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.

 

Stephen Hawking says Aliens exist

page: 7
106
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 25 2010 @ 04:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Bob Sholtz

Originally posted by Schaden

Originally posted by Bob Sholtz
"Astrophysicist Hugh Ross has calculated the probability that these and other constants (122 in all) would exist today for any planet in the universe by chance (I.e., without Divine design). Assuming there are 10^22 planets in the universe (a very large number: 1 with 22 zeros following it), his answer is shocking; one chance in 10^138, that’s one chance in one with 138 zeros after it. There are only about 10^70 atoms in the entire universe."

do i believe that life exists elsewhere? meh, i'm not sure. but to claim that the odds are in favor of life existing elsewhere is silly when the chances of life existing on our own planet is so slim.



If he calculated the odds as greater than all of the atoms in the universe, and yet humans are here, his estimate appears severly flawed and invalid.

My personal guess is there are perhaps dozens of planets with advanced life, in our galaxy alone. It could be in the hundreds of thousands, millions even, considering the size of the entire universe.


thats what the odds are...based on anthropic constants, for life to exist without intervention.

though your train of logic is interesting. preconsieved belief>confronted with data>life exists, so data must be wrong>preconsieved belief holds.

nothing really wrong with it, though either you misread, didn't read the link, or tossed out the possibility of an overarching god figure.


To say life can only exist if u have these so called constants, 122 in all is an absolutely insane statement that lends no credents to the idea of aliens existing else where in the universe.... No one knows what different anthropic constants are needed for something we cant even concieve of.. Maybe this applies to some life down on planet earth but to try and say all these are needed for life to exist is INSANE!!! and ignorant. Peace


[edit on 25-4-2010 by uk alienhunter]




posted on Apr, 25 2010 @ 04:08 AM
link   
Interesting read, I'd heard about that statement before.

There are 4 options:

1) Intelligent life does not exist outside our planet (some still regard that as an option despite the mathematical odds being against it)
2) Intelligent life exists outside our planet but hasn't been able to reach us
3) Intelligent life exists on some lush paradise planet and therefore has no interest in our pile of rock
4) They are visiting us (and are maybe dangerous and beyond our understanding which is why they're kept secret)

[edit on 25-4-2010 by Jonas86]



posted on Apr, 25 2010 @ 04:16 AM
link   
reply to post by Tryptych
 


To my logic, if the hypothetical aliens have mastered intergalactic travel etc, would they really be some barbaric morons? I think we're reflecting our own idiocy to other possible species here.

Could it be, instead, that your opinion merely reflects wishful human thinking?

At present, we know for certain of only one intelligent species. The behaviour of that species does not suggest that intelligence acts as an effective counter to interpersonal violence, warfare, genocide or the extermination of other species.

As for all the unintelligent species we know of - examples of individual violence, warfare and even genocide abound among them.

In fact, violent competition for resources and status seems to be universal among living creatures. Even plants duke it out over water, fertile soil and - especially - sunlight. Bacteria engage in chemical warfare against other bacteria. The theory of natural selection suggests that such behaviour is built into the structure of the universe.

Personally, I don't expect intellectually and technologically advanced aliens to behave any differently from terrestrial creatures. Like us, they would be products of natural selection; the iron rule of survival of the fittest would certainly apply to whatever environment they evolved in, and they would have developed accordingly. Even if there were some reason to suppose they would turn out to be innocents or angels, there is far greater reason to guard against the very substantial possibility that they are, in fact, just like us.



posted on Apr, 25 2010 @ 04:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by Bob Sholtz
reply to post by Matrix Rising
 


as much as i love hawking, his logic is flawed, he has underestemated the odds. there are things called "anthropic constants". basically, precise and narrowly defined variables that must be exact for life to exist.

