You only have to look at this planet to see how hard it is to leave the atmosphere. How many species have ever lived on earth? How many of those would be considered intelligent? How many of them have left the atmosphere?

Stop thinking so hard. I mean don't you think alien civilizations have laws and such? They can't get funding to send their people to earth. They get sued too much so they stop testing their long range spacecraft. Worst of all, they get dumber over time; as technology increases they evolve to be more simple.

Both common sense and the law of probabilities screams out that there has to be intelligent life out there.

The fact that this part of the galaxy hasn't had any visits from such would seem to confirm that faster than light travel is a physical impossibility however.

They don't need to go fast if they've mastered genetics enough to slow or stop aging.

They would sure need a lot of patience however. The nearest possible earth like planets are tens of thousands of light years distant.

I hope they haven't died of boredom before they get here.

Why do they need to be earthlike planets? We only assume that based on a small sample from our own galaxy.

http://fc04.deviantart.net/fs39/i/20...vineDesign.png
Drake equation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I want drake to murder my vagina.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...rank_Drake.jpg

Lol. I've already mentioned the Drake equation several times here already. Again, in spite of it, Fermi paradox remains unanswered.

Moreover, astrobiologists have explained fully how drakes equation means very little in reality.

Fuel is probably expensive on their planet. Maybe they are super intelligent but have no way to get here.

Common sense has very little to do with the universe and the evolution of life. If it were all so obvious, then the question would be answered.
The speed of light is a man made limit.

The universe is a harsh environment and life is rare because of it. Assuming complex intelligent life just pops up because it did here is assuming a lot.

Are dinosaurs complex and intelligent? They were here for 825 times longer than humans have been here. At least according to google - dinosaurs 165 million years - humans 200,000 years. Point is, dinos were never going to leave earth even if they stayed on the planet for it's entire existence.

I think humans are probably an anomaly. Perhaps a handful of similar lifeforms out there capable of leaving their home planet. Even fewer with the right materials and motive to leave.

Anyone read this???? dyna mo?

Well even on earth we have only one intelligent life form(humans) it takes luck and many years for civilization to build up. Anyways if the same conditions as were on earth would reproduce on a different planet a life like what we have here would probably exist. no reason for why not..
in terms of connecting with a planet or areas in the galaxy that are so far away probably its just not as easy.

E.T.'s manifesto.

Read much of it - mighty impressed with the extraterrestrial's command of the French/English language. :1orglaugh

Should be added as a new chapter in that other fictitious book - the bible. :1orglaugh

the issue with Drake's equation::::::::


As many stars as there are in our galaxy (100 ? 400 billion), there are roughly an equal number of galaxies in the observable universe?so for every star in the colossal Milky Way, there?s a whole galaxy out there. All together, that comes out to the typically quoted range of between 1022 and 1024 total stars, which means that for every grain of sand on Earth, there are 10,000 stars out there.

The science world isn?t in total agreement about what percentage of those stars are ?sun-like? (similar in size, temperature, and luminosity)?opinions typically range from 5% to 20%. Going with the most conservative side of that (5%), and the lower end for the number of total stars (1022), gives us 500 quintillion, or 500 billion billion sun-like stars.

There?s also a debate over what percentage of those sun-like stars might be orbited by an Earth-like planet (one with similar temperature conditions that could have liquid water and potentially support life similar to that on Earth). Some say it?s as high as 50%, but let?s go with the more conservative 22% that came out of a recent PNAS study. That suggests that there?s a potentially-habitable Earth-like planet orbiting at least 1% of the total stars in the universe?a total of 100 billion billion Earth-like planets.

So there are 100 Earth-like planets for every grain of sand in the world. Think about that next time you?re on the beach.

Moving forward, we have no choice but to get completely speculative. Let?s imagine that after billions of years in existence, 1% of Earth-like planets develop life (if that?s true, every grain of sand would represent one planet with life on it). And imagine that on 1% of those planets, the life advances to an intelligent level like it did here on Earth. That would mean there were 10 quadrillion, or 10 million billion intelligent civilizations in the observable universe.

Moving back to just our galaxy, and doing the same math on the lowest estimate for stars in the Milky Way (100 billion), we?d estimate that there are 1 billion Earth-like planets and 100,000 intelligent civilizations in our galaxy.


If we?re right that there are 100,000 or more intelligent civilizations in our galaxy, and even a fraction of them are sending out radio waves or laser beams or other modes of attempting to contact others,?

But we haven?t. Not one. Ever.

Where is everybody? they are not here. it's just us.

my understanding is complex and intelligent means the capacity to create technology for colonization.

Our sun is relatively young in the lifespan of the universe. There are far older stars with far older Earth-like planets, which should in theory mean civilizations far more advanced than our own. As an example, let?s compare our 4.54 billion-year-old Earth to a hypothetical 8 billion-year-old Planet X.

http://waitbutwhy.com/wp-content/upl...e-1024x416.png

Planet X

If Planet X has a similar story to Earth, let?s look at where their civilization would be today (using the orange timespan as a reference to show how huge the green timespan is):
http://waitbutwhy.com/wp-content/upl...2-1024x537.png

Planet X vs Earth

The technology and knowledge of a civilization only 1,000 years ahead of us could be as shocking to us as our world would be to a medieval person. A civilization 1 million years ahead of us might be as incomprehensible to us as human culture is to chimpanzees. And Planet X is 3.4 billion years ahead of us?

There?s something called The Kardashev Scale, which helps us group intelligent civilizations into three broad categories by the amount of energy they use:

A Type I Civilization has the ability to use all of the energy on their planet. We?re not quite a Type I Civilization, but we?re close (Carl Sagan created a formula for this scale which puts us at a Type 0.7 Civilization).

A Type II Civilization can harness all of the energy of their host star. Our feeble Type I brains can hardly imagine how someone would do this, but we?ve tried our best, imagining things like a Dyson Sphere.

http://waitbutwhy.com/wp-content/upl...-1024x1024.png

Dyson Sphere

A Type III Civilization blows the other two away, accessing power comparable to that of the entire Milky Way galaxy.

If this level of advancement sounds hard to believe, remember Planet X above and their 3.4 billion years of further development. If a civilization on Planet X were similar to ours and were able to survive all the way to Type III level, the natural thought is that they?d probably have mastered inter-stellar travel by now, possibly even colonizing the entire galaxy.

One hypothesis as to how galactic colonization could happen is by creating machinery that can travel to other planets, spend 500 years or so self-replicating using the raw materials on their new planet, and then send two replicas off to do the same thing. Even without traveling anywhere near the speed of light, this process would colonize the whole galaxy in 3.75 million years, a relative blink of an eye when talking in the scale of billions of years:
http://waitbutwhy.com/wp-content/upl...ize-Galaxy.png
Colonize Galaxy

Source: Scientific American: ?Where Are They?

Continuing to speculate, if 1% of intelligent life survives long enough to become a potentially galaxy-colonizing Type III Civilization, our calculations above suggest that there should be at least 1,000 Type III Civilizations in our galaxy alone?and given the power of such a civilization, their presence would likely be pretty noticeable. And yet, we see nothing, hear nothing, and we?re visited by no one.

And from the same article you plagiarized which you have conveniently omitted and added your own nonsense:

We have no answer to the Fermi Paradox?the best we can do is ?possible explanations.? And if you ask ten different scientists what their hunch is about the correct one, you?ll get ten different answers.


The Fermi Paradox - Wait But Why

all im gonna say is the OP better be right. cause if there is any life that can contact us, we are totally screwed. same as when the spanish met the aztecs.

didnt end well for the aztecs.

Best post I have ever read on GFY.

Oh no, they are here, they just choose not to be seen.

Yep! That was my first thought when I saw thread title!

If I have to read this much to figure it out, it's not worth it. How does anyone know if a single species can survive for 3.4 billion years?

Settle down man. You are obviously threatened by others who think differently than you.

The funny part is you're so agitated you are not even making sense. You just said it again, there is no answer to the paradox. Thanks for reiterated that.

But again, settle down. I've mentioned a age times this thread was an attempt to chat with others who are interested in the subject. If you want to attack me for not citing references, as if that somehow negates the fact that the question is unanswered lol, you are in the wrong thread.

I'll create a fucking bibliography when my professor requires one. In the meantime realize you are looking like a mean-spirited person with nothing better to do than struggle with a topic that's over your head. So settle down and try and contribute or go fuck yourself. Either way, no biggie to me.

You don't have to read that much. If you are interested in the topic, then read it, if not then don't.

Amen!

...

I can't figure out if I'm talking to you or replying to some text that was written years ago by someone else, but regardless it takes a hell of a lot more than some trolling plagiarist to raise my blood pressure.


Hilarious. You think we've looked at every planet in the vast majority of the universe (your words, I think) and you're telling others whats over their head? :1orglaugh

It was a joke. I read it but I think it's too complicated. We don't know the chances of one species dominating their environment and surviving for billions of years. What if there are lots of highly advanced species on other planets and they are at war with each other?

Just saying there are many reasons for not being visited besides "there is no other intelligent life in the entire universe". Perhaps we are being visited right now and the aliens are not in human form but some sort of microbe or something we can't even see.

There in lies your problem.

See far-l's post with the YouTube on mushrooms. I didn't realize you were joking. I like the example I c&p'ed because it shows in spite of the huge numbers over a long time, there is a lack of evidence.

no one has a 100% definite answer to this - case closed

No sense in closing a case with no answer. Especially with a new discipline of science studying the issue. Case very much open.

BFT3K nailed it succinctly.


In any event, not only is it a mathematical certainty that other life will exist, it is a certainty that a percent have achieved intelligence equal to humankind and a percent far superior.

It?s too small minded and arrogant to refuse that probability simply because of our own species current limitations, where everything considered, answering that question is beyond humankind's current abilities unless it's kindly dropped in our laps.

No evidence (or lack thereof) gathered to date by humans (considering the primitive tools at our disposal in relation to the task at hand) to answer our own question alter the mathematical certainties at all. And whilst humans attempt to answer the ?are we alone? question, we are without doubt an isolated species, sat in a (best guess known to humans currently regarding observable universe) 93 billion light year diameter dark room, with essentially a lit match, restrictive spectacles and an ineffective ear trumpet.

A technologically superior race/entity (who we will naturally assume for the purposes of this thread is capable of the required travel by whatever means) sufficiently fast enough, have exactly the same reason and motivation to visit humankind right now that you yourself have to leave your home with the sole purpose of visiting a tiny anthill deep in the Australian outback.

It's absolutely not a mathematical certainty. It's a statistical probability. Polar opposite.

It's small minded and arrogant to assume intelligent life elsewhere is a certainty. That's not science.

Self replicating spacecraft answer the speed issue. I posted a link to a significant paper on that earlier in this thread. It also shows the task to only take several million years.

When did you see that argument made?

I made the same argument, almost word-for-word in my first novel, "The Minerva Virus" (hardcover and ebook available on Amazon) about 10 YEARS AGO.

I wrote a paper on it almost 12 years ago, and the proof was much more extensive.

Just curious if this was something they "came out" with recently?

if it keeps people entertained - no problem :winkwink:

but unless E.T. says hello we'll never know

The answer is machines with artificial intelligence and the ability to self-repair and replicate themselves. No biological species can last for billions of years but certainly a self-repairing, learning machine could. The next step in human evolution will be silicon based and not carbon based.

I've been an avid follower of this sort of thing for years too. The movie "Interstellar" brought it up for me, due to the theme being colonization of other planets.

WE are the "evidence" ancient aliens visited us and changed our DNA.

Besides, if Giorgio says it's so then IT IS SO.

:D

I do tend to agree with this. Although I think it's closer to the mushroom explanation. spores on a comet kinda thing.

OK, I've given this a couple whirls, it's more metaphysical than I can.....follow, i guess. sorry Jayman!

Haha spot on!:thumbsup

That we can think, create and make things doesn't mean shit.

I disagree.


The only people it's not a mathematical certainty to would be:

1) Those that can't grasp for whatever reason that a percent of life in whatever form, in whatever environment and therefore potentially intelligent life to whatever degree are instances that are statistically in the trillions universally.

2) Those that can grasp the instances but also know it absolutely can not be currently proven in anyway shape or form, not where they would be prepared to hang their career hat on it and certainly not without being assaulted from every angle by those who can't comprehend that position unless a spaceship lands on the Whitehouse lawn of course.


The scale of the universe is inconvenient and humankind's best efforts considering the magnitude of the task can only be described as a primitive foray into the first few feet of a 93 billion light year diameter expanse. This bodes well for a negative argument, which is naturally ridiculous on a universal level. Or at best a positive argument where those on that side of the fence are only brave enough to admit to "possibilities" lest they wish to be ridiculed by small mindedness.

Besides, isn't the Universe expanding at a rate faster than we can travel thereby ensuring we will never reach "the end"?

the people it's not a mathematical certainty to are astrobiologists, people who are academically trained in 2, if not 3 of the most challenging disciplines of science- astrophysics, biology and chemistry. PHD educated.

certainty in math requires rigorous proof. To assume simply because life evolved here + Drake's equation = life elsewhere is not based on any math or any certainty. it's all probability. pointed out earlier in this thread, other intelligent advanced life may simply not be there yet, or was there and is long gone. whichever way, we could very well be completely alone.

Maybe it takes longer than 200,000 years to get here. Aliens probably came here to visit the dinosaurs and brought the first mammals (rats) aboard their ships. Then they sent a colony ship but the electronics malfunction and it turned into a ball of ice that impacted earth killing off the dinosaurs.

To a highly advanced species do you think we would look more like dolphins or cockroaches? Do you think insects know what fish are? Fish know what insects are; protein. But do you think a roach would even notice a fish?

You are blowing my mind man.

<///////////////////>~~~