Is silicon-based life possible?

No
Sincerely,
/sci/

Yes, but its going to be stunted by the lack of variety carbon offers.

>>7776151
Why not?

Can't silicon make analogues of organic molecules like silane?

>>7776148

what is silicon valley

Silicon don't have such variety of forms as carbonium.

>>7776148

The real question is, why should it be? Why not germanium? Or tin based life?

Carbon is a very common element in the universe. It's a small element, so it doesn't interfere as much, due to its size, with bond geometry. There are many other characteristics which make carbon the idea element for increasing chemical diversity, and ultimately, evolution is about finding what works and killing off what doesn't. Silicon based life is the biological equivalent of thermodynamic unfavorablility. It can happen given certain conditions, but it doesn't naturally want to happen.

>>7776148

Yes, they live in valleys and have above average levels of autism.

>>7776148
I was confused by your image, i saw it somewhere but couldn't remember where.
It was actually at the very end of that russian trailer video for a homotopy theory course.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qlh6knaaVYY

File: fc2b1d5ecb90e9337116dfaf45be03aca91c44af.jpg (44KB, 620x260px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 620x260px

Star Trek says yes and we have cell phones today so...you figure it out.

>>7776203
wtf did I just watch

>>7776153
The only thing carbon and silicon have in common is 4 valence electrons. Silicon is a larger atom, has more shells, and thus has different shielding properties. Not to mention the abundance of the element itself in the universe as other posters have mentioned.

It may be ok for some replacements of carbon, but to replace carbon in complex biological systems? No, they are already too delicate as it is.

>>7776148
From what I understand, the increased size of silicon disallows the diversity carbon offers in terms of reactivity

Possible - maybe in a liquid nitrogen-based environment (like that of Triton), but not very likely as silicon is highly reactive and has a low bond strength. For more information, check out:
Bains, W.; Many chemistries could be used to build living systems. Astrobiology. 2004, 4, 137-167.

I personally think its far less likely than carbon.

For one thing, CO2 doesnt since in water, but SiO2 does.

>>7776148
purely hypothetically by looking at the periodic table, yes
practically, carbon is way better for life in hundreds of aspects and worse in none of the aspects I could think of

for example
carbon is several times more abundant than silicon
silicon is heavier than carbon, which means molecules are also heavier and less mobile
silanes are more kinetically labile than alkanes, which means shorter chains and less stable molecules
there are almost none long hydrosilicon chains that are prerequisite for membranes and therefore cells and life
silanes are insoluble in water, which is prerequisite for metabolism (and I could give you another hundred reasons why water is the best medium for life)
SiO2 is solid and insoluble in everything but concentrated hydroxides at high pressure and hydrofluoric acid and thus biologically almost unavailable, while CO2 is gas easily soluble in water

you could have carbon life that uses silicon in it's molecules a lot more than Terrestrial life, but pure silicon life is impossible

>>7776251
>improbable

Why the fuck do you call silicium "silicon" seriously dumb americans it looks like silicone that's dumb and cumfusing as shit

>>7776269
>Europeans
>buttdevestatingly confused by mere letters
>good at science
>good at anything

>>7776251
>carbon is several times more abundant than silicon
?? the fuck did you pull that from ??
silicon is like literally 1000 times more abundant than carbon in earth's crust alone and we're still carbon-based


to answer OP's question: no it isn't

>>7776295
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abundance_of_the_chemical_elements
Your retarted

Yes. And you kill them with Head & Shoulders.

>>7776306
Dandruff isn't a living organism

>>7776299
?? that only proved my point
I don't get how you think you can use carbon's abundance in the universe to prove your point when the only valid sample size we have is the earth at the moment and silicon is about 1000x more abundant than carbon here

File: qIhX1sP.gif (2MB, 350x197px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 350x197px

>>7776269

>we're not talking about the fake boob stuff?

>>7776306
That movie was 10/10!

>>7776317
Your souper retarted

>>7776378
r u trolling me rn????

File: Silicone_life_1.jpg (134KB, 299x523px) Image search: [Google]

134KB, 299x523px

Ask again in about 3000 years