Hi Warren & All,
Quote:
Originally Posted by supernova1965
I think that you can also say that for intellegent life not to exist saying that Earth and only Earth in the universe holds life of any type is simply impossible for me to believe. When and
[LEFT][COLOR=#000000]How can we seriously believe that in all those planets we are the only ones out there its like saying if we see a single ant on an ant hill that it is the only one there. Very difficult for me to believe about the ants or the possibility of life out there somewhere.
|
Yes, I know the numbers of stars out there are staggering but similarly, a fantastically vast majority of them absolutely cannot host advanced life or are at least exceptionally unsuited to host advanced life (by that I mean "people" -- not microbes). Either they have too much mass and burn too quickly, or not enough and are too feeble, are variable, are x-ray producers, in binary star systems, have metallicity that is too low, are in the wrong spot in a galaxy, have the wrong sort of orbit around the centre of the galaxy, or are simply in the wrong sort of galaxy.
Then (on top of that) you have to have the right planet with the corrrect constituents, the correct mass, plate tectonics, a large moon, the right obliquity, right magnetic field strength, the right siblings at the right places within the system (for very long, stable periods), at the right distance from the host star -- and a huge host of other things come into play as well. The things that count against a star hosting a planet that actually has advanced intelligent life are truly vast. Just because microbes are found does not by any stretch of the imagination imply there are (or indeed one day "will") be "people". The pitfalls that are capable of sterilising a complete planet that has made a start down the biosphere-track are also very significant, if not statistically quite probable when viewed on long timescales. Remember, humans, as a advanced, intelligent creatures occupy an incredibly tiny fraction of the time-line of Earth. Indeed for the first 80% of the timeline, there was no such thing as multi-cellular life here. It took 4.6 billion years before we (people) arrived and if you listen to the biologists, humans (as a "design") should never have succeeded. The fact we did make it to where we are now is almost a freak chance -- a statistical abberration; and that on top of all the other unlikely outcomes.
When you say that it's " ... impossible for me to belive ...", now answer honestly, is that because you really
want to believe the contrary? Any belief based on a desire will have a significant impact on a person's opinion. It's very easy to see an ultra large number of stars out there and say "Gee there must be someone else out there". But there are at least an equally fantastic number of things that go into making the right star, in the right spot, within the right galaxy etc etc. Really, they are quite vast and there is a significant probability that we as humans are alone in the galaxy (at this time at least) and maybe, in the Universe.
I think the Drake equation (for all the fame that attaches to it) is a massive oversimplification of the factors that go into producing an environment suitable for intelligent life or predicting the number of Earth-like planets in the Milky Way.
But as I said ... its only
an opinion. And I guess until there is empirical evidence proving the issue one way or t'other, it's all just intelligent guesses and statistical arguments.
As I said before, I'd suggest if you are interested in the subject; "The Rare Earth Hypothesis" by Ward and Brownlee (who are real and highly regarded scientists) is a proper eye-opener on what it takes to go from a nebula to intelligent beings who can mix concrete and sign complicated insurance forms.
Best,
Les D