What is out there ?
Discussion
Skyedriver said:
They aren't Aliens on their Home planet
If anyone or thing comes here at the moment they'll think it's closed
They shouldn't be travelling anyway.
(It's unlikely that they have the same diseases and viruses that we have so coming here could either kill us or them)
Look at the incredible damage covid has caused to many countries. That’s just a virus that’s pretty mild for most under 70. If anyone or thing comes here at the moment they'll think it's closed
They shouldn't be travelling anyway.
(It's unlikely that they have the same diseases and viruses that we have so coming here could either kill us or them)
Imagine what would happen if space aliens turned up with some alien pathogen.
Either human kind would realise we’re not alone and all unite as one people or it would be total carnage. I’m guessing the second.
"What is out there?" is a rather unanswerable question really.
The only genuine answer can be is "lots of things - some of which we know a lot about, some of which we know a little about, an awful lot that we know a hardly anything about but which we are trying to find out more and an enormous amount we never never know anything ever".
However, the act of TRYING to find out as much as we can is the fun and interesting part.
The only genuine answer can be is "lots of things - some of which we know a lot about, some of which we know a little about, an awful lot that we know a hardly anything about but which we are trying to find out more and an enormous amount we never never know anything ever".
However, the act of TRYING to find out as much as we can is the fun and interesting part.
Chimune said:
DoctorX said:
This is the link I send to anyone who will listen! GroundEffect said:
No that one's b
ks.
Really it is a theory of Sir Roger Penrose, I guess some bloke on the internet thinks it bks. ks it must be wrong, can ask what you field in quantum mechanics is?... '' “Somehow, our consciousness is the reason the universe is here.” So does he think there’s intelligent life—or consciousness—somewhere else in the cosmos? “Yes, but it may be extremely rare.” But if consciousness is the point of this whole shebang, wouldn’t you expect to find some evidence of it beyond Earth? “Well, I’m not so sure our own universe is that favorably disposed toward consciousness,” he said.
“You could imagine a universe with a lot more consciousness that’s peppered all over the place. Why aren’t we in one of those rather than this one where it seems to be a rather uncommon activity?''
https://nautil.us/issue/47/consciousness/roger-pen...
The Spruce Goose said:
I actually think computers will be the only thing that comes close to understanding the universe, and probaby what will be left after we die out.
Have you been reading Asimov's short story The Last Question?Edited by The Spruce Goose on Friday 19th February 13:49
The Spruce Goose said:
Really it is a theory of Sir Roger Penrose, I guess some bloke on the internet thinks it bks it must be wrong, can ask what you field in quantum mechanics is?...
To quote your link directly: "Conventional wisdom goes something like this: The theory is almost certainly wrong, but Penrose is brilliant.". If you're really after a theoretical physicist wks it must be wrong, can ask what you field in quantum mechanics is?... k-off, then Stephen Hawking thought Penrose was wrong and I'm for sure not getting in between those guys if they're having an argument.Penrose is indeed one of the foremost minds of his, or indeed any, generation. But this is realistically, nothing more than a fascinating thought experiment with little to commend it as actual reality. Indeed one of its most brilliant aspects is that's essentially unprovable either way - it is in the same box as "we're just in a computer simulation that's indistinguishable from reality". So you'll forgive me if I file this one under "interesting, but ultimately not especially relevant".
Currently reading a superb book by Harvard Professors of Astrophysics, Avi Loeb, called ‘Extraterrestrial’. He makes a strong case as to why he believes the interstellar object Oumuamua that passed through the solar system in 2017 was not natural but an object made by an extraterrestrial intelligence. He’s no flake, and the science is compelling. Brilliant read, strongly recommend.
deckster said:
To quote your link directly: "Conventional wisdom goes something like this: The theory is almost certainly wrong, but Penrose is brilliant.". I
Are you arguing with me or the theory because I'm not sure quoting from an article i posted really counts to bolster your argument. He was good enough to be Hawking Phd tutor.As I've said, we can't understand something that is pretty much unfathomable with our monkey brains, it requires thinking that goes against the grain. It is clearly in the realms of philosophy and science and that rubs people up the wrong way.
The reality is what we see and perceive is vastly different to what the universe is, and the potential of what it could be. We have actaully envisaged a idea based on a concept of what the universe is.
The Spruce Goose said:
Are you arguing with me or the theory because I'm not sure quoting from an article i posted really counts to bolster your argument. He was good enough to be Hawking Phd tutor.
As I've said, we can't understand something that is pretty much unfathomable with our monkey brains, it requires thinking that goes against the grain. It is clearly in the realms of philosophy and science and that rubs people up the wrong way.
The reality is what we see and perceive is vastly different to what the universe is, and the potential of what it could be. We have actaully envisaged a idea based on a concept of what the universe is.
You jumped on somebody for daring to suggest that Penrose might be wrong. The article you quoted actually suggested that Penrose was probably wrong, as well.As I've said, we can't understand something that is pretty much unfathomable with our monkey brains, it requires thinking that goes against the grain. It is clearly in the realms of philosophy and science and that rubs people up the wrong way.
The reality is what we see and perceive is vastly different to what the universe is, and the potential of what it could be. We have actaully envisaged a idea based on a concept of what the universe is.
That aside: yes of course, you're absolutely right. What we perceive is the thinnest of veneers over a huge sea of unknown. But that's why it's all so exciting!
GroundEffect said:
The only change to that is that we are considering it from our level of sophistication/development.
Sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic - Arthur C. Clarke (same guy - got about!)
So given enough time and enough locations it could happen (i.e. in what may be an infinite universe) anything that is possible WILL happen. Worm holes etc will get developed somewhere.
Us humans have only really had what we'd call proper technology in the last 200 years. 200 years at the rising rate like we have:
Now just think if we accelerate that just 100 years in to the future. Now think 200. 300. 500. 2000! Unless there is some cosmic filter that stops a civilisation getting too advanced (before it extincts itself maybe, like the possible explanation of the Drake Equation paradox) there should be many many civilisations out there that can zip around their galaxy and probably populate the whole thing.
That itself sounds incredibly impressive and sci-fi and very Star Trek, but that's just one galaxy. Each spot in this image is a galaxy.
So how does an alien species find us? We have been eminating detectable emissions for a 150 years. That means:
Everything we've ever emitted, broadcast or sent out that would make us worth looking in to is a spec on one not particularly exciting galaxy in a corner of the universe that might eventually get looked in to.
Even from inside our own solar system, this is how we look...
A pale blue dot.
The Hubble deep field image is one of my favourites and I find it simply amazing, basically looking back in time. Pretty sure on a Brian Cox BBC show he uses it and focused on a few pixels of red which (at that time at least) was the oldest galaxy observed. Sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic - Arthur C. Clarke (same guy - got about!)
So given enough time and enough locations it could happen (i.e. in what may be an infinite universe) anything that is possible WILL happen. Worm holes etc will get developed somewhere.
Us humans have only really had what we'd call proper technology in the last 200 years. 200 years at the rising rate like we have:
Now just think if we accelerate that just 100 years in to the future. Now think 200. 300. 500. 2000! Unless there is some cosmic filter that stops a civilisation getting too advanced (before it extincts itself maybe, like the possible explanation of the Drake Equation paradox) there should be many many civilisations out there that can zip around their galaxy and probably populate the whole thing.
That itself sounds incredibly impressive and sci-fi and very Star Trek, but that's just one galaxy. Each spot in this image is a galaxy.
So how does an alien species find us? We have been eminating detectable emissions for a 150 years. That means:
Everything we've ever emitted, broadcast or sent out that would make us worth looking in to is a spec on one not particularly exciting galaxy in a corner of the universe that might eventually get looked in to.
