The Aliens. Are we gonna talk about it?

[fskimospy]

Alright, let's suppose that the reason we haven't made contact is because we've only been emitting radio waves for 150 years and the nearest intelligent life is 76 light years away and so we'll receive their return signal in 2 years. Then what?
Assuming (highly unlikely IMO) we could somehow communicate better with them than we do with the other species on our own planet, that's quite the long distance relationship when we'd be separated by a whole human life's distance at the speed of light.

Oh I don’t mean anything. I think the overwhelmingly likely answer is we will never encounter any intelligent life from another planet in our lives or our grandchildren’s lives. I just strongly suspect it exists out there somewhere.

 

[Vic]

Guys, both Star Trek and Star Wars were written to be allegories of the diversity of human life on planet earth. The reason they occur in space is not to accurately portray space travel but to spur our imaginations and to open our minds to the possibility of something beyond ourselves and thus encourage us to see ourselves as human beings and not our various divisions.
This was the express intent of both of Roddenberry and Lucas.

 

[Vic]

Oh I don’t mean anything. I think the overwhelmingly likely answer is we will never encounter any intelligent life from another planet in our lives or our grandchildren’s lives. I just strongly suspect it exists out there somewhere.

I'm confident it exists too. Most likely there are a nearly infinite number of intelligent sentient species out there. On galaxies so far away that they are already accelerating away from us at faster than the speed of light.

 

[VRAMdemon]

I can't even fathom interstellar travel with biological creatures aboard a "spacecraft" is even possible . As Vic and others mentioned, Space travel is not friendly to living beings, with all the radiation and long distances (among other things) to travel. I don't think extraterrestrial intelligent biological life is here. Now maybe terrestrial life that we don't know about living underground or at the bottom of the oceans might be possible. And I do think intelligent life does exist out there. We just won't see it.

The only way I can see alien life is really here, they might have sent unoccupied spacecrafts with the technology to restart their species once it got here. AI that can create life just as it existed in their home planet. So, for example, they would have the DNA “program” for their species and find the materials to build life again from scratch. I would think AI intelligences driving this thing would be machine AIs, not biological. But if a biology-based civilization were able to construct a super AI somehow without being destroyed by it, well who knows. Again this is off the wall shit that collects in my brain when talking about the universe and life

 

[Jaskalas]

One of the things that our children's generation is going to need to come to grips with is the scientific reality of space travel.

That is, if they can first figure out how to get humans to stop killing each other.
Sticks and stones do not make good space faring material.

 

[dlerious]

That is, if they can first figure out how to get humans to stop killing each other.
Sticks and stones do not make good space faring material.

I don't know. Flinging rocks at a planet from space would probably make things uncomfortable for any inhabitants.

 

[Moonbeam]

Aliens are just another form of the ‘other’ that by denying our identification with them we are free to project onto them the truth about how we feel about ourselves. This is why so often we imagine then as terrifying.

 

[Paratus]

So lets talk about the Drake Equation, the Fermi Paradox, and the Great Filter.

The Drake Equation is a way to estimate the number of technological civilizations in the galaxy.
N = R* x Fp x Ne x Fl x Fi x Fc x L

N - number of detectable technological civilizations

R* - rate of star formation

Fp - fraction of stars systems with planets

Ne - avg number of planets per system that can support life

Fl - fraction of planets that develop life

Fi - fraction that develop intelligent life

Fc - fraction that develop a technological civilization

L - avg length of time the civilization is active



Depending on the assumptions for these variables and length of time the galaxy has existed there should be several alien civilizations that are detectable - there aren’t. Which brings us to the Fermi Paradox. Where is everyone? Even with conservative estimates for the variables there should be somebody detectable around.



Since there isn’t, that means something drives the estimates to be much lower than we think they are. That could be REALLY bad for humanity.



The hypothesis for why there is no other detectable alien civilizations around is called The Great Filter. It assumes there is one or more “filters” that affects the term(s) in the Drake equation.



For example if planets like Earth that could support life are extremely rare then intelligent aliens would also be extremely rare. After all we have access to 92 elements on the periodic table - many of which are required for life. Those elements took several generations of star formation to create meaning we could be very early in the habitable portion of the universes timeline.

Another potential filter would be the jump from single to multicellular life. Life started on the Earth fairly quickly but took serval billion years to make the jump to multicellular life.

Combine these two and Earth could be one one of the first locations where multicellular life was possible.

Now for some of these terms our technology helps us make a good estimate. Astronomy gives us a good idea of how many stars there are and how fast they are forming. Since the 90’s we’ve gotten better at finding planets around those stars including ones in similar orbits to Earth. In the next couple of decades we can probably narrow down how likely some of those are to have atmospheres like Earth.



The problem for humans is what if the filter is on the last term, the length of a technological civilization. If it turns out there are plenty of habitable planets and intelligent life easily occurs again again, yet we don’t detect them, then something prevents civilizations from existing for very long. Something like most civilizations tend to wipe themselves out via war or environmental collapse. Or maybe natural phenomena like supernovas and gamma ray bursts happen frequently enough to sterilize almost all planets with life on them.



Or maybe it’s the “Dark Forest” filter where some advanced race of aliens upon detecting life sends some mysterious blue goo to your solar system that could wipe out all life.



At any rate let’s hope we are passed the filter since our civilization is detectable in greater than 100 light year diameter sphere via our radio transmissions. Which suggests we might not have much time left before we, or someone, or something wipes us out.

 

[vi edit]

Well, if we're writing a story, getting wiped out by an alien civilization seems a lot more interesting than nuking or destroying our own planet ourselves. I think I'll take that door if offered.

 

[Paratus]

Well, if we're writing a story, getting wiped out by an alien civilization seems a lot more interesting than nuking or destroying our own planet ourselves. I think I'll take that door if offered.

To get you started

Series or books either is good

Soon to be a series too.

 

[vi edit]

I've read up through book 3 or 4 of the expanse. Proto molecule... except maybe just outright deadly to Humans seems like something that isn't outside realms of reality.

Or our Sun just says fuck it, I'm out and we just go into a forever ice age.

 

[SMOGZINN]

So lets talk about the Drake Equation, the Fermi Paradox, and the Great Filter.

So the real problem with the Drake Equation is that we don't really know much about it. A lot can hide in those variables, and we don't even know if they are all the variables there are. There could be any number of completely unknown variables in there that makes the rest of them basically a rounding error.

The Drake Equation is a way to estimate the number of technological civilizations in the galaxy.
N = R* x Fp x Ne x Fl x Fi x Fc x L

N - number of detectable technological civilizations

R* - rate of star formation

Fp - fraction of stars systems with planets

Ne - avg number of planets per system that can support life

Fl - fraction of planets that develop life

Fi - fraction that develop intelligent life

Fc - fraction that develop a technological civilization

L - avg length of time the civilization is active

That could be REALLY bad for humanity.

It could be, but it could also be REALLY good for humanity. Honestly, if we accept the Drake Equation as it is, then it seems that the good is more probably then the bad.
Of the variables in the equation there are a few we have an idea of their value ( or at least we know enough to make some really rough guesses.)

Variables N, R*, Fp are all something we can guess at with some degree of accuracy, at least in our local galaxy.

Variables Ne, Fl, Fi, Fc we can't even make a guesstimate on as we have exactly one point of data for all these. All we can really say is that the number for each of them is greater than zero. That means that any or all of these could be the great limiter. The answer could end up being that life is out there, but it is so rare that it does not even occur once in every galaxy. This would be really good for humanity. We might have a galaxy, or even a galaxy cluster, to ourselves.

And finally, the variable everyone focuses on, the L. It could be also be a great limiter, or it might not. Once again we have basically no data on this. Like the others all we can say about this one is that it is not zero. So, we know exactly as much about it as the other 4 unknowns.
So that leaves 4 that are good, and one that is bad. Not terrible odds all things considered.

Those elements took several generations of star formation to create meaning we could be very early in the habitable portion of the universes timeline.

Very probably not. We know that complex life existed on this planet for about 400 million years before our civilization came about, they just didn't have the right situations for intelligence to form (that we know of). If we go by our civilization's advancement, then a civilization that has just a thousand year head start on us would be technologically godlike compared to us. With just our one example we know it could have happened up to 400 million years before us. So, even if we are 'early' in the 'habitable portion of the universes timeline' that timeline is still so vast compared to the speed that civilization advances that being 'early' is not significant. Once again, all based on our exactly one point of data. But that is the Drake Equation for you.

At any rate let’s hope we are passed the filter since our civilization is detectable in greater than 100 light year diameter sphere via our radio transmissions. Which suggests we might not have much time left before we, or someone, or something wipes us out.

That all matters on the exact value of those middle four variables. Four variables would have to work against us for that last one to matter, at least as far as the Dark Forest hypothesis goes.

 

[cytg111]

All these theories deal with the super large and vast metrics of space and time. For all you know quantum mechanics may tomorrow reveal that any particle in the universe is accessible from any particle in the universe in a special kind of entanglement. To quantify that which is more advanced than us is futile. In terms of AI there is a reason they call it the singularity.

 

[nickqt]

There's a great youtube channel called Cool Worlds with an actual physicist who can explain a lot of what y'all are talking about in better scientific detail.

Here's a video on Fermi's Paradox and the Drake Equation.

I can't recommend enough this channel if you're generally interested in space, physics, the cosmos, etc.

 

[Paratus]

So the real problem with the Drake Equation is that we don't really know much about it. A lot can hide in those variables, and we don't even know if they are all the variables there are. There could be any number of completely unknown variables in there that makes the rest of them basically a rounding error.



It could be, but it could also be REALLY good for humanity. Honestly, if we accept the Drake Equation as it is, then it seems that the good is more probably then the bad.
Of the variables in the equation there are a few we have an idea of their value ( or at least we know enough to make some really rough guesses.)

Variables N, R*, Fp are all something we can guess at with some degree of accuracy, at least in our local galaxy.

Variables Ne, Fl, Fi, Fc we can't even make a guesstimate on as we have exactly one point of data for all these. All we can really say is that the number for each of them is greater than zero. That means that any or all of these could be the great limiter. The answer could end up being that life is out there, but it is so rare that it does not even occur once in every galaxy. This would be really good for humanity. We might have a galaxy, or even a galaxy cluster, to ourselves.

And finally, the variable everyone focuses on, the L. It could be also be a great limiter, or it might not. Once again we have basically no data on this. Like the others all we can say about this one is that it is not zero. So, we know exactly as much about it as the other 4 unknowns.
So that leaves 4 that are good, and one that is bad. Not terrible odds all things considered.


Very probably not. We know that complex life existed on this planet for about 400 million years before our civilization came about, they just didn't have the right situations for intelligence to form (that we know of). If we go by our civilization's advancement, then a civilization that has just a thousand year head start on us would be technologically godlike compared to us. With just our one example we know it could have happened up to 400 million years before us. So, even if we are 'early' in the 'habitable portion of the universes timeline' that timeline is still so vast compared to the speed that civilization advances that being 'early' is not significant. Once again, all based on our exactly one point of data. But that is the Drake Equation for you.



That all matters on the exact value of those middle four variables. Four variables would have to work against us for that last one to matter, at least as far as the Dark Forest hypothesis goes.

Actually there is some evidence to suggest we are on the early side life existing according to this article and the paper linked within.

Did We Arrive Early To The Universe's Life Party?

According to a new study from the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, life as we know it could have emerged prematurely in the Universe

www.universetoday.com

Plus while we only have our own singular case to look at the relative periods in our own history suggest that inert chemistry progressing to single cell life happens on a much shorter timescale than single cell life to multicellular life.

Estimates put single cell life at ~ 400M after the Earth formed while multicellular life took and additional 2-3 Billion years.

Intelligence took an additional 600M years and us being a detectable species only took a few 100 thousands.

So while we only have one example we can compare each of these steps to each other. Life appeared fairly quickly while multicellular life took nearly an order of magnitude longer while the transition from intelligence to technology was several orders of magnitude quicker.

 

[fskimospy]

Actually there is some evidence to suggest we are on the early side life existing according to this article and the paper linked within.

Did We Arrive Early To The Universe's Life Party?

According to a new study from the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, life as we know it could have emerged prematurely in the Universe

www.universetoday.com

Plus while we only have our own singular case to look at the relative periods in our own history suggest that inert chemistry progressing to single cell life happens on a much shorter timescale than single cell life to multicellular life.

Estimates put single cell life at ~ 400M after the Earth formed while multicellular life took and additional 2-3 Billion years.

Intelligence took an additional 600M years and us being a detectable species only took a few 100 thousands.

So while we only have one example we can compare each of these steps to each other. Life appeared fairly quickly while multicellular life took nearly an order of magnitude longer while the transition from intelligence to technology was several orders of magnitude quicker.

This is all very interesting to me. Please continue arguing about the prevalence of life.

This is not sarcasm, these are great posts!

 

[skyking]

I think the probability of other intelligent life in the universe is a near certainty due to the sheer scale of the universe, which is basically beyond our comprehension. Other intelligent life we can come into contact with? That’s considerably less likely.

👍
That scale cuts both ways. Throw in time as a variable and that's a hell of a crapshoot now.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

Actually there is some evidence to suggest we are on the early side life existing according to this article and the paper linked within.

Did We Arrive Early To The Universe's Life Party?

According to a new study from the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, life as we know it could have emerged prematurely in the Universe

www.universetoday.com

Plus while we only have our own singular case to look at the relative periods in our own history suggest that inert chemistry progressing to single cell life happens on a much shorter timescale than single cell life to multicellular life.

Estimates put single cell life at ~ 400M after the Earth formed while multicellular life took and additional 2-3 Billion years.

Intelligence took an additional 600M years and us being a detectable species only took a few 100 thousands.

So while we only have one example we can compare each of these steps to each other. Life appeared fairly quickly while multicellular life took nearly an order of magnitude longer while the transition from intelligence to technology was several orders of magnitude quicker.

We've also been through many extinction events, and while we don't know how common they are (probably very), life would have been further along without them most likely.

 

[sportage]

I don't even want to hear about the existence of space aliens until us humans here on earth quit killing each other. Why would any space alien even think about coming to earth as long as civilization allows assault weapons to gun down 5 year olds in class rooms?
I don't know any space aliens but I will grant them credit that if they are out there and looking for intelligent life, they know its not to be found here. If they are out there they'd simply pass... us.... by....
"Reebut Vuvu Zouch Yenkeae"
Translation: "earthlings are freakin nuts"

 

[SMOGZINN]

Actually there is some evidence to suggest we are on the early side life existing according to this article and the paper linked within.

Did We Arrive Early To The Universe's Life Party?

According to a new study from the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, life as we know it could have emerged prematurely in the Universe

www.universetoday.com

I read that article, and it does not really say much. The main point is that the longer a planet orbits a stable star the more time it has to form life. Well, sure. That is how time works. That tells us nothing about how long it takes life to form on average. On average how long does a planet (that has the right conditions) need to form life?

Plus while we only have our own singular case to look at the relative periods in our own history suggest that inert chemistry progressing to single cell life happens on a much shorter timescale than single cell life to multicellular life.

Sure, that is how it worked in the one case we have studied. But is that case representative of other cases? We have no idea. Maybe the random chance that the right chemicals form to create that self replicating molecule that makes life possible happened super fast on Earth and takes other planets billions of years to occur, or maybe it happens almost immediately on other planets and we took billions of years for it to happen here? Maybe we are super slow to evolve. Maybe we were super fast. We have no idea where we sit on the bell curve of (Amount of time passed) vs (Level of evolution).

So while we only have one example we can compare each of these steps to each other. Life appeared fairly quickly while multicellular life took nearly an order of magnitude longer while the transition from intelligence to technology was several orders of magnitude quicker.

And while that tells us a whole bunch about life here on Earth, it is still just one data point in the grander picture of how life forms. We need hundreds if not thousands of data points to have a reasonable idea of what life is like in the universe as a whole. In other words, we don't know, and that is okay. Hopefully we will have the time to learn.

 

[Lanyap]

I recently started watching The Secret of Skinwalker Ranch on the History channel. I found it interesting.

Years ago I started reading Whitley Strieber's alien books. After the second one I started dreaming about aliens and it seemed real. I stopped reading them after the third book and the alien dreams stopped.

 

[hal2kilo]

I recently started watching The Secret of Skinwalker Ranch on the History channel. I found it interesting.

Years ago I started reading Whitley Strieber's alien books. After the second one I started dreaming about aliens and it seemed real. I stopped reading them after the third book and the alien dreams stopped.

I've been following this show very closely. Bottom line to me is that we don't begin to have a clue about what is currently on this earth already. 1.6 Gigahertz!

 

[Puffnstuff]

I saw a flying orb once a long time ago....it fell off the Christmas tree when my cat got it.

 

[SMOGZINN]

I saw a flying orb once a long time ago....it fell off the Christmas tree when my cat got it.

I've seen all sorts of unexplained aerial phenomenon in my years watching the night sky. I am just wise enough to know that just because I can't explain it doesn't mean it does not have a reasonable explanation. I just don't have the information to figure it out.
Our senses are quite prone to being deceived. Just because you saw something does not mean it is real.

 

[hal2kilo]

Never seen anything except satellites and one or two meteorites with plasma trails throughout all of my stargazing. Yet, whole communities including the police have witnessed several UAPs over the decades.