132] Plants evolved seeds, which dramatically accelerated their spread on land, around this time (by approximately 360 Ma).[133][134]

About 20 million years later (340 Ma[96]:293–296), the amniotic egg evolved, which could be laid on land, giving a survival advantage to tetrapod embryos. This resulted in the divergence of amniotes from amphibians. Another 30 million years (310 Ma[96]:254–256) saw the divergence of the synapsids (including mammals) from the sauropsids (including birds and reptiles). Other groups of organisms continued to evolve, and lines diverged—in fish, insects, bacteria, and so on—but less is known of the details.

Mesozoic Era


Dinosaurs were the dominant terrestrial vertebrates throughout most of the Mesozoic

The Mesozoic ("middle life") era lasted from 251 Ma to 66 Ma.[6] It is subdivided into the Triassic, Jurassic, and Cretaceous periods. The era began with the Permian–Triassic extinction event, the most severe extinction event in the fossil record; 95% of the species on Earth died out.[135] It ended with the Cretaceous–Paleogene extinction event that wiped out the dinosaurs. The Permian-Triassic event was possibly caused by some combination of the Siberian Traps volcanic event, an asteroid impact, methane hydrate gasification, sea level fluctuations, and a major anoxic event. Either the proposed Wilkes Land crater[136] in Antarctica or Bedout structure off the northwest coast of Australia may indicate an impact connection with the Permian-Triassic extinction. But it remains uncertain whether either these or other proposed Permian-Triassic boundary craters are either real impact craters or even contemporaneous with the Permian-Triassic extinction event. Life persevered, and around 230 Ma, dinosaurs split off from their reptilian ancestors.[137] The Triassic–Jurassic extinction event at 200 Ma spared many of the dinosaurs,[6][138] and they soon became dominant among the vertebrates. Though some of the mammalian lines began to separate during this period, existing mammals were probably small animals resembling shrews.[96]:169

By 180 Ma, Pangaea broke up into Laurasia and Gondwana. The boundary between avian and non-avian dinosaurs is not clear, but Archaeopteryx, traditionally considered one of the first birds, lived around 150 Ma.[139] The earliest evidence for the angiosperms evolving flowers is during the Cretaceous period, some 20 million years later (132 Ma).[140] In 66 Ma, a 10-kilometre (6.2 mi) asteroid struck Earth just off the Yucatán Peninsula - somewhere in the south western tip of then Laurasia - where the Chicxulub crater is today. This ejected vast quantities of particulate matter and vapor into the air that occluded sunlight, inhibiting photosynthesis. Most large animals, including the non-avian dinosaurs, became extinct,[141] marking the end of the Cretaceous period and Mesozoic era.

Cenozoic Era

The Cenozoic era began at 66 Ma,[6] and is subdivided into the Paleogene, Neogene, and Quaternary periods. Mammals and birds were able to survive the Cretaceous–Paleogene extinction event that killed off the dinosaurs and many other forms of life, and this is the era during which they diversified into their modern forms.

Diversification of mammals

Mammals have existed since the late Triassic, but prior to the Cretaceous–Paleogene extinction event they remained small. During the Cenozoic, mammals rapidly diversified to fill some of the niches that the dinosaurs and other extinct animals had left behind, branching out into many of the modern orders. With many marine reptiles extinct, some mammals began living in the oceans and became cetaceans. Others became felids and canids, swift and agile land predators. The drier global climate of the Cenozoic led to the expansion of grasslands and the evolution of grazing and hoofed mammals such as equids and bovids. Some arboreal mammals became the primates, of which one lineage would lead to modern humans.

Human evolution


A reconstruction of human history based on fossil data.[142]

A small African ape living around 6 Ma was the last animal whose descendants would include both modern humans and their closest relatives, the chimpanzees.[96]:100–101 Only two branches of its family tree have surviving descendants. Very soon after the split, for reasons that are still unclear, apes in one branch developed the ability to walk upright.[96]:95–99 Brain size increased rapidly, and by 2 Ma, the first animals classified in the genus Homo had appeared.[127]:300 Of course, the line between different species or even genera is somewhat arbitrary as organisms continuously change over generations. Around the same time, the other branch split into the ancestors of the common chimpanzee and the ancestors of the bonobo as evolution continued simultaneously in all life forms.[96]:100–101

The ability to control fire probably began in Homo erectus (or Homo ergaster), probably at least 790,000 years ago[143] but perhaps as early as 1.5 Ma.[96]:67 The use and discovery of controlled fire may even predate Homo erectus. Fire was possibly used by the early Lower Paleolithic (Oldowan) hominid Homo habilis or strong australopithecines such as Paranthropus.[144]

It is more difficult to establish the origin of language; it is unclear whether Homo erectus could speak or if that capability had not begun until Homo sapiens.[96]:67 As brain size increased, babies were born earlier, before their heads grew too large to pass through the pelvis. As a result, they exhibited more plasticity, and thus possessed an increased capacity to learn and required a longer period of dependence. Social skills became more complex, language became more sophisticated, and tools became more elaborate. This contributed to further cooperation and intellectual development.[145]:7 Modern humans (Homo sapiens) are believed to have originated around 200,000 years ago or earlier in Africa; the oldest fossils date back to around 160,000 years ago.[146]

The first humans to show signs of spirituality are the Neanderthals (usually classified as a separate species with no surviving descendants); they buried their dead, often with no sign of food or tools.[147]:17 However, evidence of more sophisticated beliefs, such as the early Cro-Magnon cave paintings (probably with magical or religious significance)[147]:17–19 did not appear until 32,000 years ago.[148] Cro-Magnons also left behind stone figurines such as Venus of Willendorf, probably also signifying religious belief.[147]:17–19 By 11,000 years ago, Homo sapiens had reached the southern tip of South America, the last of the uninhabited continents (except for Antarctica, which remained undiscovered until 1820 AD).[149] Tool use and communication continued to improve, and interpersonal relationships became more intricate.

Civilization


Vitruvian Man by Leonardo da Vinci epitomizes the advances in art and science seen during the Renaissance.

