Intelligent life is common in the Universe: Free Public Debate

[CY(CLE)BORG]

Intelligent life is common in the Universe : Free Public Debate - next Monash University Event

To (mis) quote the famous show:
"There's Life Jim but not as we know it" - Dr McCoy
"There's no sign if intelligent Life captain" - Dr Spock

So which is it........?

Two experts on astrobiology will argue the topic using the latest information and theories about astronomy and the possibility of life existing in the Universe. In recent years we have found hundreds of planets outside the Solar System. Surely intelligent life must exist somewhere. But why have radio searches revealed nothing yet? Following the debate the experts will take questions from the audience.

Date:Thursday 27 August
Time:6 - 7 pm
Venue: Lecture Theatre S4, Building 25 Clayton campus

[avandonk]

There is a simple answer to the question of radio signals. We have been transmitting 'analogue' signals for about one hundred years. Once everything is 'digital' transmissions it will look like random noise from far away. So for two equivalent civilisations to communicate they must be on the same timeline as far as their development is concerned. These windows are very short and very unlikely to coincide in time let alone within range of sensitive detectors. .

I personally think the Universe is teeming with life. Thankfully far enough away to not cause us any grief. Yet!

There is no definitive answer as we have no evidence only conjecture.

Should be interesting.

Bert

[Jeeps]

There are dinosaurs everywhere out there. Be afraid


;)


cheers

[avandonk]

The other 'gedanken' argument if an alien species millions of years ahead of us pass us by regularly and do not bother to communicate, Why?

When was the last time you tried to communicate with ant nests in the desert?

Bert

[DavidU]

Intelligent life is rare here on Earth. Lets hope things improve out there.

[renormalised]

True....the simple answer is there isn't that many civilisations around at present using radio and/or communications equipment as primitive as we have. Considering that 75% of all Earth-like planets in this Galaxy are on average 1.8 billion years older than ours, with all things being equal, we're not even out of the stone age, yet:D

Most of the usual comparisons (them to us being like us to pond slime) are a little demeaning and fanciful, but to be more realistic the comparison is probably more like us trying to communicate with an ant and explaining to it the fundamentals of quantum physics. Or teaching your dog how to build a radio receiver. They would probably find us both amusing and frustrating at the same time because apart from a few basic things, we would have very little in common. You couldn't discuss physics with them, they'd be so far beyond us that their understanding would seem to be nothing more than magic to us (hence the old adage of Clarke's) and our knowledge would be even less than quaint.

[avandonk]

My dog does not need a radio transmitter. He thinks by looking at me he can control me and then he gets what he wants, food! I have tried to explain basic cosmology to him but he sees the perfect Universe as an ever replenished plate of FOOD!

Bert

[renormalised]

Maybe dogs are more intelligent than humans after all. In that case, we should be barking to the cosmos (or have them do it):eyepop::P:P:D:D

[multiweb]

:rofl::rofl::rofl::thumbsup:

[Rod66]

Well there is the drake equation, which tries to simplify the idea of how many civilisations might be out there, but the problem is we have to guess at some of the values to begin with and since we don't have any contact with ANY thing out there yet, its kind of hard to prove the equation... and even worse, a number of wildly different answers are still right using this equation.

http://www.airynothing.com/smackerels/DrakeEquation.html

I tend to think that any sentient species is worthy of contact by another, regardless of how primitive they are. Have we not come far enough now to be able to speculate about future technology to at least have a go of understanding it..

I think it more likely that advanced species may in fact protect those less advanced civilisations (like ours) for fear they could easily be wiped out by more advanced ones, or worse, be enslaved by them. Also imagine what we might do with a little of their technology.. we are after all no less warlike than the ancient romans. I think we need to get to a certain level of cultural maturity before they would consider contacting us, rather than think of us as ants..

Of course a few crashed ufo's would be handy to help us along :D :D

[leon]

Na we are alone, and that's it. :whistle:

Leon :thumbsup:

[Galactic G]

If the idea of an "Infinite Universe" is correct then there is intelligent life out there. In fact, in an "Infinite Universe" there must be another forum (called 'IceInSpace') debating this question right now.

[seanliddelow]

Thank god we have digital radio. I think that earth like planet 20 light years away loooks promising. Now we have to wait 40 years.........

[Barrykgerdes]

Too true

[Enchilada]

This is actually the definitive scientific-based answer. If only this idea was implanted in the population, we wouldn't have to put up with the mumbo-jumbo from people who just haven't a clue.
No problem looking for life on Earth or in the universe out there - agree with the premise to search - but the rest in the meantime is just silly.
Great comment Bert!! :thumbsup:

[dpastern]

I guess it all boils down to how you define life, and you define intelligence. Given that planetary systems are almost becoming passé these days, I'd say there's a very good chance that in most planetary systems orbiting G type stars (or similar) that some terrestial style planets have formed in the life zone. Resonance orbits seem to be quite the norm from what observational scientists are currently seeing, so I don't believe that there's any reason that similar planetary systems to Sol's don't exist.

Of course, evolution is the big question. Will intelligent species always develop on planets like Earth? We'll probably never know.

As to aliens, why on Earth would they want to show themselves to a bunch of unintelligent, war mongering, greedy, self centered, violent humans? If I was an alien, and was monitoring us, I'd sure as hell make sure that I remained hidden.

Dave

[Inmykombi]

I find it quite bazzar that some members of the public can report seeing something strange in the sky when they just pop outside "just walking the dog" or something, and all of us that spend hours upon hours upon hours under the stars have not seen anything unusual.

In the 40 years I have spent looking at the sky, I have not seen anything strange.

Our money would be better off trying to feed the people that need it instead of looking for something that just isnt there.

I agree with a previous post that says we are all alone....

Geoffro.

[marki]

Oh I don't know about the conjecture, there are definately aliens on Earth and some have enrolled in my year 8 science class :P.

Mark

[dpastern]

Well, in my 30 years of looking at the sky, I have seen some very odd things.

