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.

 

The probability of extraterrestrial life is 100%

page: 1
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 03:11 AM
link   

The probability of extraterrestrial life is 100%



Answer to this post :
What's the probability of extraterrestrial life?


BOOK 1 : Probability 1

: www.amazon.com...

In a universe infinitely large, what is the probability of intelligent life on another planet? Sounds like a trick question, but for anyone versed in cosmology and statistics, the answer is 1; that is, there must be life on at least one other planet in the universe. This is Amir Aczel's theorem. But, as physicist Enrico Fermi once asked, if that's true, where is everyone? Aczel tackles that paradox after he goes through the statistical calculations for the probability of intelligent life, considering factors such as how many stars are in a galaxy, how many of those stars might be hospitable, how many might have planets, and how many planets might have environments suitable to support life as we know it (or as we don't). Aczel also provides an overview of the relevant developments in astronomy and biology--laying the groundwork to show that the universe's chemistry must add up to life. Whether life was spread through the universe by chunks of debris like ALH84001--the enigmatic meteorite from Mars that contained tantalizing hints of the possibility of life--or arose independently, Aczel is sure it is out there. After teasing readers with scientific history, Probability 1 delivers on its promise to prove Aczel's conjecture through a clearly explained application of known statistical theory to the chaos of the universe. --Therese Littleton



BOOK2 : The Scientific Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence


www.amazon.com...=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1259744500&sr=1-2

en.wikipedia.org...

The Drake equation (also sometimes called the "Green Bank equation," the "Green Bank Formula" or - erroneously - the "Sagan equation") is an equation to calculate the potential number of extraterrestrial civilizations in our Milky Way galaxy. It is used in the fields of exobiology and the search for extraterrestrial intelligence (SETI).

This equation was devised by Dr. Frank Drake (now Professor Emeritus of Astronomy and Astrophysics at the University of California, Santa Cruz) in 1960, in an attempt to estimate the number of extraterrestrial civilizations in the Milky Way (our galaxy) with which we might come into contact.


1961 : Drake's values give N = 10 × 0.5 × 2 × 1 × 0.01 × 0.01 × 10,000 = 10.

N is the number of civilizations in our galaxy with which communication might be possible;

2002 : We used to think N was about 10,000. Now I think it could be a great deal larger.

www.wired.com...

See also wikipedia : about Extraterrestrial_hypothesis




posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 03:27 AM
link   
The drake equation is not a reliable equation because we could never accurately fill in all the variables.

I do agree that there is life in our universe other than ourselves and maybe in the other universes if we do indeed live in a multiverse which is a theory some people have.

I just can't come to the conclusion that we are the only planet that can sustain life when there are countless other stars, galaxies and planets out there.

This video gives a great perspective on just how large the universe is because it is hard for our tiny little human brains to even comprehend how vast it truly is.




posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 03:31 AM
link   
You dont really need the drake equation. just logic and a bit of common sens.

If we are talking about well.. were are they?

What makes you think they care? and second we as a race are babies

if not less

compare how long t rex was roaming aboout the planet to the time man has spent picking his nose watching pop idol




posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 03:34 AM
link   
I prefer the beginning of the movie Contact. ( it is a simulation ).



( juste my word on it : how can you speak about capitalism ( or state capitalism= communism) when you see this ? This may not be the best vision of human system. )

Yes we don't need any equation to believe about ET life, but I prefer science.

And maybe the next time someone told you (us) ET does not exist : we should tell them just this probabilities.

I will make another thread soon about technology.


[edit on 2-12-2009 by psychederic]



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 03:37 AM
link   
scratch that its working now

[edit on 2-12-2009 by TV_Nation]



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 03:42 AM
link   
reply to post by TV_Nation
 


Great vid
just want to further what the guy was saying here.

The universe Is a reflection "in scale" on your mind

The ONLY 2 things in life that have NO SHAPE

the universe

and your mind

iether someone forgot to tell the kids that or people reallly do need to do math


you need need to imagen how big it is because its only as depends on your capacity to think.

