It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Mathematicians say it is likely alien probes have reached earth.

page: 5
34
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 30 2014 @ 09:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: roadgravel
I am waiting for the day that aliens arrive and tell us how we have the 'facts' of the universe all wrong. Much like the flat Earth and Earth concentric solar system days.


That makes both of us... I wouldn't be surprised if eventually aliens arrive and show us that we have a lot wrong about what is "fact" for us earthlings.




posted on Jul, 30 2014 @ 11:13 AM
link   
Actually, there is some evidence bearing on the question: Are there other civilizations in our galaxy? In the history of human experience, there have been a number of times when it was believed that we were in a special or unique situation. Anciently, various groups thought that their particular region to be at the center of a vast, flat circular plain.
Later, the Earth was known to be a sphere, the surface of which can have no center. Even then, the Earth was thought to be at the center of the universe, with the Sun and planets circling around it. This conviction, too, was eventually destroyed by the discovery that Earth, in common with the other planets, circles the Sun.
Perhaps these exploded theories of the past should have given us some intellectual humility, but that was not to be. When we worked out that our star, the Sun, was one among many, we thought ourselves at the center of this aggregation, called the Milky Way. We now know that to be false.
It was also held that the existence of the planets of our solar system was a very rare thing, a fluke caused by a near-collision of our star with another. Recent years have seen this refuted, as hundred upon hundreds of planets outside out solar system have been discovered.
Now it is suggested as a reasonable proposition that intelligent life in the galaxy is very rare, perhaps so rare that we are alone. Can we prove that this is not the case? No. We do have the repeated experience of thinking ourselves specially circumstanced in one way or another and later having such thinking refuted, though. It seems wiser to bear this in mind, and make the mental leap, supposing ourselves one of a multitude of thinking, progressing species in this galaxy.



posted on Jul, 30 2014 @ 11:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: WalterWhite

originally posted by: roadgravel
I am waiting for the day that aliens arrive and tell us how we have the 'facts' of the universe all wrong. Much like the flat Earth and Earth concentric solar system days.


That makes both of us... I wouldn't be surprised if eventually aliens arrive and show us that we have a lot wrong about what is "fact" for us earthlings.


Given the were no flat earth days (urban myth that people from another era thought the earth was flat), and putting that aside, why do you think people from another planet would have more knowledge than us? I have a feeling any reaching out they do to us would be as missionaries to convert us to their faith.



posted on Jul, 30 2014 @ 11:31 AM
link   
a reply to: Ross 54


Now it is suggested as a reasonable proposition that intelligent life in the galaxy is very rare, perhaps so rare that we are alone. Can we prove that this is not the case? No.


The point being raised by many is that we don't know. It is only possible to show that intelligent life exists. It is impossible to show that it doesn't. The best we can say right now is we don't know. We can believe, imagine, speculate and assume. There is nothing wrong with that but that is what it is.



posted on Jul, 30 2014 @ 05:03 PM
link   
Okay, now I’m not a mathematician or an astronomer but here are my numbers. Please be kind. This is just an estimate and theory and a posibility, but my numbers are all conservative.


On November 4, 2013, astronomers reported, based on Kepler space mission data, that there could be as many as 40 billion Earth-sizedplanets orbiting in the habitable zones of sun-like stars and red dwarf stars within the Milky Way Galaxy.

According to the best estimates of astronomers there are at least one hundred billion galaxies in the observable universe. They've counted the galaxies in a particular region, and multiplied this up to estimate the number for the whole universe, but that’s a conservative estimate because some scientists say it could be 500 billion galaxies! And that's just the observable universe!

I don’t think I’m being off the mark to extrapolate that to estimate that there are probably 40 billion possible life bearing planets in each galaxy ...therefore.

X is the number of the possible habitable planets in the universe. G is the number of Galaxies in the Universe. And P is the number of habitable planets in each Galaxy.

Therefore X=G X P That number is 4 sextillion. That's a 4 with 21 zero's after it. If I multiply that by 1% that leaves me with 40 quadrillion possible planets in our Universe that could hold life. I think 1% is a low estimate and we’re not even talking about moons. We guess that there are several moons in our own solar system that could harbor life.

Now it took 4.6 billions years for life to evolve to our current state on earth. I think it’s fair to assume that, for other planets with life forms. Some scientists estimate that there are many galaxies older than the milky way and others think they’re all about the same age. But give or take a hundred thousand or a million years of evolution in all of those possible 40 quadrillion planets with advanced life forms on it and there is a possibility of that millions or billions or even quadrillions of them have civilizations millions of years more advanced than us.

Again this is just a possibility. A theory but it’s based on Math and science. Not saying I ‘m right and there is no concrete proof, as of yet, but you must be open to the possibility. Yes? 40 Quadrillion is a huge number!!



posted on Jul, 30 2014 @ 05:34 PM
link   
a reply to: LogicalRazor



The issue I take with this.. is that these knuckleheads wasted resources,,ie gov. grants ,too watch computer simulations of what may or may not be possible for aliens too do , when they could of just read a couple ATS threads & concluded the same thing,,, Congratulation ATS users ...you now are deserving of a Bachelor's degree in Astrophysics & a Master's in Physics .

edit on 30-7-2014 by Moondoggie because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 30 2014 @ 05:47 PM
link   
As I have said countless times, one has to think about our own technological trajectory to realize that "alien probes" are likely not something the size of a house or even a garbage can but rather, tiny.

Think about it.

In just 5 decades we went from satellites this size:



to this size:



And from drones the size of the back of a pickup truck to ones this size:



What will the next 50 years bring?

There are some clues in the field of nanotechnology.

We've got machines at the nano scale, so small that you could fit one within the width of a human hair:




So if we're looking for alien probes perhaps we should not be looking for the large ships from 1950s sci-fi but rather tiny machines which can only be seen under an electron microscope and could be crawling on top of the screen you're reading right now, looking at you without you even noticing it because it is too small for human eyesight?

There's a good reason to believe this is or has gone on at some point in the Milky Way Galaxy's history.

Think of how many nanoprobes you can fit into a Pringle's can. More than the entire population of Earth!

And it is far easier to send a Pringles can across the gulf of space between the stars than something even the size of the old Space Shuttle.

Physics favors miniaturization for interstellar exploration or colonization. The galaxy could be filled with nano-scale machine intelligences and we'd not know it. There's the answer to the Fermi Paradox of "Where is Everybody?"

Perhaps we too will eventually upload our brains into computers and send out small probes like these to be our eyes and ears.

Perhaps the meek really shall inherit not just the Earth, but the Universe.

Perhaps the person who finds ET will find it not looking up, but looking down under a microscope.



posted on Jul, 30 2014 @ 05:50 PM
link   
a reply to: amazing


Please be kind

Always. I think there is a lot of misconceptions and misunderstanding when we try to express that life exists out there in mathematical terms. I think the terms "probability" and "likelihood" are often misused in this context. Those terms are used to determine the odds of something occurring based on sample data. The sample data consists of data where the thing you are trying to predict has occurred and when it has not occurred. Think of a deck of cards. We know Aces occur 4 times so we can determine probability of drawing an ace from the deck because of what we know. Now just because we are talking about billions of things, the math doesn't change. There is no point where the numbers get so big that the math changes.

So it doesn't matter how big or how many things there are. What matters is how many times you observed that thing happening. So what the Drake equation does is it makes up those values. We can call them guesses or assumptions but that is what makes up for the lack of observed data. So its a guess and that is not the type of thing you want to be doing if you have a gambling problem.

Now yes, the size and numbers are staggering and awe inspiring. My gut tells me that Intelligent life does exist out there because if the very things you mentioned. It really is hard to imagine that we are alone. It is also hard to imagine that you can lose with pocket aces twice in a row.



posted on Jul, 30 2014 @ 05:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: amazing
Okay, now I’m not a mathematician or an astronomer but here are my numbers. Please be kind. This is just an estimate and theory and a posibility, but my numbers are all conservative.


On November 4, 2013, astronomers reported, based on Kepler space mission data, that there could be as many as 40 billion Earth-sizedplanets orbiting in the habitable zones of sun-like stars and red dwarf stars within the Milky Way Galaxy.

According to the best estimates of astronomers there are at least one hundred billion galaxies in the observable universe. They've counted the galaxies in a particular region, and multiplied this up to estimate the number for the whole universe, but that’s a conservative estimate because some scientists say it could be 500 billion galaxies! And that's just the observable universe!

I don’t think I’m being off the mark to extrapolate that to estimate that there are probably 40 billion possible life bearing planets in each galaxy ...therefore.

X is the number of the possible habitable planets in the universe. G is the number of Galaxies in the Universe. And P is the number of habitable planets in each Galaxy.

Therefore X=G X P That number is 4 sextillion. That's a 4 with 21 zero's after it. If I multiply that by 1% that leaves me with 40 quadrillion possible planets in our Universe that could hold life. I think 1% is a low estimate and we’re not even talking about moons. We guess that there are several moons in our own solar system that could harbor life.

Now it took 4.6 billions years for life to evolve to our current state on earth. I think it’s fair to assume that, for other planets with life forms. Some scientists estimate that there are many galaxies older than the milky way and others think they’re all about the same age. But give or take a hundred thousand or a million years of evolution in all of those possible 40 quadrillion planets with advanced life forms on it and there is a possibility of that millions or billions or even quadrillions of them have civilizations millions of years more advanced than us.

Again this is just a possibility. A theory but it’s based on Math and science. Not saying I ‘m right and there is no concrete proof, as of yet, but you must be open to the possibility. Yes? 40 Quadrillion is a huge number!!


Someone already did the math for you based on data from the Kepler spacecraft:









So around 4 Trillion for the Observable Universe



posted on Jul, 30 2014 @ 05:56 PM
link   
a reply to: Totemic

No crap sherlock..

I've said for a long time that probes is whats visiting us.. Mostly!

It explaines alot of things and gives solutions to possible problems.

1. The small size of many of the observed ufos.
2. Animal AND human mutilation. An "AI" probe probably wouldn't differentiate between humans and animals in their preprogrammed studies.
3. Movement of the probes.
4. The lack of contact despite obervations.
5. Travelling vast distances for millions of years without the need to support life. Just reporting back.
PS. This is something we should be looking for. Directed signals FROM earth, not TO earth.

Etc etc



posted on Jul, 30 2014 @ 06:05 PM
link   

originally posted by: glend
More likely they'd use their huge space telescopes to examine planets for signs of life and only send probes to the best candidates. With something like 1-2 million stars within 500 light years one would hope they'd find at least a few candidates. If they could build probes that can constantly accelerate at 1G they'd be able to reach them all within 8-10 years (probe time).

Not really. You have to allow for deceleration you know, unless you just want to fly by at near lightspeed.

At a constant thrust, you'd have to begin deceleration at the halfway point.

Harte



posted on Jul, 30 2014 @ 06:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: ZetaRediculian
a reply to: amazing


Please be kind

Always. I think there is a lot of misconceptions and misunderstanding when we try to express that life exists out there in mathematical terms. I think the terms "probability" and "likelihood" are often misused in this context. Those terms are used to determine the odds of something occurring based on sample data. The sample data consists of data where the thing you are trying to predict has occurred and when it has not occurred. Think of a deck of cards. We know Aces occur 4 times so we can determine probability of drawing an ace from the deck because of what we know. Now just because we are talking about billions of things, the math doesn't change. There is no point where the numbers get so big that the math changes.

So it doesn't matter how big or how many things there are. What matters is how many times you observed that thing happening. So what the Drake equation does is it makes up those values. We can call them guesses or assumptions but that is what makes up for the lack of observed data.


Good points about the Drake Equation.




At the time the Drake Equation was written, it was all guesses.

But not anymore.


In the 5 decades since then, it should be noted the first few factors now have known values based on observations.

We know (R) - the rate of star formation in our Milky Way galaxy = 7 - Finding this was one of the main reasons the Hubble space telescope was built.

We know (fp) the fraction of stars of stars with planets = around 100% - for just about every star you see (especially stars like our Sun has planets circling it. Planets are a byproduct of star formation. - Finding this was one of the main reasons the Keck telescopes in Hawaii were built.

We know (ne) the fraction of the stars with planets like the Earth in the habitable zone where liquid water could exist on its surface = 0.22 or 22% for Sunlike (F, G, K class) stars and 0.48 or 48% for dimmer, smaller red dwarf (M) stars. - Finding this factor was the PRIME reason the Kepler spacecraft was built and launched.




These were things that were unknown when Frank Drake drew up the equation and the reason Frank Drake drew up the equation was not to arrive at a definitive answer back then but to break down the BIG question of how many civilizations might be in the Milky Way in to smaller pieces which observations and experiments could get answers to.

We're closing in on (fl) - the fraction of planets which have life and most experts agree we'll know this sometime within the next 30 years due to sophisticated ground and space telescopes which will be able to sniff out the signatures of life (called biomarkers) in the atmospheres of planets around other stars.




Once we know that then the next thing to learn will be (fi) the fraction of life bearing worlds which produce intelligent technological life.

It's even possible we might find fi before fl.

edit on 30-7-2014 by JadeStar because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 30 2014 @ 06:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: Moondoggie
a reply to: LogicalRazor



The issue I take with this.. is that these knuckleheads wasted resources,,ie gov. grants ,too watch computer simulations of what may or may not be possible for aliens too do , when they could of just read a couple ATS threads & concluded the same thing,,, Congratulation ATS users ...you now are deserving of a Bachelor's degree in Astrophysics & a Master's in Physics .


Did it dawn on you that perhaps some of those "knuckleheads" that actually study this subject actually read ATS....



posted on Jul, 30 2014 @ 06:44 PM
link   
a reply to: JadeStar


In the 5 decades since then, it should be noted the first few factors now have known values based on observations.


That really is the key. I did not know that. Good stuff.



posted on Jul, 30 2014 @ 07:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: JadeStar
We know (fp) the fraction of stars of stars with planets = around 100% - for just about every star you see (especially stars like our Sun has planets circling it. Planets are a byproduct of star formation. - Finding this was one of the main reasons the Keck telescopes in Hawaii were built.


How is this 100% when binary systems (or higher number systems) account for 30-40% of all systems and approximately half of those do not have planets?



posted on Jul, 30 2014 @ 07:06 PM
link   
Sorry, double.



edit on 30-7-2014 by AugustusMasonicus because: networkdude has no beer



posted on Jul, 30 2014 @ 07:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04

originally posted by: amazing

I think there is a really good mathematical probability that alien probes have visited earth or at least our solar system.

Can you share with me the equations you are using?


why do you disagree?

I neither agreed or disagreed. Someone stated a fact, I asked for the mathematical equation that was used. If it can not be provided then it should not be said to have been used.



posted on Jul, 30 2014 @ 07:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: PleiaDsClusterDck
The Drake equation is:
N = R_[\ast] \cdot f_p \cdot n_e \cdot f_[\ell] \cdot f_i \cdot f_c \cdot L
where:
N = the number of civilizations in our galaxy with which radio-communication might be possible (i.e. which are on our current past light cone);
and
R* = the average rate of star formation in our galaxyfp = the fraction of those stars that have planetsne = the average number of planets that can potentially support life per star that has planetsfl = the fraction of planets that could support life that actually develop life at some pointfi = the fraction of planets with life that actually go on to develop intelligent life (civilizations)fc = the fraction of civilizations that develop a technology that releases detectable signs of their existence into spaceL = the length of time for which such civilizations release detectable signals into space[8]

N= 0 according to that equation.



posted on Jul, 30 2014 @ 07:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: amazing
Therefore X=G X P That number is 4 sextillion. That's a 4 with 21 zero's after it. If I multiply that by 1% that leaves me with 40 quadrillion possible planets in our Universe that could hold life. I think 1% is a low estimate and we’re not even talking about moons. We guess that there are several moons in our own solar system that could harbor life.

No one is debating there are lots of planets that could hold life. The point is we have zero evidence they DO hold life. Saying there are 100 trillion sentient species and saying there are 0 outside Earth are both possibilities, with the 0 being the stronger of the two, as it is the only supposition with evidence to support it.



posted on Jul, 30 2014 @ 07:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: JadeStar
Good points about the Drake Equation.




At the time the Drake Equation was written, it was all guesses.

But not anymore.

And perhaps someday we actually will have real statistics. Anyone claiming we never will is just as bad as those claiming we already do.



new topics

top topics



 
34
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join