Just because you haven't seen anything, doesn't automatically discount others. Nor does it make it a solid reason for not investigating alien life.

Dave

[Inmykombi]

Fair enough, but no-one else I know has seen anything strange either.
Maybe if I did see something, I would have a deifferent view.

Please enlighten us with what you have seen.

[seanliddelow]

Off topic, but are you a science teacher?

[JethroB76]

Not having seen "anything strange" has convinced you that other intelligent life doesn't exist somewhere?

[dpastern]

I have recounted my experiences on other threads on IIS several months ago, and received much ridicule. I will not repeat them here.

Dave

[Barrykgerdes]

Of course there is intelleigent life elsewhere although there is very little within our reach, particularly on the home planet. The Universe is infinite so there will be an infinite number of places where intelligent life abounds. No body appears to understand infinity or time. I cannot grasp it in real terms but I know it is so. We get many people defining the size of the universe but if we do define it what is outside?

Barry:thumbsup::shrug:

[Inmykombi]

I shouldn't relate the " not seeing anything" with the possibility of life out there somewhere.

I am assuming that some intelligent life out there may want to visit us here, and make themselves known to us.

We will just have to keep looking until we satisfy our Human curiosity.

[casstony]

I think it's likely the universe is teeming with life, but I wonder if it is ever possible for a civilisation to evolve beyond our present self-destructive level of intelligence. To do so the aliens would need to have a passive nature, but then how could they evolve in the first place against other competitive species?

[sally1jack]

I think there probably is life somewhere out there, growing under a rock or something. We always assume that life else where is more intelligent than us maybe is maybe isn't.
If they are anything like us they will wipe themselves out long before interstella travel is close to being possilbe.Look at us we can't even get to mars, even to get out of our solar system is still science fiction.

I think we need to fix up ours world so someone would want to come.We have 3 big problems as i see it. Poverty , Population & politicians. Solution Feed,Reduce ,eradicate :rofl: :P
Phil

[renormalised]

It's not our level of intelligence which is self destructive. It's what we choose to do with it that can be self destructive. It's social and political systems which are self destructive. We can change them, if we want to. It's our apathy and inertia which prevent us....basically our stupidity. Change scares most people, and therefore they don't want to see it occur. So, those people who want power most of all, take advantage of that, and what you get as an outcome of that is what you see on this planet, right now. We can change, but it's going to take the right sort of person to push it and lead it along. Though, we all have to take responsibility for what needs to be done.

That's where any civilisation, anywhere in the Universe, can make it. It has to embrace change and take responsibility for it. Not endlessly debate the why's and wherefores and then hide under a rock, hoping some other idiot will take the lead, or clean up the mess that they make for themselves.

[renormalised]

That's another thing which we have to combat....defeatist attitudes. If you believe in something for long enough to convince yourself it's true, then it becomes a self fulfilling prophecy.

[kinetic]

Carl Sagan once did a rough statistical estimate of the chances
of life elsewhere.
In the equation, worst case estimates were plugged in to
all the variables.
Even when it was all calculated with these downgraded numbers,
the experiment pointed towards the universe containing life somewhere
in significant numbers.

Now my view is that if we took that as our starting position
and then looked back on ourselves we get this:

Life here, science tells us is the result of evolution of several hundred
million years.
Edit:Evolution also tells us that we consider ourselves superior to every other
species below us, and we take it upon ourselves to choose which
inferior species survive or not...basically on a whim.

Several hundred million years is just a blink of an eye in the age
of the universe.
Then finally, if that's how we view our species below us, imagine how
another civilisation superior to ours would probably view us?
And also remember that since the invention of radio transmission
and subsequent television and everything else we broadcast, that
the bubble of these transmissions is something like 75 or 100 light
years big now....:)

I'd be worried :whistle:

Steve

[renormalised]

It's not science telling us anything....it's our culture, our societies which indoctrinate us into believing such philosophies. There are societies and philosophies on this planet which are the antithesis of this....Hinduism and Buddhism for example. It's specifically a philosophy of Western culture that promotes and inculcates the sort of philosophy you're speaking about. When you've had several thousand years of such society and philosophy being taught to generations right form birth, what do you expect to see and happen. Exactly what we've got now. The whole culture is dysfunctional....religion, politics and society. It needs changing.

[sally1jack]

I wasn't being defeatist i was simply observing human nature,I am a very positive person & changed my life so i am in the position help others,
I use to believe i was batman when i was a little boy , still can't find Robin though.
Humans nature is at question here, you think I'm defeatist i disagree that why in the end the world ends up in conflict on all levels
Anyway i think this is getting off topic

Phil :)

[Darth Wader]

If there is intelligent life out there, they are probably disgusted by our species and are steering clear, like travellers staying away from a war-torn country.

[sjastro]

Unfortunately science has been distorted to produce extreme views.
Darwin's theory of evolution, in particular natural selection, formed the platform of Nazi policy on race.

Modern eugenics is based on the same principles.

Steven

[Ian Robinson]

Intelligent life might be common every in this universe , BUT ....it's not very common on the third rock out from Sol .

[renormalised]

I wasn't specifically talking about yourself but using your quote to illustrate what is a defeatist attitude. You maybe a very positive person but that never stops anyone from having doubts about something.

It's fine to debate on topics and agree or disagree, but that doesn't have to mean that we go out and then start shooting at one another. The reasons why people do that is because they're afraid and insecure about their own belief system, even if they don't admit it publicly or even to themselves. It's when that is manipulated by people wanting control over others, that it becomes dangerous.

And this isn't off topic, as this sort of debate goes right to the heart on the survivability of any civilisation...alien or otherwise.

[Karls48]

Self- destructible intelligence – if we did not posses it we would be still living in the trees. I think that present trend to protect everyone against everything presents bigger danger for our eventual demise then all the nuclear technologies, global warming, wars and whatever fads that will come up in the future, put together.
I think that we are pretty naïve broadcasting our presence to space around us. If there are any advanced civilisation in our galaxy, it is like saying to them “here we are, come and get us”. If the laws of physics work same in whole universe it is reasonable to expect that evolution will work in same manner everywhere also. Meaning that any intelligent species out there will have survival traits similar to ours. In other words – nasty - from point of view of other species, but equipped with attributes for their own survival and advancement.

[renormalised]

Precisely Steven....society (or at least certain sections, thereof) taking a tool and using it for purposes other than what it was intended for. It doesn't have to be for anything extreme, though. It's being misused right now to promote wholly dubious and erroneous philosophies in both education and the media, in many countries...including here.

[renormalised]

Some civilisations out there will be belligerent, granted. But not all of them. Surely, in observing the people of this planet for as long as what most of us here have, we can see that there are a great many different ways of thought and behaviour present here. Not everyone is a belligerent warmonger or power hungry person. Given all things being equal, it will most likely be the same for ET. Instead of hiding away from the possibilities, we should embrace our curiosities and what it may lead us to. Because, if we decide to hide under a rock, it might protect us for a time, but someone at some stage will come along and turn that rock over.

[casstony]

Our intelligence gives us the capacity to destroy ourselves.

Our adversarial nature suggests we will destroy ourselves.

Our nature is the key part of our current dilemma. History dictates that we, the sheeple, will once again be enthusiastically led to war by an opportunistic tyrant. I say 'we' since human nature is the same around the world and any powerful nation could turn to fascism. It's always possible that things could be different this time, in the sense that anything's possible, but history usually repeats. I think we will likely be put to the test by the economic stresses of the coming decade.

Not to mention degradation of our biosphere.

[marki]

And the depletion of our resources.

Mark

[renormalised]

Like I said....our intelligence won't destroy us, it's what we chose to do with it that either does or doesn't. We have the capacity to do good or bad....it all boils down to choice. Yes, we are a predatory species, but that doesn't make us self destructive. What makes us self destructive, or not, is our choices and what we intend to do with them. For the most part, we do good and we co-operate with our fellows. If we didn't, we wouldn't be where we are now. We would've self destructed long before we got to our present stage of development, if we ever got out of the trees at all.

It's down to this....a dysfunctional society, and we need to make major changes to it, now. If we don't, then we'll reap what we sow.

[marki]

Don't forget decadance, western society is heading there fast:eyepop:. In the end didn't the Romans get too fat to fight?

Mark

[renormalised]

That's all part of being dysfunctional. Eventually you get to a state of supreme inertia and lethargy and your society falls apart. Someone bigger and uglier than you are comes along and knocks you off your perch, or you just slide into the abyss and disappear under your own effluent.

[marki]

Haha :D:D:D:D:D.

I am not sure about us being so self destructive anymore. Too many opposing teams have enough gear to fry the entire face of the Earth. I think it has forced our species to grow up and though the politicians may burp and fart they all know that if they release their weapons it will mean their own anilation. This to me is the highest form of self preservation which is built into each and everyone of us. We choose not to die so we must negotiate. I believe our species will be around for a long while yet :).

Mark

[renormalised]

So do I....I think we'll have a rather long tenure here, in one form or another.

[dpastern]

I disagree. Every other major species has been wiped out at one stage of the planet's evolutionary cycle, I do not believe humans will be any different.

Dave

[Lumen Miner]

But, if the ants had set up lil' radio transmitters and were pinging me, I would be interested. Maybe that's just me though.
I do get the point though... We are nothing but a mess, of under-developed slime.





That can be said for common sense also. It would seem to be not so common these days.

Customer- "Excuse me, do I really need a caulking gun to use this caulking tube"

Me- "Yes, you do, we have some cheap ones though"

Customer- "But do I REALLY need to use the gun?"

Me- "Yes sir, it needs a compression device to make it come out"

Customer- "But where does it say in the directions I need it??"

Me- "I'm not sure if it will actually say it, but I guess it is just assumed"

Customer- Stares at me like i'm trying to rip him off.

Me- "Well actually, to tell you the truth, I think they are just trying to get more money out of you. Just take it home, try a stick and push it up the tube"

Wonder how much he got out.... Geez i'm cruel, got to get out of customer service... :rofl:



Tell you what would, really call in the inter-planetary police. Start jettisoning nuclear rubbish into outer space.... See how long the enviro geeks, take to coming knocking on our front door step.



I disagree, a passive nature is not needed. Given our level of evolution, I find it hard to blame ourselves for our current conditions. It would not how ever take a passive natured person to realise fossil fuel are not the way to go....
Like I said though, green energies were not available to us when our industrial needs required them.... So I can not hold us to blame... However recently I could not say the same...





You might be thinking parrallel universe, in a different time continum... Even if there was an "Infinite Universe", there would not necessarily be another "Iceinspace" forum. As infinite would suggest, there are infinite possibilites of occurances. Chances are the "Iceinspace" ticket would not come up again anytime soon... could do though.

I get what you mean though...



I don't find it that "bazaar", there are many people out there with minds not so adapt to the uniqueness of our universe... Bits of space junk, aurora's satellites etc. Would all look weird to a lay person. The brain plays funny jokes sometimes. Add a few beers to the equation and you have yourself a sighting.



Perhaps they don't come out for us "non-believers" :rofl:








Interesting topic... :)

[multiweb]

mmhh... that's the problem Mark. Too many matches lying around left by the "responsible people" but there's a bunch of "no good kids" around bound to pick one up and start a major drama. The odds don't look good. :whistle:

[marki]

Well if you look on the bright side (scuz the pun) if it happens you will not be aware of it for very long:P.

Mark

[avandonk]

Maybe we should ask the Aztecs, Mayans, North American Indian, Australian Aboriginal, Africans and many more what happens when a technologically superior mob invade your homeland and strip it of resources and treat the local population very badly. This is historical fact not conjecture!

Can anyone remember the sci fi movie where the aliens were taking humans to a better place. The 'hero' in the movie worked out that the aliens Book 'To Serve Man' was a cook book!

Bert

[marki]

Bert it never seems to occur to anyone that we may be the most advanced species in the universe. I shudder to think of the consequences for other lifeforms if that is the case.

Mark

[avandonk]

Mark we glibly define ourselves as being at the apex of evolution. Yet we ignorantly destroy the very thing that gives us life. We are all on a finite sphere called spaceship Earth and we are all damaging it through greed. The web of life on our planet is what nurtures all of us. If we damage this we damage ourselves. To me this is self evident. I could at this stage spout a lot of data but I won't.

When I was a young lad in the fifties we used to swim in the Diamond Creek at Eltham and there were Platypuses (i) in the same place and we just ignored each other. The creek was teeming with fish and the full lot of other species. It is now being slowly being brought back after it turned into a sewer.

We do not need to fear aliens as we are doing a very good job of ruining our planet all by ourselves.

Bert

[multiweb]

Don't have to look that far. We eat most of the other life forms locally. Picture that. First spaceship to reach earth lands in a KFC car park. Two chooks walk down the ladder... :eyepop: :lol:

[renormalised]

The Grand Emperor of the Chookonian League hears of the news transmitted back to Fowlon, war is declared to save their Earthly brethren and the insidious monkeys are wiped off the face of the map:eyepop::P:D

[GeoffW1]

Hi,

The aliens are not out there viewing I Love Lucy or Bert Newton. I was quite relieved when I found that out.

Those signals were broadcast by omni antenna and quite true, propagate as a bubble, rather than a beam, from Earth. They however degrade and "smear" quite quickly, and would not be intelligible (well, maybe even at broadcast :lol:) much beyond our Solar system.

Cheers

[multiweb]

Galactic News Flash : "War started - Earth gets Egged!! " :scared:

[marki]

Bert you will get no argument from me on this one. Our species has been the most destructive ever to evolve on this planet. I am begining to think we have past the point of no return and are on the slippery slope of self extinction.

Mark

[renormalised]

Headlines in the "Galaxy Bulletin"..."Earth Hen-Pecked":P:P:D:D

[marki]

"Sanders to face charges of salt and battering" :P

Mark

[renormalised]

Has to face war crimes tribunal at the Galactic Council, for crimes most fowl (pun fully intended:P):D:D

[gman]

One would have to go right out on a limb to say that there hasn't been, is not or ever will be intelligent life somewhere in the universe.

I am one who does believe that there is, was or will be due to the distance and time from our vantage point.

[Lumen Miner]

I like to think of it as the Earths / a planets / the universes, automatic debug function.

This would apply to all, habitable planets in the universe.

This is only my personal opinion and pure speculation.

It looks oldly to me that evolution would coincide, directly and proportionally to the elements surrounding a species, during their existence phase.

The elements are present and used via, processes available / developed, during that stage of their evolutionary progress.
Eventually there will be a point, where either consumption of the available raw elements is ceased / alternatives sourced, or the inhabitants of the planet erradicate themselves via over population and stripping the planet of it's available resources. Rendering them obsolete as a species.

If evolution does not provide a means do develope alternative resources / find them, then the game is over, we lost.

So the question is, have we already lost? Or are we just skimming through by the skin of our teeth..?

[Lumen Miner]

I think that was The Simpsons... :rofl: :rofl:

[marki]

It's official, Sanders sentenced for crimes against aves. He is to be tarred, feathered, plucked and sent to the barders. His remains will be used to fertilise corn crops:P.

Mark

[renormalised]

Sentence to be carried out at the Crow of dawn:P:P:D:D

[marki]

Humanity weeps, now they will never know what the twelve secret herbs and spices were. This knowledge is in the exclusive possession of their fowl overlords:D.

Mark

[bobson]

So, this is what happens when weather is bad :)

[starlooker]

I am not sure how anyone can just say "we are alone".

If we exist here, then why can't life exist elsewhere? We are made of matter that exists abundantly elsewhere in the universe. So what is it that makes us unique?

If you were on an island in the Pacific, with no way of getting off it, and no way of communicating with anyone else outside of the island, would it be correct to think that there is no life off the island?

Earth is just an island, in space.

[mswhin63]

I remember a program or article many years ago that looked at the possibilty of what possible creatures would look like if survived in different condition. Mostly based on gravity but the possibility exists for aliens to exist under different Nitrogen, oxygen mixes.

So the possibilties could be enormous. Whether they would be inteligent enough or not is a different matter. Also the speed of light and the distances to be covered to determin the existance of intellegent life could be at what time they have or even developed enough.

Anything is possible we just may no have enough technological advancement to determin this. SKA may give us a little more infomation if it is ever used for SETI.

I also beleive that there is more integigent life out there but I also beleive that we are not advanced enough to determin it yet. Time and light speed travel may help if possible.

[Robh]

You can quote all the statistics you like about the number of suitable stars etc, but until some form of even the most primitive life is found elsewhere or intelligent signals are received from afar, there is no evidence that any intelligent life exists anywhere else in this Universe.

The existence of life implies the existence of the basic chemicals of life.
However, the existence of the basic chemicals of life does not imply the existence of life.

We may, quite simply, be unique. :D

Regards, Rob

[dpastern]

Sadly for the billions of other species that share the Earth with humans, I agree with you.

Bert makes some very valid points - things have drastically went downhill in the space of 30 years.

Wishing things would fix themselves, or go away if ignored, doesn't think them. This is exactly what our government and corporate sectors are currently doing.

Dave

[Robh]

Mother Earth has itself evolved an inanimate intelligence. She automatically varies her systems to changing internal and external inputs. The life she supports must re-adapt or perish.
Man is attacking her life-systems with increasing effect. Mother Earth is reacting to these inputs and producing an environment hostile to man. Once man is gone, she will have plenty of time to restore the balance and allow a more friendly species to evolve again.

Regards, Rob

[renormalised]

How do you know that the intelligence is inanimate??. We know so little about what life actually is that for all we know the planet might itself be a living organism (remember the Gaia Hypothesis). Intelligence in this form might be so far beyond us that we wouldn't even recognise it as such. We'd have no way of knowing unless someone had figured it out intuitively or we could communicate with it. In either case, we're just stabbing in the dark so far as our present condition is concerned. James Lovelock's theory wasn't all that well accepted in the scientific community and whilst they see some resemblance to their latter ways of thinking, I doubt if any biologist/ecologist/evolutionary scientist would consider the planet itself to be alive. That would be too much for them to consider and would be quite outside their world paradigm. A lot of very unpalatable ideas and possibilities would be brought up if they had to consider it as factual existence.

[bobson]

I'd like to see your faces once you find out that we are aliens on this planet.

[Robh]

The way we treat our planet, you'd think we were!
Where's home?

Regards, Rob

[avandonk]

Self awareness is not unique to humankind. Life in my opinion is the Universes way of becoming self aware. It is also Carl Sagans who I stole the idea from!

Thirty percent of your dry body weight are organisms (bacteria etc) that are not you. Without them you would not survive. These resident organisms live in a symbiotic relationship with all of us. Disease can really be thought of as this balance going awry.

Where does an individual start and end. We actually all rely on the vast web of life that covers this planet for our survival.

I happen to think that the human brain and others are body temperature quantum computers at some underlying level. I can think of no other reason for the existence of self awareness or conciousness. Quantum entanglement then can link everything together in ways we can only guess at.

This is all conjecture of course but is testable. We do not even know where to start. Perhaps the development of quantum computers which is happening as we speak can shed some light on this.

I have done a lot of my best work while asleep! Or outside for a smoke not even conciously thinking of the problem I had, and an idea would materialise that quite often was correct.

Bert

[renormalised]

Or maybe, the Universe (or any universe) is just the playground which life itself creates in order to grow and learn through physical existence.

Look at it in this way...how non trivial/random, beautiful and elegant are the underlying structure, the constants and mathematical constructs of the Universe. So finely balanced and precise. As if it were designed and yet if you put this to any scientist these days, they'd laugh at you...start quoting about the weak and/or strong anthropic principle and say they find no evidence for it to be anything other than some random chance occurrence. A "fluke of nature", "the natural outcome of the laws of physics", if you will. Having to consider that the Universe is not some random, chance event but that it may have been staged brings up some rather unpalatable ideas for scientists. It invokes a creator (now I can hear the creationists singing with joy about this....don't open your mouths yet, fellas. You've completely misinterpreted/misunderstood everything right from the start). However, there is no need for a specific being or entity to have been a "creator", not in the sense of a religious interpretation of what creation means. There's no "God" sitting on a throne somewhere waving his or her wand and making everything "according to their likeness". What if, since we are invoking the notion that all life is interconnected, on a higher level of consciousness/intelligence/being, all life is in fact the one living entity, but with countless parts making up all the living beings in existence. That living entity would have abilities and intelligence far beyond anything we could even dream of ourselves. Our minds would barely be able to touch it, but only because we choose not to. We live by what we see, and yet there is so much of the Universe that we don't see. We've become enamoured of the materialistic way of viewing things and our science is dependent upon it. What if we're missing 99% of everything just because we refuse to look beyond some small little box of reality, just because it offends our sensibilities. Because we can't test for something doesn't mean it's not testable. It just means we haven't the capabilities yet to test it. Remember, we're still evolving, but at different rates depending on what you're looking at. And just because we haven't figured out a way of observing or testing something doesn't mean it doesn't exist. There's also the corollary of that statement too, but that's the beauty of science. We can actually do something about finding out about it through study and careful measurement, intuition and leaps of logic. Religion, on the other hand, requires us to follow the dictates of others based on blind faith, with no supporting evidence (or very little, except for that which is twisted into a semblance of evidence). It relies on fear and insecurity, and is exploited by those wishing to have power over those who feel fear and insecurity. Yet they are the least secure and most fearful.

[renormalised]

The planet Coozbean....yep yep yep yep yep!!!:P:P:D:D

[avandonk]

Were you talkin' to me? Carl.

Here is a very simple 'gedanken' experiment.

What if as all of what we see now was at the same place and the same time in a hypothetical singularity. This means at the quantum entanglement level everything in the Universe is connected! Could it be the evolution of the Universe is controlled by some feedback mechanism we can only guess at. So the whole shebang is one feedback controlled evolving entity. A self referential organism?

Bert

[renormalised]

Yes and no, because I was also talking to everyone else too:D:D

But I like your idea as well...it ties in quite nicely with some of what I wrote. Actually if you take quantum entanglement for what it is, despite what we may experience, given the how particles behave at this level (and taking into account "spooky" action at a distance), then in reality this is exactly what it is!!.

[Alchemy]

intelligent life common..... no evidence for it, none found so far. Common....unlikely elsewhere.... who knows

[marki]

I am a strong supporter of de-evolution. Its happening before my eyes, I see it every day, each generation less functional then the last. I would like to think I might have a tree to climb up but there won't be any left :P.

Mark

[Robh]

Hilarious. :lol:
But also sad.
Of course, there will be trees left standing. Just no leaves on them.

Regards, Rob

[Karls48]

This is a big city phenomenon. Fortunately there are people still living in country.

[marki]

Hmmm I wonder if it's a plot against us city folk. I mean they have kept their gene pool pretty closed and I'll bet they are the ones putting all the hormones in the chicken food. Me thinks I smell a "fowl" plot at hand here :P:D.

Mark

[marki]

You would see this to I expect Rob. Most of my year 8's cannot even remain in their chairs let alone construct a sentence with any sort of real meaning ( their average behaviour is much like the naughty young chimps at the zoo). They are extremely socialable little munchikins whose only intrest in life appears to be being grandparents by the time they turn 25 ;).

Mark

[renormalised]

The Chookerian League strikes the first blow!!!:eyepop::eyepop::P:P:D:D

[renormalised]

That partially because the parents these days (and for a considerably longer period of time, actually) take little or no interest in teaching their children themselves, how to read and write, instill curiosity in the world around them or anything like that. Mainly because they themselves were brought up similarly. We've become too dependent on the TV and video game to take "care" of the kids. Says a lot for intelligent life here on this planet.

[marki]

Yes Cartman and Bart are not proving to be good parental replacements I am affraid. My parents spent a lot of time with us kids in this area and I started reading at about 4yo. I can scarcely remember a time when I did not have a book in my hand. I guess it's a sign of the times, both parents have to flog themselves to death to pay the huge morgage and the kids are left to their own means. Really shows at parent teacher meetings, I swear half the parents do not even know who their kids are and the kids have zero respect for their folks. Pretty sad state of affairs in my book. The real question is without interlectual stimulation can we continue to move forward???

Mark

[renormalised]

My parents, especially Dad, always had me around when they were reading or looking at something interesting. When they could, they always took me to places like museums and libraries. I could read a newspaper by the time I was 5 and they stopped testing my reading levels by the time I'd turned 9...I already had the reading level of a college graduate by the time I was 8. The principal of the school I was at wanted to put me into a special class for gifted kids, but Dad didn't want it, as he went through the same thing when he was young and he didn't like it. These days, I know college graduates (and undergrads) who are flat out spelling their own names!!!!. Takes all of their toes and fingers just to count to 5. It's a sad state of affairs, alright.

[Baddad]

Hi All, :)

I've spent a good hour reading the posts on this thread. Good quality speculation. I wish to add my thoughts on the topic.

Getting back to the "Ants in the desert".

The ants bite, or have cause to be a pest. Superior race of humans destroy (control) the pest. Alternatively the ants can be studied if they are not a pest at the time. Undisturbed is best ofcourse.

Earth life forms in the eyes of aliens with fast space travel technology will have that attitude. They will not be requiring humans for food. They are way beyond that. To these aliens Earth has little interest to them. We are not that important to them.

Space travel is quite a hurdle at present. :einstein:A.E. presented to us the theory of time and space. Can not travel faster than light. But can time be altered?

Is that how aliens travel?

To really be on the square we are more concerned with life forms that are more advanced than humans. To discover any primitive forms would be percieved as a step towards the ultimate.

The question of what is life. Wow. The concepts presented in the posts are so close to what I think is incredible. I relate to those ideas very well. My apologies to those who presented them for not mentioning them directly.

I think that all life is connected somehow. Wherever it exists in the universe. That ofcourse is difficult to prove and is only speculation.

It can be what one post explains it to be. Earth is a living entity.
We simply can not recognise it.

Looking forward to more good input on this thread.

Cheers Marty

[Alchemy]

my last thoughts on the matter

as covered by drakes equation... will life survive itself as civilization progresses?

not on this planet. we are quite happy to incrementally go one step further ie chop just one more tree down , then another etc, a concept taught in childrens books ( the lorax by Dr suess). always assuming that it wont make a difference ( the frog in the slowly boiling water) , add to the mix war, pollution, overpopulation, global warming, plus a host of other things. given we have not learned from history, i guess we never will.

back to drakes equation, how long does a civilization last..... not long in the big picture (10,000 years out of 14,000,000,000) if life just like us was out there and it behaved like us ..... youd never find them.

[joe_smith]

its not our intelligence that destroys, its our Ego of self-interest and lack of intelligence that destroys. To me if we are really that smart why are we using our intelligence to spend millions of dollars looking for life out there when we should look after the life here on earth its 2009 and still mothers, fathers, sons and daughters are starving to death or being killed for the Ego of someone else's self-interest. Ego is not a dirty word, its a weapon of mass destruction.

[Robh]

On the assumption that intelligent life has evolved somewhere else, I wonder whether it is possible for that species not to destroy their environment. At the very spike of technological advancement they also need to be smart enough to factor in changes to their ecosystems. Somehow they need to minimise their footprint to sustain their ecosystems. However, many changes to environment during this period are unforeseen and essentially unpredictable. Increasing population and technological demands require increasing amounts of energy and result in increasing ecological damage.

Curiously, evolution has allowed the domination of this planet by one intelligent species that has now reached an evolutionary plateau. Barring genetic engineering, we have to use what we've got. But are we smart enough?

It seems any intelligent species will need their habitat for a long time before they can develop the physics and technology to travel across the Universe or relocate somewhere else.

Rob

[avandonk]

Our development depends on so many things we do not understand. To leave out any steps and experiences in the development of an individual can find major problems further down the track. Fast tracking will lead to burn out.

A good stimulating environment is the best teacher especially before you are three. You whole attitude to life starts at home and is formed at/during this small window.

I read years ago of a boy who spent his whole infancy in one of those wheeled chairs at his parents 24hr servo. He never learnt to roll or crawl etc. He started walking straight out of the wheeled chair thingy. Later on he could not learn to read or write no matter how hard he tried.
For some months he was required to not walk at all. He came good as far as reading and writing. It seems the connections made in the brain by crawling and rolling etc. are needed for reading and writing.

Even childrens games are making the neural connections needed for more complex tasks later in life.

I wonder what damage we are doing to our children by putting them in cotton wool. People err so far on the side of 'safety' that most children never get to do what is totally natural and needed for their full development.

I will stop now.

Bert

[avandonk]

When I first came across Godels Theorem I realised that I should be very afraid. This was a bit much to take after not understanding Quantum Mechanics. Then all the birds still sang the grass grew and the children still laughed.

I have come to realize we are in the foothills of knowledge. We must persevere!


Bert

[renormalised]

I'm a big fan of the adage..."the more we learn, the less we actually know", and whilst some think we're at the pinnacle of knowledge, in reality we haven't even stepped over the mound of dirt at the bottom of the small foothill next to the range of Mt Everests.

[avandonk]

Where I come from we are at the foot hills. We have decided to make base camp.

Bert

[mac]

Is there intelligent life out there? I don't know. To believe either way surely requires a leap of faith. And I'm particularly good at sitting on the fence, so that's where I'll stay.

But it's fun to talk about these things. I sometimes like to think that life is not restricted to the definition of earth-bound scientists. That perhaps it could exist in other forms, in other types of energies. Maybe there's life in neutrinos? Passing through all different kinds of matter, like some kind of 'force'... ooooh! Or maybe quasars are the egg sacks for ancient alien races? :)

[Robh]

Reminds me of Fred Hoyle's sci-fi novel, The Black Cloud. A cloud moving through space which is an intelligent being.

Regards, Rob.

[renormalised]

So, if you see a Barnard object smile when you take its piccie, you know there's life out there:P:D

[dpastern]

Just was reading an old Astronomy mag - re: spitzer detecting Hydrogen cyanide. They looked at 61 stars with dust clouds. Most of them were sun like, but 17 were smaller, cooler M and Brown dwarfs. None of the cooler stars had this chemical present. 30% of the larger, warmer sun like stars did. So that's 30% of 44, or around 13. About 20% of the original total count.

Why is this chemical so important? Because it's part of what makes Adenine, which is a required part of the basic building blocks of DNA.

I do believe that if life starts, it will eventually evolve into multiple organisms, some of which will have increased intelligence. I do not believe that humans are unique or special, nature is too varied, too inventive for this to be the case imho. What constitutes intelligence is a big question. Are we really intelligent, I'd personally say no. An intelligent species wouldn't allow a good portion of our global population to live in poverty or abuse. It wouldn't allow the unequal spread of wealth that we see. It wouldn't allow the mass abuse of our planet's biosphere either. An intelligent species would be aware of this and stop it from happening. We just don't seem to learn. It's not enough that a small percent understand this, it has to be across the board.

Dave

[Darth Wader]

Dave, you hit the nail right on the head.

[dpastern]

:) Wade. Unfortunately most people think I'm weird for saying this sort of thing. We are taught at an early age that it's OK to rape the planet's resources. Young children are generally not encouraged to mix with nature, or to respect it. The only way we're going to fix this problem is for parents to start doing this. Since the global economics are forcing both parents to work, at least more commonly, it means less and less parental responsibility for the upbringing of the children. We're now seeing the tip of the iceberg with the current generation being mostly greedy, unsocial, unhelpful, rude and self centered. Yes, I'm tarring them all with the same brush, and I know not all of the current generation are like this, but I'm trying to generalise here, since we can only look at our species as a generalised point of view.

Dave

[Lumen Miner]

I agree with were you are going, but do you think she is capable of fully restoring, after such a parasitic species has stripped mined minerals, which will take hundreds of thousands of years to regenerate?

[Darth Wader]

Luckily I don't think you're weird!:lol: To me it's just common sense... Animals have respect for the environment they live in - you're be hard pressed to find a non-human animal polluting their own drinking water or laying waste to the land they live on - but for some reason humans have evolved "beyond" this. How can we say that we are the pinnacle of evolution when we commit atrocities against not only each other, but our home planet too.

I am teaching and will continue to teach my young son about nature and will do the same for my daughter as soon as possible (she's 7 weeks old which makes it a bit tough!). I want my kids to respect nature and marvel in its beauty with the same wonderment I had as a child (and thankfully still have). I can see that modern apathetic attitudes pose a threat to this however - one only has to look at the gaggle of mindless youth kicking about at local malls to become somewhat disheartened...:(

[Redshift]

The big band was one monumental fluke, right? All of a sudden, in an instant, something came into being where before there was nothing. Molecules of hydrogen gas and a little helium. The fledgling universe was born. What were the possibilities of that event ever taking place?

Eventually there were stars - the foundaries in which all the other elements of the universe were forged, including the elements that combine to make life possible. Eons pass. What do you know, a planet has formed that has all the conditions needed to support life. Who would have thunk it? What were the chances of that?

Now somehow life itself appears on this planet, just as mysteriously as the big bang itself. Now let's face it, its one thing to talk about how this chemical and that go together to make amino acids or whatever that can make living cells, but its quite another thing to know how or why 'life' itself happened. What do we suppose are the chances of 'life' actually beginning?

Then there's the whole thing about evolution. How one fluke after another caused that single cell that first 'lived' billions of years ago to multiply and become every living thing that has ever existed on this planet. It is truly a wonder.

It seems to me, the big question is - could the same thing happen more than once in this universe?

Someone once made the analogy of the alphabet soup factory exploding. All the alphabet soup letters fall to the ground and land on top of each other to form the complete Concise Oxford dictionary. Such are the chances.

I tend to agree with those of you who have said that we are alone in this universe - but what do I know.

[Robh]

Not that it will make any difference, but I'm happy with that time frame.

Regards, Rob

[Karls48]

Many people expressed gloomy prediction for the survival of human species on this planet. Most had expressed opinion that what we are doing to our planet is not “natural”. That our greed, egoism, intolerance, disregard for other living things and our aggressiveness in pursing what ever benefit us will lead to our ultimate demise. I don’t agree with such a conclusions. First of all saying that what we are doing is not natural is implying that we are an aliens and not part of this planet. It is same as saying that actions of the fox getting in the chuck house and killing dozen of chucks, although he can eat only one, are unnatural.
For long time now humans did try their best to eradicate some insect and animal species we consider to be pests, without success. The rabbits, mice, rats’ sparrows, starlings, foxes, mosquitos and cockroaches and so on, and still they thrive despite of biological, chemical and mechanical warfare against them. Some species exploited and took advantage of niche environments and thrived as long such environment existed. When environment changed they become extinct with or without human intervention. It is said that crocodiles exist basically unchanged for 200 million years.
And as long there is a demand for their skins and meat their species survival is assures regardless of destruction of their habitat. Other species (rabbits, mice and so on) rapidly adapted to the changing environments and they survive. We are like rabbits or other pests. Because of our intelligence, our ability to adapt and what some describe as our bad attributes we will adapt to whatever conditions our environments trow at us. The current civilisation will eventually disintegrate or change; our population may increase to tens of billions or drop dowun to few millions. But our spices will survive (barring external catastrophe- such as big asteroid impact) to explore and to understand the Universe we are living in
If there is intelligent life somewhere in the Universe and if laws of physics indeed are same everywhere, any intelligent life regardless if carbon based or based of something else must follow very similar path to our evolution. The laws of conservations of energy and entropy will dictate this. For any intelligent self-preserving organism to act on anything it have to gain more energy then it expend on such an action. If not it will e4ventualy become extinct. It does not mean that intelligent life could not develop in symbiotic relationship with its environment, but then it is highly unlikely that such an organism will ever attempt to leave it planet. It may think about the Universe and come to understanding of it but unless you believe in metaphysics it is unlikely we can make contact with it.
Finally, it is interesting that same predictions of doom and inevitable demise exist in all cultures and religions. May it be a evolutionary mechanism that make us to accept political or religious leaderships and bind us to the groups that are better equipped for survival then an individual alone would be?

[Karls48]

I’ sorry but this is not true. Have you ever been out in the bush and seen waterhole full of animal droppings and urine. No? Then go and spend some time out in the sticks.

[Robh]

Interesting analogy with the alphabet soup letters.
Fred Hoyle once calculated that the likelihood of the simplest cell forming by chance was about the same as that of a tornado sweeping through a junk-yard, which has all the bits and pieces of a Boeing 747, completely assembling the 747. A 747 has some 6 million parts.
The probability that life originated by chance alone is, to all intents and purposes, zero.

Regards, Rob

[Darth Wader]

Animal droppings in a waterhole is hardly the same as industrial waste, heavy metals or pesticides seeping into our water.

[avandonk]

The old furphy of random events being unlikely to produce any organism has been debunked long ago. If you set up a system with simple rules it will by trial and error lead to complexity by tiny increments. Not spontaneous appearance such as the ridiculous analogies some people propose.

Fred Hoyle should have got the Nobel Prize in my opinion for his seminal work on nuclear synthesis in stars. He failed to do this by pushing his more wacky ideas which only puts the very conservative Nobel comittee offside.

Evolution by random events can be shown repeatedly in any competent biological laboratory.

Bert

[FredSnerd]

From what I’m able to observe most people who believe that there’s life on other planets usually believe it because, they say, there are so many planets in the universe probability has it that there must be life somewhere.

But it seems to me that the number of planets in the universe is only half of the probability equation. The other half is what are the chances that life will occur in any one place. That is, the fact that life occurred on earth might be such a freak of nature that even a billion more universes over thousands of billions of years could not replicate it again. So what I’m saying is that we need to first know how life is made before we can determine this question using probability.

[Robh]

Bert. Let's take a step back here! I've yet to see an artificially created living cell formed from a pool of random chemicals even if they are organic. Any primitive organism needs to be able to metabolise and at the same time be able to reproduce itself. There is certainly an element of spontaneity in this, which can be reflected in a very low order of probability.

Regards, Rob

[avandonk]

In the lab I worked in we could do things that are incomprehensible to laymen such as yourself.

What I rail against is very ignorant people thinking that their view on science is rational.

Sorry


Bert

[avandonk]

The Earth only had single celled organisms for about three billion years. It is estimated that the early precursors to life on this planet are many times the biomass what is on the surface. Where do they live? In solid granite. These organisms only reproduce once every hundred years.

I will not mention the bacteria that live in hot springs or the bacteria that are at the bottom of the ocean and only live on a poisonous gas H2S for their energy and subsistence.

I only see what is there and try to understand.

I am most probably wasting my time as I know where you are coming from. End of story.

Bert

[Robh]

Bert. I have no doubt in your expertise and many things about the Universe are indeed incomprehensible to me.
I am however open to rational discussion.
I have no problem with evolution once the ball gets rolling. But I still think the odds of creating a living organism from a random primordial pool of chemicals is quite slim. It must have both metabolic and reproductive function simultaneously?

Regards, Rob

[avandonk]

Rob it all depends on self assemby governed by the rules of chemistry. You are burning sugar and oxygen at 37C. Is this miraculous or just good management?

Bert

[avandonk]

Could I say it more simply Rob we are here WHY?

We exist because we do. The best minds for millennia have pondered on this problem.

Only good peer reviewed science has worked so far.

There are many 'spiritual' versions of our reality. To me they are always found wanting. Their demands and precepts are totally without foundation and any sort of accountabilty. I personally think they are all a con to control us lesser humans.

If any people want to be spiritual then they should keep it to themselves.

Bert

[Robh]

Now that is an interesting question! From a philosophical or religious viewpoint, a debate here will solve nothing. People believe what they want to believe.
However, the point I've been making is that life in this Universe may not be as common as people think. We really don't know how "easy" it is for life to form. We may be the only planet in the observable Universe to fluke it.

Rob

[dpastern]

Yes, but the difference between them and us is that their droppings and urine are a part of nature, they are a natural habit, not a manmade one, and they break down and disintegrate back into the water ways.

Dave

[dpastern]

Wade - that is truly good to see. Photography is a great way to get kids involved in nature I might add.

Karl - If I might just add - Bees and Frogs are in severe danger worldwide. They are disappearing at a rate of knots. Birding populations in North America are at their lowest in 50 odd years. Ask Artie Morris who's an avid pro bird photographer and has 25 years + birding experience under his belt. Fish populations in the North American waterways are under attack as well, with some water ways completely devoid of fish, when as little as Ten years ago they were teeming.

We can be Ostriches and stick our heads in the sand, or we can own up and admit to the problems that we are causing. I prefer to be mature and admit that we are causing issues, other than trying to dodge the blame, which sadly, too many of our species do.

Dave