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.

 

N = R* fp ne fl fi fc L

page: 2
16
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 20 2009 @ 03:01 PM
link   
And I would just like to state that the "N" jskytale and yeti have come up with is STILL a higher percent chance than it is to win the lottery.

At least Texas Mega Millions.

And while we don't have lottery winners everyday, nor can we name lottery winners, we can all agree THERE ARE LOTTERY WINNERS, right?




posted on Jun, 20 2009 @ 03:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by GeechQuestInfo
And I would just like to state that the "N" jskytale and yeti have come up with is STILL a higher percent chance than it is to win the lottery.

At least Texas Mega Millions.

And while we don't have lottery winners everyday, nor can we name lottery winners, we can all agree THERE ARE LOTTERY WINNERS, right?


oh, absolutely. my math assumed that life arose completely by chance, which i personally find a little unlikely. i think it is more likely that when the building blocks are there, it doesn't take a lightning strike landing on the eprcet spot in the perfect puddle to begin the right chemical reaction - it happens eventually in a large portion of cases. i also, personally, believe there is at least one species that has found us and is monitoring us scientifically much the same way we monitor a new species we found on our own planet. the reason fro this was a daylight UFO sighting i had many years ago that I honestly can't explain with man-made technology.

because the site i used does not take into consideration the amount of civilizations that successfully populate a second planet, thereby essentially becoming immune to chance natural disasters wiping them out, I personally believe there are *at least* 3-4 other highly intelligent species in our galaxy with several to many thousands of populated planets.

[edit on 20-6-2009 by JScytale]

[edit on 20-6-2009 by JScytale]



posted on Jun, 20 2009 @ 03:22 PM
link   
"because the site i used does not take into consideration the amount of civilizations that successfully populate a second planet, thereby essentially becoming immune to chance natural disasters wiping them out, I personally believe there are *at least* 3-4 other highly intelligent species in our galaxy with several to many thousands of populated planets"

WOW!!! Thank you for Jskytale for that point. Out of the countless hours spent thinking I really hadn't thought of civilizations that would populate 2 planets.

Thank You for opening my mind a little bit more this afternoon.

Will you see what you can decipher from this post?

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Thanks



posted on Jun, 20 2009 @ 03:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by GeechQuestInfo
Not to be a narcissistic but why do the posts that contain jokes get a lot of views and comments but then serious stuff such as this post doesn't?


Logical reason...

The material in this thread cannot be debunked... so no debunkers pop in to stir things up. Those that agree have nothing new to add and cannot say "I agree
" nor do they have debunkers to give rebutal to

And you invoked one of the MAGIC words that keeps trolls at bay, MATH
The trolls do not understand it, so scurry back under a rock






[edit on 20-6-2009 by zorgon]



posted on Jun, 20 2009 @ 04:03 PM
link   
reply to post by zorgon
 


EXACTLY!


Even with the worst case scenario of Drakes equation that would still leave us with about 10 civilizations equal to or more advanced than our own. That simply means even with the most stringent and ruthless use of Drakes equation it means there is at least Ten Times more life out there than just Earth.


With the possibility of thousands if not millions of other civilizations. Either way the "Believers" win...




[edit on 20-6-2009 by SLAYER69]



posted on Jun, 20 2009 @ 04:09 PM
link   
reply to post by SkepticPerhaps
 


fL= the fraction of the planet's life during which the communicating civilizations survives

neandrethals were not communicating and didnt have tech like weapons of mass destruction. Humans have only just begun to send signals.

How long will humans survive on earth from this point on? I think theres a good chance we will destroy ourselves within 10,000 years.

If i go crazy and say tech civs will last another million years it puts the number of civs in our galaxy at 6.

[edit on 20-6-2009 by yeti101]



posted on Jun, 20 2009 @ 04:29 PM
link   
My apologese for trolling but I thought this article maybe of interest.

Number of alien worlds quantified



posted on Jun, 20 2009 @ 04:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by zorgon

Originally posted by GeechQuestInfo
Not to be a narcissistic but why do the posts that contain jokes get a lot of views and comments but then serious stuff such as this post doesn't?


Logical reason...

The material in this thread cannot be debunked... so no debunkers pop in to stir things up. Those that agree have nothing new to add and cannot say "I agree
" nor do they have debunkers to give rebutal to

And you invoked one of the MAGIC words that keeps trolls at bay, MATH
The trolls do not understand it, so scurry back under a rock






[edit on 20-6-2009 by zorgon]



Originally posted by SLAYER69
reply to post by zorgon
 


EXACTLY!