"Astrophysicist Hugh Ross has calculated the probability that these and other constants (122 in all) would exist today for any planet in the universe by chance (I.e., without Divine design). Assuming there are 10^22 planets in the universe (a very large number: 1 with 22 zeros following it), his answer is shocking; one chance in 10^138, that’s one chance in one with 138 zeros after it. There are only about 10^70 atoms in the entire universe."

do i believe that life exists elsewhere? meh, i'm not sure. but to claim that the odds are in favor of life existing elsewhere is silly when the chances of life existing on our own planet is so slim.



Actually, I would say that your logic is flawed. We have absolutely NO concept of how big the Universe is. Therefore, it is ridiculous to believe, or to limit ourselves to believing that there are only about 10 ^ 70 atoms, or anything else in the Universe. We are discovering newer and bigger things by the moment which informs us that we know something new today that we didn't know yesterday.

My guess is that they're just as real as us. And remember, the only thing that really makes anything real is how your mind interprets it.

Much love to all...



posted on Apr, 25 2010 @ 04:27 AM
link   
reply to post by EvolvedMinistry
 


Agreed Totally.
The point of view of the "observer", it can modify the "observed object".



posted on Apr, 25 2010 @ 04:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by Tryptych
It's not actually Hawkings' idea:

Drake Equation

The question is more like: if it's so probable that other life exists, why haven't they contacted us? Or maybe they have, who knows.


well...life on other planets doesnt have to be intelligent. there could just be bacteria or small insect or animal life..so they couldnt really contact us haha.

remember there was unintelligent life on earth well before we were here.

and if there was intelligent life elsewhere...theres a chance they dont know we are here yet...remember we are considered intelligent life and we dont know if anything is out there yet either.

and if they are intelligent and capable of contacting us...theres the question of...why should they? if they are that much more advanced than us they may not be interested in us.

do you feel the need to try and talk to animals? no because they arent intelligent enough to bother with.



posted on Apr, 25 2010 @ 04:50 AM
link   

Originally posted by Bob Sholtz
reply to post by Matrix Rising
 


as much as i love hawking, his logic is flawed, he has underestemated the odds. there are things called "anthropic constants". basically, precise and narrowly defined variables that must be exact for life to exist.

"Astrophysicist Hugh Ross has calculated the probability that these and other constants (122 in all) would exist today for any planet in the universe by chance (I.e., without Divine design). Assuming there are 10^22 planets in the universe (a very large number: 1 with 22 zeros following it), his answer is shocking; one chance in 10^138, that’s one chance in one with 138 zeros after it. There are only about 10^70 atoms in the entire universe."

do i believe that life exists elsewhere? meh, i'm not sure. but to claim that the odds are in favor of life existing elsewhere is silly when the chances of life existing on our own planet is so slim.



and how does he make those calculations? we dont even know how big the universe is so how can we calculate how much is in it.

its beyond arrogance to think that we are alone in the universe.



posted on Apr, 25 2010 @ 05:06 AM
link   
Stephen Hawking has warned that active ET contact by our race should be avoided, as the planet could be plundered?

My question:
What we would have to make if they have already found us?



posted on Apr, 25 2010 @ 05:07 AM
link   
No news to me, I’ve seen their ships – back in 1984.

I was driving south on I-55 about 40 miles north of Memphis, TN around 8:00 pm. My wife was a passenger. We noticed two white balls of light about a ¼ mile away to the left hovering about 200 ft. above a field. When we got even with them I pulled over on the shoulder of the freeway to watch them. My wife threw a fit and did not want any part of it. They just hovered there about 100 feet apart from each other. So, I decided to try to communicate with them by flashing my headlights bright – dim – bright – dim. They then began to slowly dim all the way down to what I can only describe as red hot coals then slowly back up to intense pure bright white light. They alternated bright – dim – bright – dim right along with me. We did that for about one minute until my wife freaked out and demanded we get out of there.

