/sci/ - Science & Math

>>6565442
>http://strawpoll.me/1795108

Needs an "I don't know" option.

have discussions, too. What would intelligent life look like. I would guess it might look humanoid. To build civilization, you need hands or some body part to manipulate your surroundings. You also need some advanced level of communication. Who knows, they could look a lot like us

>>6565446
thats no fun. Im trying to gage which way sci bends. None of us can actually know this, but we can suspect it.

>>6565442
>What does /sci/ think about alien life???
that pic is so precise

It would be more than selfish and arrogant to think that we are alone in the universe

>>6565466
either option is magnificent if you think about it.

>>6565466
Science doesn't give a shit about your feelings.

>>6565450
Intelligent life need not look humanoid, just look at dolphins, elephants, etc. If you want a non-nomadic highrise buildings civilization like we have now you'll need some things

>strong yet precise manipulator limbs
I'll just write my usual bauplan thing here. Uright humanoid would work for this, along with the less suspected theropod bauplan (kinda like OP's pic but more horizontal) and the less anticipated centaur like bauplan as evolved from pentapods or hexapods, with the anterior or middle limbs acting as manipulators.

>big brain
You could have the brain in the cephalon like in Earth animals or in the chest possibly. If it's in the chest you have to worry less aboot toppling over when you get a big brain.

>communication
Empathic connection between individuals would be needed for a society like ours, using body language, sounds, and other nuanced things like positioning within the group.

Besides that, if you aren't looking for aliens that live like humans, you can get pretty wacky in bauplan design. Remember though, the bauplan has to be adaptable and efficient.

>>6565481
science doesnt give a shit about anything. it is an abstraction and does not think or feel

>>6565450
Argument from ignorance is a fallacy.

>>6565470
this guy gets it

We're probably not alone though. Just think that in the 90s we didn't know planets outside the solar system. Now we know thousands of them.

>>6565483
Exactly. That's why this bullshit "muh opinions" thread is inappropriate on a science board. Come back when you have evidence.

>>6565487
Science doesn't care about your beliefs. Evidence or GTFO.

>>6565491
Now, explain me how the discovery of hundreds of exoplanets is a form of "belief".

>>6565501
Show me an alien.

if there is alien life, why havent they tried to communicate with us?

>>6565442
Has anyone read this book?

>>6565507
Show me that the presence of planets in the habitable zone of their stars has nothing to do with the birth of life forms.

You could aswell be a creationist.

>>6565519
You believe in things with no evidence Go back to >>>/x/. /sci/ is for science.

>>6565522
I want to believe.

>>6565522
So is the work of astronomers and astrobiologists worthless? You should go and tell them that they're wasting their time.

>>6565482
>Besides that, if you aren't looking for aliens that live like humans, you can get pretty wacky in bauplan design.

An important point though is that it's not very likely that we'll encounter these aliens in the foreseeable future since presumably "living like humans" includes things like progressing technologically to the point where interstellar travel/colonization is possible. Basically, we'd have to come to them instead of them coming to us or more probably our species meeting in the middle.

Maybe another interesting question is whether or not humans represent a good optimization for a species that wants to reach the interstellar stage.

>>6565534
Astronomy is star gazing stamp collecting. Try astrophysics instead, if you want science. And "astrobiology" isn't even a real thing because we haven't yet seen any alien life.

Life exists here. It is extremely unlikely that it doesn't exist elsewhere.
In fact, it would be extremely arrogant to think that there couldn't be.

>>6565542
>I can't into probability theory
>my beliefs are more important than math

Yes, we got it, kid. You're ignorant AND unwilling to learn.

>>6565481
why my feelings? I admit we have no evidence, just the probability, (the amount of stars and planets, for every star we have 1,2 planets) it would be reasonably to be an agnostic about this.
Don't think with your stomach, think with your brain.
And through the probability we can conclude that there is a good chance for alien life. To say there is no alien life because we humans are so special and cool and the whole universe is just for us would be irrational, selfish and arrogant.

>>6565563
You don't know shit about probability theory. You don't even know what a probability space is. Abusing the word "probability" when talking about your personal beliefs is the most anti-intellectual thing you can do. Please kill yourself.

>>6565541
>Astronomy is star gazing stamp collecting
kekek

>And "astrobiology" isn't even a real thing because we haven't yet seen any alien life.

True, but there would be no progress without new ideas. With your logic, string theory would not be considered science too (and we could agree on that, until experimental proof). But has string theory been completely useless to our understanding of the universe? Fuck no. Same about astrobiology. We need people who try to find something if we want to find something. What is really useless is stating the obvious like you did.

>>6565540
Yeah, it's far more likely that when we get to the first inhabitable planet we'll meet either bacteria (in which case unfortunatelly we'll probably just take the palnet for ourselves and negate any natural evolution the planet could have progressed in a few billion years), animal/plant life in which case it'll be a nature preserve with a NO TOUCH policy, cavemen esque soiphonts in which case contact may or may not happen, or super advanced life. Finding another species close to our tech level in the first few planets we get to would be nigh impossible.

>Maybe another interesting question is whether or not humans represent a good optimization for a species that wants to reach the interstellar stage.

I think so, we have very adaptable and flexible bodies as healthy humans, going into space fulltime might require some tweaks such as hand feet and stronger bones or something that won't atrophy in space. We'll probably ALWAYs have to use spacesuits though, except for the cyborgs and vecs (robots).

>>6565573
Baseless speculation isn't science. Science requires evidence.

>>6565545
Except life sprung up on Earth AS the oceans were forming. Barring a super precise and well timed panspermia impact, we can assume life will spring up just as easily elsewhere with sufficient conditions.

>people actually think alien life exist

fuck off to /x/. Life is so unprobable that Im not even sure if we are all real, cud be a simulation

>>6565577
I seriously hope that you're trolling, mate.

>>6565579
We don't know the exact mechanism of abiogenesis. Stop talking out of your ass.

>>6565577
The evidence is in how biomechanics and physiology work on our planet. Ever heard of the inverse -square law? If we tweak the contributing factors a bit (planet's gravity, atmosphere/pressure, etc) we can accurately predict how the biology of the planet will respond.

>>6565584
It's as much asstalking as any theory you could present on the matter.

>>6565580
Probably is a simulation, but not in the way you're thinking of it.

>>6565582
What part of ths scientific method do you not understand?

>>6565586
Nobody cares about useless "what if" fantasies without any basis in observational evidence.

>>6565592
Tell that to theoretical physisists and exceptional astrobio/specbio artists such as Terryl Whitlatch and Wayne D. Barlowe who design creatures in all the kinds of movies you love to watch.

>>6565600
Every toddler can draw fantasy creatures. That's not "art". And most importantly it's NOT SCIENCE.

>>6565522
>You believe in things with no evidence

The chance of life developing on an Earth-like planet is non-zero, the proof being 'us'.
There are many trillions of earth-like planets, meaning that the chance of life existing on at least one of those is extremely high.

>>6565601

>>6565604
Can you please stop parading around your ignorance of basic probability theory? You simply don't know enough math to talk about the topic.

In my opinion, the universe is really big thus there is likely something(s) out there, just not intelligent in a sense that they can't let us know they are there. Maybe they're too far away.

This topic really interests me but I don't know enough about it to be sure with my own answer.

>>6565592
What part of my post didn't you read?

>>6565608
Maybe you should try posting an actual counter argument instead of just claiming I'm wrong.

>>6565614
>implying you would understand actual math
>implying you would be willing to change your dogmatic beliefs

perls before the swine

>>6565616
lel

>>6565618
Come on, kid. Do you even know what a probability space is?

>>6565601
Toddler's can't draw fantasy creatures with "accurate" and biologically feasible bone structures, muscle tone, skin folding, appropriate perspective and animal grouping patterns taht takes a lifetime of practice and actual animal observation to handle correctly and with few to minor screwups. Sounds like you've never drawn a thing in your life mate.

>it's NOT SCIENCE

So we should stop drawing depictions of dinosaurs too eh? Hell, why even try and reconstruct their skeletons, we could get it wrong initially like when we didn't have Spinosaurus' skull and we didn't know it was related to Baryonyx. Skeletal reconstruction is NOT SCIENCE.

>>6565621
There is nothing "scientifically accurate" in childish drawings. Fantasy is not science.

>>6565624

>>6565619
>I have literally no evidence to back up my retarded beliefs so I'm just going to shitpost instead

>>6565624
Calling something childish seems to be your go to argument here bub, sure you're not projecting a bit? "Childish" drawings that land you a respected career as a creature designer and have an awesome portfolio like Terryl is anything but adolescent, much less than your fucked up perspective of art and it;s importance to humanity and how we view ourself as a global culture (much more than math ever will you fuckhead).

>>6565442
Between the apparent enormous abundance of potential habitable-zone planets, and the enormous rapidity with which life arose on Earth right after the Hadean eon (which seems to suggest that life probably found it very easy to evolve here), I'd be surprised (although not shocked) if there wasn't at least single-celled or equivalent life abundant in the universe

I couldn't even begin to guess about intelligent life, though. Too many unknown factors. The best anyone in the scientific community could possibly do is a great big shrug.

>>6565634
I'm just saying that WITH spec bio/astrobio, we can attempt to understand how aliens will act due to their physiology, much like anyone can do for the basics features and behaviors of man. Without it we would never have a shot at effectively communicating.

>>6565627
Where did you go to school? How is it possible that someone older than 10 doesn't know what a probability space is?

>>6565636
It's an interesting mental exercise, perhaps, but I think xenopsychology is pure fantasy. We have precisely fuck-all datapoints here.

>>6565642
In America, presumably.

>>6565629
Childish escapist fantasies are not science. Your immaturity is not science. Please seek an appropriate board for your nonsense.

>>6565608
>>6565642
Still waiting for an argument.

>>6565662
Give me any piece of evidence that you would be able to understand a mathematical explanation.

>>6565666
Why don't you just fucking post the explanation you fucktard?
If you have one then stop beating around the bush and just answer already.

>>6565651
If we had a space board here taht would be perfect but all we have is /sci/ so seriously, whine more aboot it.

>>6565645
Finally someone gets it. >an interesting mental exercise is exactly why I'm into the practice of spec bio. Same reason you mathletes solve equations for fun.

>>6565671
I don't have time to waste explaining something to someone who is neither capable of nor willing to understand it. Give me evidence that you would understand a mathematical explanation.

>>6565677
>I don't have time to waste
And yet you keep posting.

>>6565442
Stupid question. The universe is too big for intelligent life to not exist beyond Earth.

>>6565705
[evidence needed]

>>6565621
Wow, that concept artist doesn't even understand center of mass.

>>6565708
Go get a telescope and look at the sky.
If you don't live in a light polluted area, you can see these things called galaxies which contain billions of stars and planets.

>>6565442

You know, even if intelligent life does exist, I'm not sure I want it near us. It'd be nice for the human race to expand and settle new worlds, to freely experiment with science and ideology, to spread it's wings so to say.

It'd be hard to do that if the galaxy turns out to be overcrowded and we're basically fucked for coming 200 000 000 years too late.

>>6565705
I'm not claiming absolute metaphysical certainty. It's just a practical assumption. Life spontaneously formed somewhere at least once. The universe appears relatively homogeneous and given the scale of the observable universe and the fact that the universe in its entirety is likely much bigger than what we can see it is therefore reasonable to assume life spontaneously arose more than once.

>>6565715
I had a telescope. Never saw any aliens though.

>>6565708
I'm not claiming absolute metaphysical certainty. It's just a practical assumption. Life spontaneously formed somewhere at least once. The universe appears relatively homogeneous and given the scale of the observable universe and the fact that the universe in its entirety is likely much bigger than what we can see it is therefore reasonable to assume life spontaneously arose more than once.

>>6565721
I've never seen any dinosaurs either.
There is literally no proof that the earth is more than 6,000 years old.

>>6565512
Maybe we could be that insugnificant like a slug to us, but we are the slug in this case

>>6565724
I agree that alien life very likely exists, but that comparison is going too far.

>>6565724
There are fossils of dinosaurs and there are experiments to confirm the age of the earth. There is no evidence for aliens and no experiment to confirm their existence. Please go back to /x/. Your shitposting is pathetic.

>>6565512
Why would they want to? They would likely either try to maintain our isolation for the sake of observation or they wouldn't care about our presence. In either case it would be up to us to find them.

>>6565729
>very likely

Please write down the probability space.

>>6565674
>interesting mental exercise

meaningless; science should be used observe and describe the world we see around us, not waste time thinking about what aliens could, potentially, look like. since that's pointless.

>>6565730
You are the one claiming that life cannot develop anywhere but on earth.
So are you some sort of fundie christian? Or just plain old stupid?

>>6565732
Sorry but I don't make $300K starting.

>>6565732
Likely in a Bayesian sense, not a frequentist sense.

>>6565735
I'm not saying life cannot develop anywhere else. Of course it is possible. I'm just saying you're a fucking retarded piece of shit for abusing language of probability theory when talking about your personal beliefs. You clearly don't know shit about math. Please educate yourself and stop shitting up this board.

>>6565740
>personal beliefs
A mathematical probability is not a belief.

>>6565736
>>6565738
Please keep your "ironic shitposting" on /s4s/.

>>6565742
You did not post any probability space. You don't even know what that word means.

>>6565740
I'm all for making English more technically accurate, but I think this subject would be a lot easier to talk about if you simply made that practical assumption that when someone says "I believe extraterrestrial life exists" they mean "it is very very very likely extraterrestrial life exists" instead of assuming they mean they are ABSOLUTELY certain.

>>6565748
Why do that when you can sperg and shitpost instead?

>>6565747
Is this a new meme or something?

>>6565748
"Likely" implies the usage of a probability measure. If yuo don't know what that is, then don't say anything about likelihood.

>>6565748
But it isn't likely. You DO NOT KNOW THE PROBABILITY. You are talking about your personal belief, not about math.

Define:

"intelligent"

>>6565751
Hes the local angry shitposter, basically a meme at this point
And particularly epic one at that.

>>6565759
>He

>>6565762
:^)

>>6565763
Whoa that looks like a face pretty neet job there anon

:>)

>>6565442
Well, life clearly evolved here. So, the Copernican and Mediocrity principles being taken, it seems eminently plausible that it could happen elsewhere and that Earth is not completely unique. Plus, with all the exoplanets we've been finding, Earth-like conditions seem likely to actually be pretty common.

And given how fast life evolved on Earth - it seems to have popped up almost instantly after the Hadean eon, as soon as the Earth became livable - it seems quite likely that either Earth was either anomalously lucky for the evolution of life at that point, or that the evolution of life is just highly probable under Earthlike conditions.

So I'd expect there to be lots of life, on one way or another, throughout the universe. We'll know that pretty well once we actually get the ability to measure exoplanet atmospheres.

http://news.discovery.com/human/psychology/humans-ant-colonies-120502.htm

>>6565769
>it seems eminently plausible that it could happen elsewhere and that Earth is not completely unique
[Citation Needed]

>>6565754
The Drake equation sucks, sure, but we know all the variables are nonzero, the size of the universe is very large, and we have little reason to believe any of the other variables is as unlikely as the universe is big.

If a Laplace's Demon walked into the room, pointed a gun at your head, and asked you "yes or no, does life exist beyond Earth?" how would you respond?

>>6565775
>The Drake equation
Drake used this equation as a joke at the beginning of a conference. His goal was to get a cheap laugh from the audience by using an equation so naively stupid that even a 10 year old can be expected to see how ridiculously flawed it is.

>If a Laplace's Demon walked into the room, pointed a gun at your head, and asked you "yes or no, does life exist beyond Earth?" how would you respond?
Of course I'd say "yes". However if he asked whether it was "likely", I'd punch his fucking face into a bloody mess for abusing language of probability theory when talking about beliefs.

>>6565758
Biological organisms with nervous systems complex enough to supplant genetic adaptation with memetic adaptation as the primary means of adapting to changes in the environment.

>>6565780
You must punch people in the face a LOT.

>>6565783
I do. lol