It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Alien Life must exist according to the Laws of Physics

page: 2
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in


posted on Jun, 11 2018 @ 06:02 AM
While the math may predict other Earth like planets capable of communicating with us, those predicted planets may be too far away for even light to have traveled between us and them since they reached that level of technology.

Even if some other civilization skipped the Earths dark ages they would only have gained 500 years towards achieving that goal. All it takes is some earlier more primitive ancestor not "getting lucky" and an entire planets technical civilization never happens.

posted on Jun, 11 2018 @ 06:07 AM
a reply to: neoholographic

You could use physics to argue life is impossible in the universe, yet oddly here we are. I really hope there is other life out there but you cant rule out that something so strange happened that the oblt place lige formed was here, we could have been that impossible fluke of nature. I hope life pops up everywhere but until we can find and study it on other planets we wont kmow how or if it occurs.

Now if this is the only planet in the universe that contains lige doesnt that put an interesting spin on where these aliens people see come from? How many intellegent species actually share this planet with us? Could all those fairy tales of faeries or ogres simply be lifeforms that became good at hiding from us?

Of you look at it like alien's are from earth it makes out observations and their behavior make so much more sense.
edit on 6/11/18 by dragonridr because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 11 2018 @ 06:25 AM

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed

originally posted by: highvein
a reply to: neoholographic

Don't go putting words in my mouth.

I said it could be, which is only a thought.

But as far as observable clear cut evidence there is none for life existing outside of Earth, which I might add does not mean there is not life outside of Earth.

To dismiss the thought that life in this Universe originated on Earth is very close minded also.

You mean observable evidence that you have observed yourself, which it sounds like you haven't. You have no knowledge what other people have observed.
Just because there isn't public official and academic confirmation of something concrete does not mean it doesn't exist, or that no one has ever seen it, it only means you haven't seen it. You don't speak for everyone. But the same thing you just said is often parroted by some scientist, or some other public figure, as if they know. They only know what they know personally. Having most all of society agree on something like "nobody knows for sure" is also completely false. It is only true for those who agree with it based on what they know or don't know.

I think you didn't read my entire post before you responded. You must have missed

which I might add does not mean there is not life outside of Earth.

If you guys don't take into account all plausible thoughts on the subject, then you are not actually trying to find the truth.

posted on Jun, 11 2018 @ 06:32 AM

originally posted by: SummerRain

originally posted by: Peeple
a reply to: neoholographic

What? "...the universe is fine tuned for life to exist"?
Since when? The universe is full of all kinds of radiation, flying rocks, small dust particles so fast they put a hole in the strongest materials, explosions everywhere, ....
Earth is fine tuned for life. That much is true. But take away the Moon and the magnetic core and you get a wobbling rock without seasons and atmosphere.
How many planets have we found with magnetic core and a moon, or something similar that keeps the axis stable?

None. If you don't mind me answering my own question.

From the fires of chaos, emits an eternal spark. life. human. the vagrant virus that consumes all.


The peak of human evolution - yay! NOT.

edit on 11-6-2018 by WarPig1939 because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 11 2018 @ 06:33 AM
I tend to see in threads like these the age of our universe, 14 billion years, thrown out there as proof that other life must exist out there in the universe.

Here are some things you need to keep in mind:

1) In the beginning, there was only Hydrogen. It would take the very first stars forming from that hydrogen (Population 3 stars) forging the heavier elements to have anything else. There would be no rocky type planets around stars like that, as the elements to form those rocky planets did not exist.

2) Much later on, you have Population 2 stars....very metal poor. Some of these might have rocky planets around them, but most likely either not, or very small. Pop 2 stars can be located towards the center of our galaxy....not exactly a nice place to live in.

3) Population 1 stars, like our sun, are high in metals. These heavier elements are abundant enough to allow for much more rocky planets to form. They only be around for about 8 billion years or less.

4) The Earth and Sun formed about 4.5 billion years ago. The first life that we know of here on Earth showed up about 3.8 billion years ago. And it took 3.8 billion years for that life to become intelligent, tool building/using life.

Our universe is actually quite young. I know that doesn't sound like it when you start tossing the word "billion" around for years, but it actually is. Here's something to give you an idea that can be hard to wrap your head around:

Red Dwarf stars use hydrogen so slowly that they have incredibly long life spans. A 0.1 M red dwarf (meaning it has 1 tenth of the mass of our sun) could last up to 10 TRILLION years.

That's 10,000,000,000,000 years.

One Trillion is One THOUSAND billion.

Our universe is only 14 of those billions years old. It means our universe is quite young.

We only have the Earth as a template for life and intelligent life. It took 4.5 billion years for our sun and the Earth to form, end up with life on it, and for that life to become intelligent tool using beings.

That 4.5 billion is about 32% of the age of our universe.

posted on Jun, 11 2018 @ 06:59 AM
a reply to: Azureblue

To the religious it means, that other intelligent life forms, let alone other MORE intelligent life forms than humans, simply cannot exist can it?

What about the obsession of thinking finding life on another plant rules out there is a spiritual/higher plain of existence that is more spiritual in the context of lack of physical body than a material existence?

I what to be more defined by my spirit than my biological functions?

Talk about being closed minded to different forms of existence and what dimensions it can habitat.
edit on 11-6-2018 by neutronflux because: Added and fixed

posted on Jun, 11 2018 @ 07:30 AM
The concept 'Law' doesn't apply to physics.
'Laws' of physics ? So are constants universal constants in space and time ? Is that proven or just defined ?

There might be even life in our solar system. Why assume that intelligent life wants to chat with humanity. Why assume that they are too dumb to hide their presents. Why assume that alle telemetric data is true. intercepting and altering communications of satelites wouldn't be that difficult for an advanced civilization.

Venus and mars in the goldilock zone.Venus and mars both might had live at some point in time. Maybe it developed maybe it cloaked it's presents , or maybe not.

posted on Jun, 11 2018 @ 07:39 AM
a reply to: neoholographic

You might like this TED talk where Christoph Adami outlines a way to just use spectral analysis to detect life of any type:

Smart people are really smart!

edit on 11-6-2018 by dfnj2015 because: (no reason given)

posted on Jun, 11 2018 @ 07:41 AM
a reply to: frenchfries

I loved this talk especially since it was "banned". I may not agree with everything Sheldrake concludes but I just love the way he thinks outside the box.

posted on Jun, 11 2018 @ 08:13 AM
I would urge everyone to read the book by John Gribbin about the likelihood of sentient life developing to be a rare event.

I'm not requiring anyone to take something on 'faith' and he is very careful to go over all of the aspects. He shares my conclusion that it appears that 'evolution' as a process does -not- select for intelligence.

In conclusion, while the physics of this universe seems to be favorable for planets, suns and stars and possibly life, the most you can say is that it's very probable that microscopic one-celled organisms are likely to be probable throughout the Milky Way galaxy. But beyond that there is no evidence that higher forms are likely, Gribbin thinks it's a possible barrier event to go from one-celled or even organic molecules (molecules containing carbon) to anything more complex.

Everyone seems to confuse the exact nature of the 'Are We Alone' question and that is not just are we the only life, but we are possibly the ONLY sentient life in the Milky Galaxy or our Local group, which has gotten off-planet and in fact, only to Low Earth Orbit (LEO) in a sense of a working situation.

For a human-sized (not shaped, necessarily) to be able to develop into a sentient, space-faring civilization they would have to assure that they are capable of self-sustaining and that means colonizing to a high level a number of planets to prevent being wiped out via an extinction event. Only then, logically, would it be safe to venture out into the space of their local group to seek out other sentients. (It's more likely they'd send nano-probes).

For another good example of how to envision the correct paradigm including the effect of space-time expansion (fabric of the Universe, in other words) see the very good youtube by author Kurzgesagt, 'How Far Can We Go'.

Once you read the book and see this it will change your view on this topic. Prior to informing yourself you are just not able to make an informed decision on it.

posted on Jun, 11 2018 @ 08:13 AM
a reply to: dfnj2015

well 'banned' and thinking outside of the box go together. The Scientific community (Not the scientific method) is as much an religion as religion is. I find it kind of suspicious that all the inventions eventually lead to a more passive docile population. Breaktroughs lead to better consumer products but not to real advancement of humanity.

In the 70 there was the plan to change the c02 atmosphere of venus using algea. in the 50's there was the plan fly to a nearby star using nuclear power and in the 80's it was said that in 2000 there would be a permanent moon station. in the 90's there was talk about sending stuff in low orbit using an electromagnetic gun....

What actually happened was , a space shuttle and sending drones to other planets. We (humanity) are now at the point were is seems doubtful whether man will land on the moon within the next decade.

Humanity doesn't explore it does consume. And no doubt that there will come more and better consumer products , VR worlds and robots. But my guess is it that under the reign of the NWO humanity will just become zombified VR junkies , and not explorers of the marvelous universe this is. So aliens will find us long before we find them.

posted on Jun, 11 2018 @ 08:25 AM
a reply to: Maverick7

Pretty light mainstream stay inside the box science message . Assuming that all science is correct , fundaments of physics are completely understood , and there are no loopholes in the theory.

The message :

Spinning towards the conclusion that spaceflight is useless. Stay at home look at the universe obey ,setup webspace , support us ,become passive, exploring is dumb we know almost everything. pfff.....

posted on Jun, 11 2018 @ 09:01 AM
a reply to: frenchfries

What actually happened was , a space shuttle and sending drones to other planets. We (humanity) are now at the point were is seems doubtful whether man will land on the moon within the next decade.

All under the claim space explanation is dangerous? While people get killed crossing the street everyday?

posted on Jun, 11 2018 @ 09:56 AM
a reply to: neoholographic

Laws of Physics?

No, but according to the mathematics, there is almost no chance that we are alone in the universe. The only question on the mind of scholars in the fields pertaining to life on other worlds, would be is there any other life in the universe RIGHT NOW.

You see, the element of time is a big deal when working these things out. Time in this universe is one of the insurmountable barriers to discovery. For example, the observable universe is a limitation placed on our ability to perceive the universe, by the fact that its outer reaches are so far away, that light from them has not yet reached our world. That problem is not merely distance, but time. In time, the edges we currently perceive will be further away, and more of the universe will be visible to us. That being said, eventually, according to some of the best put together thinking on the subject, eventually forces pushing the expansion of space, will eventually force all the lights in the sky so far apart, as to render each of them a lonely star in what feels like a void. That is one interpretation of the potential future awaiting us... its a ways off, so not to worry.

The point is, that it is not a matter of querying whether alien life can exist in this universe, or even whether it does. Its a matter of asking "Since alien life must exist in the universe, when and where does it exist?", and that is a much harder question. It may be that we are the first. I personally doubt it, but its at least theoretically possible. It may be that we are merely one in a myriad, but the only expression of intelligent life that exists right now, in this cosmic eyeblink we call the history of mankind. Maybe all the species which came before have had time to evolve, expand, and die by now, and we are the last one? Maybe when this species winks out of existence like the trailing end of a damp fart, the next species to possess intelligence, will sprout at a far flung edge of the universe, around some nondescript star, whirling in a not particularly impressive galaxy, itself orbiting a fairly typical super massive black hole. Perhaps the universe is TEEMING with life, but it is so varied and alien to us, that we cannot even recognise its signatures!

The point is that there is no way to PROVE anything, until we find something other than ourselves to consider and contemplate, and until that happens, this is all very much an exercise, rather than a practical query.

posted on Jun, 11 2018 @ 10:08 AM
a reply to: TrueBrit

He is a thought and I will not tell you where I read this yet. Consider that one universe when it has reached a point of knowledge and wisdom projects and creates another universe , and I shall ask you this. What is beyond the edge (if there is one) of the universe ? Does nothing even exist ? Food for thought.

posted on Jun, 11 2018 @ 10:14 AM
a reply to: bluemooone2

Well, I personally believe that this universe is likely to be one expression of a deeper, more fundamental structure, like a twig, which itself is the issue of a branch, which itself is the issue of a trunk, which itself was grown from some kind of larger body.

But that potential is utterly impossible to prove or disprove with our current technology.

But it is absurd to me to think that nothing is an actual thing. There is something everywhere, even outside of the places we know how to describe as somewhere, as far as I can make out. I doubt however, that one universe developing a sentient species within it, or having great knowledge amassed within it, has anything to do with the formation of other universes. Very subtle fluctuations of quantum level objects, or other things even further beneath the skein of the visible and knowable, is far more likely to cause that, than anything we could recognise or acknowledge as something we contributed to, including the mere gaining of knowledge.

Remember, the universe already contained far more information than any one species could ever amass about it. So the percentile information density of our universe is likely to be largely unaffected by our existence, either now, or in the best of our possible futures.

posted on Jun, 11 2018 @ 10:36 AM
a reply to: TrueBrit

Well, I personally believe that this universe is likely to be one expression of a deeper, more fundamental structure, like a twig, which itself is the issue of a branch, which itself is the issue of a trunk, which itself was grown from some kind of larger body.

Thats beautiful
And I agree.

posted on Jun, 11 2018 @ 11:04 AM
So what is the point? Is there anyone save some fundies and hillbillies who does NOT believe there is life elsewhere? I get a kick out of people who come on here and say from a position of authority something like, "People are just stupid if they don't think there is life out there." Umm, OK, who does that, exactly? Nobody I know. Can you name some names? Contemporary names? No fair going back to the time of the Inquisition. So what is this Straw Man you are setting up to "argue" a point no one disputes? OF COURSE there is "life out there!" Can we move on from that, please?

posted on Jun, 11 2018 @ 12:27 PM
a reply to: schuyler

Isn't part of the strawman these people use, to use the
logical error of appeal to incredulity "you say there
isn't life!"

then immediatley morph their argument like a pea
under 3 cups to:

So you agree that there is fungus and stuff all over the place,
(an appeal to common sense logical fallacy)

to where they really want to take you:

so that means there must be a billion star empires per square
light year with cloaked star ships at every street corner!

That's the puerile ploy that seems to evolve from the
initial set of conditions.


posted on Jun, 11 2018 @ 12:46 PM
a reply to: KellyPrettyBear

And you know there are not how again? LOL I personally believe that the human form has done quite well out there and many planets have human advanced life. Even us from a futures past or somesuch. I can explain the theory better wit a cube, triangle, and circle drawing.

edit on 11-6-2018 by bluemooone2 because: (no reason given)

new topics

top topics

<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in