I could not understand why no one else on the freeway pulled over to watch. I've watched the night sky a lot since then but I’ve never seen UFOs again. If they were man made then we have some amazing stuff.



posted on Apr, 25 2010 @ 05:08 AM
link   
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.



posted on Apr, 25 2010 @ 05:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by Antor
My question:
What we would have to make if they have already found us?


The question about this phenomena is: "Have they visited earth (or are they visiting earth)?"

So first we must find out the answer to that, and know if they found us. Even though we cant do much, but a craft to land and appear live on tv would help.

If they really found us, then for now they must be just watching and studying us, as they dont manifest a lot (at least we dont have a solid proof).

My opinion is that only time will tell.



posted on Apr, 25 2010 @ 05:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by Fangula

Originally posted by Bob Sholtz
reply to post by Matrix Rising
 


as much as i love hawking, his logic is flawed, he has underestemated the odds. there are things called "anthropic constants". basically, precise and narrowly defined variables that must be exact for life to exist.

"Astrophysicist Hugh Ross has calculated the probability that these and other constants (122 in all) would exist today for any planet in the universe by chance (I.e., without Divine design). Assuming there are 10^22 planets in the universe (a very large number: 1 with 22 zeros following it), his answer is shocking; one chance in 10^138, that’s one chance in one with 138 zeros after it. There are only about 10^70 atoms in the entire universe."

do i believe that life exists elsewhere? meh, i'm not sure. but to claim that the odds are in favor of life existing elsewhere is silly when the chances of life existing on our own planet is so slim.



That's a pretty narrow-minded way of thinking about it. This is the Universe we're talking about. We don't know how many planets there are, and we don't even understand how large the Universe is. To even mathematically calculate this with so much missing information (unless you make stupid assumptions, like the guy you quoted did) would make it incredibly inaccurate. There are so many unknowns -- we know very little. I am going to assume (like the guy you quoted) that life is very abundant in the Universe. I don't even see how it couldn't be. The math above is just full of a bunch of guesses.

Also, I tend to think there are more than 10^22 planets in the Universe. A lot more.

Peace.
One Love.


[edit on 25-4-2010 by Fangula]


stephen hawking's numbers aren't so far from what ross claims. hawking predicts around 10^80 particles.

and to answer your question, there actually are equations for finding the mass of the universe. we can probably get pretty close. stephen hawking even supports some anthropic constant reasoning, for the nay-sayers out there, i'll toss up a few quotes.

"Why is the universe the way we see it?" The answer is then simple: If it had been different, we would not be here! 131"


"If the rate of expansion one second after the big bang had been smaller by even one part in a hundred thousand million million, the universe would have recollapsed before it ever reached its present size. 128"

-"A Brief History of Time"



posted on Apr, 25 2010 @ 05:21 AM
link   
reply to post by Matrix Rising
 


If things are no brainers, how come it is only a minority of us that have talked about alien life for all these years.

He is right that you would not trust any alien group.

Like like i and others say, earth is probably being run by them anyway. I think this is hell, and there really is an entity called the devil, who you all celebrate at xmas.



posted on Apr, 25 2010 @ 05:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Kaytagg
Also, why would aliens colonize earth, as apposed to any of the other billions of planets in the galaxy?


I think he is thinking too narrow, i think earth is being run by them, but they do it from behind the scenes. Demon possession has always been talked about.

Plus humans are incredibly stup1d, and even the ones in the secret societies are pretty thick, but they have there spiritual knowledge, lol.



posted on Apr, 25 2010 @ 05:28 AM
link   
reply to post by Gakus
 


i posted a source earlier in the thread.

btw. ross isn't the only physicist who has come up with numbers like this, there are quite a few with similar odds.

"Donald Page of Princeton’s Institute for Advanced Study has calculated that the odds against our universe randomly taking a form suitable for life is one out of 10^124, a number beyond imagination"


www.inplainsite.org...

and even if you disagree with hugh ross (remember, hawking has made a similar prediction) on the amount of atoms in the universe, the odds of all the anthropic constants happening in the same universe is still viable.



posted on Apr, 25 2010 @ 05:32 AM
link   
reply to post by Bob Sholtz
 


It is possible to imagine alien beings who are smarter and wiser than we are but who are spiritually inferior, or just plain evil.

