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: 3
16
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 20 2009 @ 05:59 PM
link   
reply to post by reugen
 


I was going to post the same thing, Milky Way is 100,000 light years across. The universe is much grander, you guys might want to re-do your calculations.




posted on Jun, 20 2009 @ 06:02 PM
link   
I first learned of Drake's equation decades ago. Not only because Gene Roddenberry once cited it in his development/inspiration for 'Star Trek' but also because I was an avid fan of Carl Sagan's "Cosmos" on PBS.

Unless I missed it, as I 'trolled' (
) through the replies so far, one point not mentioned, something that I've always considered, is the immense length of time that our Galaxy alone has existed.

In other words, it would seem that some people are thinking of possible ET races as 'contemporary' to Humans. Once you realize the timescales involved it becomes apparent that the equation is just a 'snapshot', and the other variables of star formation and ages can be considered.
edit: To finish this thought. Races far, far older could exist, and I'm not sure Drake takes that into account. By the same token, thousands could exist, still in nascent stages of development.

For instance, complex multi-cellular lifeforms have existed on our planet for hundreds of millions of years. Yet, here we are, only slightly aware and awake, for about the last few millennia.

Not certain I'm explaining it well -- it just seems we've come extraordinarily far and fast in just the last few centuries, when compared to all of those millennia of Homo Sapien Sapien's existence I mentioned.

[edit on 6/20/0909 by weedwhacker]



posted on Jun, 20 2009 @ 06:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Phlegmi
 


i did, at many points (as did others) specify our "predictions" using estimates on the drake's equation were referring to our galaxy. as for the universe, i recall one post saying 'we would have to explore 4 galaxies before finding another intelligent species according to this", and I stated "it is essentially a given life exists elsewhere in the *universe*, the milky way is debatable".



posted on Jun, 20 2009 @ 06:04 PM
link   

Originally posted by weedwhacker
I first learned of Drake's equation decades ago. Not only because Gene Roddenberry once cited it in his development/inspiration for 'Star Trek' but also because I was an avid fan of Carl Sagan's "Cosmos" on PBS.

Unless I missed it, as I 'trolled' (
) through the replies so far, one point not mentioned, something that I've always considered, is the immense length of time that our Galaxy alone has existed.

In other words, it would seem that some people are thinking of possible ET races as 'contemporary' to Humans. Once you realize the timescales involved it becomes apparent that the equation is just a 'snapshot', and the other variables of star formation and ages can be considered.

For instance, complex multi-cellular lifeforms have existed on our planet for hundreds of millions of years. Yet, here we are, only slightly aware and awake, for about the last few millennia.

Not certain I'm explaining it well -- it just seems we've come extraordinarily far and fast in just the last few centuries, when compared to all of those millennia of Homo Homo Sapiens existence I mentioned.


the equation does attempt to address that by including the average lifespan of a communicative civilization, but it is a very simple equation.



posted on Jun, 20 2009 @ 06:05 PM
link   
reply to post by JScytale
 


Well for me there is no conflict between science and a spiritual belief. I can only speak for myself and of my opinion on the subject. I'm not trying convince anybody of how I feel nor would I ever try. That was Einsteins response to the then new "Chaos Theory " Why would he have made such a response? Unless under it all he was endeavoring to discover how "God" did it.

That quote says it all...



posted on Jun, 20 2009 @ 06:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by SLAYER69
reply to post by JScytale
 


Well for me there is no conflict between science and a spiritual belief. I can only speak for myself and of my opinion on the subject. I'm not trying convince anybody of how I feel nor would I ever try. That was Einsteins response to the then new "Chaos Theory " Why would he have made such a response? Unless under it all he was endeavoring to discover how "God" did it.

That quote says it all...


well, maybe if i explain it more clearly, what i mean will become apparent.

einstein's theory only attempts to describe certain functions of our universe. he revolutionized the way people describe gravity, for example. it had never crossed anyone's mind that the mass of an object literally warps space around itself, or that space and time are not separate but two aspects of a single thing. his math described the behavior of celestial objects far better than any theory before had, and was accepted as scientific.

now, when it comes to personal opinions on *why* the universe functions as it does, or what gravity *really* is, anyone can devise their own explanations. Einstein's theories describe behavior, they do not explain it. Ask a large group of physicists *what* gravity is and you'll get a huge variety of responses and a whole lot of "we don't exactly know". They can tell you how it behaves and affects objects quite easily however.

Anyone is free to have their own opinion, but it is only that. Einstein's personal opinion was that the universe was too elegant to have been created by chance.



posted on Jun, 20 2009 @ 06:15 PM
link   
reply to post by JScytale
 


Yes, I know JS.

And, you're right, it is very simple.

I am just saying that the last factor, 'L', could run into lengths far greater than most "sceptics" will give credit. Tens, or hundreds of millions of years, perhaps.

AND, the other factor (forget the one) defining the 'possibility' of main-sequence G-type stars (only ones we know, so far conducive to life as we know it) could also be extremely conservative. Because, all of the third-generation stars (like Sol) in our Galaxy didn't form at the same time!

A few billion years' difference greatly skews the equation's results...to the positive.

Possibly. Since, so far, it is only conjecture.

[edit on 6/20/0909 by weedwhacker]



posted on Jun, 20 2009 @ 07:56 PM
link   
Mookie89

"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."

hahahaha, yes I meant galaxy, as did you I'm assuming

"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). "

Thank You Jscytale for correcting myself and mookie89.

And just to be clear to Tgidkp

"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". "

The fact was I used the wrong word. I can admit I messed up. Jeez sometimes you guys are harsh.

As far as the size of our galaxy we can assume it is approx 13.5 billion light years since "science" can only "see" to the big bang.

How could something only 13.5 billion years old be 165 billion light years wide?

It is assumed that the universe expands at the speed of light correct? so something that is approx. 13.5 billion years old would have to be as big as it's age unless the universe is expanding at faster than light speed.

Any takers with a real science article to disprove what I said, I'm sorry and shoulda posted a reliable source for the size of our galaxy.

Those of you who get caught up in debating the size are missing the WHOLE point of why I posted this in the first place.

It was supposed to be a debate of how "easy" it would be, if this galaxy has other life forms "older" than us and more advanced, to have explored it all.

The point was at half of light speed it would take 200,000 years to traverse this ENTIRE GALAXY.

Any "know it all" wanna let us know the percentage of time that would be in respect to the age of this galaxy.

I'll help you out, it's AT LEAST 4.5 billion years old, as the EARTH is 4.5 billion years old.

I don't wanna do the math cuz it's not worth getting "ridiculed" if I type a wrong number.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA



posted on Jun, 20 2009 @ 09:15 PM
link   
well...i wouldnt have been so harsh if you hadnt started off in the OP with "science is this and this" and "the numbers mean that and that". if you are going to approach this from a scientific perspective, then i expect a higher standard. on the other hand, if your purpose is simply to explore an interesting idea then just say so.

...but here again, we have a problem:


The point was at half of light speed it would take 200,000 years to traverse this ENTIRE GALAXY.


assuming your numbers are correct, then it would take 200,000 years to travel from one end to the other. if you were going to travel, map-out, and study the entire area of the galaxy then you need to approximate the total size volume of our galaxy:




V= pi x r2 x h = 3.14 x 50,000 x 1,000 = 7,850,000,000,000 light years cubed

(and that is assuming you dont stop off for coffee somewhere!)



posted on Jun, 20 2009 @ 11:37 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?


I had to quote this because it's too important just to pass over. I, for one, know exactly what you are feeling and it would be nice for more science based discussion to happen here, but with all the shock threads and massive claims running wild it just serves to divide people into 'believers' and 'debunkers' while teh evidence is hardly anything to write home about.

I love the equation. It's fun to think about the possibilities. The criticism of the equation is valid, although I can't really understand why numismatic prudence without a logical reason for such low numbers could be more valid than 'fudging the numbers' to get an optimistic 'aliens are everywhere' conclusion...

It's a glass half full or half empty kind of formula.




posted on Jun, 21 2009 @ 01:25 AM
link   
tgidkp:


assuming your numbers are correct, then it would take 200,000 years to travel from one end to the other. if you were going to travel, map-out, and study the entire area of the galaxy then you need to approximate the total size volume of our galaxy:



V= pi x r2 x h = 3.14 x 50,000 x 1,000 = 7,850,000,000,000 light years cubed


I'm sorry I'm not as smart as you, could you explain those numbers to me and what they mean? I see your cylinder, but without an explanation and describing it I have to assume you just pulled it from somewhere.

