info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Fermi's Paradox Solved?
66 views
Skip to first unread message
Rober...@msn.com
Nov 26, 2012, 10:20:08 PM11/26/12
to
Is it possible that no other intelligent life exists in all the universe, except for us? The thought is sobering.
A great many scientists, and other people, find the suggestion unreasonable. They are aware that the universe is unimaginably immense, and therefore, by mere chance alone, they assume that life must have arisen many times in many places, and that there must be intelligent, civilized “space aliens” throughout the universe.
It seems unreasonable that we could be alone in all this vast universe.
But there is more than a modicum of support for just that idea.
The famous physicist, Enrico Fermi, once (circa 1950) posed the question, “Where are they?” to a select, small group of eminent colleagues.
The context of that statement is somewhat unclear many years later, but subsequent interviews, with those present at the time, strongly suggest that Fermi was saying that there cannot be extra-terrrestrial civilizations capable of inter-stellar space travel.
Because if there were such technologies, the math shows that we should already have been colonized by them.
Given the age of the galaxy, probability theory indicates that even if intelligent life is very unlikely in any given solar system, the sheer numbers of stars in the galaxy, combined with billions of years of time, make it highly likely that earth should have attracted the attention of, and the exploitation by, at least one advanced technological civilization, and long ago, perhaps millions of years ago.
To our knowledge, this has not happened.
One might speculate that alien spacecraft have indeed visited our planet, but that for whatever motive they had, left no clear proof of their visits.
Might they have adopted a “non-interference” policy? If so, then we might reasonably conclude that we are under constant and pervasive surveillance by invisible extraterrestrials.
Certainly, any technological creatures capable of interstellar space travel would be able to completely conceal their presence, while keeping us under meticulously detailed observation. We would never know.
Bear in mind that in just the last few decades, our own technological advances have carried us from the first airplane to the first manned landing on the moon, as well as unmanned landings on Mars and even much farther beyond. (Titan, for example.)
If there is a technological civilization on another planet, its technology could be thousands, even millions of years beyond ours. One person (Arthur C Clarke) has said that such an advanced technology would appear, to us, to be magical. We cannot imagine what such creatures could be capable of doing.
Footnote: “Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.” Arthur C. Clarke, English physicist & science fiction author, in "Profiles of The Future", 1961 (Clarke's third law)
If we are indeed under surveillance by such advanced aliens, then that fact would discredit any and all reports of “alien flying saucer” sightings, since any such flying saucers, if they exist, should be utterly undetectable. We should never be able to see them at all.
Even our present, primitive stealth technology suggests that in the near future, virtually invisible, even undetectable, aircraft can be built.
If we (primitives) are able to achieve that much, then certainly, alien spacecraft must be completely undetectable to us. Completely.
So then, we are left with two distinct possibilities to consider:
1) We are already laboratory rats, completely at the mercy of invincible powers.
2) There are no such powers, and we are alone in the universe.
In further reading, I came across a possible solution to Fermi’s paradox. But it has disturbing elements.
Those who study the evolution of society include a group known as “trans-humanists.” They are the source of this possible solution.
Their basic prediction is that, as technology advances, humans will begin to incorporate technological devices into our own bodies, to augment our abilities. We will merge with our machines. We are already doing this, of course. Eye-glasses and hearing aids, pacemakers and artificial hearts, are just the avant garde of future bio-tech.
Eventually, we will incorporate computer micro-chips into our brains. Digital angel technology (in an advanced form) might link all individuals into one electronic version of the super-ego, a collective persona which we might all share, linking our thoughts and consciousness.
Eventually, we will have transformed our own species into something totally unlike what we are now.
Maybe that has already happened to the space aliens.
If so, then this offers a solution to the great problem of the Fermi paradox.
For if exo-biological theory demands that life in the universe be ubiquitous, and if from that we can postulate that intelligence and technology must also proliferate, then what invariable, universal factor might cause the absence of inter-planetary conquest by any and all extra-terrestrial civilizations,. . .
. . . a universal factor that never has any exceptions? None.
It could be that all technological civilizations must inevitably reach a stage where they become computerized, and finally non-biological.
Non-biological intelligences should completely abandon, as a matter of necessity, all the suddenly obsolete drives and motivations so necessary to biological organisms.
Reproduction, territorial expansion, cultural conquest, indeed, even individual survival itself, might become completely irrelevant to the electro-creature.
Even if these drives do not completely disappear, the enhanced intelligence of the new creatures would allow them to recognize the need for self-restraint, while giving them the ability to self-impose such restraint.
If indeed we are not alone in the universe, there must be a logical explanation as to why we do not detect any non-earthly visitors. There must be an answer to Fermi's question.
The “zoo” explanation (that we are a laboratory under continual monitoring) is plausible, but it does not establish a binding universal principle with no exceptions at all.
The transhumanist hypothesis does.
As a footnote, we might add that quantum entanglement theory suggests that highly advanced exo-civilizations may have mastered natural principles of which we have little or no knowledge. For example, our primitive experiments with quantum entanglement and nonlocality suggest that we might someday achieve the ability to instantly travel to any place in the universe without physically going there, sort of a virtual travel concept.
To be even more speculative than that, it has been suggested that such advanced technologies might even have developed means by which individuals can abandon their physical bodies altogether, and become disembodied energy fields. So there are many possible explanations as to why we have no contact with alien civilizations on other planets.
But there is one more possibility. There might not be any.
.
A great many scientists, and other people, find the suggestion unreasonable. They are aware that the universe is unimaginably immense, and therefore, by mere chance alone, they assume that life must have arisen many times in many places, and that there must be intelligent, civilized “space aliens” throughout the universe.
It seems unreasonable that we could be alone in all this vast universe.
But there is more than a modicum of support for just that idea.
The famous physicist, Enrico Fermi, once (circa 1950) posed the question, “Where are they?” to a select, small group of eminent colleagues.
The context of that statement is somewhat unclear many years later, but subsequent interviews, with those present at the time, strongly suggest that Fermi was saying that there cannot be extra-terrrestrial civilizations capable of inter-stellar space travel.
Because if there were such technologies, the math shows that we should already have been colonized by them.
Given the age of the galaxy, probability theory indicates that even if intelligent life is very unlikely in any given solar system, the sheer numbers of stars in the galaxy, combined with billions of years of time, make it highly likely that earth should have attracted the attention of, and the exploitation by, at least one advanced technological civilization, and long ago, perhaps millions of years ago.
To our knowledge, this has not happened.
One might speculate that alien spacecraft have indeed visited our planet, but that for whatever motive they had, left no clear proof of their visits.
Might they have adopted a “non-interference” policy? If so, then we might reasonably conclude that we are under constant and pervasive surveillance by invisible extraterrestrials.
Certainly, any technological creatures capable of interstellar space travel would be able to completely conceal their presence, while keeping us under meticulously detailed observation. We would never know.
Bear in mind that in just the last few decades, our own technological advances have carried us from the first airplane to the first manned landing on the moon, as well as unmanned landings on Mars and even much farther beyond. (Titan, for example.)
If there is a technological civilization on another planet, its technology could be thousands, even millions of years beyond ours. One person (Arthur C Clarke) has said that such an advanced technology would appear, to us, to be magical. We cannot imagine what such creatures could be capable of doing.
Footnote: “Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.” Arthur C. Clarke, English physicist & science fiction author, in "Profiles of The Future", 1961 (Clarke's third law)
If we are indeed under surveillance by such advanced aliens, then that fact would discredit any and all reports of “alien flying saucer” sightings, since any such flying saucers, if they exist, should be utterly undetectable. We should never be able to see them at all.
Even our present, primitive stealth technology suggests that in the near future, virtually invisible, even undetectable, aircraft can be built.
If we (primitives) are able to achieve that much, then certainly, alien spacecraft must be completely undetectable to us. Completely.
So then, we are left with two distinct possibilities to consider:
1) We are already laboratory rats, completely at the mercy of invincible powers.
2) There are no such powers, and we are alone in the universe.
In further reading, I came across a possible solution to Fermi’s paradox. But it has disturbing elements.
Those who study the evolution of society include a group known as “trans-humanists.” They are the source of this possible solution.
Their basic prediction is that, as technology advances, humans will begin to incorporate technological devices into our own bodies, to augment our abilities. We will merge with our machines. We are already doing this, of course. Eye-glasses and hearing aids, pacemakers and artificial hearts, are just the avant garde of future bio-tech.
Eventually, we will incorporate computer micro-chips into our brains. Digital angel technology (in an advanced form) might link all individuals into one electronic version of the super-ego, a collective persona which we might all share, linking our thoughts and consciousness.
Eventually, we will have transformed our own species into something totally unlike what we are now.
Maybe that has already happened to the space aliens.
If so, then this offers a solution to the great problem of the Fermi paradox.
For if exo-biological theory demands that life in the universe be ubiquitous, and if from that we can postulate that intelligence and technology must also proliferate, then what invariable, universal factor might cause the absence of inter-planetary conquest by any and all extra-terrestrial civilizations,. . .
. . . a universal factor that never has any exceptions? None.
It could be that all technological civilizations must inevitably reach a stage where they become computerized, and finally non-biological.
Non-biological intelligences should completely abandon, as a matter of necessity, all the suddenly obsolete drives and motivations so necessary to biological organisms.
Reproduction, territorial expansion, cultural conquest, indeed, even individual survival itself, might become completely irrelevant to the electro-creature.
Even if these drives do not completely disappear, the enhanced intelligence of the new creatures would allow them to recognize the need for self-restraint, while giving them the ability to self-impose such restraint.
If indeed we are not alone in the universe, there must be a logical explanation as to why we do not detect any non-earthly visitors. There must be an answer to Fermi's question.
The “zoo” explanation (that we are a laboratory under continual monitoring) is plausible, but it does not establish a binding universal principle with no exceptions at all.
The transhumanist hypothesis does.
As a footnote, we might add that quantum entanglement theory suggests that highly advanced exo-civilizations may have mastered natural principles of which we have little or no knowledge. For example, our primitive experiments with quantum entanglement and nonlocality suggest that we might someday achieve the ability to instantly travel to any place in the universe without physically going there, sort of a virtual travel concept.
To be even more speculative than that, it has been suggested that such advanced technologies might even have developed means by which individuals can abandon their physical bodies altogether, and become disembodied energy fields. So there are many possible explanations as to why we have no contact with alien civilizations on other planets.
But there is one more possibility. There might not be any.
.
ben...@hotmail.com
Nov 27, 2012, 11:19:17 AM11/27/12
to
On Tuesday, 27 November 2012 03:30:03 UTC, Rober...@msn.com wrote:
> Is it possible that no other intelligent life exists in all the universe,
> except for us? The thought is sobering.
{Please ignore my previous attempt at a posting as I forgot to edit for line
> Is it possible that no other intelligent life exists in all the universe,
> except for us? The thought is sobering.
length. I did remember to edit for single spacing but that is not sufficient!}
For me, there is no doubt that life exists elsewhere in the universe.
The fact that life exists on earth proves it is possible. Chemical
elements appear to exist throughout the universe so it is impossible
for me to believe that life does not exist elsewhere.
If a religion tells you as a child that you are made in a god's image
then that will be an idea difficult to throw off. And it is probably
assumed to give you courage in a difficult world to understand what
makes it work. But if one eliminates the idea of a person being made in
a god's image then what is left is that a person exists, one intelligent
life was made. And what can happen once, here, can happen again, over
there, in a homogeneous world.
The 'intelligent' part is a distractor. If algae etc are formed then
the process is on a roll to more complex forms given enough time.
Why life from other sources, there, has not been observed, here, is a
second part to the question. Absence of evidence is not evidence of
absence. As the Central Americans found out when the Spanish arrived.
Predators tend to creep up on prey, which could be rather worrying in
this context, if one were given to worrying about such things. If such
life is creeping up on us from afar at << speed c, then we have less
need to worry. If they could travel at >> c then it is a surprise they
are not here. Maybe warp factor 0.9999999 is the maximum speed possible
for all life to have evolved so far.
We have the future in which to gather more evidence for extraterrestrial
life using rockets and robotics. (I wonder what the maybe history-
making recent possible find of the Mars Rover is?) But extra-solar
system would be more impressive. And extra-galactic life.
My preon model has at its heart a preon which is really a universe at a
smaller fractal scale. Does a preon have intelligent life in it? Will
humans ever know? It would not be extra-universal life as a preon is in
our universe. But as I view a preon as a universe I also view our
universe as a larger fractal scale preon. And preons interact in
particle interactions. So is there extra-universal life inside one of
the other universes that may interact with our universe? Particle
interactions cause an elementary particle to have a collapse of its wave
function, ie change from a wave nature to a locatable particle nature.
This would cause a universe to come to a singularity, or to lose its
internal metric, which is only an end of cycle as it would reform into
its next wave cycle.
Before the BB, was our universe even bigger? E.g. at the BB singularity
was our universe, say, a W- rather than an e-? I know time did not
exist before the BB but that would be just as true for the internal
clock of an e- being created from a W-.
The matter in our universe is not energetic enough to cause the Higgs
fields to be Higgs particles regularly, unlike the atoms in a table
which are constantly interacting and having a regular particle nature.
But if the vacuum energy were big enough in the past, could the universe
be mostly have been made up of charm and strange rather than up and
down. And before that made mostly of top and bottom? And before that
made of bigger particles. In my model, up = (1,5) {ie one matter preon
and six antimatter preons} and down =(4,2), charm = (13,17) and strange
= (16,14), top = (25,29) and bottom = (28,26), and so on bigger and
bigger families of fermions requiring more and more energy to make them
particles from fields.
As I think that the universe was once a particle sized (M,N) where M and
N were huge integers, could there at one time been {probably long prior
to the BB} structures made out of huge yet stable particles?
Ben
Not a physicist
Not a philosopher
ben6993
Nov 27, 2012, 11:19:24 AM11/27/12
to
On Tuesday, 27 November 2012 03:30:03 UTC, Rober...@msn.com wrote:
> Is it possible that no other intelligent life exists in all the universe, except for us? The thought is sobering.
For me, there is no doubt that life exists elsewhere in the universe.
The fact that life exists on earth proves it is possible. Chemical
elements appear to exist throughout the universe so it is impossible
for me to believe that life does not exist elsewhere.
If a religion tells you as a child that you are made in a god's image
then that will be an idea difficult to throw off. And it is probably
assumed to give you courage in a difficult world to understand what
makes it work. But if one eliminates the idea of a person being made in
a god's image then what is left is that a person exists, one intelligent
life was made. And what can happen once, here, can happen again, over
there, in a homogeneous world.
The 'intelligent' part is a distractor. If algae etc are formed then
the process is on a roll to more complex forms given enough time.
Why life from other sources, there, has not been observed, here, is a
second part to the question. Absence of evidence is not evidence of
absence. As the Central Americans found out when the Spanish arrived.
Predators tend to creep up on prey, which could be rather worrying in
this context, if one were given to worrying about such things. If such
life is creeping up on us from afar at << speed c, then we have less
need to worry. If they could travel at >> c then it would be surprising
The fact that life exists on earth proves it is possible. Chemical
elements appear to exist throughout the universe so it is impossible
for me to believe that life does not exist elsewhere.
If a religion tells you as a child that you are made in a god's image
then that will be an idea difficult to throw off. And it is probably
assumed to give you courage in a difficult world to understand what
makes it work. But if one eliminates the idea of a person being made in
a god's image then what is left is that a person exists, one intelligent
life was made. And what can happen once, here, can happen again, over
there, in a homogeneous world.
The 'intelligent' part is a distractor. If algae etc are formed then
the process is on a roll to more complex forms given enough time.
Why life from other sources, there, has not been observed, here, is a
second part to the question. Absence of evidence is not evidence of
absence. As the Central Americans found out when the Spanish arrived.
Predators tend to creep up on prey, which could be rather worrying in
this context, if one were given to worrying about such things. If such
life is creeping up on us from afar at << speed c, then we have less
that they are not here. Maybe warp factor 0.9999999 is the maximum speed possible for all life to have evolved so far.
We have the future in which to gather more evidence for extraterrestrial
life using rockets and robotics. (I wonder what the maybe history-
making recent possible find of the Mars Rover is?) But extra-solar
system would be more impressive. And extra-galactic life.
My preon model has at its heart a preon which is really a universe at a
smaller fractal scale. Does a preon have intelligent life in it? Will
humans ever know? It would not be extra-universal life as a preon is in
our universe. But as I view a preon as a universe I also view our
in particle interactions. So is there extra-universal life inside one of
the other universes that may interact with our universe? Particle
interactions cause an elementary particle to have a collapse of its wave
function, ie change from a wave nature to a locatable particle nature.
This would cause a universe to come to a singularity, or to lose its
internal metric, which is only an end of cycle as it would reform into
its next wave cycle.
Before the BB, was our universe even bigger? E.g. at the BB singularity
was our universe, say, a W- rather than an e-? I know time did not
exist before the BB but that would be just as true for the internal
clock of an e- being created from a W-.
The matter in our universe is not energetic enough to cause Higgs
the other universes that may interact with our universe? Particle
interactions cause an elementary particle to have a collapse of its wave
function, ie change from a wave nature to a locatable particle nature.
This would cause a universe to come to a singularity, or to lose its
internal metric, which is only an end of cycle as it would reform into
its next wave cycle.
Before the BB, was our universe even bigger? E.g. at the BB singularity
was our universe, say, a W- rather than an e-? I know time did not
exist before the BB but that would be just as true for the internal
clock of an e- being created from a W-.
JohnF
Nov 28, 2012, 10:00:23 AM11/28/12
to
ben...@hotmail.com wrote:
> Rober...@msn.com wrote:
>> Is it possible that no other intelligent life exists in all the universe,
>> except for us? The thought is sobering.
>
> Rober...@msn.com wrote:
>> Is it possible that no other intelligent life exists in all the universe,
>> except for us? The thought is sobering.
>
> For me, there is no doubt that life exists elsewhere in the universe.
> The fact that life exists on earth proves it is possible.
I tried and failed explaining, over dinner, the anthropic principle
> The fact that life exists on earth proves it is possible.
to a friend, and subsequently wrote a short page
http://www.forkosh.com/index_seti.html
to try doing a better job (she remained unconvinced).
--
John Forkosh ( mailto: j...@f.com where j=john and f=forkosh )
Rober...@msn.com
Nov 29, 2012, 10:02:38 AM11/29/12
to
John F's post is very interesting and appropriate.
However, Enrico Fermi seemed to be assuming that the galaxy should be teeming with advanced (technologically sophisticated) life.
An additional assumption was that many of these civilizations were very, very far advanced beyond our own -- perhaps by millions of years. A civilization with even a headstart of 1,000 years should be orders of magnitude more advanced than we are.
With millions of years, even at sub-light-speeds, despite the great distances involved, earth should have been visited many times in the past.
IF (and it's a big if) this is all true, then what could possibly explain the fact that we have ZERO evidence of these advanced extra-terrestrial civilizations?
What single, universal principle, with zero exceptions, could keep any and ALL advanced civilizations from impacting us in some noticeable (or fatal) way?
AFAIK, the trans-human (trans-biological) hypothesis explains this perfectly.
It seems unimaginable that any biological society could ever develop inter-stellar space travel without developing advanced computers and advanced physics -- the two would be interdependent and mutually reinforcing.
These two technologies intertwine intricately with medical, prosthetic, and cyber-biological technologies that would be necessary (and irresistible) enhancements to any creature with the capacity to develop space travel technologies.
The combination of all of these would bring about a technological singularity (as predicted by Vernor Vinge in 1993). Such a singularity might be unexpectedly abrupt -- as in for example a breakthrough in quantum computing.
While such a singularity might result in the replacement of biological organisms with purely electro-mechanical robots, it is more likely that there would be a merge between the two -- computer-enhanced bio-organisms, self-modified to permit space travel.
However, it is also likely that such a merger would change the inherent nature of the creatures. They might no longer be driven by territorial ambitions.
Furthermore, with the discovery of exotic physical laws of which we are only at the speculation stage, actual physical travel might become both unnecessary and undesirable.
Instead, some form of instantaneous "virtual" space-travel might be done for research reasons (non-locality is one speculative principle that could apply).
Given all this, we might be surrounded, infiltrated and pervaded by uncountable numbers of undetectable space aliens already, and at every inch and moment of our lives.
So much for privacy! (LOL)
========================================
However, Enrico Fermi seemed to be assuming that the galaxy should be teeming with advanced (technologically sophisticated) life.
An additional assumption was that many of these civilizations were very, very far advanced beyond our own -- perhaps by millions of years. A civilization with even a headstart of 1,000 years should be orders of magnitude more advanced than we are.
With millions of years, even at sub-light-speeds, despite the great distances involved, earth should have been visited many times in the past.
IF (and it's a big if) this is all true, then what could possibly explain the fact that we have ZERO evidence of these advanced extra-terrestrial civilizations?
What single, universal principle, with zero exceptions, could keep any and ALL advanced civilizations from impacting us in some noticeable (or fatal) way?
AFAIK, the trans-human (trans-biological) hypothesis explains this perfectly.
It seems unimaginable that any biological society could ever develop inter-stellar space travel without developing advanced computers and advanced physics -- the two would be interdependent and mutually reinforcing.
These two technologies intertwine intricately with medical, prosthetic, and cyber-biological technologies that would be necessary (and irresistible) enhancements to any creature with the capacity to develop space travel technologies.
The combination of all of these would bring about a technological singularity (as predicted by Vernor Vinge in 1993). Such a singularity might be unexpectedly abrupt -- as in for example a breakthrough in quantum computing.
While such a singularity might result in the replacement of biological organisms with purely electro-mechanical robots, it is more likely that there would be a merge between the two -- computer-enhanced bio-organisms, self-modified to permit space travel.
However, it is also likely that such a merger would change the inherent nature of the creatures. They might no longer be driven by territorial ambitions.
Furthermore, with the discovery of exotic physical laws of which we are only at the speculation stage, actual physical travel might become both unnecessary and undesirable.
Instead, some form of instantaneous "virtual" space-travel might be done for research reasons (non-locality is one speculative principle that could apply).
Given all this, we might be surrounded, infiltrated and pervaded by uncountable numbers of undetectable space aliens already, and at every inch and moment of our lives.
So much for privacy! (LOL)
========================================
Bradley K. Sherman
Nov 29, 2012, 1:15:23 PM11/29/12
to
In article <92b8cb39-1fd0-4848...@googlegroups.com>,
<Rober...@msn.com> wrote:
> ...
What would such evidence look like? Are bacteria aware of
microscopes?
Perhaps the fact that Sol and Luna subtend the same angle
is evidence. How would one know?
--bks
<Rober...@msn.com> wrote:
> ...
>IF (and it's a big if) this is all true, then what could possibly
>explain the fact that we have ZERO evidence of these advanced
>extra-terrestrial civilizations?
> ...
>explain the fact that we have ZERO evidence of these advanced
>extra-terrestrial civilizations?
What would such evidence look like? Are bacteria aware of
microscopes?
Perhaps the fact that Sol and Luna subtend the same angle
is evidence. How would one know?
--bks
JohnF
Nov 30, 2012, 1:14:28 PM11/30/12
to
Rober...@msn.com wrote:
> Is it possible that no other intelligent life exists in all the universe,
> except for us? The thought is sobering.
Wait a minute, so does that mean, "...it's a mighty sobering thought." ?
> Is it possible that no other intelligent life exists in all the universe,
> except for us? The thought is sobering.
I knew that sounded familiar, but couldn't place it at the time.
The quote's from an old (decades old) Peanuts newspaper cartoon strip
about extraterrestrial life. You're familiar with that, right?
ben6993
Nov 30, 2012, 3:43:38 PM11/30/12
to
On Friday, 30 November 2012 18:14:28 UTC, JohnF wrote:
Expecting a phrase to be unique is like expecting life on earth
to be unique? When processes exist to make products you tend to
get products. Products like planets, starts and galaxies:
Only one moon, for earth, but
> one planet
>> one star
>> one galaxy
I also suspect >> one universe
And more than one person using the phrase 'sobering' in juxtaposition to
'thought'.
http://fact-archive.com/quotes/Walt_Kelly
(I did not know the Peanuts usage.)
The main fact for me is that we know that there is life on earth.
A man meets a woman and asks for sex with her for £1,000,000.
She says yes. Next he asks for sex for £5. She says what kind
of woman do you think I am? He says: we have already established
that madam and are now simply haggling over the price.
It is hard to gather statistics without being able to sample the
universe adequately. But we know what kind of place the universe is.
It is one that supports life. Haggling over the frequency of
occurrence of life is just a matter of statistics and the statistics
seem unreliable.
My argument is uncomfortable close to one for intelligent design? But
I prefer "unintelligent design". The universe seems to be producing
chemicals, planets, stars and galaxies and with it a process for
producing life. I see no reason to suppose life is impossible
elsewhere, as that assumes we are very special. So special an
environment as maybe chosen by a god rather than be just a mundane
planet near a mundane sun in a mundane galaxy, probably in a mundane
universe.
Maybe any life that has evolved sufficiently advanced enough to get
here is too intelligent to want to come here.
Ben
to be unique? When processes exist to make products you tend to
get products. Products like planets, starts and galaxies:
Only one moon, for earth, but
> one planet
>> one star
>> one galaxy
I also suspect >> one universe
And more than one person using the phrase 'sobering' in juxtaposition to
'thought'.
http://fact-archive.com/quotes/Walt_Kelly
(I did not know the Peanuts usage.)
The main fact for me is that we know that there is life on earth.
A man meets a woman and asks for sex with her for £1,000,000.
She says yes. Next he asks for sex for £5. She says what kind
of woman do you think I am? He says: we have already established
that madam and are now simply haggling over the price.
It is hard to gather statistics without being able to sample the
universe adequately. But we know what kind of place the universe is.
It is one that supports life. Haggling over the frequency of
occurrence of life is just a matter of statistics and the statistics
seem unreliable.
My argument is uncomfortable close to one for intelligent design? But
I prefer "unintelligent design". The universe seems to be producing
chemicals, planets, stars and galaxies and with it a process for
producing life. I see no reason to suppose life is impossible
elsewhere, as that assumes we are very special. So special an
environment as maybe chosen by a god rather than be just a mundane
planet near a mundane sun in a mundane galaxy, probably in a mundane
universe.
Maybe any life that has evolved sufficiently advanced enough to get
here is too intelligent to want to come here.
Ben
theaet...@gmail.com
Dec 2, 2012, 10:06:47 PM12/2/12
to
As to where are they, the question really is, what evidence would exist if they had visited and didn't stick around, or, if they did and wanted to do so covertly, could they?
The answer to the first part just look at the series "Life After People", as to the second, I think they could successful remain hidden if here and so desired.
Thus, Fermi's question was, ultimately, nieve...
0 new messages