The Fermi Paradox

[Bracket]

The Fermi paradox (Fermi's paradox or Fermi-paradox) is the apparent contradiction between high estimates of the probability of the existence of extraterrestrial civilizations and the lack of evidence for, or contact with, such civilizations.

Read more...

[badeskov]

Personally, I have never understood why this is a paradox at all. Radio signals are attenuated relative fast (on astronomical scales ~200 light years) to the extent where we cannot detect them and what if Einstein was correct (and so far all indications are that he was) that the light speed barrier is insurmountable. The Universe could be teeming with life and we wouldn't have the foggiest idea.

Cheers,

Badeskov

[DONTEATUS]

Personally, I have never understood why this is a paradox at all. Radio signals are attenuated relative fast (on astronomical scales ~200 light years) to the extent where we cannot detect them and what if Einstein was correct (and so far all indications are that he was) that the light speed barrier is insurmountable. The Universe could be teeming with life and we wouldn't have the foggiest idea.

Cheers,

Badeskov

This is the safe bet Badeskov` I hear ya and raise ya ten trillion giga-parsec`s The chances of us hitting the motherload and meeting T.E. or whom ever is very limited by our brain size at the moment. They are simpley waiting for us to grow up, not Out like we seem to prefer.

Well Lets not give up ,Keep Looking Up !justDONTEATUS

[Redranger]

Can an ant understand humanity?

Ants are social insects, so they live in a colony. Ants operate as a unified entity, working together to support the colony.

So do you think they can comprehend education, electricity, government, cars or anything that we think, say, and do.

A possible explination for why we have no evidence proving other intelligent life exsists, is that those other organisms are so different that we can't comprehend them.

If I were to show a flashlight to an 18th century European he would think it was magic and accuse me of practicing witchcraft. He wouldn't be able to conceive it.

Clarke's third law states "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."

People don't believe in God because they say its impossible for someone to be raised from the dead or instantly be cured of an illness, etc.

Just because you can't explain it doesn't mean it can't happen.

My point is that we aren't the only intelligent life in the universe, we just don't have evidence of it becuase we can't comprehend it.

[psyche101]

Can an ant understand humanity?

Ants are social insects, so they live in a colony. Ants operate as a unified entity, working together to support the colony.

So do you think they can comprehend education, electricity, government, cars or anything that we think, say, and do.

An ant cannot make a plasma television, Ants are not an intelligent species, they act on instinct. They have no capacity to understand such because they have not gone through an evolutionary change like hominids did. They are still adapting to their environment, we are adapting our environment.

A possible explination for why we have no evidence proving other intelligent life exsists, is that those other organisms are so different that we can't comprehend them.

Or, one could consider that space is unimaginable vast and it takes massive resources and some genius to traverse it. If we can comprehend the signals from a pulsar, I feel we have reached a "contactable" Level. For Pete's sakes, we are now studying exoplanets. I do not feel that is "primitive" on any scale, even the most advanced species would be doing this as well.

If I were to show a flashlight to an 18th century European he would think it was magic and accuse me of practicing witchcraft. He wouldn't be able to conceive it.

What if you explained it to him, how a battery works, and how it heats the element in the lamp? Alessandro Volta made a battery in 1800. I do not think that one could not help another understand.

Clarke's third law states "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic."

Arthur C Clark was a Sci Fi author.

People don't believe in God because they say its impossible for someone to be raised from the dead or instantly be cured of an illness, etc.

Just because you can't explain it doesn't mean it can't happen.

According to geological and fossil records, and advancements in astrophysics, we know God does not need to exist to have a Universe. Whilst that might not count an omnipotent being out of the picture, one wonders where such fits in.

People cannot be raised from the dead, the body is made to break down, Google Human Oxidation process.

My point is that we aren't the only intelligent life in the universe, we just don't have evidence of it becuase we can't comprehend it.

We just do not know that. That's the rub. For all the evidence that we actually have, the argument is just as possible that we are the only species, I know that is unlikely, but when we break it all down, that is what we have got. And as I pointed out above, we listen to Pulsars and detect distant exoplanets, I feel that is a pretty decent accomplishment. If we can comprehend a Pulsar at distance, then I feel your idea is flawed. I think Badeskov has come up with the only answer to this question.

Edited May 10, 2012 by psyche101

[Redranger]

An ant cannot make a plasma television, Ants are not an intelligent species, they act on instinct. They have no capacity to understand such because they have not gone through an evolutionary change like hominids did. They are still adapting to their environment, we are adapting our environment.

