Im not sure, mainly because Ive personally never seen anything that just made me think "Ok, no clue WTF that is" Ive seen one thing once, that was huge way off in the distance when I was about 16 or 17 while driving. Problem was it was during the Buick Open, and they usually fly a big ol blimp during it. Ive seen blimps though, and I lost track of it while driving, so that one, not sure.
But uh like your avatar, I partly do want it all to be real.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Medium of Death wrote:Yes. The Universe is bloody massive.
Not convinced on the 'currently visit earth' aliens though,
Well in that regard, yae I definitely believe there is other intelligent life out there, like you said the Universe is just to fething big to not have anything else. Life literally just seems to happen regardless of environment. I was commenting on the Earth visitors
The universe is too large to exclude the possibility, but I'm not going to run around spouting "there are aliens out there" unless we actually find something.
Some interesting answers guys, I believe that there is alien life, but I am open, yet sceptical that they have visited earth. Although the TV programmes like UFO hunters are still an interesting watch.
Mathematically, even if we assume that life of any kind has something like 1:1,000,000,000 chance of appearing on a planet, then even so there would be many billions of planets with some form of life on them
The universe is just too big for there not to be.
Statistically there should be somthing else out there. As to whether or not they've been visiting us, well, I'm sceptical. Its a possibility, but other life is probably really far away or no more developed than we are. It can't be ruled out that they are capable of getting here, but if they can why has there been no attempts at contact?
No.
The universe is a finite place and the maths says it's pretty unlikely.
You may as well say "well there's all these grains of sand, one of them must be a completely accurate map of Chipping Norton".
The universe is so large that the probability of intelligent life existing approaches 1 and the probability of it existing within traveling distance of us approaches 0
Depends on the question. Are we talking "Are their aliens period?" Well yeah, in a universe where there are billions of galaxies each with billions of stars, that we know of so far, the idea that we're the sole intelligent life in the cosmos is laughable.
If we're talking, "Are little gray men anally violating rednecks and sheep in Arkansas?" Well, no. That's alcohol and inbreeding.
Joey wrote:No.
The universe is a finite place and the maths says it's pretty unlikely.
The universe is large enough that "pretty unlikely" still constitutes near certainty. You have to basically hit "impossible" before you can say that and since it already happened once, "impossible" is off the table.
Joey wrote:No.
The universe is a finite place and the maths says it's pretty unlikely.
You may as well say "well there's all these grains of sand, one of them must be a completely accurate map of Chipping Norton".
A finite place so utterly huge that the unlikeliness is offset by it's size.
Hell, the universe is so large that it's actually incomprehensible to us just how big it is.
Now, if that had been an answer to "Is there other sentient life out there?" then my answer might have been slightly different, but not by much. After all, sentient life takes multiple forms right here on Earth.
Joey wrote:No.
The universe is a finite place and the maths says it's pretty unlikely.
You may as well say "well there's all these grains of sand, one of them must be a completely accurate map of Chipping Norton".
Exactly which maths state that the area set in the universe is finite? Also which maths state that it's pretty unlikely? Most proofs for this kind of thing tend to state that there is almost certainty in the existence of extraterrestrial lifeforms.
When you said maths, did you mean "my head"?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Gorskar.da.Lost wrote:
Joey wrote:No.
The universe is a finite place and the maths says it's pretty unlikely.
You may as well say "well there's all these grains of sand, one of them must be a completely accurate map of Chipping Norton".
A finite place so utterly huge that the unlikeliness is offset by it's size.
Hell, the universe is so large that it's actually incomprehensible to us just how big it is.
Now, if that had been an answer to "Is there other sentient life out there?" then my answer might have been slightly different, but not by much. After all, sentient life takes multiple forms right here on Earth.
Where are you guys getting this "finite" business from?
Gorskar.da.Lost wrote:Mathematically, even if we assume that life of any kind has something like 1:1,000,000,000 chance of appearing on a planet, then even so there would be many billions of planets with some form of life on them The universe is just too big for there not to be.
1 in a billion is likely too small.
The usefulness of the Drake Equation is that it gives an idea of the appropriate variables. In order to have life on a planet you have to have a habitable planet. In order to have a habitable planet you have to have the right mix of chemicals. In order to have life on that planet you have to have some other chemical mix.
The uselessness of the Drake Equation is that it's essentially a SWAG. And therefore doesn't actually give any useful information, except for the user's bias.
I'm of the opinion that it doesn't matter whether there's life out there or not, it will never have an impact on our planet.
Well, it comes down to the Fermi Paradox, which boiled down comes to this:
The number of planets is so large that life should be common, and if it is common then we should have proof of its existence. Since we have no proof of existence, life in the universe is so incredibly rare or short lived that we (humans) will never meet it.
Shrike325 wrote:Well, it comes down to the Fermi Paradox, which boiled down comes to this:
The number of planets is so large that life should be common, and if it is common then we should have proof of its existence. Since we have no proof of existence, life in the universe is so incredibly rare or short lived that we (humans) will never meet it.
There are so many logical holes in the fermi paradox that it belongs in a comic book text bubble at this point.
Gorskar.da.Lost wrote:Mathematically, even if we assume that life of any kind has something like 1:1,000,000,000 chance of appearing on a planet, then even so there would be many billions of planets with some form of life on them
The universe is just too big for there not to be.
1 in a billion is likely too small.
The usefulness of the Drake Equation is that it gives an idea of the appropriate variables. In order to have life on a planet you have to have a habitable planet. In order to have a habitable planet you have to have the right mix of chemicals. In order to have life on that planet you have to have some other chemical mix.
The uselessness of the Drake Equation is that it's essentially a SWAG. And therefore doesn't actually give any useful information, except for the user's bias.
I'm of the opinion that it doesn't matter whether there's life out there or not, it will never have an impact on our planet.
Oh, it probably is too small, hence the assumption.
Still, as to the last part of your response, yeah, I doubt we'll live long enough as a species to ever prove it.
Joey wrote:No.
The universe is a finite place and the maths says it's pretty unlikely.
You may as well say "well there's all these grains of sand, one of them must be a completely accurate map of Chipping Norton".
Exactly which maths state that the area set in the universe is finite? Also which maths state that it's pretty unlikely? Most proofs for this kind of thing tend to state that there is almost certainty in the existence of extraterrestrial lifeforms.
When you said maths, did you mean "my head"?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Gorskar.da.Lost wrote:
Joey wrote:No.
The universe is a finite place and the maths says it's pretty unlikely.
You may as well say "well there's all these grains of sand, one of them must be a completely accurate map of Chipping Norton".
A finite place so utterly huge that the unlikeliness is offset by it's size.
Hell, the universe is so large that it's actually incomprehensible to us just how big it is.
Now, if that had been an answer to "Is there other sentient life out there?" then my answer might have been slightly different, but not by much. After all, sentient life takes multiple forms right here on Earth.
Where are you guys getting this "finite" business from?
Hm, actually looking it up, there seems to be no actual indicative size for the universe; indeed, it might actually be infinite.
If so, I think my mind just blew up, because that would be amazing.
Joey wrote:No.
The universe is a finite place and the maths says it's pretty unlikely.
The universe is large enough that "pretty unlikely" still constitutes near certainty. You have to basically hit "impossible" before you can say that and since it already happened once, "impossible" is off the table.
No...there is an actual number of planets in the universe.
If there is life in the universe then it would have to be related to us, the chance of complicated biological information evolving twice, independently, is negligible.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Gorskar.da.Lost wrote:
Hm, actually looking it up, there seems to be no actual indicative size for the universe; indeed, it might actually be infinite.
If so, I think my mind just blew up, because that would be amazing.
The universe can't be infinite or it would cause an infinite gravitational pull on everything else and nothing would exist.
Joey wrote:No.
The universe is a finite place and the maths says it's pretty unlikely.
The universe is large enough that "pretty unlikely" still constitutes near certainty. You have to basically hit "impossible" before you can say that and since it already happened once, "impossible" is off the table.
No...there is an actual number of planets in the universe.
If there is life in the universe then it would have to be related to us, the chance of complicated biological information evolving twice, independently, is negligible.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Gorskar.da.Lost wrote:
Hm, actually looking it up, there seems to be no actual indicative size for the universe; indeed, it might actually be infinite.
If so, I think my mind just blew up, because that would be amazing.
The universe can't be infinite or it would cause an infinite gravitational pull on everything else and nothing would exist.
Playing devil's advocate here:
Lets say that the chance of life occurring in the universe is 1 / (3.5 x 10^22) per star. One, 35 sextillionth. 0.00000000000000000000000028%. Current estimates are that there are 70 sextillion observable stars, and so with the earlier assumption, there should be at least 2 groups of life out there, statistically.
