Remove this ad

Radioactive Hot Spots on Earth’s Beaches May Have Sparked Life

by Ian O'Neill on January 12, 2008

Want to stay on top of all the space news? Follow @universetoday on Twitter

The Earth is a water-dominated planet, perhaps radioactive beaches helped life to thrive. (Image credit: Ian O'Neill)
We’ve heard about life being created in a puddle of primordial chemical soup, sparked by lightning strikes, or organic molecules falling to Earth from comets or planets, such as Mars. But now, there is an alternative. Early Earth was radioactive; the Moon also had a lower orbit, generating strong tidal forces. Due to the close proximity to abundant water, radioactive beaches may have possessed all the essential ingredients for organic compounds, and eventually life, to thrive.

Research by the University of Washington, Seattle, suggests that perhaps the highly radioactive environment of Earth some 4 billion years ago may have been the ideal time for life to form. The orbit of the Moon also had a part to play in this offbeat theory.

Through strong tidal forces by a Moon that orbited far closer to the Earth than it does today, radioactive elements accumulated on the beaches could be gravitationally sorted. The chemical energy in these beach hot spots was probably high enough to allow self-sustaining fission processes (which occurs in natural concentrations of uranium). The main product from fission is heat, therefore powering chemical processes and the generation of organic, life-giving compounds.

“Amino acids, sugars and [soluble] phosphate can all be produced simultaneously in a radioactive beach environment.” – Zachary Adam, an astrobiologist at the University of Washington Seattle.

Remove this ad

This is a hard theory to understand, it is well known that radioactivity breaks down organic molecules and causes a whole host of problems for us carbon-based creatures. But in the early Earth, devoid of plants and animals, radioactive processes may have provided energy for life to begin in the first place.

This theory also partially explains why life may be a very rare occurrence in the universe: there must be the correct concentration of radioactive elements, on the surface of a water-dominated developing planet, with tidal forces supplied by a closely orbiting stellar body. The Earth may, after all, be unique.

Source: Telegraph.co.uk

Remove this ad

About

[Follow me on Twitter (@astroengine)]

[Check out my space blog: Astroengine.com]

[Check out my radio show: Astroengine Live!]

Hello! My name is Ian O'Neill and I've been writing for the Universe Today since December 2007. I am a solar physics doctor, but my space interests are wide-ranging. Since becoming a science writer I have been drawn to the more extreme astrophysics concepts (like black hole dynamics), high energy physics (getting excited about the LHC!) and general space colonization efforts. I am also heavily involved with the Mars Homestead project (run by the Mars Foundation), an international organization to advance our settlement concepts on Mars. I also run my own space physics blog: Astroengine.com, be sure to check it out!

Tagged as: carbon, life, lifeform, organic, primordial soup, radioactivity

← Older Comments
  • http://www.revrob.com Rev. Rob

    This theory is good, the commentary is not. We all know, including the editor of Universe Today, that a planet doesn’t need to have water to form life, just solvent. Ammonia, for example, would work fine.

    Additionally, why do you need a moon and tides to create pools? Rain, and especially springs, are just fine.

    I was about to say that this is what happens when untrained journalists report on science when a majority of news organizations no longer even have a science editor, but Mr. O’Neill see is a solar physicist, so I don’t know what purpose of “The Earth may, after all, be unique.”

    I cringed when I read that line.

  • Chuck Lam

    To Rev Rob, “A unique earth” may or may not be. Blind faith thinking one way or the other does not make it so. An open mind to the possibilities of what is or isn’t is what science research is about. Closed minds in science simply don’t make it.

  • http://sxr.demon.co.uk Steve R

    Tides are not for pools, but for …” radioactive elements accumulated on the beaches could be gravitationally sorted” … you know, like sized stuff accumulates together on a beach.

  • Timothy A. DeLany

    I like the idea actually. It does not say however that this is the only way in which life could have formed on earth.
    There are any number of ways in which life forms could have developed independently of one another. We find all sorts of extremophile (sp?) life forms. We have radioactive loving ones 2 miles down in gold mines, living on uranium. We have them living in the cooling vents of nuclear reactors. Some live in almost straight acid conditions, while others live in pure alkaline conditions. Some bacteria live on sulphur compounds, some on methane, some even eat crude oil. Life has been found 6Km below the Earth’s surface (a la Thomas Gold). Dr. Godfrey Louis has found that the “red rain” organisms (Kerala, India) can withstand extreme tempuratures (650 degrees Fahrenheit,) high pressures and live on a wide variety of substances ( Incuding but not restricted to methanol, iodine and cedar oil.)
    Life has been found to survive the vacuum of space, live by eating solid rock, and hibernating for millions of years in solid Antarctic ice to be later revived..
    I have come to believe in the idea of panspermia, that anywhere life can exist ,it probably will exist, whether beneath the surface of a planet or even hibernating on a passing comet or asteroid. I have come to believe this from simply observing life on Earth.

  • Chuck Lam

    To Timothy A, DeLany,.
    And all of what you so eioquently describe is happening in four dimensions.

  • Timothy A. DeLany

    Dear Chuck Lam: If the universe is indeed 14 -16 billion years old and we are a mere (as a planet) 4.6 billion years old, we are yet infants in the scheme of things. We, as humans have been around less than two million years? In our own gallaxy we are the new kids on the block, still wet behind the ears. Who is to say that we are the pinacle of civilization in the universe? More than likely, in view of our recent history, we are the laughing stock of the block! Our main occupation is the planning of our own self-destruction. Any civilization that would want to check us out would not want to land in the open, because we would shoot first and ask questions later ( Oops, even the Russians decided against that! From experience, I might add.) With project ‘Blue Book’ take a closer look. I have a book by it first head investigator; one out of five could not be explained. It is not a matter of all UFO’s being extraterrestrial. It is a matter of any UfO’s being extraterrestrial!
    My wife is calling for me to call it quits for the night, so I will be looking forward to continuing this discussion later!
    Life does not necessarily need oxygen and may not even need water to survivie. The tempuatures may widely vary as well as the air pressure (water pressure,) day length or year. All of the life forms mentioned in my previous post exist here on earth today. Some were only recently discovered, but all are here now!

  • N Stone

    tim is right, sugars oxgen, water, all of these things are building blocks for earthlings but carbon based life might be very hard to sustain in the early stages. who knows, there might be rock people! or even creatures made of gasses!

  • Chuck Lam

    Hello Tim D., You are so correct in your views. Yes, I suspect that we are truly infants in the universal scheme of things. Considering the age of the universe, there just has to be a few “more advanced civilizations” out there. Maybe not in our galaxy, but they are out there. As I have repeatedly said, I believe the reason for no contact or possibily of no contact ever with another civilation is rarity and the the mind bending distances involved. Modulated electromagnetic energy in any form peters-out to nothing at fairly short cosmic distance. Maybe one day somone will develop a means to detect a billionth of a femto watt.

← Older Comments

Previous post:

Next post: