/sci/ - Science & Math

>>10790924
Well until something changes in our understanding of abiogenesis, it’s this. Eugene Koonin is probably the biologist with the highest h index and by his calculations here, it’s statistically impossible that there is life causally connected with us. Link to paper also https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1892545/

>muh our radio signals have only travelled 110 light years
doesn’t matter
>you can’t map alien behaviour after ours an assume a biological imperative to expand
doesn’t matter
>too far apart for hypothethical alien life to feasibly interact
doesn’t matter
>we aren’t listening properly
doesn’t matter
and on the other end of the spectrum
>we should have seen signs of type III civilisations if there were life elsewhere
doesn’t matter
>muh von neumann probes
doesn’t matter
all of these are just empty posits that don’t demonstrate anything

It's a combination of factors Abiogenesis is extremely rare. The universe is only 13.8 billion years old and complex molecules could only form 4.5 billion years ago for the first time.

The solar system is 4.5 billion years old and life on Earth is 4 billion years old.

The chance of abiogenesis happening could be so low that even if every atom in the universe was a habitable planet it still wouldn't happen twice yet it happened on Earth.

This in combination with us being extremely early in the time frame of life being possible in the universe makes it extremely likely we're just the first.

There had to be a species that was the first. Just turned out it was us.

It will also most likely mean we'll stay the only life in the universe as we slowly monopolize all matter and energy in the universe over the coming millions of years. Never giving another species the opportunity to evolve.

>>10790924
>Fermi paradox
The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

>>10790924
Maybe we're just ugly..

>>10791131
>It will also most likely mean we'll stay the only life in the universe as we slowly monopolize all matter and energy in the universe over the coming millions of years. Never giving another species the opportunity to evolve.
HAH!

don't be so boastful

>>10790924
Its one of the many possible answers which is why its a paradox.

>>10791259
what is it about this phrase that so attracts brainlets

>>10790924
Easy, the reason we can't see any alien life out there is because all intelligent species evolves beyond their physical vessel into higher dimensions of reality. Think of the Ancients from Star gate.

The only life that could be out there is primitive and has no means of contacting us just like we can't contact them and as we evolve further we will leave this plane of existence and leave earth behind.

>>10790924
Fermi was a nuclear physicist, not an astronomer. Just because you don't see bacteria with your naked eye doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Be patient.

>>10791097
>all of these are just empty posits that don’t demonstrate anything

So is your post.

>>10790924
But once self-propagating systems have attained global scale, two crucial differences emerge. The first difference is in the number of individuals from among which the "fittest" are selected. Self-prop systems sufficiently big and powerful to be plausible contenders for global dominance will probably number in the dozens, or possibly in the hundreds; they certainly will not number in the millions. With so few individuals from among which to select the "fittest," it seems safe to say that the process of natural selection will be inefficient in promoting the fitness for survival of the dominant global self-prop systems. It should also be noted that among biological organisms, species that consist of a relatively small number of large individuals are more vulnerable to extinction than species that consist of a large number of small individuals. Though the analogy between biological organisms and self-propagating systems of human beings is far from perfect, still the prospect for viability of a world-system based on the dominance of a few global self-prop systems does not look encouraging.

>>10791131

And it could also be so common it happens on every Earth like planet.

We know shit stop trying to pretend we do.

Until we can directly observe atmosphere of Earth sized exoplanets all this bullshit is completely pointless.

>>10790924
The second difference is that in the absence of rapid, worldwide transportation and communication, the breakdown or the destructive action of a small-scale self-prop system has only local repercussions. Outside the limited zone where such a self-prop system has been active there will be other self-prop systems among which the process of evolution through natural selection will continue. But where rapid, worldwide transportation and communication have led to the emergence of global self-prop systems, the breakdown or the destructive action of any one such system can shake the whole world-system. Consequently, in the process of trial and error that is evolution through natural selection, it is highly probable that after only a relatively small number of "trials" resulting in "errors," the world-system will break down or will be so severely disrupted that none of the world's larger or more complex self-prop systems will be able to survive. Thus, for such self-prop systems, the trial-and-error process comes to an end; evolution through natural selection cannot continue long enough to create global self-prop systems possessing the subtle and sophisticated mechanisms that prevent destructive internal competition within complex biological organisms.

>>10790924
Meanwhile, fierce competition among global self-prop systems will have led to such drastic and rapid alterations in the Earth's climate, the composition of its atmosphere, the chemistry of its oceans, and so forth, that the effect on the biosphere will be devastating. In Part IV of the present chapter we will carry this line of inquiry further: We will argue that if the development of the technological world-system is allowed to proceed to its logical conclusion, then in all probability the Earth will be left a dead planet-a planet on which nothing will remain alive except, maybe, some of the simplest organisms-certain bacteria, algae, etc.-that are capable of surviving under extreme conditions.

Earth's radio emissions are going down as technology improves. Far more advanced aliens would be even harder to detect.

Lack of Dyson Spheres means absolutely nothing since it's just a sci-fi concept.

Some of the planets we discovered could very well be alien structures but we can't tell since all we see is one pixel.

This is pointless.

>>10790924
The theory we've outlined here provides a plausible explanation for the so-called Fermi Paradox. It is believed that there should be numerous planets on which technologically advanced civilizations have evolved, and which are not so remote from us that we could not by this time have detected their radio transmissions. The Fermi Paradox consists in the fact that our astronomers have never yet been able to detect any radio signals that seem to have originated from an intelligent extraterrestrial source.
According to Ray Kurzweil, one common explanation of the Fermi Paradox is "that a civilization may obliterate itself once it reaches radio capability." Kurzweil continues: "This explanation might be acceptable if we were talking about only a few such civilizations, but [if such civilizations have been numerous], it is not credible to believe that every one of them destroyed itself" Kurzweil would be right if the self-destruction of a civilization were merely a matter of chance. But there is nothing implausible about the foregoing explanation of the Fermi Paradox if there is a process common to all technologically advanced civilizations that consistently leads them to self-destruction. Here we've been arguing that there is such a process.

>>10790924
>I guess there's a possibly that animals, insects etc may exist, but even then that's likely improbable.

It's 100% impossible that Earth is the only planet with life.

>>10792701
lol, Koonin demonstrates with some really simple toy calculations that the probabilities involved in the spontaneous emergence of RNA are so low that it should not happen twice in our observable region. It’s a strong posit with a pretty obvious implication

>>10792706
Except we know spontaneous emergence from rna synthesis is such an extremely rare event that it should not have happened twice, refer >>10791097. Even if abiogenesis could happen by some other process than through RNA on another planet, proposing that the probabilities are much lower assumes specialness on our part and goes against the Copernican principle

>>10792716
It’s your wishful thinking weighed against the paper from a leading biologist lol

Dark forest nigga

>>10793106
Between the phoenix lights and the nimitz event I wager there is more than just humans lol

>>10793152
Goofy looking fuck

>>10793152
Dark forest doesn't really make any sense. Why?

Because when we finish the ELT we have a telescope powerful enough to scan the atmosphere of 40% of the planets in the milky way galaxy. Advanced species would know about life on Earth by now anyways even if we never announced anything so dark forest species would just scan the atmosphere of every planet and then send projectiles at any that show signs of potential life.

Earth would have been destroyed a billion years ago when it started showing oxygen and CO2 in the atmosphere.

Dark Forest theory doesn't make sense due to this.

>>10793106
>lol, Koonin demonstrates with some really simple toy calculations that the probabilities involved in the spontaneous emergence of RNA are so low that it should not happen twice in our observable region.

Why assume all life everywhere needs RNA?
https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn26641-synthetic-enzymes-hint-at-life-without-dna-or-rna/

Here's a simpler theory. Radio waves just don't reach very far in space. Because it's not empty. It's full of dust, gas, charged particles, energetic fields and all kinds of shit that seriously degrades, scatters and distorts signals by increasing levels with increasing distance and therefore time to get messed up.

"But we pick up radio signals from space all the time!!!" Yeah. From transmission sources like stellar fusion, supernovas, pulsars, that sort of thing. Compare the power output of one of those to a radio antenna. I'll wait. When you're done with that part, consider that natural phenomenon aren't sending any kind of distinct deliberate signal with actual decipherable meaning so it isn't a big deal if those signals get seriously degraded either.

TL;DR Humans are impatient

>>10791097
>Everything that proves me wrong doesn’t matter

/sci/ has really degraded

>>10790924
Fermi paradox doesn’t exist, dumb fucking moron. There’s UFOs RIGHT HERE. RIGHT NOW.

>>10791259
>The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

Yes it is evidence of absence. Just not proof of absence.

>>10796087
Huh, how do they prove Koonin’s calculations wrong? My point was that aside from the fact that they are empty posits, they work from the assumption that the probability of life emerging is unknown and tries to arrive at it from a top-down approach. It’s just a pointless endavour when we know the probabilities involved in emergence from RNA or DNA and they say that, statistically, life cannot have appeared twice in any one observable universe

>>10790924
Any combination of the known possible answers for the Fermi paradox can be correct. That's the whole thing, we just don't know, we just can't know...

Brainlet here.

Would we be able to detect a thermonuclear explosion in any spectrum, say 10,000 light years away?

Would regular thermonuclear detonations be a way to signal over vast distances?

>>10796487
No
No

The Fermi paradox is retarded.
Just because we haven't been contacted by or observed intelligent extraterrestrials, doesn't mean they don't exist. That is retard logic. Lack of evidence doesn't mean lack of existence.
You are stupid if you think this.

>>10791097
Low IQ.

>>10797828
Extraterrestrials are scary and also evil. Also what kind of retard gives a shit about any of these threads when clocks are still legal in the vast majority of countries on Earth. As soon as the core of this planet begins to spin again after NASA completes that project with the government to stop the water leaking up I'm going straight away to make a complaint. Ban clocks and make them pay for all they have done. When you think I might be just some crazy person who doesn't even have the intelligence to know whats really going on. But I'll tell you that there as got to be an explanation for all of these events. It can't just be a coincidence. There are aliens and they come from a hybrid breeding facility deep within the walls of area 51 mind control facility. Google streetview doesn't have it listed because it's right there on the other side of the marshes where the zoo used to be. And inside that box is something you really don't want to know about I can assure you of that.

>>10791131
Actual bigg brainedd post.
Fermi paradox memers can't accept this because they NEED to believe ultra intelligent aliens are out there because they loathe humanity and feel secure by fantasizing about an space advanced successful race they can project their morals onto, in short aliens are just the new age God.

>>10797831
aliens don’t exist just because it sells well and is featured a lot on the popsci videos that prescribe everything to you anon

>>10791131
>and complex molecules could only form 4.5 billion years ago for the first time.

Wrong, conditions for life to arise occured much sooner than that. The Sun and the Earth is not special.

Now abiogenesis may still be very rare even if conditions are right, which is a valid explanation for Fermi paradox.

>>10797828
It only takes a mere small fraction of the age of the universe to for aliens spread all over the galaxy. We should see them by now. The simplest explanation is the most straightforward one - aliens dont exist.

So if you subscribe to the fermi paradox, you're basically saying the odds of us existing are extremely, incredibly small.

And yet...

>>10790924
there is an obvious answer:
"there is no type III civilization in our galaxy"
but maybe this is not exciting enough for average scifi fans

>>10790924
What if the smart aliens make less babies than the space niggers and eventually the once fairly advanced civilization gets substituted for savages so the chances of further advance are forever lost. Its happening to our species as we speak so this could well be the great filter, no?

Isnt it because the distance between stars are huge?
Seems to me even if the universe was teeming with life it's not like we could make it out at the distance we are looking st them.

>>10798558
>"there is no type III civilization in our galaxy
I think you could safely say that a type zero civilization should have a hard time predicting what a type three civ would actually look like and operate.
You could have some benchmarks based on known physics, but who knows what new discoveries are made in the intervening steps.

>>10791131
and that's a good thing

>>10798229
What's wrong with clocks Anon?

>>10790924
I suspect we are in fact alone in the universe.

>>10798688
cosmic inflation has diluted the number of abiogenesis events to less than one per Hubble volume, similar to magnetic monopoles

>>10798600
a plausible theory for some civilizations, but for every one of them and for billions of years? improbable

>>10791264
We aren't space chad and space stacy.
We space r9k.

>>10791097
These calculations seemed off so I checked in on Koonin to see why he is so opposed to the RNA hypothesis. So I started reading his book.

Koonin has developed and prefers his own model called the Virus World where viruses play the key part in the development and evolution of life. It's his pet theory for decades. He specifically makes the requirements ridiculously high in the last part of the calculations because otherwise it wouldn't support his model, where viruses bridge that cap by preserving and carrying the required components.

>>10798720
I think viruses are just a remnant of some pre-cellular world, because some of them still have the genes necessary to duplicate themselves, just rendered inactive by mutation.

>>10798732
I like the theory the more I think about it. Just not the calculations on abiogenesis.

>>10798797
Calculating abiogenesis is utter nonsense until we know how it works in the first place.

Every time there's a thread like this I feel the need to say the same thing.

You don't need explanations about the probability of abiogenesis or the possibility of a species achieving civilization capable of spaceflight.

Space is big, and there's a speed limit.

Even assuming life propagated across many viable planets at the same time humanity evolved, even if they evolved millions of years before us and achieved organized radio emissions, there's just plain and simple a lot of very dangerous, very deadly nothing.

The logistics and engineering of trying to identify an alien civilization from hundreds or thousands of lightyears away, which is on the low end of the obstacles of distance, are incredibly taxing.
The prospect of traveling into space is incredibly taxing.
The prospect of traveling beyond the safety of your star's heliosphere even more ludicrously slow.

Even if you presume there are ways to get close to or even surpass the universal physical speed limit, space is still enormous. You have to communicate and travel at many MANY times the speed of light to accomplish meaningful interstellar logistics.

And even once you can do that there's the time it takes to visit each and every location within the growing sphere of POSSIBLE locations to visit, which is further limiting.

Basically space is huge, too huge to deal with.
Until we find an excuse to throw out our physical model we can assume that the only reason we haven't been visited or communicated with is very simply that it's a lot of nothing you have to defeat.

>>10793106
Yet the fact it is a paper form a leading biologist is irrelevant. Only the substance of the paper matters, not the academic status of the person who wrote it.

There are two alternatives. Humanity is the bastard son of the universe or simulation theory (intelligent design).