Sentient life elsewhere in the Milky Way

[Eden]

I'm interested to hear what the general consensus is among forum members regarding the likelihood of sentient life elsewhere in the Milky Way -- disregarding, for the moment, other galaxies outside of our own.

I feel that the ideas planted in our minds by the likes of Star Trek and so forth make it difficult to approach this topic objectively. The Drake Equation is a novel approach but in this relatively early stage of our exploration of space we have little choice but to populate some of its variables with numbers which are practically arbitrary in their usefulness.

Looking at the ever-increasing number of exoplanetary discoveries and the huge scope by which they vary, I am personally inclined to believe that the question should not so much be a matter of whether there is sentient life out there but rather where that life is. The Kepler mission has only barely scraped the surface, given it's highly limited ability to detect extrasolar planets.

I am keen to hear what other forum members have to say on this subject.

Cheers,
Brett

[sheeny]

I think life could be quite bountiful. Sentient life probably reasonably rare though and technological life forms who we think of like ourselves, extremely rare.

Al.

[julianh72]

I think it's a near-certainty that sentient life is out there (and plentiful), and it's possible that we may even receive signals from a distant civilisation on an exoplanet one day, but carrying on a conversation may be difficult with any civilisation that is more than a few light years from Earth.

Recent evidence shows that stars with one or more planets are the norm rather than the exception, and planets in the "habitable zone" are proving to be quite common. We are also expanding our ideas about how big the "habitable zone" is - e.g. not very long ago, the Earth was the only planet in our solar system that was considered to be in the habitable zone, but we now know that Europa and Enceladus have oceans of liquid water. This means that there are literally hundreds of billions of planets or moons in the Milky Way alone which lie within the habitable zone as we currently understand it, and there are of course hundreds of billions of galaxies in the observable universe.

As for the Drake Equation - with so many candidate planets and moons, regardless of how low you rate the probability of life forming on any given planet, and how low you rate the probability of life evolving to some sort of sentient civilisation, that still suggests millions of candidate planets in our Milky Way - all we have to do is find them!

[OzStarGazer]

I am glad somebody asked. I have been thinking of asking this question for quite a while now.
Yes, I think that there is sentient life out there too. We are so small. It would be a terrible waste of space if only our planet were inhabited!
I wish we will know more before I die because I have always been interested!

[avandonk]

Get over it folks most of the Universe is very nasty to soft fleshy things like us.

In an infinite Universe that is one of many infinite Universes all that is possible has happened and is happening and will happen again and again ad infinitum!

Just enjoy the short time you have to mostly bicker with your fellow simians. Try not to throw too much of your own excrement at others.

Bert

[Peter Ward]

And now a reading from the Book of Python....

"The universe itself keeps on expanding and expanding
In all of the directions it can whizz
As fast as it can go, the speed of light, you know
Twelve million miles a minute and that's the fastest speed there is

So remember, when you're feeling very small and insecure
How amazingly unlikely is your birth
And pray that there's intelligent life somewhere up in space
'Cause there's bugger all down here on Earth"

[AG Hybrid]

Can't disagree with this point of view at all. Life is so fragile. How many aspects have fallen into place to get to where we are now?

So many things can go wrong and have gone wrong.

A comet killing the dinosaurs allowed mammals and the only technological life we know develop. And that took 65 million years. In the scheme of things that's not very long. But, really 65 million years is a long time between mass extinctions. How lucky we have been not to cop another comet or a nearby supernova/GRB. Hell the Oort Cloud is supposed to have nearly a trillion comet hanging out there. Just lying there in wait to get a gravitational nudge towards the inner planets.

I'm not saying there is no intelligent life in our galaxy. Just don't expect the intergalactic senate from Star Wars.

Another point. If I was part of a technologically advanced race and I observed the Human race, how we treat each other and our planet. I probably wouldn't stop for a chat.

[5ash]

[QUOTE=sheeny;1092477]I think life could be quite bountiful. Sentient life probably reasonably rare though and technological life forms who we think of like ourselves, extremely rare.

I've always thought this point of view held by a number of theorists is the most sensible one , after all even if life does flourish all over the universe as it probably does , evolution to sentient life capable of developing complex technology is not so likely . Even here on earth some groups of humans reached levels of technology that failed to change for thousands of years before intervention from groups with more advanced technology , perhaps they would not have changed if left?
Philip

[el_draco]

Thank gawd for that!!! :P

[sheeny]

[QUOTE=5ash;1092615]
Exactly my point. How many sustainable cultures (don't even consider species) have been destroyed by our particular special case of insanity? Exponential growth as a basis for a culture on a finite planet? It can only work if you intend to move on... and that's not so easy.

Intelligence? There's plenty of intelligent individuals, but collectively I have to agree with the Monty Python quote of Peter's.;):lol:

Al.

[JB80]

Reminds me of this little gem........

THEY'RE MADE OUT OF MEAT


"They're made out of meat."

"Meat?"

"Meat. They're made out of meat."

"Meat?"

"There's no doubt about it. We picked up several from different parts of the planet, took them aboard our recon vessels, and probed them all the way through. They're completely meat."

"That's impossible. What about the radio signals? The messages to the stars?"

"They use the radio waves to talk, but the signals don't come from them. The signals come from machines."

"So who made the machines? That's who we want to contact."

"They made the machines. That's what I'm trying to tell you. Meat made the machines."

"That's ridiculous. How can meat make a machine? You're asking me to believe in sentient meat."

"I'm not asking you, I'm telling you. These creatures are the only sentient race in that sector and they're made out of meat."

"Maybe they're like the orfolei. You know, a carbon-based intelligence that goes through a meat stage."

"Nope. They're born meat and they die meat. We studied them for several of their life spans, which didn't take long. Do you have any idea what's the life span of meat?"

"Spare me. Okay, maybe they're only part meat. You know, like the weddilei. A meat head with an electron plasma brain inside."

"Nope. We thought of that, since they do have meat heads, like the weddilei. But I told you, we probed them. They're meat all the way through."

"No brain?"

"Oh, there's a brain all right. It's just that the brain is made out of meat! That's what I've been trying to tell you."

"So ... what does the thinking?"

"You're not understanding, are you? You're refusing to deal with what I'm telling you. The brain does the thinking. The meat."

"Thinking meat! You're asking me to believe in thinking meat!"

"Yes, thinking meat! Conscious meat! Loving meat. Dreaming meat. The meat is the whole deal! Are you beginning to get the picture or do I have to start all over?"

"Omigod. You're serious then. They're made out of meat."

"Thank you. Finally. Yes. They are indeed made out of meat. And they've been trying to get in touch with us for almost a hundred of their years."

"Omigod. So what does this meat have in mind?"

"First it wants to talk to us. Then I imagine it wants to explore the Universe, contact other sentiences, swap ideas and information. The usual."

"We're supposed to talk to meat."

"That's the idea. That's the message they're sending out by radio. 'Hello. Anyone out there. Anybody home.' That sort of thing."

"They actually do talk, then. They use words, ideas, concepts?"
"Oh, yes. Except they do it with meat."

"I thought you just told me they used radio."

"They do, but what do you think is on the radio? Meat sounds. You know how when you slap or flap meat, it makes a noise? They talk by flapping their meat at each other. They can even sing by squirting air through their meat."

"Omigod. Singing meat. This is altogether too much. So what do you advise?"

"Officially or unofficially?"

"Both."

"Officially, we are required to contact, welcome and log in any and all sentient races or multibeings in this quadrant of the Universe, without prejudice, fear or favor. Unofficially, I advise that we erase the records and forget the whole thing."

"I was hoping you would say that."

"It seems harsh, but there is a limit. Do we really want to make contact with meat?"