Even from inside our own solar system, this is how we look...
A pale blue dot.
Whilst intelligent life on earth has occurred through a number of significant factors such as, a sun that burns long enough to give sufficient time, right distance from sun, sufficient water, sufficient mass + magnetic field to hold onto the atmosphere and sufficient water, (Mars used to have water and an atmosphere but lost it), some catastrophic events that drive change (would mammals ever have progressed beyond small rodents if the dinosaurs weren't wiped out?) Etc.... The odds are that somewhere out there, other planets are likely to have had most if not all ingredients.
As others have said, I suspect distance and time will make it highly unlikely that the human race will ever come across life as we know it.
Be interesting to see if they do see remnants of micro organisms on Mars, Europa may hold some hope too but getting there and boring through the ice is going to take alot of time.
GroundEffect said:
Humans cannot comprehend just how big the universe is. We don't even know how big it is because light is only so fast, light from the most distant objects literally cannot keep up with the rate of expansion of the universe
.
Another quote from the guide.
Space is big. Really big. You just won't believe how vastly hugely mind-bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist, but that's just peanuts to space. Listen; when you're thinking big, think bigger than the biggest thing ever and then some. Much bigger than that in fact, really amazingly immense, a totally stunning size, real 'wow, that's big', time. It's just so big that by comparison, bigness itself looks really titchy. Gigantic multiplied by colossal multiplied by staggeringly huge is the sort of concept we're trying to get across here.
deckster said:
You jumped on somebody for daring to suggest that Penrose might be wrong. The article you quoted actually suggested that Penrose was probably wrong, as well.
That aside: yes of course, you're absolutely right. What we perceive is the thinnest of veneers over a huge sea of unknown. But that's why it's all so exciting!
I think it fair that the theory by a highly decorated quantum theorist, respected in his many fields isn't just called ''bThat aside: yes of course, you're absolutely right. What we perceive is the thinnest of veneers over a huge sea of unknown. But that's why it's all so exciting!
ks..''The premise of his thoughts came from when he was a brain researcher and came up with the theory of that consciousness arises from quantum-mechanical processes. The same quantum-mechanical processes that are in the universe. Not a full on believer of Panpsychism, but similar thoughts.
''It acts according to a theory we don’t yet have.'' He said.
Life like bacteria is abundant I'd say but intelligent life like us / animals is hard and takes a long time^ + loads of luck imho so will be rare. Rule of large numbers says it must be out there but the vastness of space means it may as well not exist. No little green men ever imho.
^5bn years ish for humans to arrive?
TX.
^5bn years ish for humans to arrive?
TX.
TwigtheWonderkid said:
Yes, time is the enemy.
The universe is close on 15 billion years old. And it will carry on for trillions of years. The Earth is just 4.7b years old, and only has another 5 billions years before the sun swallows us up. So this planet will only exist for a minute fraction of the universe's life. Within that minute fraction, is an even tinier fraction, which is the period humans will exist and be in a position to record and monitor any meeting with another life form.
So the chances of other life may be good, but the chances of us and them coinciding in time and meeting, nil, or very close to nil.
1bn for the Sun to get us apparently, will boil off all our water.The universe is close on 15 billion years old. And it will carry on for trillions of years. The Earth is just 4.7b years old, and only has another 5 billions years before the sun swallows us up. So this planet will only exist for a minute fraction of the universe's life. Within that minute fraction, is an even tinier fraction, which is the period humans will exist and be in a position to record and monitor any meeting with another life form.
So the chances of other life may be good, but the chances of us and them coinciding in time and meeting, nil, or very close to nil.
TX.
Gecko1978 said:
I have always assumed if the universe is as big as we think then odds are there are other life forms. Though they could have litetally evolved and died out millions of years before us.
I think we are brand new on the scene.Just think of the advances we have made in a short time. From the Wright brothers first flight to sending something to land on Mars. Etc.