Even with the worst case scenario of Drakes equation that would still leave us with about 10 civilizations equal to or more advanced than our own. That simply means even with the most stringent and ruthless use of Drakes equation it means there is at least Ten Times more life out there than just Earth.


With the possibility of thousands if not millions of other civilizations. Either way the "Believers" win...




[edit on 20-6-2009 by SLAYER69]


this isn't a "win or lose" competition with "believers vs skeptics". its an intelligent discussion where virtually everyone accepts that life exists elsewhere in our universe. As for our galaxy, that's up for debate depending on its prevalence. Visiting us? Unlikely, but I have personal experiences that lead me to believe it is very possible.

Just bear in mind that pure "believers" are people approaching the discussion with preconceived notions and are not going to get any closer to the truth because of this. Keep an open mind, use logic and reason, and assume UFO evidence is false until the provided evidence is enough to truly convince you on the grounds of logic, and you have a good approach to it.

There is also no such thing as a "pure skeptic". There are people with varying degrees of apprehension to the topic at hand. Like I said before, some is ideal, but you don't want to go into the discussion and also refuse to accept solid evidence, however exceedingly rare that is regarding UFOs. Skeptics keep a more scientific approach - so regardless of whether or not you disagree, they are more likely to have a more complete understanding of the phenomenon, *even if* they are apprehensive to believing it.

In the end though, everyone falls in on a spectrum. If you want to learn the truth, the ideal place on it is near the center, slightly towards the skeptic side. No one "wins" or "loses" when you are seeking answers. Seeing it like that takes everything and trivializes it to a black and white schoolyard competition that will get you nowhere.

[edit on 20-6-2009 by JScytale]



posted on Jun, 20 2009 @ 05:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by JScytale
this isn't a "win or lose" competition with "believers vs skeptics".


No but the question was why no one visits a serious thread... I had the same issue with my Martian fossil thread that I ran as a test along side two sensational threads... guess which had the most interest? And yet repeatedly in those two thread skeptics chided me for using sensational headlines

The two threads hit like wildfire, many flags stars and pages, while the serious one did half a page in the same time, even though it had several applauses

THAt was the point ... THAT was the answer to the question

But nice speech anyway



posted on Jun, 20 2009 @ 05:12 PM
link   
EXTRA SOLAR PLANETS

An extrasolar planet, or exoplanet, is a planet beyond our Solar System, orbiting a star other than our Sun.

As of June 2009, 353 exoplanets are listed in the Extrasolar Planets Encyclopaedia.

en.wikipedia.org...

The Extrasolar Planets Encyclopaedia
exoplanet.eu...


Top 10 Most Intriguing Extrasolar Planets
www.space.com...

[edit on 20-6-2009 by zorgon]



posted on Jun, 20 2009 @ 05:21 PM
link   
reply to post by GeechQuestInfo
 


Actually, the known galaxy is some 75 BILLION light years across, not 100,000. So you're math is WAY off. Now, on the other hand, our Milky Way galaxy is some 100,000 light years across. I don't know if that's what you meant, but your math is way off.

[edit on 6/20/0909 by Mookie89]



posted on Jun, 20 2009 @ 05:39 PM
link   
I do like the way you think, however being a non matematical type myself I must add the spiritual equation to the mix.

When you use Einstein I can too in that he was known for the study of meditation towards the last part of his life, seems he was not only smart but that knew intelligence and math without awarenes is a lopsided equation.

The science of the future will be balanced and enlightening. Did you know the last part of your equation spells fickle? to me that is what science is today, fickle.



posted on Jun, 20 2009 @ 05:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mookie89
reply to post by GeechQuestInfo
 


Actually, the known galaxy is some 75 BILLION light years across, not 100,000. So you're math is WAY off. Now, on the other hand, our Milky Way galaxy is some 100,000 light years across. I don't know if that's what you meant, but your math is way off.


you mean the universe?

and we don't know *exactly* how big it is. estimates range as large as 165 billion.

our *galaxy* is ~100,000 light years in diameter, and ~1,000 light years in thickness. This discussion is regarding the amount of intelligent life in the milky way. As for the universe, it is almost a given life exists in it - but other galaxies are so far away that its beyond unlikely we will find a way to travel to another *galaxy* anytime soon. By soon I mean in the next hundred million or so years assuming we even exist so long (we wont, least not as homo sapiens sapiens).

