What if there are no super advanced aliens?

[Anomalocaris]

Our Super-Advanced Alien Neighbors are Missing

After surveying some promising galactic candidates, an astronomer has concluded that there is little to no evidence for any super-advanced alien civilizations in our local universe.

If you’re living in fear of alien invasions, this may seem like good news, but it is a perplexing — and, frankly, disappointing — finding based on our current understanding of the physical laws of our universe.

Read more

[theotherguy]

Here's the thing: as unlikely as intelligent life is to arise, there's a precedent for it. The problem with any estimates as to how often intelligent life appears is that we have a sample size of one, within a very limited area. Literally all we have is that it can happen, but not everywhere. Anything else is a blind guess.

[freetoroam]

If you’re living in fear of alien invasions

http://news.discovery.com/space/alien-life-exoplanets/our-super-advanced-alien-neighbors-are-missing-150916.htm

Then this news is the least of your worries!

[Bendy Demon]

You do realize that everything we can observe so far comprises only a tiny fraction of our galaxy and an equally infinitesimal portion of our universe.

Considering that all we can observe with our current technology is really tiny compared to the insanely huge expanse of our universe and all, I think it ludicrous as well as incredibly ego and anthropocentric to assume that we would be the only planet that an advanced race would visit.

[Occult1]

You do realize that everything we can observe so far comprises only a tiny fraction of our galaxy and an equally infinitesimal portion of our universe.

Considering that all we can observe with our current technology is really tiny compared to the insanely huge expanse of our universe and all, I think it ludicrous as well as incredibly ego and anthropocentric to assume that we would be the only planet that an advanced race would visit.

Let alone the fact that our understanding of physics and the Universe may be very limited. We are looking for a ''signature'' of a Type III civilisation, well perhaps they simply do not leave such ''signature''. Or maybe we have been isolated on purpose, on some outpost at the outer edge of a galaxy. I mean, who can tell?

Edited September 17, 2015 by Phenix20

[fred_mc]

On earth, life has existed for at least 3.5 billion years so it took at least that long for intelligent life to appear. I've read that in about 1 billion years from now, the sun will have expanded so much so that most of the atmosphere will have disappeared into space and the oceans will have evaporated, so that only simple life like bacteria can exist. In other words, much of the time that complex life could exist on earth passed before intelligent life appeared. We don't know if this is typical or not though. Some stars live much longer than ours so life has more time to develop. Anyway, the point of life seems to be to survive to reproduce. Again and again, nature has developed similar solutions for this like being able to run very fast to get away from the predator. However, only humans have developed the solution to get high intelligence to survive; to develop and use traps, weapons, fire etc. In other words, this seems like a rare solution by nature, maybe because it is not energy-efficient, a big brain requires a lot of energy.

Edited September 17, 2015 by fred_mc

[bubblykiss]

So-called Kardashev Type III civilizations – galaxy-spanning civilizations that command power equal to all of the stars in their galaxy – are very rare or entirely absent from the local Universe, according to Prof Michael Garrett of the Netherlands Institute for Radio Astronomy (ASTRON) and Leiden Observatory.

http://www.sci-news.com/astronomy/science-kardashev-type-iii-civilizations-03249.html

[Space Commander Travis]

I thought you said "no evidence of the Kardashians". Anyway, what an idiotic set of assumptions, just because they haven't found something that suits their predetermined theory, but that's always the way with Experts isn't it, settle on a theory, try to find evidence to suit it, and if you don't, then obviously it doesn't exist, not that your predetermined assumption might not be right.

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

They're very rare in science fiction as well.

The Daleks manage it, but only if you listen to the audios where they once blew up a galaxy in order to make it "pure" enough to because the seat of the new Dalek Empire.

Not even the Vorlons and the Shadows are at that level.

The Forerunners from Halo are close.

The Mass Effect Reapers aren't a civilisation, but they in effect use our galaxy as a garden - does that make them a Level 3?

Asimov's Foundation is close, as is Herbert's Leto II's Empire, and the post-Herbert post-Singularity with the KH Duniverse is certainly there.

[lightly]

Most everyone thinks of "advanced" in strictly technological terms. There are other ways to be successful as a species , as we think of it .. or as beings of some sort or the other? Technology is often a double edged sword?

[DONTEATUS]

Well If were it ? Then Pass another Round of Drinks !

Cause Its really ,REALLY Big out there !

[psyche101]

Let alone the fact that our understanding of physics and the Universe may be very limited.

Physics is the same everywhere you go in the Universe.

Our understanding might be limited, but I see no evidence of big holes in the current model.

We know our understanding of the Universe is not 100% correct. Until GR and QM are resolved, and the Big Bang has certain problems to resolve as well - that we are aware of these flaws means we are working toward the solution. As such, it indicates that we are "on the right track".

We are looking for a ''signature'' of a Type III civilisation, well perhaps they simply do not leave such ''signature''.

We defined the "Type" so of course we would detect the signal, we determined what signal to pick up!! You are referencing an entire unknowns, which would not be what we consider "Type II".

Or maybe we have been isolated on purpose, on some outpost at the outer edge of a galaxy.

No, Stellar evolution put this system here, and it is in what appears to be the Galaxy's "Habitable Zone" which also make sense in the exact same regard a solar system one does. We sit in a nice comfortable "shadow" so to speak, between spiral arms in a minor arm. Quite clearly nature did that, and we are simply lucky to be in the right spot at the right moment.

I mean, who can tell?

We can - Observation.

Most everyone thinks of "advanced" in strictly technological terms. There are other ways to be successful as a species , as we think of it .. or as beings of some sort or the other? Technology is often a double edged sword?

Dinosaurs got a 66 million years run - not bad.

[psyche101]

I thought you said "no evidence of the Kardashians".

The gravity pull from those orbs is more than noticeable on my instruments. Hard to dismiss.

Anyway, what an idiotic set of assumptions,

What do you find "idiotic" in particular? The article starts with:

After surveying some promising galactic candidates, an astronomer has concluded that there is little to no evidence for any super-advanced alien civilizations in our local universe

Which seems a reasonable assumption based on local observation when he is applying that assumption to his particular parameters?

just because they haven't found something that suits their predetermined theory,

The theory was already in existence, and according to "Its application" these are the findings it suggests, I don't think anyone has at any time put faith in that theory as being correct? Kardashev Scales?? I mean why not look for the Death Star itself? There is a strong element of thought experiment here, that seems rather obvious?? We may as well look for Asimov's Obelisk mightn't we??

I thought it was just a math expression. People do not actually expect to find Dyson Spheres and such surely????

but that's always the way with Experts isn't it, settle on a theory, try to find evidence to suit it, and if you don't, then obviously it doesn't exist,

I thought it was just proving this to be an expression. Applying the equation gives this very result. As do the Drake Equation and The Fermi Paradox. Thought experiment, if they actually worked, we might be exchanging phone calls with an interstellar neighbors by now.

not that your predetermined assumption might not be right.

Is this not how they test these equations? I am sure they attempt to falsify them before application, however, how is this not the best test, and I have no doubt any tests that are likely to be more successful would be welcomed by this group first of all.

[Frank Merton]

Absence of something when we should expect to find it is indeed good evidence of real absence. All those who want to argue the presence of something for which they have no evidence can only speculate and engage in wishful thinking and rationalization. This is not science.

[Earl.Of.Trumps]

You do realize that everything we can observe so far comprises only a tiny fraction of our galaxy and an equally infinitesimal portion of our universe.

Considering that all we can observe with our current technology is really tiny compared to the insanely huge expanse of our universe and all, I think it ludicrous as well as incredibly ego and anthropocentric to assume that we would be the only planet that an advanced race would visit.

Hot damn!! Well spoken [applause]

[Earl.Of.Trumps]

So-called Kardashev Type III civilizations – galaxy-spanning civilizations that command power equal to all of the stars in their galaxy – are very rare or entirely absent from the local Universe, according to Prof Michael Garrett of the Netherlands Institute for Radio Astronomy (ASTRON) and Leiden Observatory.

http://www.sci-news....ions-03249.html

I see. And just how far did Prof Garretts search for type III civilizations take him, Seakonk New Jersey?? There are 400 Billion planets in our solar system, you have to look at them in order to know if type iii civilizations exist "close by" or not.

[Earl.Of.Trumps]

I thought you said "no evidence of the Kardashians". Anyway, what an idiotic set of assumptions, just because they haven't found something that suits their predetermined theory, but that's always the way with Experts isn't it, settle on a theory, try to find evidence to suit it, and if you don't, then obviously it doesn't exist, not that your predetermined assumption might not be right.

Norbert, dear chap, the search is for INTELLIGENT life forms.

[Earl.Of.Trumps]

Absence of something when we should expect to find it is indeed good evidence of real absence. All those who want to argue the presence of something for which they have no evidence can only speculate and engage in wishful thinking and rationalization. This is not science.

Frank, a LOT of science is speculation. When I was in grammar school, the age of the universe was said to be 8 billion years old. Do you call that science or speculation?? And the age of the universe has been "rewritten" several times after that, each time, scientists claiming *this* is the true age of the universe. Frank, you have to have a baseline to work with. and yes, Speculation is perfectly Ok, providing the speculation is rooted in known and accepted science.

PS: The Hopi Indians have said all the while that the Universe is 16 Billion years old. LOL

Edited September 21, 2015 by Earl.Of.Trumps

[psyche101]

I see. And just how far did Prof Garretts search for type III civilizations take him, Seakonk New Jersey?? There are 400 Billion planets in our solar system, you have to look at them in order to know if type iii civilizations exist "close by" or not.

HOLY CRAP!!!!!

When did this happen Professor Earl?????

Last I Looked there were only 8 of them!!! Unless you still wish to count Pluto - then 9.

Edited September 22, 2015 by psyche101

[Imaginarynumber1]

HOLY CRAP!!!!!

When did this happen Professor Earl?????

Last I Looked there were only 8 of them!!! Unless you still wish to count Pluto - then 9.

With the woo, all things are possible.

[Frank Merton]

Frank, a LOT of science is speculation. When I was in grammar school, the age of the universe was said to be 8 billion years old. Do you call that science or speculation?? And the age of the universe has been "rewritten" several times after that, each time, scientists claiming *this* is the true age of the universe. Frank, you have to have a baseline to work with. and yes, Speculation is perfectly Ok, providing the speculation is rooted in known and accepted science.

PS: The Hopi Indians have said all the while that the Universe is 16 Billion years old. LOL

No. Speculation is speculation, not science. The scientist develops a hypothesis and then tests it, but if there is no way to test it or if it is just out of his imagination, then it is not science, no matter your pedantry. That scientists can and do change their minds is also just good science -- data driven, not speculative nor wishful-thinking driven.

[psyche101]

You do realize that everything we can observe so far comprises only a tiny fraction of our galaxy and an equally infinitesimal portion of our universe.

I do not know of anyone challenging that, it is often well illustrated by all.

Considering that all we can observe with our current technology is really tiny compared to the insanely huge expanse of our universe and all, I think it ludicrous as well as incredibly ego and anthropocentric to assume that we would be the only planet that an advanced race would visit.

Despite claims of visitation, proof remains non existent. It is expected that we do not get visitors because space is really big, you are speaking of the Universe, not a local system, and ours is bare of intelligent life forms, we know, we have been to the planets. To get to the next Galaxy at the speed of light would take 250 million years.

That's at 186 thousand miles per second. Our tech does not factor there, why do you feel it is possible to traverse these distances?

When speaking of "The Universe" Travel cannot apply. It is just too darn big.

[psyche101]

I see. And just how far did Prof Garretts search for type III civilizations take him, Seakonk New Jersey?? There are 400 Billion planets in our solar system, you have to look at them in order to know if type iii civilizations exist "close by" or not.

Do you read the links before you let your brain vomit all over your keyboard???????

Had you read this one, you would have found your question answered.

From the OP's link:

Earlier this year, Roger Griffith of Penn State University and co-authors compiled a catalogue of 93 candidate galaxies — culled from a total population of 100,000 objects — where unusually extreme mid-IR emission is observed. One problem is that although rare, this kind of emission can also be generated by natural astrophysical processes related to thermal emission from warm dust.

Prof Garrett has used radio measurements of the very best candidate galaxies and found that the vast majority of these systems have emission that is best explained by natural astrophysical processes.

Now back to that solar system prof Earl, can you explain how you found 400 Billion planets when the rest of us see 8?

Quite the fountain of BS information aren't you Earl.

[psyche101]

Norbert, dear chap, the search is for INTELLIGENT life forms.

Kim's butt implants even know there is only 8 planets in the solar system mate.

I do not think you should be throwing stones in glasshouses.

[psyche101]

Frank, a LOT of science is speculation. When I was in grammar school, the age of the universe was said to be 8 billion years old. Do you call that science or speculation?? And the age of the universe has been "rewritten" several times after that, each time, scientists claiming *this* is the true age of the universe. Frank, you have to have a baseline to work with. and yes, Speculation is perfectly Ok, providing the speculation is rooted in known and accepted science.

It has well been established that you are the lowest common denominator here, you just "don't get it" and didn't in school either it seems. 8 Billion years os a figure that GIVES us the age of the Universe, it is not supposed to be the age of the Universe.

As opposed to trying to teach your special brand of information, it would pay for you to revisit that which you think you know.

One isotope pair that has been used is rhenium and osmium: in particular Re-187 which decays into Os-187 with a half-life of 40 billion years. It looks like 15% of the original Re-187 has decayed, which leads to an age of 8-11 billion years. But this is just the mean formation age of the stuff in the Solar System, and no rhenium or osmium has been made for the last 4.56 billion years. Thus to use this age to determine the age of the Universe, a model of when the elements were made is needed. If all the elements were made in a burst soon after the Big Bang, then the age of the Universe would be to = 8-11 billion years. But if the elements are made continuously at a constant rate, then the mean age of stuff in the Solar System is

(to + tSS)/2 = 8-11 Gyr

which we can solve for the age of the Universe giving

to = 11.5-17.5 Gyr

238U and 232Th are both radioactive with half-lives of 4.468 and 14.05 Gyrs,

LINK

How many time have you been clearly shown that Science is not a rigid standard that does not change - you are thinking of religion, which has used the same book for 2,000 years, science is fluid and changes as discoveries are better understood, which is not in any conceivable way incorrect or a cover up, that ideal just comes from your paranoia.

PS: The Hopi Indians have said all the while that the Universe is 16 Billion years old. LOL

Each tribe have their own version don't they? Which one states that? They also ask the sun to bless newborns as well, nice ritual, but you are more leaning toward religion than visitation there, you just do not realise it.