However, it is more likely that any civilization that had surpassed us scientifically would have improved on our level of moral development, too. One may even speculate that an advanced alien society would sooner or later find some way to genetically eliminate evil behavior, resulting in a race of saintly beings.

We all evolve spiritually - spiritual evolution. Its natural. A million years from now if we're still around, we would have matured into a more intellectually capable civilization and more spiritually evolved where our present mindset of greed, corruption, and the hunger for wars have been long forgotten. We wouldn't need this. We would have moved ahead.


For example, today, what is the Raison d'être for war? Religion, energy and the unequal distribution of wealth. Religion is purely a human manifestation and when religion becomes an outdated concept and energy is freely available would there be any need for war? For greed and corruption?

In a nutshell, I feel that advanced cultures would be benevolent and have no need to disrupt the natural evolution in the cosmos by invading planets like Earth for resources! There's a huge universe out there for them to exploit. Trillions of star systems with unlimited resources.

If ETs were of the malevolent kind, we would have been meat long ago. But we're still here! Right?

So no, they'll not be invading Earth! (That's my personal opinion. Take it or leave it).


[edit on 25-4-2010 by OrionHunterX]



posted on Apr, 25 2010 @ 05:33 AM
link   
reply to post by Matrix Rising
 


Excellent thread - can't wait for the doco.

Scientists claiming that alien life is more likely than not is not new - i believe Einstein also stated that the mathematics make it so.

However, what is new here is such a high profile scientist warning us that contact may be dangerous....

This, again, is not new to the peripheries of science, but i don't believe the establishment has ever voiced this notion of malevolent aliens. I hope it is just that - a notion - and that Hawking is not part of a move to prepare the public for a situation that already exists.

It's been posted here that a species that has advanced to interstellar travel must surely be benevolent. My instincts tell me the same, but all our instincts are human ones - who knows how diverse the instincts of the universe really are?

By its very nature the universe is cannibalistic - just look at black holes; they don't seem particularly benevolent...



posted on Apr, 25 2010 @ 05:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by Matrix Rising
Like I said it's a no brainer that extraterrestrials exist based on recent scientific discoveries.




Similarly, Lord Rees, the astronomer royal, warned in a lecture earlier this year that aliens might prove to be beyond human understanding.

“I suspect there could be life and intelligence out there in forms we can’t conceive,” he said. “Just as a chimpanzee can’t understand quantum theory, it could be there are aspects of reality that are beyond the capacity of our brains.”




Ok this is Off topic but it is one of the most important statements on everything....




“Just as a chimpanzee can’t understand quantum theory, it could be there are aspects of reality that are beyond the capacity of our brains.”


put thison life, religion, natural proceses, time space, humans and most important.... women... lol no seriously,with every apect that is investigated keep this in mind...

OT

me like hawking



posted on Apr, 25 2010 @ 05:46 AM
link   
The United states should take the lead and orbit some nuclear warheads at various points between our earth and our moon (That's right - they're Ours. They belong to us..)

Anyhow...

These devices could be used to divert or mitigate and asteroid impact. In a worst case scenario they could be used on aliens which are deemed potentially hostile.

At the very least it would show any potential invader that humanity (at least part of it) is prepared to take steps to secure the safety of the people on the earth.

*I am unsure of how many nuclear bombs would be adequate for our needs. I imagine variable yield devices would make the most sense, but it is important to have enough energy at our disposal to deal with (or deter) any threats that may decide to stop by our planet.



posted on Apr, 25 2010 @ 05:54 AM
link   
Even though I don't agree with a huge part of what Hawking's says this is probably the first time he said something that I could agree. The only shame is that any 2 year old would realize the same thing



new topics

top topics



 
106
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join