Is there life elsewhere in the Universe??

Forums › Off topic › Is there life elsewhere in the Universe??

1 | ... | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16

2385 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#996927 1-Mar-2014 11:05

Dratsab:
Klipspringer:
freitasm: You can be an atheist and believe there's life in other planets.

On the other hand, I know a lot of religious people who says life in other planets is impossible because God created man on Earth and that's it, since there's nothing else in the book saying anything about other planets.

Really? care to explain?

If you believe there could be life on other planets, life that maybe formed long before our time, you treading very close to religion. Maybe this life is more advanced than us? Maybe they created us? Or we are Gods ourselves who will one day create our own planet?

Any atheist who believes in possible alien life is contradicting themselves? surely.

Miles off topic but atheism is a rejection of the belief in the existence of deities, as opposed to theism, not a rejection of the belief in the existence of life.

God can fit the definition of "Alien" very easily. Not of this earth. If you believe aliens may exist, then I can certainly assume that alien life may be a God.

To me it sounds like hypocrisy.

Interesting none the less. Won't go further into this here as it will probably just lead to discussing religion. Happy to hear more about atheism though because I don't think that qualifies as a religion?

tdgeek

29750 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#996929 1-Mar-2014 11:09

Dratsab: I think it's exceptionally arrogant to think there is no life anywhere else in the universe. Intelligence, and levels thereof is moot as the OP's question merely asks about life, not intelligence.

Harking back to James' comments, a few posts above, the big hole in what you're saying is stating that everything is moving away from everything else (in relation to whole galaxies themselves) as this is demonstrably incorrect. Search "galaxy collision".

Very good point. But, it would be due to the varying effects of gravity of surrounding matter (and dark matter?) causing some galaxies to alter course I would say. Plus there would be some level of attraction as well? Stars dying and stars being created adds to the mix. I think Andromeda and the Milky Way are on course to merge, but I wouldn't start digging an underground shelter just yet... :-)

Gravity and attraction are amazing. I patched some lawn a few weeks ago, in the ice cream container there were about 10 seeds left. I put a little water in, spread them around, waited till all stable and still and spread apart, left it in the garden shed. Next day they were together. Did that as I watched about attraction on a doco just before then.

sleemanj

1490 posts

Uber Geek

#996937 1-Mar-2014 11:29

Dratsab:
Harking back to James' comments, a few posts above, the big hole in what you're saying is stating that everything is moving away from everything else (in relation to whole galaxies themselves) as this is demonstrably incorrect. Search "galaxy collision".

My edit clarified that this (observation of universal expansion) is conditioned on the absence of other forces (ie, gravity).

In your example of galaxial collisions, they are close enough and massive enough that their gravity is (in the process of) binding those galaxies together.

If it wasn't for that, like other galaxies, they would be observed to be moving apart.

The first couple paragraphs of the wikipedia article will explain why we don't observe expansion on small scales (close galaxies are small scale, believe it or not), but do on big scales (two clusters of galaxies for example, which is rather big).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metric_expansion_of_space

---
James Sleeman
I sell lots of stuff for electronic enthusiasts...

gzt

17146 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#996946 1-Mar-2014 11:42

Klipspringer: ...Why is the earth organized chaos? Why did the big bang explode in such a way that it formed a perfect little earth, in a perfect place, with perfect beauty?

We are a part of that creation and created from the same patterns. It is not surprising we should find this beautiful. Thinking of the big bang as an explosion is kind of misleading because there was not any space to explode into at that time. Nor was there even any time.

TwoSeven

1624 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#996981 1-Mar-2014 13:10

tdgeek:
joker97: well who knows maybe laws of physics changed in the past. they say there is a big bang because everything is moving away, at some time they must be at one singular point hence the big bang ... well ... what if ... it ain't that simple - it sounds way to simple for me esp string theorists are postulating 10 dimensions (6 more than we can comprehend)

I'd rather believe in multiple dimensions than the theory that every atom in the universe came from one single point 13.7 billion years ago.

Well, both theories are looking pretty non-functional at the moment. As I understood things general relativity doesn't predict the start of the universe, only its operation after the start. There isn't really an excepted theory for the start of the universe and as I pointed out in my last post, the Hartle-Hawking theory is as good as any.

The point in question is around the idea of a singularity - which may or may not be a valid idea. The hartle-hawking theory introduces multiple universes (like a bubble bath) with our one being the one that finally got successfully created - the biggest bubble.

I think there is a mathematical formula for predicting the probability life on another planet, if I can find it I shall post it.

Software Engineer
(the practice of real science, engineering and management)
A.I. (Automation rebranded)
Gender Neutral
(a person who believes in equality and who does not believe in/use stereotypes. Examples such as gender, binary, nonbinary, male/female etc.)

...they/their/them...

tdgeek

29750 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#996991 1-Mar-2014 13:20

gzt:
Klipspringer: ...Why is the earth organized chaos? Why did the big bang explode in such a way that it formed a perfect little earth, in a perfect place, with perfect beauty?

We are a part of that creation and created from the same patterns. It is not surprising we should find this beautiful. Thinking of the big bang as an explosion is kind of misleading because there was not any space to explode into at that time. Nor was there even any time.

Hard to comprehend "no time"

The conundrums, what happened 2 minutes before time began, and if there was nothing, what was there 2 metres away from the point of the alleged big bang. If the universe is expanding, what is there 2 metres past the edge?

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
79295 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#996992 1-Mar-2014 13:21

You are thinking of the Drake Equation.

Sharesies

Trade NZ and US shares and funds with Sharesies (affiliate link).

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
79295 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#996993 1-Mar-2014 13:23

Sorry, on mobile. But the Drake Equation uses so many unknown or estimated variables that is actually just a gimmick used to guesstimate the possibility of life in other planets.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#997152 1-Mar-2014 16:12

freitasm: Sorry, on mobile. But the Drake Equation uses so many unknown or estimated variables that is actually just a gimmick used to guesstimate the possibility of life in other planets.

An important distinction here:

The Drake Equation was (is?) used for SETI. If we're estimating probability for "ETI" existing, then using our own planet as an example, the probability of there being "life" as opposed to "intelligent life capable of sending messages into space" will be many tens of million times greater.
A big unknown about that would of course be how long a civilisation can be technologically capable of sending such messages, but also capable of avoiding self-obliteration. I hope it's a long time - but who knows? If we do manage to achieve something so dumb as complete self-destruction, then despite reducing the chance of some LGM elsewhere in the universe finding "ETI = us" (too late to get a return message though), life will almost certainly continue on Earth.

Of course the Drake equation is a gimmick (with regard to determining probability of SETI finding something).
But the first 4 variables are about determining the probability of "life" - and not specifically ETI, so:
R = Rate of star formation (I'm sure we will have got better at estimating that in the last 50 years - I'd need to look that up)
fp = we absolutely have got better at this - we have observed exoplanets and can count them! 50 years ago it was only conjecture that they "should" be there. Now we know they're common!
ne = we've refined observation of exoplanets so (after extrapolation) we can say with some confidence, that there are perhaps 10 billion stars in our galaxy alone which have planets in the "goldilocks zone". We're also able to determine some characteristics of some explanets, atmosphere makeup etc. (AFAIK not yet with "earth sized" expoplanets in the "goldilocks zone" - but I'm sure we'll get better at looking at them).
fl = the number of those planets which actually do go on to create life - and can't be guessed - until we find one or more. The most likely scenario is that we'll find some chemical biosignature first - but that won't be conclusive enough, we'll hopefully get better at that. For many people, "proof" of extraterrestrial life won't exist until we bring a LGM home in a cage, and display him or her or it in a zoo.

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#997157 1-Mar-2014 16:27

tdgeek:
gzt:
Klipspringer: ...Why is the earth organized chaos? Why did the big bang explode in such a way that it formed a perfect little earth, in a perfect place, with perfect beauty?

We are a part of that creation and created from the same patterns. It is not surprising we should find this beautiful. Thinking of the big bang as an explosion is kind of misleading because there was not any space to explode into at that time. Nor was there even any time.

Hard to comprehend "no time"

The conundrums, what happened 2 minutes before time began, and if there was nothing, what was there 2 metres away from the point of the alleged big bang. If the universe is expanding, what is there 2 metres past the edge?

There was no "spacetime", so no time, no physical dimensions.

Perhaps (or not) more comprehensible by way of a down to earth analogy;
Does a completely blind man see only blackness?
No - he sees nothing at all.

tdgeek

29750 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#997164 1-Mar-2014 16:34

Fred99:
tdgeek:
gzt:
Klipspringer: ...Why is the earth organized chaos? Why did the big bang explode in such a way that it formed a perfect little earth, in a perfect place, with perfect beauty?

We are a part of that creation and created from the same patterns. It is not surprising we should find this beautiful. Thinking of the big bang as an explosion is kind of misleading because there was not any space to explode into at that time. Nor was there even any time.

Hard to comprehend "no time"

The conundrums, what happened 2 minutes before time began, and if there was nothing, what was there 2 metres away from the point of the alleged big bang. If the universe is expanding, what is there 2 metres past the edge?

There was no "spacetime", so no time, no physical dimensions.

Perhaps (or not) more comprehensible by way of a down to earth analogy;
Does a completely blind man see only blackness?
No - he sees nothing at all.

That helps a little! What's LGM?

Fred99

13684 posts

Uber Geek

#997168 1-Mar-2014 16:45

tdgeek:

That helps a little! What's LGM?

Oh - "Little Green Man".

tdgeek

29750 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#997174 1-Mar-2014 16:52

Fred99:
tdgeek:

That helps a little! What's LGM?

Oh - "Little Green Man".

Damnnnnn I was hoping for a hi tech explanation! Cheers Fred!

garbonzai

315 posts

Ultimate Geek

#997240 1-Mar-2014 19:22

My Opinion,

If there is billions, Zillions or what ever stars (Suns), alot will have planets, if some of those planets are in "the sweet spot" the correct distance from the Sun (like Earth is) and have an atmosphere, then I think yes.

But the big problem is we have no way of ever getting out into the Comos to discover anything with our current technology, the distances are to vast.

fastest manned jet aircraft, 3529KPH,

fastest manned rocket aircraft, 7274KPH

fastest manned anything, Apollo Command Module as it returned from the Moon-> 40,000KPH

Speed of Light in PH (per hour, not per second) 1.079 billion KPH (yes billion) or 671 million MPH

Closest Star (Sun) to earth, Prxima Centauri, 4.2421 light years (39,900,000,000,000 km away)

Closest Star (Sun) that has at least one planet, Epsilon Eridani, 10.5 light years

Galaxy Andromeda, 2,538,000 light years

And at our current top speed of 40,000 kph, I don't know the maths exactly, but it takes thousands of years at 40k to one light year.

So until someone named Scotty invents the Warp Drive, it's all theory, what's in our mind and what we choose to believe.

my 2 cents

Ouranos

118 posts

Master Geek

#997259 1-Mar-2014 20:06

sleemanj:Everything that is not bound together by other (stronger) forces that is, eg the atoms making you do not expand away from each other, because you are very much bound together :-)

According to "The Big Rip" theory, even atoms will eventually (in around 20 billion years) be torn apart by the expansion of the Universe. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Rip

If the theory is true, then life will no longer be possible anywhere in the Universe.

1 | ... | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16