I guess Bison had in mind something like creatures with a totally inorganic chemistry.
Siliceous beings, maybe...?
I lost a bit of hope in discovering non-carbon, non-silicon life. Metallic life seems to me too much infeasible; and others non-metals don't catenate. Even with silicon, it would be hard expect it - maybe Si+Al+O, like in Earth soil, but these kind of composites seems too much inert.
Sentient machines.
Some scientists wondered about lifeforms that are based on a silicon chemistry because silicon is the element that has properties that are closest to carbon. It is possible to form long molecules using silicon instead of carbon atoms.
In an analogous manner, others have proposed lifeforms that uses ammonia NH3 as solvent instead of H2O.
But a machine could be made of many things metallic and non-metallic.
Remember that the modern industry uses another elements in their semiconductor substances, elements like Indium, Gallium and Germanium, thus not only Silicon.
There are exotic materials also, things like the supercondutor ceramics the physicists are synthetising in some laboratories in the pursuit of the discovery of a supercondutor in ambient temperatures.
I can imagine sentient machines that could "eat" Th, U, Pu or another energy source when necessary (certainly not in a dayly basis!).
Yep, but metals don't seem to be evolution-friendly. I can't imagine proto-machines starting to appear as I can with proto-cells made of carbon. Life, as far we know, starts with closed reaction cycles, some kind of proto-metabolism...
My question is, which elements can start life?
About ammonia, it has water-like proprieties, and is a nice hypothetical substitute. But it's liquid only in lower temperatures than water, so these beings would have a lower metabolism rate (and, by extension, a lower evolution and longer life-time).
Hunh... maybe... and what if we just ignore the 2nd periodic row, and search in 3rd?
Silicon+phosphorous+sulphur instead of carbon+nitrogen+oxygen? Seems plausible to me!
Exobio is fascinanting.
No problem with low temperatures and longer life-time.
The most common type of stars are
M dwarfs, by far.
Stars that being cooler and smaller than the sun could easily have planets with conditions compatible with the triple point of ammonia.
Cool cool planets! With low temperatures that favours superconduction.
Also, such kind of stars are long-living, far more stable than the sun with "lifespans" of tens of billion years
at least.
The universe aren't old enough to see a M dwarf dying!
M giants and supergiants are at the end of their lives, but stars of this kind were of early types when at the
main sequence, like B,A,F and G, not of type M.
The current theories of stellar evolution postulates that a M-dwarf will not go through the giant phase at the end of its life. No Betelgeuse for them!