I think is cool, interesting and not mind bending



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 03:54 AM
link   
reply to post by psychederic
 


well on this wiki page en.wikipedia.org...

it gives the updated values for the drake equation an comes up with:

2.31 transmitting civs in our galaxy. Along way from 10,000. If thats true we would need to search 200 billion stars to find 1 signal. Its going to be a long wait.

Also the problem for seti who think civs are common is why hasnt earth been colonized in the last 2 billion years? Otherwise known as the fermi paradox.

Their answer is to say interstellar travel is too resourse intensive and impractical. Essentially saying that no civ even though theyre common has attempted or suceeded in colonizing the galaxy. That would have to apply to every civ in the history of the milky way. It might be true but doesnt sit well with me. The simple answer is civs are very rare.

[edit on 2-12-2009 by yeti101]



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 04:23 AM
link   
I agree the probability is very high, but is there any verifiable proof that other life exists? It will be interesting to see atheists have the tables turned on them when asked for proof of extraterrestrial life.

Do aliens or other forms of extraterrestrials exist?

Please provide proof.


[edit on 2/12/2009 by Dark Ghost]



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 04:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Dark Ghost It will be interesting to see atheists have the tables turned on them when asked for proof of extraterrestrial life.


what ??????

since when has ` belief in extra terrestrials ` been a tennant of atheism ?

i am an atheist , and while i do hold the view that extra terrrestrial life is " almost certain to exist , some where in the universe in some form "

i do not cling to this beleif as an ` article of faith `

i cannot and will not offer any proof for my view as it is just that , a view - based on statistical probalility stemming from my belief that life on earth has a naturalistic orogin

bottom line - if proof were offered that there was zero extra terrestrial life anywhere in the universe - i would accept it on its metits - it would not cause me to renounce atheism , or adopt a deist belif system

the clue is in the name - atheist
vulgar translation - without gods . the question of extra terrestrial life is wholey seperate from atheism



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 05:09 AM
link   
delete

[edit on 2-12-2009 by john124]



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 05:22 AM
link   
What if the one other planet that has life is the size of our sun or even bigger. Maybe that is why they need such fast vehicles.

With the said, I lead you to this The Drake Equation is obsolete



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 05:25 AM
link   
reply to post by psychederic
 


I've always wondered if there was some sort of paradox to it. The chance of ET life is 100 percent reasoning that because we exist there must be life on another planet? Well that might be true, but I think that could be wrong too.

Just because there's life here doesn't mean there has to be ET life somewhere else, because the 100% requirement for ET life has already been met. Let me explain.

We fulfill the requirements for ET life. There is a 100% chance that ET life will evolve somewhere in an infinite universe, but where? Well, here. We just don't think of ourselves as ETs, but to an ET we would indeed be alien.

Therefore the requirement for extraterrestrial life has already been met. In other words, there might be more ET life out there, but no more alien life is required. All the requirements have been met. Yes ET life did evolve in the universe. It was us.

Now to say that since the universe is infinite life had to evolve in 2 places, well actually I believe leads us to another paradox. In an infinite universe if life must have evolved in 2 places then it must have evolved in 3 places too. If it evolved in 3 places then it must have evolved in 4 places. In 4 places then 5 places too and on and on and on until infinity.

Now this causes a problem. If life had to evolved in an infinite amount of places then EVERY planet has to have life on it. But as far as we know that's not true. So that leads us to new conceptual math where one infinity is bigger than the other and we don't know how much bigger.

So, as far as we know, not every planet has life on it. Therefore, there is an unknown limit on where life can occur. The only problem is, we don't know exactly what that limit is.

Since we don't know we can't actually be certain that we ourselves aren't the only ETs in the universe. We can only guess.

The drake equation is a good guess. Until we find other life forms though we won't know how good the guess was. But in the end it is true that there is a 100% chance of ET life in the universe. The only problem is we may very well be that ET life that full fills the requirement and there might not be any more.

[edit on 2-12-2009 by tinfoilman]



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 05:35 AM
link   
faith exist even if you are an atheist.

But a sheep that follow a stupid religion cannot understand that. YOU CANNOT PROOVE GOD, OK, I GOT YOU.

