ET Likely Doesn't Exist, Finds Math Model

Does this absolute moron grasp the idea that we have barely even imaged another planet that is outside of our own solarsystem, let alone the entire galaxy and then beyond our own galaxy, expanding into the almost limitless other galaxies that populate the universe. Thats one hell of alot of planets to claim as lifeless rocks......

Hundreds and hundreds of billions of stars in our own galaxy and we've barely even seen outside of our own - these so called "intellectuals" are arrogant enough to suggest that there cannot be other life else where

I'm willing to bet there are life forms within our own solarsystem.

[edit on 25-4-2008 by dodgygeeza]

[edit on 25-4-2008 by dodgygeeza]

Why do we always have to have models and formulas for predicting the probability of "Earth-like" planets for them to provide life. This is the universe that we barely know now. Who are we to say that life has to start and have the same conditions like we have here on Earth. We really need to evaluate our system of thinking on how we view life in our universe.

and IF that theory is right it only count for lifeforms based on carbon, hydrogen and some other atooms (sorry for my bad chemestry and english) how says that there isn't a chench that there is life based on oxigen or phophor

All of this assumes, it seems to me, that intelligent life could only evolve on planets which are:

• Earth-like
  
• A similar distance from a star with similar properties to that of our own sun
  
• Replete with the same chemical elements that we have thus far discovered on our own world and in our local cosmic neighborhood
  
• Home to life based upon the same biochemistry that life on our world is based upon
  
• Home to life evolving only at a rate similar to life on our own planet
  

...none of which, in my opinion, is even remotely close to being confirmed or proved. It seems to me that in a universe so vast and as yet unexplored, life of multiple varieties in multiple varieties of environments, and under a multitude of conditions (only some of which we may be able to conceive of at all), might flourish. We have no way of knowing or predicting whether this is or is not the case with any degree of accuracy in my opinion.

(Edit to fix the dreaded "or" instead of "of" typo)

[edit on 4/25/2008 by AceWombat04]

Good Lord and these people are paid top dollar.

First off they aren't going to get anywhere fast if they are going by what "WE" the human race needs to survive.

In reality Earth has to much oxygen in the air other species can not survive on Earth like ourselves.

Some species CAN breathe thin air and others well, your intelligent you can figure it out.

Its kind of like what is good for the goose is bad for the gander.

From what I have seen, most live within------ we walk upon, and yes..... I do think Earth and the human race are unique.





[edit on 25-4-2008 by observe50]

reply to post by yeti101


My opinion is that 1 data point is not a whole lot better than 0 data points when trying to extrapolate beyond 1 data point. But you and I probably agree on that.

reply to everyone who is angry with this guy

This guy is presenting a model to try to get people to think more about the temporal windows for earth life in our current planetary models. There is nothing wrong with that. Its a useful model for people to think about.

But it is very much a hyper-extension, so it shouldn't be taken to be drawing conclusions. The data that he/she will need to input into the model, and the model itself, are likely sufficiently flawed as they will need significant revision in the future. The point is to try to build a model so that we can make forward progress.

The problem is the press acts like each attempt at such a model is some kind of definitive solution. I suppose this approach to reporting science draws more eyeballs to the story, but it is not an accurate representation of the nature of the science.

This kind of science consists of dialogs of competing ideas. Not statements of absolute laws. We may get to that point in the future, but we aren't there yet. Many of the concerns about the model raised here are exactly the point of having this kind of model out there in the first place. The scientists involved are challenging people to test it at a theoretical and experimental level. So keep it up!

[edit on 25-4-2008 by Ectoterrestrial]

What evidence can they produce that our model of how life is created and evolves on earth is an exact duplication of how life could evolve on another planet. As they said in Jurassic Park "life finds a way", it's true, we find life in the hottest and coldest conditions where we once assumed no life could exist. Our model of life is not universal, it's only earthly. To say life could not emerge on another planet unless the conditions matched our own is very arrogantly human.

All of you saying that it would be self centered to even suggest that we are alone in the universe. What if we are though? It wouldn't be self-centered, it would be the truth.

Furthermore, what if I thought that it is a bit self-centered that you think there is life elsewhere in the universe? Why would I think that?

Because you want to think that our generation is more important than all others. You are so keen to discover that there is life in other parts of the universe would prove that we are the ultimate generation.

I'm not swinging to either tree, but I don't see how you can call someone who thinks we are alone in the universe self-centered.

reply to post by littlemoe


First of all that's all BS~! The government is just trying to keep the fear going in you, the feel for being Dependant on them so they can tell us what to think/feel, oh ya 911 was NOT an inside job... just another BS!

Here's some facts, even if the calculations are true and the earth like planets that we have discovered have no intelligent life on them then that's just less then 1% of the entire universe. In fact universe is said to be infinite and growing faster and faster, so we are like a sand grain on an endless beach, then tell me again we happen to be the only intelligent life out there... give me a break, almost reminds me of all these religions on how they all preach us that they are the only way to connect to god, just brainwashing people, WAKE UP! Think for yourself, reason with your OWN logic/feeling.

"Create a system or be enslaved by another mans" William Blake

Originally posted by InterestedObserver
All of you saying that it would be self centered to even suggest that we are alone in the universe. What if we are though? It wouldn't be self-centered, it would be the truth.

I would say if that were true, that must mean we're pretty special and a living miracle.

reply to post by littlemoe


"Ne = The number of Earth-like planets — meaning planets that have liquid water — within each planetary system."

