backtop


Print 133 comment(s) - last by bigdawg1988.. on May 4 at 9:00 PM


Intelligent life is more likely to be like the Borg than Vulcans, according to Stephen Hawking. Hawking says humans should try to avoid contact with intelligent aliens.  (Source: National Geographic)
Don't count on friendly aliens, like ET, says Hawking; they're likely looking to conquer, colonize, and exploit

Stephen Hawking, 68, has long suffered from a motor neurone disease that has extremely limited his powers of communication and movement, but that has never stopped him from  making important contributions to scientific theory.  Hawking just finished up a three-year project, a TV series called Stephen Hawking's Universe, which will air on Sunday May 9 at 9 p.m. on the Discovery Channel.

In the show he will offer up some controversial assessments on extraterrestrial life and what it might be like.  

Hawking is a firm believer that alien life does exist.  The universe contains hundreds of billions of galaxies, each with hundreds of millions of stars, many which have been shown to have planets in orbit.  Numbers virtually guarantee that life has evolved elsewhere, Hawking believes.  He states, "To my mathematical brain, the numbers alone make thinking about aliens perfectly rational.  The real challenge is to work out what aliens might actually be like."

So what might these extraterrestrial species be like?  Hawking believes that most are likely "simple" species, similar to those that have evolved on Earth; ranging from microbes to land animals.

However, Hawking believes there is likely intelligent life out there.  And he's frightened by that possibility.

The aliens in Hawking's vision would be much like the malefic beasties in the blockbuster science-fiction flick 
Independence Day.  He describes, "We only have to look at ourselves to see how intelligent life might develop into something we wouldn’t want to meet. I imagine they might exist in massive ships, having used up all the resources from their home planet. Such advanced aliens would perhaps become nomads, looking to conquer and colonize whatever planets they can reach."

He says that humans should try to avoid alien contact as we colonize space.  He states that such contact would be "a little too risky".  What would result?  He states, "If aliens ever visit us, I think the outcome would be much as when Christopher Columbus first landed in America, which didn’t turn out very well for the Native Americans."

In addition to his theories about vicious aliens, Hawking suggests that based on examples of life surviving on Earth in extreme environments, life could be found in unbelievable places, such as in the center of stars or even floating in interplanetary space.

Hawking's colleagues concur on this point.  Lord Martin Rees, a British royal astrophysicist, told his students in lecture earlier this year that humans might not be able to recognize or understand forms of life they stumble across in space.  He states, "I suspect there could be life and intelligence out there in forms we can’t conceive.  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."

How close could primitive life be?  Professor Brian Cox, University of Manchester's "rockstar physicist" suggests we look in our own solar backyard.  He says that Mars, Europa (a moon of Jupiter), and Titan (a moon of Saturn) are likely places to find it.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

Disagree
By wgbutler on 4/26/2010 10:21:18 AM , Rating: -1
There is probably no other life in the universe, certainly not intelligent life, as the likelihood of life of any kind evolving from chemicals is so prohibitively low that it has probably never happened anywhere else.

Scientists like Victor Stenger and Francisco Ayala (who has argued that the SETI program needs to be shut down as the odds of intelligent life evolving anywhere in the Universe are essentially nill) disagree with Hawking's speculation that there are nasty aliens out there ready to invade us.

And even if intelligent life did exist elsewhere in the Universe, it would be impossible for them to get to Earth (or for us to get to them) because according to the laws of physics nothing can travel faster than the speed of light. So even if they had light speed capable starships it would take thousands of years for them to even travel here.

I love science fiction as much as anyone. Sorry to be such a wet blanket, but those are the facts.

wgbutler




RE: Disagree
By amanojaku on 4/26/2010 10:38:24 AM , Rating: 2
How about a more practical approach: would aliens give a crap about Earth? As a race:

1) We're too stupid; we have brains that we just don't use
2) We're too weak; slaves need to be hardier than our fragile bodies
3) We're too poor; Earth's natural resources are scarce

I'm with Trey Parker and Matt Stone: aliens just want to see us on TV.


RE: Disagree
By Mitch101 on 4/26/2010 11:04:20 AM , Rating: 4
As one scientist put it.