No doubt there's life, but we won't ever be able to witness that personally outside our solar system other than be remote means (for example by analysing the atmospheres of exoplanets using telescopes).
Reason is that the vast distances require a very special life form (special in terms of longevity of individuals) to "zip around the galaxy and populate it" to quote a previous poster. It requires an even more special life form to do this for entire universe. This is quite apart from the required technology to make such trips.
Imagine a supply ship setting off on a 40.000 light year journey to a colony somewhere on the other side of the Milky Way. Also imagine the ship can reach 0.8 times the speed of light. From the viewpoint of earth, the ship will take 2x40.000/0.8 = 100.000 years for the round-trip. The time as experienced by the ship is much shorter (due to the Lorentz contraction): only around 6 years (there is a wiki here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twin_paradox). Actually, it will be a bit longer as the ship has to accelerate and slow down twice, but it will still be less than 10 years.
No astronaut would set off on a 10-year journey knowing that, on his return, earth is 100.000 years older and everyone and every place he ever knew (and perhaps the whole of mankind) will be long gone. And no country or organisation would build such a ship, only to never see or hear from it again.
So, in order to make meaningful, multiple return journeys within the lifetimes of both individuals on board and on earth, the typical lifetime of such individuals should be multiple times the time of the journey as measured on earth. It follows we're looking for life forms whose individuals typically live a million years. From their chronology viewpoint, such a trip would to us be the equivalent of driving from London to Birmingham and back in an afternoon, only to realise that when you're back in London, everyone and everything is 10 years older. Still difficult, but no longer totally crazy/impossible.
The fact that we haven't seen any such life form visiting us means they don't exist or don't have the technology - and anyway they are not likely to exist in a universe that is only a few billions years old i.e. only a few thousand generations - it took us billions since the start of life on earth to even get out of the water and populate land...
My view is that whatever life there is - it hasn't mastered interstellar/intergalactic travel. If this is wrong, then where is everybody? (Fermi)
Reason is that the vast distances require a very special life form (special in terms of longevity of individuals) to "zip around the galaxy and populate it" to quote a previous poster. It requires an even more special life form to do this for entire universe. This is quite apart from the required technology to make such trips.
Imagine a supply ship setting off on a 40.000 light year journey to a colony somewhere on the other side of the Milky Way. Also imagine the ship can reach 0.8 times the speed of light. From the viewpoint of earth, the ship will take 2x40.000/0.8 = 100.000 years for the round-trip. The time as experienced by the ship is much shorter (due to the Lorentz contraction): only around 6 years (there is a wiki here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twin_paradox). Actually, it will be a bit longer as the ship has to accelerate and slow down twice, but it will still be less than 10 years.
No astronaut would set off on a 10-year journey knowing that, on his return, earth is 100.000 years older and everyone and every place he ever knew (and perhaps the whole of mankind) will be long gone. And no country or organisation would build such a ship, only to never see or hear from it again.
So, in order to make meaningful, multiple return journeys within the lifetimes of both individuals on board and on earth, the typical lifetime of such individuals should be multiple times the time of the journey as measured on earth. It follows we're looking for life forms whose individuals typically live a million years. From their chronology viewpoint, such a trip would to us be the equivalent of driving from London to Birmingham and back in an afternoon, only to realise that when you're back in London, everyone and everything is 10 years older. Still difficult, but no longer totally crazy/impossible.
The fact that we haven't seen any such life form visiting us means they don't exist or don't have the technology - and anyway they are not likely to exist in a universe that is only a few billions years old i.e. only a few thousand generations - it took us billions since the start of life on earth to even get out of the water and populate land...
My view is that whatever life there is - it hasn't mastered interstellar/intergalactic travel. If this is wrong, then where is everybody? (Fermi)
Edited by Jim1064 on Saturday 20th February 19:40
Gassing Station | Science! | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff