Originally Posted by BFT3K (Post 20288431)

The fact that aliens do NOT visit our planet PROVES there IS intelligent life out there.

Originally Posted by BFT3K (Post 20288431)

The fact that aliens do NOT visit our planet PROVES there IS intelligent life out there.

Originally Posted by dyna mo (Post 20290899)

Our sun is relatively young in the lifespan of the universe. There are far older stars with far older Earth-like planets, which should in theory mean civilizations far more advanced than our own. As an example, let?s compare our 4.54 billion-year-old Earth to a hypothetical 8 billion-year-old Planet X.

http://waitbutwhy.com/wp-content/upl...e-1024x416.png

Planet X

If Planet X has a similar story to Earth, let?s look at where their civilization would be today (using the orange timespan as a reference to show how huge the green timespan is):
http://waitbutwhy.com/wp-content/upl...2-1024x537.png

Planet X vs Earth

The technology and knowledge of a civilization only 1,000 years ahead of us could be as shocking to us as our world would be to a medieval person. A civilization 1 million years ahead of us might be as incomprehensible to us as human culture is to chimpanzees. And Planet X is 3.4 billion years ahead of us?

There?s something called The Kardashev Scale, which helps us group intelligent civilizations into three broad categories by the amount of energy they use:

A Type I Civilization has the ability to use all of the energy on their planet. We?re not quite a Type I Civilization, but we?re close (Carl Sagan created a formula for this scale which puts us at a Type 0.7 Civilization).

A Type II Civilization can harness all of the energy of their host star. Our feeble Type I brains can hardly imagine how someone would do this, but we?ve tried our best, imagining things like a Dyson Sphere.

http://waitbutwhy.com/wp-content/upl...-1024x1024.png

Dyson Sphere

A Type III Civilization blows the other two away, accessing power comparable to that of the entire Milky Way galaxy.

If this level of advancement sounds hard to believe, remember Planet X above and their 3.4 billion years of further development. If a civilization on Planet X were similar to ours and were able to survive all the way to Type III level, the natural thought is that they?d probably have mastered inter-stellar travel by now, possibly even colonizing the entire galaxy.

One hypothesis as to how galactic colonization could happen is by creating machinery that can travel to other planets, spend 500 years or so self-replicating using the raw materials on their new planet, and then send two replicas off to do the same thing. Even without traveling anywhere near the speed of light, this process would colonize the whole galaxy in 3.75 million years, a relative blink of an eye when talking in the scale of billions of years:
http://waitbutwhy.com/wp-content/upl...ize-Galaxy.png
Colonize Galaxy

Source: Scientific American: ?Where Are They?

Continuing to speculate, if 1% of intelligent life survives long enough to become a potentially galaxy-colonizing Type III Civilization, our calculations above suggest that there should be at least 1,000 Type III Civilizations in our galaxy alone?and given the power of such a civilization, their presence would likely be pretty noticeable. And yet, we see nothing, hear nothing, and we?re visited by no one.

Originally Posted by SuckOnThis (Post 20290913)

And from the same article you plagiarized which you have conveniently omitted and added your own nonsense:

We have no answer to the Fermi Paradox?the best we can do is ?possible explanations.? And if you ask ten different scientists what their hunch is about the correct one, you?ll get ten different answers.


The Fermi Paradox - Wait But Why

Originally Posted by 420 (Post 20290955)

If I have to read this much to figure it out, it's not worth it. How does anyone know if a single species can survive for 3.4 billion years?

Originally Posted by edgeprod (Post 20288520)

Only a complete lack of understanding of the size, scope, and diversity of the universe would lead to swallowing Fermi's hypothesis on this matter ... that, and an ego the size of the known universe, to think that humanity is remotely special, let alone unique.

Originally Posted by dyna mo (Post 20290972)

Settle down man. You are obviously threatened by others who think differently than you.

The funny part is you're so agitated you are not even making sense. You just said it again, there is no answer to the paradox. Thanks for reiterated that.

But again, settle down. I've mentioned a age times this thread was an attempt to chat with others who are interested in the subject. If you want to attack me for not citing references, as if that somehow negates the fact that the question is unanswered lol, you are in the wrong thread.

Originally Posted by dyna mo (Post 20290972)

I'll create a fucking bibliography when my professor requires one. In the meantime realize you are looking like a mean-spirited person with nothing better to do than struggle with a topic that's over your head. So settle down and try and contribute or go fuck yourself. Either way, no biggie to me.

Originally Posted by dyna mo (Post 20290980)

You don't have to read that much. If you are interested in the topic, then read it, if not then don't.