An alien race capable of traveling across the universe isn't interested in talking with us. Its the equivalent of us wanting to talk to the ants.


RE: Disagree
By freeagle on 4/26/2010 11:09:44 AM , Rating: 3
yet there are some people fascinated by ants and are studying them as part of their job... I don't think we would be as uninteresting as you think


RE: Disagree
By Motoman on 4/26/2010 11:38:16 AM , Rating: 5
...just think of the size of the magnifying glasses they must have. We can't repel magnification of that magnitude!


RE: Disagree
By MadMan007 on 4/26/2010 2:41:12 PM , Rating: 3
That's why they abduct and anally probe us. There's a lot of 'shit' to discover ;)


RE: Disagree
By MegaHustler on 4/26/2010 11:13:11 AM , Rating: 2
I think you're right. As long as we keep up those Single Female Lawyer episodes, we're probably going to be alright.


RE: Disagree
By Hieyeck on 4/26/2010 12:49:28 PM , Rating: 2
We're hardly poor in resources, but then any alien race capable of travelling across light years wouldn't need resources. They'd mine a rock closer to them and probably use nanotech to make whatever they need. All they need is matter is a star close by.

Which is what we're going to end up doing - Strip mine Mars/Venus and turn Mercury into a giant power plant to juice up nano-factories.


RE: Disagree
By OrSin on 4/26/2010 10:41:42 AM , Rating: 2
Those same scientist says the odds of life happen are so low that we should not even exist. So guess what. They are wrong. I would not put much faith is their "odd assumptions".
The laws of physics is re-evaluated every few years, at least of on the quantum level. Already they have found particles that can move faster then the speed of light. Don't let the chimpanzee in you show though. :)


RE: Disagree
By edywolfy on 4/26/2010 11:42:00 AM , Rating: 3
If you take earth's first appearance of life as an example, i would say life is a probable concept given the minimum proper circunstances. I mean, as soon as planet earth cooled down, like 4 billion years ago, the first self reproducting molecules appeared.

If life chances of happening are so low, i think earth would be floating around empty some more billions of years.

Theres always that theory that life was transported to earth by a meteor.

Or we could be the lucky ones i guess.


RE: Disagree
By freeagle on 4/26/2010 10:44:55 AM , Rating: 2
Assuming life does exist out there, his prediction might not be that far from truth. Every organism needs resources to survive. The more intelligent it is, the more it needs ( true, I have only one specie to draw this conclusion from ). But there are symbiotic relationships between species, and it is also probable that that we see as a waste might be resource to them.

Now to the point of life existing out there or not... Both sides have interesting and, to an extent, valid points, but none has anything to base it on. We do not know how life is created. It might be simple and spontaneous in almost every environment, or extremly rare event. You can choose what feels right for you, you can believe it, but that wont make it true.


RE: Disagree
By gamerk2 on 4/26/2010 10:47:15 AM , Rating: 3
Depends; there are plenty of Physics theories which permit FTL travel, and even Quantam Mechanics provides mechanisms for transporation between two places at a FTL pace (Wormholes, etc). And lets not forget the all mighty time dilation...

The odds of life elsewhere are pretty high; its basically chemistry, get something that does nothing but replicate itself, throw in evolution, and viola!


RE: Disagree
By Xavi3n on 4/26/2010 10:48:33 AM , Rating: 5
To be honest, we cant even say how the universe works properly (Dark Matter, Dark Energy and Dark Aether come to mind), so who is to say that we have a complete understanding of the universe and the physics that lie within?

Every-time we come up with a theory about how things work in the Universe we find something that shatters those theories, so who is to say there isn't a way to travel faster than light? to think we know the Universe so completely, is utterly presumptuous, most physicists would laugh you out of the room for those types of ideas, there is ALWAYS more to learn, there are things in the Universe that just dont jive with the laws of physics.

Finally, if the chance of Intelligent Life developing on other worlds is even 0.0001%, there will still be hundreds of thousands of civilisations in this galaxy alone, let alone the Universe as a whole.

Also, I find Stephen Hawkins theories to be rather weak, he's looking at Aliens through what we know and what we did, Aliens could very well do things for reasons that would seem completely Alien (lol) to us, so they might help us, study us or conquer us, but I don't think conquering is just a certain outcome.


RE: Disagree
By haukionkannel on 4/26/2010 12:52:09 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Also, I find Stephen Hawkins theories to be rather weak, he's looking at Aliens through what we know and what we did, Aliens could very well do things for reasons that would seem completely Alien (lol) to us, so they might help us, study us or conquer us, but I don't think conquering is just a certain outcome.


Well I think that Hawkins tells more about us. If I would be a space alien I would not like to meet any Earthers. Because the Earthers are guite dangerous race...

We can not say anything about extraterrestial life and what kind of "persons" they are, but we are capable of analysing humans and basically that is what Hawkins has done here... Our history as on "outsider visitors" in new areas has not been very pretty.


RE: Disagree
By HighWing on 4/26/2010 2:13:13 PM , Rating: 2
According to the The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy earth is:

"Harmless"

A recent revised entry states:

"Mostly Harmless"


RE: Disagree
By icrf on 4/26/2010 3:43:07 PM , Rating: 2
I can't for the life of me find it, but I saw a video within the last year of Hawking answering a similar question. His then response was something akin to:

Yes, intelligent life almost certainly exists, but it's not very likely we'll ever come into contact with it. If our history is any indication, advanced civilizations tend to self-destruct. The odds of intelligent life living close enough to us to reach us before their civilization falls is not very high.


RE: Disagree
By Ard on 4/26/2010 10:50:17 AM , Rating: 2
I would say the numbers are against you. Even if we surmise that the chances of life forming are one in a billion, that still leaves a billion times life will form/evolve (and that's taking the low estimate, as the high end estimates that there are a trillion, billion planets in the universe based on what we've observed so far).

As to the ability of sentient life to reach us, I would simply look to the anthropic principle (taken out of context for this example but useful nonetheless). If aliens were able to reach us, it is undoubtedly the case that they would have the technological means to do so. It also goes without saying that they would be far more intelligent than our species. And, when you get right down to it, if an alien species developed closer in time to the formation of the universe (there's about a 9 billion year gap between the age of earth and the age of the universe), it makes sense that they would be more intelligent because they would potentially have millions to billions of years of a head start on us.

While it's certainly delving into the realm of science fiction at the moment, who says that there isn't an ability to bend (or warp to use Star Trek parlance) space to effectively travel faster than light without breaking that "law". Just because we can't fathom, now, how to traverse ridiculous expanses of space in a reasonable time period, doesn't mean that we won't be able to someday.

All that to say, I think it's definitely more likely than not that there is other life in the universe of some of that life will undoubtedly be sentient. Is there any proof yet? Of course not. That's why I don't say it in absolute terms (nor do you in taking the opposite position). It's simply more likely that there is than there isn't based on the numbers. For me to think otherwise is to take a very egocentric and irrational approach to the sheer vastness of the universe.


RE: Disagree
By Aloonatic on 4/26/2010 11:08:37 AM , Rating: 2
"The chances of anything coming from Mars are a million to one," he said...


RE: Disagree
By Ard on 4/26/2010 11:29:07 AM , Rating: 2
Why did you guys rate him down? He didn't say anything ridiculous. He just doesn't think it's likely for there to be other life and he questions the ability to travel millions of light years without dropping dead due to old age first.


RE: Disagree
By Lucid48 on 4/26/2010 11:38:38 AM , Rating: 2
The Emperor of Mankind needs to show him self. Show us the Imperial truth and prepare us from the coming onslaught. We must destroy all xenos scum and take our rightful place in this galaxy!

Tha hadron collider will allow us to unlock the secrets of the warp and move to victory!


RE: Disagree
By aegisofrime on 4/26/2010 11:47:00 AM , Rating: 2
One of the problems I have with his post is this:

" There is probably no other life in the universe, certainly not intelligent life, as the likelihood of life of any kind evolving from chemicals is so prohibitively low that it has probably never happened anywhere else."

Prohibitively low... Based on what evidence? We do not know of one other Earth-like planet. So how can he make that kind of statement when the knowledge that we have of the Universe is frankly, pathetic?