What change would that be? What made that change come to pass?

If it happened to us why cant it happen to other creatures?

Or, one could consider that space is unimaginable vast and it takes massive resources and some genius to traverse it. If we can comprehend the signals from a pulsar, I feel we have reached a "contactable" Level. For Pete's sakes, we are now studying exoplanets. I do not feel that is "primitive" on any scale, even the most advanced species would be doing this as well.

You think the most adapted species is still using radios? Really?

What if you explained it to him, how a battery works, and how it heats the element in the lamp? Alessandro Volta made a battery in 1800. I do not think that one could not help another understand.

"Oh, it runs on batteries? Why didn't you say that in the first place?"

Arthur C Clark was a Sci Fi author.

And a very good one at that!

According to geological and fossil records, and advancements in astrophysics, we know God does not need to exist to have a Universe. Whilst that might not count an omnipotent being out of the picture, one wonders where such fits in.

Someone believes they can prove that? Ha, I'd like so see some evidence, post some links if you have any.

People cannot be raised from the dead, the body is made to break down, Google Human Oxidation process.

Not with our current technology.

According to who?

We just do not know that. That's the rub. For all the evidence that we actually have, the argument is just as possible that we are the only species, I know that is unlikely, but when we break it all down, that is what we have got. And as I pointed out above, we listen to Pulsars and detect distant exoplanets, I feel that is a pretty decent accomplishment. If we can comprehend a Pulsar at distance, then I feel your idea is flawed. I think Badeskov has come up with the only answer to this question.

What we've got isn't everything, we shouldn't assume without all the facts.

Fire was a decent accomplishment too..........

[DBunker]

What we've got isn't everything, we shouldn't assume without all the facts.

Neither should you.

Fire was a decent accomplishment too..........

Man didnt invent fire..

[psyche101]

What change would that be? What made that change come to pass?

The changes that made us jump down from the trees, seek nutrition and learn the most advantageous way to use it. The changes that made us overcome predation, an opposable thumb, a large brain, bipedal stance, the list goes one. All of these factors combined to make an intelligent species.

If it happened to us why cant it happen to other creatures?

Physiology for the largest part. Hominids have a perfect body shape to manipulate objects. We went thorough a specific set of circumstances, if the same set of circumstance were applied to Chimps I guess it is conceivable they might have taken our place.

You think the most adapted species is still using radios? Really?

Indeed, the cheapest and safest way to cross space. You think they have spaceships zipping around with no way to contact them? Logically to my mind, this is the way first contact should be initiated.

"Oh, it runs on batteries? Why didn't you say that in the first place?"

That is pretty simplified, was I not descriptive enough for you?

The concept of electricity should not be hard to explain to an 18th century person. We have lightning as an example. If I can explain a torch to a 4 year old, why could I not explain it to an 18th century adult?

And a very good one at that!

Yes, yet still an author all the same. That is the big one here. His living relied on his imagination, nit what facts he could procure.

Someone believes they can prove that? Ha, I'd like so see some evidence, post some links if you have any.

OK.

LINK - Stephen Hawking: God was not needed to create the Universe

In his latest book, The Grand Design, an extract of which is published in Eureka magazine in The Times, Hawking said: “Because there is a law such as gravity, the Universe can and will create itself from nothing. Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the Universe exists, why we exist.”

He added: “It is not necessary to invoke God to light the blue touch paper and set the Universe going.”

Not with our current technology.

According to who?

Name me one person who has achieved immortality

You didn't google did you. Here Let Me Google That For you LINK

According to physiology. The very air we breathe eventually kills us.

What we've got isn't everything, we shouldn't assume without all the facts.

Did you read the first line of my sentence? I said exactly the same thing to you! There might be other life, there might not! Nobody can prove this either way.

Fire was a decent accomplishment too..........

Learning to control fire was a big step forward, one of the many. But it is not the mark of a space faring species. Listening to Pulsars and being able to determine what that signal is in my opinion a good reason to consider that we could recognise evidence, if it existed.

Edited May 11, 2012 by psyche101

[Redranger]

We are certian about certian things.

I should have been more clear, what I meant to say was that understanding fire for use in advancing our knowledge was a decent accomplishment

[Redranger]

The changes that made us jump down from the trees, seek nutrition and learn the most advantageous way to use it. The changes that made us overcome predation, an opposable thumb, a large brain, bipedal stance, the list goes one. All of these factors combined to make an intelligent species.

Dolphins are very intelligent. Theres more then one way to evolve into an intelligent species.

Indeed, the cheapest and safest way to cross space. You think they have spaceships zipping around with no way to contact them? Logically to my mind, this is the way first contact should be initiated.

Again neutrinos! Faster then light, and everywhere!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-15017484

The concept of electricity should not be hard to explain to an 18th century person. We have lightning as an example. If I can explain a torch to a 4 year old, why could I not explain it to an 18th century adult?

My point is that we often label things we don't understand as "magic" or "impossible."

Yes, yet still an author all the same. That is the big one here. His living relied on his imagination, nit what facts he could procure.

Fantasy is just streched reality.

OK.

LINK - Stephen Hawking: God was not needed to create the Universe

In his latest book, The Grand Design, an extract of which is published in Eureka magazine in The Times, Hawking said: “Because there is a law such as gravity, the Universe can and will create itself from nothing. Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the Universe exists, why we exist.”

He added: “It is not necessary to invoke God to light the blue touch paper and set the Universe going.”

According to him gravity is a law of the universe. So without the universe there isn't gravity. There isn't gravity if there isn't anything for it to affect.

Name me one person who has achieved immortality

No one on Earth has, but an alien species very well may have.

Did you read the first line of my sentence? I said exactly the same thing to you! There might be other life, there might not! Nobody can prove this either way.

Correct, no one can prove it with what knowledge we currently have.

Learning to control fire was a big step forward, one of the many. But it is not the mark of a space faring species. Listening to Pulsars and being able to determine what that signal is in my opinion a good reason to consider that we could recognise evidence, if it existed.

We wouldn't know how to listen if we didn't first learn to control fire among other things.

[Mentalcase]

Yeah I hate that Ant analogy, doesn't fit at all.

[Redranger]

Yeah I hate that Ant analogy, doesn't fit at all.

Spock used amoebas, I thought ants would be a better fit.

[Mentalcase]

Isn't Spock fictional?

[Redranger]

Haha, yeah he is.

[Merc14]

An ant cannot make a plasma television, Ants are not an intelligent species, they act on instinct. They have no capacity to understand such because they have not gone through an evolutionary change like hominids did. They are still adapting to their environment, we are adapting our environment.

Or, one could consider that space is unimaginable vast and it takes massive resources and some genius to traverse it. If we can comprehend the signals from a pulsar, I feel we have reached a "contactable" Level. For Pete's sakes, we are now studying exoplanets. I do not feel that is "primitive" on any scale, even the most advanced species would be doing this as well.

What if you explained it to him, how a battery works, and how it heats the element in the lamp? Alessandro Volta made a battery in 1800. I do not think that one could not help another understand.

Arthur C Clark was a Sci Fi author.

According to geological and fossil records, and advancements in astrophysics, we know God does not need to exist to have a Universe. Whilst that might not count an omnipotent being out of the picture, one wonders where such fits in.

People cannot be raised from the dead, the body is made to break down, Google Human Oxidation process.

We just do not know that. That's the rub. For all the evidence that we actually have, the argument is just as possible that we are the only species, I know that is unlikely, but when we break it all down, that is what we have got. And as I pointed out above, we listen to Pulsars and detect distant exoplanets, I feel that is a pretty decent accomplishment. If we can comprehend a Pulsar at distance, then I feel your idea is flawed. I think Badeskov has come up with the only answer to this question.

Well said!

[psyche101]

Dolphins are very intelligent. Theres more then one way to evolve into an intelligent species.

They are an animal that uses some rudimentary tools. How many Dolphins that you know have made a car, a plasma telly?

Nobody knows actually how intelligent a Dolpin is, we know they can generalise which is also true for pigs, and we know they can communicate, also true of great apes. Dolphins are wild animals but people anthropomorphise them into some cute cuddly creature. They are not, Dolphins commit infanticide and they rape anything. Several people have been raped by Dolphins, there is even a story that Demi Moore had a close encounter, not that I would blame the Dolphin, I always though Demi Moore was pretty hot.

How long do you think it would take before a Dolphin is ready to explore space?

Again neutrinos! Faster then light, and everywhere!

http://www.bbc.co.uk...onment-15017484

For one, how do you propose to use these Neutrinos?

For two, the above experiment was proven incorrect. In the link you gave me it says:

But the group understands that what are known as "systematic errors" could easily make an erroneous result look like a breaking of the ultimate speed limit.

That has motivated them to publish their measurements.

"My dream would be that another, independent experiment finds the same thing - then I would be relieved," Dr Ereditato told BBC News.

But for now, he explained, "we are not claiming things, we want just to be helped by the community in understanding our crazy result - because it is crazy".

This follow up story shows us what the independent testing showed:

Not so fast. On Wednesday the CERN team said they had made a mistake, Science Magazine

reported. Something had gone wrong with the timing gear, and with the optical fiber connection. Neutrinos, they said, probablydon’t travel faster than light, at 186,000-miles-per-second. Or at least they haven’t been able to prove it yet.

“Always check the cable before doubting Einstein,” Forbes

wrote with glee Wednesday. Five other reasons you should never doubt the father of modern physics after the jump.

LINK -

Neutrinos are not faster than light — why you should never doubt Einstein

My point is that we often label things we don't understand as "magic" or "impossible."

Who is doing that? Fringe crackpots? People who "Self educated" themselves with science? I do not label things magic. I just do not do that. I doubt anyone in real Science would as well.

Some things are impossible, things are what they are. That's just life.

Fantasy is just streched reality.

No it is not, that is why they are do not have the same names. Fantasy is imagination. Imagination can inspire, but it is no benchmark.

According to him gravity is a law of the universe. So without the universe there isn't gravity. There isn't gravity if there isn't anything for it to affect.

Yes indeed, that is the proof you were asking for is it not?

No one on Earth has, but an alien species very well may have.

Why? What drives you to believe this is not only possible, but has happened?

Correct, no one can prove it with what knowledge we currently have.

Exactly, with what we know, there is an equal chance that we are alone here. The stars indicate otherwise, but as far as proof goes, we have none for life outside of this planet. As such, everything we are told from those who claim to know about Aliens is made up.

We wouldn't know how to listen if we didn't first learn to control fire among other things.

Perhaps, it was a very early step, but the example I had brought up was indicative of space faring species, I thought that was what we were getting at? If we hunt exoplanets and can leave the solar system, that has to be pretty impressive next to a Dolphin right?

Edited May 11, 2012 by psyche101

[psyche101]

Spock used amoebas, I thought ants would be a better fit.

I absolutely love star trek too. I have used analogies from it as well. I think that one might have been written quite some time ago, and we have a better understanding of space and life nowadays. We can realise that some of the creatures depicted never could have attained sentience, and many people have made many discoveries in the meantime. Regardless Gene Rodenberry was in my opinion something of a visionary and he has inspired some inventions with Star Trek so the tale goes. Brilliant series, very inspiring, but we need to remember Star Treks real world prime directive - to provide entertainment

[psyche101]

Well said!

Thank you, I do my best to carry a conversation

[Merc14]

I always though Demi Moore was pretty hot.

How long do you think it would take before a Dolphin is ready to explore space?

I disagree on one point, Demi is still hot, at least to an over 50 guy. A bit rode hard and put up wet but wouldn't throw her out of bed for eating crackers.

[psyche101]

I disagree on one point, Demi is still hot, at least to an over 50 guy. A bit rode hard and put up wet but wouldn't throw her out of bed for eating crackers.

No, we are in agreeance there my friend!

I always thought Demi Moore was pretty hot, and I still do! I am 45 but her husband is younger than that, I might be in with a chance!

[Merc14]

No, we are in agreeance there my friend!

I always thought Demi Moore was pretty hot, and I still do! I am 45 but her husband is younger than that, I might be in with a chance!

Better than a chance I believe, the guy cheated on her and she is single again! Hence the drunken haze for a few months (Tom Arnold cashed in on that). Good luck to you in your pursuit, my wife would kill me if I did the same. LOL

Edited May 11, 2012 by Merc14

[Merc14]

My wife subscribes to the celebrity magazines and unfortunately I read them while on the throne if the Kindle was left upstairs.

[psyche101]

Better than a chance I believe, the guy cheated on her and she is single again! Hence the drunken haze for a few months (Tom Arnold cashed in on that). Good luck to you in your pursuit, my wife would kill me if I did the same. LOL

Good news indeed! My wife would be happy I think. She might get a moments peace....................

[quillius]

Personally, I have never understood why this is a paradox at all. Radio signals are attenuated relative fast (on astronomical scales ~200 light years) to the extent where we cannot detect them and what if Einstein was correct (and so far all indications are that he was) that the light speed barrier is insurmountable. The Universe could be teeming with life and we wouldn't have the foggiest idea.

Cheers,

Badeskov

Hello Badeskov,

I fully agree, good post. I too struggle with seeing this as a paradox, I am glad that the problem with this 'paradox' can be seen from both sides

[Leonardo]

Space isn't empty and, at the relativistic velocities necessary to make interstellar travel feasible, that is a very real problem.