As I stated it was my mistake, I meant to say traverse this galaxy not Universe.

And if the galaxy is said to be 100,000 light years across, and we travel half of light speed to traverse it from end to end it would take 200,000 years. Thats basic algebra. Of course I understand there would be "pit-stops" , "map-outs", study this study that. I was trying to get people to understand the whole concept that if you wanted to traverse this entire GALAXY it would take much TIME in relativeness to the TIME THIS GALAXY has been in existence. People spend so much time trying to argue the specific wordings of these articles and get so detailed they miss the whole point.

I can admit, like Sun Tzu says, if at first you didn't understand me it's my fault.

If I try my best to explain myself better and you still don't understand me, it's your fault.

Let me point out more faults in the article that were made:


Sumerians truly were the 1st inteligent civilization


They were not, tgidkp, can you tell me who was?


life on this planet is aprox 6000 yrs old


It's older than that, tgidkp, can you tell me how long human life has been around?

I think you got to caught up in ONE misworded phrase and missed the whole point.

If I showed you a 9 pictures of ACTUAL BEINGS FROM OUTER SPACE and also showed you 1 picture of a being that has obviously been made on a computer, your the kinda person who would only remember the computer made being aren't you tgidkp? It wouldn't matter that I just showed you 9 REAL BEINGS FROM OUTER SPACE. Thus you would miss the whole point, and have not learned anything in the process.



posted on Jun, 21 2009 @ 05:08 PM
link   
from the OP:


Originally posted by GeechQuestInfo
Now realize that the universe is 100,000 light years across, (as far as we see it now) so if a civilization were traveling half the speed of light they could explore the known universe in 200,000 years.





at 1/2 speed of light, it will take 200,000 years to travel from point A to point B, which is 100,000 light years....hardly an exploration of the known galaxy.




in this picture, the shaded area represents the entire known galaxy. at 100,000 light years across and 1000 light yeas in height, its total volume is 7,850,000,000,000 light years cubed (in reference to my previous post). at 1/2 speed of light, it will take 15,700,000,000,000 years to explore this mass from top to bottom, left to right, and every other which way.

of course, these numbers are only an approximation. but my argument is that many of the critical points of your argument are fundamentally flawed.

.....

no, i am not one to miss the forest for the trees. i just think that you are being way too generous in your estimations.



posted on Jun, 22 2009 @ 05:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by tgidkp
from the OP:


Originally posted by GeechQuestInfo
Now realize that the universe is 100,000 light years across, (as far as we see it now) so if a civilization were traveling half the speed of light they could explore the known universe in 200,000 years.





at 1/2 speed of light, it will take 200,000 years to travel from point A to point B, which is 100,000 light years....hardly an exploration of the known galaxy.




in this picture, the shaded area represents the entire known galaxy. at 100,000 light years across and 1000 light yeas in height, its total volume is 7,850,000,000,000 light years cubed (in reference to my previous post). at 1/2 speed of light, it will take 15,700,000,000,000 years to explore this mass from top to bottom, left to right, and every other which way.

of course, these numbers are only an approximation. but my argument is that many of the critical points of your argument are fundamentally flawed.

.....

no, i am not one to miss the forest for the trees. i just think that you are being way too generous in your estimations.


while your point is valid, your prediction is not. The galaxy is primarily open space - exploring the entirety of the galaxy would be a process of flying between millions of points, not covering every square inch of nothingness. Not to mention, it wouldn't be one person doing it, it would be generations upon generations of explorers going off in every which way.



posted on Jun, 22 2009 @ 07:13 AM
link   
reply to post by SkepticPerhaps
 



WOW, way to underestimate nature... You estimated .00001 planets with life will develop intelligence?


i never addresed this so i will now. Heres my reasons

complex life on earth seems to go through 150 milion year periods. We are 65 million years into the 3rd. The first two 150 million year periods did not produce a technological intelligent species. I think this alone tells us tech intelligence is rare.

In evolution they have what they call "convergent features". These are features that appear in many species fior example the eye. Some like to extrapolate convergent features to life in the galaxy. If we found a planet with complex life its likely we would find creatures with eyes of some sort.