RE: Disagree
By Lucid48 on 4/26/2010 11:57:45 AM , Rating: 2
Exactly...our galaxy it self is almost so large we can barely comprehed it......knowing that there are billions of gallaxies....now thats absurd to think that nothing else would not be there is such a vast amount of space.


RE: Disagree
By wgbutler on 4/26/2010 1:07:57 PM , Rating: 1
The reason why they rated me down is because they want me to be wrong. They like the science fiction movies and want things like Star Trek and Star Wars to be true.

For that matter, I love science fiction too. I'd love for there to be other habitable planets that we could reasonably travel to and colonize. It would be awesome if there were other intelligent species in the universe that we could communicate with and learn from.

Unfortunately, none of that is true. Mankind will never leave this solar system, nor will any space aliens come to visit us in our solar system. Nor will we ever colonize Mars or Venus, to say nothing of the other planets, although I guess its possible that we could eventually put some kind of a small base on Mars kind of like we have in Antarctica, if we ever got our act together and decided to seriously push the space program.

wgbutler


RE: Disagree
By darkweasel on 4/26/2010 3:08:17 PM , Rating: 3
I think they rated you down because you have a fairly negative tone and you state "as fact" things that are your opinion.


RE: Disagree
By aegisofrime on 4/26/2010 3:25:20 PM , Rating: 2
Exactly that:

"Unfortunately, none of that is true. Mankind will never leave this solar system, nor will any space aliens come to visit us in our solar system. Nor will we ever colonize Mars or Venus, to say nothing of the other planets, although I guess its possible that we could eventually put some kind of a small base on Mars kind of like we have in Antarctica, if we ever got our act together and decided to seriously push the space program."

What reason do you have for saying that? You can see into the future? Your omniscience tells you that we are absolutely alone in the universe?


RE: Disagree
By JediJeb on 4/26/2010 5:22:57 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
Unfortunately, none of that is true. Mankind will never leave this solar system, nor will any space aliens come to visit us in our solar system. Nor will we ever colonize Mars or Venus, to say nothing of the other planets, although I guess its possible that we could eventually put some kind of a small base on Mars kind of like we have in Antarctica, if we ever got our act together and decided to seriously push the space program.


Mankind will never fly.
Mankind will never fly faster than the speed of sound.
Mankind will never escape the atmosphere.
Mankind will never reach the moon.

Nobody truly knows the limits to Mankind's abilities.


RE: Disagree
By iano80 on 4/26/2010 7:04:21 PM , Rating: 2
The earth is only a few thousand years old (give or take).

the earth was created in six days

Mankind was the first living thing.

Everything revolves around the earth.

Mankind will never fly.

There's nothing smaller than the atom.

The concept of superluminal travel is impossible.


RE: Disagree
By HighWing on 4/26/2010 2:38:08 PM , Rating: 2
To put it bluntly, the reason he's rated down is because he "is" wrong. I know he just posted that we "want" him to be wrong, but the truth is he is wrong by the simple fact that he assumes he is right.

As it's already been stated there is hard evidence to prove mathematically that there "is" life somewhere out there. However, to assume that is right is debatable, which is his argument. But to assume it's wrong is also far from the right as well, as the simple truth is we do not know for sure one way or the other. So to just assume one side is right over the other is scientifically wrong, as even in testing most scientists do allow for the possibility to be wrong. These scientists will say that they "believe" this to be true and that there is evidence to "suggest" that it is true. But ask them if they are 100% positive it's a fact, and I bet you they would then go back to saying the evidence "could" support that. Simply meaning, it's not a fact, and to assume so is wrong!

Secondly he was also rated down because as he stated. "Physics says that faster then light speed is impossible!" and from that he kinda went on to say that it will never happen. To this all I can say is that at one point in time "Physics" stated that heavier then air flight was not possible! Fact is there are already many possibilities out there that do allow for FTL travel, while they may not be proven facts, the truth is they have not been "unproven" either. Thereby to state that FTL is not possible, is quite simple a false statement. Truth is, science can prove that it might be possible, we just have no means to test it to prove which side "is" fact.

