Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

'No way we are alone', says UK space exploration boss


UM-Bot

Recommended Posts

Well duh. The universe is too large for us to be the only life bearing planet.
However whether any living planet, let alone civilization is close enough for us to ever interact with them...

  • Like 6
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suspect that they may be a wasp-like species that lay their eggs inside mammalian large-size (1.3+ kg) brains.

 

In order to increase species diversity I propose to invite them to settle on our planet.

 

Children and people who concur don't have anything to worry about for lack of qualifying brain size.

  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Someone answer me this: What is the chance of Shakespeare's Hamlet being written verbatim on a different planet in a different galaxy?

The point of this question? Something so unique can be repeated, but it's extremely unlikely. That's how I see life. Extremely lucky.

Statistics, amounts and size are worthless arguments in this case.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've always thought that maybe, if we could light up the universe and look around, it might be terrifying what we'd find. Weird alien life undulating, feeding and breeding everywhere. It'd be a real jump scare.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was trying to include a YouTube video in that last post to a scene in Pee-Wee's Big Adventure when his headlight lamp lights up the darkness and the ensuing hilarious jump scare but it wouldn't let me include the video in the post. I kept getting something about the value entered is not allowed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Orphalesion said:

Well duh. The universe is too large for us to be the only life bearing planet.
However whether any living planet, let alone civilization is close enough for us to ever interact with them...

You make a great point, and with our current technology I certainly agree with you!:tu:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Ell said:

I suspect that they may be a wasp-like species that lay their eggs inside mammalian large-size (1.3+ kg) brains.

 

In order to increase species diversity I propose to invite them to settle on our planet.

 

Children and people who concur don't have anything to worry about for lack of qualifying brain size.

Dude, your crazy, but I love your posts you never disappoint!:lol:

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, zep73 said:

Someone answer me this: What is the chance of Shakespeare's Hamlet being written verbatim on a different planet in a different galaxy?

The point of this question? Something so unique can be repeated, but it's extremely unlikely. That's how I see life. Extremely lucky.

Statistics, amounts and size are worthless arguments in this case.

What’s truly unique about the Earth and Humanity Zep?

Our planet and the life on it were created from Star dust in a Universe so vast it’s truly beyond human comprehension. Statistics, amounts, size and repetition are in no way worthless arguments and the very fact you think so surprises me. My, friend you are far to intelligent to hold this view, just open you mind a little and consider simple flipping a coin it’s a 50/50 shot whether it’s heads of tail. Well, the chances that intelligent life exists across our universe is no different so statistically it’s far more probable than not my friend!:tu:

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Grim Reaper 6 said:

What’s truly unique about the Earth and Humanity Zep?

Our planet and the life on it were created from Star dust in a Universe so vast it’s truly beyond human comprehension. Statistics, amounts, size and repetition are in no way worthless arguments and the very fact you think so surprises me. My, friend you are far to intelligent to hold this view, just open you mind a little and consider simple flipping a coin it’s a 50/50 shot whether it’s heads of tail. Well, the chances that intelligent life exists across our universe is no different so statistically it’s far more probable than not my friend!:tu:

I used to think like that too. But in my scientific studies I read a lot about how cells are composed and work chemically. There are so many different and complicated parts that must work together to make a reproducible cell, that it defies logic. It must have taken nature many thousands (maybe millions) of years - and a sh!tload of luck -  to accidentally put it together.

Of all random things that has ever happened, life was the least likely and most complicated and delicate. Could it happen twice or more? I am very skeptical.

Edited by zep73
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, zep73 said:

I used to think like that too. But in my scientific studies I read a lot about how cells are composed and work chemically. There are so many different and complicated parts that must work together to make a reproducible cell, that it defies logic. It must have taken nature many thousands (maybe millions) of years - and a sh!tload of luck -  to accidentally put it together.

Zep, I have bachelor degrees in Biology and Chemistry I understand what you’re saying in detail my friend. But this process is not as complicated as you seem to think it is when you put the size of our Universe into that context. I personally believe in Panspermia, that the very building blocks of life were created when the Singularity that created our occurred, and new building blocks are created and distributed with each supernova that occurs across the Universe. Then there materials and chemical compounds are distributed to planets across the Universe, some take root and grow others don’t and other develop and are destroyed.

However, when you consider our universe is approximately 13.7 billion years old, and the oldest formed Galaxy in approximately 13.4 billion years old can you even imagine how many times life has had a chance to take root and develop?

5 minutes ago, zep73 said:

Of all random things that has ever happened, life was the least likely and most complicated and delicate. Could it happen twice or more? I am very skeptical.

On this my brother statistically, biologically and chemically we must agree to respectfully agree to disagree because the simplest of odds do not support your conclusion!:tu:

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Grim Reaper 6 said:

Zep, I have bachelor degrees in Biology and Chemistry I understand what you’re saying in detail my friend. But this process is not as complicated as you seem to think it is when you put the size of our Universe into that context. I personally believe in Panspermia, that the very building blocks of life were created when the Singularity that created our occurred, and new building blocks are created and distributed with each supernova that occurs across the Universe. Then there materials and chemical compounds are distributed to planets across the Universe, some take root and grow others don’t and other develop and are destroyed.

However, when you consider our universe is approximately 13.7 billion years old, and the oldest formed Galaxy in approximately 13.4 billion years old can you even imagine how many times life has had a chance to take root and develop?

On this my brother statistically, biologically and chemically we must agree to respectfully agree to disagree because the simplest of odds do not support your conclusion!:tu:

I admire your optimism, dear friend, but we must agree to disagree on this.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, zep73 said:

Someone answer me this: What is the chance of Shakespeare's Hamlet being written verbatim on a different planet in a different galaxy?

The point of this question? Something so unique can be repeated, but it's extremely unlikely. That's how I see life. Extremely lucky.

Statistics, amounts and size are worthless arguments in this case.

You make the basic assumption that 'life' on another planet, or in another galaxy must be an exact replica of what is found here on earth in order to be possible. You conclude that life must follow the same pattern of evolution, the same laws etc. But we have no idea if there exist other models on how intelligent life-forms could emerge in the Universe. Our very definition of consciousness and sentience is primitive at best.

Edited by Occult1
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Occult1 said:

You make the basic assumption that 'life' on another planet, or in another galaxy must be an exact replica of what is found here on earth in order to be possible. You conclude that life must follow the same pattern of evolution, the same laws etc. But we have no idea if there exist other models on how intelligent life-forms could emerge in the Universe. Our very definition of intelligence and sentience is primitive at best.

I assume nothing. Life is chemistry. Input, output and reproduction. Are you suggesting a form of life that needs no energy or reproduction to be sustained?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, zep73 said:

I assume nothing. Life is chemistry. Input, output and reproduction. Are you suggesting a form of life that needs no energy or reproduction to be sustained?

Life may be beyond chemistry, it’s theoretically possible that some forms of life beyond our limited understanding could be pure energy! In my opinion the biggest problem when it comes to this subject is that humanity is still in the dark ages. Many members of the scientific community can’t view things past the tip of their nose, if the greatest minds humanity has ever spawned had not thought outside the box none of the current achievements mankind has made would have ever occurred.

There is a huge difference between being brilliant and being a genius. Take Albert Einstein for instance, his education was minimal and yet he had the ability to see things differently than others, Nikola Tesla is another example on different ends of the spectrum. These men were initially laughed at, and then their ideas caught on and our history was changed in ways we can’t completely comprehend even today. My point rolled up is simple, if we apply everything Universally to the context of what occurred on Earth as far as life is concerned we do ourselves a major injustice.

Currently we’re humankind sits in the grand scheme of things were are infants, our knowledge of physics, and all other aspects of science is so very limited. When one looses the ability to look beyond what is considered credible, then that individual has stopped growing and learning. This is where the ability to sit and dream comes into play, and all the greatest minds humanity has ever produced had this ability because sitting and thinking within the constraints of a box is far to limited to ever allow further advancement in all scientific disciplines!

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Grim Reaper 6 said:

Life may be beyond chemistry, it’s theoretically possible that some forms of life beyond our limited understanding could be pure energy! In my opinion the biggest problem when it comes to this subject is that humanity is still in the dark ages. Many members of the scientific community can’t view things past the tip of their nose, if the greatest minds humanity has ever spawned had not thought outside the box none of the current achievements mankind has made would have ever occurred.

There is a huge difference between being brilliant and being a genius. Take Albert Einstein for instance, his education was minimal and yet he had the ability to see things differently than others, Nikola Tesla is another example on different ends of the spectrum. These men were initially laughed at, and then their ideas caught on and our history was changed in ways we can’t completely comprehend even today. My point rolled up is simple, if we apply everything Universally to the context of what occurred on Earth as far as life is concerned we do ourselves a major injustice.

Currently we’re humankind sits in the grand scheme of things were are infants, our knowledge of physics, and all other aspects of science is so very limited. When one looses the ability to look beyond what is considered credible, then that individual has stopped growing and learning. This is where the ability to sit and dream comes into play, and all the greatest minds humanity has ever produced had this ability because sitting and thinking within the constraints of a box is far to limited to ever allow further advancement in all scientific disciplines!

I couldn't agree more. I just think you give human science too little credit.
I am an 'out of the box' thinker myself. I know it is scientifically controversial to entertain the idea that life is unique to Earth. But that controverse is based in a fear of looking like a creationist. Magical thinking. It's not. It's just a realisation of how incredibly lucky we are to be alive. Scientifically.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Orphalesion said:

Well duh. The universe is too large for us to be the only life bearing planet.
However whether any living planet, let alone civilization is close enough for us to ever interact with them...


The distance that must be overcome is a consideration - for now. To wit:

If humans *could* travel at the speed of light, we could cross our galaxy in 100,000 years. Well, that isn't very encouraging, now, is it. 
And, going to Alfa Centuri is a 2.4 year trip at the speed of light, 6,000 years traveling at the speed humans now travel in space. This will never do!

We need the shortcut, the Einstein-Rosin bridge, aka, the wormhole. Or perhaps interdimensional travel, or something not even suggested in theory. 
But I feel certain that mankind will find something, someday. 

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, zep73 said:

I couldn't agree more. I just think you give human science too little credit.

Thats very true, because in the scope of the Universe we are a very young species, because in a Universe that's 13.7 billion Years old our planet is very young. Especially when you consider the bulk of what is considered scientific knowledge, we have only gained in the last 150 years, if we survive as a species where will we be in a1000 years can you even imagine that!!:D

18 minutes ago, zep73 said:

 


I am an 'out of the box' thinker myself. I know it is scientifically controversial to entertain the idea that life is unique to Earth. But that controverse is based in a fear of looking like a creationist. Magical thinking. It's not. It's just a realisation of how incredibly lucky we are to be alive. Scientifically.

What's funny here is your bolded comments above, you make that statement about creationism and yet thinking life on earth is unique and special is exactly what creationists teach!!!!:D 

Take care my brother, it's always a pleasure to have a conversation with you, I have missed it!!!:tu:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Earl.Of.Trumps said:


The distance that must be overcome is a consideration - for now. To wit:

If humans *could* travel at the speed of light, we could cross our galaxy in 100,000 years. Well, that isn't very encouraging, now, is it. 
And, going to Alfa Centuri is a 2.4 year trip at the speed of light, 6,000 years traveling at the speed humans now travel in space. This will never do!

We need the shortcut, the Einstein-Rosin bridge, aka, the wormhole. Or perhaps interdimensional travel, or something not even suggested in theory. 
But I feel certain that mankind will find something, someday. 

 

Thats is spot on my friend, great post!!!!!!!!!:tu:

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Grim Reaper 6 said:

Thats very true, because in the scope of the Universe we are a very young species, because in a Universe that's 13.7 billion Years old our planet is very young. Especially when you consider the bulk of what is considered scientific knowledge, we have only gained in the last 150 years, if we survive as a species where will we be in a1000 years can you even imagine that!!:D

How do you know that? How do you know our species is young? How do you know how long advanced science takes to master? You have a timeline based in assumptions and fantasy, my friend.

 

17 minutes ago, Grim Reaper 6 said:

Take care my brother, it's always a pleasure to have a conversation with you, I have missed it!!!:tu:

Right back at you :tu:

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, zep73 said:

How do you know that? How do you know our species is young? How do you know how long advanced science takes to master? You have a timeline based in assumptions and fantasy, my friend.

:lol:Our Universe is 13.7 billion years old, the first galaxy formed 13.4 billion years after Universal creation. Our Solar System didn't form until 9.2 billion years after Universal Creation, and it also didn't form until 8.9 billion years after the first galaxy was full formed! These are not assumptions this is based upon mankind's limited knowledge of the basics of physics that created the entire process!

If you would like I can put this in a mathematical equation for you, so that you can do the math and figure it out for yourself !:D

So, you're saying that the scientific knowledge we have accumulated in the last 150 years was accomplished quickly? Our species has only been what you would call human for approximately the last 200,000 to 300,000 years. The oldest known Homo Sapien fossil discovered is approximately 315,000 years old, before this only Homo Erectus remains have been discovered.

What, we consider modern humans did not have the capacity for speech until approximately 50,000 years ago based upon linguistic scientific models, which coincided with the ability to express oneself through the creation of art. So, it has taken the human species approximately 49,000+ years to reach this point in human development and technology we are at today, so what are you even talking about!:D

This answers the bolded comments completely, along with everything else you said above. Now, other than that saying you do not agree will not work, because if you don't agree prove me wrong scientifically. My comments are based upon science, yours have so far only been based upon your opinion. Now, trust me I can take this to any depth you wish, however, I will not offer science in exchange for your opinion, so put up and make your cases scientifically. :D

My Brother from another mother!!!!!!!:tu:

 

6 minutes ago, zep73 said:

 

Right back at you :tu:

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It’s worth bearing in mind that the majority of the solar systems energy (the contribution) is a fusion reaction with energy framed through a hydrogen/helium lense.

 

Also; 196x technology proposal

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.