Complex Life In the Galaxy (or Are We Alone?)

[Brant Gaede]

The book Rare Earth makes a persuasive case that complex life is extraordinarily rare--the Earth is extraordinarily rare for quite a few reasons, the most intriguing being the creation of the moon and how the moon is so necessary to our human existence.

This might seem incredible considering that our galaxy might have 200 billion or even more stars, but let's consider the miracle of the existence of any one human being--me or you. Our mothers had/have a very delimited number of eggs that might eventually become a sentient being, but those dads?--Male sperm ejaculate might contain 50 million individual sperm and if for whatever reason in whatever way dad ejaculates 200 times a year for 50 years and being a good Catholic (except for any masturbation, but sinning is a given--that's what confession is for) with a fertile wife has ten children--unlikely but not impossible--(50 million x 200 = 10 billion x 50 = 500 billion sperm cells / 10 = one chance in 50 billion. (5 children = 1 in 100 billion.) So, what's so remarkable about 200 billion stars creating only one conceptual life form over 9 billion years? Is possible, no? (Note, the actual number of eggs was not factored in--assume 1. If 10, then 1 in 100 billion becomes 1 in a trillion.)

--Brant

sperm for thought

[BaalChatzaf]

Chances are all life is complex. Even the one celled archae the first life on Earth was a non-trivial structure. Intelligent life is less likely. However since all life is complex the question comes down to this: what are the chances of life in the Cosmos other than on Earth. My gut impulse is to say rather good. Second generation starts churn out carbon and water and other life-friendly chemicals so I think the odds favor the existence of life else where. How intelligent. Who knows?

Until we actually find a living or living capable substance in a celestial body such as an asteroid or a comet we will not know.

Our chances of visiting another planet around another star are remote so we will most likely have to wait for evidence of alien life to come to us.

[Selene]

The book Rare Earth makes a persuasive case that complex life is extraordinarily rare--the Earth is extraordinarily rare for quite a few reasons, the most intriguing being the creation of the moon and how the moon is so necessary to our human existence.

This might seem incredible considering that our galaxy might have 200 billion or even more stars, but let's consider the miracle of the existence of any one human being--me or you. Our mothers had/have a very delimited number of eggs that might eventually become a sentient being, but those dads?--Male sperm ejaculate might contain 50 million individual sperm and if for whatever reason in whatever way dad ejaculates 200 times a year for 50 years and being a good Catholic with a fertile wife has ten children--unlikely but not impossible--(50 million x 200 = 10 billion x 50 = 500 billion sperm cells / 10 = one chance in 50 billion. So, what's so remarkable about 200 billion stars creating only one conceptual life form over 9 billion years? Is possible, no?

--Brant

sperm for thought

Wow, that was hot!

[jts]

Many years ago I read a book about the possibility of intelligent life elsewhere than Earth. According to this book, a Prof. Lawson proposed an idea to shoot a very powerful laser beam at the sun that would cause the sun to produce certain blue lines in its spectrum. (How this is supposed to work, I don't know. Chain reaction maybe.) These blue lines are supposed to not be possible by any natural process and therefore must be artificial. Intelligent beings out there could recognize these blue lines as evidence that we are here.

The book says that since Prof. Lawson's proposal, astronomers found 15 stars within a radius of a hundred lightyears that have these artificial blue lines. All 15 stars are the kind that are likely to have planets. One of these stars is Barnard's Star.

For anyone who wants some of what the author of the book was smoking, I have no idea what that was or how to get it.

[Mikee]

Jerry,

I found nothing about this. Do you have the name of the book or the authors full name?

[jts]

Jerry,

I found nothing about this. Do you have the name of the book or the authors full name?

Nope. It was a paperback piece of crap in the 1970s.

[Mikee]

You're not motivating me to read your stuff if you knowingly post stuff you yourself regard as crap. I guess you're just in a crappy mood today...

[jts]

You're not motivating me to read your stuff if you knowingly post stuff you yourself regard as crap. I guess you're just in a crappy mood today...

Any and all so-called evidence of intelligent extraterrestrial life is crap from the point of view of science. All that can be done with the topic of IEL is:

1. science fiction entertainment

2. useless speculation

3. unproved ideas disguised as science

So why did I read that book? I wallow in crap like a pig wallows in mud. Star Trek is crap from the point of view of science.

There is a French physics perfesser who takes seriously a crop circle that answered the famous binary message to the stars. We live on 2 planets in our star system. We are carbon and silicon. Entertaining lecture. Not real science.

[BaalChatzaf]

According to the late Carl Sagan there are hundreds of bilyuns of galaxies in the Cosmos and within each are hundreds of billyuns of stuhrs. Life is made out of stuhr-stuff and can be found on Pale Blue Dots.

Ba'al Chatzaf

[deanwins]

Brant,

It may be so that our reality only has us humans. I'm most confident that there are replicating polymers elsewhere in our reality than on Earth. I personally think there is most likely other life forms in our reality that are similar or more intelligent than us humans.

As for the likeliness of exactly us existing... I believe that all fully self consistent systems exist, and hence there is an infinite number of fully independent non-interacting realities. Not that this is provable, just that it answers the question of why we exist: all truth systems exist. Truth systems can exist as a subset of our reality, such as the system y = mx+b. But y = mx+b does not interact with y = nx^2 + mx + b, nor does it interact with us.

[jts]

According to the late Carl Sagan there are hundreds of bilyuns of galaxies in the Cosmos and within each are hundreds of billyuns of stuhrs. Life is made out of stuhr-stuff and can be found on Pale Blue Dots.

Ba'al Chatzaf

No native life was ever found other than on Earth. You can make a theory that there is native life elsewhere but your theory does not make a testable prediction. Maybe it makes a prediction but there is no Earthly way to test it. Therefore it is not scientific. And besides, any evidence of extraterrestrial life must be published in a peer reviewed scientific journal; otherwise it is crap. Doesn't matter how many hundreds of bilyuns of galaxies and how many hundreds of bilyuns of stuhrs per galaxy, the best you and Carl Sagan can do is speculate.

[Jules Troy]

I personally do not think it is a very good idea for us to be broadcasting anything to the stars. Hiding in plain sight seems to be prudent at this point in our development. After all who is to say that whoever may be out there is actually friendly.

[Brant Gaede]

I personally do not think it is a very good idea for us to be broadcasting anything to the stars. Hiding in plain sight seems to be prudent at this point in our development. After all who is to say that whoever may be out there is actually friendly.

Moi.

--Brant

I'm already here: we want your women

[Jules Troy]

Hahahaha!

[BaalChatzaf]

According to the late Carl Sagan there are hundreds of bilyuns of galaxies in the Cosmos and within each are hundreds of billyuns of stuhrs. Life is made out of stuhr-stuff and can be found on Pale Blue Dots.

Ba'al Chatzaf

No native life was ever found other than on Earth. You can make a theory that there is native life elsewhere but your theory does not make a testable prediction. Maybe it makes a prediction but there is no Earthly way to test it. Therefore it is not scientific. And besides, any evidence of extraterrestrial life must be published in a peer reviewed scientific journal; otherwise it is crap. Doesn't matter how many hundreds of bilyuns of galaxies and how many hundreds of bilyuns of stuhrs per galaxy, the best you and Carl Sagan can do is speculate.

It is in principle testable. If we ever get good enough telescope or interferometers we might be able to detect organic compounds in the atmospheres of exoplanets. Right now we can't say whether there is live or not on the exoplanets that have been spotted thus far because most of the discoveries have been by indirect means.

Ba'al Chatzaf

[dldelancey]

Brant,

It may be so that our reality only has us humans. I'm most confident that there are replicating polymers elsewhere in our reality than on Earth. I personally think there is most likely other life forms in our reality that are similar or more intelligent than us humans.

As for the likeliness of exactly us existing... I believe that all fully self consistent systems exist, and hence there is an infinite number of fully independent non-interacting realities. Not that this is provable, just that it answers the question of why we exist: all truth systems exist. Truth systems can exist as a subset of our reality, such as the system y = mx+b. But y = mx+b does not interact with y = nx^2 + mx + b, nor does it interact with us.

That answers the question in the same way that "because I said so" answers the question.

[Jules Troy]

Kneel puny hoomans!!

[BaalChatzaf]

According to the late Carl Sagan there are hundreds of bilyuns of galaxies in the Cosmos and within each are hundreds of billyuns of stuhrs. Life is made out of stuhr-stuff and can be found on Pale Blue Dots.

Ba'al Chatzaf

No native life was ever found other than on Earth. You can make a theory that there is native life elsewhere but your theory does not make a testable prediction. Maybe it makes a prediction but there is no Earthly way to test it. Therefore it is not scientific. And besides, any evidence of extraterrestrial life must be published in a peer reviewed scientific journal; otherwise it is crap. Doesn't matter how many hundreds of bilyuns of galaxies and how many hundreds of bilyuns of stuhrs per galaxy, the best you and Carl Sagan can do is speculate.

At present we have no way of detecting Other-Life. The question is -in principle- testable be we are shy of the technology at this time so we will have to leave it as a matter of speculation.

Ba'al Chatzaf

[SoAMadDeathWish]

The book Rare Earth makes a persuasive case that complex life is extraordinarily rare--the Earth is extraordinarily rare for quite a few reasons, the most intriguing being the creation of the moon and how the moon is so necessary to our human existence.

This might seem incredible considering that our galaxy might have 200 billion or even more stars, but let's consider the miracle of the existence of any one human being--me or you. Our mothers had/have a very delimited number of eggs that might eventually become a sentient being, but those dads?--Male sperm ejaculate might contain 50 million individual sperm and if for whatever reason in whatever way dad ejaculates 200 times a year for 50 years and being a good Catholic (except for any masturbation, but sinning is a given--that's what confession is for) with a fertile wife has ten children--unlikely but not impossible--(50 million x 200 = 10 billion x 50 = 500 billion sperm cells / 10 = one chance in 50 billion. (5 children = 1 in 100 billion.) So, what's so remarkable about 200 billion stars creating only one conceptual life form over 9 billion years? Is possible, no? (Note, the actual number of eggs was not factored in--assume 1. If 10, then 1 in 100 billion becomes 1 in a trillion.)

--Brant

sperm for thought

If this is the book's central argument then it is a really really bad one.

To see why, look at lotteries. It is extremely unlikely that any specific lottery player will win, but it is pretty much guaranteed that there will be a winner. Likewise, it is very unlikely that any specific person will be plucked out of person space to be born, but it is almost guaranteed that a pregnant woman will give birth to someone.

Therefore, while the specific conditions that led to the rise of life on Earth and the existence of life on Earth are extremely unlikely, the probability of the existence of any life at all in the galaxy could be significantly higher.

[Brant Gaede]

The book Rare Earth makes a persuasive case that complex life is extraordinarily rare--the Earth is extraordinarily rare for quite a few reasons, the most intriguing being the creation of the moon and how the moon is so necessary to our human existence.

This might seem incredible considering that our galaxy might have 200 billion or even more stars, but let's consider the miracle of the existence of any one human being--me or you. Our mothers had/have a very delimited number of eggs that might eventually become a sentient being, but those dads?--Male sperm ejaculate might contain 50 million individual sperm and if for whatever reason in whatever way dad ejaculates 200 times a year for 50 years and being a good Catholic (except for any masturbation, but sinning is a given--that's what confession is for) with a fertile wife has ten children--unlikely but not impossible--(50 million x 200 = 10 billion x 50 = 500 billion sperm cells / 10 = one chance in 50 billion. (5 children = 1 in 100 billion.) So, what's so remarkable about 200 billion stars creating only one conceptual life form over 9 billion years? Is possible, no? (Note, the actual number of eggs was not factored in--assume 1. If 10, then 1 in 100 billion becomes 1 in a trillion.)

--Brant

sperm for thought

If this is the book's central argument then it is a really really bad one.

To see why, look at lotteries. It is extremely unlikely that any specific lottery player will win, but it is pretty much guaranteed that there will be a winner. Likewise, it is very unlikely that any specific person will be plucked out of person space to be born, but it is almost guaranteed that a pregnant woman will give birth to someone.

Therefore, while the specific conditions that led to the rise of life on Earth and the existence of life on Earth are extremely unlikely, the probability of the existence of any life at all in the galaxy could be significantly higher.

Not the central argument. All you have to do is acknowledge that out of billions of gallaxies that, sure, there's complex, conceptual life out there not ours. Likely a lot of it. All my talk about sperm and eggs, btw, is not in the book, a book you could get and read if you had any real interest in the subject.

--Brant

[BaalChatzaf]

Doesn't matter how many hundreds of bilyuns of galaxies and how many hundreds of bilyuns of stuhrs per galaxy, the best you and Carl Sagan can do is speculate.

That is true. However we have no any evidence that carbon based life is impossible elsewhere.

So the best we can say is that life is possible and not be too surprised if we find living stuff elsewhere.

Life is a matter of chemistry and thermodynamics. If the laws of physics, chemistry and thermodynamics is the same everywhere in the cosmos, then just on the humongous numbers of stars, and variety of stars we cannot say that life elsewhere is impossible.

The speculation that life exists elsewhere is not outright nonsense that contradicts known physical laws.

Ba'al Chatzaf

[Derek McGowan]

The one technology that intrigues me the most, beyond any other, is faster than light travel. Hopefully when (if) we can produce such an engine, we might finally get some answers.

Of course we may find that our solar system is "fenced in" to prevent other races from exploiting us which would also prevent us from getting out....

[BaalChatzaf]

The one technology that intrigues me the most, beyond any other, is faster than light travel. Hopefully when (if) we can produce such an engine, we might finally get some answers.

Of course we may find that our solar system is "fenced in" to prevent other races from exploiting us which would also prevent us from getting out....

Yodah says do not your breath hold until faster than light go we can, else blue turn you will.

Ba'al Chatzaf

[Brant Gaede]

The one technology that intrigues me the most, beyond any other, is faster than light travel. Hopefully when (if) we can produce such an engine, we might finally get some answers.

Of course we may find that our solar system is "fenced in" to prevent other races from exploiting us which would also prevent us from getting out....

It would take more than a lifetime of continuous tolerable acceleration to even get close to the speed of light. That tolerable would soon become intolerable, btw. Distance is the fence. When distance became less of a fence here on earth communicable diseases killed tens upon tens of millions of non-Europeans, especially influenza.

--Brant

[BaalChatzaf]

The one technology that intrigues me the most, beyond any other, is faster than light travel. Hopefully when (if) we can produce such an engine, we might finally get some answers.

Of course we may find that our solar system is "fenced in" to prevent other races from exploiting us which would also prevent us from getting out....

It would take more than a lifetime of continuous tolerable acceleration to even get close to the speed of light. That tolerable would soon become intolerable, btw. Distance is the fence. When distance became less of a fence here on earth communicable diseases killed tens upon tens of millions of non-Europeans, especially influenza.

--Brant

It would take forever. Relativistic Mass increases without bound. Where would the energy necessary to maintain a constant rate of acceleration come from. What would exert the force. An object with non-zero rest mass cannot be accelerated to the speed of light if you accept the basic premises of relativity theory.

Ba'al Chatzaf