Bottom line is he was rated down because he was assuming that since some people say it's not possible, then it's not, and in a way goes on to say it's pointless to think otherwise. To this all can say is if everyone stopped projects because they were told it's not possible, then we would probably still be living in caves! As many of today's innovations were once thought, "Not Possible"


RE: Disagree
By wgbutler on 4/26/2010 3:15:59 PM , Rating: 2
quote:

But ask them if they are 100% positive it's a fact, and I bet you they would then go back to saying the evidence "could" support that. Simply meaning, it's not a fact, and to assume so is wrong!


At some point you have to go with what is within the realm of probability and not get carried away with hypotheticals. There are some very smart people (I've mentioned some names in my other posts) out there saying that the SETI program is a waste of money and should be shut down because the likelihood of another intelligent species existing anywhere else in the Universe is basically NILL.

You can try to argue with them if you like but you have to explain why they are wrong and it is statistically probable that another species of intelligent life exists.

quote:

To this all I can say is that at one point in time "Physics" stated that heavier then air flight was not possible!


I don't think physics ever stated this. The fact of the matter is that anyone could look up in the sky and see birds flying around and realize that heaver than air flight was possible.

quote:

Fact is there are already many possibilities out there that do allow for FTL travel, while they may not be proven facts, the truth is they have not been "unproven" either. Thereby to state that FTL is not possible, is quite simple a false statement. Truth is, science can prove that it might be possible, we just have no means to test it to prove which side "is" fact.


Unless Einstein's theory of special relativity is fundamentally wrong (and its been proven correct over and over again in various experiments), anything with mass travelling faster than the speed of light is physically impossible.

But forget about FTL speed for a moment. We do not even possess the technology to travel at half the speed of light. Even if we focused all of our research and and energies on developing a means to travel at .5C in space, that would take centuries, if not millenia, to accomplish.

And even if we developed the capability to travel at the speed of light itself, that would only make a few of the nearest stars accessible to us (and even then it would take years to get there). The VAST majority of our galaxy would still be out of reach even IF we could travel at the speed of light.

quote:

bottom line is he was rated down...


Actually I don't mind being rated down. I feed off controversy and negative ratings tell me that I've plucked a few nerves... : )

quote:

To this all can say is if everyone stopped projects because they were told it's not possible, then we would probably still be living in caves! As many of today's innovations were once thought, "Not Possible"


My position is not that we should stop scientific and technological progress. Quite the contrary.

But I still hold to my position that we will never leave the solar system. Let's be frank here, we can't even balance our national budget and make social security or medicare solvent. And if we can't do those very basic things, colonizing a planet around Alpha Centauri is impossible.

wgbutler


RE: Disagree
By iano80 on 4/26/2010 7:14:57 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
At some point you have to go with what is within the realm of probability and not get carried away with hypotheticals. There are some very smart people (I've mentioned some names in my other posts) out there saying that the SETI program is a waste of money and should be shut down because the likelihood of another intelligent species existing anywhere else in the Universe is basically NILL.

Conjecture, a tenuous one at best - given the scale of the known universe (and the fact it's already happened once in abundance).

quote:
I don't think physics ever stated this. The fact of the matter is that anyone could look up in the sky and see birds flying around and realize that heaver than air flight was possible.

They looked up at the sky and made the claim with what they knew at the time and were later proven wrong.

quote:
Unless Einstein's theory of special relativity is fundamentally wrong (and its been proven correct over and over again in various experiments), anything with mass travelling faster than the speed of light is physically impossible.

Relativity also allows for wormholes and the manipulation of spacetime. You're partially correct that 'anything with mass travelling faster than the speed of light is physically impossible', this doesn't mean it's impossible for space itself to move faster. I said partially as it does not include particles travelling faster than the speed of light by default (i.e tachyons). Of course the technology to exploit this doesn't exist yet - but then neither did an atomic bomb a mere hundred years ago.

quote:
But I still hold to my position that we will never leave the solar system. Let's be frank here, we can't even balance our national budget and make social security or medicare solvent. And if we can't do those very basic things, colonizing a planet around Alpha Centauri is impossible.

All of our accomplishments so far have been acheived with let's face it far worse social backgrounds. I hate to be this blunt but this argument is dead before it left the ground (pardon the pun).


RE: Disagree
By ghost101 on 4/26/2010 12:09:58 PM , Rating: 2
"So even if they had light speed capable starships it would take thousands of years for them to even travel here."

You do know how long the universe has existed?

Hawking is talking about nomadic aliens who could have become nomads millions of years ago.


RE: Disagree
By Lucid48 on 4/26/2010 12:21:58 PM , Rating: 2
Problem is that most humans beleive that things only existed as long as we have.

Like you said the universe is 13.75+ BILLION years old and there are billions of galaxies and trillions of solar systems.....Wake the hell up and open your minds. We are very likely not the only ones in this and there are probobly many civilisations that have or still exist before we ever were.


RE: Disagree
By wgbutler on 4/26/2010 1:24:41 PM , Rating: 1
quote:

Like you said the universe is 13.75+ BILLION years old and there are billions of galaxies and trillions of solar systems


It is true that the Universe is 13.75 billion years old and there are trillions of solar systems. But for a sizeable part of the universe's history any kind of life couldn't have existed for various reasons (the universe was too hot, atoms didn't exist yet, galaxies hadn't formed yet, etc).

Additionally, only spiral galaxies produce the material to make planets, and the vast majority of a spiral galaxy in uninhabitable as any planets near the galactic core (where 95%+ of the stars are) will be fried by galactic radiation while any planets too close to the edge will lack the heavy elements needed to form life. All of the extra-solar planets we have discovered so far are nowhere near being able to support life.

It takes a very special set of conditions for a planet to be habitable for complex life, and the Earth is the only planet we have yet discovered that has these conditions.

For the enthusiasts who love to claim that there are probably hundreds or thousands of intelligent species out there, I suggest looking up "Fermi Paradox" and "Rare Earth Hypothesis". Also read up on the opinions from scientists like Frank Tipler and Francisco Ayala.

What they say makes sense. If you can explain why they are wrong and why things like plentiful Earth-like planets, abiogenesis, advanced macro-evolution from bacteria to intelligent species are probable events in the resources alloted to the Universe, then write up a scientific paper and get published before someone steals your ideas!

And I haven't even touched faster than light travel. If you can disprove the theory of relativity and explain how this is feasible, I'd love to hear it!

wgbutler


RE: Disagree
By Lucid48 on 4/26/2010 1:50:19 PM , Rating: 2
I suppose that you have heard of the multiverse and string theories.


RE: Disagree
By iano80 on 4/26/2010 7:38:51 PM , Rating: 2
The problem is butler, non of what you've quoted (including relativity) really disprove these events. Plentiful earth like planets don't need to exist - that mere 5% of stars is quite frankly a hell of a lot of stars (and I'm not sure where you can say with certainty only spiral galaxies can contain planets)

As for all the extra-solar planets we've discovered so far - we haven't yet got the resolution to detect objects much smaller than Jupiter around a star, it's WAY, WAY too early to say we won't detect earth size planets. Coupled with the fact we've examined a pathetically minute amount of stars and I'd say your assertion was premature.

As for the Fermi paradox and Rare earth hypothesis there are many reasons not to use the absence of contact as proof we will never encounter intelligent life (not least amongst which the infintesimal amount of time we've been looking).

Of-course I'm not going to say I can prove intelligent life exists, nor am I going to say FTL travel is possible - I have no more evidence than you do. That my friend, is the point.

At this point with our paltry knowledge of the universe to say with definity either way isn't science - it's religion.


RE: Disagree
By Seemonkeyscanfly on 4/27/2010 10:24:44 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
TextIt takes a very special set of conditions for a planet to be habitable for complex life, and the Earth is the only planet we have yet discovered that has these conditions.


That is if you assume only life forms like us exist. Maybe in other solars systems there are life forms that look like rocks to us, they need no air, and are so slow we can not seem them move (move a mile in two years). They can live in temps sub 5,000 F and up to 750 F. They live for 100,000 years... Now of course this sounds crazy to us but the point is we do not know all forms of life, so do not assume we know all forms of conditions needed to support life.


RE: Disagree
By callmeroy on 4/26/2010 1:53:41 PM , Rating: 1
That is mind blowing to me....

There are so many stars and planets in the universe is beyond trillions.