They are assuming all life in the universe requires liquid water. Wow. Woo! Go team science! Way to think outside the box!!

I have never heard of that school anyway...lol.....hell we have a professor at Cisco Junior College that thinks he is a alien...Or did when I went there 15 years ago

This is the same concept of when a mathematician in the 1980's "proved" that it was impossible to make a hard drive larger than 800 megabytes. We have hard drives now that can store terrabytes of information.

Originally posted by GeeGee
This is the same concept of when a mathematician in the 1980's "proved" that it was impossible to make a hard drive larger than 800 megabytes. We have hard drives now that can store terrabytes of information.

YEP!

The interesting thing about Science - - it is based only on what you know TODAY!

reply to post by Zeptepi


That's a really cool calculator. According to my predictions, there's over 90 civilizations in our galaxy. That's a high number geez. Multiply that be the billions of galaxies in our universe, and the mathematical possibility of life increases by infinity.

The chances of intelligent life out there with the capabilities to travel and to be anywhere in range of earth to matter all depends on what a person believes.
If you want to build a math model you need to base it on set ideas and those ideas can lead to 100% Star Trek type universe or a barren one except for a few. Since in our case the universe is 15 billion years old there is a much smaller window for life to evolve (which also takes what 4 billion to get to our level?) if you base your hypothesis on totally random events that start with non-living material coming together to form life and then that life evolves into something intelligent, and is not let’s say a intelligent sponge, that further evolves into a species that can space travel you will not have much interaction if and when by shear chance a race like this forms.

The religious way is very obvious, but there is also the seeding way. Seeding is one way that still follows the random event pattern, but furthers it by suggesting that a race developed about as early as it possibly could and then when that race evolved well pass what we are today, but billions of years ago, went out and seeded earth along with other worlds since this random event is extremely rare to happen naturally.

My money is on we are very alone and we are that race that maybe if we live and travel to other worlds we will be the seeders, so I agree with the topic.

Originally posted by freighttrain
Here's some facts, even if the calculations are true and the earth like planets that we have discovered have no intelligent life on them then that's just less then 1% of the entire universe. In fact universe is said to be infinite and growing faster and faster, so we are like a sand grain on an endless beach, then tell me again we happen to be the only intelligent life out there... give me a break, almost reminds me of all these religions on how they all preach us that they are the only way to connect to god, just brainwashing people, WAKE UP! Think for yourself, reason with your OWN logic/feeling.

I think you are basing a lot on assumptions. First to say there is life out is a far cry from intelligent life, which is a far cry from one that is also physically able to space travel.

Second to say the universe is infinite and so there is intelligent life in abundance doesn’t take in the sheer size of what you are talking about here. If you put 100 people on earth, but then you spread them out evenly with all the physical limitations, the chances of two of them actually meeting each other in their life time would be extremely lucky. Now expand this to astronomical numbers in distance and difficulty we would see that the calculated chance is a number that is so high it would be a mathematical impossibility for any of these races ever meeting even though they are out there just because of the fact that the universe is infinite.


[edit on 25-4-2008 by Xtrozero]

I know one thing -- survivability trumps all other needs.

And collectively, as a race, individuals will willingly sacrifice their lives for the good of the species, if they had to die so that mankind's existence into the future would be assured.

So then, this tells me that as we advance in our space programs, one of our foremost goals right from the very beginning, not after hundreds or thousands of years of space travel, will be to create a habitable colony on the nearest possible heavenly body. From what I understand, Mars is the first target for a colony, and we will have to build them underneath "Eco-bubbles", domes which sustain the environment underneath them. Naturally, this would need to be made of some super strong material, and have some killer observational technology, so as to see potentially life-threatening (dome damaging) weather or objects coming their way. Who knows, maybe we will make it under the surface so as to avoid potential weather issues.

I do think we will have a smaller manned outpost on the moon, but not to the extent of Mars. The moon base will be akin to the international space station, and the colony on Mars? it will be more like .. Jamestown, Virginia, when the first English colonists landed in the New World. In other words, less than 100 individuals, a set amount of men and women, of a set age and fitness, pre-tested for all sorts of ailments and genetic disorders, so that they could procreate if necessary and advance the human race. But anyways.

My point is, if these are some of our beginning objectives as a "primitive" space traveling race of beings, or in other words newbies, surely any race of beings that advanced to our current level would have similar goals, and should they have advanced another .. X amount of thousands of years into the future, their technology would be so potentially great that they could leave their home planet and never return. Their home planet could be destroyed and it would be nothing but history book material for them. They'd have colonized entire other planets by that point, and would also likely have craft to traverse space of such a size that 1,000s could live comfortably.

In short, it doesnt matter if Earth-like planets are really rare and then eventually get burnt to a crisp; a theoretical intelligent advanced race of beings could've easily been at a level where they had colonized many other planets and moons, as well as control "motherships" or even what we'd consder a "small, rapidly moving planet", whch would actually be a deathstar-esque craft like from star warzzz

reply to post by littlemoe




i'm sorry,but that is total BS.


i mean it's pretty freakin obvious we are not alone.

we are not alone..it's a fact and it's all good..we need to become a civilized race and help spread life and goodness throughout the univers


edit=reason i know it's a fact is cause i have seen 3 ufo's in my life and one was no doubt an alien spacecraft,also my grandfather was a regional director for MUFON and i was able to research his and their knowledge.

[edit on 25-4-2008 by Skipper1975]

[edit on 25-4-2008 by Skipper1975]

reply to post by littlemoe


Oh leave mr watson alone. Wild baseless speculation is fun