[HN Gopher] How deep does life go?
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       How deep does life go?
        
       Author : Hooke
       Score  : 138 points
       Date   : 2024-04-08 21:43 UTC (2 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (thereader.mitpress.mit.edu)
 (TXT) w3m dump (thereader.mitpress.mit.edu)
        
       | macawfish wrote:
       | All the way deep.
        
       | p1esk wrote:
       | I hoped it was about how deep life goes underground.
        
         | trescenzi wrote:
         | It is:
         | 
         | "It found living bacterial cells 1,626 meters below the
         | seafloor, in rocks 111 million years old, at temperatures of
         | 113 degrees Celsius. This led the authors to estimate that
         | bacteria in subsurface sediments may make up as much as two-
         | thirds of total bacterial biomass."
        
           | mongol wrote:
           | Good news. Seems then that an Armageddon type of event would
           | not extinguish all life on earth.
        
             | huytersd wrote:
             | Honestly I don't think anything could extinguish _all_ life
             | on earth short of maybe 20 comets hitting earth at the same
             | time or something.
        
               | samplatt wrote:
               | I wonder how long it'd take for life to leave after Earth
               | leaves the goldilocks zone. How much life would there be
               | after the oceans have evaporated and stripped into space?
               | If life could evolve to not require water at all, maybe
               | it could survive until the sun physically envelops the
               | planet.
        
               | antonvs wrote:
               | 20 comets (or asteroids) wouldn't even come close to
               | doing it. Events like that can cause extinctions of many
               | ecosystems, by many others will be essentially
               | unaffected. Microbes in the sediment below the seafloor
               | are a good example. They wouldn't even notice the comets.
        
               | pfdietz wrote:
               | The slow and inexorable brightening of the Sun (it's
               | already 30% brighter than when it settled onto the Main
               | Sequence) will eventually cause a runaway greenhouse
               | effect. The oceans will all be converted to steam and the
               | surface temperature will be far beyond what life could
               | survive. After that things only get hotter until the Sun
               | enters its end stages and leaves the Main Sequence.
        
               | BurningFrog wrote:
               | A hot surface does very little to life several miles
               | below it.
        
               | pfdietz wrote:
               | Since heat is flowing out of the Earth, the temperature
               | below will eventually become hotter than the temperature
               | at the surface.
        
             | OsrsNeedsf2P wrote:
             | 2.8 billion years[0] is the high estimate before _all_
             | remaining life on earth goes extinct. Likely including
             | these little buggers.
             | 
             | [0]
             | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_far_future
        
               | PostOnce wrote:
               | based on our current knowledge, not only of the science
               | that we can extrapolate to the future, but of our
               | technology and how we will apply it
               | 
               | note that that list is all negative things we suspect
               | will happen and include no accounting for our own
               | intervention in matters
        
               | zehaeva wrote:
               | I'm not sure how anyone's intervention could ever
               | withstand some of these effects.
               | 
               | I could foresee maybe a sun shade of some sort to help
               | mitigate the increase in temperature, but at some point
               | the sun is going to envelope the earth.
               | 
               | Also, this several billion years into the future. Anyone
               | left wouldn't be anything you could remotely call human.
               | Evolution hasn't stopped in humans.
        
               | stuart73547373 wrote:
               | iirc we could plausibly move to Titan and live off
               | nuclear energy
        
             | BurningFrog wrote:
             | I remember reading somewhere that that may have saved life
             | on Earth at least once.
        
             | temp0826 wrote:
             | Think bigger with your mass extinction events! Maybe a
             | rogue blackhole zipping through the inner solar system and
             | ripping the crust off the planet like a ripe tangerine.
        
           | 082349872349872 wrote:
           | If there is a Creator with an inordinate fondness for
           | beetles, their fondness for prokaryotes remains obviously
           | superordinate.
        
       | femto wrote:
       | > The Alvin's most famous dive, however, was its 1968 exploration
       | of the wreck of the ill-fated Titanic.
       | 
       | That should be 1986?
        
         | mkl wrote:
         | Yes: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DSV_Alvin#Exploration_of_RMS
         | _T.... It was only found in 1985.
        
         | miramba wrote:
         | Noticed that too and wondered: A typo or AI?
        
           | anarbadalov wrote:
           | A typo. Thank you for flagging! I updated the article and
           | added a correction. HN is the best.
        
           | MC995 wrote:
           | I would think just a simple typo.
           | 
           | Mixing up 1986 -> 1968 is a very human transposition error
           | that I've not personally seen a LLM make.
           | 
           | Now, if the article said the the famous dive was done by
           | Alvin and the Chipmunks and not the deep submersible vehicle
           | Alvin, I would suspect AI.
        
             | permo-w wrote:
             | this is the kind of error humans make because we generate
             | text letter by letter. LLMs generate text in whole words or
             | meaningful fragments of whole words (tokens). unless 1986
             | is unusually statistically similar to 1968, an LLM is
             | unlikely to make that mistake.
        
       | b800h wrote:
       | I wonder how much of an impact these bacteria have on climate
       | change, given how numerous they are, and that their activities
       | appear to fix CO2.
       | 
       | For example, from Wikipedia:
       | 
       | hydrogen sulfide chemosynthesis:                   18H2S + 6CO2 +
       | 3O2 - C6H12O6 (carbohydrate) + 12H2O + 18S
        
         | basil-rash wrote:
         | Verily I say unto you, bacteria have had a far greater impact
         | on climate change than humans could ever dream to. Oxygen
         | wouldn't be here without them, for one. And plant-available
         | Nitrogen.
         | 
         | All the changes we are seeing now are absolutely nothing
         | compared to the impact bacteria had had on the climate.
        
           | toss1 wrote:
           | Perhaps, but bacteria do it on time scales of hundreds of
           | millions of years, while humans do it on timescales of
           | decades or centuries.
           | 
           | Take _ANY_ other process and speed it up by 5-6 orders of
           | magnitude and see how different it is. For example, try
           | sipping your coffee at only 3 orders of magnitude faster --
           | it 'll literally require an explosion to accelerate to
           | 1000fps and then decelerate to 0 to traverse the 2' from
           | saucer to lips in in 2/1000 sec instead of 2 sec. The effect
           | on ecosystems is similar; changes that would be easily
           | adapted to by all flora and fauna are instead fatal to many.
           | And those ecosystems sustain us.
           | 
           | Moreover, even the slow pace of bacterial climate change is
           | no solace -- the most notable change they caused was the
           | Great Oxidation Event and Snowball Earth wiping out almost
           | all life for 300 million years.
           | 
           | I'd prefer to not whistle ignorance into the wind. I'd rather
           | we take simple measures that make life better for everyone
           | and everything, and yes, using sustainable energy sources
           | instead of burning valuable and increasingly scarce
           | hydrocarbons is a basic step.
           | 
           | [0] https://ui.adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2019asbi.book..261T/abs
           | tra...
        
             | basil-rash wrote:
             | The changes introduced by bacteria were certainly not
             | adapted to by all flora and fauna, as you go on to
             | describe. But here we are.
             | 
             | Had the bacteria said "hey guys all this Oxygen we're
             | making is seriously disrupting the environment and killing
             | a lot of stuff, we should limit our productivity in order
             | to ensure that doesn't happen, after all we're the greatest
             | things that will ever be on this planet so we have to make
             | sure it's well suited for us and only us forever and ever
             | and ever", here we would not be.
        
               | toss1 wrote:
               | It is silly to speculating about the results of bacteria
               | somehow limiting or compensating for their excess O2
               | production, especially since there could be many ways it
               | could have been done (not necessarily limiting, but
               | evolving CO2 or CH4 producing species to counterbalance,
               | etc.). Such speculations could just as easily conclude
               | that we could have evolved a billion years earlier if
               | they'd "done something", and we'd now be 1000x as mature
               | a species.
               | 
               | Even if we make your assumption that humans are somehow
               | entitled to do whatever we want, it is massively stupid
               | to ignore the fact that we depend on an extremely complex
               | web of life to survive. We can break some links, but
               | breaking too many will literally be suicidal.
               | 
               | When we see that we are doing something that _WILL_
               | inevitably break many of those links (not to mention
               | flood most of our major cities in decades, which is
               | already happening), the only wise thing to do is to
               | adjust course to prevent that destruction.
               | 
               | Yet you seem to think it is a good idea to spread
               | ignorance and stupidity. That way is guaranteed to NOT
               | advance even humanity's self-centered interests. Do you
               | have some fetish about burning hydrocarbons or some
               | religion that makes it sacred?
        
           | postmodest wrote:
           | Are we really playing whataboutism for the banded iron
           | formations from 3.7Gya?
           | 
           | Are you going to mention the Siberian Traps next?
           | 
           | My dude, civilization almost collapsed several times due to
           | like, one volcano. Imagine a 20% increase in global CO2 due
           | to human activity.
           | 
           | You can say "well, the earth recovered from the Permian
           | extinctions" but that's meaningless, we're talking about
           | _humanity_.
           | 
           | Trilobites weren't all "oh, no worries, the Cyanobacteria
           | didn't end life on earth so we're totally fine, brah! We're
           | _rationalist trilobites_!"
        
             | basil-rash wrote:
             | Speak for yourself. I made no mention of humanity.
        
       | denton-scratch wrote:
       | > The drill reached 4,776 meters and the deepest core was
       | collected at 1,177 meters
       | 
       | So they did 3,599m of drilling for no purpose? This seems
       | inexplicable, perhaps I'm misreading it.
        
         | seszett wrote:
         | I think the journalist just didn't understand exactly what this
         | mission did[0]. It drilled through 1 177 meters of rock, in a
         | place where the ocean floor was 4 776 meters below the surface.
         | 
         | [0]http://publications.iodp.org/proceedings/370/101/370_101.htm
         | ...
        
         | klyrs wrote:
         | > Our primary objective during Expedition 370 was to study the
         | relationship between the deep subseafloor biosphere and
         | temperature.
         | 
         | Not "no purpose."
        
       | alexwasserman wrote:
       | Seems weird to talk about the deep sea and miss Challenger
       | Deep/Marianas trench, and the Trieste completely.
        
       | permo-w wrote:
       | one of the most fascinating and mysterious things to me are
       | subterranean or exclusively cave-dwelling (mega)fauna. the
       | earth's crust is a very big place
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-04-10 23:02 UTC)