Throughout more than 90% of its history, Homo sapiens lived in small bands as nomadic hunter-gatherers.[145]:8 As language became more complex, the ability to remember and communicate information resulted in a new replicator: the meme.[150] Ideas could be exchanged quickly and passed down the generations. Cultural evolution quickly outpaced biological evolution, and history proper began. Between 8500 and 7000 BC, humans in the Fertile Crescent in Middle East began the systematic husbandry of plants and animals: agriculture.[151] This spread to neighboring regions, and developed independently elsewhere, until most Homo sapiens lived sedentary lives in permanent settlements as farmers. Not all societies abandoned nomadism, especially those in isolated areas of the globe poor in domesticable plant species, such as Australia.[152] However, among those civilizations that did adopt agriculture, the relative stability and increased productivity provided by farming allowed the population to expand.

Agriculture had a major impact; humans began to affect the environment as never before. Surplus food allowed a priestly or governing class to arise, followed by increasing division of labor. This led to Earth’s first civilization at Sumer in the Middle East, between 4000 and 3000 BC.[145]:15 Additional civilizations quickly arose in ancient Egypt, at the Indus River valley and in China. The invention of writing enabled complex societies to arise: record-keeping and libraries served as a storehouse of knowledge and increased the cultural transmission of information. Humans no longer had to spend all their time working for survival—curiosity and education drove the pursuit of knowledge and wisdom.

Various disciplines, including science (in a primitive form), arose. New civilizations sprang up, traded with one another, and fought for territory and resources. Empires soon began to develop. By around 500 BC, there were advanced civilizations in the Middle East, Iran, India, China, and Greece, at times expanding, at times entering into decline.[145]:3 In 221 BC, China became a single polity that would grow to spread its culture throughout eastern Asia, and it has remained the most populous nation in the world. The fundamentals of the Western world were largely shaped by the ancient Greco-Roman culture. The Roman Empire was Christianized by Emperor Constantine in the early fourth century and declined by the end of the fifth. Beginning with the seventh century, Christianization of Europe began. In 610, Islam was founded and quickly became the dominant religion in western Asia. In 1054 AD the Great Schism between the Roman Catholic Church and the Eastern Orthodox Church led to the prominent cultural differences between Western and Eastern Europe.

In the fourteenth century, the Renaissance began in Italy with advances in religion, art, and science.[145]:317–319 At that time the Christian Church as a political entity lost much of its power. In 1492, Christopher Columbus reached the Americas, initiating great changes to the new world. European civilization began to change beginning in 1500, leading to the scientific and industrial revolutions. That continent began to exert political and cultural dominance over human societies around the planet, a time known as the Colonial era (also see Age of Discovery).[145]:295–299 In the eighteenth century a cultural movement known as the Age of Enlightenment further shaped the mentality of Europe and contributed to its secularization. From 1914 to 1918 and 1939 to 1945, nations around the world were embroiled in world wars. Established following World War I, the League of Nations was a first step in establishing international institutions to settle disputes peacefully. After failing to prevent World War II, mankind's bloodiest conflict, it was replaced by the United Nations. After the war, many new states were formed, declaring or being granted independence in a period of decolonization. The United States and Soviet Union became the world's dominant superpowers for a time, and they held an often-violent rivalry known as the Cold War until the dissolution of the latter. In 1992, several European nations joined in the European Union. As transportation and communication improved, the economies and political affairs of nations around the world have become increasingly intertwined. This globalization has often produced both conflict and cooperation.

Recent events


Astronaut Bruce McCandless II outside of the space shuttle Challenger in 1984

Change has continued at a rapid pace from the mid-1940s to today. Technological developments include nuclear weapons, computers, genetic engineering, and nanotechnology. Economic globalization spurred by advances in communication and transportation technology has influenced everyday life in many parts of the world. Cultural and institutional forms such as democracy, capitalism, and environmentalism have increased influence. Major concerns and problems such as disease, war, poverty, violent radicalism, and recently, human-caused climate change have risen as the world population increases.

In 1957, the Soviet Union launched the first artificial satellite into orbit and, soon afterward, Yuri Gagarin became the first human in space. Neil Armstrong, an American, was the first to set foot on another astronomical object, the Moon. Unmanned probes have been sent to all the known planets in the solar system, with some (such as Voyager) having left the solar system. The Soviet Union and the United States were the earliest leaders in space exploration in the 20th century. Five space agencies, representing over fifteen countries,[153] have worked together to build the International Space Station. Aboard it, there has been a continuous human presence in space since 2000.[154] The World Wide Web began in the 1990s, and since then has become an indispensable source of information in the developed world.

Rare Earth hypothesis

Rare Earth hypothesis

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
The Earth seen from Apollo 17.jpg

In planetary astronomy and astrobiology, the Rare Earth hypothesis argues that the emergence of complex multicellular life on Earth (and, subsequently, intelligence) required an improbable combination of astrophysical and geological events and circumstances. The hypothesis argues that complex extraterrestrial life is a very improbable phenomenon and likely to be extremely rare. The term "Rare Earth" originates from Rare Earth: Why Complex Life Is Uncommon in the Universe (2000), a book by Peter Ward, a geologist and paleontologist, and Donald E. Brownlee, an astronomer and astrobiologist.

An alternative view point was argued by Carl Sagan and Frank Drake, among others. It holds that Earth is a typical rocky planet in a typical planetary system, located in a non-exceptional region of a common barred-spiral galaxy. Given the principle of mediocrity (also called the Copernican principle), it is probable that the universe teems with complex life. Ward and Brownlee argue to the contrary: that planets, planetary systems, and galactic regions that are as friendly to complex life as are the Earth, the Solar System, and our region of the Milky Way are very rare.