"I agree one hundred percent. What's there to say? 'Hello, meat. How's it going?' But will this work? How many planets are we dealing with here?"

"Just one. They can travel to other planets in special meat containers, but they can't live on them. And being meat, they can only travel through C space. Which limits them to the speed of light and makes the possibility of their ever making contact pretty slim. Infinitesimal, in fact."

"So we just pretend there's no one home in the Universe."

"That's it."

"Cruel. But you said it yourself, who wants to meet meat? And the ones who have been aboard our vessels, the ones you probed? You're sure they won't remember?"

"They'll be considered crackpots if they do. We went into their heads and smoothed out their meat so that we're just a dream to them."

"A dream to meat! How strangely appropriate, that we should be meat's dream."

"And we marked the entire sector unoccupied."

"Good. Agreed, officially and unofficially. Case closed. Any others? Anyone interesting on that side of the galaxy?"

"Yes, a rather shy but sweet hydrogen core cluster intelligence in a class nine star in G445 zone. Was in contact two galactic rotations ago, wants to be friendly again."

"They always come around."

"And why not? Imagine how unbearably, how unutterably cold the Universe would be if one were all alone ..."

http://www.terrybisson.com/page6/page6.html

[redbeard]

Both are gold.

What I sometimes think on this topic, and the words in the two above quotes, roughly sum it up.


Try this:
Imagine that we ARE the only beings such as us or anything similar, (life as we know it in general), and think from time to time over about a week about what we might search for that is not life as we know it.

After a week, it would be curious to see how we looked at our universe knowing that we are the only ones in here and what would be the alternate priority search! We could meet at pubs to discuss results for several hours and go home happy.
　
Yep, too much wine tonight!

[Eden]

I'm glad to see some input on this, some very good points raised too I might add.

Although I've always been highly sceptical towards the whole idea of one day receiving some sort of transmission from another life-form elsewhere in the galaxy (or the universe for that matter), Julian hit the nail on the head in his summary of the situation as it stands at this stage in our evolution.

I'm not certain of the source, but the "very conservative" estimate of the minimum number of exoplanets in the observable universe is believed to be somewhere around 50 sextillion (50,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 ).

Considering most people have difficulty digesting numbers that exceed the scale of billions and struggle to get their head around the distances expressed by light-year units (which becomes incrementally worse when we start talking about other galaxies which are millions or billions of light years from Earth), if this is indeed a value which falls short of the very least number of other planets out there, surely one could rationally say that there must be another planet aside our own which harbours intelligent life?

I think it would be unreasonable to expect millions of planets out there in the universe with bipedal hominid lifeforms, but I do not think that a solar system like our own is as rare as we might be lead to believe or have believed in the past. To expect to hear from those intelligent life forms which do exist, at least in our lifetime, is asking for a lot and a two-way conversation is completely out of the question. It's all about the distances...the very same reason behind why they don't come visiting.

Even if Earth depended -- absolutely depended -- on our moon to stir the primordial muck pond from which we crawled, even if Earth or any other planet from which life could spring, HAD to be a certain distance from it's host star in order for that life to come into being, I don't think either of these pre-requisites (which are probably two of, if not the two, most important) could even be classed as rare or unusual. Stars of various temperatures, exoplanets with water and who knows how many other elements and moons orbiting them a certainty, you've got most of the ingredients right there already.

As for the value of life and it's fragility, the universe is a very dangerous place and as history has shown, all it would take is for an asteroid or similar body to collide with an inhabited planet or a freak solar event for the whole house of cards to come crashing down.

The vast distances of space will probably be the single most difficult endeavour that humanity will ever have to overcome, if we do continue to thrive as a species and successfully prevent ourselves from destroying this planet. If we wish to thrive as a species, it's paramount that we do overcome it because the Earth and its resources will not sustain us forever, no matter how careful, conservative or energy efficient we might choose to be.

