The Fermi paradox

[Laurens]

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

The Fermi paradox is the apparent contradiction between high estimates of the probability of the existence of extraterrestrial civilizations and the lack of evidence for, or contact with, such civilizations.

What are your thoughts on the Fermi paradox, why haven't we got any evidence of extraterrestrial life?

I don't know what to make of it, so I would be interested to know your thoughts.

 

[Inferno]

The distances are too great, both for travel and communication.

EDIT: We already HAVE evidence! All hail XENU!

 

[ThePuppyTurtle]

There is no life on other planets because God made the Earth for us and Everything els is for things other then Life. (Like to keep time, or just look pretty.)

 

[borrofburi]

The distances are too great, both for travel and communication.

This.

There is no life on other planets because God made the Earth for us and Everything els is for things other then Life. (Like to keep time, or just look pretty.)

I can't tell if you're being facetious or not... In the case that you are not, would contact with an alien civilization count against your faith? Or would you simply rationalize that away as "obviously god made them too"?

 

[Anachronous Rex]

Clearly they were all consumed by the space duck.

And yet here we are, foolishly filling the void with our television signals at the risk of attracting it's attention. It's as though we're trying to be consumed... I mean, have you seen Jersey Shore?

 

[Aught3]

What are your thoughts on the Fermi paradox, why haven't we got any evidence of extraterrestrial life?

They've probably seen Star Trek and are cowering in fear of our all-powerful spaceships.

 

[Unwardil]

The distances are too great, both for travel and communication.

Additionally to this (though it's already a big one) is that other civilizations out there are running on a different timescale to us. So even assuming that every single star system 100% of the time develops a space faring civilization, there's nothing to say they all do it at anywhere approaching a congruent time where they will ever discover each other.

 

[aeritano]

First off: I am by no means a mathematician, astrobiologist, cosmologist, or a physicist.. I am a biologist that studies life here on Terra Firma . My grasp on all the little details of this paradox and the drake equation is non existent.. but i am making these claims as a biologist.

is it just me, or does the Fermi paradox and the drake equation run on a single bad premise that all life as we know it has to be like us?

i mean.. i think its kind of egotistical to say that all life has to be like us. has to be carbon based, has to utilize water, etc, etc...

The reason why humans are so fit for this world is because we have evolved to fit this world, not the other way around. I must say, that out of the countless planets and systems out there, i dont think we are th only life forms out there. Because maybe life has adapted to other environments, like silicon based to provide protection from high heat. Or maybe a genome that is more fit for a highly acidic or toxic environment.

Again, my grasp on the details and workings of the Fermi paradox and the drake equation are very low. But from my understanding as a biologist and my understanding on how life molds itself to be best fit for its environment. i think its stupid to assume that all life is carbon based, breathes Oxygen and needs water for survival.

i personally would like to think that all plants have the possibility to support life, simply because as Jeff Goldblum said in Jurassic Park "Life finds a way..."

not to mention it would be ultra fun trying to understand how other lifeforms work

 

[RigelKentaurusA]

The distances are too great, both for travel and communication.

Agreed. Plus, as Unwardil pointed out, there's that issue with time. 50 years ago we put the first human into orbit in what was effectively a glorified metal ball. And the Universe has had 14 Gyr at quadrillions of other planets. Something tells me we haven't searched long enough or far enough for the current null result to be described as a "paradox."

 

[Prolescum]

What are your thoughts on the Fermi paradox, why haven't we got any evidence of extraterrestrial life?

They've probably seen Star Trek and are cowering in fear of our all-powerful spaceships.

Quiver at the might of the Prime Directive*!

*the abusive Janeway edition

In all seriousness, the prime directive is as good a reason as any as to why there has been no communication (assuming they could communicate over such distances) or anything else. Non-intervention in less advanced cultures. There's also the zoo hypothesis which is practically the same thing.

 

[Master_Ghost_Knight]

I would expect seeing any alien civilization by now as I would expect jumping in a pool of needles and get stabed by the only straw in it.

Plus the numbers assigned to the probabilities are hoghwash. I wouldn't lose my sleep over popularized expectations.

 

[Deleted member 619]

is it just me, or does the Fermi paradox and the drake equation run on a single bad premise that all life as we know it has to be like us?

Not really. It is, however, based on the premise that a technological species has a reasonable degree of probability in the presence of intelligence and doesn't really take into account the number of features actually required for a technological species. This is another factor in answer to the OP, of course. A cursory glance at a lot of discussions on the internet quickly reveals that people genuinely think that intelligence is a very special trick, and that it is intelligence alone that has granted us mastery of our environment (to that degree to which we actually possess it, naturally...), completely overlooking the role that such simple things as opposable thumbs play, among other factors.

i mean.. i think its kind of egotistical to say that all life has to be like us. has to be carbon based, has to utilize water, etc, etc...

The reason why humans are so fit for this world is because we have evolved to fit this world, not the other way around. I must say, that out of the countless planets and systems out there, i dont think we are th only life forms out there. Because maybe life has adapted to other environments, like silicon based to provide protection from high heat. Or maybe a genome that is more fit for a highly acidic or toxic environment.

Well, this is, of course. the perfect response to any fine-tuning argument. The universe isn't fine-tuned for life, life is fine-tuned for the universe, by virtue of actually having been tuned by the physical principles that allow it. The major premise of the Drake equation is still somewhat robust, because it isn't making any assumptions except those you put in yourself. In some senses, it actually provides a rebuttal to the Fermi paradox, although most people do think they are related, and in some senses they are, but if you plug in conservative numbers, it returns quite low figures for a technological civilisation in our light-vicinity, which is to say in that region whose radio signals could have reached us in the minuscule time we have actually been employing this technology. That's about 70 lightyears, since we have been utuilising radio for about 70 years. Now, this provides another firm demonstration that the Fermi paradox isn't actually paradox, because our radio signals have made it 70 lightyears across the galactic disc, which is itself about 100,000 lightyears across. This means that our signals have made it less than one tenth of one percent across the galaxy. Bear in mind that

Again, my grasp on the details and workings of the Fermi paradox and the drake equation are very low. But from my understanding as a biologist and my understanding on how life molds itself to be best fit for its environment. i think its stupid to assume that all life is carbon based, breathes Oxygen and needs water for survival.

Definitely, but I don't think either really does rely on that assumption.

i personally would like to think that all plants have the possibility to support life, simply because as Jeff Goldblum said in Jurassic Park "Life finds a way..."

not to mention it would be ultra fun trying to understand how other lifeforms work

Indeed, assuming we would even recognise it as life...

 

[Dragan Glas]

Greetings,

I'd agree about distance and timing being critical factors - also, intelligent life may not be as prevalent, along with the fact that it may be truly "alien", and therefore, not interested in chatting to "Neanderthals" ["Us?? Boring??", Lt. Reed, Enterprise ]

There's also the "paranoia" explanation, as has recently been resurrected ...

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn20361-exoevolution-aliens-who-hide-survive.htmlAliens who hide, survive.

Kindest regards,

James

 

[AndromedasWake]

The Fermi paradox strikes me as being very weak. What if the only other two intelligent civs in the Milky Way had achieved interstellar travel at roughly the same period in the history of the Universe, and have since been holding a bloody war over one or two thousand habitable systems on the other side of the galaxy?

Just because a civilisation has the technology to explore the entire galaxy/Universe does not mean they should have the resources or will to do so. Nor must they necessarily ever develop them.

Humans will wipe each other out over the first solid gold planet we find. You all know it to be true.

P.S. the grass is made of diamond.

 

[Dragan Glas]

Greetings,

The Fermi paradox strikes me as being very weak. What if the only other two intelligent civs in the Milky Way had achieved interstellar travel at roughly the same period in the history of the Universe, and have since been holding a bloody war over one or two thousand habitable systems on the other side of the galaxy?

Just because a civilisation has the technology to explore the entire galaxy/Universe does not mean they should have the resources or will to do so. Nor must they necessarily ever develop them.

Humans will wipe each other out over the first solid gold planet we find. You all know it to be true.

P.S. the grass is made of diamond.

All too likely, I'm afraid - even before we leave Earth...with climate change hovering over us, Russia and others have already started planting flags underwater to stake their claim to the Arctic and Antarctic resources (oil, etc).

Welcome to The Diminishing Resources War.

Or "Armageddon", if you prefer.

Kindest regards,

James

 

[)O( Hytegia )O(]

There is no life on other planets because God made the Earth for us and Everything els is for things other then Life. (Like to keep time, or just look pretty.)

1) The Universe is so vast that most of it lies outside of our own line of sight, and we can only see a portion of it (that's why it's referred to as "the Visible Universe")
Thus, your point of it serving aesthetic or clock-based purposes for life on Earth is null.

2) I don't think you have a proper grasp of Earth's place in the Universe...
Beautiful poem by Carl Sagan, called "the Pale Blue Dot" properly describes the whole of our entire planet and the history of mankind in 3 1/2 minutes. I think you would enjoy it:


3) That seems to be an utter waste of a perfectly good universe.

The Fermi paradox strikes me as being very weak. What if the only other two intelligent civs in the Milky Way had achieved interstellar travel at roughly the same period in the history of the Universe, and have since been holding a bloody war over one or two thousand habitable systems on the other side of the galaxy?

Badass thought.
Quick, AW! You get the Anti-Matter and I develop a Mass Effect drive to warp space around a ship and cause near-light-speed travel...
My only problem with near-light-speed travel is that we would also have to have an accurate map of the universe so that ATLEAST we don't end up smashing headlong into a planet (talk about embaressing).

Just because a civilisation has the technology to explore the entire galaxy/Universe does not mean they should have the resources or will to do so. Nor must they necessarily ever develop them.

Considering the size of the Galaxy... That would take a very very VERY long time to achieve.

Humans will wipe each other out over the first solid gold planet we find. You all know it to be true.

The Ramifartians will whipe us all out for our H2O supply. I heard that it's a delacacy on their planet.

 

[MRaverz]

I see no paradox.

Conditions for life are rare, space is very big.

Until we know how big the universe is, we have no idea whether or not there should be more or less life around.

 

[televator]

I feel like we're totally in the dark about extraterrestrial intelligent life. In a similar manner to how people were in the dark about the arrangement of the solar system. I mean the revelation of intelligent life existing independently somewhere else would be like a gateway to new knowledge in a similar manner IMO.

Only problem is that this lack of knowledge could be permanent for us considering that the Universe is literally larger than imagination. How the hell do you find anything as tiny and particular as intelligent life in something this big? :shock:

 

[Pulsar]

They all have cloaking devices, I tell ya!

 

[Master_Ghost_Knight]

What if the only other two intelligent civs in the Milky Way had achieved interstellar travel at roughly the same period in the history of the Universe, and have since been holding a bloody war over one or two thousand habitable systems on the other side of the galaxy?

I think that is even more unlinkely. A very small difference in the technological level can very easily tip the scales making any hypotetical clash be comparable to the epic strugle for the world domination between us and the monkeys at the zoo.

I don't think 2 advanced civilizations living close togheter is a balanced position. More likely than not one would allways make the other their bottom bitch.