On 4 November 2013, astronomers reported, based on Kepler space mission data, that there could be as many as 40 billion Earth-sized planets orbiting in the habitable zones of sun-like stars and red dwarf stars within the Milky Way Galaxy.[1][2] 11 billion of these estimated planets may be orbiting sun-like stars.[3] The nearest such planet may be 12 light-years away, according to the scientists.[1][2] With the closest found at 16 light-years (Gliese 832 c). Nonetheless, by concluding that complex life is uncommon, the Rare Earth hypothesis is a possible solution to the Fermi paradox: "If extraterrestrial aliens are common, why aren't they obvious?"[4]

Rare Earth's requirements for complex life

The Rare Earth hypothesis argues that the emergence of complex life requires a host of fortuitous circumstances. A number of such circumstances are set out below under the following headings: galactic habitable zone, a central star and planetary system having the requisite character, the circumstellar habitable zone, a right sized terrestrial planet, the advantage of a gas giant guardian and large satellite, conditions needed to ensure the planet has a magnetosphere and plate tectonics, the chemistry of the lithosphere, atmosphere, and oceans, the role of "evolutionary pumps" such as massive glaciation and rare bolide impacts, and whatever led to the still mysterious Cambrian explosion of animal phyla. The emergence of intelligent life may have required yet other rare events.
In order for a small rocky planet to support complex life, Ward and Brownlee argue, the values of several variables must fall within narrow ranges. The universe is so vast that it could contain many Earth-like planets. But if such planets exist, they are likely to be separated from each other by many thousands of light years. Such distances may preclude communication among any intelligent species evolving on such planets, which would solve the Fermi paradox.

The right location in the right kind of galaxy

The dense centre of galaxies such as NGC 7331 (often referred to as a "twin" of the Milky Way[5]) have high levels of radiation which are dangerous to complex life

Rare Earth suggests that much of the known universe, including large parts of our galaxy, cannot support complex life; Ward and Brownlee refer to such regions as "dead zones." Those parts of a galaxy where complex life is possible make up the galactic habitable zone. This zone is primarily a function of distance from the galactic center. As that distance increases:
  1. Star metallicity declines. Metals (which in astronomy means all elements other than hydrogen and helium) are necessary to the formation of terrestrial planets.
  2. The X-ray and gamma ray radiation from the black hole at the galactic center, and from nearby neutron stars, becomes less intense. Radiation of this nature is considered dangerous to complex life, hence the Rare Earth hypothesis predicts that the early universe, and galactic regions where stellar density is high and supernovae are common, will be unfit for the development of complex life.[6]
  3. Gravitational perturbation of planets and planetesimals by nearby stars becomes less likely as the density of stars decreases. Hence the further a planet lies from the galactic center or a spiral arm, the less likely it is to be struck by a large bolide. A sufficiently large impact may extinguish all complex life on a planet.
Item #1 rules out the outer reaches of a galaxy; #2 and #3 rule out galactic inner regions, globular clusters,[citation needed] and the spiral arms of spiral galaxies.[citation needed] These "arms" are regions of a galaxy characterized by a higher rate of star formation, moving very slowly through the galaxy in a wave-like manner. As one moves from the center of a galaxy to its furthest extremity, the ability to support life rises then falls. Hence the galactic habitable zone may be ring-shaped, sandwiched between its uninhabitable center and outer reaches.

While a planetary system may enjoy a location favorable to complex life, it must also maintain that location for a span of time sufficiently long for complex life to evolve. Hence a central star with a galactic orbit that steers clear of galactic regions where radiation levels are high, such as the galactic center and the spiral arms, would appear most favourable. If the central star's galactic orbit is eccentric (elliptic or hyperbolic), it will pass through some spiral arms, but if the orbit is a near perfect circle and the orbital velocity equals the "rotational" velocity of the spiral arms, the star will drift into a spiral arm region only gradually—if at all. Therefore Rare Earth proponents conclude that a life-bearing star must have a galactic orbit that is nearly circular about the center of its galaxy. The required synchronization of the orbital velocity of a central star with the wave velocity of the spiral arms can occur only within a fairly narrow range of distances from the galactic center. This region is termed the "galactic habitable zone". Lineweaver et al.[7] calculate that the galactic habitable zone is a ring 7 to 9 kiloparsecs in diameter, that includes no more than 10% of the stars in the Milky Way.[8] Based on conservative estimates of the total number of stars in the galaxy, this could represent something like 20 to 40 billion stars. Gonzalez, et al.[9] would halve these numbers; he estimates that at most 5% of stars in the Milky Way fall in the galactic habitable zone.

The orbit of the Sun around the center of the Milky Way is indeed almost perfectly circular, with a period of 226 Ma (1 Ma = 1 million years), one closely matching the rotational period of the galaxy. While the Rare Earth hypothesis predicts that the Sun should rarely, if ever, have passed through a spiral arm since its formation, astronomer Karen Masters has calculated that the orbit of the Sun takes it through a major spiral arm approximately every 100 million years.[10] Some researchers have suggested that several mass extinctions do correspond with previous crossings of the spiral arms.[11]
Andromeda and the Milky Way have a similar mass, but whereas Andromeda is a typical spiral galaxy the Milky Way is unusually quiet and dim. It appears to have suffered fewer collisions with other galaxies over the last 10 billion years, and its peaceful history may have made it more hospitable to complex life than galaxies which have suffered more collisions, and consequently more supernovae and other disturbances.[12] The level of activity of the black hole at the centre of the Milky Way may also be important: too much or too little and the conditions for life may be even rarer. The Milky Way black hole appears to be just right.[13]

Orbiting at the right distance from the right type of star

The terrestrial example suggests that complex life requires water in the liquid state, and a central star's planet must therefore be at an appropriate distance. This is the core of the notion of the habitable zone or Goldilocks Principle.[14] The habitable zone forms a ring around the central star. If a planet orbits its sun too closely or too far away, the surface temperature is incompatible with water being liquid.