So we can ask the question. Is tech intelligence a convergent feature of evolution? The answer is a resounding no. Its happened once in 500 million years out of billions of species. Nature just doesnt seem very interested in intelligence.

So to say tech intelligence is common in our galaxy on planets with complex life i think is just plain wrong.

[edit on 22-6-2009 by yeti101]



posted on Jun, 22 2009 @ 07:25 AM
link   
reply to post by JScytale
 


hey man. i am not tryin to ruin the party. i actually enjoy the idea of ETs visiting our planet. (in my mind, tho, it would be better said as: extra-dimensional beings manifesting into our reality construct)

i just have difficulty understanding why people insist on trotting out the old math and logic if all we're gonna do is talk s***?

point has been made.

i will drop it now.




posted on Jun, 22 2009 @ 06:21 PM
link   

in this picture, the shaded area represents the entire known galaxy. at 100,000 light years across and 1000 light yeas in height, its total volume is 7,850,000,000,000 light years cubed (in reference to my previous post). at 1/2 speed of light, it will take 15,700,000,000,000 years to explore this mass from top to bottom, left to right, and every other which way.


Hey man, where did you find the height of the galaxy?

Agree'd with your extra-dimensional suggestion. Yes, SOME are extra-dimensional, but also some just trot across the stars as means of exploration, and some don't trot very far at all.

When you narrow your field of scope to something, whatever it may be to just be ONE THING, one usually misses the BIG PICTURE.

The way this issue of other life forms has been investigated by people with pre-concieved notions is why this issue has yet to be solved. When you explore all posibilities it starts to unravel itself.



[edit on 22-6-2009 by GeechQuestInfo]



posted on Jun, 22 2009 @ 07:58 PM
link   
i got a seriously stupid and persistant virus/spyware attempt after watching the carl sagan video on page one.

i dont' know if it was the video or this site but it was dumb, really dumb.

something is stupid here.



posted on Jun, 23 2009 @ 03:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Moodle
i got a seriously stupid and persistant virus/spyware attempt after watching the carl sagan video on page one.

i dont' know if it was the video or this site but it was dumb, really dumb.

something is stupid here.


that's a youtube link. the odds of that being the cause are extraordinarily slim. it is *much* more likely you got the spyware elsewhere and symptoms started when you were watching. my noscript didn't pick up a single connect outside youtube, and my AV detected nothing.



posted on Jun, 23 2009 @ 04:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by GeechQuestInfo

in this picture, the shaded area represents the entire known galaxy. at 100,000 light years across and 1000 light yeas in height, its total volume is 7,850,000,000,000 light years cubed (in reference to my previous post). at 1/2 speed of light, it will take 15,700,000,000,000 years to explore this mass from top to bottom, left to right, and every other which way.


Hey man, where did you find the height of the galaxy?

Agree'd with your extra-dimensional suggestion. Yes, SOME are extra-dimensional, but also some just trot across the stars as means of exploration, and some don't trot very far at all.

When you narrow your field of scope to something, whatever it may be to just be ONE THING, one usually misses the BIG PICTURE.

The way this issue of other life forms has been investigated by people with pre-concieved notions is why this issue has yet to be solved. When you explore all posibilities it starts to unravel itself.
[edit on 22-6-2009 by GeechQuestInfo]


It is as easy as Google or Wikipedia to find facts about our Galaxy - 'The Milky Way'.


The Milky Way, sometimes called simply the Galaxy, is the galaxy in which the Solar System is located. It is a barred spiral galaxy that is part of the Local Group of galaxies. It is one of billions of galaxies in the observable universe.
Diameter 100,000 light years
Thickness 1,000 light years (stars)
Number of stars 200 to 400 billion
Oldest known star 13.2 billion years[1]

Source: en.wikipedia.org...


As a galaxy, the Milky Way is actually a giant, as its mass is probably between 750 billion and one trillion solar masses, and its diameter is about 100,000 light years. Radio astronomial investigations of the distribution of hydrogen clouds have revealed that the Milky Way is a spiral galaxy of Hubble type Sb or Sc. Therefore, our galaxy has both a pronounced disk component exhibiting a spiral structure, and a prominent nuclear reagion which is part of a notable bulge/halo component.

Source: messier.obspm.fr...

Toot



new topics

top topics



 
16
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join