reply to post by soldier8828
Interesting. I personally just do not believe in them, here are some facts that I have issues with.
1) The Drake Equation
2) The Probability of Life
3) Different types of evolved Life Forms
Its only two, because I could list more, but I am half asleep and half awake. But I still have issues. They seem like solid evidence, for instance the
Drake Equation states:
Well first of all:
The equation is,
N = ( R* x fp x ne x fl x fi x fc) x L
Each part of the equation comprised either a number or a factor and during the conference the team of scientists discussed each term in detail and
made their best estimate of its value. The individual terms were then placed within the Drake equation to evaluate the number, N, of civilisations
with whom we might communicate:...............
For example, let us suppose that such a civilisation comes into being about every 10,000 years. If such civilisations attempt to make contact with
others for 1,000,000 years on average, then we would expect there to be around 100 in our galaxy from whom we might possibly detect signals.
How accurate is the current estimate of N?
The problem is that while some of the factors involved in the evaluation of Rcc are reasonably well known, we can only make educated guesses for
others. Neither do we have any real idea of the typical value for L (More on L), so our final estimate for N is not expected to be accurate.
In fact it has been said that the Drake Equation is a way of encapsulating a lot of ignorance in a small space! Evaluations of N in the early days of
SETI were probably on the optimistic side with values of up to 1,000,000 considered possible.
Some now say that intelligent civilisations will arise only rarely and thus that we might be the only one existing in our Galaxy at the present time.
The true answer will no doubt lie somewhere in between and the SETI projects could perhaps be regarded as an experimental way of finding the answer of
how often advanced civilisations arise.
A lot of people base there belief on this equation yet, according to recent findings:
The integers that are plugged into this equation are often subject to wide interpretation and can differ significantly from scientist to
scientist. Even the slightest change can result in vastly different answers. Part of the problem is that our understanding of cosmology and
astrobiology is rapidly changing and there is often very little consensus among specialists as to what the variables might be.
So if there is not a general understanding between scientist, how is this at any level or measure accurate. It just does not make sense.
Another major problem of the Drake Equation is that it does not account for two rather important variables: cosmological developmental phases and
Again, since the equation does not seem to grow with science, rather its stuck in the past, has many different meanings and understandings between
scientists. Time is highly important to any study, because everything changes with time and the cosmos certainly change over the spand of a few years.
If anything the Drake equation is now a bust and a failed attempt to prove that life is on other planets or in other galaxies.
The Drake Equation Bust
And as I stated before the probability of Life is also used. Alien supporters often state that since we are here that means other life forms must be
somewhere else as well. I mean its only logic correct? Well, when we disect what it takes for life to be here I come to this issue:
The simpliest form of life, scientist all agree, that was some sort of basic cell, most likely baterium, without a nucleus. But even the most basic
cell needs to have the major components to function, DNA Molecules and amino acids. The DNA holds the nucleotides and the Amino Acids are the
proteins. So if the first cell of life is going to start on another planet, what are the odds of this happening? Lets examine some more of what cells
need to live and there structure:
- Chirality for example- Nucleotides in the DNA, base pairs must be the same orientation- left handed or right handed. All the amino acids in the DNA
chain must be of the same orientaion, or it simply does not work. Therefore, if the chirality is not correct, the cell does not even start to function
and does not even come into existence.
The very simplest bacteria that science can imagine will have approximatly: 100,000 nucleotides (however, science has never seen it before, but thats
what they feel it will need to at least live). However, the smallest bacteria that science has seen and knows of is 500,000. And 10,000 amino acids,
is the smallest amino acid that science knows of.
So simply put the cell would need a minimum of 100,000 nucleotides.
10,000 amino acids.
Add them up and we get 110,000. Now we have a 50% chance that the cell starts and a 50% chance that it does not. What are the odds? (using simple
110,000 times) 0.5 to the power of 110,000 in base 10 equals the following: 1 in 10 to the power of 33,113. And the odds come out to 10 to the power
of 33,113 for the odds of a Random Chirality Probability. A huge impossibility. Let me put this in some sort of perspective.
1 in 10 to the power of 33,113 is the same as winning 4700 state
lotteries in a row with only one ticket for each!
Another problem is the life specific amino acids- odds of this happening by chance- 10 to the power of 6,021. Correct Amino Acids in the right place
one chance in 10 to the power of 13,010. Correct Genetic material placement: 1 chance in 10 to the power of 60,155.
So lets review:
1) Chirality= 10 to the power of 33,113
2) Life Specific Amino Acids= 10 to the power of 6,021
3) Correct Amino ACid placement= 10 to the power of 13,010
4) Correct Genetic Material= 10 to the power of 60,155
5) And most importantly, gene placement, correct gene placement= 10 to the power of 528
Add it up it comes to the total of 10 to the power of 112,827 and worst of all its 1 out 10 to the 112,827. 1 !!!!
1 in 10 to the power of 112,827 is the same as winning 16,119 state lotteries in a row with only one winning ticket.
Check out this probability.
This is like taking any selected electron. And I mean ANY, from the Universe, person, star, planets, galaxies, everyhing and anything. Now if you were
to somehow lay that out on a table and have all those electrons just laid out before you all mixed up and such. You can choose one electron and have
it hidden anywhere on the table. You have a better chance of picking that one electron than life starting on its own or life being on another planet.
But wait its not over yet!
You have a better chance at picking that one electron 1,376 time in a ROW! And remember that is just for one cell, and all of this needs to be
correct, just to get one dead cell.
And then I often here that Life can arise through different properties of life. I also have a problem with this.
For instance. Mirror based life, Arcenic Life, and Silicon life.
Now mirror based life is just like us, accept opposite amino acids. Thats easy to understand and put forth, however, that life would need similar
conditions that we have on earth.
The only stumbling block to the idea is that arsenic-based DNA tends to break down quickly. "You don't want to build your DNA out of a compound with
a half-life in the order of a couple of minutes," points out Steve Benner of the Foundation For Applied Molecular Evolution in Gainesville, Florida.
Benner is a brilliant man. Highly intelligent. However, he points out that it could be a good thing in extreme cold, where chemical reactions move
But how much cold can sustain life?
However, silicon is less abundant in the universe and its structures are much less stable and much more reactive than carbon's, particularly in
the presence of oxygen where it produces a solid
Less abundent? Less stable? And much more reactive and oxygen is needed for ALL life, therefore if the silicon theory means solidifying the host,
death is almost certain.
Back to the cold temperatures needed for the 2 life theories:
If water existed (on mars), it would have been locked up as ice. As a result, the formation and evolution of life forms would have been
But if any of the life existed with these type of genetic and life forms a huge problem occurs to the Contact scenario. A big problem:
If these life forms were to come to earth, simply put, they would DIE. Arcenic needs Extreme cold to even be considered, but not to cold as to kill
the life forms. Silicon needs so many things that it is almost impossible to think that they would even be alive.
I guess, I just do not see the possibility of them being around.... Let me know what you think
Also I have not heard of collier or nassim, I will have to look into those folks. Is their a specific website or book? Let me know!