THERE IS ONLY YOU who can CREATEs YOUR POSITIONS, your faith, your "believe system" , your god. Do you need to be a sheep ? DO you need to believe like the other believe, sorry this is stupid ( even more if the common believe system is stupid )



What are gods ? The community ? God, the state, money, technologies , and all ideologies ?

Are you (we) beyond ideology ?

You see the point is "what we believe" is not the point, because we will believe necessarely in something ( or a way of thinking).

BECAUSE we need to define ourselfs, a little.

That being said : what is the best "believes system" ?

Humanism ? Holism

Or religion, conservatism, racism , war ?

The question of god : is to esoteric , or metaphysic. ( you cannot answer to it, or you will say "like the community", you will conservative, in a defensive position )

You should let this question to after your dead , if there is something.
RELIGION DOES NOT MATTER.

Spirituality is important for human being.

You see i don't say : there is no god we can do whatever we want.

NO. I don't care of "gods"/ believe system.

A human with no culture will understand what is good and what is not.

I think you shoud see this :






Jiddu Krishnamurti


[edit on 2-12-2009 by psychederic]



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 05:40 AM
link   
reply to post by psychederic
 


Weren't we talking about science and aliens? Now we switch in the middle to religion? Maybe a new thread?



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 05:44 AM
link   
Sorry it was an answer to Dark Ghost



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 05:49 AM
link   
reply to post by psychederic
 


Oh okay, I was just like wait a minute. Am I lost on ATS again? Unfortunatly my brain isn't oiled right now. Science or religion. Can only think about one at a time right now



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 06:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by tinfoilman
reply to post by psychederic
 


Oh okay, I was just like wait a minute. Am I lost on ATS again? Unfortunatly my brain isn't oiled right now. Science or religion. Can only think about one at a time right now


But "wait a minute" : don't you think the separation of the science and human politics is not dangerous ?

Science and technology are not just good tools, Science itself is becoming dangerous : this may become a highly political facts in the nexts years.

I think we should think in a more global way. Is the the politics, the economy, and 1000 differents sciences ? Being a specialist, I Don't think it a good way to handle the reality.

[edit on 2-12-2009 by psychederic]



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 08:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by yeti101
Their answer is to say interstellar travel is too resourse intensive and impractical. Essentially saying that no civ even though theyre common has attempted or suceeded in colonizing the galaxy. That would have to apply to every civ in the history of the milky way. It might be true but doesnt sit well with me. The simple answer is civs are very rare.


This may be due to Dr. Robert Hanson's Great Filter hypothesis. In short, it says that life must go through eight steps to reach the point of being a colonizing species (though Hanson admits there may be more steps). If any one of those steps is improbable, occuring only rarely, it may explain why we don't see evidence of colonies everywhere we look (but absence of evidence is not evidence of absence). If the final step, Colonization Explosion, is improbable, it does not bode well for our future.

It may also be that colonizing civilizations come but they also go, for whatever reason. Some sort of cosmic disaster or perhaps intelligent life never gives up its self-destructive tendencies. We may be in or emerging from a Galactic Dark Age.



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 12:15 PM
link   
reply to post by DoomsdayRex
 


it may be due to one of many things. But the fact remains any scenario you try to give in order to explain the silence or non-colonization is an order of magnitude more convoluted than the simplest most obvious answer. We are alone or tech civs are extremely rare.

Tech civs being extremely rare would also fit with what we've seen on earth over the past 500 million years. It becomes extraordinary difficult for someone to argue tech civs are common with the evidence we have.


[edit on 2-12-2009 by yeti101]



posted on Dec, 2 2009 @ 12:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by yeti101
It may be due to one of many things. But the fact remains any scenario you try to give in order to explain the silence or non-colonization is an order of magnitude more convaluted than the simplest most obvious answer. e are alone or tech civs are extremely rare.


Yes, that may be the simpliest answer but it doesn't tell us the reasons why.

Question for you folks: would you rather have us never find alien life or discover that there were civilizations but everyone is dead and gone, and we are the last?




top topics



 
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join