The simple fact is we have not been looking for long enough. SETI has been looking at single stars one at a time for forty years. That's not really a long time. Its like dropping a needle out a plane in the hope it lands on a piece of thread you set up 30,000 feet below.
The only proof against there being any intelligent life out there is in my opinion not fermi paradox but something way nerdier and way more specific.
'Von Neumodian Probes' or as Iain M Banks called them 'Hegemonising Swarms'. Essentially a self replicating machine that moves (the speed is largely irrelevant could be walking pace for all it matters) from resource to resource making copies of itself. IIRC one would have stripped the galaxy bare in about 100,000 years.
Of course you could argue that carbon based life is one such 'hegemonising swarm' that landed on earth. As some of the more hare brained explanations of life say it stowed away on an asteroid.
Joey wrote:No.
The universe is a finite place and the maths says it's pretty unlikely.
The universe is large enough that "pretty unlikely" still constitutes near certainty. You have to basically hit "impossible" before you can say that and since it already happened once, "impossible" is off the table.
No...there is an actual number of planets in the universe.
If there is life in the universe then it would have to be related to us, the chance of complicated biological information evolving twice, independently, is negligible.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Gorskar.da.Lost wrote:
Hm, actually looking it up, there seems to be no actual indicative size for the universe; indeed, it might actually be infinite.
If so, I think my mind just blew up, because that would be amazing.
The universe can't be infinite or it would cause an infinite gravitational pull on everything else and nothing would exist.
Playing devil's advocate here:
Lets say that the chance of life occurring in the universe is 1 / (3.5 x 10^22) per star. One, 35 sextillionth. 0.00000000000000000000000028%. Current estimates are that there are 70 sextillion observable stars, and so with the earlier assumption, there should be at least 2 groups of life out there, statistically.
Except neither you nor anyone actually has a clue how life itself came to being. Atm all we can do is stick an electric current through amino acids and note that nothing whatsoever happens.
In leui of any other evidence we must accept the simplest assertion, that life/DNA occurred entirely at random. And if you accept that, the chances of it happening again are TINY.
Also note aliens!=aliens. It's possible life on earth came from space, or we inadvertently colonised another bit of rock. But that would just be a few bacteria.
I'm not sure that is what the current idea is, Joey, but given that we lack experimental proof about much to do with the scale of the universe, I think that you could do with toning down the certainty there a little.
Given that we can observe an estimated (one estimate I saw, anyway) 70,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 stars (that's seventy sextillion), the chances of life (just life- chemical formations which pass information on and can evolve) existing I think is pretty damn high. The chances of intelligent life is a lot lower, but I don't think it's unreasonable to imagine that it might exist. It is not as close to a certainty as the presence of some simple replicating DNA/other replicating chemical loops, or say, alien bacteria. Aliens visiting Earth I think is really unlikely, especially in the "sneaking around and anal probing people" kind of way. It's just too far, too much expenditure of energy and effort, to come all that way and not do anything big and worthwhile.
No...there is an actual number of planets in the universe. If there is life in the universe then it would have to be related to us, the chance of complicated biological information evolving twice, independently, is negligible.
Where are you getting this gak? Do you have any sort of formal astrophysics education?
The chances of intelligent life is a lot lower, but I don't think it's unreasonable to imagine that it might exist.
Given that it exists in the only observed location of biological life it doesn't seem incredibly unreasonable. The time scales throw it off a lot though.
No...there is an actual number of planets in the universe. If there is life in the universe then it would have to be related to us, the chance of complicated biological information evolving twice, independently, is negligible.
Where are you getting this gak?
Logic.
If the universe had an infinite number of planets their gravitational pull would be infinite, therefore we must assume it is finite.
No...there is an actual number of planets in the universe. If there is life in the universe then it would have to be related to us, the chance of complicated biological information evolving twice, independently, is negligible.
Where are you getting this gak?
Logic. If the universe had an infinite number of planets their gravitational pull would be infinite, therefore we must assume it is finite.
That doesn't make sense in the slightest. That concept does not mesh with any common understanding of gravity or the dispersion of matter in the universe.
No...there is an actual number of planets in the universe. If there is life in the universe then it would have to be related to us, the chance of complicated biological information evolving twice, independently, is negligible.
Where are you getting this gak?
Logic.
If the universe had an infinite number of planets their gravitational pull would be infinite, therefore we must assume it is finite.
No...there is an actual number of planets in the universe. If there is life in the universe then it would have to be related to us, the chance of complicated biological information evolving twice, independently, is negligible.
Where are you getting this gak?
Logic.
If the universe had an infinite number of planets their gravitational pull would be infinite, therefore we must assume it is finite.
That doesn't make sense in the slightest. That concept does not mesh with any common understanding of gravity or the dispersion of matter in the universe.
Kinda does make sense. If the universe is infinitely large, and as such has infinite matter, then there would be an infinity large gravitational force pulling in all directions.
Newton's laws are a little outdated in the modern parlance. The outward expansion of the big bang cancels out the gravitational force, and as the universe expands further it gets weaker. There are some other proposed theories to explain why the universe hadn't collapsed in on itself.
While it is unlikely in the current framework that the universe is infinite, it is not impossible that it is. It's hard to state much in this sort of cosmology with any kind of certainty.
No...there is an actual number of planets in the universe. If there is life in the universe then it would have to be related to us, the chance of complicated biological information evolving twice, independently, is negligible.
Where are you getting this gak?
Logic. If the universe had an infinite number of planets their gravitational pull would be infinite, therefore we must assume it is finite.
That doesn't make sense in the slightest. That concept does not mesh with any common understanding of gravity or the dispersion of matter in the universe.
Kinda does make sense. If the universe is infinitely large, and as such has infinite matter, then there would be an infinity large gravitational force pulling in all directions.
But it doesn't make sense that that would prevent an infinite universe or a universe with infinite matter (those are two very different things). Gravity also attenuates at an exponential curve so gravity doesn't gather like a giant tidal wave to rip us all apart. It just stops doing anything past a certain distance.
No...there is an actual number of planets in the universe. If there is life in the universe then it would have to be related to us, the chance of complicated biological information evolving twice, independently, is negligible.
Where are you getting this gak? Do you have any sort of formal astrophysics education?
The chances of intelligent life is a lot lower, but I don't think it's unreasonable to imagine that it might exist.
Given that it exists in the only observed location of biological life it doesn't seem incredibly unreasonable. The time scales throw it off a lot though.
Good tv show about this on the ol' Beeb. There is some evidence that life has evolved numerous times just on earth. As for intelligent life, the corvid family, philosophically speaking, has all the traits associated with intelligence, self awareness, perception of others, reasoning, language, use of tools etc. The only behaviour they currently lack is the desire to create artwork. Some scientists even going as far as saying they are on the cusp of where we were 100,000 years ago.
No...there is an actual number of planets in the universe. If there is life in the universe then it would have to be related to us, the chance of complicated biological information evolving twice, independently, is negligible.
Where are you getting this gak?
Logic.
If the universe had an infinite number of planets their gravitational pull would be infinite, therefore we must assume it is finite.
That doesn't make sense in the slightest. That concept does not mesh with any common understanding of gravity or the dispersion of matter in the universe.
Kinda does make sense. If the universe is infinitely large, and as such has infinite matter, then there would be an infinity large gravitational force pulling in all directions.
But that field would be dispersed across infinite space, cancelling it out.
No...there is an actual number of planets in the universe. If there is life in the universe then it would have to be related to us, the chance of complicated biological information evolving twice, independently, is negligible.
Where are you getting this gak?
Logic.
If the universe had an infinite number of planets their gravitational pull would be infinite, therefore we must assume it is finite.
That doesn't make sense in the slightest. That concept does not mesh with any common understanding of gravity or the dispersion of matter in the universe.
Kinda does make sense. If the universe is infinitely large, and as such has infinite matter, then there would be an infinity large gravitational force pulling in all directions.
But that field would be dispersed across infinite space, cancelling it out.
But the distance between the observer and the observed is not infinite.
No...there is an actual number of planets in the universe. If there is life in the universe then it would have to be related to us, the chance of complicated biological information evolving twice, independently, is negligible.
Where are you getting this gak?
Logic.
If the universe had an infinite number of planets their gravitational pull would be infinite, therefore we must assume it is finite.
That doesn't make sense in the slightest. That concept does not mesh with any common understanding of gravity or the dispersion of matter in the universe.
Kinda does make sense. If the universe is infinitely large, and as such has infinite matter, then there would be an infinity large gravitational force pulling in all directions.
But it doesn't make sense that that would prevent an infinite universe or a universe with infinite matter (those are two very different things). Gravity also attenuates at an exponential curve so gravity doesn't gather like a giant tidal wave to rip us all apart. It just stops doing anything past a certain distance.
You are arguing for an infinite number of planets because the universe is infinitely large. Unless those planets are massless, then you are arguing for a universe with infinite mass. If there is infinite mass, then there is an infinitely large gravitational force. If there is an infinitely large gravitational force pulling in all directions, molecular bonds could not form. If molecular bods could not form (as they would be pulled apart), then life could not exist at all. I exist. Therefore there is a finite amount of mass, therefore there are a finite number of planets, this does not necessarily preclude an infinitely large universe, as it is quite possible that the universe is infinitely large, but at some point, becomes empty.
Joey, as much as I like your Avatar, I sometimes think you deliberately choose to be argumentative.
Joey wrote:No.
The universe is a finite place and the maths says it's pretty unlikely.
You may as well say "well there's all these grains of sand, one of them must be a completely accurate map of Chipping Norton".
Looking at the evolution of life on earth, the same patterns have come to form over an over again. The same structures have shown themselves in entirely separate evolutionary paths.
Our understanding of how life has formed on earth can lend itself to its formation on other planets, there is understanding enough that we can draw upon certain norms. i.e. the need for water for the creation of life.
The maths actually say the opposite of what you say is true - we know complex life has come into being at least once, and the almost incomprehensible number of stars and galaxies within the universe means that claiming we are the only ones is egotistical to the extreme.
Really the greater barrier is time and space - the universe is simply so old, and so massive, that the difficulty might be instead being in the right place and time to encounter them.
You could also point out Greg Bear's (the SF writers) slightly pessimistic theory - that the nature of life is struggle, and any complex and intelligent forms of life that have come into being (and unable to separate themselves from that fundamental character) have ultimately destroyed themselves when they have eventually created weapons capable of doing so. Perhaps there are a million burning balls in the galaxy, life blasted or poisoned out of existence.
As for aliens having the technology to travel the gulf between stars, and then messing up so they make some farmer in Kansas aware of their presence? I would say that such a thing would be extremely unlikely.
I'm not sure why people are getting hung up on infinite. It doesn't have anything to do with anything.
There is a metric gak-ton of Galaxies, Stars, Solar Systems, and, therefore, planets in the universe. To say that there's not at least 1 other planet with intelligent life on it is not a concept I can agree with, but I'll respect your opinion.
No...there is an actual number of planets in the universe. If there is life in the universe then it would have to be related to us, the chance of complicated biological information evolving twice, independently, is negligible.
Where are you getting this gak?
Logic. If the universe had an infinite number of planets their gravitational pull would be infinite, therefore we must assume it is finite.
That doesn't make sense in the slightest. That concept does not mesh with any common understanding of gravity or the dispersion of matter in the universe.
Kinda does make sense. If the universe is infinitely large, and as such has infinite matter, then there would be an infinity large gravitational force pulling in all directions.
But it doesn't make sense that that would prevent an infinite universe or a universe with infinite matter (those are two very different things). Gravity also attenuates at an exponential curve so gravity doesn't gather like a giant tidal wave to rip us all apart. It just stops doing anything past a certain distance.
You are arguing for an infinite number of planets because the universe is infinitely large. Unless those planets are massless, then you are arguing for a universe with infinite mass. If there is infinite mass, then there is an infinitely large gravitational force. If there is an infinitely large gravitational force pulling in all directions, molecular bonds could not form. If molecular bods could not form (as they would be pulled apart), then life could not exist at all. I exist. Therefore there is a finite amount of mass, therefore there are a finite number of planets, this does not necessarily preclude an infinitely large universe, as it is quite possible that the universe is infinitely large, but at some point, becomes empty.
Thats not how gravity works. Two equal gravitational pulls on both sides of you pull equally. You aren't ripped apart, it just cancels out. Gravity also attenuates rapidly, meaning that infinite gravitational force over an infinite area doesn't imply infinite pull from the point of the observer. It actually implies that there would be no gravity at all. There are pockets of gravity in the universe that correspond to concentrations of matter and energy, but they are fairly evenly distributed which prevents some sort of ridiculous collapse scenario. Theres already enough energy in the observable universe to do that according to this view of gravity which pretty intensely implies that it's wrong.
kronk wrote:I'm not sure why people are getting hung up on infinite. It doesn't have anything to do with anything.
There is a metric gak-ton of Galaxies, Stars, Solar Systems, and, therefore, planets in the universe. To say that there's not at least 1 other planet with intelligent life on it is not a concept I can agree with, but I'll respect your opinion.
Because with an infinite universe, there are infinitely many alien civilizations. With infinitely many alien civilizations, there are infinitely many that have the ability to travel to Earth, and with infinitely many having the ability to travel to earth, there are infinitely many that ARE visiting Earth.
@ShumaGorath:
Please elaborate.
From my understanding F(gravity) = G * ((m(1) * m(2)) / r^2).
If there is infinite mass, than from any point, F(gravity) goes to infinity in all directions.
Pacific wrote:Joey, as much as I like your Avatar, I sometimes think you deliberately choose to be argumentative.
Joey wrote:No.
The universe is a finite place and the maths says it's pretty unlikely.
You may as well say "well there's all these grains of sand, one of them must be a completely accurate map of Chipping Norton".
Looking at the evolution of life on earth, the same patterns have come to form over an over again. The same structures have shown themselves in entirely separate evolutionary paths.
Our understanding of how life has formed on earth can lend itself to its formation on other planets, there is understanding enough that we can draw upon certain norms. i.e. the need for water for the creation of life.
The maths actually say the opposite of what you say is true - we know complex life has come into being at least once, and the almost incomprehensible number of stars and galaxies within the universe means that claiming we are the only ones is egotistical to the extreme.
Really the greater barrier is time and space - the universe is simply so old, and so massive, that the difficulty might be instead being in the right place and time to encounter them.
You could also point out Greg Bear's (the SF writers) slightly pessimistic theory - that the nature of life is struggle, and any complex and intelligent forms of life that have come into being (and unable to separate themselves from that fundamental character) have ultimately destroyed themselves when they have eventually created weapons capable of doing so. Perhaps there are a million burning balls in the galaxy, life blasted or poisoned out of existence.
As for aliens having the technology to travel the gulf between stars, and then messing up so they make some farmer in Kansas aware of their presence? I would say that such a thing would be extremely unlikely.
Once you have DNA, the rest of life is pretty easy.
Question is, how do you form DNA, or any biological code, at random?
No one knows the answr to that so no one actually knows how likely alien life is.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Shrike325 wrote:
@ShumaGorath:
Please elaborate.
From my understanding F(gravity) = G * ((m(1) * m(2)) / r^2).
If there is infinite mass, than from any point, F(gravity) goes to infinity in all directions.
That is correct, but if people want to drop the infite argument then let them.
Considering the size of the universe, I think it is all but guaranteed that there are other planets with life on them out there, and a fairly good chance that some of it is intelligent life.
However, I'm quite confident that absolutely none of it has ever come to earth.
kronk wrote:I'm not sure why people are getting hung up on infinite. It doesn't have anything to do with anything.
There is a metric gak-ton of Galaxies, Stars, Solar Systems, and, therefore, planets in the universe. To say that there's not at least 1 other planet with intelligent life on it is not a concept I can agree with, but I'll respect your opinion.
Because with an infinite universe, there are infinitely many alien civilizations. With infinitely many alien civilizations, there are infinitely many that have the ability to travel to Earth, and with infinitely many having the ability to travel to earth, there are infinitely many that ARE visiting Earth.
@ShumaGorath: Please elaborate.
From my understanding F(gravity) = G * ((m(1) * m(2)) / r^2). If there is infinite mass, than from any point, F(gravity) goes to infinity in all directions.
At which point its important to understand how gravity interacts with energy, time, space and matter.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
kronk wrote:I'm not sure why people are getting hung up on infinite. It doesn't have anything to do with anything.
There is a metric gak-ton of Galaxies, Stars, Solar Systems, and, therefore, planets in the universe. To say that there's not at least 1 other planet with intelligent life on it is not a concept I can agree with, but I'll respect your opinion.
Infinite implies certainty. If it's infinite then there is an occurrence of every possibility an infinite number of times. It's a pretty big difference.
kronk wrote:I'm not sure why people are getting hung up on infinite. It doesn't have anything to do with anything.
There is a metric gak-ton of Galaxies, Stars, Solar Systems, and, therefore, planets in the universe. To say that there's not at least 1 other planet with intelligent life on it is not a concept I can agree with, but I'll respect your opinion.
Because with an infinite universe, there are infinitely many alien civilizations. With infinitely many alien civilizations, there are infinitely many that have the ability to travel to Earth, and with infinitely many having the ability to travel to earth, there are infinitely many that ARE visiting Earth.
@ShumaGorath: Please elaborate.
From my understanding F(gravity) = G * ((m(1) * m(2)) / r^2). If there is infinite mass, than from any point, F(gravity) goes to infinity in all directions.
Gravity is infinite but also incredibly weak, it is in fact the weakest of the four fundamental forces to the point that a simple bar magnet can overpower the attraction of the entire earth and lift a nail with ease. Besides equal pulls in opposite directions cancel out so if the universe is equal then there is infinite force in every direction and thus no net force in any particular direction (barring anomalies caused by local masses).
There is also the inflation caused by dark energy and the wonderful world of quantum mechanics to account for that suggest a force countering gravity and the certainty of every possible action respectively.
kronk wrote:I'm not sure why people are getting hung up on infinite. It doesn't have anything to do with anything.
There is a metric gak-ton of Galaxies, Stars, Solar Systems, and, therefore, planets in the universe. To say that there's not at least 1 other planet with intelligent life on it is not a concept I can agree with, but I'll respect your opinion.
Because with an infinite universe, there are infinitely many alien civilizations. With infinitely many alien civilizations, there are infinitely many that have the ability to travel to Earth, and with infinitely many having the ability to travel to earth, there are infinitely many that ARE visiting Earth.
@ShumaGorath:
Please elaborate.
From my understanding F(gravity) = G * ((m(1) * m(2)) / r^2).
If there is infinite mass, than from any point, F(gravity) goes to infinity in all directions.
Gravity is infinite but also incredibly weak,
Impossible. It is either infinite, or it is finite and weak.
kronk wrote:I'm not sure why people are getting hung up on infinite. It doesn't have anything to do with anything.
There is a metric gak-ton of Galaxies, Stars, Solar Systems, and, therefore, planets in the universe. To say that there's not at least 1 other planet with intelligent life on it is not a concept I can agree with, but I'll respect your opinion.
Because with an infinite universe, there are infinitely many alien civilizations. With infinitely many alien civilizations, there are infinitely many that have the ability to travel to Earth, and with infinitely many having the ability to travel to earth, there are infinitely many that ARE visiting Earth.
@ShumaGorath: Please elaborate.
From my understanding F(gravity) = G * ((m(1) * m(2)) / r^2). If there is infinite mass, than from any point, F(gravity) goes to infinity in all directions.
Gravity is infinite but also incredibly weak,
Impossible. It is either infinite, or it is finite and weak.
Infinite in occurance and infinite in strength are not the same. Two infinite amounts are not inherently equal. Set size, base number, granularity, and numerous other things are exceptionally important in calculating things with infinite values.
It has infinite range as it has force determined by an inverse square of it's distance yet is relatively ineffectual when compared to the other four forces, how is that impossible?
Shrike325 wrote:Right, with infinite mass in the universe you have an infinitely strong gravitational force, I suppose I should have been more specific.
Except you don't. You're mashing all that gravity into one place because the equation gives you a sideways 8, but it's infinitely dispersed. If you have an M&M every square mile infinitely in all directions in infinite space it's an infinite number of M&Ms. Except you don't have an infinite pile of M&Ms, you have one M&M every square mile over infinite space. Still not good enough to see one from the location of another. That even dispersal even means that they won't attract each other since all that infinite gravity cancels itself out.
corpsesarefun wrote:Think of spacetime as a sheet, if you press down on a sheet at one point but hold it taut with equal force then there will be no net effect.
Visually that's probably a bad example since sheets and paper tend to bend due to lever action if an equal force is applied in the middle and at the periphery (they're also elastic).
corpsesarefun wrote:Think of spacetime as a sheet, if you press down on a sheet at one point but hold it taut with equal force then there will be no net effect.
Visually that's probably a bad example since sheets and paper tend to bend.
I'm thinking a taut latex sheet or a bedsheet but to be fair most visual examples fail if you go into any detail.
If the universe is infinite and has an infinite amount of mass, gravity would NOT be infinite, because gravitational waves still only travel at the speed of light. So, we'd only be experiencing gravity from objects within our light cone (13.75 billion light years in radius).
That being said, the most widely accepted (but not entirely agreed upon) theories predict the universe as finite in size (but constantly growing).
As for the aliens question, Fermi's Paradox is a very real issue. It boils down to the following: If life was even super rare (like 1 in a billion), we'd certainly see a few cases of it in our galaxy as there is billions and billions of planets in our galaxy. And, as the universe is incredibly old and the Earth is relatively young, at least one of those alien life forms would be billions of years ahead of us, developmentally. Even at speeds much slower than the speed of light and pausing for centuries at each new planet, they would have colonized the entire galaxy by the time dinosaurs were first evolving. Since we haven't seen them, it must mean that life is even rarer than that estimate.
So, there's only a few reasonable possibilities (in my ranking of most desirable to least desirable):
1) Our planet exists in the equivalent of a nature preserve. Aliens are well aware of us, but they want to leave us alone so we can develop naturally. (This means it's possible they visit regularly as a form of anthropology.)
2) Life is so incredibly rare that we're the only life in the Milky Way. (This means there's still probably life somewhere else in the Universe, but we'll never ever ever meet it.)
3) Alien life is so incredibly foreign in nature that we simply can't recognize it for what it is. They may be here with us and we don't even notice them, or they may be ignoring us because they don't recognize us as life. (Perhaps they live in sulfuric acid pools on Venus and think water is too poisonous for life.)
4) The Galaxy is, in fact, a really bad place to live. The first (or one of the first) species to start colonizing the Galaxy was incredibly hostile. There's now a near-constant state of all out war among the stars. The surviving species have to devote all of their resources to fighting everyone else to stay alive. If this is the case, the first time humanity makes contact with anyone, they'll most likely immediately wipe us out since we may be a threat to them. (And, we won't be able to defend ourselves, since they're a billion years more advanced in technology than us.)
5) Life is actually somewhat common, but there's a great barrier to actually performing manned space exploration. This causes every (or at least so many that the only survivors are as common as scenario 2) species that encounters it to fail to expand beyond their home planet. Best case scenario is that it's nuclear weapons, and once a species develops nukes, it wipes itself out. If so, we've done a pretty amazing job so far and actually stand a chance at being the first ones to survive it. Worst case scenario, there's some science experiment or other technological advance that's so obvious, every species comes up with it. But, it inevitably leads to their own destruction. (Perhaps it's burning natural resources, and every species before us has caused climate change that killed them all, and we've only got a few years left.)
All the above has been stated by me, a trained physicist (with a BS, no post-graduate degree) with a heavy amateur fascination with advanced physics theory. I'm not a professional, but I like to think of myself as pretty close.
Grakmar wrote:If the universe is infinite and has an infinite amount of mass, gravity would NOT be infinite, because gravitational waves still only travel at the speed of light. So, we'd only be experiencing gravity from objects within our light cone (13.75 billion light years in radius).
That being said, the most widely accepted (but not entirely agreed upon) theories predict the universe as finite in size (but constantly growing).
Not proven, we know next to nothing about gravitational waves and they may well move faster than light.
Listen I think they should teach the theory of gravity and the theory of evolution in public schools too as long as they provide the childrens the oppourtunity to learn that god created all life in his image, and he holds us on the earth. If he created us in his image clearly there can't be aliens. End of story /lock thread.
Medium of Death wrote:Yes. The Universe is bloody massive.
Not convinced on the 'currently visit earth' aliens though,
Pretty much this.
With all the worlds out there that can support life as we know it, there has to be ONE or so form of aliens out there. Coupled with the fact that there are now living Metal Cells, and it's more absurd to think that life COULDN'T exist on another planet.
AustonT wrote:Listen I think they should teach the theory of gravity and the theory of evolution in public schools too as long as they provide the childrens the oppourtunity to learn that god created all life in his image, and he holds us on the earth. If he created us in his image clearly there can't be aliens. End of story /lock thread.
AustonT wrote:Listen I think they should teach the theory of gravity and the theory of evolution in public schools too as long as they provide the childrens the oppourtunity to learn that god created all life in his image, and he holds us on the earth. If he created us in his image clearly there can't be aliens. End of story /lock thread.
AustonT wrote:Listen I think they should teach the theory of gravity and the theory of evolution in public schools too as long as they provide the childrens the oppourtunity to learn that god created all life in his image, and he holds us on the earth. If he created us in his image clearly there can't be aliens. End of story /lock thread.
But if all life is in his image, what about cows?
Livestock. Genesis 1:24.
You may have also missed a hefty dose of sarcasm.
Argh! You see? You see! The DCM bourgeoisie are keeping secrets from us! To arms, comrades! What do they know!? The secret location of the Fountain of Youth? El Dorado? Where the hell all my socks went? Seriously, I can only ever seem to find one sock from any given pair.
Errrr, on topic.... uh....
Crap. I can't really elaborate on anything I've already said or anything anyone else has said.
There is no DCM, it was nothing more than some swamp gas from a weather balloon getting trapped in a thermal pocket and reflecting the light from Venus.
corpsesarefun wrote:There is no DCM, it was nothing more than some swamp gas from a weather balloon getting trapped in a thermal pocket and reflecting the light from Venus.
Haha
Any way, I am not trying to sound crazy, but I think that it is still very credible that our planet has been visited by aliens; there are no facts, but there is no way to disapprove it, so who knows
Da Boss wrote:There's no way to disprove that the world and all causality isn't controlled by invisible intangible bees either. So that's what I believe.
RatBot wrote:Argh! You see? You see! The DCM bourgeoisie are keeping secrets from us! To arms, comrades! What do they know!? The secret location of the Fountain of Youth? El Dorado? Where the hell all my socks went? Seriously, I can only ever seem to find one sock from any given pair.
Errrr, on topic.... uh....
Crap. I can't really elaborate on anything I've already said or anything anyone else has said.
Joey wrote:No.
The universe is a finite place and the maths says it's pretty unlikely.
You may as well say "well there's all these grains of sand, one of them must be a completely accurate map of Chipping Norton".
No, the maths actually says that there should be at least one other form of life out there amongst the stars.
As for life, who says it has to be the same as us? It could be similar to us, it could be completely different. We have several theories as to how life came to be, we just haven't found which of the current theories, if any, is right.
Allegations of the DCM being an Alien cell designed to infiltrate human tactics of war via tabletop games are completely unbased.
There is NO alien conspiracy at dakka.
corpsesarefun wrote:There is no DCM, it was nothing more than some swamp gas from a weather balloon getting trapped in a thermal pocket and reflecting the light from Venus.
Haha
Any way, I am not trying to sound crazy, but I think that it is still very credible that our planet has been visited by aliens; there are no facts, but there is no way to disapprove it, so who knows
Joey wrote:No.
The universe is a finite place and the maths says it's pretty unlikely.
You may as well say "well there's all these grains of sand, one of them must be a completely accurate map of Chipping Norton".
No, because the point is not just saying 'there's lots of something, therefore there every unlikely thing must out there once'.
The point is to actually study and come to understand the scale of the first number (which is actually bigger than the number of grains of sand on Earth) and the second (which is dependant on repeating processes, and not at all like the randomness of parts of a grain of sand just happening to fall into line to resemble something).
Automatically Appended Next Post:
biccat wrote:1 in a billion is likely too small.
That's you just making stuff up.
The usefulness of the Drake Equation is that it gives an idea of the appropriate variables. In order to have life on a planet you have to have a habitable planet. In order to have a habitable planet you have to have the right mix of chemicals. In order to have life on that planet you have to have some other chemical mix.
The uselessness of the Drake Equation is that it's essentially a SWAG. And therefore doesn't actually give any useful information, except for the user's bias.
Except of course, people know stuff. They even know stuff that people on Dakka don't know. It's incredible, I know, but it really is true. They use that knowledge to make reasoned estimates of things. They can even use it make reasoned estimates of what is out there in the universe.
The estimates on the commonality of planets in the life zone, and the existance of various chemicals aren't just made up numbers.
I'm of the opinion that it doesn't matter whether there's life out there or not, it will never have an impact on our planet.
I agree with you there.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Pacific wrote:You could also point out Greg Bear's (the SF writers) slightly pessimistic theory - that the nature of life is struggle, and any complex and intelligent forms of life that have come into being (and unable to separate themselves from that fundamental character) have ultimately destroyed themselves when they have eventually created weapons capable of doing so. Perhaps there are a million burning balls in the galaxy, life blasted or poisoned out of existence.
I think it's an idea that had a lot of intuitive appeal in the Cold War, and possibly also late 2001, early 2002.
Grakmar wrote:...As for the aliens question, Fermi's Paradox is a very real issue. It boils down to the following:
If life was even super rare (like 1 in a billion), we'd certainly see a few cases of it in our galaxy as there is billions and billions of planets in our galaxy. And, as the universe is incredibly old and the Earth is relatively young, at least one of those alien life forms would be billions of years ahead of us, developmentally. Even at speeds much slower than the speed of light and pausing for centuries at each new planet, they would have colonized the entire galaxy by the time dinosaurs were first evolving. Since we haven't seen them, it must mean that life is even rarer than that estimate...
Here is the issue, I see, with that statement, regarding the Fermi's Paradox. Think about our own species. If a species reached a Type II in the Kardashev scale for technological advancement, which means the civilization can harnest energy from it's parent star, who's to say there is some economic fluxuation that once a civilization reaches a certain point that it would collapse on itself? There could be millions of ancient civilzations across just our arm of the Milky Way Galaxy and we would not be able to see them because they have died off.
NASA discovered arsenic based lifeforms somewhere near Houston, this was thought impossible.
There is a whole ecosystem based around underwater mineral volcanoes, and the sun's energy has nothing to do with it. This was thought impossible.
There are microbes found in underground gas pockets, once thought impossible.
And viruses come from space.
There is life out there...And if there isn't, and we are all that there is then the universe is fethed.
There is a hell of a lot of Stars and Galaxies out there that I'm almost certain Alien lifeforms exist.
I find it interesting that New Zealand and the French Goverment have publicly released thier UFO files which seems strange they would have actaul investigation into such things.
Maybe we can't detect them because they went digital. Analogue signals are fairly easy for us to detect compared to digital ones that require a key and the right frequency.
Our communications technology has already changed from indescriminate blasting of the airwaves to discrete targetted transmissions mainly aimed downward from satellites. Our radio signature in the galaxy has bloomed and dimmed in less than 60 years; a mere blip in time.
Zyllos wrote:
Grakmar wrote:...As for the aliens question, Fermi's Paradox is a very real issue. It boils down to the following:
If life was even super rare (like 1 in a billion), we'd certainly see a few cases of it in our galaxy as there is billions and billions of planets in our galaxy. And, as the universe is incredibly old and the Earth is relatively young, at least one of those alien life forms would be billions of years ahead of us, developmentally. Even at speeds much slower than the speed of light and pausing for centuries at each new planet, they would have colonized the entire galaxy by the time dinosaurs were first evolving. Since we haven't seen them, it must mean that life is even rarer than that estimate...
Here is the issue, I see, with that statement, regarding the Fermi's Paradox. Think about our own species. If a species reached a Type II in the Kardashev scale for technological advancement, which means the civilization can harnest energy from it's parent star, who's to say there is some economic fluxuation that once a civilization reaches a certain point that it would collapse on itself? There could be millions of ancient civilzations across just our arm of the Milky Way Galaxy and we would not be able to see them because they have died off.
It takes 2-3 generations of stars; a reasonably settled mature solar system with a planet in the hbitable zone that has been bombarded by cometary matter so that there is enough water and organic chenicals on the surface to form life. Hell life may even require a magnetic field. I think that we can assume that there wouldn't be much if any intelligent life with Billions of years on us.
We must also take into account that although a species may develop intellingence and self awareness as a survival trait, it is not necessarily linked to an ability to create tools or an interest in astronomy.
On earth there are have been many oportunities for intelligence to emerge. We should think ourselves lucky that the rise of communal insects did not occur at the time when atmospheric oxygen levels were high enough to support insects the size of small dogs. I doubt self aware insect colonies would be much interested in looking up.
Yes I think aliens exist. I just don't think they are interested in meeting us.
As an aside I believe that Grey aliens are an expression of the template our mind has for what constitutes a human form. The eyes are around here; the mouth and nose are centered there; the head is shaped vaguely like this and the body is of lower priority but shaped like this.
I used to see these when I was little. They were always peeking round doors in the dark. I am old enough that the grey alien stories had not been spread, I am also mildly schizophrenic.
Joey wrote:No.
The universe is a finite place and the maths says it's pretty unlikely.
You may as well say "well there's all these grains of sand, one of them must be a completely accurate map of Chipping Norton".
Exactly which maths state that the area set in the universe is finite? Also which maths state that it's pretty unlikely? Most proofs for this kind of thing tend to state that there is almost certainty in the existence of extraterrestrial lifeforms.
When you said maths, did you mean "my head"?
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Gorskar.da.Lost wrote:
Joey wrote:No.
The universe is a finite place and the maths says it's pretty unlikely.
You may as well say "well there's all these grains of sand, one of them must be a completely accurate map of Chipping Norton".
A finite place so utterly huge that the unlikeliness is offset by it's size.
Hell, the universe is so large that it's actually incomprehensible to us just how big it is.
Now, if that had been an answer to "Is there other sentient life out there?" then my answer might have been slightly different, but not by much. After all, sentient life takes multiple forms right here on Earth.
Where are you guys getting this "finite" business from?
Hm, actually looking it up, there seems to be no actual indicative size for the universe; indeed, it might actually be infinite.
If so, I think my mind just blew up, because that would be amazing.
Im just going to say that after watching several documenaries on other possibilities besides the big bang they all said that the universe is near infinite and scientists claiming it is infinite are using it as an easy way out of calculations.
Also i dont believe in aliens becase to believe in something implies there is no solid proof of said object of belief (see religion, miracles) and there is proof that alien life exists and has existed. This proof comes in the form of fossilised microbes found on mars and also at least 1 earth like planet that has life sustaining elements, foliage and correct temperatures.
So to sum up, i dont believe in aliens for i know with evidence backng me up that they exist.
The_mini_painter wrote:[Im just going to say that after watching several documenaries on other possibilities besides the big bang they all said that the universe is near infinite and scientists claiming it is infinite are using it as an easy way out of calculations.
Meanwhile at NASA:-
Scientist 1:' He's onto us! All of our hard years of avoiding doing work is ruined!'
Scientist 2:- 'Tell me about it! All these years, I've been puttting doing those troublesome calculations off....'
Scientist 1:- 'Blame it on Global Warming. That's all we can do now...'
Krellnus wrote:I believe in the possibility of alien life, to think that life couldn't exist somewhere else out there in the big big universe is massively arrogant.
To be fair, no-one is saying life couldn't exist.
Some people are saying 'given a rough estimation of what's needed for life to form, and the sheer number of stars in the universe life must exist out there' and other people are responding 'it isn't so much a rough estimation as a complete guess so really the answer is we can't know if there's life out there'.
There are billions of planets in this galaxy. There are billions of galaxies in the universe, many smaller and many quite a bit larger than this one. It is statistically improbable that there is only one planet in the entire universe which has intelligent life.
But it's also statistically improbable that we'll ever find them in our lifetimes specifically because of the vastness of space. And even if we do, they could be so far away that by the time we find them they're already extinct, as light just didn't travel fast enough.
There are billions of planets in this galaxy. There are billions of galaxies in the universe, many smaller and many quite a bit larger than this one. It is statistically improbable that there is only one planet in the entire universe which has intelligent life.
But it's also statistically improbable that we'll ever find them in our lifetimes specifically because of the vastness of space. And even if we do, they could be so far away that by the time we find them they're already extinct, as light just didn't travel fast enough.
Yeah, I agree with you on that. I’m just saying what the two sides were actually claiming, compared to what Krellnus had characterised the argument as.
Krellnus wrote:I believe in the possibility of alien life, to think that life couldn't exist somewhere else out there in the big big universe is massively arrogant.
To be fair, no-one is saying life couldn't exist.
Some people are saying 'given a rough estimation of what's needed for life to form, and the sheer number of stars in the universe life must exist out there' and other people are responding 'it isn't so much a rough estimation as a complete guess so really the answer is we can't know if there's life out there'.
Fair enough, I was more directing it straight at the question/OP, maybe I should have made that a bit clearer.
I wouldn't be surprised if it also looked nothing like us or what we're used to.
And lets face it, if there is intelligent life, would you really want to sat "Hi!"?
We suck. We can't be civil in just about anything. We're probably like the smelly
kids with lice of the universe.
Krellnus wrote:Fair enough, I was more directing it straight at the question/OP, maybe I should have made that a bit clearer.
Is cool.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
alarmingrick wrote:I wouldn't be surprised if it also looked nothing like us or what we're used to.
And lets face it, if there is intelligent life, would you really want to sat "Hi!"?
Looks aside, there’s also the issue of what we’d talk to it about. There’s an old line about a lion, even if it were gifted perfect English, could never talk to us, because our frames of reference are so different, and therefore our ways of thinking are so different.
And that’s just for a creature that lives on the same planet.
There's every chance that we'd find their thought processes unintelligible, and they'd think the same of us.
I'm not so sure. A lion is not sapient, and does not have an understanding of the functions of the world around it. We do, although no doubt in a vastly more simply manner than an alien race that could span the distance between stars, there is the fundamental understanding of mathematics and physics that could be a common ground between us.
While I don't believe in a 'superior power' in the way the Abrahamic religions talk about such a term, I sometimes wonder if the Universe has a certain vanity to it. Like it knows it is amazing, and we (and perhaps others) have come about and are in a position to gaze upon and comprehend its intricacies.
Anyway, I'll grab me coat..
remilia scarlet wrote:if they look like this, I'll gladly let them invade us.
I read a sci-fi novel some time ago (sadly I can't remember the name or writer!), humans are using teleportation wormholes to travel across the galaxy, but the process uses a massive amount of energy, and after a set time they are sling-shot back to Earth again.
In it there is the first encounter of intelligent alien life - they are tall, with claws and terrifying to look at (like something from a Horror movie). When they get the chance, they attack the astronauts they are dealing with. In the end and some time later they finally converse with the aliens, and discover that the aliens themselves had no way to know how to communicate with the humans, to find out what was normal etc. So, they read the mind of one of the astronauts and made themselves look and behave like he expected them to.
So, Remilia, if you are the first human that aliens meet, perhaps that is how they will look?
I would say that based on the size of the universe it's probably that life exists elsewhere. Experiments on Earth seem to increasingly show that the odds of various stages in the creation of life occurring naturally are not actually too improbable, especially when considering the time scales and size of the world's oceans, etc.
But there are a few issues than make it difficult for us to contact alien life, assuming we even develop a star drive that means that distance to other worlds is little problem. Firstly, I would imagine that complex life is much less common than simple life, the idea that we will find worlds with animals running around is far more optimistic than finding bacteria, which while scientifically fascinating is not what people hope for when 'meeting' alien life.
Secondly, the odds are that even if intelligent life does occur elsewhere, we will miss the opportunity to meet it. The universe is 9 billion years old, the earth 4.5 billion, we orbit an ordinary middle aged star. While complex life has been around for hundreds of millions of years, intelligent life in the form of humanity only set on its course out of Africa about 5 million years ago and Homo sapiens has only appeared in the last 200,000 years , and of that we've only had meaningful civilisation in the last 10-20,000 at a stretch. And of most of that time, we simply were too immature as a species to understand many scientific concepts. Now we are technologically advanced and have accelerated rapidly in the last 200 years from steam power to putting a man on the moon. We are risking annihilation through atomic weapons and climate change.
So in summation, if other aliens are like us, to have any meaningful dialogue with them we'll have to meet them in a very small window of opportunity, very very small, a matter of a few thousands of years in millions or billions. We are more likely to meet people who are primatives, the archaeological remains of dead species or species who are so far more advanced than us that to whom we are the ones that appear little more than ants.
We don't know what form life will take. Unlike most SF shows, we probably won't be able to breed with alien life because we have no shared origin, unless you accept that life on Earth was seeded from space in the first place, in which case many worlds could share a common origin, but that's fairly fantastic. DNA is vital for life because it's the only self-replicating molecule we have that does what it can, but the complexities are such that there could be other molecules that do the same thing we just don't know what they could be. Far from aliens having a DNA tripex or other SF sounding nonsense, they could have a chemical composition utterly unlike our own. As they say, 'It's life Jim, but not as we know it'.
The french gov has said UFOs are real. Check up the UFO incidents in Belium during the eighties. Thousands saw objects formed the same way. There is even a picture. Thousands of credible persons have seen UFOs. Even Jimmy Carter saw a UFO. Iranian and Chilean fighter jets even attacked UFOs. The american goverment started its harrasment of people who claim to have seen UFOs after it closed down its agency that was checking information. Brittish and american air force personal saw a UFO that had landed and draw the symbols that were on it.
They must exist, again, given the size of the universe.
They may have visited, but I do not believe in any government cover-ups; I think First Contact would be a good thing, surely... certainly a unifying force.
Plus the people who say no tend to just cite what it would take to duplicate us on another planet. There could be any number of other mechanisms to generate life under different circumstances.
Henners91 wrote:They must exist, again, given the size of the universe.
Not to mention the possibility of there being a whole hell of a lot of alternate universes that life could be lurking in.
How weird, I was just explaining the Multiverse to my wife while watching Ghost hunters. I make up crazy theories to try and prove "ghosts" are real using things I read/watch/hear Theoretical Physicists come up with.
Warrior Squirrel wrote:The french gov has said UFOs are real. Check up the UFO incidents in Belium during the eighties. Thousands saw objects formed the same way. There is even a picture. Thousands of credible persons have seen UFOs. Even Jimmy Carter saw a UFO. Iranian and Chilean fighter jets even attacked UFOs. The american goverment started its harrasment of people who claim to have seen UFOs after it closed down its agency that was checking information. Brittish and american air force personal saw a UFO that had landed and draw the symbols that were on it.
Thousands of people seeing something is hardly notable, the population is around 7 billion.
Rented Tritium wrote:Plus the people who say no tend to just cite what it would take to duplicate us on another planet. There could be any number of other mechanisms to generate life under different circumstances.
This is a point I tried to make earlier. There are, for example, planets that have methane that performs in much the same role as water does on this planet due to cold temperatures, There could be life there that is similar to is, but very different!
Moon. But yea, I wouldnt be surprised if we actually landed something there and looked around for a few years, and found some things worth note
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Titan_(moon)
I think there's a lot of confusion going on by what we're talking about by saying "Aliens". Various people are using it to mean various things. We've got arguments defining aliens as the following:
1) Life of any form existing on an object outside Earth (not including any we accidentally brought with us on a probe). We haven't seen any evidence proving life exists anywhere else (some hints, but nothing definitive yet), but it's pretty commonly accepted that it most likely does.
2) Multi-cellular life existing outside Earth. This has absolutely zero evidence and is pure conjecture.
3) Intelligent life (meaning ~human level of intelligence or better) existing outside Earth. This has absolutely zero evidence and is pure conjecture.
4) Intelligent life existing in our Galaxy. The lack of any contact seems to indicate this is not the case. But, that's still speculation.
5) Intelligent life visiting Earth regularly. Although believed by a few, this is almost certainly not the case.
So, if we want to argue about this, can we at least keep our arguments separate? Too many people are jumping from a "We've seen evidence of life on Mars" (support for #1) to a "So, I look forward to First Contact" (#4). These are vastly different leaps of what "Aliens" are.
Grakmar wrote:I think there's a lot of confusion going on by what we're talking about by saying "Aliens". Various people are using it to mean various things. We've got arguments defining aliens as the following:
1) Life of any form existing on an object outside Earth (not including any we accidentally brought with us on a probe). We haven't seen any evidence proving life exists anywhere else (some hints, but nothing definitive yet), but it's pretty commonly accepted that it most likely does..
Intelligent aliens would likely not be friendly. So 'first contact' would not be good. Top scientists theorise as much. They'd have no incentive to be kind to us. The more likely scenario is they'd wipe us out; take the planets resources and move on.
There is one other body in the solar system besides earth that contains liquid water, which is the key to life. We orbit around one star.
There are two hundred billion or so stars in the Milky Way. Galaxies usually have hundreds of billions of stars in them.
There are an estimated 100 to 200 billion galaxies in the observable universe
They recently did a study showing that planets likely outnumber the stars.
So what is one hundred billion times one hundred billion? (Assuming there is at least one star for every planet in the observable universe). So why should it be so that out of all those planets, ours is the only one to support life?
I don't know. Honestly, i wouldn't know. All i can say it, that i believe in the possibility.
There's a lot of scientific convictions and theories on the matter - any many other astrological questions. But honestly, i do not believe that we're even capable of asking ourselves (or science) as much as any QUESTIONS, that might get even close to answering that question: If there is life on other planets.
- My only real belief on the matter is that the universe we live in is too immense for us to even come CLOSE to a "real answer". It's just too huge - and too complicated - for us to fully comprehend. Ever!
sebster wrote:There's every chance that we'd find their thought processes unintelligible, and they'd think the same of us.
They might not even be interested in communicating at all, if they could, simply because they would be aware we hold nothing of value to them, save for our sternums making a handy place to sprawn their brood. Luckily, we just need to know one thing...
The dreamer in me says, "Yes, without a doubt. If there isn't then it's an awful waste of space." However, the scientist in me requires proof that is unmistakable and unshakable. But with the current Exoplanet count totaling 725 planets as of Monday. We're bound to get lucky one day and find life out there somewhere!
I think it's fairly likely that an alien race would NOT be peaceful.
Creatures that are intelligent enough to figure out how to willingly transport themselves across uncounted billions of light years are more than likely predators. I'd imagine they'd be similar to predators and aliens, honestly. Absolute, top-of-the-foodchain killers.
If we managed to visit them, we would likely be seen as... well... aliens, and our effect on extraterrestrial planets would be gigantically significant to the natives.
Also, I wonder if Buzz Aldrin and the gang were in the least bit worried about aliens on the moon? Could you imagine if you were just walking around, doing moon stuff, and an ugly little beast attacked you and your astronaut friends? You would be petrified!
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Warrior Squirrel wrote:The french gov has said UFOs are real. Check up the UFO incidents in Belium during the eighties. Thousands saw objects formed the same way. There is even a picture. Thousands of credible persons have seen UFOs. Even Jimmy Carter saw a UFO. Iranian and Chilean fighter jets even attacked UFOs. The american goverment started its harrasment of people who claim to have seen UFOs after it closed down its agency that was checking information. Brittish and american air force personal saw a UFO that had landed and draw the symbols that were on it.
Sauce?
Thousands of credible persons have seen UFOs. Even Jimmy Carter saw a UFO.
Pacific wrote:I'm not so sure. A lion is not sapient, and does not have an understanding of the functions of the world around it. We do, although no doubt in a vastly more simply manner than an alien race that could span the distance between stars, there is the fundamental understanding of mathematics and physics that could be a common ground between us.
And how a species comes to understand the world around it is bound to be vastly different to ourselves. We, like lions, are not beings of pure reason, but ones full of instinct and conditioned response.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Samus_aran115 wrote:I think it's fairly likely that an alien race would NOT be peaceful.
Creatures that are intelligent enough to figure out how to willingly transport themselves across uncounted billions of light years are more than likely predators. I'd imagine they'd be similar to predators and aliens, honestly. Absolute, top-of-the-foodchain killers.
If we had the capability to travel to other planets we would do it, and it wouldn't be to hunt and/or kill other intelligent life. There is no reason to assume other species are more likely than not to be different to ourselves.
Aliens most likely exist, although they may have the same level of tech as us and be farther away or maybe they have a slightly better level of tech than us but can't quite reach or see us. Or maybe, just maybe there is a race of giant arachnids led by a giant brain bug planning on launching meteors at us.
Anyways, yes I believe in aliens but I hope we're better than them right now.
Grakmar wrote:
You can't use evidence of life on Earth to support the idea of life anywhere else.
Yes I can. I use life existing on earth as evidence that life can exist on planets. With an uncountable number of planets in the observable universe, there's got to be another one like ours out there somewhere.
I find the idea that we are alone in the universe a lot more fantastic than the idea of alien life existing on other planets.
Without doubt, given the size of the universe and it's constant expansion, the chemical combinations required to form life in any form (silicon-based, carbon-based, etc...) is undeniably likely to occur even in entirely random scenarios with the qualities that the universe has. Saying that humans are alone in the universe is either closed-minded or spiritual (no disrespect in that). Then again, the Fermi Paradox creates a pretty big gap in the believability in ETs, I'd like to believe that humans are advanced compared to other species that might exist, but there are nearly infinite possibilities.
There would have to be intelligent life out there somewhere, in some form. However, our senses may not have the capacity to understand their forms. Remember, our senses only visualise 4 dimensions (height, length, width and time). What sort of life are they? carbon based, silicon based, or gas based? And remember, intelligent life doesn't have to mean sentient. A hive mind could constitute life.
There are just so many factors against us even understanding or even experiencing contact, that mean it would be very unlikely to tell.
Mr Hyena wrote:Yes...because Humanity has been so good at that. Right?
Because how a species interacts with simpler forms of life that it traditionally hunted and ate is exactly how it must behave when that species meets intelligent life elsewhere in the galaxy.
For proof, you can look at all the people who've come into this thread and said 'I hope there's intelligent life out there because I want to hunt it and kill it'.
Because how a species interacts with simpler forms of life that it traditionally hunted and ate is exactly how it must behave when that species meets intelligent life elsewhere in the galaxy.
I heard Europeans interacted pretty nicely with the Native Americans and Africans.
Because how a species interacts with simpler forms of life that it traditionally hunted and ate is exactly how it must behave when that species meets intelligent life elsewhere in the galaxy.
I heard Europeans interacted pretty nicely with the Native Americans and Africans.
You mean handing them small-pox infested blankets and enslaving them...
Mr Hyena wrote:Thus proving my point. Aliens (if they are intelligent) would do the same to us.
Surely that only holds up if they think in the same way as humans though ?
And, of course, not every European did interact with natives in said fashion.
And of course, pretty uniquely in human history thus far, we have people, organisations and a culture that has and is considering the implications of such a thing happening.
What I think would be more worrying is that human history tends to show that when a culture that has hitherto assumed they're pretty much #1 has encountered a civilisation that is ( in certain ways) superior to them, that culture tends to die out pretty quickly afterwards.
In exactly which direction this would work out would, of course, depend on which civilisation was "superior". I think it would be quite interesting to consider what we would do if we discovered life on another world that wasn't as advanced as us. How would we react or deal with them ? "Prime Directive" type situation, would/should be try to exploit or take advantage of them or perhaps we'd want to step in to help them ? And would that work out.
Medium of Death wrote:We've missed the most important question.
Would you help the Aliens subjugate your fellow man?
Depends. Are we talking heroic Army of Darkness almost assured victory or are we talking humans vs. Borg?
If Borg, I have a list of people I would help subjugate.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
sebster wrote:
If we had the capability to travel to other planets we would do it, and it wouldn't be to hunt and/or kill other intelligent life. There is no reason to assume other species are more likely than not to be different to ourselves.
No it would be much much worse and more callous. We would take their stuff, wiping out their habitat. Even if we didn't we would spread germs and other nasties to take them out (hopefully).
Remember boys and girls...Earth First! We'll mine the other planets later!
Automatically Appended Next Post:
reds8n wrote:
Mr Hyena wrote:Thus proving my point. Aliens (if they are intelligent) would do the same to us.
Surely that only holds up if they think in the same way as humans though ?
And, of course, not every European did interact with natives in said fashion.
And of course, pretty uniquely in human history thus far, we have people, organisations and a culture that has and is considering the implications of such a thing happening.
What I think would be more worrying is that human history tends to show that when a culture that has hitherto assumed they're pretty much #1 has encountered a civilisation that is ( in certain ways) superior to them, that culture tends to die out pretty quickly afterwards.
In exactly which direction this would work out would, of course, depend on which civilisation was "superior". I think it would be quite interesting to consider what we would do if we discovered life on another world that wasn't as advanced as us. How would we react or deal with them ? "Prime Directive" type situation, would/should be try to exploit or take advantage of them or perhaps we'd want to step in to help them ? And would that work out.
Thats the best option actually. The really bad scenarios are when we stumble across (or they us) a speciies that doesn't even recognize we are there, and unknowingly wipes us out.
Other scenarios. what is we run across life that, for all intents and purposes, is immortal, and has not concept of death.
Other scenarios are of the Andromeda Strain variety. Something not intelligent, just utterly lethal, llike Mad Cow disease in space.
the two men spotted what they at first thought was an X-47B military drone hovering in the air over the woods at night.
so .. they...
trained a scoped Winchester Sportsman .30-06 deer rifle on the object, and fired three successive shots center mass at the object, with no obvious effect, or ricochet sound. Man with me fired two slugs from a Mossberg 12 gauge shotgun center mass, also with no effect."
the two men spotted what they at first thought was an X-47B military drone hovering in the air over the woods at night.
so .. they...
trained a scoped Winchester Sportsman .30-06 deer rifle on the object, and fired three successive shots center mass at the object, with no obvious effect, or ricochet sound. Man with me fired two slugs from a Mossberg 12 gauge shotgun center mass, also with no effect."
America Hurr! The American Redneck, protecting our sacred borders from molesting alien scum since 1783.
Mr Hyena wrote:Intelligent aliens would likely not be friendly. So 'first contact' would not be good. Top scientists theorise as much. They'd have no incentive to be kind to us. The more likely scenario is they'd wipe us out; take the planets resources and move on.
I have always thought this is a silly idea for a few reasons:
1: Why drag mineral/chemical resources out of a planetary gravity well when there are thousands of times more in the asteroid belt.
2. Even if they can breathe the same atmoshere as us it is VERY unlikely that the aliens and us will have the same protein bases so ALL life on earth would be toxic or poisonous to them.
3. Why eat the stuff on earth when you obviously have the tech and energy to synthasize your own food for interstellar travel.
4. Why drop down on to a planet at all? You will only need to build a rocket to get off again. Asteroids are far more space farer friendly once you get over the need for gravity and protection from radiation. Planets are for noobs.
reds8n wrote:http://news.gather.com/viewArticle.action?articleId=281474981083799
only in America !
Bit confused here as
the two men spotted what they at first thought was an X-47B military drone hovering in the air over the woods at night.
so .. they...
trained a scoped Winchester Sportsman .30-06 deer rifle on the object, and fired three successive shots center mass at the object, with no obvious effect, or ricochet sound. Man with me fired two slugs from a Mossberg 12 gauge shotgun center mass, also with no effect."
Even alien life will have to overcome the exact same hurdles as humanity did. It's not like alien life have an alternate reality with different physical constants than the ones we live and learned by. It would only make sense that if our species is having this very same questions that alien life would also have the very same questions also. And in light of that, I would believe that initial contact with another sentient life form would be, at least initially, friendly.
Leslie Kean, a veteran investigative reporter who has spent the past ten year studying the still-unexplained UFO phenomenon, reviewed hundreds of government documents, aviation reports, radar data, and case studies with corroborating physical ecidence. She interviewed doezens if high-level officials and aviation witnesses from around the world. Among them, five air Force generals and a host of high-level sources-including FIfe Symington III, former governor of Arizona, and Nick Pope, former head of the brittish Defence Ministry´s UFO Investigative Unit-have written their own breathtaking, firsthand accounts about UFO encounters and investigations exclusivly for this book. With the support of former White House chief of staff John Podesta, Kean lifts the veil on decades of U.S. government imsinformation about this mysterious phenomenon and presents irrefutable evidence that unknown flying objects-metallic, luminous, and seemingly able to maneuver in ways that defy the laws of physics-actually exist.
"The most important book on the phenomenon in a generation."-Journal of scientific exploration
"Writtrn with penetrating depth and insight, the revelations in this book constitute a watershed event in lifting the taboo against rational discourse about this controversial subject."-Harold E. Puthoff, Ph.D, Director of the institute for advanced stuties at Austin.
"Kean presents the most accurate, most credible reports on UFOs you will ever find. She may not have the final smoking gun, but I smell the gunpowder."-Miles O´Brien science correspondant for PBS´s NEWSHOUR
"This is an unprecedented assessment of what may be the greatest challange ever to mankind. In an outstanding piece of investigative journalism, Kean provides a well-written and convincing appeal for change in dealing with a phenomenon that can no longer be ignored."-Jean Claudes RIbes, Ph.D, Paris Observatory(Ret.)
"Leslie Kean has found a thoughtful path between extreme views of conspiracy theorists on one side and `deniers´ on the other. She makes a strong case for the U.S. participation in official, international UFO investigations. A fascinating thought-provoking book."-Neal Lane, Ph.D, Rice university, former Director of the Whie House Office of Science and Technology Policy
Also known as "I know there's UFOs out there I just have to find them", IE, pseudoscience (the expectation of the existence of something leads them to believe only explanations that support the existence of the something they believe, even when the explanations aren't the simplest and best ones out there).
On September 18, 1976 an iranian fighter jet piloted by future General Parviz Jafari(retired) attacks a UAF that had been seen by the inhabitants of Tehran. He tried to fire several times but every time he was to fire his missiles his panel stopped working. When he went to close to it, radio did not work and later after following it, he was forced to withdraw.
On April 11, 1980, Comandante Oscar Santa Marìa attacked a suspected enemy spy ballon that was above the Air Force base, La Joya. He fired a burst of 30 mm shells but without effect. It then speeds away with Oscar following it before he realises what it is and retreats back to the base. A note is that every time both pilots tried to attack the objects steered away and avoided them. And the chances of seeing an UFO is the same as your plane being hijacked of terrorists. Stop being so damn ignorant people. You can believe in god but not something that has been seen by thousands of credible witnesses that have given the same descriptions?
Automatically Appended Next Post: Former president Carter wanted Nasa to set up an agency simillar to the european and south american ones to collect info of UFOs since he himself once saw one.
The universe is an enourmous place, infinite, so there MUST be something somewhere. I do doubt, though, that they will visit earth, not today, not tomorrow, not for the next -------- million/billion years if ever.
To be fair, "unknown object" does not automatically mean "alien invasion!!111" or any kind of alien at all.
I don't think anyone disputes that, at times, unidentified objects appear. What I (and probably most others) dispute is that these are extraterrestrial in origin.
I believe in the possiblity, but not out right positive. It is rather interessting, so I watch ancient aliens and UFO Hunters. But my fav show is Fact or Fake: Paranormal Files.
I read a sci-fi novel some time ago (sadly I can't remember the name or writer!), humans are using teleportation wormholes to travel across the galaxy, but the process uses a massive amount of energy, and after a set time they are sling-shot back to Earth again.
In it there is the first encounter of intelligent alien life - they are tall, with claws and terrifying to look at (like something from a Horror movie). When they get the chance, they attack the astronauts they are dealing with. In the end and some time later they finally converse with the aliens, and discover that the aliens themselves had no way to know how to communicate with the humans, to find out what was normal etc. So, they read the mind of one of the astronauts and made themselves look and behave like he expected them to.
So, Remilia, if you are the first human that aliens meet, perhaps that is how they will look?