Holy crap how much little faith and hope one must lack to write it off as nope "its just us".

All that aside...just for the "fun" of imagining the possibilites..I can't imagine no other life but us.

(As a side note: if we really think we are this special we humans sure have a funny way of expressing our appreciation to our planet....)


RE: Disagree
By wgbutler on 4/26/10, Rating: 0
RE: Disagree
By callmeroy on 4/26/2010 3:34:24 PM , Rating: 2
You are right....the vastness of the universe (that we know of) compared to where we can scan or broadcast (even in terms of light years) is still analogous to comparing a single grain of sand (the amount of space we have the ability to scan,explore or broadcast to) on an entire beach (the universe).

So yeah with that kind of coverage you'd think we'd be getting "hits" of intelligent life all over the place....

:)


RE: Disagree
By wgbutler on 4/26/10, Rating: 0
RE: Disagree
By bh192012 on 4/26/2010 10:32:35 PM , Rating: 2
... or that they see us just fine, detected our oxygen/carbon atmostphere and H20 and have known about a living Earth for billions of years, but their Stephen Hawking spooked them into keeping quiet. If he's going to keep us quiet, and we (like him) use our sample of 1 to extrapolate every other civilization, then we can conclude they're all quietly hiding from us and each other. Fermi-solved, where's my medal.


RE: Disagree
By jjmcubed on 4/26/2010 3:44:38 PM , Rating: 3
So SETI has been going on for what 20 years? Our signals have been going out for no more than 100 years(Radio/TV). As in our signals have only gone out 100 light years. Just our galaxy is 100,000 light years across.

Our signals have gone one billionth into our universe and you know that there is no one else?


RE: Disagree
By Steele on 4/26/2010 3:58:52 PM , Rating: 2
Maybe they're single-celled protoalienzoa.

Maybe they're aliendinosaur-hunting Paliniens.

Maybe they're still living in caves and terrorizing the alienheathens in the next valley.

Maybe they're nomadic pastoral aliensheepherders.

Maybe their Alienroman Legions are laying siege to barbarians.

Maybe Alien Columbus just discovered Alienmerica.

Maybe they're in the middle of Alienworld War One.

Maybe they've advanced FAR beyond our ability to listen in.

Or maybe you're right and they don't exist.

The universe is too big to use words like "never."


RE: Disagree
By Seemonkeyscanfly on 4/27/2010 10:34:18 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Well, where are they then? I mean we've been listening for decades for radio waves coming from possible intelligent sources in the SETI program and have come up with zilch so far. Try googling "Fermi paradox" when you get a chance. Also check out:


Oh, I was listening in on my interstellar radio and I did make contact.. sort of. I received a message that said: "Mr. and Mrs. Sellerrrizaukcbacknnowchi, where out to lunch. Call back in 45 earth years."
Dude, think about it, even if we knew where a planet was located with intelligent life we still may not be able to communicate with them. We all live on one single planet and how many different languages, traditions, beliefs, religions, schools of though and such do we have? We have a hard enough time communicating amongst ourselves let alone another form of intelligent life.


RE: Disagree
By jeff834 on 4/27/2010 2:25:31 AM , Rating: 1
You're not entirely correct about your ideas of physics. The laws of physics say it isn't possible for matter to ACCELERATE to the speed of light, but there are many theories for FTL travel that don't involve acceleration at all. Even in science fiction you see some reasonable theories that could be possible one day. The idea of a "warp bubble" that envelops an interstellar ship and then moves space around the ship instead of moving the ship itself. The idea of artificial wormholes is actually described very well in the terrible movie Event Horizon. Basically they say you can travel from one point to another or you can "fold" space to make those two points the same point and travel through a hole to get there. Are those 2 theories science fiction? Of course they are. But there are "science fiction" movies about traveling to the moon before 1969, and in the 18th century we thought flies were spontaneously generated. The moral is we know next to nothing about the universe, and what we think we know about physics and many other things changes almost daily.


"Paying an extra $500 for a computer in this environment -- same piece of hardware -- paying $500 more to get a logo on it? I think that's a more challenging proposition for the average person than it used to be." -- Steve Ballmer

Related Articles













botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki