Science Question: Do you believe that intelligent life eventually eradicates itself?
 

Watching a few science programs, notably carl sagan and stephen hawking, both seemed to think it was likely that once life evolves to a certain technological point, it gets its hands on too much power (ie atomic bombs) and eradicates itself)

Thats once of the explanations for the fermi paradox, which basically asks if there is such a high probability of life out there in the universe, why there isn't any found evidence.

i know there are some science buffs on here, what are your thoughts on that?

Were there some example of precedence given?

Just because there is a high probability of life out there doesn't mean it's intelligent and if it is maybe it has no use for us.

I kinda always wondered, lets say tomorrow we discovered a 2nd Earth that could sustain human life. What would we do knowing that?

Would we start working together with other countries to try and figure out a way to get people there to start a second civilization? .. or would we just continue doing what we do now?

evidence of extraterrestrials is everywhere. carl sagan is a genius stephan hawking is a rolling supercomputer.......

i think its all speculative, they are guessing why they have not found any evidence of life outside earth

some other guesses were human beings were created alone, aristotle believed in that, then also that life could be periodically destroyed by naturally occurring events, and another is that there is a predatory civilizations out there that cull life and we just have not been alerted to their presence, and others

We'll find evidence of intelligent life outside of our planet soon enough. We just don't have technology advanced enough yet. Most people don't fully grasp just how huge the universe truly is.

I'm sure some intelligent life has eradicated itself but surely not all. I absolutely believe there are other advanced civilizations out there. If there were an intelligent race 1,000 light years away that sent us a signal at this very moment we wouldn't even receive it for at least 1,000 years, and that's assuming they sent it at the speed of light.

I'm sure we'll get a signal someday. That, or they'll just show up.

Just look at Prince, and you'll get your answers there.

it has always been a struggle for a civilization to survive it's technology. some haven't, the 'Mayans' for example... it's possible they contaminated the water table with sacrifice, plus the slash and burn farming caused issues with the environment...

just read any Philip K. Dick novel and you'll get your answer.

You have been on GFY since 2001 - Think about it...

Space is incomprehensibly large. It is many billions of times larger than what humans think of when they try to comprehend 'infinite' as a concept. The fact that life probably exists somewhere in the universe doesn't mean it exists close to us or is detectable by our current ability to sense.

As to higher life forms exterminating themselves, things do tend toward equilibrium it seems. However, the problem is probably more of how we feel about it than anything else. We tend to view death, destruction and extinction as 'bad' things because from our perspective they are, but from the perspective of the cosmos an extinction of one species or an entire galaxy is just another insignificant blip on a never ending timeline of things that change. Our species is so unjustly arrogant, to such a degree, that we actually think our existence matters in some way and that we are somehow different in the grand scheme of things than every other particle that exists now, existed previously, or will exist in the future. Our arrogance prevents us from being boring to ourselves, but that's about it.

well none of that really matters when you consider Leonard Susskind's string theory does it?

There are trillions of stars and planets around them so it's very feasible that life exists elsewhere in some form, even if it's akin to unintelligent slime mold. But the distances between stars are so large that the possibility of interacting with other life forms if they even exist is very limited.

You are saying all of those failed because of evolution?

Eisensteins theory of special relativity. Theory that pur galaxy is a cone and everything gets pulled to the sun beyond life. Why Venus is our "sister" planet etc.

I suspect that once a species becomes intelligent enough for medical breakthroughs that prevent disease, overpopulation will do the job.

I consider Idiocracy to be a scientific text.

Maybe we'll experience an eradication or not. We'll see.

I don't think there's any doubt that the human species will be eradicated, whether it's self eradication or something external. The universe doesn't need us, doesn't care about us or the planet that spawned us. And that's where religion steps in, to soothe the weak and scared with magic and meaning.

And the genius of Carl Sagan, one of my favorite pieces of writing.

http://fc04.deviantart.net/fs70/i/20...er-d34kbgg.png

Brilliant. Had not seen that before. Thanks for posting it.

String theory has yet to be proven and also has not been used to successfully prove anything else. It 'works' only because it can not be tested by any verifiable method of science. When it can be demonstrated via experimentation and analysis, not merely as a 'belief' Ill start giving it much more respect. Until then it isn't all that different from the 'theory' of intelligent design. It sounds nice, but there is no tangible proof supporting it.

even better in Carl's own voice

maybe the evolution of civilization and technology and I'm not saying anything other than showing you the place to look for answers. by reading history, sociology etc for 40 years my conclusion is that a society/civilization must over come it's technological advances to survive... whether it be using horses or farming, because all technology's have repercussions...

maybe, maybe not... quantum physics has been and is being used for real world applications...

The simple answer to this... absofuckinglutely.

I'm pretty sure some species are smarter than we are and realize the benefits of not killing each other over pointless crap and work together.

I really doubt every intelligent species in the entire universe is as dumb as we are when it comes to technological advancements.

Quantum Physics is a theory proven by experimentation but not fully understood. String theory is an abstract concept some people offer as a 'possible explanation' of Quantum physics without any kind of verifiable proof so far. String theorists may be right or wrong... it can not be tested in any way... much like religion. :2 cents:

intelligent life should prosper in the end should it not? if it eradicates itself how intelligent could it be?

as for lacking of evidence of others throughout space it's ridiculous to think that we could even identify such a thing. Most people can't even fathom the scale of the universe no less understand it so as far as we know it's right in front of us and we don't see it, and wont for some time.

If the universe is infinite, that means that any and all possibilities are infinite... hence, string theory is ABSOLUTELY accurate in another universe. :2 cents:

If the universe is NOT infinite, where does it end? And if it does? What's on the other side?

Slit tests and quantum physics. It makes sense.

you sound like more of a bible thumper than anybody in this thread.

Bible thumpers accept faith and belief in lieu of evidence and analysis. That is exactly the opposite of what I have done in this thread. You may believe string theory explains things or have faith that one day someone will find a way to test it. However, up to this point no valid scientific test to my knowledge has ever empirically proven it to be a correct assertion. I am definitely not a physicist, but I have done a fair amount of reading on the subject and have not found a single example of a test conducted using the scientific method which validates any part of string theory. The best I have found is 'examples of tests that did not disprove it.'

If your argument is that infinite existence means an infinite number of possibilities and therefore that gravity does not exist in another 'dimension', then this quickly becomes a semantic argument because we can also imagine another 'dimension of infinity' where You agree with Me that You are completely wrong. :2 cents:

I be leave blind faith is the most dangerous thing to our continued existence, to me its the only real threat.

And history shows us that!

You sound like an intelligent guy. Let me ask you this? (I retract my bible thumper statement...)

Infinity is infinite, therefore any possible outcome that can or would be possible is there... am I right? Of course we can not test certain things, we are technologically retarded as a species but moving on up.

I personally believe we are like a piece of dandruff on the top of the head of something so much larger than us we would never be able to comprehend it... and all it takes is some Head & Shoulders one day and we are snuffed out. We just live such short lifetimes and it's relative... that literally we could be a pimple on something huge's back and just be waiting to be popped.

I am saving this thread for after the kids are asleep...i think i need some inspiration to really post properly in here..:)

what are some of those benefits?

are you calling religious fundamentalists intelligent life?

No, go at it. I'd like to hear what you have to say

That argument is meaningless because it yields entirely contradictory results. In an infinite number of dimensions there will be at least one Harmon who agrees with me, one who disagrees with me and one who is a sunflower. That gives any analysis based on 'infinity' zero value. We do not know that space is infinite, or that time is infinite. If we assume all possibilities are infinite we have no reason to discuss anything ever because every outcome has happened, is happening and will happen.

You are always free to believe anything you like just like any bible-thumper is free to believe what they want. However, saying something is a valid part of science requires more than that. So far string theory hasn't earned its acceptance, at least not so far as I have found in any of my reading.

we think we're intelligent, because we're not intelligent enough to realize we're not all that. We're most intelligent on earth maybe. We dont know better as humans

no I think theres a point where a species could be evolved enough to not self destruct