An Interesting Comment on Life in the Universe, 1933

 

JF Ptak Science Books   Quick Post

In the year that the human race started its very real plunge into the Wasteland, Frederick L. Leonard (Chair of the astronomy department at UCLA) had his eyes on another prize. In a short article in Popular Astronomy¹, Prof. Leonard spent a few pages discussing the possibility of extraterrestrial life. He kept the discussion in one and two syllable words and was very straightforward, winding up talking about the possibilities of "life" in our own solar system. He quickly dismisses all of the planets as contenders save for Venus and mars, and then wasn't really happy with that, at all, and opened the discussion more as to "life" might be. 

There were several surprises in the article, including one about the authors of Astronomy ( Henry Norris Russell; Raymond Smith Dugan; John Quincy Stewart,  Astronomy: A Revision of Young's Manual of Astronomy ...) being "surprised" that there was no oxygen found on Venus. The bigger moment though was saved for Percival Lowell, who had long labored in support of advanced lifeforms on Mars, though the quote from him regarding extraterrestrial life was really very good. Leonard quotes him so:

"If astronomy has taught us anything it is that man is but a detail in the universe, and the resemblants though diverse detail are inevitably to be expected...[humans] are destined to discover any number of cousins scattered through space."

The odds favor a statement like this, that human life is a "detail" of the universe and that there are not doubt other 'details" to be found, resembling earth life or not. Odd as weren't so much with Lowell in keeping with his intelligent lifeforms being on Mars, which is just a step or two away. In any event, I found the Lowell statement to be a pretty sober appraisal of the possibility of Life Elsewhere, in general.

Notes:

1. Frederick Leonard. "Life on Other Worlds", in Popular Astronomy, May 1933, vol 41 no. 5., pp 260-3 in the issue of pp 239-294.

 

JF Ptak Science Books   Quick Post

In the year that the human race started its very real plunge into the Wasteland, Frederick L. Leonard (Chair of the astronomy department at UCLA) had his eyes on another prize. In a short article in Popular Astronomy¹, Prof. Leonard spent a few pages discussing the possibility of extraterrestrial life. He kept the discussion in one and two syllable words and was very straightforward, winding up talking about the possibilities of "life" in our own solar system. He quickly dismisses all of the planets as contenders save for Venus and mars, and then wasn't really happy with that, at all, and opened the discussion more as to "life" might be. 

There were several surprises in the article, including one about the authors of Astronomy ( Henry Norris Russell; Raymond Smith Dugan; John Quincy Stewart,  Astronomy: A Revision of Young's Manual of Astronomy ...) being "surprised" that there was no oxygen found on Venus. The bigger moment though was saved for Percival Lowell, who had long labored in support of advanced lifeforms on Mars, though the quote from him regarding extraterrestrial life was really very good. Leonard quotes him so:

"If astronomy has taught us anything it is that man is but a detail in the universe, and the resemblants though diverse detail are inevitably to be expected...[humans] are destined to discover any number of cousins scattered through space."

The odds favor a statement like this, that human life is a "detail" of the universe and that there are not doubt other 'details" to be found, resembling earth life or not. Odd as weren't so much with Lowell in keeping with his intelligent lifeforms being on Mars, which is just a step or two away. In any event, I found the Lowell statement to be a pretty sober appraisal of the possibility of Life Elsewhere, in general.

Notes:

1. Frederick Leonard. "Life on Other Worlds", in Popular Astronomy, May 1933, vol 41 no. 5., pp 260-3 in the issue of pp 239-294.