/sci/ - Science & Math

>Logically it's pretty much widely known that there is a very very large amount of life existing in the universe, and a significant number of intelligent life yes?

Nope.

We can logically make an assumption that there is other life in the universe based off of sheer probability, but it's not "known" to be in a "very very large amount" with a "significant number of intelligent life".

Try again OP, next time, with less shitposts.

We don't know enough about the composition of exosolar planets to extrapolate the probability of replicators evolving in a given star system.

I think that there is probably life out there, but it's sparse and far away enough that we'll need a working wormhole or alcubierre drive to find it in a reasonable number of years.

It's also possible, however unlikely, that we are the most advanced life form in the galaxy, or close to. That would account for the lack of alien starships.

>>3816456


Stop contradicting yourself in your post buddy, and learn that "very very large" and "significant number" can have different meanings for different people, there's really no set definition of what "significant" or "very very large" could be, to someone very very large amount could be 100, or 10000000000.
Lets just play hypothetical's here and do some real math.

Let's say 15% of all stars have planets. (When really it's closer to 34% of stars according to Kepler)

There's about 300 Billion stars in the milky way (300,000,000,000) let's disregard dwarf galaxies and super massive galaxies (ones that have trillions of stars) and assume all galaxies are the same size as the milky way.


Hubble has found that there's at least 170,000,000,000 galaxies in the observable universe.

That equals around 51000000000000000000000 stars.

which comes around to about

7650000000000000000000 stars with planets.

lets say 1% of those stars have at-least one terrestrial habitable planet or moon.


76500000000000000000 planets and or moons that are habitable.


Lets say life develops on only 0.00001% of them (most likely any planet with a soup of water will develop basic life at some point though, perhaps even any planet with water will always develop life, we don't know yet)
765000000000000 planets/moons with life. (4500+ per galaxy)

now lets say intelligent life (human like or smarter) develops on only 0.0000000001% of those.

76500 planets/moons with intelligent life.


Keep in mind those are extremely absurdly low numbers and psuedo-math.

Realistically it's most likely much much higher then that.


So no, to answer your question Mr. Sage threads on topic, personally I think numbers above thousands are significant.

>>3816597
>WAAAAHHH HOW DARE U KORECT ME!!!

>>3816433
>>3816456

>Hurr durr sage what doesn't appeal to me xD

Given the massive amount of chemical properties suitable for live to arise, and given the immense scale and age of the Universe, it is amazingly unlikely that we are alone.

That could be that catch of the universe though - all that space, and we're the only ones in it.

It seems highly unlikely that's the case however, whether you like it or not.

Mathematically speaking, life exists elsewhere in the universe.

>>3816604

>see giant post in thread

>its someone arguing and obliterating some sage fag

>lol and bump thread


good luck op, there are plenty of assholes here in /sci though.

>>3816604

Another intelligent, well thought out post by /sci/.

>>3816597

HURRRRF NO WE R SPECIAL DONT USE FACTS AND REASON THAT HURTS SAGESAGESAGESAGE

Why didn't daddy love me? ;_;

>>3816597

>absurdly low numbers

We have no idea, though. We haven't found life anywhere else. We don't actually know how "probable" it is that life develops elswhere. Your estimations could be absurdly high.

>>3816636

perhaps, but working with what we have, according to our solar system ANY planet that has liquid water for a while develops life.

>>3816428
>we just discovered that neutrinos travel faster then the speed of light

Nope

<i>Logically it's pretty much widely known that there is a very very large amount of life existing in the universe, and a significant number of intelligent life yes?</i>

Yes, "logically". If one's logic was of a type of modern-day decadent, having grown weary and despairing of a limiting type of life on Earth, who seeks a salve for an internal despair.

With almost the same zeal that Christians once (and still do!) projected the guiding hand of God onto every natural phenomena, so do these decadents see the vastness of the universe as an excuse for life to magically appear as some inherent teleos of stellar evolution. Or rather, galactic and stellar evolution as being guided by a Will To Life. Yet have these decadents any appreciation for how hard won life on earth was? How cosmically "fortunate" our planet was in respect to our form of life?

>>3816597
>>3816614

"Hey if I pull out numbers without actually examining the environments of known extrasolar planets, then I can make anyone look like an idiot for daring to suggest that life might be a unique phenomena."

You're making a retarded argument from scale without any knowledge of abiogenesis, its preconditions, and how other extrasolar bodies measure up.

HINT: We've only had one sample so far. It's FUCKING RETARDED TO SPEAK OF "WELL MATHEMATICALLY", as if the universe was FOR SURE created so that there could be life for your decadent amusement (albeit in a low enough distribution to make the prospect of other life exciting rather than a humbug assumption)


SURE IS SCIENCE HERE.

>>3816667

Instead of having a pseudo-intellectual rant about what others think why don't you make a case (since you're so zealous about it) for why you believe life is so incredibly rare in the universe?

I'm monitoring this thread, waiting for that VIOLENT SIMIAN guy to come in who always posts in these life in space threads and rant about how we're a bunch of VIOLENT SIMIANS WITH BOMBS that will never amount to anything, haven't seen him yet.

>>3816680

Yes it's SO pseudo-intellectual to point out the mistakes of the megalomaniac acting as pseudo-intellectual (while mistaking themselves for an intellect).

And then you make the all too common subhuman mistake of not actually reading the post but scanning it as some sort of emotional response ("IS IT ANGRY? APPROVING? DURR) and then responding to what your perceive as the emotion of the post. Or else you would've stumbled across

"You're making a retarded argument from scale without any knowledge of abiogenesis, its preconditions, and how other extrasolar bodies measure up.

HINT: We've only had one sample so far. It's FUCKING RETARDED TO SPEAK OF "WELL MATHEMATICALLY", as if the universe was FOR SURE created so that there could be life for your decadent amusement (albeit in a low enough distribution to make the prospect of other life exciting rather than a humbug assumption)


SURE IS SCIENCE HERE."

>>3816701

Wow, you've really lost it.

Again you just examine the response and critique it like some sort of all knowing master of intelligence and human nature. If you weren't so thick-headed and non knowledge-based intelligent (you know, real intelligence, not something you learned) you would have been able to gather that the low percentages in the post are put in not just to humor the reader, but to substitute for the fact that no one really knows how life occurs on other planets and its conditions and the states of extrasolar planets, now that you've seen that instead of just copy-pasting the last half of your other post how about you actually make a case for yourself instead of critiquing others?

Why is it "fucking retarded" to assume things mathematically about the universe, it for sure wasn't created so there could be life, but that doesn't mean that life isn't common.

Why do you think life is uncommon? Oh wait, you're just a delusional megalomaniac living in his own fantasy world of believing Earth is his little unique snowflake and there is nothing like it, because you're just so much smarter then everyone right?


Humorous.

>>3816735

Anyone who thinks we're more likely alone than not alone is out of it.

There are zero arguments AGAINST why life my arise elsewhere other than an emotional appeal.

It may turn out it is ONLY us, but for the meantime, the default position should be open minded discussion, not blindly asserting that it isn't possible like some people.

>>3816428
> Why haven't we found any yet?

Because from our one example, and from the silence raining down from the stars, and from the total lack of any visual indication of astrophysical engineering, lifeforms find it tough to survive their own technology.

Using our example as the only one upon which to draw, we have a massive base of biological imperatives and motives that are violently incompatible with civilized society. Literally, a couple of thousand years of governmental civilization can't overcome that. A couple of hundred years of high technology can't over that either. Violent simians just can't get along with each other, and it's COOPERATION that's required in order to work up the sustained high-tech and high-energy industry that results in getting off a home world.

"Widely Known," OP?
It is broadly assumed, it is certainly NOT known,
and there are still plenty of reasons to think life is rare.
Don't make assumptions everyone agrees with your GUESSES.

>>3816692
> I'm monitoring this thread, waiting for that VIOLENT SIMIAN guy to come in who always posts in these life in space threads and rant about how we're a bunch of VIOLENT SIMIANS WITH BOMBS that will never amount to anything, haven't seen him yet.

I never said you'll never amount to anything. We're going to leave behind a fine set of ruins, along with radiological and chemical pollution that will have remarkable lifespans, far in excess of our race's lifespan itself. That's something to be proud of.

But we ARE going to destroy ourselves. We just can't learn to get along. We REFUSE to learn. At our core is a violent animal that is dumb and selfish. And every response your sort of person just emphasizes that point. YOU CAN'T ACCEPT THE TRUTH.

>>3816597
'according to Kepler'?
How can you knowingly reference Kepler,
a guy who had almost NO data or knowledge, even of the most basic facts?
Seriously, I'd rather you made up information than cite people with less knowledge than, frankly, almost any of us have.

>>3816795
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kepler_%28spacecraft%29

>>3816792

>Oh shit guys he's here

Fuck off retard.

>>3816770

>Silence raining down from the stars

>lack of any visual indication of astrophysical engineering,


are you fucking kidding? Signals degrade over long distances in space, and even if someone is broadcasting to our planet and knows we're here we would have to be listening,

You're acting like as soon as any intelligent signal is beamed at earth it's instantly picked up from everywhere, nope nope nope.

And visual? Are you serious? You think we could see shit like a Dyson Sphere? Maybe if it was close enough.

Have we made a Dyson Sphere? No, have we made anything that you can detect from very very far away? Nope, not unless listening for it specifically.

You're right, there's probably quite a few lifeforms that annihilated each other, but then again, maybe not, we just got close to it. We haven't done it, so out of one statistic no species has destroyed themselves with technology.

And what's to say other life doesn't evolve more centered around cooperation?

>>3816792
Are you that guy that keeps ranting about 'The Last War'?

>>3816614
the mathematical analysis is very different, though -- it declares a chance.
OP instead just declared that most people KNOW there is a VERY VERY LARGE amount of life.

Those are drastically different.


OP also stated without any analysis that there are billions of planets that can harbor... etc.

OP further wondered why we haven't found planets, when he stated we all knew there were so many billions.
OP is a fool, who has no concept of the scale of things or how intelligent people analyze.
(and to verify that, OP has already decided 'we' just discovered neutrinos travel faster 'then' light; and used such new knowledge to prove that we do not know everything !)

>>3816735

"Why is it "fucking retarded" to assume things mathematically about the universe"

Because you know nothing about "life", chemistry, and abiogenesis and how they relate to stellar, planetary, and geologic evolution. Don't forget we only have one sample world. And yet you want to cover up those issues by presenting a set of numbers as "absurdly low" rather than just plain absurd in relation to your lack of knowledge.

"Oh wait, you're just a delusional megalomaniac living in his own fantasy world of believing Earth is his little unique snowflake and there is nothing like it, because you're just so much smarter then everyone right?"

In so much that Earth is the only planet that we know of so far with life that can bestow value onto things, then yeah. It is a godamn special snowflake. Until we find another world, anything else is literally a delusion.

>>3816792


>But we ARE going to destroy ourselves[Citation Needed]


Why?

We haven't done so yet, and we're moving farther and farther from it, why do you believe that?

>We just can't learn to get along.

Really? You're just flat out stating that humans are completely incapable of ever learning to get along. Who are you?

>We REFUSE to learn.

What.


>At our core is a violent animal that is dumb and selfish.

Ok man, I agree with you 100%, (maybe not the dumb part)

I just don't see how you can just say this and account it for fact. Everything that happens every day refutes all of your points. Why are you 100% right?

>>3816680
You make the false assumption people are claiming, believe, or have stated that life is rare:
the statements are about the fake claims, stupid assumptions, and poor logic that is being stated.
That kind of crap is dangerous.

please don't assume you know so much about what is not said;
you know nothing about someone's beliefs just because they object to dumb statements.

OP here, just wanted to clarify that I meant

Logically it's pretty much widely believed

instead of

Logically it's pretty much widely known

My mistake everyone.

>>3816818
> Signals degrade over long distances in space, and even if someone is broadcasting to our planet and knows we're here we would have to be listening,
> You're acting like as soon as any intelligent signal is beamed at earth it's instantly picked up from everywhere, nope nope nope.
> And visual? Are you serious? You think we could see shit like a Dyson Sphere? Maybe if it was close enough.

Quit pretending that a space-faring, technological civilization will be that invisible. I'm tired of hearing this sort of crap. The indicators would produce SOMETHING to detect after many decades of trying to find them.

And let's say that there ARE a few out there. Even a few thousand space-faring civs spread across the universe is the next best thing to having ZERO. The average space between each one makes it impossible for our individual lifespans to ever consider trying to make a connection.

So they are not out there, or they are too distant to even matter. SAME DIFFERENCE.

>>3816846
> We haven't done so yet, and we're moving farther and farther from it, why do you believe that?

WAT. Are you a fucking blind moron? Your stupid-assed yuppie life isn't even getting better. The Westernized rich are the only ones seeing actual improvement; everyone else is either wallowing in poverty, or wallowing in deep debt.

> Really? You're just flat out stating that humans are completely incapable of ever learning to get along.

Precisely. You've lived under a nuclear Sword of Damocles for your entire life, likely. Pollution types just get more and more unable to fade into the environment. We've made substances that will last about as long as the Pioneers and Voyagers. They are inimical to lifeforms.

> Why are you 100% right?

Because we've raised the stakes so fucking high that you are either wholly ignorant, or you're too terrified to admit it.

>>3816841
>Until we find another world, anything else is literally a delusion.
This is wrong because
>Because you know nothing about "life", chemistry, and abiogenesis and how they relate to stellar, planetary, and geologic evolution.
is bullshit.

I'm sorry that you're fucking ignorant, but I'd appreciate it if you wouldn't condemn the rest of us to your level.

BY THE WAY, EVERYONE:
STOP ARGUING WITH VIOLENT SIMIAN GUY.
JUST STOP.
IT IS FUTILE.

>>3816792

lol hysterical christians of the heart

"Man is beast and superbeast"

Our "violent and dumb" parts enabled us to be smart enough for the present day. You're disappointed that the assemblage of different species of mind called "mankind" aren't merely bunch of innocent angels subverted to your particular form of beastly appetites and pleasures.

>>3816886

Uh, even third world countries have conditions that have been improved thanks to globalisation and technology. Saying otherwise is just poppycock.

>>3816886

Yep, according to everyone here you're a retard and I'm just going to ignore your delusional visions of the human race to have some good discussion with everyone else.

Guys, Imagine how epic the day we finally find life in space will be, just imagine how everyone will act.

>>3816894
>is bullshit.

Ha ha oh wow. Tell me when you win the Nobel Prize for describing your Principia Abiogenesis whereupon you MATHEMATICALLY *snort* describe the exact ranges and conditions for "life" and all stellar, planetary, and geologic forms which would sustain it. And then predict which planets will have life.

See, the thing about you eager-for-life-on-other-world fucks is that it's about a fucking wish. The thought of just a single planet with life would kill that fucking wish. And for that fucking wish, you're willing to lie and stumble to maintain a certainty that it will be fulfilled.

As for me, I don't really give a fuck up to the point where I have to endure scribblings declaring the absolute certainty of life on other worlds. Soppy wishes based on earthbound defects putting on the cloaks of logical arguments have the effect of a nausea on me and at that point I actually do care if but for my health and well being.

>>3816976
You said we know NOTHING.
That's bullshit.

>>3816976
What crawled up your ass and died?
Your argument is horribly emotional and hypocritical.

Did the Drake Equation rape your dog and kick your wife?

>>3816979

I said you personally knew nothing via the retardation of your mathematical enterprise.

>>3816984

Oh god the Drake Equation.

"Hey, let's make a bunch of retards feel excited by giving them something called an 'Equation' which will lend their wish a form of mathematical certainty without said retards realizing that most of the variables are in the current state of scientific knowledge WILD FUCKING GUESSES making the equation effectively FUCKING WORTHLESS with the irony being that the information needed to make the equation work would require exploration of the sort to the point where such an equation would probably be obsolete."

>>3816976


Why is it more logical for your brain to assume that earth is the only planet with life?

Lets say we just discovered the ocean, after giant amounts of testing and observing from one single location we've only found one fish, so there must only be one fish in the ocean.

>>3817008

I don't "assume" Earth is the only planet with life. Until I know of another planet with life or, to be on the safe side, until I know of another solar system with life then the planet/solar system I'm in is literally the only motherfucking thing with life for all practical purposes.

It takes a WANT, a WISH for other life to make one ignore one's own ignorance and WILL a certainty for life on other world's.

>>3817019
...you're violent simian guy. Aren't you.

You fucker.
I know it's you.

Considering the evidence for ancient extremophiles that survived the impact which created the moon, i'd say life isnt that sparse, and is actually kind of an asshole about not going away.

The solution to the fermi paradox is more likely that eveyone else is using some othe kind of communication medium, and only used radio for like 200 years of their civilization's evolution before realizing how dog shit it was.

Either that or the tyranny of light speed has limited them.

>>3817022

Sadly I'm not that "hysterical christian without a heart to endure the evil genius of reality".

I feel sorry for guy who can't see the relation between "violent simians" and the highest examples of apes and the absurdity of wishing for a world where only one type existed.

>>3817032
>>3817032
>>3817032


So much this.


Life is more of a virus or parasite then something extremely rare.

>>3817043
Buncha fucks if you ask me
Chilling for a millio years before consuming like two oxygen atoms, fuck that shit. Buncha showoffs

>>3817032
>tyranny of light speed
>implying light speed is an issue

>>3817074
It just might end up being the end all. No wormholes, no slip space, no warp, just a slow ass speed limit

I really hope not but physics doesn't give a flying fuck what you hope for

>>3817088
Oh I don't think it wouldn't be difficult. I just think it's not as much of an issue to a type 2 civilization.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YYEgq1bweN4

This will answer all your questions.

The drake equation thoroughly explained.

>>3817098


good video, watched all 4.

IMHO:
- We WON'T find life or the evidence of past life on Mars, Europa, or anywhere within the Sol system outside of Earth.
- We WILL discover life indirectly by observing an oxygen rich atmosphere on earth like exoplanets within the century.
- There WON'T be any intelligent life within earshot because intelligent life very rarely if ever gets off it's home planet before going extinct.

>>3818645

Maybe not within earshot but it's kind of silly to think we're the smartest beings in our galaxy.

>The most common ingridients found throughout the universe
>we're made of them
>no life on other planets

sure is dumbass in here

>>3818645
an opinion is not scientific.

Statistically, every single planet in the universe with flowing liquid water and liquid oceans has life on it.

Anyone mad?

>>3818769
Not even remotely true. Not mad.

>>3818775

Prove it wrong.

>>3818776
ok

>citation needed

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wow!_signal
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio_source_SHGb02%2B14a

>>3818801

It's pretty crazy how the Wow! signal still can't be explained, at this point the most probable explanation would be some sort of civilization.

>>3818847
>can't be explained
obviously aliens

>can't be explained
obviously god

>>3818847
>at this point the most probable explanation would be some sort of civilization.

There's absolutely no reason to consider that explanation as "most probable".

>>3818860


Everything that could potentially be "god" can be explained though.

>>3818880
The Wow! signal obviously came from god.

>>3818884

Why would god send a narrow band radio signal at earth from a random place in space, when god can do anything and knows everything or just make a message appear in thin air.

Oh wait, because it's illogical.

Why would a god even exist? It's not even reasonable.


Why would a random civilization send a narrow band radio signal at earth? It's all they can do, and it's what we've done swiping our signals across the sky.

Why would a civilizaiton even exist? Well, we do easily.

That's logical.
Any more hilarious comparisons you want me to make mockery of?

>>3818761
well, it's all guesswork at this point anyway

>Why haven't we found any yet?

BECAUSE THERE ARE ONLY A HANDFUL OF FUCKING PLANETS WE CAN DIRECTLY OBSERVE AND LIFE RESIDING ON A PLANET WOULD NEED TO BE DIRECTLY OBSERVED

THIS WHOLE THREAD IS STUPID

>>3816428
we're it

get used to feeling special

>>3817098
is that the one that was recently debunked as being extremely optimistic that if life conditions present themselves, life must exist?

yeah, no

>>3816428
actually, we've found 54 planets in the habitable zone

>>3818944
http://www.space.com/10742-kepler-exoplanets-data.html

>>3818944
0/54
0/540
0/5400
0/54000
0/5^54000
when will you give it up?

>>3818952
that was my first post in this thread
how am I trying to divide by 0?
I wasn't even aware I was doing math

>>3818952

>we're a unique snowflake L0L HUMANS SO AMAZING
>LOL Out of 170 billion galaxies none of them have any life other then us lol
>We're so unique lol its such a miracle that we developed
>ONCE IN A LIFE TIME CHANCE OF amino acids nad such forming lol!
>IT COULDN EVER HAPPEN AGAIN LOL xD SO UNIQUE! CHERIS THE MIRACLES

>>3818966
divide 0
sorry
same question

>>3817032
>Considering the evidence for ancient extremophiles that survived the impact which created the moon, i'd say life isnt that sparse, and is actually kind of an asshole about not going away

just going to point this out again
"life finds a way" is cheesy. "Life just won't fuck off already" sounds more accurate.

>>3818967
Not the guy you are derping at, but unfortunately you must consider that although life is obviously capable of developing and becoming intelligent (as evidenced by us being here) that doesnt mean that any alien civilizations exist within the same timespan as our own, if any exist, have existed or ever will exist.

Anyways your whole tweenage spaz posting is just pointless. Take up an afterschool sport and work some of that angst out.

speaking of drake
>kepler observing 145,000 stars
>997 so far have detectable planets
># of stars with planets is roughly .00687
>among those stars, there are 54 earth-sized planets in the habitable zone
># of habitable planets out of 1200 planets = 0.045

># of those habitable planets which can harbor life = ???
># of those planets which can harbor macroscopic life = ????
># of those planets that develop civilizations = ???


we're getting there

>>3818988

Then you agree that it's pretty stupid to think that we're the only ones in the universe as that guy i was replying to was implying.

Then why even get angry or respond to the post?

I wasn't saying LOL LIFE IS EVERY WHERE FAGGOT THERES ATLEAST 500000000 INTELLIGENT CIVS IN OUR GALAXY,

I'm just saying that, they are out there somewhere.

I think it is very likely that there isn't any other lifeform.

>>3819005

i agree, we're the only living things, earth was just a fucked up freak accident. Its just like getting a bunch of metal and throwing it together, hoping it falls into place forming a functioning jet engine is the same chance of life developing!

>>3819136

>>3819136

holy shit every time someone gives that argument i burst a fucking blood vessle

Personally, I think that any planet that develops with a certain composition (IE, liquid water, oxygen, methane and other trace chemicals and exists for more then 10,000 years will inevitibly, maybe even sooner develop at least some form of life, and then depending on the gravity of the planet and warmth and solar stability it is inevitable that after a certain time (proabably around 2 billion to 6 billion years) some form of intelligent species will be developed.

Then you have to factor in those who don't kill themselves or those who get raped by an asteroid or gamma ray burst or sun fluctuations.


Personally, there's most likely around a 25,000 to 400,000 civilizations that are at around our level of intelligence. Which is reasonable since the FARTHEST possible detected thing we know of (narrow band radio signals) we can only detect them in around an 80 light-year radius (http://www.faqs.org/faqs/astronomy/faq/part6/section-12.html))
, and the milky way is 100,000 light-years around, we're on the end of the spiral, so we're much farther from the average stars then the ones closer to the middle, even if we were looking for them and listening to that particular place in the sky it would have to be broadcast from their planet right at the technological level we are at, 80 years back in time, to coincide with just now when we've started looking.

There's most likely a form of intelligence within 60 light years away.
At least 5 of the 54 Kepler found solar systems with earth planets (or ones with gas giants) in the habitability zones will have some form of basic life on them, or moons of the gas giants.

It's only a matter of time before we advance enough to explore them.

>>3819340

This post deserves a bump

people, people, PEOPLE.
WE. ARE. ALONE.
Intelligent life is an aberration that begun and WILL END with us, HERE on this planet.
We will never venture the stars
We will never colonize other planets (not even in the solar system)
We will never meet aliens 1) beacouse there aren't any 2) beacouse even if there where they would be too far.
We will never discover the way to upload our minds into computers and reach singularity/whatever the SHIT transhumanists believe.
We will all die here. This planet is our birthplace and it will be our mass grave.

Can we please lie down and wait now?
PS: also God doesn't exist and life is a chemical reaction, beautifull to a sentient observer but devoid of sense.

>>3819391

Cut some more.

>We will never discover the way to upload our minds into computers and reach singularity/whatever the SHIT transhumanists believe.

Educate yourself. See pic.

>>3819391
maybe not, but i plan on working towards those goals.

>>3819404

this

>>3819404
for future generations.

>>3819005
This.

>>3819403
Mind uploading will most likely be possible. But it will probably just be a copy of your consciousness and not a transfer of your own.

>>3819433

>But it will probably just be a copy of your consciousness and not a transfer of your own.

OH MY GOD WHO THE HELL CARES

>>3819403
yeah. next time you'll want me to believe magic exists and you'll post a page from a d&d supplement to prove it.
It's IMPOSSIBLE. you might think a brain is like a computer, well be AMAZED discovering that all the power of computing we've got right now at the very top of our tech level doesn't get the honor to lick the dirt out of a neuron's boots.
Transhumanism= be a retard, sound smart.

>>3819444

>yeah. next time you'll want me to believe magic exists and you'll post a page from a d&d supplement to prove it.

Didn't get the links?

>well be AMAZED discovering that all the power of computing we've got right now at the very top of our tech level doesn't get the honor to lick the dirt out of a neuron's boots.

The Blue Brain project has simulated over 10,000 neurons.

>>3819444

http://www.csi.uoregon.edu/projects/celegans/

Uploaded nematode.

>>3819433
That's crazy though. If somebody has the exact same consciousness as you, does that make them you?

>>3819440
you care, you fear death so desperatelly you're ok with blathant pseudoscience. Also what the hell you think is so special in your personality that deserves being stored indefinitelly? If it was the real YOU in there i would understand, but are you such a narcisist that you're satisfied with a copy of you eternally bullshitting people with your sentationalist "scientific" bullshit?

>>3819444
>tech is not as powerful as the human brain
give it time.

>>3819444

Giant Angry Simian Guy is just unstoppable, nothing can counter his rampage.

You can't argue with a delusional rampaging simian.

>>3819466

>Also what the hell you think is so special in your personality that deserves being stored indefinitelly?

What do I think is so bad about me that I should die? What about you, and everyone else? Do they deserve to die just because biology made them like that?

>If it was the real YOU in there i would understand, but are you such a narcisist that you're satisfied with a copy of you eternally bullshitting people with your sentationalist "scientific" bullshit?

Because there's no difference, at the time of the upload, between you and the 'copy'. Who cares if it's a copy? Who cares if there are a billion copies?

What's if it's done destructively, scanning a neuron, simulating it while destroying it's biological counterpart, rinse and repeat? It'd be a slow, gradual transfer of consciousness, no interruptions. The original would die while the upload is built, so it wouldn't be a copy.

look, i'll just leave and leave you guys here waiting for your space faityes-sleep paralysis to teach you how to science yourselves up waiting for the science-god and its virtualrapture and then venture the stars in a jointcloud.
Have fun.

>>3819492

At least calm down so you can type right.

>>3819491
There's nothing inherently bad in you. hence you should die. it's your right to die, and it's humanity's right to have a generation follow the preceding one. else the same things are said over and over and over again and nobody does shit. Death is good, i wait death.
Were i to know you and care about you as a person, to call you a friend etc, i WOULD FCKING CARE if a simulation of what you would do/say went on and on on why it's the same as you. I'd smash the little fucker to the ground.

>>3819503
look it's just transhumanism gets out the worst in me, i'm sorry. I'll just leave.
Yes i get THIS MAD. even in real life.

>>3819492
>>3819524
>>3819530


holy shit he's lost it, rampant angry simian with bombs is loose.

>>3819524

>I'd smash the little fucker to the ground.

That's probably because you can't understand what computers are capable of.

>There's nothing inherently bad in you. hence you should die. it's your right to die, and it's humanity's right to have a generation follow the preceding one. else the same things are said over and over and over again and nobody does shit. Death is good, i wait death.

You think things don't change just because people will be getting uploaded? You think none of them will say "gee, being in a computer, i can toy with all my neurons and undo the changes, maybe i should try to improve myself!"? Uploading will make neurosurgery a trillion times easier. Things <span class="math">\it{will}[/spoiler] change, because people will be able to modify whatever makes them *them*.

>>3819491
I'd like this, something slow that happens while you're aware preferably
It'd feel kind of weird, but there would be no percievable interruption of conciousness, so i'd be "me" enough on the other end for my tastes.

From there it's just a matter of upgrading the materials and implementation every few years i guess

>>3819340

holy shit dat picture, any of those dots could possible have life.

>>3819671
dat feel

>>3818801
>>3818847
Fact: Elvis Presley "died" the day after the Wow! signal was recorded. Coincidence?

>>3818966
it's a question of when the evidence that we are the only life in the universe is going to satisfy your curiousity; not dividing by 0

lrn2numerator

if we visit 6 googleplex planets, and there is no life on any of them, will you then feel comfortable saying that there is no life but on earth?

where it was, you know, CREATED?

>>3818967
yes, get used to it. we're special

well, not you in particular, but some of us.

>>3819186
"vessal"

>>3819360
why? for gaussing that there are tens of thousands of aliens who leave us alone?

>>3819391
life's just a coctail party, on the beach
you got rats on the west side, bedbugs downtown
look at me, this town's in tatters
i've been shattered

chance of life on other planets: still ZERO

>>3819403
i'm already transhuman

it's not as different as you would assume, and it did not happen the way you thought it would happen

but points for predicting truth with bullshit

>>3819456
is that the one where they fed a worm who knew the solution to a maze to worms that did not know the solution, and the clueless worms ate the smart worms, and became smart?

that was pretty cool

>>3820072
definition of coincidence

samefagging the shit out of this thread is getting me no lulz. i have failed.

I'm simply using sense when I say this, but how can we refuse to believe there is life out there?

If we know our Sun is a star, and see the millions of other stars out there, then logically, planets will orbit the stars in the same way Earth orbits our Sun, right?

So... Chances are, there are more planets than stars. Now, any of those planets could have life on them. Do we honestly think the climates of those planets must be like Earth's to support life besides our own? Surely alien species have adapted to their planets, breathing whatever air is on their planet, be it oxygen, nitrogen or anything, even something not found on Earth, and surviving in the temperatures of their planet. Perhaps they look at Earth the same way we look at their planet, thinking the same thing... "Nothing on our planet could survive there..."

Now, with the amount of planets out there, how can we think there is no intelligent life out there? Sure, some planets will have feral aliens inhabiting them, but surely there will be aliens of intelligence on other planets too, right?

Oh, and before you say shit like "Then why haven't they visited us?", just think of what this planet is to their eyes. Just another rock amongst millions. Besides, they might be about as intelligent as us, only just beginning to reach out into space.

>>3820169
That's the joke.

>>3818999
The problem is you are only going to find out the chances of human-like life using that line of thinking.

>>3820135

Its spelled "Guessing"

and if you read the post he shits on you and proves how it would be almost impossible to detect them even if they were really close.

What if we've already been communicating with a very near intelligence in secret

Can't wait until we actually excavate mars and find fossils of all kinds of shit from when mars was warm and lush. The rust is most likely blown up buildings from an intelligent civilization's nuclear war.

There could be plenty of intelligent life in the nearby star systems and we'd never know it.

Pre - industrial planets would give off no artificial radio or light waves or other signals, and, if on a mars sized world would be nearly impossible to detect even orbiting around the very nearest star.

Even a civilization as far advanced as ours, we could completely miss due to the interference in interstellar space... which, no probe has ever sent a signal back from even a single light-year away, so we have little concrete proof on how electromagnetic waves distort along those kind of distances.

if we do encounter intelligence, i suspect it will be something like Lem's Solaris or maybe Crichton's Sphere, an entity that reflects our own psyche back on us in an attempt to observe and understand our behavior.

Our fastest probe, Voyager 1, is currently travelling at the speed of 17 km/s or 0.00006c, with Pioneers and New Horizon not far behind. If our future colonization ship could travel 20 times faster at 0.001c, it would take 50 million years to travel to the other side of the Milky Way galaxy. If our colonists would always travel 5 light years to the next star system, stop for 1000 years to build a new civilization, and then continue to the next star system, the total time would increase to 60 million years.

This means that even at the speed of 0.001c it would only take 50 to 60 million years to colonize the entire galaxy. Compare this to the age of the galaxy 13,000 million years. If we had started 5 million years after the dinosaurs died, we would now rule the galaxy.

>>3822897
Maybe an alien civilization doesnt want to expand to other planets... for whatever reason, maybe they did and collapse for whatever reason...
Arguing about how and why another species would do is highly theoretical... above that, a lot of things can happen in millions of years.

I do think that there is an great deal of alien lifeforms "out there" not only some human-like "intelligent" ones but many animal like and plants etc.
The problem with discovering technological advanced civilizations is the very short time span we have to discover them.
I.e. Seti doesnt run very long, they must have developed RADIO and send out strong signals at a time which allowed these signals to cover the distance from their planet to our and reach us in the exact time that SETI run.... AND was scanning this sector.
Seeing as how small of a time frame there is, the time radio signals need to cover the distance and how vast the space is which needs to be observed it is like finding a special red sand corn in the pacific ocean... only even harder.
Plus we don´t know how radio signals behave in interstellar space...

All this is assuming they are very similar to us in regards of behavior and tech-level...

>>3822667


Imagine if we saw a dyson swarm or something giant like that far away.

Imagine if we lived in a supercluster

>>3824041
We do, we live in the virgo supercluster.
That picture's a globular.

>>3824065
Too much weed smoke, i did mean globular cluster not super.