[edit on 20-6-2009 by JScytale]



posted on Jun, 20 2009 @ 05:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by JScytale

Originally posted by Mookie89
reply to post by GeechQuestInfo
 


Actually, the known galaxy is some 75 BILLION light years across, not 100,000. So you're math is WAY off. Now, on the other hand, our Milky Way galaxy is some 100,000 light years across. I don't know if that's what you meant, but your math is way off.


you mean the universe?

and we don't know *exactly* how big it is. estimates range as large as 165 billion.

our *galaxy* is ~100,000 light years in diameter, and ~1,000 light years in thickness. This discussion is regarding the amount of intelligent life in the milky way. As for the universe, it is almost a given life exists in it - but other galaxies are so far away that its beyond unlikely we will find a way to travel to another *galaxy* anytime soon. By soon I mean in the next hundred million or so years assuming we even exist so long (we wont, least not as homo sapiens sapiens).

[edit on 20-6-2009 by JScytale]


I should probably follow my own advice huh?

But yes, I meant the universe is some 75 billion light years across, not the galaxy.



posted on Jun, 20 2009 @ 05:47 PM
link   
reply to post by GeechQuestInfo
 


Hmm, the galaxy we live in, the milky way, is 100.000 light years across, it has approx. 100 billions stars and there are approx. 100 billion galaxies in the known universe.

Wikipedia: en.wikipedia.org...

Cheers



posted on Jun, 20 2009 @ 05:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by antar
I do like the way you think, however being a non matematical type myself I must add the spiritual equation to the mix.

When you use Einstein I can too in that he was known for the study of meditation towards the last part of his life, seems he was not only smart but that knew intelligence and math without awarenes is a lopsided equation.

The science of the future will be balanced and enlightening. Did you know the last part of your equation spells fickle? to me that is what science is today, fickle.



You cannot incorporate religious beliefs into the scientific method without giving up the scientific method - religious beliefs are just that, pre-existing beliefs - which invalidate interpretations of results.

Einstein may have believed to a degree in spirituality, but he *never* made the mistake of incorporating that into his theories for very specific purposes.



posted on Jun, 20 2009 @ 05:56 PM
link   
reply to post by JScytale
 


this is a quote from the OP:


...Now realize that the universe is 100,000 light years across...


so, our friend Mookie89 was correct in his critisism of the OP....and you should think twice before coming across as know-it-all.

threads like this really anger me. it is a blatant mis-use of science and math. the OP was complaining about not getting any attention for an intelligent thread...but this thread is totally riddled with un-intelligent assumptions and inaccurate "facts".



posted on Jun, 20 2009 @ 05:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by JScytale

Einstein may have believed to a degree in spirituality, but he *never* made the mistake of incorporating that into his theories for very specific purposes.



I have to disagree with that statement. Why should one be limited to any combination of beliefs?

"God does not play dice with the universe."
-- Albert Einstein



posted on Jun, 20 2009 @ 05:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by SLAYER69

Originally posted by JScytale

Einstein may have believed to a degree in spirituality, but he *never* made the mistake of incorporating that into his theories for very specific purposes.



I have to disagree with that statement. Why should one be limited to any combination of beliefs?

"God does not play dice with the universe."
-- Albert Einstein


like I said, he believed in spirituality, but it never once leaked into his science.

show me an example of einstein's theories where he says "god did it" or "and then a miracle happened". At no points does he ever assume anything - his personal beliefs are one thing, his science is another.



posted on Jun, 20 2009 @ 05:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by tgidkp
reply to post by JScytale
 


this is a quote from the OP:


...Now realize that the universe is 100,000 light years across...


so, our friend Mookie89 was correct in his critisism of the OP....and you should think twice before coming across as know-it-all.

threads like this really anger me. it is a blatant mis-use of science and math. the OP was complaining about not getting any attention for an intelligent thread...but this thread is totally riddled with un-intelligent assumptions and inaccurate "facts".


i had assumed it was a typo, because earlier in the post he refers specifically to the milky way.


"Frank Drake's own current solution to the Drake Equation estimates 10,000 communicative civilizations in the Milky Way"

Holy crap that's A LOT. The average scientist may not agree with the outcome of Drake's Equation, but the average scientist usually agrees that the equation does hold basis that life is out there somewhere in the cosmos. The discrepency come's when you try and say we've been VISITED. Scientists panic to prove we haven't. It's pretty hard to prove the negative.


[edit on 20-6-2009 by JScytale]



new topics

top topics



 
16
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join