The habitable zone varies with the type and age of the central star. The habitable zone for a main sequence star very gradually moves out over time until the star becomes a white dwarf, at which time the habitable zone vanishes. The habitable zone is closely connected to the greenhouse warming afforded by atmospheric water vapor (H
2
O
), carbon dioxide (CO
2
), and/or other greenhouse gases. Even though the Earth's atmosphere contains a water vapor concentration from 0% (in arid regions) to 4% (in rain forest and ocean regions) and -as of June 2013- only 400 parts per million of CO
2
, these small amounts suffice to raise the average surface temperature of the Earth by about 40 °C from what it would otherwise be,[15] with the dominant contribution being due to water vapor, which together with clouds makes up between 66% and 85% of Earth's greenhouse effect, with CO
2
contributing between 9% and 26% of the effect.[16]

Rocky planets must orbit within the habitable zone for life to form. Although the habitable zone of such hot stars as Sirius or Vega is wide:
  1. Rocky planets that form too close to the star to lie within the habitable zone cannot sustain life; however, life could arise on a moon of a gas giant. Hot stars also emit much more ultraviolet radiation that ionizes any planetary atmosphere.
  2. Hot stars, as mentioned above, may become red giants before advanced life evolves on their planets.
These considerations rule out the massive and powerful stars of type F6 to O as homes to evolved metazoan life.

Small red dwarf stars conversely have small habitable zones wherein planets are in tidal lock—one side always faces the star and becomes very hot and the other always faces away and becomes very cold—and are also at increased risk of solar flares (see Aurelia) that would tend to ionize the atmosphere and be otherwise inimical to complex life. Rare Earth proponents argue that life therefore cannot arise in such systems and that only central stars that range from F7 to K1 stars are hospitable. Such stars are rare: G type stars such as the Sun (between the hotter F and cooler K) comprise only 9%[17] of the hydrogen-burning stars in the Milky Way. However, some exobiologists have suggested that stars outside this range may give rise to life under the right circumstances; this possibility is a central point of contention to the theory because these late-K and M category stars make up about 82% of all hydrogen-burning stars.[17]
According to Rare Earth, globular clusters are unlikely to support life.

Such aged stars as red giants and white dwarfs are also unlikely to support life. Red giants are common in globular clusters and elliptical galaxies. White dwarfs are mostly dying stars that have already completed their red giant phase. Stars that become red giants expand into or overheat the habitable zones of their youth and middle age (though theoretically planets at a much greater distance may become habitable).

An energy output that varies with the lifetime of the star will very likely prevent life (e.g., as Cepheid variables). A sudden decrease, even if brief, may freeze the water of orbiting planets, and a significant increase may evaporate them and cause a greenhouse effect that may prevent the oceans from reforming.

Life without complex chemistry is unknown. Such chemistry requires metals, namely elements other than hydrogen or helium and thereby suggests that a planetary system rich in metals is a necessity for life. The only known mechanism for creating and dispersing metals is a supernova explosion. The absorption spectrum of a star reveals the presence of metals within, and studies of stellar spectra reveal that many, perhaps most, stars are poor in metals. Low metallicity characterizes the early universe: globular clusters and other stars that formed when the universe was young, stars in most galaxies other than large spirals, and stars in the outer regions of all galaxies. Metal-rich central stars capable of supporting complex life are therefore believed to be most common in the quiet suburbs of the larger spiral galaxies—where radiation also happens to be weak.[18]

With the right arrangement of planets

According to Rare Earth, without the presence of the massive gas giant Jupiter (fifth planet from the Sun and the largest) complex life on Earth would not have arisen.

Rare Earth proponents argue that a planetary system capable of sustaining complex life must be structured more or less like the Solar System, with small and rocky inner planets and outer gas giants.[19]

In addition, Rare Earth proponents have argued that the arrangement of the Solar System is not only rare but optimal as the large mass and gravitational attraction of the gas giants provide protection for the inner rocky planets from Small Solar System body impacts and asteroid bombardment.

A continuously stable orbit

Rare Earth argues that a gas giant must not be too close to a body upon which life is developing, unless that body is one of its moons. Close placement of gas giant(s) could disrupt the orbit of a potential life-bearing planet, either directly or by drifting into the habitable zone.

Newtonian dynamics can produce chaotic planetary orbits, especially in a system having large planets at high orbital eccentricity.[20]

The need for stable orbits rules out stars with systems of planets that contain large planets with orbits close to the host star (called "hot Jupiters"). It is believed that hot Jupiters formed much further from their parent stars than they are now, and have migrated inwards to their current orbits. In the process, they would have catastrophically disrupted the orbits of any planets in the habitable zone.[21]

A terrestrial planet of the right size

It is argued that life requires terrestrial planets like Earth and as gas giants lack such a surface, that complex life cannot arise there.[22]

A planet that is too small cannot hold much of an atmosphere. Hence the surface temperature becomes more variable and the average temperature drops. Substantial and long-lasting oceans become impossible. A small planet will also tend to have a rough surface, with large mountains and deep canyons. The core will cool faster, and plate tectonics will either not last as long as they would on a larger planet or may not occur at all.[23]
Great American Interchange on Earth, around ~ 3.5 to 3 Ma

With plate tectonics

Rare Earth proponents argue that plate tectonics is essential for the emergence and sustenance of complex life.[24] Ward & Brownlee assert that biodiversity, global temperature regulation, carbon cycle and the magnetic field of the Earth that make it habitable for complex terrestrial life all depend on plate tectonics.[25]

Ward & Brownlee contend that the lack of mountain chains elsewhere in the Solar System is direct evidence that Earth is the only body with plate tectonics and as such the only body capable of supporting life.[26]

Plate tectonics is dependent on chemical composition and a long-lasting source of heat in the form of radioactive decay occurring deep in the planet's interior. Continents must also be made up of less dense felsic rocks that "float" on underlying denser mafic rock. Taylor[27] emphasizes that subduction zones (an essential part of plate tectonics) require the lubricating action of ample water; on Earth, such zones exist only at the bottom of oceans.

Ward & Brownlee and others such as Tilman Spohn of the German Space Research Centre Institute of Planetary Research[28] argue that plate tectonics provides a means of biochemical cycling which promotes complex life on Earth and that water is required to lubricate planetary plates.

Plate tectonics and as a result continental drift and the creation of separate land masses would create diversified ecosystems which is thought to have promoted the diversification of species, and that diversity is one of the strongest defenses against extinction.[29]

An example of species diversification and later competition on Earth's continents is the Great American Interchange. This was the result of the tectonically induced connection between North & Middle America with the South American continent, at around 3.5 to 3 Ma. The previously undisturbed fauna of South America could evolve in their own way for about 30 million years, since Antarctica separated. Many species were subsequently wiped out in mainly South America by competing Northern American animals.

A large moon

The Moon is unusual because the other rocky planets in the Solar System either have no satellites (Mercury and Venus), or have tiny satellites that are probably captured asteroids (Mars).

The giant impact theory hypothesizes that the Moon resulted from the impact of a Mars-sized body, Theia, with the very young Earth. This giant impact also gave the Earth its axis tilt and velocity of rotation.[27] Rapid rotation reduces the daily variation in temperature and makes photosynthesis viable.[citation needed] The Rare Earth hypothesis further argues that the axis tilt cannot be too large or too small (relative to the orbital plane). A planet with a large tilt will experience extreme seasonal variations in climate, unfriendly to complex life. A planet with little or no tilt will lack the stimulus to evolution that climate variation provides.[citation needed] In this view, the Earth's tilt is "just right". The gravity of a large satellite also stabilizes the planet's tilt; without this effect the variation in tilt would be chaotic, probably making complex life forms on land impossible.[30]

If the Earth had no Moon, the ocean tides resulting solely from the Sun's gravity would be only half that of the lunar tides. A large satellite gives rise to tidal pools, which may be essential for the formation of complex life, though this is far from certain.[31]

A large satellite also increases the likelihood of plate tectonics through the effect of tidal forces on the planet's crust. The impact that formed the Moon may also have initiated plate tectonics, without which the continental crust would cover the entire planet, leaving no room for oceanic crust. It is possible that the large scale mantle convection needed to drive plate tectonics could not have emerged in the absence of crustal inhomogeneity.

If a giant impact is the only way for a rocky inner planet to acquire a large satellite, any planet in the circumstellar habitable zone will need to form as a double planet in order that there be an impacting object sufficiently massive to give rise in due course to a large satellite. An impacting object of this nature is not necessarily improbable.

An evolutionary trigger for complex life

Regardless of whether planets with similar physical attributes to the Earth are rare or not, some argue that life usually remains simple bacteria. Biochemist Nick Lane argues that simple cells (prokaryotes) emerged soon after Earth's formation, but almost half the planet's life had passed before they evolved into complex ones (eukaryotes) and because all complex life has a common origin, this event can only have happened once. In his view, prokaryotes lack the cellular architecture to evolve into eukaryotes because a bacterium expanded up to eukaryotic proportions would have tens of thousands of times less energy available; two billion years ago, one simple cell incorporated itself into another, multiplied, and evolved into mitochondria that supplied the vast increase in available energy that enabled the evolution of complex life. If this incorporation occurred only once in four billion years or is otherwise unlikely, then life on most planets remains simple.[32] An alternative view that mitochondria evolution was environment triggered, and that mitochondria containing organisms appear very soon after first traces of oxygen appear in Earth`s atmosphere.[33]

The right time in evolution

Paleogeography of the Earth (~260 Ma)
The Siberian Traps, exterminating 95% of Earth's Permian life formed in the green lowlands of paleo-Siberia, farthest north on the map
 
Timeline of evolution; writing exists only since 0.000218 % back in Earths history

While life on Earth is regarded to have spawned relatively early in the planet's history, the evolution to complex organs took around 800 million years[34] Civilizations on Earth have existed for ~10,000 years and radio communication with space is not older than 80 years. Relative to the age of our solar system (~4.57 Ga) this is a tiny age span, an age span where extreme climatic variations, super volcanoes or large meteorite impacts were absent. The fragility of intelligent or evolving to intelligent life to factors that have nearly all of the living higher species on the planet is very big. The Permian-Triassic mass extinction, attributed to have been caused by widespread and continuous volcanic eruptions in an area the size of Western Europe; the Siberian Traps, around 251.2 Ma ago, had 95% of the species extinct. This event happened in a time when the Earths paleocontinents were joined in Pangaea.

More complex life on Earth started some 542 million years ago with the Cambrian Explosion. In the time span since this period the Earth has been hit by a number of larger meteorite impacts of which only one is considered to have caused a mass extinction; the Chicxulub impact at the Cretaceous–Paleogene boundary (~65.5 Ma) on the Yucatán peninsula in Mexico.

If intelligent extraterrestrial civilizations did exist and with such an intelligence level that they could make contact with distant Earth, they would have to live in the same time span in evolution. The nearest Earth-like planets are around 11.9 light years away; probable planets as Tau Ceti e and f around the star Tau Ceti in the constellation of Cetus, a star considered to be 5.8 Ga; 1.23 billion years older than the Sun.

Under the assumption that both the explosion of life and the development of civilization were to be relative to the planet's age, they would have spawned 723 Ma and 12.691 ka, respectively. The time between the life explosion if that had existed on an exoplanet and the dawn of civilizations is thus very large and the time between civilization and radio signals evenly so.

The risk of intelligent-life destruction is not a Drake equation factor; in the 33 million years since the Eocene-Oligocene extinction event there have been no major mass extinctions.

The chance of bigger impacts in the time span of evolution to intelligent life depends on the amount of shielding by larger bodies, such as our system's Jupiter or the Moon. The chance of a large impact and resulting mass extinction happening in a multi-planetary "protected" system is, however, impossible to predict.

