Because our Earth is at some special size and gravity defined as,
1:1
There are larger planets and there are smaller planets.
Their ratio's are;
3:1 or as change of gravity 3:5 for larger planets.
and;
1:7 for smaller planets with an increased gravity of, 1:7+x
where x is more gravity or less as -x.
So then, because we have , on our planet Earth variability of species ,the rule of the, "laws of natural selection",
might be non existent as a theory of, "survival of the fittest.
Instead, suppose a planet is so populated by life of an infinite variety of organisms that their proximity to each other
is so large that , being an astronaut , walking through such a field with the parameter being 10 x 10 meters, the
effect would be like stepping on minimal areas of free space , in the range of 10 cm squared.
Because of the gravity and the size of such planets, the larger ratio =3:1 as well as 3:5 in terms of the 10 cm squared
and an amount of 3,4,or 5 variability in change.
However because our Earth is also like this , there are planets that i'm suggesting has, larger organisms, similar to
turtles, dogs anteaters and so on as their volume being that of 1 meter cubed.
So the variety for every new 1 meter square is another 3,4,5 species of such size, that it would be difficult to displace
through such a field to study the species and their diversity. There are however problems in terms of the fact that
some planets would have ,"evolved poisonous " responses to each species on the rule of 1 m squared to 1 meter squared
has the responses whereby the species protect themselves with the limit of growth , that does not develop the organisms
spread to other places.
Also it may be so that the examples of the, "turtle" may be of the 1 liter cubed in size, and yet ,it does not move about
in it's area because it feeds of it's own poisons.
When we discover such variability in nature on other planets, we will surely have many new medicinal solids and fluids.
image courtesy of pinterest.
1:1
There are larger planets and there are smaller planets.
Their ratio's are;
3:1 or as change of gravity 3:5 for larger planets.
and;
1:7 for smaller planets with an increased gravity of, 1:7+x
where x is more gravity or less as -x.
So then, because we have , on our planet Earth variability of species ,the rule of the, "laws of natural selection",
might be non existent as a theory of, "survival of the fittest.
Instead, suppose a planet is so populated by life of an infinite variety of organisms that their proximity to each other
is so large that , being an astronaut , walking through such a field with the parameter being 10 x 10 meters, the
effect would be like stepping on minimal areas of free space , in the range of 10 cm squared.
Because of the gravity and the size of such planets, the larger ratio =3:1 as well as 3:5 in terms of the 10 cm squared
and an amount of 3,4,or 5 variability in change.
However because our Earth is also like this , there are planets that i'm suggesting has, larger organisms, similar to
turtles, dogs anteaters and so on as their volume being that of 1 meter cubed.
So the variety for every new 1 meter square is another 3,4,5 species of such size, that it would be difficult to displace
through such a field to study the species and their diversity. There are however problems in terms of the fact that
some planets would have ,"evolved poisonous " responses to each species on the rule of 1 m squared to 1 meter squared
has the responses whereby the species protect themselves with the limit of growth , that does not develop the organisms
spread to other places.
Also it may be so that the examples of the, "turtle" may be of the 1 liter cubed in size, and yet ,it does not move about
in it's area because it feeds of it's own poisons.
When we discover such variability in nature on other planets, we will surely have many new medicinal solids and fluids.
image courtesy of pinterest.