[xelasnave]

Pity the money spent on proving GR some 10 billion approx to date could not have gone to looking for life in our solar system. The search for life should be of higher prioity than proving something which seems pretty strong to start with. I dont know where I got the figure from so I am happy to be corrected as to GR investment to date.
Alex

[xelasnave]

Will other life have the same DNA system and will there be any relationships to be drawn ..I would love to see missions find something befote I leave this planet. Alex

[Peter Ward]

WTF is GR?

[xelasnave]

Sorry for using intitals to refer to General Relativity.
My point again is that proving General Relativity although important is perhaps less so when the importance of finding the simplest of life forms in our solar system. For example the hunt for gravity waves if unsuccessful will not faulsify General Relativity and scientists will conclude the theory holds but our gear is not up to finding gra ity waves which they will still assume to be a reality. Same for Gravity B Probe the theory predicts it and not finding evidence of frame dragging would not faulsify General Relativity. So given General Relativity long list of proofs why continue to prove it right. I would rather pend funds to find a single cell life form than find a gravity wave which is reasonably expected to be found. Just think finding or not finding simple life will do for us.

[avandonk]

Dust that sings

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9nnwvoH-4XI

Bert

[doppler]

If there is life out there and there is a god of the universe then the distance between is gods quarantine. And we must remember that nothing is real everything is just a theory.

[glend]

Sentience is the ability to feel, perceive, or to experience subjectivity. It is not the ability to reason. It is fairly likely that sentient life can be found in the Milky Way arm. The ability to think (reason) seems to be much harder to find, judging by its rarity here on earth.

[el_draco]

I would dispute the existence of sentient life on this planet... "Humanity" acts more like a virus.:shrug:

[graham.hobart]

A fleet of fuel depleted star ships enters earth orbit and descends inexorably towards the Antipodes.
A lone sheriff stands astride the Sydney Harbour Bridge shouting " stop the boats! We stopped the boats oooo errrr!"
Seriously , apart from thermophilic bacteria or extreme cold pressure vacuum loving bugs, in my mind Hawking hit the nail on the tyre by using the example of Captain Cook vs the South Pacific islanders. Faced with a vastly superior technological race ( assumption holds if you cruise between stars), they got beads, influenza, syphilis and exploitation, Cook ( before he was murdered) to be far was apparently a decent man, as was Banks?, but they opened up half the world to speculators, venereal priests and psychotic mostly pommie governors.
Not a good start.
If they cruise from Rigel to here, they are not on a peace mission my friends.
The mote in gods eye/ foot fall/ the forge of god- all good fiction to whet your drake addled brain pans.
All we can do is throw faeces!!!!! (Again):help:

[Andy01]

"It is known that there are an infinite number of worlds, simply because there is an infinite amount of space for them to be in. However, not every one of them is inhabited. Therefore, there must be a finite number of inhabited worlds. Any finite number divided by infinity is as near to nothing as makes no odds, so the average population of all the planets in the Universe can be said to be zero. From this it follows that the population of the whole Universe is also zero, and that any people you may meet from time to time are merely the products of a deranged imagination."
Douglas Adams

One can also philosophically argue from a Christian viewpoint that we're lucky to be here at all as God made us in His image, on one tiny planet in the vast Cosmos.

To quote the late great Carl Sagan,
"The Earth is the only world known so far to harbor life. There is nowhere else, at least in the near future, to which our species could migrate. Visit, yes. Settle, not yet. Like it or not, for the moment the Earth is where we make our stand.

It has been said that astronomy is a humbling and character-building experience. There is perhaps no better demonstration of the folly of human conceits than this distant image of our tiny world. To me, it underscores our responsibility to deal more kindly with one another, and to preserve and cherish the pale blue dot, the only home we've ever known."

It's my personal philosophy, as an amateur astronomer, Astrophotographer and born again Christian that we're bloody lucky to still be here as a race. That we havn't destroyed ourselves or been destroyed, that we can look through our telescopes and see wonders and ask "Why are we here" and "Are we alone" is the purpose of life. Not to answer "42" but to consider "Why were all those stars created?" and is it just some kind if test for us as a race?

It's like God's saying "Right there you go, now you've seen what I've made, what are you going to do about it to advance yourselves as a race? " kind of question.

We've seen soooo many visions and insights from Hollywood and Sci-fi novelists about what could or might be, and many religions have their own position about what is or is not, but for for me.. to paraphrase Douglas Adams again, "If we were the only form of life it would be an awful waste of space".

ie: it seems highly improbable that we're alone here.

Cheers
Andy

[KenGee]

Gee must be something in the water in Tassie! I knew you guys had low self-esteem but that is silly.

[xelasnave]

Simple answer rather than make up stories is we dont know not only simple but honest. Why are those words so difficult to utter. We can speculate on probabilities but we dont know but using religious texts or Hollywood mpvies ad authoriy is never going to work.

[astroron]

I have to agree Ken, I am so fed up with the Crap saying "There is no intelligent life here on Earth,:mad2:
Just look at the marvelous things the human race has achieved over the last few million years.
That we are also stuffing things up as well is what life is all about,we are really just a young species and I am sure in the future we will get things right to a big degree or die out in trying.
Cheers:thumbsup:

[AstralTraveller]

We've learned to control and change many things - just not ourselves. Can we do so in time? I'd like to hope so but one has to admit there is a lot happening in the world that suggests we won't.

[xelasnave]

I also agree. A bit of a side step a discussion a week ago we considered how much general inteligence could be raised and the effects. Say IQ doubled or trippled hpw would that translate. Greater productivity could be expected however wpuld we becpme more civilized given our fall back to esentially animal tesponce in a crisis or matters of the heart. Conclusions presented were IQ would be no improvement unless somehow animal responce could be eliminated. I have observed irrational behaviour in inteligent folk..rage or anger making or taking high intelligence out of the mix. Again sorry for errors and i hope my ppint can be understood. Alex

[el_draco]

On the contrary, I get to see lots of Tassie and I have no issue with self-esteem. Its also about the only place I know where I can stick my face in a stream and drink without getting giardia; tastes great mate :thumbsup:

The questions that jump to mind repeatedly whilst I am enjoying the environment our "leaders" are so intent on destroying are:

What kind of a species would seek to destroy what I see for short term gain?

Answer, Virus

What life form grows exponentially until it destroys its "host"?

Answer: Virus

What does "humanity" most closely resemble?

Answer: Virus

Self evident truth IMHO... :shrug:

[xelasnave]

This is a science forum and if you make claims that humans are indeed virus it would be reasonable that you answer this question. Can you present reference to a scientific body of work or a scientific theory in support of the proposition you suggest. Alex;)

[el_draco]

It is indeed a scientific forum. However, I was offering a personal opinion based on the observation of similar traits of two different life forms, nothing more. Based on these observations, and the likely ultimate outcome, the observation is worth making... :D and the water does taste great! :lol:

Rom

[xelasnave]

Rom I got a kilometer frontage to the Timbara River at back of my place and I know how you feel. It is unpoluted except they did put in a cyanide tailing dam up river which was safe until it overflowed but who would have called that in an area with rain fall like a tropical jungle..er it is semi rain forest but well it could not cause too much damage could it..
Science is science like law or religeon certain things must be recognised.. We need a philosophy forum really. And dont worry about the planet it will still be here after man has left. Extinction is the rule and i could support that with little egfort alex

[KenGee]

Rom all populations are held in check by food and predation. think of mouse plagues or locus.
our science has allowed us to free ourselves of many of the problems that have plagued us in the past. Perhaps you would like us to step back?

oh btw the water in my area is just fine.

[xelasnave]

And Rom check out "scientific theory" on say wiki. The term has a specificmeaning such that it is more in line with the laymans term ...fact.. It is not a notion or idea which may or may not be sound reasonable a scientific theory is for practocal purpose a scientific fact. You dont say I have a theory you can say you have an idea. Anyways in my view one must grasp this small and impprtant aspect to consider or talk science. It was not so long ago that water was a dubipus commodoty..science made it safe..The simple concept of boilinh wayer is science protecting us from the nasties that can be found in what wpuld appear clean water. Infant mortality dropped with the introduction of tea in England causr kids got to drink purifoed water.. They drank ale and wine cause it did not kill ypu like water.

[speach]

Of course there is. The universe is a rather large place and to think we are the only ones is Narcissistic.

[doppler]

Is the universe large or are we very small ?

[xelasnave]

It is all relative..at least that is our best scientific model theory. I have Hubble deep field photo on my fone and enjoy showing folk the number of gallaxies a grain of sand at arms lenght hides from view presumably no matter what part of the sky you try to cover. It has a strange effect claming I suspect if any comprehend their so small yet so important.Alex

[el_draco]

Alas, WE wont get a say in the matter. Watch this and breathe deep.

http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/arithmetic-population-and-energy-lecture/

In short, this is why we are screwed and its coming VERY fast.

Science has not in any way shape or form freed us from the realities of over population, it has merely delayed the inevitable and, in doing so, will make the inevitable correction horrific. Think Wildfire...

Rom

[xelasnave]

Science is a tool used by humans it is not the problem..follow the money to find the real problem and dont waste time attacking windmills but the miller if you must.. Sorry Kenny I look forward to your responce but you know me there are things i cant keep to myself. Sorry for jumping the que line. Totally your call.

[xelasnave]

I am surprised i am still on air and until a recharge this must be the last post. I call for and will initate a thread to outline the basics for science..the meaning of theory and why we use the best model to date..on a personal level I find the big bang unacceptable but recognise it is our best model it is working so if you disagree present a better theory the gives better pridictions. I was and probably still the resident crackpot here but at least have taken the time to read the rules. There is nothing wrong with our science it is amazing it works so well but it does because it limits folks the facts and predicyion that works humans are revied their work tested and happily many papers are shown t have fraud etc but that is a gd thing it shows the best will survive and fraud found out. Could it be better maybe but then all you do is show how to make it better seriously a new system and how it is better.. Critism without a new model is useless i.Dam this kyboard but please take the time to understand what science is find out how it works find out what it promises and what it dors not promise..it does not offer truth it offers the best model we have at the moment that has best tested and can be used to predict an outcome..it sort simply yet it so simple

[xelasnave]

It seems simple but it is not that simple you need yet a si.ple understanding of how science defines itself a laymans definition defines science as something he thinks it is but usually it is not. Do yourself a favor find out what it is..it is not what you currntly believe. The truth will take you forward..well it has for me and I ofger my advice in an effort to expand your wisdom

[KenGee]

Rom we didn't move from the stone age to the bronze age because we run out of rocks.
We self regulate our growth look at most of the developed world growth is zero. As the developing world catches up their growth will slow as well. At some point world growth will actually reverse.

[Peter Ward]

I suspect it's already happened.

No other planetary body/moon has been visited by humans for 42 years.

Supersonic airliners have not graced our skies for over a decade.

Media (as in archival data formats, CD, DVD, Bluray) have longevity
less than the spoken word.....(when was the last time you saw/held a leather bound version of Encyclopedia Britannica? )

:sadeyes:

[el_draco]

There is no indication that overall population growth will slow in a controlled manner. Even the local dweebs in charge push a "sustainable growth rate" of 3%. Utter B.S.!! Calculate the doubling time and you'll understand why they are talking about a "Big Australia" .

The one thing that IS guaranteed is that we WILL have zero growth and probably a rapid population crash. We are NOT immune from population dynamics and there is no indication to suggest that we will avoid this fate. Economics says "Grow for Growths sake", History says otherwise History looks like it will repeat, but this time, on a global scale. If it does, the resulting planet will be impoverished both in terms of resources and biodiversity.