Originally Posted by SuckOnThis (Post 20290989)

I can't figure out

Originally Posted by 420 (Post 20290999)

It was a joke. I read it but I think it's too complicated. We don't know the chances of one species dominating their environment and surviving for billions of years. What if there are lots of highly advanced species on other planets and they are at war with each other?

Just saying there are many reasons for not being visited besides "there is no other intelligent life in the entire universe". Perhaps we are being visited right now and the aliens are not in human form but some sort of microbe or something we can't even see.

Originally Posted by MaDalton (Post 20291099)

no one has a 100% definite answer to this - case closed

Originally Posted by PiracyPitbull (Post 20291127)

BFT3K nailed it succinctly.


In any event, not only is it a mathematical certainty that other life will exist, it is a certainty that a percent have achieved intelligence equal to humankind and a percent far superior.

It?s too small minded and arrogant to refuse that probability simply because of our own species current limitations, where everything considered, answering that question is beyond humankind's current abilities unless it's kindly dropped in our laps.

No evidence (or lack thereof) gathered to date by humans (considering the primitive tools at our disposal in relation to the task at hand) to answer our own question alter the mathematical certainties at all. And whilst humans attempt to answer the ?are we alone? question, we are without doubt an isolated species, sat in a (best guess known to humans currently regarding observable universe) 93 billion light year diameter dark room, with essentially a lit match, restrictive spectacles and an ineffective ear trumpet.

A technologically superior race/entity (who we will naturally assume for the purposes of this thread is capable of the required travel by whatever means) sufficiently fast enough, have exactly the same reason and motivation to visit humankind right now that you yourself have to leave your home with the sole purpose of visiting a tiny anthill deep in the Australian outback.

Originally Posted by dyna mo (Post 20288415)

The basic points of the argument, made by physicists Enrico Fermi and Michael H. Hart, are:

The Sun is a typical star, and relatively young. There are billions of stars in the galaxy that are billions of years older.
Almost surely, some of these stars will have Earth-like planets. Assuming the Earth is typical, some of these planets may develop intelligent life.
Some of these civilizations may develop interstellar travel, a technology Earth is investigating even now (such as the 100 Year Starship).
Even at the slow pace of currently envisioned interstellar travel, the galaxy can be completely colonized in a few tens of millions of years.

According to this line of thinking, the Earth should already have been colonized, or at least visited. But no convincing evidence of this exists.

Furthermore, no confirmed signs of intelligence elsewhere have yet been spotted in our galaxy or (to the extent it would be detectable) elsewhere in the observable universe.


With no evidence of intelligent life other than ourselves, it appears that the process of starting with a star and ending with "advanced explosive lasting life" must be unlikely.



we are all alone peeps.

Originally Posted by dyna mo (Post 20291126)

No sense in closing a case with no answer. Especially with a new discipline of science studying the issue. Case very much open.

Originally Posted by MaDalton (Post 20291099)

no one has a 100% definite answer to this - case closed

Originally Posted by MiamiBoyz (Post 20291226)

The answer is machines with artificial intelligence and the ability to self-repair and replicate themselves. No biological species can last for billions of years but certainly a self-repairing, learning machine could. The next step in human evolution will be silicon based and not carbon based.

Originally Posted by Idigmygirls (Post 20291212)

When did you see that argument made?

I made the same argument, almost word-for-word in my first novel, "The Minerva Virus" (hardcover and ebook available on Amazon) about 10 YEARS AGO.

I wrote a paper on it almost 12 years ago, and the proof was much more extensive.

Just curious if this was something they "came out" with recently?

Originally Posted by The Porn Nerd (Post 20291285)

WE are the "evidence" ancient aliens visited us and changed our DNA.

Besides, if Giorgio says it's so then IT IS SO.

:D

Originally Posted by jaYMan (Post 20288422)

What do you think of this? Ten-Fifteen minute read at least unless you're just a skimmer.

Alien Message to Mankind: "Do You Wish That We Show Up?" | Earth. We are one.



:2 cents:

Originally Posted by Relentless (Post 20288593)

It's arrogant to say 'other intelligent life' - have you looked at 'us' lately?

Originally Posted by dyna mo (Post 20291180)

It's absolutely not a mathematical certainty. It's a statistical probability. Polar opposite.

It's small minded and arrogant to assume intelligent life elsewhere is a certainty. That's not science.

Originally Posted by PiracyPitbull (Post 20291341)

I disagree.


The only people it's not a mathematical certainty to would be:

1) Those that can't grasp for whatever reason that a percent of life in whatever form, in whatever environment and therefore potentially intelligent life to whatever degree are instances that are statistically in the trillions universally.

2) Those that can grasp the instances but also know it absolutely can not be currently proven in anyway shape or form, not where they would be prepared to hang their career hat on it and certainly not without being assaulted from every angle by those who can't comprehend that position unless a spaceship lands on the Whitehouse lawn of course.


The scale of the universe is inconvenient and humankind's best efforts considering the magnitude of the task can only be described as a primitive foray into the first few feet of a 93 billion light year diameter expanse. This bodes well for a negative argument, which is naturally ridiculous on a universal level. Or at best a positive argument where those on that side of the fence are only brave enough to admit to "possibilities" lest they wish to be ridiculed by small mindedness.

Originally Posted by 420 (Post 20291386)

Maybe it takes longer than 200,000 years to get here. Aliens probably came here to visit the dinosaurs and brought the first mammals (rats) aboard their ships. Then they sent a colony ship but the electronics malfunction and it turned into a ball of ice that impacted earth killing off the dinosaurs.

To a highly advanced species do you think we would look more like dolphins or cockroaches? Do you think insects know what fish are? Fish know what insects are; protein. But do you think a roach would even notice a fish?

Originally Posted by dyna mo (Post 20291092)

See far-l's post with the YouTube on mushrooms. I didn't realize you were joking. I like the example I c&p'ed because it shows in spite of the huge numbers over a long time, there is a lack of evidence.

Originally Posted by dyna mo (Post 20291358)

the people it's not a mathematical certainty to are astrobiologists, people who are academically trained in 2, if not 3 of the most challenging disciplines of science- astrophysics, biology and chemistry. PHD educated.

Originally Posted by dyna mo (Post 20291358)

certainty in math requires rigorous proof. To assume simply because life evolved here + Drake's equation = life elsewhere is not based on any math or any certainty. it's all probability. pointed out earlier in this thread, other intelligent advanced life may simply not be there yet, or was there and is long gone. whichever way, we could very well be completely alone.

Originally Posted by PiracyPitbull (Post 20291480)

So I don't get overly concerned about earth bound theories on intelligent life existence within a 500 billion galaxy universe which is 93 billion light years in diameter. I really don't :)

Originally Posted by PiracyPitbull (Post 20291480)

The opinion of those people is not something that concerns my beliefs regarding universal statistics of life or intelligent life existence at all.

Simply because, they are still people theorizing with an understanding of the life and lifeforms of our own environment but they're theorizing about life and environments they are unable to observe, have never been to and are light years away. It's an interesting exercise of course but, considering the immense magnitude of even earths "very immediate neighborhood" I doubt any person that thinks critically gives such opinions any gravity.

A Light year, for example....it's so often trivialized but, to put it into perspective the sheer expanse of our immediate door step, the unmanned Voyager 1 still requires another 17,500 years travel at its current velocity to reach the distance required for just one light year (current travel: 40 years and 11 billion miles).

So another 17500 years and Voyager will still have not reached one quarter of the distance to our nearest star, Proxima Centauri. And where were humans all those years ago, we'd just started creating pottery.

So I don't get overly concerned about earth bound theories on intelligent life existence within a 500 billion galaxy universe which is 93 billion light years in diameter. I really don't :)





I'm going to stand by the mathematical certainty, simply because statistics fully favor a rational belief.

There are several trillion statistical instances to be right about intelligent life as oppose to a detractors belief where (even if the largely incomprehensible universal statistics can boggle anyone's mind) they would still need to nullify several trillion instances for those who do believe to be wrong.

And those who accept the statistics only need (apart from our own planet of course) another one in a couple of trillion to be correct.

I'll take those odds as a certainty any day of the week.

Originally Posted by BFT3K (Post 20288431)

The fact that aliens do NOT visit our planet PROVES there IS intelligent life out there.

Originally Posted by Joshua G (Post 20291725)

OP is like a caveman before the telephone. Theres no cavemen on the other side of earth. how can there be, there is no proof. my eyes tell me there are no other cavemen. & someone elses paradox cant be unproven, so duh, we're the only ones here.

then the phone was invented. the caveman was wrong, all along.

maybe a dash of respect for the size of the universe combined with a perspective on how far left humans have to drive before achieving omniscience, then maybe the OP might stop trolling everyone & find something productive to do.

:)

Originally Posted by dyna mo (Post 20288415)

The basic points of the argument, made by physicists Enrico Fermi and Michael H. Hart, are:

Originally Posted by Joshua G (Post 20291725)

OP is like a caveman before the telephone.

:)

Originally Posted by Joshua G (Post 20291725)

OP is like a caveman before the telephone. Theres no cavemen on the other side of earth. how can there be, there is no proof. my eyes tell me there are no other cavemen. & someone elses paradox cant be unproven, so duh, we're the only ones here.

then the phone was invented. the caveman was wrong, all along.

maybe a dash of respect for the size of the universe combined with a perspective on how far left humans have to drive before achieving omniscience, then maybe the OP might stop trolling everyone & find something productive to do.

:)