Notices
Results 1 to 75 of 75
Like Tree21Likes
  • 4 Post By Flick Montana
  • 1 Post By KJW
  • 1 Post By dan hunter
  • 1 Post By PhDemon
  • 1 Post By RedPanda
  • 2 Post By Daecon
  • 2 Post By Dywyddyr
  • 1 Post By Howard Roark
  • 3 Post By RedPanda
  • 1 Post By RedPanda
  • 1 Post By Daecon
  • 2 Post By Cogito Ergo Sum
  • 1 Post By pineapples

Thread: Life Should be Common in the Universe, physicists say

  1. #1 Life Should be Common in the Universe, physicists say 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    880
    Does the Rapid Appearance of Life on Earth Suggest that Life Is Common in the Un

    yup here it is. Real scientists doing real science on the possibilities of ET.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Life-Size Nanoputian Flick Montana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Flatland
    Posts
    5,437
    I don't think anyone on this forum would debate the possibility of life on other planets. To think that it doesn't exist on one of the billions of worlds in one of the billions of galaxies in our known universe seems a little absurd.


    "Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." -Calvin
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Anti-Crank AlexG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    2,809
    But Reiku will say it means they must have visted us.
    Its the way nature is!
    If you dont like it, go somewhere else....
    To another universe, where the rules are simpler
    Philosophically more pleasing, more psychologically easy
    Prof Richard Feynman (1979) .....

    Das ist nicht nur nicht richtig, es ist nicht einmal falsch!"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    880
    Actually, given 8 billion years evolution (this is about as much time allowed for life to appear before us) we are relatively new kids on the cosmic estate. To think aliens have no chance of getting here, or that they couldn't have in the 8 billion years we haven't been about, may turn out to be one of the most selfish mistakes of mankind. It might cost us in the future. A unprepared civilization is a race in danger.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    880
    As for rapid development, the Cambrian explosion comes to mind Cambrian explosion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    This was the rapid development of simple into complex life.


    Timeline of evolutionary history of life - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    880
    Or rapid appearance of life... 4 billion years ago? More like a rapid evolution of life, with five mass extinctions. And it still found a way.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    KJW
    KJW is online now
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    1,473
    The anthropic principle guarantees our existence irrespective of how small the probability of our existence is. Therefore, it cannot be inferred from our existence that the probability of our existence is not extremely small. And because the anthropic principle does not extend to the existence of other life in the universe, the likelihood of other life existing in the universe in addition to our existence may be so small that we may indeed be alone in the observable universe. To argue that life is common in the universe is to argue that life is statistically easy to produce, but one cannot use life on earth as evidence that it is easy to produce.
    John Galt likes this.
    There are no paradoxes in relativity, just people's misunderstandings of it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    880
    Quote Originally Posted by KJW View Post
    The anthropic principle guarantees our existence irrespective of how small the probability of our existence is. Therefore, it cannot be inferred from our existence that the probability of our existence is not extremely small. And because the anthropic principle does not extend to the existence of other life in the universe, the likelihood of other life existing in the universe in addition to our existence may be so small that we may indeed be alone in the observable universe. To argue that life is common in the universe is to argue that life is statistically easy to produce, but one cannot use life on earth as evidence that it is easy to produce.

    the Anthropic principle? Which one says this, there are about four versions, and I am not brushed up on them.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,408
    Quote Originally Posted by Chesslonesome View Post
    Does the Rapid Appearance of Life on Earth Suggest that Life Is Common in the Un

    yup here it is. Real scientists doing real science on the possibilities of ET.
    That is the problems with mathematicians, they confuse math theories with reality.
    There might be other living things in the universe, and someday we might even find some evidence to support that hypothesis.
    However until we do find some evidence and figure out how to make contact the question remains moot.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    880
    Quote Originally Posted by dan hunter View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Chesslonesome View Post
    Does the Rapid Appearance of Life on Earth Suggest that Life Is Common in the Un

    yup here it is. Real scientists doing real science on the possibilities of ET.
    That is the problems with mathematicians, they confuse math theories with reality.
    There might be other living things in the universe, and someday we might even find some evidence to support that hypothesis.
    However until we do find some evidence and figure out how to make contact the question remains moot.

    So cynical. I don't believe the question is moot. Where is the inspiration in humanity these days?

    Surely these are exactly the sort of interesting questions physicists should be asking.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,408
    Quote Originally Posted by Chesslonesome View Post
    So cynical. I don't believe the question is moot. Where is the inspiration in humanity these days?

    Surely these are exactly the sort of interesting questions physicists should be asking.
    Why do you think the Drake equation matters to anything at this time?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    880
    Quote Originally Posted by dan hunter View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Chesslonesome View Post
    So cynical. I don't believe the question is moot. Where is the inspiration in humanity these days?

    Surely these are exactly the sort of interesting questions physicists should be asking.
    Why do you think the Drake equation matters to anything at this time?


    Well I don't know if it ''matters'' as such, but it is a statistical way to test civilizations. Statistics isn't the same thing as real life, but statistics may be a good indication to how much life we could be dealing up to.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    880
    I think the lowest estimate is anything from a thousand to a million civilizations in the milky way alone.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    880
    I actually pointed out some of those facts of Drakes equation in some other work...


    Consider some figures to help you make your decision: There are roughly around 300 billion stars alone in this small portion of the universe we call our galaxy, the Milky way. There are in fact hundreds of billions of galaxies in this universe. Some say as large as 500 billion!


    There is no viable way to know exactly how many stars are in the universe in total. We know the universe is massive possibly even infinite, it has a diameter of about 93 billion light years. A light year is how long it takes for a particle of light to travel in a year. Since a particle of light, like all massless radiation in the universe travels at the fastest speed known... in just one second, to give you an idea, light can travel 186,000 miles, it then has taken about 13 billion years for a photon to reach us from the farthest reaches of space... that is a lot of space and a lot of time.


    In a universe, where so many galaxies reside in so much openness it is hard to imagine that Earth is the only planet that harbours life... Earth came onto the cosmic stage around 4.5 billion years ago, but we know star systems have been forming much earlier than this. The earliest galaxy discovered may have clumped together as early as 450 million years old. It was around 600 times more denser and 8.5 times smaller than our own. Star formation alone happened much earlier than this, it was at it's maximum rate of production about 5-8 million years after Big Bang.


    With some idea how long we have for some life to appear in the universe, we can draw some conclusions from home. Life appeared on our planet about 3.6 billion years ago... Earth was less than 10 billion years old! Taking into account how long it probably took for Earth to produce just the right conditions, known as the primordial sea, in a time scale compared to the universe, life on Earth appeared rather dramatically and quickly. But just as dramatic, many of these lifeforms where destroyed in what is called a mass extinction. There are have been five estimated mass extinctions, which can be related to a number of different factors... but the main point is, that as soon as that original single celled life appeared on Earth, life in general has been relentless. Today, over 8 million species of life exist on planet Earth.


    So we know life must want to thrive and as the famous statement from Jurassic Park says, ''life will find a way.''


    So has it found a way on any other planet?


    Most likely it has and most scientists would seem to agree that the universe is far too big to suggest that life elsewhere is improbable. In fact, life elsewhere should be expected, we certainly cannot be special enough to be the only organism ever to observe the universe.


    Since galaxies where forming as early as 450 million years after big bang, that gives us about 8 billion years for the universe to allow life elsewhere, that would be, for an alien civilization an 8 billion evolutionary jump start. Now, I am not suggested that life appeared in the universe 8 billion years ago, but life may have appeared any time since then. Even a civilization only 1 billion years old would be like gods to us. Their technology will be far more advanced, they will have mastered interstellar space travel and they will know all sorts of new physics we are yet to discover.


    Drake's equation, attempts to mathematically answer the question about how much life is in the universe. Probabilistically-speaking, given uncertainties as well, the equation can make an estimate of anything between 1000 and 100,000,000 civilizations in our galaxy alone. Keep in mind some figures I hit at you earlier, there being something around 500 billion galaxies in the universe alone. If all galaxies where roughly the same (which they are not, but for smudging purposes) this could mean there could be anything up to 500,000,000,000,000,000 civilizations in the universe! Even if we cut that number to half and by half again for good measure, it is still a large number!


    How true this is, we will not know for a very long time. But it is safe to say, that if any of these large numbers are true, we must begin to be open to the idea that aliens may have in fact the technology to reach us from whatever distant star system they may be in. Today, some people think such thinking to be delusional that any alien civilization has ever visited our planet. After the little statistical lesson I have given, do you feel these sceptics are correct in what they say?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,408
    Quote Originally Posted by Chesslonesome View Post
    I actually pointed out some of those facts of Drakes equation in some other work...
    Thanks, I am quite aware of what the Drake equation is.
    My question to you was, "Why do you think the Drake equation matters to anything at this time?"

    Your first answer was, "
    Well I don't know if it ''matters'' as such, but it is a statistical way to test civilizations. Statistics isn't the same thing as real life, but statistics may be a good indication to how much life we could be dealing up to."

    After looking at a few of your other threads I suspect you want to use the Drake equation to support your belief that UFOs are extraplanetary.
    Whatever, I am not here to confront your belief in space aliens. I recognize that it would likely be a pointless exercise.

    My comment was that the Drake equation doesn't matter and the question of whether aliens exist is not answerable unless something dramatically changes, like some actual evidence appearing.

    Have fun looking for such evidence and try not to go full crank and conspiracy theorist over it.
    (You should never go full crank.)
    LuciDreaming likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    155
    Why, did you want to meet your neighbors?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    880
    Quote Originally Posted by dan hunter View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Chesslonesome View Post
    I actually pointed out some of those facts of Drakes equation in some other work...
    Thanks, I am quite aware of what the Drake equation is.
    My question to you was, "Why do you think the Drake equation matters to anything at this time?"

    Your first answer was, "
    Well I don't know if it ''matters'' as such, but it is a statistical way to test civilizations. Statistics isn't the same thing as real life, but statistics may be a good indication to how much life we could be dealing up to."

    After looking at a few of your other threads I suspect you want to use the Drake equation to support your belief that UFOs are extraplanetary.
    Whatever, I am not here to confront your belief in space aliens. I recognize that it would likely be a pointless exercise.

    My comment was that the Drake equation doesn't matter and the question of whether aliens exist is not answerable unless something dramatically changes, like some actual evidence appearing.

    Have fun looking for such evidence and try not to go full crank and conspiracy theorist over it.
    (You should never go full crank.)


    I don't think the Drake equation actually proves anything other than possibilities.


    I think of alien life in much the same way. I ask in 8 billion years what are the possibilities some alien life could have become intelligent enough for intersteller travel. If we can gauge this on ourselves, then we appeared in only 15,000 years ago and our intellect is remarkable: That is 533,333,333 times smaller the amount of time other civilizations could have had. That's plenty time on the cosmic real estate.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    880
    Quote Originally Posted by thulium_gal View Post
    Why, did you want to meet your neighbors?

    Ohhh... You'll never get me in space. Even if the sun collapsed, if you think I am sitting on about 600 tonnes of fuel you can think again
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    880
    I'd quite happily shoot myself before that. I wouldn't enjoy space, not for me.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    KJW
    KJW is online now
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    1,473
    Quote Originally Posted by Chesslonesome View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by KJW View Post
    The anthropic principle guarantees our existence irrespective of how small the probability of our existence is. Therefore, it cannot be inferred from our existence that the probability of our existence is not extremely small. And because the anthropic principle does not extend to the existence of other life in the universe, the likelihood of other life existing in the universe in addition to our existence may be so small that we may indeed be alone in the observable universe. To argue that life is common in the universe is to argue that life is statistically easy to produce, but one cannot use life on earth as evidence that it is easy to produce.
    the Anthropic principle? Which one says this, there are about four versions, and I am not brushed up on them.
    I was using the term "anthropic principle" in a generic sense.
    There are no paradoxes in relativity, just people's misunderstandings of it.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    880
    Quote Originally Posted by KJW View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Chesslonesome View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by KJW View Post
    The anthropic principle guarantees our existence irrespective of how small the probability of our existence is. Therefore, it cannot be inferred from our existence that the probability of our existence is not extremely small. And because the anthropic principle does not extend to the existence of other life in the universe, the likelihood of other life existing in the universe in addition to our existence may be so small that we may indeed be alone in the observable universe. To argue that life is common in the universe is to argue that life is statistically easy to produce, but one cannot use life on earth as evidence that it is easy to produce.
    the Anthropic principle? Which one says this, there are about four versions, and I am not brushed up on them.
    I was using the term "anthropic principle" in a generic sense.

    ok.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #22  
    Forum Professor Daecon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    1,288
    I believe it's reasonable to expect there to be life elsewhere in the Universe.

    Even if there as only an average of one life-viable planet per galaxy, there's still a LOT of galaxies out there.

    As for why we've not detected anything, well, if we're the only life in our galaxy - how likely is it that'd we'd be able to detect life all the way over in another galaxy?

    Also, we may be one of the very first lifeforms (or life-viable planets) to have developed in the Universe so far. We're still practically at the very first day of the Universe's lifespan, aren't we?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #23  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Posts
    957
    Quote Originally Posted by Daecon View Post
    I believe it's reasonable to expect there to be life elsewhere in the Universe.
    I agree altho' I would replace the word "Universe" with the phrase "our galaxy and the other galaxies". I also think there is a reasonable chance that primitive, or simple, life forms exist somewhere in the Solar System.
    I'm sure I have read, here and in other sources, the argument that altho' life, and an advanced technological civilisation, exists on our planet this does not prove, or even provides real evidence, life exists elsewhere.
    The situation, on the Earth, certainly does not offer conclusive proof about anything, but surely must be considered a major piece of evidence that life exists in other places.
    I have to add I'm not certain this topic should be in the Physics sub forum.
    Last edited by Halliday; April 27th, 2014 at 08:00 AM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #24  
    Life-Size Nanoputian Flick Montana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Flatland
    Posts
    5,437
    Quote Originally Posted by Chesslonesome View Post
    Actually, given 8 billion years evolution (this is about as much time allowed for life to appear before us) we are relatively new kids on the cosmic estate. To think aliens have no chance of getting here, or that they couldn't have in the 8 billion years we haven't been about, may turn out to be one of the most selfish mistakes of mankind. It might cost us in the future. A unprepared civilization is a race in danger.
    Why do you think life on another planet would have evolved along our path? Why do you assume they would be builders or travelers? What if they were highly intelligent, but immobile, plant-like lifeforms? Why can't the aliens simply remain as bacteria? How do you know in what way their environmental pressures will cause them to evolve?

    To think that the aliens would have such immaculate evolutionary timing as to be roughly on our level of sentience, yet be capable of travelling thousands of light years, avoiding our detection equipment only to be spotted by some 14 year old on a camping trip is a pretty severe stretch. What if most life exists in the dark universe and we're the odd man out? Maybe we aren't detectable by the other life out there.

    There are so many "what if" scenarios that settling on the little green men in a saucer one seems like bad judgment.
    "Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." -Calvin
    Reply With Quote  
     

  26. #25  
    Bullshit Intolerant PhDemon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Newcastle-upon-Tyne, UK
    Posts
    5,294
    Quote Originally Posted by Flick Montana View Post
    There are so many "what if" scenarios that settling on the little green men in a saucer one seems like bad judgment.


    "Wibble"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  27. #26  
    Genius Duck Moderator Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    11,746
    Quote Originally Posted by Flick Montana View Post
    There are so many "what if" scenarios that settling on the little green men in a saucer one seems like bad judgment.
    Nobody seems to bother about the medium-ish height sort-of-purple ones.
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  28. #27  
    ▼▼ dn ʎɐʍ sıɥʇ ▼▼ RedPanda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,737
    Statistically, every Lottery winner should have lost.
    kojax likes this.
    SayBigWords.com/say/3FC

    "And, behold, I come quickly;" Revelation 22:12

    "Religions are like sausages. When you know how they are made, you no longer want them."
    Reply With Quote  
     

  29. #28  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope zinjanthropos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Driving in my car
    Posts
    4,879
    Somethings I've always wondered about: We have successfully landed spacecraft on various celestial bodies within our solar system. Great efforts were taken to keep these machines clear of microbes and such but I can't help thinking nothing's perfect, so is it almost or is it truly a certainty that we have already sprinkled life on other planets? Could this life have survived and already be evolving on those worlds? If we are, as some people say, somewhere near the bottom of the intelligence scale when compared to the probability of other developed intelligences, then to what scale could the higher beings plant life elsewhere. Seems to me that if interstellar travel is in our future or may have already been successfully achieved then all it takes is for life to develop on only one planet amongst the trillions of existing planets in order for life to be distributed amongst the cosmos.
    All that belongs to human understanding, in this deep ignorance and obscurity, is to be skeptical, or at least cautious; and not to admit of any hypothesis, whatsoever; much less, of any which is supported by no appearance of probability...Hume
    Reply With Quote  
     

  30. #29  
    Life-Size Nanoputian Flick Montana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Flatland
    Posts
    5,437
    "Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." -Calvin
    Reply With Quote  
     

  31. #30  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope zinjanthropos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Driving in my car
    Posts
    4,879
    Quote Originally Posted by Flick Montana View Post
    I get panspermia. I'm just playing devil's advocate. If one planet billions of years ago developed life and it got blasted into space to become sustainable chunks of frozen microbes then you might still only require one planet to develop all the life for the cosmos. Do I believe this, no.
    All that belongs to human understanding, in this deep ignorance and obscurity, is to be skeptical, or at least cautious; and not to admit of any hypothesis, whatsoever; much less, of any which is supported by no appearance of probability...Hume
    Reply With Quote  
     

  32. #31  
    Forum Professor Daecon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    1,288
    Quote Originally Posted by Flick Montana View Post
    *dirty laugh*

    "sperm"
    RedPanda and Dywyddyr like this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  33. #32  
    Genius Duck Moderator Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    11,746
    Quote Originally Posted by Daecon View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Flick Montana View Post
    *dirty laugh*

    "sperm"
    Now that is just childish.

    (In other words I held off long enough for someone else to beat me to it).
    RedPanda and Daecon like this.
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
    Reply With Quote  
     

  34. #33  
    Moderator Moderator Cogito Ergo Sum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    2,519
    Quote Originally Posted by zinjanthropos View Post
    I get panspermia. I'm just playing devil's advocate. If one planet billions of years ago developed life and it got blasted into space to become sustainable chunks of frozen microbes then you might still only require one planet to develop all the life for the cosmos. Do I believe this, no.

    I am more in favor of pseudo-panspermia, although I cannot state that panspermia is an unreasonable hypothesis,
    as it is possible that life originated elsewhere in the universe and was ejected via impact-expelled rocks, so that it landed on several young planets (including Earth).
    "The only safe rule is to dispute only with those of your acquaintance of whom you know that they possess sufficient intelligence and self-respect not to advance absurdities; to appeal to reason and not to authority, and to listen to reason and yield to it; and, finally, to be willing to accept reason even from an opponent, and to be just enough to bear being proved to be in the wrong."

    ~ Arthur Schopenhauer, The Art of Being Right: 38 Ways to Win an Argument (1831), Stratagem XXXVIII.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  35. #34  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    155
    Quote Originally Posted by Chesslonesome View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by thulium_gal View Post
    Why, did you want to meet your neighbors?

    Ohhh... You'll never get me in space. Even if the sun collapsed, if you think I am sitting on about 600 tonnes of fuel you can think again
    Ever heard of wormholes proposed by Einstein?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  36. #35  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    880
    Quote Originally Posted by thulium_gal View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Chesslonesome View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by thulium_gal View Post
    Why, did you want to meet your neighbors?

    Ohhh... You'll never get me in space. Even if the sun collapsed, if you think I am sitting on about 600 tonnes of fuel you can think again
    Ever heard of wormholes proposed by Einstein?

    I have. Just like the Alcubiere drive, we need exotic matter for wormholes to keep them open long enough. We do actually have a negative pseudo-negative region of energy in the Casimir effect. Scientists are asking if we can somehow harvest it. No easy task.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  37. #36  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    880
    Quote Originally Posted by Cogito Ergo Sum View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by zinjanthropos View Post
    I get panspermia. I'm just playing devil's advocate. If one planet billions of years ago developed life and it got blasted into space to become sustainable chunks of frozen microbes then you might still only require one planet to develop all the life for the cosmos. Do I believe this, no.

    I am more in favor of pseudo-panspermia, although I cannot state that panspermia is an unreasonable hypothesis,
    as it is possible that life originated elsewhere in the universe and was ejected via impact-expelled rocks, so that it landed on several young planets (including Earth).


    I am a big fan of Panspermia.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  38. #37  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    880
    Quote Originally Posted by Daecon View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Flick Montana View Post
    *dirty laugh*

    "sperm"

    Well, it's about fertilizing planets.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  39. #38  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    2,222
    Quote Originally Posted by RedPanda View Post
    Statistically, every Lottery winner should have lost.
    But factually there are lottery winners. Factually we have never met an alien race. (I know, what's a fact doing in a "cluelessone" thread?)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  40. #39  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    880
    Quote Originally Posted by billvon View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by RedPanda View Post
    Statistically, every Lottery winner should have lost.
    But factually there are lottery winners. Factually we have never met an alien race.

    Statistically, the universe should be thriving. It might not be fact, but there isn't much fact you will win the lottery tomorrow, but someone is very likely to.

    Just like someone is very likely to, in our history to visit us.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  41. #40  
    Life-Size Nanoputian Flick Montana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Flatland
    Posts
    5,437
    Quote Originally Posted by Chesslonesome View Post
    Just like someone is very likely to, in our history to visit us.
    Citation needed.
    "Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." -Calvin
    Reply With Quote  
     

  42. #41  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    880
    Quote Originally Posted by Flick Montana View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Chesslonesome View Post
    Just like someone is very likely to, in our history to visit us.
    Citation needed.

    Michio Kaku

    ''It isn't a matter of if, it's a matter of when they visit us.''
    Reply With Quote  
     

  43. #42  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    155
    Quote Originally Posted by Chesslonesome View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Flick Montana View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Chesslonesome View Post
    Just like someone is very likely to, in our history to visit us.
    Citation needed.

    Michio Kaku

    ''It isn't a matter of if, it's a matter of when they visit us.''
    or how of ten they visit us. lo l
    Reply With Quote  
     

  44. #43  
    Life-Size Nanoputian Flick Montana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Flatland
    Posts
    5,437
    Quote Originally Posted by Chesslonesome View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Flick Montana View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Chesslonesome View Post
    Just like someone is very likely to, in our history to visit us.
    Citation needed.

    Michio Kaku

    ''It isn't a matter of if, it's a matter of when they visit us.''
    Again, appeal to authority. And it's not even someone who is considered particularly credible.
    "Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." -Calvin
    Reply With Quote  
     

  45. #44  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,774
    Quote Originally Posted by Chesslonesome View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Cogito Ergo Sum View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by zinjanthropos View Post
    I get panspermia. I'm just playing devil's advocate. If one planet billions of years ago developed life and it got blasted into space to become sustainable chunks of frozen microbes then you might still only require one planet to develop all the life for the cosmos. Do I believe this, no.

    I am more in favor of pseudo-panspermia, although I cannot state that panspermia is an unreasonable hypothesis,
    as it is possible that life originated elsewhere in the universe and was ejected via impact-expelled rocks, so that it landed on several young planets (including Earth).


    I am a big fan of Panspermia.
    Yes, you are a well rounded crank, Reiku.
    Last edited by Howard Roark; April 27th, 2014 at 06:02 PM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  46. #45  
    ▼▼ dn ʎɐʍ sıɥʇ ▼▼ RedPanda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,737
    Quote Originally Posted by billvon View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by RedPanda View Post
    Statistically, every Lottery winner should have lost.
    But factually there are lottery winners. Factually we have never met an alien race. (I know, what's a fact doing in a "cluelessone" thread?)
    My post was more meant to convey the fact that statistics can't prove anything.
    Even if there was a 99.999% chance of there being life on another planet - that doesn't mean there is.
    SayBigWords.com/say/3FC

    "And, behold, I come quickly;" Revelation 22:12

    "Religions are like sausages. When you know how they are made, you no longer want them."
    Reply With Quote  
     

  47. #46  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    880
    Quote Originally Posted by Flick Montana View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Chesslonesome View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Flick Montana View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Chesslonesome View Post
    Just like someone is very likely to, in our history to visit us.
    Citation needed.

    Michio Kaku

    ''It isn't a matter of if, it's a matter of when they visit us.''
    Again, appeal to authority. And it's not even someone who is considered particularly credible.


    How about Hawking? He is already warning us of alien visitation. Is he credible enough for you>?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  48. #47  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,774
    Quote Originally Posted by Chesslonesome View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Flick Montana View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Chesslonesome View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Flick Montana View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Chesslonesome View Post
    Just like someone is very likely to, in our history to visit us.
    Citation needed.

    Michio Kaku

    ''It isn't a matter of if, it's a matter of when they visit us.''
    Again, appeal to authority. And it's not even someone who is considered particularly credible.


    How about Hawking? He is already warning us of alien visitation. Is he credible enough for you>?
    This is not what he said. He said something different (just as kooky as YOUR claims):

    "Over the years, Hawking maintained his public profile with a series of attention-getting and often controversial statements:[261] he has asserted that computer viruses were a form of life,[262] that humans should use genetic engineering to avoid being outsmarted by computers,[263] and that aliens likely exist and contact with them should be avoided.[264][265]" (from wiki)
    Flick Montana likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  49. #48  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    880
    Quote Originally Posted by xyzt View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Chesslonesome View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Flick Montana View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Chesslonesome View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Flick Montana View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Chesslonesome View Post
    Just like someone is very likely to, in our history to visit us.
    Citation needed.

    Michio Kaku

    ''It isn't a matter of if, it's a matter of when they visit us.''
    Again, appeal to authority. And it's not even someone who is considered particularly credible.


    How about Hawking? He is already warning us of alien visitation. Is he credible enough for you>?
    This is not what he said. He said something different (just as kooky as YOUR claims):

    "Over the years, Hawking maintained his public profile with a series of attention-getting and often controversial statements:[261] he has asserted that computer viruses were a form of life,[262] that humans should use genetic engineering to avoid being outsmarted by computers,[263] and that aliens likely exist and contact with them should be avoided.[264][265]" (from wiki)


    what are you talking about, you don't have the first clue what I am on about do you, yet again, trollisms!

    BBC News - Stephen Hawking warns over making contact with aliens
    Reply With Quote  
     

  50. #49  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    880
    Seriously, what has computer viruses got to do with alien visitation???

    BOLD ENOUGH??
    Reply With Quote  
     

  51. #50  
    ▼▼ dn ʎɐʍ sıɥʇ ▼▼ RedPanda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,737
    Quote Originally Posted by Chesslonesome View Post
    Seriously, what has computer viruses got to do with alien visitation???
    BOLD ENOUGH??
    You didn't manage to read his post all the way through, did you.
    SayBigWords.com/say/3FC

    "And, behold, I come quickly;" Revelation 22:12

    "Religions are like sausages. When you know how they are made, you no longer want them."
    Reply With Quote  
     

  52. #51  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,774
    Quote Originally Posted by Chesslonesome View Post
    Seriously, what has computer viruses got to do with alien visitation???

    BOLD ENOUGH??
    Reiku,

    You have problems with reading and comprehension.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  53. #52  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    880
    The statement:

    ''that aliens likely exist and contact with them should be avoided.[264][265]"''

    Does NOT say that aliens will not visit. He is warning us about their visitation, which means he is open to the possibility we will be visited is we haven't already.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  54. #53  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    880
    In fact, his statement implies a total opposite of what you lot are saying.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  55. #54  
    ▼▼ dn ʎɐʍ sıɥʇ ▼▼ RedPanda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,737
    Quote Originally Posted by Chesslonesome View Post
    The statement:
    ''that aliens likely exist and contact with them should be avoided.[264][265]"''
    Does NOT say that aliens will not visit. He is warning us about their visitation, which means he is open to the possibility we will be visited is we haven't already.
    And what does that have to do with computer viruses?
    SayBigWords.com/say/3FC

    "And, behold, I come quickly;" Revelation 22:12

    "Religions are like sausages. When you know how they are made, you no longer want them."
    Reply With Quote  
     

  56. #55  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    880
    Quote Originally Posted by RedPanda View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Chesslonesome View Post
    The statement:
    ''that aliens likely exist and contact with them should be avoided.[264][265]"''
    Does NOT say that aliens will not visit. He is warning us about their visitation, which means he is open to the possibility we will be visited is we haven't already.
    And what does that have to do with computer viruses?


    Obviously he has no idea what Hawking is saying. Hawking likened alien visitation to a similar scenario when columbus reached the America's.


    This clearly has fuck all to do with computer virus'. clearly, he had no context in which Hawking made his statement. Hawking clearly see's the possibilities of alien contact, whilst you lot, seem to think it is crank.


    It's not, this is a wake-up call, not for this forum, but for our whole race.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  57. #56  
    ▼▼ dn ʎɐʍ sıɥʇ ▼▼ RedPanda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,737
    Quote Originally Posted by Chesslonesome View Post
    This clearly has fuck all to do with computer virus'.
    Then why did you bring it up?
    Why ask questions about computer viruses when they have "fuck all" to do with alien visitation?
    dan hunter likes this.
    SayBigWords.com/say/3FC

    "And, behold, I come quickly;" Revelation 22:12

    "Religions are like sausages. When you know how they are made, you no longer want them."
    Reply With Quote  
     

  58. #57  
    Life-Size Nanoputian Flick Montana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Flatland
    Posts
    5,437
    Well, who says the aliens won't be in the form of a computer virus?

    The notion that they have to be biological seems very egocentric.
    "Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." -Calvin
    Reply With Quote  
     

  59. #58  
    Forum Professor Daecon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    1,288
    Super-duper-mega-ultra advanced aliens could possibly take the form of Von Neumann probes.
    jgoti likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  60. #59  
    Forum Senior
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Western Australia
    Posts
    319
    i see von neumann probes as the most likely visitors we'll get. with really low values of "likely".
    Sometimes it is better not knowing than having an answer that may be wrong.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  61. #60  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,408
    Quote Originally Posted by Chrispen Evan View Post
    i see von neumann probes as the most likely visitors we'll get. with really low values of "likely".
    So now it seems like a good time to mention the Fermi paradox.
    If space aliens are as common as the Drake equation suggests then where the effing hell are they hiding? We should be tripping over them all the time and be inundated with Von Neuman probes but so far nothing, nada, zilch.

    Same thing with time travelers.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  62. #61  
    Moderator Moderator Cogito Ergo Sum's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Belgium
    Posts
    2,519
    Quote Originally Posted by dan hunter View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Chrispen Evan View Post
    i see von neumann probes as the most likely visitors we'll get. with really low values of "likely".
    So now it seems like a good time to mention the Fermi paradox.
    If space aliens are as common as the Drake equation suggests then where the effing hell are they hiding? We should be tripping over them all the time and be inundated with Von Neuman probes but so far nothing, nada, zilch.

    One of the explanations could be that the majority of the extraterrestrial life forms have not yet reached the stage of multicellularity:
    On endosymbiosis (link to an article by Ed Yong)
    Strange and Daecon like this.
    "The only safe rule is to dispute only with those of your acquaintance of whom you know that they possess sufficient intelligence and self-respect not to advance absurdities; to appeal to reason and not to authority, and to listen to reason and yield to it; and, finally, to be willing to accept reason even from an opponent, and to be just enough to bear being proved to be in the wrong."

    ~ Arthur Schopenhauer, The Art of Being Right: 38 Ways to Win an Argument (1831), Stratagem XXXVIII.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  63. #62  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,910
    Life Should be Common in the Universe, physicists say
    Except that isn't what the paper says. Never mind, interesting anyway.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  64. #63  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,910
    Quote Originally Posted by Cogito Ergo Sum View Post
    One of the explanations could be that the majority of the extraterrestrial life forms have not yet reached the stage of multicellularity:
    On endosymbiosis (link to an article by Ed Yong)
    That is an excellent article.
    ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat
    Reply With Quote  
     

  65. #64  
    Forum Freshman Schrodingersothercat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Now in Glendale AZ but formerly from Elkhorn WI, just outside Milwaukee.
    Posts
    37
    Quote Originally Posted by dan hunter View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Chrispen Evan View Post
    i see von neumann probes as the most likely visitors we'll get. with really low values of "likely".
    So now it seems like a good time to mention the Fermi paradox.
    If space aliens are as common as the Drake equation suggests then where the effing hell are they hiding? We should be tripping over them all the time and be inundated with Von Neuman probes but so far nothing, nada, zilch.

    Same thing with time travelers.
    Well then, you have not seen my neighbor yet. But his planet of origin may well be chemically induced--jus' sayin'.

    If, for what ever reasons, we can not exceed the speed of light, or create worm holes or whatever we as imaginative human beings can think up to travel through space in a timely manner, then we may never know of others out there. I think "life" is as inevitable as the universe is. Statistics say there are X amount of intelligent life inevitable. But if the laws can not be broken, our worlds may never cross. IF, the rules can be broken, we may never have the mental capacity to break those rules. IF, the number of intelligent beings that may be able to break rules are so few and far between that we may never know each other exist. Then we may be doomed to live out our species lives and never know they are out there. It may be the most cruel trick against intelligent life ever perpetrated.

    We can guess, imagine, contemplate, extrapolate, formulate, and wish all we want, we may just never know. But it's not in human nature or possible not in intelligent nature to ignore the possibility. Just like all inventions, it starts with a dream.

    Mark
    Reply With Quote  
     

  66. #65  
    ▼▼ dn ʎɐʍ sıɥʇ ▼▼ RedPanda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,737
    There are 300 billion stars in our galaxy.
    Even if we could travel faster than light, we might still never find the life out there.
    SayBigWords.com/say/3FC

    "And, behold, I come quickly;" Revelation 22:12

    "Religions are like sausages. When you know how they are made, you no longer want them."
    Reply With Quote  
     

  67. #66  
    Forum Masters Degree DianeG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    504
    Quote Originally Posted by dan hunter View Post

    So now it seems like a good time to mention the Fermi paradox.
    If space aliens are as common as the Drake equation suggests then where the effing hell are they hiding? We should be tripping over them all the time and be inundated with Von Neuman probes but so far nothing, nada, zilch.

    Same thing with time travelers.
    Some answers I've heard relate civilization collapse to aggression, hedonism, or suggest that human level intelligence might be rarer than we think, because lots of life forms survive perfectly well without it. Pretty much all of them on earth.

    But in answer to the Fermi paradox, a friend of mine suggested that perhaps few civilizations survive becoming dependent on fossil fuels. That may sound ridiculously anthropomorphic for a number of reasons, but fossil fuel does seem like low hanging fruit for any carbon based intelligent life form that started setting things on fire and developed mechanization. Does every civilization like us either run out of it, fail to discover a cheap alternative to sustain their large numbers and complex society, or over heat their planet long before they ever colonize space?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  68. #67  
    Forum Freshman Schrodingersothercat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    Now in Glendale AZ but formerly from Elkhorn WI, just outside Milwaukee.
    Posts
    37
    We've only been sending signals (radio) out for less than 90 years. If they are only 90 light years or more away or more then they are only just getting radio from us now. Or not at all if farther. Why would they come here if they had no idea we are here? It would be one hell of a mission to undertake for no reason. There may be billions of possible aliens out there, but the closest ones could be several trillions of miles away.

    Mark
    Reply With Quote  
     

  69. #68  
    Forum Senior pineapples's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Ireland someplace
    Posts
    360
    If aliens ever visit, itíll probably be an archaeological expedition rather than social.

    RedPanda likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  70. #69  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,035
    Quote Originally Posted by KJW View Post
    The anthropic principle guarantees our existence irrespective of how small the probability of our existence is. Therefore, it cannot be inferred from our existence that the probability of our existence is not extremely small. And because the anthropic principle does not extend to the existence of other life in the universe, the likelihood of other life existing in the universe in addition to our existence may be so small that we may indeed be alone in the observable universe. To argue that life is common in the universe is to argue that life is statistically easy to produce, but one cannot use life on earth as evidence that it is easy to produce.
    Is there any evidence that the emergence of life is unlikely? No matter how low the probability is per-roll-of-the-dice, if you roll more dice than that, you can always overcome it. How many die rolls were made in the first billion years of the Earth's existence?

    It seems to me that any planet with the right conditions would make well more die rolls than were needed to win the game. All that is needed is for the game to be win-able.

    Quote Originally Posted by Daecon View Post
    I believe it's reasonable to expect there to be life elsewhere in the Universe.

    Even if there as only an average of one life-viable planet per galaxy, there's still a LOT of galaxies out there.

    As for why we've not detected anything, well, if we're the only life in our galaxy - how likely is it that'd we'd be able to detect life all the way over in another galaxy?

    Also, we may be one of the very first lifeforms (or life-viable planets) to have developed in the Universe so far. We're still practically at the very first day of the Universe's lifespan, aren't we?
    The existence of extremophiles on Earth should tell us that exact conditions aren't necessary.

    Extremophile - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    The main thing is for the planet in question to be at the right temperature, and preferably have elements in all three stages (liquid, solid, and gaseous), with a view toward the sky from its surface.

    Life could start without a view of the sky, but it would eventually fizzle out if it didn't eventually migrate toward photosynthesis.


    Quote Originally Posted by Chesslonesome View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Flick Montana View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Chesslonesome View Post
    Just like someone is very likely to, in our history to visit us.
    Citation needed.

    Michio Kaku

    ''It isn't a matter of if, it's a matter of when they visit us.''
    If they did visit us, they probably wouldn't go out of their way to make their presence known when they did.

