- #1
jonegil
i think this is a complex question...what you guys think about this?
marcus said:What is more interesting, in that department, is the discovery of earth-like planets and the development of methods to extend terrestrial life to them.
jonegil said:yeah...da number of extra-solar planets' increasin as da number of teluric or somewhat teluriclike planets aswell...maybe in da next decade
Erm...jonegil said:telluric doesn't mean earth-like...it comes from latin and it means rock-like...
I presumed that, since we are discussing extraterrestrial life, you would be using the first definition..OED said:Of or belonging to the earth, terrestrial; pertaining to the Earth as a planet; also, of or arising from the Earth or soil.
Now correct me if I'm reading marcus' post incorrectly, but I'm sure he is talking about candidates to be earth-like planets also.jonegil said:and when i said "in the next decade" i was referring to telluric planets not planets with life
It would put to rest once and for all the question of whether we're unique. In this case, 1+1= way more than 2.wolram said:The only fact i know is that we have not detected extraterrestrial life.
Even if we did find life on a par with us at say, 10lys, 20llys, 50lys distant
what would the advantage be to us?
H8wm4m said:The mere existence of a UFO shatters the well protected dogmas of modern science. The extra-solar origins of UFO's suggest faster than light travel. Their right angle turns at extreme velocities, non-conventional propultion systems, and other oddities defy the laws of Newtonian and einsteinian physics.
This is why no amount of evidence, even if it is throughout mankinds history, will convince the bulk of the scientifc community of their existence.
russ_watters said:Btw, Ivan - here's an example of an alien spacecraft proponent using the term UFO to mean "alien spacecraft ".
Ivan Seeking said:I believe that virtually any interpreation of Drake's equation when applied to the entire universe yields a value almost exactly equal to 1.
http://www.amazon.com/dp/0316648299/?tag=pfamazon01-20
From a statistical pov, we are certainly not alone.
BoomBoom said:Life...yes, but "intelligent" life? I think the odds are still against it. Think of all the billions upon billions of species on our planet. How many of those are capable of space travel? Just one.
http://pubs.wri.org/pubs_content_text.cfm?ContentID=535Estimates of global species diversity have varied from 2 million to 100 million species, with a best estimate of somewhere near 10 million, and only 1.4 million have actually been named.
http://www.newscientist.com/channel...85.400-neanderthals-bid-for-human-status.html...Neanderthals have typically been thought of as incapable of innovation, as it was assumed to be something unique to Homo sapiens, says Hopkinson. "With this evidence of innovation it becomes difficult to exclude Neanderthals from the concept of humanity."
Ivan Seeking said:http://pubs.wri.org/pubs_content_text.cfm?ContentID=535
And many species differ very little so this is somewhat misleading.
That interpretation assumes that the universe is spatially infinite. Regardless of whether or not it is true, it isn't a terribly useful assumption. Besides potentially yielding a [itex] (1/ \infty) * \infty [/itex] situation, it doesn't provide us with an answer that has any meaning. The Drake equation was designed for our galaxy only and it is speculative enough as it is! It may be a catchy title for a book, but it doesn't have any meaning beyond that. And, in fact, the book wasn't written for that purpose anyway, but just uses it as teaser and a jumping-off point to discuss the actual purpose of the drake equation: We already know that the probability of life existing in the universe is exactly 1. The point of the Drake equation is to guestimate how much life there is in the universe.Ivan Seeking said:I believe that virtually any interpreation of Drake's equation, when applied to the entire universe, yields a probability for life out there of [almost exactly] 1.
http://www.amazon.com/dp/0316648299/?tag=pfamazon01-20
From a statistical pov, we are certainly not alone.
Chronos said:Neanderthal practiced ritual burial, built fires, used tools, and created artistic works. I'm curious to whom Hopkinson attributed the 'incapable of innovation' assertion. There is at least a fair chance homo erectus used fire:
http://anthro.palomar.edu/homo/homo_3.htm
BoomBoom said:...but constrained to just our galaxy (since inter-galaxy travel seems impossible), I still bet it's pretty low chances that aliens are out there flying around in spaceships.
Ivan Seeking said:So at this point we can't even talk about the odds of an encounter; only the odds of the odds. At this time I see no way to have any confidence about any answer here.
No, just a handful of the reviews and summaries...Ivan Seeking said:Just out of curiosity, have you read the book?
Yes, that's what I said.The point of the drake equation is to estimate how much life might be in the galaxy, not the universe.
No. Not if the number is only infinitessmally larger than zero. My math is a touch thin on this, but I think infinity/infinity is undefined.So when we extrapolate this to the entire universe, any Drake result larger than zero yields a very large number.
I understand that. I'm just pointing out that it isn't a very meaningful thing to do - or to discuss.The poll asks if there is any extraterrestrial life, so the "probability 1" seemed appropriate to mention. He uses the Drake equation in his reasoning.
Well, that's my point as well - you seemed to have a great deal of confidence in the "1" you posted, which is why I was arguing that we can't have any confidence in that number.At this time I see no way to have any confidence about any answer here.
russ_watters said:No, just a handful of the reviews and summaries...
Yes, that's what I said.
The point of the Drake equation is to guestimate how much life there is in the universe.
Not if the number is only infinitessmally larger than zero.
you seemed to have a great deal of confidence in the "1" you posted, which is why I was arguing that we can't have any confidence in that number.
We already know that the probability of life existing in the universe is exactly 1.
The current scientific consensus is that it is highly likely that extraterrestrial life exists somewhere in the universe. However, there is no definitive evidence yet to prove its existence.
Scientists are using a variety of methods to search for extraterrestrial life, including analyzing data from telescopes and space probes, searching for signs of habitability on other planets, and looking for biosignatures in the atmospheres of exoplanets.
Some potential challenges in discovering extraterrestrial life include the vastness of the universe, the limitations of our current technology, and the possibility that extraterrestrial life may be vastly different from life on Earth.
The discovery of extraterrestrial life would have a significant impact on our society, both scientifically and culturally. It could provide us with a better understanding of our place in the universe and potentially lead to advancements in technology and medicine.
Some ethical considerations surrounding the search for extraterrestrial life include the potential impact on indigenous life forms, the responsibility to protect any discovered extraterrestrial life, and the potential consequences of making contact with advanced alien civilizations.