Rare Earth equation

The following discussion is adapted from Cramer.[35] The Rare Earth equation is Ward and Brownlee's riposte to the Drake equation. It calculates N, the number of Earth-like planets in the Milky Way having complex life forms, as:
N = N^* \cdot n_e \cdot f_g \cdot f_p \cdot f_{pm} \cdot f_i \cdot f_c \cdot f_l \cdot f_m \cdot f_j \cdot f_{me}[36]
where:
  • N* is the number of stars in the Milky Way. This number is not well-estimated, because the Milky Way's mass is not well estimated. Moreover, there is little information about the number of very small stars. N* is at least 100 billion, and may be as high as 500 billion, if there are many low visibility stars.
  • n_e is the average number of planets in a star's habitable zone. This zone is fairly narrow, because constrained by the requirement that the average planetary temperature be consistent with water remaining liquid throughout the time required for complex life to evolve. Thus n_e = 1 is a likely upper bound.
We assume N^* \cdot n_e = 5\cdot10^{11}. The Rare Earth hypothesis can then be viewed as asserting that the product of the other nine Rare Earth equation factors listed below, which are all fractions, is no greater than 10−10 and could plausibly be as small as 10−12. In the latter case, N could be as small as 0 or 1. Ward and Brownlee do not actually calculate the value of N, because the numerical values of quite a few of the factors below can only be conjectured. They cannot be estimated simply because we have but one data point: the Earth, a rocky planet orbiting a G2 star in a quiet suburb of a large barred spiral galaxy, and the home of the only intelligent species we know, namely ourselves.
  • f_g is the fraction of stars in the galactic habitable zone (Ward, Brownlee, and Gonzalez estimate this factor as 0.1[9]).
  • f_p is the fraction of stars in the Milky Way with planets.
  • f_{pm} is the fraction of planets that are rocky ("metallic") rather than gaseous.
  • f_i is the fraction of habitable planets where microbial life arises. Ward and Brownlee believe this fraction is unlikely to be small.
  • f_c is the fraction of planets where complex life evolves. For 80% of the time since microbial life first appeared on the Earth, there was only bacterial life. Hence Ward and Brownlee argue that this fraction may be very small.
  • f_l is the fraction of the total lifespan of a planet during which complex life is present. Complex life cannot endure indefinitely, because the energy put out by the sort of star that allows complex life to emerge gradually rises, and the central star eventually becomes a red giant, engulfing all planets in the planetary habitable zone. Also, given enough time, a catastrophic extinction of all complex life becomes ever more likely.
  • f_m is the fraction of habitable planets with a large moon. If the giant impact theory of the Moon's origin is correct, this fraction is small.
  • f_j is the fraction of planetary systems with large Jovian planets. This fraction could be large.
  • f_{me} is the fraction of planets with a sufficiently low number of extinction events. Ward and Brownlee argue that the low number of such events the Earth has experienced since the Cambrian explosion may be unusual, in which case this fraction would be small.
The Rare Earth equation, unlike the Drake equation, does not factor the probability that complex life evolves into intelligent life that discovers technology (Ward and Brownlee are not evolutionary biologists). Barrow and Tipler[37] review the consensus among such biologists that the evolutionary path from primitive Cambrian chordates, e.g. Pikaia to Homo sapiens, was a highly improbable event. For example, the large brains of humans have marked adaptive disadvantages, requiring as they do an expensive metabolism, a long gestation period, and a childhood lasting more than 25% of the average total life span. Other improbable features of humans include:
  • Being the only extant bipedal land (non-avian) vertebrate.[dubious ] Combined with an unusual eye–hand coordination, this permits dextrous manipulations of the physical environment with the hands;
  • A vocal apparatus far more expressive than that of any other mammal, enabling speech. Speech makes it possible for humans to interact cooperatively, to share knowledge, and to acquire a culture;
  • The capability of formulating abstractions to a degree permitting the invention of mathematics, and the discovery of science and technology. Only recently did humans acquire anything like their current scientific and technological sophistication.

Advocates

Authors that advocate the Rare Earth hypothesis:
  • Stuart Ross Taylor,[27] a specialist on the solar system, firmly believes in the hypothesis, but its truth is not central to his purpose, which is to write a short introductory book on the solar system and its formation. Taylor concludes that the solar system is probably very unusual, because it resulted from so many chance factors and events.
  • Stephen Webb,[4] a physicist, mainly presents and rejects candidate solutions for the Fermi paradox. The Rare Earth hypothesis emerges as one of the few solutions left standing by the end of the book.
  • Simon Conway Morris, a paleontologist, endorses the Rare Earth hypothesis in chapter 5 of his Life's Solution: Inevitable Humans in a Lonely Universe,[38] and cites Ward and Brownlee's book with approval.[39] His main purpose, however, is to argue that if a planet does harbour life, intelligent beings something like humans are inevitable.[40]
  • John D. Barrow and Frank J. Tipler (1986. 3.2, 8.7, 9), cosmologists, vigorously defend the hypothesis that humans are likely to be the only intelligent life in the Milky Way, and perhaps the entire universe. But this hypothesis is not central to their book The Anthropic Cosmological Principle, a very thorough study of the anthropic principle, and of how the laws of physics are peculiarly suited to enable the emergence of complexity in nature.
  • Ray Kurzweil, a computer pioneer and self-proclaimed Singularitarian, argues in The Singularity Is Near that the coming Singularity requires that Earth be the first planet on which sentient, technology-using life evolved. Although other Earth-like planets could exist, Earth must be the most evolutionarily advanced, because otherwise we would have seen evidence that another culture had experienced the Singularity and expanded to harness the full computational capacity of the physical universe.
  • John Gribbin, a prolific science writer, defends the hypothesis in a book devoted to it called Alone in the Universe: Why our planet is unique.[41]
  • Guillermo Gonzalez, astrophysicist who coined the term Galactic Habitable Zone uses the hypothesis in his book The Privileged Planet to promote the concept of intelligent design[42]
  • Michael H. Hart, astrophysicist who proposed a very narrow habitable zone based on climate studies edited the influential book "Extraterrestrials: Where are They" and authored "Atmospheric Evolution, the Drake Equation and DNA: Sparse Life in an Infinite Universe"[43]

Criticism

Cases against the Rare Earth Hypothesis take various forms.

Exoplanets with Earth-like properties are being discovered

An increasing number of extrasolar planet discoveries are being made with 3,548 candidate planets now known as of August 2013. These discoveries and such tools as the Kepler space telescope aid estimating the frequency of Earth-like planets. Because life has not been found on other planets, and because the Copernican principle states that life should be common on these other Earth-like planets if the Copernican principle is true, the more Earth-like planets that are found without life increases the strength of the Rare Earth Hypothesis. In 2013 a study that was published in the journal
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences calculated that about "one in five" of all sun-like stars are expected to have earthlike planets "within the habitable zones of their stars"; 8.8 billion of them therefore exist in the Milky Way galaxy alone.[44]

NASA and the SETI Institute now categorise Earth like planets with an Earth Similarity Index (ESI) of mass, radius and temperature.[45][46]

Current technology limits the testing of important Rare Earth Criteria: surface water, tectonic plates, or a large moon, are currently undetectable, and few of the 146 documented exasolar systems have been found to resemble ours because Earth-sized planets are difficult to detect. However, a large moon and planetary arrangements that resemble that of the solar system are not necessarily important for the development of life in a system (see other reasons below).

Oxygen is not a requirement for multicellular life

Multicellular life, e.g., anaerobic metazoa, can exist without oxygen (despite Ward & Brownlee's now disproven contrary assertion [47]). Three multicellular species, including Spinoloricus nov. sp. discovered in the hypersaline anoxic L'Atalante basin at the bottom of the Mediterranean Sea in 2010, appear to metabolise with hydrogen instead of oxygen, lacking mitochondria and instead using hydrogenosomes.[48][49]

Anthropic reasoning

The hypothesis concludes, more or less, that complex life is rare because it can evolve only on the surface of an Earth-like planet or on a suitable satellite of a planet. Some biologists, such as Jack Cohen, believe this assumption too restrictive and unimaginative; they see it as a form of circular reasoning.

According to David Darling, the Rare Earth hypothesis is neither hypothesis nor prediction, but merely a description of how life arose on Earth.[50] In his view Ward and Brownlee have done nothing more than select the factors that best suit their case.
What matters is not whether there's anything unusual about the Earth; there's going to be something idiosyncratic about every planet in space. What matters is whether any of Earth's circumstances are not only unusual but also essential for complex life. So far we've seen nothing to suggest there is.[51]
Critics also point to a link between the Rare Earth Hypothesis and the creationist ideas of intelligent design.[52]

Alternative habitats for complex Life

Complex life may exist elsewhere in environments similar to those found around black smokers on Earth.

Rare Earth proponents argue that simple life may be common, though complex life requires specific environmental conditions to arise. Some argue that complex life may exist in such diverse habitats as those beyond the Solar System's habitable zone and on non-planetary bodies where both water and an active energy source may exist. For example, sub-surface water habitats that are warmed by tidal heating may exist on Europa and Enceladus.[53][54] Some theories on the origin of life on Earth indicate that complex life evolved in such environments before arising on the surface.

Uncertainty over Jupiter's role

The assertion that Jupiter's mass guards the terrestrial planets from impacts has been challenged.
Since Rare Earth, the 2005 Nice model and 2007 Nice 2 model have provided computer modelling of planetary formation. A study by Horner & Jones (2008) using computer simulation found that while the total effect on all orbital bodies within the Solar System is unclear, Jupiter has caused more impacts on Earth than it has prevented.[55]

Necessity of tectonics

Ward & Brownlee argue that tectonics is necessary to support biogeochemical cycles required for intelligent life and that such geological features are unique to Earth and that such processes do not occur elsewhere citing the lack of any observable orogenic evidence. However recent evidence points to similar activity either having occurred or continuing to occur on other terrestrial objects including Mars,[56] Venus,[57] Titan,[58][59] Europa,[60] Enceladus[61] and the Moon.[59] Several more natural satellites exhibit similar processes though that may have different mechanisms.

Many Rare Earth proponents argue that the Earth's plate tectonics would probably not exist if not for the tidal forces of the moon. However the hypothesis that the moon's tidal influence initiated Earth's plate tectonics remains unproven. Additionally, strong evidence suggests that plate tectonics existed on Mars, which does not currently have a large companion.[62]

NASA scientists Hartman and McKay argue that plate tectonics may in fact slow the rise of oxygenation (and thus stymie complex life rather than promote it).[63] Computer modelling by Tilman Spohn in 2014 found that plate tectonics on Earth may have arisen from the effects of complex life's emergence, rather than the other way around as the Rare Earth might suggest. The action of lichens on rock may have contributed to the formation of subduction zones in the presence of water.[64]

Giant impacts may not be rare nor necessary for rotational speed

Recent work by Edward Belbruno and J. Richard Gott of Princeton University suggests that giant impacts such as those that formed the Moon can indeed form in planetary trojan points (L4 or L5 Lagrangian point) which means that similar circumstances may occur in other planetary systems.[65]
Although the giant impact theory posits that the impact forming the Moon increased Earth's rotational speed to make a day about 5 hours long, the Moon has slowly "stolen" much of this speed to reduce Earth's solar day since then to about 24 hours and continues to do so: in 100 million years Earth's solar day will be roughly 24 hours 38 minutes, in 1 billion 30 hours 23 minutes. Larger secondary bodies would exert proportionally larger tidal forces that would in turn decelerate their primaries faster and potentially increase the solar day of a planet in all other respects like earth to over 120 hours within a few billion years. This long solar day would make effective heat dissipation for organisms in the tropics and subtropics extremely difficult in a similar manner to tidal locking to a red dwarf star.

Top 10 Unsolved Mysteries of Science

Top 10 Unsolved Mysteries of Science

June 25, 2014 | by Lisa Winter
Original link:  http://www.iflscience.com/physics/top-10-unsolved-mysteries-science
Photo credit: NASA, ESA, CFHT, CXO, M.J. Jee (University of California, Davis), and A. Mahdavi (San Francisco State University)
 
Despite what cable news may tell you, scientists don’t really squabble over if evolution is real (it is) or if the climate is changing faster than can be explained by naturally-occurring phenomena (it is) or if vaccines are regarded as safe and recommended for most children (they are). Sure, there may be fine points within those categories that are debatable, but not to the extent that is commonly described by talking heads on TV. However, that’s not to say that scientists perfectly understand everything about the ways of the Universe.

Physicist Brian Cox once said: “I'm comfortable with the unknown—that’s the point of science. There are places out there, billions of places out there, that we know nothing about. And the fact that we know nothing about them excites me, and I want to go out and find out about them. And that's what science is. So I think if you’re not comfortable with the unknown, then it’s difficult to be a scientist… I don’t need an answer. I don’t need answers to everything. I want to have answers to find.”

So what are some of the top mysteries keeping scientists busy? Here’s our top ten:

Why is there more matter than antimatter?

According to our current understanding of particle physics, matter and antimatter are equal but opposite. When they meet, they should destroy one another and leave nothing left over, and most of those annihilations should have occurred early in the Universe. However, there was enough matter left over to make the billions and billions of galaxies, stars, planets, and everything else. Various explanations surround mesons, which are short-lived subatomic particles made of one quark and one antiquark. B-mesons decay more slowly than anti-B-mesons, which could have resulted in enough B-mesons surviving the interaction to create all of the matter in the Universe. Additionally, B-, D-, and K-mesons can oscillate and become antiparticles and then back again. Studies have suggested that mesons are more likely to assume the normal state, which may also be why regular particles outnumber antiparticles.

Where is all the lithium?

Early in the Universe when temperatures were incredibly high, isotopes of hydrogen, helium, and lithium were synthesized in abundance. Hydrogen and helium are still incredibly abundant and make up nearly all of the mass in the Universe, though there is only about a third of the lithium-7 that we should see. There are a wide variety of explanations for why this might have happened, including some hypotheses involving hypothetical bosons known as axions, and others believe it is trapped in the core of stars, which our current telescopes and instruments can’t detect. However, there are currently no clear front running theories to explain this absence of lithium in the Universe.

Why do we sleep?

While we do know that the human body is regulated by a circadian clock that keeps humans on a sleep/wake cycle, we don’t really know why. Sleep is the time when our bodies repair tissues and perform other maintenance activities, and we spend nearly a third of our lives snoozing. Some other organisms don’t need to sleep at all, so why do we? There are a few different ideas out there, but none seem to solidly answer the question. Some theorize that animals who are able to sleep have evolved the ability to hide from predators, while others who need to remain more alert are able to rest and regenerate in other ways without fully going to sleep. While scientists don’t quite know why we do it, they are starting to learn more about why it is important, and how sleep impacts important things like brain plasticity.

How does gravity work?

We all know that gravity from the moon causes tides, Earth’s gravity holds us to the surface, and the sun’s gravity keeps our planet in orbit, but how much do we really understand it? This powerful force is generated from matter, and more massive objects therefore have a greater ability to attract other objects. While scientists do understand a great deal about how gravity acts, they aren’t really sure why it exists. Why are atoms mostly empty space? Why is the force that holds atoms together different from gravity? Is gravity actually a particle? These are answers that we really just can’t answer with our current understand of physics.

Where is everyone?

The observable Universe is 92 billion light-years in diameter, filled with billions of galaxies with stars and planets, yet the only evidence of any life anywhere is right here on Earth. Statistically, the odds of us actually being the only living beings in the Universe are impossibly low, so why the hell haven’t we connected with anyone else yet? This is known as the Fermi Paradox, and there have been dozens of suggestions to explain why we haven’t encountered extraterrestrial life; some more plausible than others. We could probably talk about all of the different possibilities for days about whether or not we’re just missing signals, if they’ve actually been here and we didn’t know it, they can’t/don’t want to talk to us, or—the extremely unlikely scenario—if Earth is the only planet with life ever.

What is dark matter made of?

About 80% of all mass in the Universe is made of dark matter. Dark matter is pretty peculiar stuff, as it doesn’t emit any light. Though it was first theorized about 60 years ago, there isn’t any direct evidence of its existence. Many scientists believe dark matter is comprised of weakly interacting massive particles (WIMPs), which could be up to 100 times more massive than a proton, but doesn’t readily interact with the baryonic matter our instruments were designed to detect. Other candidates for dark matter’s composition include axions, neutralinos, and photinos.

How did life begin?

Where did life on Earth come from? How did it happen? Those who believe in the Primordial Soup model believe that a nutrient-rich early Earth eventually formed increasingly-complex molecules that gave rise to life. This could have taken place in the deep ocean vents, in clay, or under ice. Different models also give variable levels of importance to the presence of lightning or volcanic activity for the spawn of life. While DNA is the predominant basis for life on Earth now, it has been suggested that RNA could have dominated the first lifeforms. Additionally, other scientists question whether other nucleic acids aside from RNA or DNA may have once existed. Did life spawn just once, or is it possible that is was created, wiped out, and then restarted? Some believe in panspermia, in which microbial life was brought to Earth via meteorites or comets. Even if that is true, it doesn’t answer the question of how that life originated.

How do plate tectonics work?

It might sound surprising, but the theory of continental plates moving around, rearranging continents and causing earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, and even forming mountains, has only received widespread support relatively recently. Though it was first postulated back around 1500 that the continents may have once fit together (it’s not really a stretch for anyone who has looked at a map), the idea didn’t gain a lot of traction until the 1960s when the hypothesis of sea-floor spreading, where rocks are pulled into the mantle of the Earth, recycled, and brought back to the surface as magma, was backed up by physical evidence. However, scientists aren’t entirely sure on what drives this movement or exactly how plate boundaries were created. There are many theories, but none of them completely address all aspects of this activity.

How do animals migrate?

Many animals and insects migrate throughout the year in order to escape changing seasonal temperatures and the waning resources that come with it or to find mates. Some of these migrations can reach thousands of kilometers in one direction, so how do they find their way there and back again year after year? Different animals use different navigational tools, including some who are able to tap into the Earth’s magnetic field and use themselves like a compass. However, scientists still don’t know how this trait evolved or how untrained animals know exactly where to go season after season.

What is dark energy?

Of all of the great mysteries of science, dark energy might be the most enigmatic of all. While dark matter makes up an estimated 80% of all mass, dark energy is a hypothetical form of energy believed to make up around 70% of all content in the Universe. Dark energy has been implicated as the cause for the expansion of the Universe, though there is still a considerable amount of mystery regarding its supposed properties. First and foremost, what is it even made of? Is dark energy constant, or are there fluctuations throughout the expanse of space? Why does dark energy’s density appear to match the density of regular matter? Can dark energy be reconciled with Einstein’s theory of gravity, or does the theory need to be reevaluated?

Smart city

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Smart_city Possible scenario of smar...