    When human researchers venture into the rain forest to observe apes, or lions, or what-have-you, they take great pains to avoid interfering in the animals' natural behavior. It ruins their research if the animals start to react to them, because then they can't sort out what is natural and what is the result of interaction.

    I think it's just really hard on humanity's ego to think that, from some other life form's perspective, we might just be interesting wild animals.
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  71. #70  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard icewendigo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    2,150
    There's a great variety in stars, but also similarities derived from properties and similarities in the environment.

    For example, someone suggested an intelligent immobile plant-like alien. Its possible, but rather unlikely, since it appears that intelligence is on earth is related or correlated to mobility(ability to act with respect to) and perception(ability to make decisions based on) of the environment.


    Dolphins and Sharks are different but have some similarities in general shape because they have both evolved while using hydrodynamic mobility as an advantage, where as other organisms that might be highly venomous and feeding on immobile preys could be expected not to have an hydrodynamic shape. A rhino has poor eyesight it doesnt need it. If human ancestors were venomous armour plated monkeys with the ability to eat virtually anything like a goat imo we might never have developed higher intelligence and might have less accurate eyesight because survival would have been easy without intelligence and good eyesight. There might be exo life forms with different shapes from what we know but also others with similar shapes as marine life (prehistoric life forms, jelly-fish, fish, crustaceans. octopus, sea slugs etc)


    We do not know what the odds are for life on other planets, we have no data so imo equations are a bit bull shite, what we do have is information about one sample, earth, and information about the properties of earth (water planet, molecular concentrations, etc) and it appears that the earth is not exotic, unique within our tiny perception sample, but I dont see why there would not be many liquid water planets with a moon, and that under similar environments, its reasonable to assume that a certain portion will have similar molecular interactions.


    As for encountering alien life forms, lets hope it would not be something like the movies The Thing (the color remake and remake prequel)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  72. #71  
    ▼▼ dn ʎɐʍ sıɥʇ ▼▼ RedPanda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,737
    Quote Originally Posted by kojax View Post
    If they did visit us, they probably wouldn't go out of their way to make their presence known when they did.

    When human researchers venture into the rain forest to observe apes, or lions, or what-have-you, they take great pains to avoid interfering in the animals' natural behavior. It ruins their research if the animals start to react to them, because then they can't sort out what is natural and what is the result of interaction.


    etc...
    SayBigWords.com/say/3FC

    "And, behold, I come quickly;" Revelation 22:12

    "Religions are like sausages. When you know how they are made, you no longer want them."
    Reply With Quote  
     

  73. #72  
    Forum Professor Daecon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    1,288
    Shortly after that photo was taken, the mother gorrila smashed David Attenborough's skull with a rock and they started eating him...
    Reply With Quote  
     

  74. #73  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,035
    Quote Originally Posted by Daecon View Post
    Shortly after that photo was taken, the mother gorrila smashed David Attenborough's skull with a rock and they started eating him...
    You had me going. I finally decided to look him up to confirm he is, in fact, not dead.

    David Attenborough - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


    So I see that some scientists do prefer to interact with the animals they are trying to film.

    I wonder what aliens would gain by interacting with us humans?

    There are probably laws about what alien visitors are allowed to do. If you go into the Amazon Jungle in Brazil where some tribes still exist that have had little or no contact with modern society - you can't just do whatever you want with/to them. You'd get in trouble if you terrorized them and the authorities found out about it. Why wouldn't space traveling aliens be part of nations also, and have to obey laws?
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  75. #74  
    Forum Sophomore
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    158
    How about the Fermi Paradox? Where are they all? I would post a link to Wikipedia, but I cannot post links yet.

    Max Tegmark says that he believes that we are the only life in the universe. No attempt at appeal to authority here, just a statement. Max also believes in the multiverse, so he definitely out on the edge in some areas.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  76. #75  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    34
    Quote Originally Posted by JoeSixPack View Post
    How about the Fermi Paradox? Where are they all? I would post a link to Wikipedia, but I cannot post links yet.

    Max Tegmark says that he believes that we are the only life in the universe. No attempt at appeal to authority here, just a statement. Max also believes in the multiverse, so he definitely out on the edge in some areas.
    >Where are they all?

    Taking into account the exponential nature of evolution, the time-window two civilization may communicate with each other is getting smaller for more developed stages. For example, Infusoria is unlikely a life form human may want to get in contact ;o)

    There are two key parameters:

    1) The fact we see no visitors we may communicate
    2) The percentage of stars a home for some ET civilization

    If every star
    harbors at least one civilization and time they stay at level we may communicate with them lasts ~XXXXXX years (XXXXXX years from the moment they obtained the interstellar travel ) then having fact of no-communication we may asses the maximum XXXXXX to be consistent with fact of no-communication. Every second star assumption gives different XXXXXX and so on...

    UFO observations may manifest the cases when contact has lost any sense (like Infusoria example)

    Reply With Quote  
     

Similar Threads

  1. How far through the life of the Universe are we?
    By Daecon in forum Astronomy & Cosmology
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: December 19th, 2013, 10:24 PM
  2. Replies: 5
    Last Post: November 25th, 2013, 01:37 PM
  3. Replies: 4
    Last Post: January 19th, 2013, 10:10 AM
  4. Life in the Universe.
    By Halliday in forum Astronomy & Cosmology
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: December 8th, 2012, 03:13 PM
  5. Replies: 33
    Last Post: July 16th, 2009, 06:52 AM
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •