There is no fermi paradox

File: 1.09 MB, 3000x1998, 160616-fermi-paradox-solved-index.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

There is no fermi paradox Anonymous Thu Jun 27 14:38:04 2019 No.10761112 [Reply] [Original]

The universe is so vast that, if life were truly naturally occurring throughout the cosmos, then by know we should have seen signs of Type 2 or Type 3 or Type 4 civilizations.

There are countless ways of detecting a civilization which has the power to mess with stars/solar systems/galaxies yet we have seen absolutely nothing.

There was a physicist/biologist who calculated the probability of organic replicators arising abiogenetically and the chances were so low that it was a miracle we ourselves existed at all. The conditions for life in the universe were probably only present once in the 13.4 billion years of existence, and that only happened billions of years ago when the earth first formed. The conditions for life to arise are no longer present anywhere in the universe and that is why mathematically abiogenesis makes no sense. That is why we don't see, hear or feel any aliens when pointing our tools out into the sky.

We are alone.

Anonymous Thu Jun 27 14:45:44 2019 No.10761129

There are many solutions to the fermi paradox other than just being alone.
The most likely are incompatible communication methods (we ARE receiving alien signals but are not capable of identifying them as such or picking them up with our methods), aliens intentionally staying silent for a number of potential reasons, or we simply haven't looked in the correct specific locations yet.

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 27 14:48:03 2019 No.10761135 >>10761112 >not realizing it just means any other life arose late enough that their signals haven't reached us yet

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 27 14:49:42 2019 No.10761142 File: 145 KB, 497x739, Untitled.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>10761112

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 27 14:51:32 2019 No.10761146 The first organism was only like ten lines of code.

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 27 14:54:47 2019 No.10761153 File: 3.38 MB, 480x360, 98c.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>10761142 ayy lmao >>10761112 What if the reason we don't find anyone else is because once you reach a certain level of intelligence you realise what a mistake life is and kys?

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 27 14:54:51 2019 No.10761154 File: 1.93 MB, 235x240, cor.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>10761142

Anonymous Thu Jun 27 14:55:02 2019 No.10761156

>>10761129
>or we simply haven't looked in the correct specific locations yet.

it is not a matter of location as it takes only a small fraction of the age of the universe for a civilization to spread all over the galaxy group even at sublight speeds

we should see them by now

Anonymous Thu Jun 27 15:01:38 2019 No.10761163

>>10761112
>we should have seen signs of Type 2 or Type 3 or Type 4 civilizations

Your mistake is assuming physics allows for anything, let alone engineering and economics. Even the current level of technology and industry we have lives on borrowed time; it won't last for very long, certainly not the timescales required to spread across the stars. And don't even get me started on the communications issues.

Anonymous Thu Jun 27 15:03:43 2019 No.10761168

>>10761156
An unintentional signal across the cosmos implies a massive waste of energy. Any time a new technology is born, what quickly follows is methods to make the technology more efficient and less wasteful. Can we really reasonably expect to detect a technologically advanced civilization across the light years?

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 27 15:05:09 2019 No.10761171 >>10761129 How many different ways do you think there could be to communicate? Do they use lasers or something?

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 27 15:08:02 2019 No.10761173 >>10761156 I disagree, interstellar empires are not inevitable, humans had the technology to colonize the entire solar system since the 70s and it hasn't been done because it's economically impossible.

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 27 15:14:37 2019 No.10761185 >>10761156 There are probably thousands upon thousands of civilizations in the galaxy at any point in time. All of them probably go extinct in their solar system.

Anonymous Thu Jun 27 15:18:50 2019 No.10761191

>the conditions for life in the universe were probably only present once in the 13.4 billion years of existence, and that only happened billions of years ago when the earth first formed. The conditions for life to arise are no longer present anywhere in the universe
Supposing this is true, then there is a huge chance that most, if not all civilizations in the universe developed radio comunications around the same time. Let's say a time frame between 500 to 50 years ago for most civilizations. If this happened to be true, you have to think of the inmense distances between stars and that radio signals travel "only" at the speed of light, so that the first signals are just 500 to 50 (from present) light years away from their home planets. The most popular notion is that intelligent life is rare as fuck, so it might be that the "closest" mean distance between two alien civilizations is thousands of light years away from each other. Acording to this logic, we could hope to recieve the first signals of intelligent life from anywhere in the universe in the next 1000 years from now, and it could be even more; OR we could be visited and/or visit other star systems hosting intelligent life and find civilizations earlier in time if we develop FTL space travel in the next 100 years or so.

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 27 15:19:14 2019 No.10761192 A planet would go almost radio silent by the time they hit type 1, not that the radio waves would ever reach us

Anonymous Thu Jun 27 15:19:24 2019 No.10761193

>>10761171
Even if they use the same methods to communicate, we wouldn't be able to detect it if the information rate was extremely slow or extremely fast or if it used an encoding methodology that's radically different than ours so it just sounded like random noise to us

Anonymous Thu Jun 27 15:21:05 2019 No.10761197

>>10761156
>humans like to expand
>therefor every alien race would automatically want to expand
this is flawed logic. Perhaps it's more normal for aliens to just stay on their home planet forever. Hell, humans haven't even left Earth really and only a tiny fraction seem to even want to. There's a good chance humans will never actually leave Earth and instead just find ways to make it permanently safe and hospitable.

Anonymous Thu Jun 27 15:24:11 2019 No.10761206

>>10761197
>There's a good chance humans will never actually leave Earth and instead just find ways to make it permanently safe and hospitable.
What an optimist. You're seeing a dichotomy between growth and stagnation? Civilization is young. It hasn't stood the test of time at all, and Earth is heading into an anthropogenic mass extinction event right now. We might become victims ourselves. The third option - extinction, soon - is the likeliest of all.

Anonymous Thu Jun 27 15:41:25 2019 No.10761251

>>10761112
Contradicts the standard cosmology model (Lambda-CDM) which assumes the Copernican principle that we should operate from the perspective we're mediocre rather than special.
Earth being the one place in the entire universe where life emerged would make us extremely special.
When your results point to something very special about our place in the universe it's a good time to reevaluate everything you're doing to produce those results.
It's kind of like if you wrote a program to produce an encrypted string and the output was "coincidentally" the current date and time. The current date and time is technically a string that could be decrypted with some key back into a message you were encrypting, but much more likely is you just fucked up and wrote logic in your program that spits out the current date and time instead or giving you the actual encrypted string.

Anonymous Thu Jun 27 15:46:07 2019 No.10761267

>>10761168
You are looking at things from the perspective of a young and developing, energy starved civilization. Average star is wasting yottawatts of energy every second by heating interstellar space. There is no real reason to conserve energy or worry about energy efficiency once you become an interstellar civ.

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 27 15:47:41 2019 No.10761274 >>10761173 >interstellar empires are not inevitable They do not need to be inevitable. They just need to be possible. It takes only one such civilization to spread over entire galaxies.

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 27 15:50:49 2019 No.10761287 >>10761267 No matter how much energy you have access to, it will always be better to make more use out of it than to get less use out of it.

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 27 15:54:13 2019 No.10761303 >>10761287 Creating an interstellar beacon to attract other intelligences is a valid energy use by itself. Humanity already attempted to do this multiple times.

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 27 15:58:09 2019 No.10761325 >>10761112 >>>/lit/13372589

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 27 16:06:47 2019 No.10761366 File: 27 KB, 127x128, 12312322.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>10761112 >he doesnt know

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 27 16:16:40 2019 No.10761405 >>10761112 Chemoautotrophs, subterranean, thermophiles, high altitude organisms in aerosol particulates etc probably exist in other places. Anything more advanced than a prokaryote seems exceedingly unlikely.

Anonymous Thu Jun 27 16:32:47 2019 No.10761472
File: 180 KB, 1920x1080, 1491311511723.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

we assume humans would expand outwards into the universe in the far distant future but thats still our cavemen thinking, just like people in the 1950s believing we will have flying cars and robots by the year 2000. will there really be a grimdark future filled with vicious aliens and heroic space marines or is that just a caveman fantasy born of the caveman imagination?

what if scientific technology just leads us inward? we turn to simulation and data instead of the "real world". this could be very possible with other civilzations that developed scientifically. and of course if 99.9% of your world is living within a simulation, the best way to protect it from other potential alien species is to hide in silence. that could be why we see nothing, hear nothing and detect nothing. they have been hiding their existence for billions of years so they can live in their own simulated fantasies which take far less energy as well.

if we as a species actually make galaxy spanning huge empires, it's far more likely we will encounter many "database ghost worlds" where the civilizations have reached their scientific peak and are just waiting out the end of the universe while living in a simulation.

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 27 16:38:15 2019 No.10761499 >>10761472 >Friends unironically believe in a Matrix-like future where people all plug into VR and live their entire life there like stupid cattle living in Utopia Sorry to say, but I'd be the motherfucker unplugging people.

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 27 16:44:10 2019 No.10761524 >>10761112 >it was a miracle "There is no such thing as magic, supernatural, or miracle; only something that's still beyond the logic of the observer." ― Toba Beta, "Betelgeuse Incident"

Anonymous Thu Jun 27 16:48:41 2019 No.10761541
File: 20 KB, 400x400, 636A9000-68F2-4675-9DEE-701D04F4956E.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>10761112
>Guys! We’ve found nothing. There must not be any advanced civilizations that have gone interstellar!

>”Asteroid the size of a car was found days before nearing lunar orbit. Scientists call this a warning to our safety”

The confidence in our technology is concerning for me

Also
>Nimitz incident

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 27 16:48:45 2019 No.10761542 >>10761472 The future will not lead us outward, nor will it lead us inward. A great regression is all that awaits us, until we become just another spoke in the wheel of evolution, to be replaced by something different.

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 27 16:49:06 2019 No.10761544 >all life must follow the same technological path and all must have emitted radio waves at some point K. >we would have detected radio waves in the mere hundred years we've had the technology to detect such a thing K.

Anonymous Thu Jun 27 16:50:40 2019 No.10761552

>>10761499
i said 99.9% but that just depends on the timeframe. in the beginning it'd be more like 0.1% of people who can afford it, followed by mass riots and political and ethical shifts. everyone will come around eventually, given that the technology improves and people will get used to it more and more and will see its benefits rather than its flaws. there will inevitably be people like you who would attempt to "unplug" others (who have most likely been reduced into a coma state, and as technology improves followed by just a brain, followed by recorded brain patterns in a hard drive) which would just result in doubling down on real world security efforts.

and just because you live in a simulation doesn't mean you're permanently disconnected from the outside world. being in a database could allow you to possess a robotic body and use it to exist in the 'real world'. heck, your idea of a fun time could be to live in the universe' hard rules rather than a simulation where the laws are very flexible.

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 27 16:53:50 2019 No.10761563 >>10761552 The babbling of someone smart enough to come up with new ideas, but not smart enough to evaluate them critically.

Anonymous Thu Jun 27 16:54:10 2019 No.10761566

Were like a month or two away from the mars rover finding proof of basic life once existing on mars and the eventual realization that life is far more common and perhaps more resilient than we give it credit for. But lets go ahead and listen to the opinions of some hairless apes that just harnessed the power of the atom less than a century ago and still shove their hands in their asses with some wadded tree material to cleanse fecal matter out of their offices that suddenly thinks their hot shit when their Fuck all tech is barely into its infancy.

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 27 16:56:31 2019 No.10761573 >>10761566 Well if Aliens are so goddamn smart why don't live on the OUTSIDE of the planet? Check-fucking-mate

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 27 17:23:50 2019 No.10761660 >>10761142 fucking kek

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 27 17:36:25 2019 No.10761693 >>10761541 In the past decade wasn't there a Tokyo-totalling meteorite that passed right through we're the earth previously was mere hours beforehand and we only detected it after it had past by?

>>	ayy Thu Jun 27 17:39:38 2019 No.10761702 they just dont want us t see them retartd

>>	ayy Thu Jun 27 17:41:31 2019 No.10761708 >>10761142 aayyyyyyy

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 27 17:59:39 2019 No.10761740 >>10761541 >Nimitz incident This was a drone/top secret aircraft flight. It is extremely obvious.

Anonymous Thu Jun 27 18:02:39 2019 No.10761747
File: 78 KB, 549x534, g343r.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>10761566
>>>/x/

The mars methane poof is almost certainly (99.9999%) abiogenic in origin. Mars had massive volcanic activity in its past and there is no doubt methane trapped underground that occasionally makes it way up tot he surface.

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 27 18:12:16 2019 No.10761766 >>10761112 >It's a paradox that we haven't seen alien life >Hey that's proof that the universe is intelligently designed >Nvm, it isn't a paradox Top kek

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 27 18:12:58 2019 No.10761768 >>10761766 >>>/x/

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 27 18:14:16 2019 No.10761771 >>10761768 >Cosmic sentient beings are paranormal

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 27 18:17:44 2019 No.10761785 >>10761771 This is: >intelligently designed So go back >>>/x/

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 27 18:20:26 2019 No.10761792 >>10761785 Sentient beings creating things isn't paranormal

Anonymous Thu Jun 27 18:24:18 2019 No.10761803

If one civilization was successful at building Dyson structures. Then it would be plainly obvious to anyone with visible light and infrared telescopes. As they would have exponentially develop around stars. Leaving a portion of a galaxy dimmed in visible light but glowing brighter in infrared.

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 27 18:44:11 2019 No.10761840 File: 79 KB, 1024x1006, Dfd9eRzWsAA3GtL.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>10761366

Anonymous Thu Jun 27 19:22:20 2019 No.10761924
File: 89 KB, 709x835, bd3f8d8ae1c83bc8aa8c40dca31c6145.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>10761251
the anthropic principle takes care of our apparent specialness

also to all the
>muh radio signals have only travelled 110 light years
>you can't map their behaviour after ours and attribute expansionism to them
>dude they don't care about us
doesn't matter. abiogenesis appears to be such an unlikely event that there should be no other life causally connected to us, pic related

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 27 19:34:51 2019 No.10761940 >>10761924 Inverse square law makes seti pointless.

Anonymous Thu Jun 27 19:40:51 2019 No.10761948

>>10761112
Thats the whole point of the fermi paradox you dense mud sucker. All it describes is that lack of detected life can be explained by something along our path that is incredibly unlikely, ie a great barrier. All you are assuming is that the great barrier is the forming of single celled organisms, which means we have already passed.
The fermi paradox doesn't only mean that there is some omnipotent alien species wiping out civilizations, it just means that the fact that two civilizations interacting is rare can be attributed to the hypothesis that there is some incredibly unlikely event that is required for a space faring civilization to exist.

>>	Anonymous Thu Jun 27 19:41:21 2019 No.10761949 >>10761924 in an infinite universe, isn't that just another small arbitrary number ?

Anonymous Thu Jun 27 19:41:37 2019 No.10761950

Maybe aliens leave our universe in search of ones with more favorable entropic conditions when they get advanced enough?

That is why we don't see investments in megastructures, I speculate. Or maybe their method of harvesting energy is even more exotic--something we haven't even conceived of as a possibility yet.

Anonymous Fri Jun 28 01:37:07 2019 No.10762552

>>10761112
>There was a physicist/biologist who calculated the probability of organic replicators arising abiogenetically and the chances were so low that it was a miracle we ourselves existed at all.
I can do that bullshit too. Let's compute a probability for a molecule to form. Imagine two atoms randomly positioned in the universe of radius 13 billion light years. To form a molecule they need to fly by each other at a distance about 0.1 nm. With radius of universe 1e16 m * 13e9 = 1e26 m probability is 1e-20/1e52 = 1e-72. That's one molecule, for two molecules it's 1e-144 - reverse googol.

Anonymous Fri Jun 28 01:47:39 2019 No.10762560

>>10761924
anon...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller%E2%80%93Urey_experiment

Doesn't matter what assumptions/calculations/theories he has, objectively, with lightning bolts and carbon/oxygen/nitrogen, more amino acids than are needed for life can be produced. Experimental data trumps any theory.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jun 28 01:59:08 2019 No.10762584 File: 457 KB, 1024x768, tmp.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>10761156 >muh Skywalker Don't watch Hollywood, retard.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jun 28 01:59:55 2019 No.10762585 >>10761112 >We are alone No G*d is with us

>>	Anonymous Fri Jun 28 02:02:02 2019 No.10762588 >>10761803 >>10761112 both you and OP are ignorant about the fact that we detected dozens of Dyson Spheres candidates

>>	Anonymous Fri Jun 28 02:03:05 2019 No.10762589 >>10761803 there is no need to colonize endlessly

>>	Anonymous Fri Jun 28 02:03:29 2019 No.10762591 >>10761112 >has the power to mess with stars/solar systems/galaxies yet we have seen absolutely nothing. There's no reason to mess with stars and galaxies.

Anonymous Fri Jun 28 02:04:51 2019 No.10762592

>>10761740
Yeah it might be. The only 3 incidents that I can't completely explain are the incident at Falcon Lake (guy might have lied), the incident in Australia back in 1960's (might be a secret aircraft), or the military witnesses talking about orbs flying above nuclear installations during the cold war which also disabled missiles from U.S and Russia IIRC. Another incident happened in Africa where a bunch of 5-6 year old kids saw an alien outside a flying saucer and decades later described what they saw and said they never saw anything like it. They were 5 but boy did they have an imagination, either that or maybe they had a hallucination from malnutrition or something.

Anonymous Fri Jun 28 02:16:24 2019 No.10762604

>>10762592
Considering a lot of bullshit was going on back then like the sun fucking with radars and making the Russians think nukes were coming at them(which the guy in charge of that instillation went against procedure and essentially ignored it because there weren't enough nukes according to him) and even an allies 'state of the art' missile detection installation thinking the moon was a nuke alongside dozens of other fucked up reports like that, I don't have much faith in reports from back then

>>	Anonymous Fri Jun 28 02:24:31 2019 No.10762612 >>10762591 That doesn't mean they would be untouched. Humans mess with everything we can.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jun 28 02:32:26 2019 No.10762622 >>10761156 When an empire reaches the size of the planet, space travel becomes toxic to it and it has to shut it down, because anything outside the planet is independent and the empire won't allow it.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jun 28 02:53:58 2019 No.10762638 >>10762560 anon... those toy calculations already assume a perfect environment for RNA synthesis. I don't know what you're even trying to say

>>	Anonymous Fri Jun 28 07:10:14 2019 No.10762897 >>10762589 there is no need NOT to colonize endlessly, hence it will happen at least for some civilizations

Anonymous Fri Jun 28 07:29:35 2019 No.10762927
File: 1.51 MB, 1000x1500, anti tech revolution.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>10761112
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.

Anonymous Fri Jun 28 07:30:38 2019 No.10762928
File: 58 KB, 622x387, UNCLE TED.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>10761112
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.

Anonymous Fri Jun 28 07:31:42 2019 No.10762933
File: 179 KB, 1200x758, ted collapse cult.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>10761112
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.

Anonymous Fri Jun 28 07:33:28 2019 No.10762934
File: 359 KB, 352x390, ted how bad things really are.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>10761112
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.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jun 28 10:41:31 2019 No.10763174 >>10761191 What makes you think that, even if life all formed at the same time, civilization all formed at the same time? That doesn't follow at all.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jun 28 14:30:35 2019 No.10763599 >>10762604 It is truly a wonder how we didn't blow this planet back into the stone age during the cold war. The tech back then was so fucking primitive that it makes me sweat just thinking about all of the near miss scenarios.

Anonymous Fri Jun 28 18:16:57 2019 No.10764115

>>10761112
You are a fucking idiot. There is no Fermi Paradox because it's not a paradox. Humans do not have the capability to see shit in our own fucking solar system. There's no way in hell you're going to detect anything in another solar system. You fucking morons are still looking for EM signals as if civilizations are going to broadcast through fucking AM radio. The Fermi Paradox is literally just human stupidity and incompetence under a different name.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jun 28 18:18:47 2019 No.10764124 >>10761156 >we should see them by now Why? Why should you see them? You certainly don't have the technology to.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jun 28 18:19:35 2019 No.10764125 Honestly there is probably no one true answer for the fermi paradox. It could just be a combination of some of the many listed explanations that has made it so we haven't seen life yet.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jun 28 18:21:22 2019 No.10764128 >>10764115 Finally, someone who can think

>>	Anonymous Fri Jun 28 18:22:56 2019 No.10764134 >>10761274 That's absurdly unlikely. I don't think you understand the logistics of an entire galaxies plural spanning empire. It's literally almost impossible.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jun 28 18:25:01 2019 No.10764136 >>10761563 So a good summarization of the entire tech industry.

Anonymous Fri Jun 28 18:28:35 2019 No.10764143

>>10761924
>abiogenesis appears to be such an unlikely event that there should be no other life causally connected to us, pic related
This is utterly totally false. Life evolved on earth almost as soon as the planet cooled and the chemistry of life on Earth reflects the chemistry of the universe, not the chemistry of the planet, so life is probably extremely common in this universe, yes even a hell like this.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jun 28 18:29:38 2019 No.10764145 >>10761940 This. You're literally cave ape throwing shit tier if you think you're going to communicate with extraterrestrials through electromagnetic radiation. You might as well be throwing rocks at the Moon.

Anonymous Fri Jun 28 20:59:30 2019 No.10764395

>>10764143
>utterly totally false
why do you type like this bro lol. the calculations are from the biologist with the highest h-index so I'm pretty convinced it won't be defeated by an anon's failing to entertain other explanations for the seemingly curiously early emergence of life on earth than that it must be a common occurrence. also if we use that as a metric how do you explain the contradiction that the leap from singe-celled life to multicellular took longer than abiogenesis, when at the same time we have observed multicellularity evolving independently in lab environments many times now while being nowhere near observing life emerging from prebiotic material

>>	Anonymous Fri Jun 28 21:55:50 2019 No.10764498 >>10764395 Do you have the link to the paper?

>>	Anonymous Fri Jun 28 21:59:45 2019 No.10764507 >>10764395 there is no contradiction

>>	Anonymous Fri Jun 28 22:25:49 2019 No.10764544 >>10764498 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1892545/ here fren

>>	Anonymous Fri Jun 28 22:39:03 2019 No.10764572 >>10761112 >the fermi paradox doesnt exist! >describes the fermi paradox I cant wait for school start again.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jun 28 22:41:04 2019 No.10764575 >>10764134 I don't think you understand the age of the universe. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aBf7uAxk6ds

>>	Anonymous Fri Jun 28 22:43:44 2019 No.10764580 >>10764134 >It's literally almost impossible. Assuming the constituents have individuality, it is just outright impossible even with magic tier tech like instant travel and communication over any distance in the palm of your hand to everyone.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jun 28 22:45:33 2019 No.10764583 File: 98 KB, 500x397, 1547548721076.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>10761940 >tfw no interstellar space age

Anonymous Fri Jun 28 22:52:53 2019 No.10764597

>>10764572
>the fermi paradox doesnt exist!
>describes the fermi paradox
Exactly. I don't know why but for whatever reason this topic has the bizarre irresistible effect of making brainlets show up and declare how it "obviously" doesn't exist because of [insert one of the many possible explanations already explicitly covered in the original write-up].
I think it's the "paradox" part of the name. Retards are unable to leave a lack of closure alone and will try to force it closed with whatever shallow and already thoroughly explored solution attempt they can cobble together. Same thing motivating all those schizophrenic pseuds who've "solved" the P versus NP problem.

>>	Anonymous Fri Jun 28 23:05:39 2019 No.10764619 >>10761112 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enrico_Fermi Turns out femi took shits that are more intelligent than you and the rest of the >ThEREEE is NoOo PAarADox!??!!

Anonymous Sat Jun 29 02:57:44 2019 No.10764946

>>10764395
>how do you explain the contradiction that the leap from singe-celled life to multicellular took longer than abiogenesis, when at the same time we have observed multicellularity evolving independently in lab environments many times now while being nowhere near observing life emerging from prebiotic material
Who knows? But the rapid appearance of life on Earth strongly suggests a default tendency for the universe.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 02:58:46 2019 No.10764951 >>10764575 So what?

Anonymous Sat Jun 29 03:01:07 2019 No.10764954

>>10764597
It's facetious and pretentious to call it a paradox. It's not a paradox at all. That would imply that nobody could possibly fathom why this is occurring, when it's obvious why it is. If I take a shit and some retard digs it out of the toilet and starts eating it because they can't figure out what shit is that doesn't mean there's a shit paradox. That means there's a retard who can't understand that you shouldn't eat shit.

Anonymous Sat Jun 29 03:03:49 2019 No.10764960

>>10764619
Fermi was a fucking retard. Nobody who is intelligent would have come up with this shit. This is so obvious and so easy to grasp the smallest most retarded child can figure it out. Someone who's involved in the STEM field has absolutely no fucking excuse to be questioning why this is the way it is, especially knowing the limitations of even the highest technology that humans have access to.

Anonymous Sat Jun 29 03:09:36 2019 No.10764969
File: 72 KB, 800x600, 1553628593789.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

The universe is absolutely packed with simple life, it will emerge and evolve wherever it can.
Advanced and intelligent life is stupid rare on the other hand, the size and age of the universe makes sure two races existing at the same time may never know of each other.

Still hoping humanity will survive and evolve to conquer every galaxy in existence.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 03:32:23 2019 No.10765009 >>10764124 >>10764115 they should be here in our system already

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 03:33:25 2019 No.10765011 >>10764134 Who says it will be a single empire? It does not need to be.

Anonymous Sat Jun 29 03:41:01 2019 No.10765024

>>10764969
Since you're not shitposting, I wanted to share some ideas.

On the physical scale, there's a lot of planets that could harbor simple life because of hydrocarbons being the basics, and carbon dioxide has massive greenhouse potential. All you need is some lightning.

Complex life takes more obviously. We have a good amount of heavy elements, reliable evidence our planet formed from a supernova remnant. Magnesium isn't that heavy, but you won't find it nearly as common as carbon or oxygen. I can easily imagine a lot of life-compatible planets wouldn't be able to reach much plant life, because of poor magnesium amounts, or it ends up too deep in an atmosphere to be useful. By extension, any planet far away but warm enough would be hobbled by low energy from photosynthesis.

There's little things in our life history, the biggest probably being the carboniferous period for us. For one lengthy time period, all coal was deposited. What if it was half the time length? What if it was longer? With less you might be able to get by, but progress would take much, much longer, unless you had tons of nuclear fuel. If there were more, we might have cooked ourselves before reaching a space age. Nuclear mitigates greenhouse problems, but maybe too much and everyone nukes each other.

We've also had numerous extinction events. It'd be likely every planet would run into some catastrophe, but how many are temporary, and conversely, how many are too many? Are some necessary? How much longer could mammals have taken to achieve a dominance? Smart reptiles could be running around instead, but being warm-blooded means you can be active for longer times and in more diverse environments.

I find it fascinating to find what are normally innocuous things, but have huge effects on life.

Statistically there's likely a lot of life already, but specifically life like us could be rare at the moment, because our conditions are rarer. We're early.

Anonymous Sat Jun 29 03:50:49 2019 No.10765035

>>10765009
Why? There are two answers to the Fermi Paradox and both result at least to some degree from the immense size of the universe and the vast distance between stars. One, as said before, humans are incompetent. But additionally, the space between stars is vast and empty and there's no reason to risk going there. Humans just assume that there is because they want to do it, because once again, humans are retarded. There's nothing out in space. All the good shit's on planets. The assumption that every intelligent species that has space faring capability will just randomly decide to travel to every star in a galaxy is fucking retarded. There's no reason to do so. It's like asking why the ocean isn't full of humans (below the surface), even though the Earth is crawling with humans. Because it's not a habitat for humans, dipshits.

Anonymous Sat Jun 29 04:02:49 2019 No.10765050

>>10765035
Selfish genes exist ya mongrel. Even if literally nobody else in a society wanted to, by the time a civilization could easily fare through space, some asshat would make self-replicating shit for invading every star system to say he owned more.

tl;dr Horatio Horatio Horatio Horatio

Anonymous Sat Jun 29 04:20:47 2019 No.10765079

>>10765035
>The assumption that every intelligent species that has space faring capability will just randomly decide to travel to every star in a galaxy is fucking retarded.

That is not the assumption. The assumption is that at least some of them at some point do. Even that is enough to result in a fully colonized galaxy.

> It's like asking why the ocean isn't full of humans (below the surface)

It is full of other life, tough. And it may very well be full of humans at some point in the future, it is not like there are no humans down there either. Remember, as a species we are in infancy.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 04:23:34 2019 No.10765085 >>10761112 Someone had to be the first life

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 04:25:43 2019 No.10765088 >>10765035 >humans are retarded See, we are special after all!

Anonymous Sat Jun 29 04:39:28 2019 No.10765107

>>10765050
You are seriously missing the point hard. And the reason is because you're an idiot human. It's not a matter of want, it's a matter of possibility. You are too stupid to understand how incredibly vast the gulf between stars is. It would require technology several orders of magnitude greater than you could even understand to bridge that gap. You can't just say "machines done it" and that be it. You are retarded end of the story.

>>10765079
I hate Elon Musk sucking futurist morons like you so fucking much. Pop science was a mistake. "B-b-but wut if wut if..." are you 12? They didn't. Deal with it. Like every other popsci pseudo nerd in this fucking damned thread, you can't even grasp a basic analogy because you're so busy trying to shoehorn it into what you want to believe. That other life in the ocean would be equivalent to simple life forms in the universe which is probably quite common. The humans in this analogy are intelligent spacefaring races. I don't know why that was so hard for you to fucking grasp other than that you're an idiot like I keep saying.

>Remember, as a species we are in infancy.
Trust me, you remind me every fucking day of my goddamned life.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 04:42:09 2019 No.10765110 >>10761499 Who the fuck are you to decide how others live their lives, fascist?

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 04:57:36 2019 No.10765132 >>10765107 there is evidence of advanced human civilization in every single liter of sea water, in the form of our waste products

Anonymous Sat Jun 29 05:02:14 2019 No.10765141

>>10765107
>"B-b-but wut if wut if..." are you 12?
>you can't even grasp a basic analogy because you're so busy trying to shoehorn it into what you want to believe.

That is rich coming from you, as you are the one trying to shoehorn your religious belief that universe is full of life and civilizations that magically stay contained to one planet for eternity. Just face it, Fermi paradox is called a paradox for a reason, and is a valid concept studied in papers by much smarter people than you and me. Your insistence that there is some obvious solution everyone is overlooking is exactly what a 12 year old immature mind would come up with.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 05:02:46 2019 No.10765144 >>10764145 puts rocks down

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 05:03:36 2019 No.10765146 >>10765107 >You are too stupid to understand how incredibly vast the gulf between stars is. Not as vast as the time you have to cross it.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 05:04:49 2019 No.10765150 >>10762897 The need to not colonize is to stop being a nigger.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 05:06:26 2019 No.10765152 >>10762622 I'd imagine they could find some way to make money off interplanetary wars.

Anonymous Sat Jun 29 05:15:32 2019 No.10765169

>>10765132
This is a lie and you're an idiot. Add to that the fact if you weren't a native of Earth you wouldn't even know what to look for to indicate signs of human presence. What if you had no concept of what plastic was or POCs? You would just think they were a native part of Earth's ecology. The arrogance and stupidity on display every time this conversation comes up is exactly why humans have never found intelligent life anywhere in the universe - including Earth.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 05:19:15 2019 No.10765175 >>10765141 Elon Musk will die one day and then whose cock will you have to suck? Have you considered that?

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 05:20:17 2019 No.10765177 >>10765146 Infinity times zero is still zero.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 05:33:01 2019 No.10765200 >>10761112 Based and high IQ post.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 05:36:17 2019 No.10765203 >>10761251 >which assumes the Copernican principle Should have assumed the God-is-the-formal-material-efficient-and-teleological-cause-and-created-man-in-the-universe-alone principle lmao

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 05:40:09 2019 No.10765209 >>10761544 >>10761192 It's the lack of extra-terrestial megastructures, not just radio waves. There are no Dyson spheres or rings, and no Type 3 civs in galaxy surveys, which is extremely unlikely unless man and Earth are special and non-Copernican.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 05:43:15 2019 No.10765219 >>10761949 An infinite universe is a god itself then, just trades Theism/Deism for pantheism.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 05:44:26 2019 No.10765221 File: 206 KB, 1280x720, tmp.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>10765009 They are.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 05:55:22 2019 No.10765240 >>10765152 Capitalism can't into space, too retarded.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 06:10:53 2019 No.10765276 >>10765050 That self-replicating shit can figure out to invade without messing with anything. Implying such civilizations breed asshats like retards.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 06:25:04 2019 No.10765305 >>10765209 >It's the lack of extra-terrestial megastructures, not just radio waves Your ability to see said mega structures is limited by the speed of light as well, dummy

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 06:27:06 2019 No.10765309 >>10765276 Our civilization bred you.

Anonymous Sat Jun 29 06:28:16 2019 No.10765310

>>10764954
>A paradox is a statement that, despite apparently valid reasoning from true premises, leads to an apparently-self-contradictory or logically unacceptable conclusion.
The premise is that we should be able to see aliens everywhere and yet we don't.

Anonymous Sat Jun 29 06:36:04 2019 No.10765316

Simulation theory explains this with ease. There is no Fermi Paradox, because there are no stars, just a skybox, if that.

It is incredibly unlikely that the indescribably vast resources of this galaxy aren't being used by intelligent life. It is much more reasonable that they simply don't exist.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 07:43:00 2019 No.10765393 >>10765305 you are not making any sense

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 07:43:29 2019 No.10765394 >>10765316 no

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 08:09:21 2019 No.10765436 >>10765316 >It is incredibly unlikely that the indescribably vast resources of this galaxy aren't being used by intelligent life. it is likely if intelligent life is rare

>>	None !!O1K42ZeoqOV Sat Jun 29 08:34:13 2019 No.10765475 >>10765209 >There are no Dyson spheres or rings prove it

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 09:04:16 2019 No.10765541 >>10765393 What do you mean? A lack of light takes the same time to register in your eyes.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 09:14:33 2019 No.10765565 >>10765209 Suppose Planet 9 is such megastructure. And it's right here. Can you see it?

Anonymous Sat Jun 29 10:05:38 2019 No.10765659

>>10765475
No heat and albedo anomalies on a scale that the Drake equation would require. There has been enough time for Type 2 civs to become Type 2.X civs and start Dyson sphereing sections of the galaxy, but they haven't. Same with galactic surveys that show no Type 3 civs in any galaxy.

God created man alone. Hopefully to fight demons in space, but probably the real demon will be boredom.

Anonymous Sat Jun 29 10:11:13 2019 No.10765676
File: 144 KB, 1024x768, stars-002.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>10765565
Yes because it will be hot (waste heat) but dark and not fit into known stellar evolution sequences of luminosity. Remember the Drake equation means that there should be lots of Type 2.X civs, we shouldn't expect just one Dyson sphere, there should be civs building thousands to millions of them dimming sections of the galaxy. But there isn't, and therefore we are alone because it is impossibley improbable we are the first unless we are also the last.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 10:12:15 2019 No.10765677 >>10765316 What if the skybox starts before my optic nerve?

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 10:14:26 2019 No.10765683 >>10765305 Yes but we can survey huge numbers of galaxies, and none are Type 3. We can survey the Milky Way, the stars are not too distant for Type 2.X civs to have necessarily developed according to Drake. But they haven't, and we are alone.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 10:18:56 2019 No.10765692 >>10765659 >God created man alone. No, there are trillions of other civilizations. It is just that average distance between them is in trillions of light years, putting the nearest one well beyond our cosmic horizon of observable universe

Anonymous Sat Jun 29 10:21:35 2019 No.10765698 [DELETED]

>>10764946
okay, then let's weigh indications against each other and it's calculations by a leading biologist that life can not have emerged twice in the same o-region against the implications in that life arose early on earth. the latter is again only substantial if you do not entertain options like life's having emerged earlier in our pocket of space or panspermia

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 10:23:11 2019 No.10765701 >>10764572 Fucking retard

Anonymous Sat Jun 29 10:23:25 2019 No.10765702

>>10764946
okay, then let's weigh indications against each other and it's calculations by a leading biologist that life can not have emerged twice in the same o-region against the implications in that life arose early on earth. the latter is again only substantial if you do not entertain options like life's having emerged earlier in our pocket of space before the formation of earth or panspermia

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 10:24:47 2019 No.10765707 >>10765676 >Remember the Drake equation means that there should be lots of Type 2.X civs Remember that we only have evidence to give values for the first 2 of the 7 terms in the Drake equation, so the rest of your argument is total bunk

Anonymous Sat Jun 29 10:25:12 2019 No.10765709
File: 66 KB, 690x776, GHGAbsoprtionSpectrum-690x776.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>10765024
CO2 only aborbs light in very narrow bandwidths that quickly saturate. It's warming effect is self-limiting and de facto caps out, at some point there is no more outgoing light left in that narrow spectrum and no more heat that can be trapped by it. There is no Drake equation consequence of CO2 or Carbon, it's a climatic bit player.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 10:30:11 2019 No.10765720 >>10764575 It's not a question of time, but of latency. Information, people and goods can't be exchanged quickly enough to maintain any sort of control or cohesion - possibly even on a genetic level.

Anonymous Sat Jun 29 10:30:29 2019 No.10765721

>>10765692
No wrong. If there are trillions of civs then trillions of them would have evolved to Type 1 stage billions of years ago, and trillions of them would have then evolved in those billions of years into Type 2 and Type 3 civs that would have left alien megastructures throughout the Milky Way and observable galaxies easily recognisable to any sky survey because of their adulturation of observations from stellar evolution predictions. There is not, therefore there can not be trillions, or even many. Intelligent life is at best extremely extremely rare. More likely so rare it is unique.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 10:32:14 2019 No.10765727 >>10765721 Nice job reading past that anon's first sentence

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 10:34:35 2019 No.10765732 >>10765707 Feed almost infinite stars and galaxies and billions of years into the equation and the other terms don't matter. Result = should be lots of Type 2-3 civs. Observation = none.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 10:37:56 2019 No.10765740 File: 92 KB, 486x450, brainlettttt.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>10765727 Shit

Anonymous Sat Jun 29 10:41:26 2019 No.10765753

>>10765732
Total horseshit. The other terms make all the difference in the world. The odds of another civ having intragalactic-detectable signals within the last 50 years could easily be 1 in a trillion, and having intergalactic-detectable signals far smaller and intersupercluster-detectable signals far smaller still.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 10:43:30 2019 No.10765758 >>10765753 By 1 in a trillion I mean per star to be clear

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 10:44:41 2019 No.10765762 >>10765720 that is debatable, but anyway, you do no need control or cohesion to colonize a galaxy

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 10:47:41 2019 No.10765773 >>10765762 You actually do. Without either, there is no incentive to gather the funds and materials to even begin. Launching a colony ship that you will never hear from again is the same as just burning up all those resources.

Anonymous Sat Jun 29 11:00:28 2019 No.10765810

Let's make one thing clear right now, ANY civilization with the power to colonize galaxies would be EXTREMELY visible in the universe.

The fact we haven't seen anything remotely like that with the Hubble means that Type 3 civilizations either don't exist or they are so incredibly rare that they are most likely beyond our observable universe.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 11:03:44 2019 No.10765820 >>10765810 Except that's not clear at all. What makes you assume they would inherently be visible across intergalactic space?

Anonymous Sat Jun 29 11:08:43 2019 No.10765834

>>10765820
We can detect countless single stars, black holes, supernovae, GRBs, pulsars, clusters, superclusters and voids.. yet you think we wouldn't be able to detect a civilization harnessing literally hundreds of billions of stars? Only a coping SETI idiot would think that.

Anonymous Sat Jun 29 11:14:18 2019 No.10765860

>>10765834
We can only resolve individual stars out to about 60 million light years. Beyond that, the only individual events we see are things like supernovas and GRBs.

If a civ were to colonize a galaxy, and harness 1% of each star's energy (still giving each system's colony 10^24 to 10^29 watts), we wouldn't detect it.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 11:17:22 2019 No.10765871 >>10765860 Bullshit. There would be a mass of stars with very clear and irregular patterns compared to all other stars. Even if the difference was as minuscule as 1%, we would absolutely detect it.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 11:18:07 2019 No.10765875 >>10761112 if you came on a world of life and they had a terrible war like history full of betrayal and the only means of traveling the universe happened to be a time machine... would you be stupid enough to give them a ride?

Anonymous Sat Jun 29 11:18:48 2019 No.10765878
File: 294 KB, 680x518, OfAllTime.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>10764954
>It's not a paradox at all. That would imply that nobody could possibly fathom why this is occurring
>>10764960
>Fermi was a fucking retard.
Or maybe, you're the retards and the guy who invented nuclear reactors and has a chemical element, an entire branch of physics, and half the standard model of elementary particles all named after him had some decent working insights into reality.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 11:23:47 2019 No.10765899 >>10765878 >appeal to authority >on a subject where we barely have any concrete evidence >on a subject where factors are variable to tens of orders of magnitude >>>/x/ this is a science board

Anonymous Sat Jun 29 11:26:06 2019 No.10765906

>>10765871
A swarm of solar collectors covering 1% of a star wouldn't produce any detectable time-varying signals. Also, stars aren't perfect blackbodies due to complex plasma physics. A 1% deviation in spectral shape would be within typical variability for stars.

Anonymous Sat Jun 29 11:32:34 2019 No.10765922

>>10765899
It's not an appeal to authority that the argument is right. It's an appeal to getting you to recognize how incredibly idiotic it is to actually believe Fermi is a retard and the Fermi Paradox is some trivial mistake you're "correcting" with a two or three sentence shitpost on 4chan.
There are intelligent ways to attempt to account for the Fermi Paradox, and calling Fermi retarded while posting the most shallow and poorly thought out "obvious solution" isn't one of them. These are considerations that take place prior to even beginning to have a serious discussion about it.
If you make a serious argument and someone responds with "OK, but that's wrong because you never won a Nobel prize" then you will have a valid complaint.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 11:34:41 2019 No.10765930 >>10765922 Fermi was a retard though and the "fermi paradox" proves it

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 11:36:37 2019 No.10765937 >>10765773 you do not need galaxy wide cohesion and communication to colonize it, being in contact nearby systems is enough

Anonymous Sat Jun 29 11:36:41 2019 No.10765938

>>10761112
We're not at the space faring stage of the human story, that's why

It would ruin the story if we seen aliens now. It would be like medieval people having cars, it's just not part of the story that god designed. In the future we will find aliens and the story will enter a new chapter.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 11:38:27 2019 No.10765943 >>10765922 this

Anonymous Sat Jun 29 12:25:18 2019 No.10766037

>>10765310
>apparently valid reasoning from true premises
Found your problem. There is literally no reason you should be able to see aliens everywhere. This is a matter of your misunderstanding, not some kind of spooky physics in the universe that makes humans special. It's not a paradox because no reasonable person would ever assume what you are assuming and what Fermi assumed.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 12:27:08 2019 No.10766041 >>10765209 Oooooor we could go with the actual reason, that human technology simply isn't up to the task.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 12:28:15 2019 No.10766043 >>10765659 Even if there were there's about a 100% chance that you're not going to be able to pick them up with primitive human monkey tech.

Anonymous Sat Jun 29 12:28:33 2019 No.10766044

>>10766037
age of the universe and our very fast technological development strongly suggests that galaxy ought to be colonized by now in entirety

now of course you can come up with reasons why this should not be the case, but they tend to be quite contrived

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 12:29:34 2019 No.10766046 >>10766041 human technology is good enough to detect dyson spheres already, or other large scale stellar engineering projects

Anonymous Sat Jun 29 12:30:28 2019 No.10766049

>>10765683
>Yes but we can survey huge numbers of galaxies, and none are Type 3
How the hell would you know? You pop science retards keep making this asinine assumption that just because something exists humans would immediately be able to detect it. A few centuries ago humans didn't even believe meteors were a thing because they assumed that rocks couldn't fall out of the sky.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 12:31:54 2019 No.10766052 >>10766049 We would be able to detect if a civilization was siphoning off significant amount of starlight for energy, yes.

Anonymous Sat Jun 29 12:34:16 2019 No.10766058

>>10765702
What is a counter indication for life evolving early on planets? Once again, the only argument your side has is "well hurr durr we can't see it with our primitive telescopes that register the closest objects as fuzzy blobs so it must not exist". Not going to pick up a lot of bacteria on Alpha Centauri with that. The closest system to the solar system is Alpha Centauri and we have no clear pictures of anything in that system, including the star, which should tell you everything you need to know about the so-called Fermi paradox.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 12:34:34 2019 No.10766059 >>10766037 >not some kind of spooky physics in the universe that makes humans special. But that's why the paradox exists. Fermi assumes there are no spooky physics and that humans aren't special. So what's your problem with his assumption then?

Anonymous Sat Jun 29 12:35:26 2019 No.10766063

>>10765707
This. The Drake equation is also trash. You can make up an equation like that for anything oh, especially if you have as little input for the variables as the Drake equation has. The way it stands right now the Drake equation could say anything from the universe is full of life to that it has no life in it or very nearly so. Literally useless.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 12:35:36 2019 No.10766064 File: 145 KB, 661x767, Ya1mxmrk1gfTzAL5QHhfIZkFHHHQ5vlZA1MUO4R8rc8[1].jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Here are various solutions to the paradox. I would go with the simplest one - intelligent life is extremely rare.

Anonymous Sat Jun 29 12:39:09 2019 No.10766074

>>10765732
Wow QED that's amazing. Except... you forgot to factor in the two most important variables - the near infinite distance full of absolutely nothing between stars which is a severe limiting factor of expansion and the incredibly primitive nature of human technology.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 12:41:13 2019 No.10766079 >>10765834 Nigger you can't even see Alpha Centauri clearly with the primitive state of human technology.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 12:42:21 2019 No.10766084 >>10765871 What makes you think that type 3 civilizations are going to be moving stars all over the place? That's an assumption you made, not scientific data.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 12:44:09 2019 No.10766089 >>10766079 we can see it clearly enough to detect miniscule variations in light output and precisely measure the spectrum there is positively no large scale harnessing of energy going on over there

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 12:44:12 2019 No.10766092 >>10765922 It is a trivial mistake that even a child wouldn't make and Fermi is clearly a retard for thinking it. And you are clearly using appeal to authority in order to attempt to defeat this obvious fact.

Anonymous Sat Jun 29 12:44:58 2019 No.10766094
File: 247 KB, 638x359, disabled.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>10766037
>no reasonable person would ever assume what you are assuming and what Fermi assumed
If you want to be taken seriously stop trying to claim Fermi was retarded. He absolutely could have made a specific assumption you have good evidence to dispute but holy shit, you come across as a mentally challenged 12 year old when you do that. Fermi was easily one of the greatest intellects in human history. Read a book.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 12:46:02 2019 No.10766098 >>10766092 >gets called out for being an idiot >doubles down Yeah, I am with Enrico on this one..

Anonymous Sat Jun 29 12:46:32 2019 No.10766101

>>10766044
You guys really need to stop invoking the age of the universe, because it's completely irrelevant to the discussion if there are other compounding factors like, again repeating for like the 80th fucking time, the distance between stars which makes Interstellar colonization almost physically fucking impossible.

Anonymous Sat Jun 29 12:47:28 2019 No.10766105

>>10766092
Two different things here:
A) You're being an idiot by suggesting a clear cut historical genius who laid the foundation for much of the modern scientific landscape we live in today is stupid
B) There are arguments to be made about specific aspects of the Fermi Paradox
Stick to B and you'll do fine, anon. Not that complicated.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 12:47:33 2019 No.10766106 >>10766052 No, you wouldn't.

Anonymous Sat Jun 29 12:50:05 2019 No.10766114

>>10766101
Distance does not make colonization impossible because you can use really slow means of travel such as large, deeply sublight generation ships or hopping from one interstellar asteroid to the next (distances between which are on the order of few AUs). And you still colonize the entire galaxy group many times over, in a mere fraction of the age of the universe.

The universe is much older than it is large.

Anonymous Sat Jun 29 12:50:40 2019 No.10766116

>>10766052
>>10766106
And even if you could, you have no reason to believe it's a Dyson Sphere because your resolution is so pathetic you'd never be able to see it. Tabby's star is an excellent example of this. This isn't even really a debate. You're all just wrong and stupid. And for all the retards continuing to say yes it is a paradox, just because a mechanic can't understand chemistry doesn't mean chemistry is a paradox. It means he's a retard. Not everything you can't understand is a paradox. Sometimes you're just an idiot.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 12:51:42 2019 No.10766119 >>10766059 You have been told multiple times in this thread. Become literate, brainlet.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 12:53:27 2019 No.10766121 >>10766114 >The universe is much older than it is large Nope

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 12:53:56 2019 No.10766125 >>10766089 Your side is hopeless. Literally too stupid to debate. You don't even understand the issues involved or any of the technology. All you keep doing is appealing to your pop science guru retards.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 12:55:23 2019 No.10766130 >>10766094 Fermi was a retard. I'm sorry you don't like that. Einstein was a retard too. How does that twist your panties?

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 12:56:05 2019 No.10766132 >>10766116 >Tabby's star is an excellent example of this. Yes, Tabby star, a star that was widely speculated to be a detection of a Dyson sphere, is evidence that are unable to detect potential Dyson spheres. You are rarted.

Anonymous Sat Jun 29 12:56:25 2019 No.10766135

>>10766098
We know. Because you're a pop science retard and you always appeal to authority regardless of how wrong that authority is because you don't actually know the science involved yourself. Which is literally the only reason this debate exists at all.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 12:57:01 2019 No.10766136 >>10766119 I haven't cause that was my 2nd reply.

Anonymous Sat Jun 29 12:58:33 2019 No.10766143

>>10766132
And what happened with Tabby's star? Since you're such a fucking genius and you obviously know everything about this topic. Go on and tell us what the researchers have said about Tabby's star. I mean surely you would know, right? You wouldn't just be arguing from a point of ignorance. No that would be stupid.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 12:58:39 2019 No.10766144 >>10766130 Was just trying to help you stop making an idiot of yourself. Going to assume at this point you're either just pretending to be this stupid or are legitimately this stupid and can't be helped. Sorry, little buddy. Hope you get better.

Anonymous Sat Jun 29 13:00:38 2019 No.10766151

>>10766135
>>10766130
>>10766125

Citation needed. Obviously you will have no problems at all to offer a widely accepted paper with obvious and conclusive solution to the Fermi paradox.

Oh wait, you are just an idiot on a chan pretending to be smarter than the entire scientific community, and magically have it all figured out.

Anonymous Sat Jun 29 13:02:53 2019 No.10766156

>>10766114
And technically it's possible that organisms could evolve laser beam emitters, yet how many times have they in Earth's history? Why don't you take 10 seconds to stop making asinine assumptions and start actually looking at reality instead. The answers are all very obvious and readily available in the universe itself but you pop science cancer refuse to recognize them because the truth is not rockstar enough for you and it's boring. Also doesn't feed your immense egos by making humans seem special.

>The universe is much older than it is large.
As if you would know one way or the other.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 13:03:58 2019 No.10766161 >>10766121 Yep. 14 billion years is enough time to colonize a 100,000 lightyear diameter galaxy 14,000 times over. They ought to be present here already. For some weird reason, they arent. Hence the paradox.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 13:05:00 2019 No.10766164 >>10766156 >And technically it's possible that organisms could evolve laser beam emitters, yet how many times have they in Earth's history? Once.

Anonymous Sat Jun 29 13:06:55 2019 No.10766169

>>10761173
They're only economically impossible in our society. Big ass medieval cathedrals were also "economically impossible" to scale because they implied starving out the prole for a year. They just didnt care about people. We do, thats we dont make things anymore unless there's enough candy for all the class.
An alien society with a strong caste system, or the social structure of Ancient Egypt, any culture that breddisposable workers like ants instead of potential politicians, would have colonized their solar system in out timeframe.

If we took the money we 'invest' in Africa and the Middle East and dumped it wholesale on space travel we'd be mining the asteroid belt. We have the money and resources, we just need to set our priorities.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 13:09:29 2019 No.10766177 >>10766136 Read the thread then.

Anonymous Sat Jun 29 13:11:56 2019 No.10766179

>>10766151
There's a repeatability crisis right now to a large degree due to the peer-review system. Not that you would know that or anything since you're brainlet pretending to be a genius. But in layman's terms it means papers don't mean shit. Anyone can publish any garbage now, and frankly that's how it's always been, it's just worse now. I know that you can't deal with the reality of the fact that scientists are not objective demigods and modern human science isn't the end-all-be-all of knowledge in the universe, but I assure you this is how things are and one day you will realize this. Maybe.

Anonymous Sat Jun 29 13:14:28 2019 No.10766185

>>10766161
This "paradox" literally only exist because of asinine assumptions. Your side has been told this many times, but you're all just too stupid to recognize this reality. Because you're incapable of recognizing flaws in your own thinking processes.

>>10766164
Zero times. The correct answer was 0 times. Technology is not evolution.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 13:23:19 2019 No.10766210 >>10766179 >repeatability crisis >papers don't mean shit The "replication crisis," which is specific to disciplines like psychology, doesn't invalidate physics you mongoloid.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 13:29:01 2019 No.10766223 >>10766177 I have and I don't see how that answers my question.

Anonymous Sat Jun 29 13:30:27 2019 No.10766226
File: 271 KB, 777x759, 1492888835454.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>10766058
how is it the only argument lol and why are you crediting arguments to me I haven't made? refer to eugene koonin's paper >>10764544 and the appendix. by the current understanding of DNA and RNA, the probabilities involved in their spontaneous emergence are so low that there cannot be life in elsewhere in our observable universe. I agree that mapping a theoretical alien's behaviour after ours and making baseless assumptions such as that they are biologically driven to expand in the same way we are is stupid, but until new insights in abiogenesis it's simply statistically impossible that there is life causally connected with us

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 13:30:52 2019 No.10766228 >>10766185 >Technology is not evolution. Meaningless distinction.

Anonymous Sat Jun 29 13:32:56 2019 No.10766236

>>10766179
I am not saying scientists are demigods, I am saying they are orders of magnitude brighter than you in particular. Indeed, maybe your solution for Fermi paradox happens to be correct, but in the same way that a broken clock is right twice a day. You dont know shit and have no actual evidence or strong argument to support your assertions. Your condescending attitude is totally unwarranted.

Anonymous Sat Jun 29 14:19:00 2019 No.10766392

>>10761112
>fermi paradox
That's just for people who can't into how fucking big the universe really is, as you say. Attenuation is a bitch.

>Type 2 or Type 3 or Type 4 civilizations.

Those are pure sci-fi and can not happen due to this thing called, "physics."

>There are countless ways of detecting a civilization which has the power to mess with stars/solar systems/galaxies yet we have seen absolutely nothing.

Since this can't actually happen, you'd need to look for stars blinking over long amounts of time. You'd need to turn one side of a star into a Morse code generator by putting something on that side and blocking/unblocking the light to that portion of the universe.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 14:20:29 2019 No.10766400 >>10761267 Retard

Anonymous Sat Jun 29 14:26:37 2019 No.10766425
File: 56 KB, 680x510, 836.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>10766169
This.

We have so much money going "nowhere" instead of it funding promising research: we're only setting ourselves further back by missing out on technologies we could have already invented and started using.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 14:33:57 2019 No.10766452 >>10766392 >pulsars exist >we're too dumb to see them as intentional beacons, and manage to integrate their illogicality into a coherent theory because we're just that obsessed with finding randomness in patterns

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 14:34:52 2019 No.10766453 >>10766452 I keep telling people that pulsars are the Universal internet, but no one listens to me.

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 14:36:51 2019 No.10766461 >>10761112 >it was a miracle we ourselves existed at all wHaT iS tHe aNtHrOpIc pRiNcIpLe

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 14:37:31 2019 No.10766463 >>10766185 >Technology is not evolution brainlet detected

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 14:38:06 2019 No.10766465 >>10766461 >tfw no anthropomorphic climate change gf

>>	Anonymous Sat Jun 29 17:50:21 2019 No.10766926 Anyone remember the Wow! signal? Could be an off-the-mark radio transmission from an alien civilization.

Anonymous Sun Jun 30 01:00:47 2019 No.10767749

>>10762560
It's certainly fair to say that it's not a problem that can be worked out in a supercomputer simulation, never mind on paper, and that not nearly enough laboratory work since Miller-Urey has been done. Though it may be the that the temperatures & pressures required to get a replicator, or set of replicators, complex enough for natural selection to build upon are simply unattainable for long in the laboratory, and that deep ocean extremophiles most closely resemble the earliest forms, how expensive can it be to build a room-sized sterile vessel in which a primordial shoreline stews under lightning & UV for a year? It would be surprising if some surprising chemistry didn't emerge from that.

Anonymous Sun Jun 30 05:50:38 2019 No.10768112

>>10761156
>we should see them by now
There is no need to colonize extensively whole galaxy for an advanced species.
There is also a good argument that we already observed alien activity.You might be also surprised to learn astronomers have catalogued dozens of dozens of Dyson Sphere candidates(but we are unable to confirm if they are artificial).

>>	Anonymous Sun Jun 30 06:07:04 2019 No.10768128 >>10761156 what if life occurring is so unlikely it only happens once per local cluster of galaxies? we will never get out of ours, they drift apart too fast. what if our sensors can never reach their signals?

Anonymous Sun Jun 30 07:02:14 2019 No.10768203

>lived in a time when we didn't even know there were a fuckton of planets. Only knew of a handful of planets
>no aliens with which to sample the probability that aliens exist
>determine that it is improbably any aliens exist anywhere from that data
>years later
>find out there's tons of planets
>every star has multiple planets
>ppl still spout fermi paradox.

>>	Anonymous Sun Jun 30 07:20:40 2019 No.10768229 based

>>	Anonymous Sun Jun 30 07:30:43 2019 No.10768238 >>10761112 Speed of light is finite, so posiibly we still haven't received any signals

Anonymous Sun Jun 30 09:10:12 2019 No.10768369

>>10761112
>The universe is so vast that, if life were truly naturally occurring throughout the cosmos, then by know we should have seen signs of Type 2 or Type 3 or Type 4 civilizations.
>There are countless ways of detecting a civilization which has the power to mess with stars/solar systems/galaxies yet we have seen absolutely nothing.
>There was a physicist/biologist who calculated the probability of organic replicators arising abiogenetically and the chances were so low that it was a miracle we ourselves existed at all. The conditions for life in the universe were probably only present once in the 13.4 billion years of existence, and that only happened billions of years ago when the earth first formed. The conditions for life to arise are no longer present anywhere in the universe and that is why mathematically abiogenesis makes no sense. That is why we don't see, hear or feel any aliens when pointing our tools out into the sky.
>We are alone.
The absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

>>	Anonymous Sun Jun 30 09:46:13 2019 No.10768404 >>10761112 https://www.ufocasebook.com/colares1977.html this one i guess is one of the biggest and real ufo encounters

Anonymous Sun Jun 30 14:18:00 2019 No.10769045

>>10766064
The simplest one is space being fuckall huge. Signals sent in the 90s reached Gliese this decade, and assuming they replied instantly their reply wouldnt reach us for for another 20 years.
And thats assuming they have the technology to listen or even give a fuck about listening. For all we know every civilization in our galaxy thinks space is cursed and refuses to explore or listen.

>>	Anonymous Sun Jun 30 14:24:44 2019 No.10769071 >>10768203 Are you an immortal vampire from the 19th century? Everyone knew exoplanets were a thing, we just didnt see them until the 80s, What kind of retard thinks the sun was the only star with planets?

>>	Anonymous Sun Jun 30 15:18:35 2019 No.10769213 >>10769045 And the other problem is that we are not listening in all directions all the time. If someone did send a signal, there's something like a 98 percent chance we'd miss it considering the small area we have covered by our radio telescopes.

Anonymous Sun Jun 30 16:07:18 2019 No.10769329

I don't really care to debate it, but it seems likely that if there any other civilizations they would be colonizing the milky way and would have FTL travel. Perhaps they have been colonizing the milky way, but the light from the matrioshka brains hasn't reached us yet.

>>	Anonymous Sun Jun 30 18:27:58 2019 No.10769638 File: 313 KB, 1600x1066, 2DC31639-B0F9-4BA6-ADFE-57CFD2FD7737.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >i don’t see any aliens >therefore aliens don’t exist it’s pretty simple, guys

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 1 01:12:15 2019 No.10770455 >>10761472 The problem here is all it takes is one (1) individual in any one (1) of your simulated worlds to decide to send out one (1) self replicating probe into the real material galaxy for shits and giggles and this falls apart.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 1 01:14:56 2019 No.10770462 >>10761129 c is limited and signals spread with r^-2. there is your solution

Anonymous Mon Jul 1 01:15:40 2019 No.10770465

>>10765107
>You are too stupid to understand how incredibly vast the gulf between stars is. It would require technology several orders of magnitude greater than you could even understand to bridge that gap.

literally all you need is fusion, suck my ass retard

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 1 01:19:12 2019 No.10770472 >>10769329 >and would have FTL travel In order for that to be a credible statement, we'd first have to prove relativity wrong.

Anonymous Mon Jul 1 01:21:04 2019 No.10770476

>>10766392
>Those are pure sci-fi and can not happen due to this thing called, "physics."

How the fuck does 'physics' stop you from building a bunch of solar panels around a star, that is literally all the meme civilization tier list shit is quantifying.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 1 01:21:49 2019 No.10770479 >>10770472 >prove relativity wrong Well get to it already. Fuck. It's like you think the future just makes itself.

Anonymous Mon Jul 1 01:25:55 2019 No.10770482

Jesus I just read this whole thing and I’m surprised no ones bringing up these points.

You assume life is in our galaxy which it might not be...Ok so what about the galaxy over? No? Dang ok...(since many of you assume we can detect such things that far)..Now what? What if we are just in the backwoods of our universe and we are the only ones inside a bubble of 100s of galaxies. But many 1000s galaxies over we have huge spots of life all over doing their thing. Huge multi race empires spanning galaxies. But They are just to far for us to even believe to detect. We are living in the little house waaay waaaay out in the woods where we have a 3 mile dirt driveway just to get to our ground door. Nearest neighbor is 20 miles out where the nearest cities are 100s.

That’s could be us. And the thing is is there would be many civilizations out there all alone and undiscovered in the middle of nowhere.

Shit I’m still finding new places in my own city that I never knew existed and I’ve been here my whole life.

Point 2

Why do all the civilizations have be all over the place spanning up galaxies and spreading?

Maybe they evolve inward living in a self made universe simulation inside a fucking foot by foot cube floating around in space or buried 50 miles below the surface of some random planet .You could never detect that.

To many possible reasons why.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 1 01:29:34 2019 No.10770489 >>10770482 I did say that someone did bring up my 2nd point my bad

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 1 01:31:09 2019 No.10770492 >>10770482 Oh I do see that someone brought up my 2nd point my bad

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 1 02:05:42 2019 No.10770537 >>10765701 t. illiterate https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermi_paradox op described it nearly verbatim

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 1 02:06:46 2019 No.10770538 >>10764954 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox That you are mad at the definition of the word paradox doesnt change said definition. Get over it.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 1 02:23:01 2019 No.10770562 >>10766143 Dust.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 1 02:25:50 2019 No.10770565 File: 188 KB, 522x614, me.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Why do popsci Bye Nye kiddies have so much trouble accepting that God made Man alone in the universe?

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 1 02:26:23 2019 No.10770566 How much of the unit sphere have we surveyed? Maybe the ayys are in a chunk we haven't pointed our shit at yet.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 1 02:47:39 2019 No.10770580 >>10770565 Prove God exists.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 1 02:50:04 2019 No.10770582 >>10770580 Necessity of a transcendent formal, material, and efficient cause for being.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 1 02:57:45 2019 No.10770591 >>10770582 >Necessity of a transcendent formal, material, and efficient cause for being. Prove being needs a cause.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 1 14:44:03 2019 No.10771688 >>10770476 Dyson shit is steampunk, forget about it already.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 1 14:45:07 2019 No.10771693 >>10769329 nigger

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 1 23:08:59 2019 No.10772880 >>10770565 God didn't make man, brainlet. God made the physical conditions for man, and those same conditions could easily be found elsewhere

Anonymous Mon Jul 1 23:20:07 2019 No.10772897

You are all forgetting that our species was only allowed to evolve due to a comet impact 65 million years ago that was just powerful enough to decimate the dominant species, yet not powerful enough to sterilize the planet. The age of mammals was born. I would imagine only a tiny fraction of planets that may have hosted life developed into a planet where any mammalian life was allowed to evolve into a species large enough to host large brains and advanced intelligence. Our very existence here is only due to a nearly impossible convergence of events.

>>	Anonymous Mon Jul 1 23:27:17 2019 No.10772911 >>10770566 We've surveyed the whole thing, it's turtles all the way down

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 2 01:22:54 2019 No.10773061 >>10772897 Wouldn't result be the same if ice age was caused by something else?

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 2 02:10:58 2019 No.10773125 >>10770591 That's what Hitler told me...

Anonymous Tue Jul 2 02:19:11 2019 No.10773131

>>10772897
You don't actually know how many alternative possible ways there are for intelligent life to develop. Just because the way it played out on Earth may have involved a comet and a mass extinction event (extinction in general isn't even uncommon incidentally, it's been pretty fucking standard throughout the history of life on this planet at least) doesn't mean all intelligent life must follow from circumstances like those.

Anonymous Tue Jul 2 02:21:27 2019 No.10773136

>>10770565
>Why do popsci Bye Nye kiddies have so much trouble accepting that God made Man alone in the universe?
Do you really want to use God as ante in a bet on alien life never being found? If I were religious I probably wouldn't try to limit God like that.

Anonymous Tue Jul 2 02:51:41 2019 No.10773187

>>10761112
Imo it's a combination of several factors.
First, you need to be in the part of a galaxy that's both calm and rich in heavy elements (the human body needs something like 30+ elements to survive).
Second, your star must be almost equal in size to our sun and must not be part of a binary system. If it's bigger, it will die much earlier. If it's smaller, tidal locking occurs and at best you end up with a planet of bacteria that thrive on infrared on the tidally locked side or warm currents from the tidally locked side to the dark side. The star must also be extremely stable over an extremely long period of time because otherwise temperature changes would kill life frequently.
These factors alone already exclude well over 97-99% of existing stars.

The next factor is the planet. Obviously, the planet must be in the habitable zone of the star and must be big enough to keep its atmosphere. Whether it needs a magnetosphere or can keep its atmosphere by other processes is still being discussed. The planet must also not be too big or else it will have a too high gravity for complex life.
Water is also part of the equation. Yeah, most habitable planets could have it, but how much is the question? If you have too much, the planet will never ever create a technological civilisation. If there are only patches of water, life won't form.
And even if life forms (a process which took hundreds of millions of years on earth), there's no telling how much the likelihood of it evolving are. From the beginning of life to humans it took over 4 billion years. That's a very significant fraction of the lifetime of the universe. And our star will be too hot in another billion years.

Imo, there could be one technological civilisation every billion light years or so.

Anonymous Tue Jul 2 02:58:38 2019 No.10773194

>>10761129
>The most likely are incompatible communication methods (we ARE receiving alien signals but are not capable of identifying them as such or picking them up with our methods)
Muh magic communication device.
>aliens intentionally staying silent for a number of potential reasons
Dark forest theory is retarded because you just need big ass telescopes to basically spy on the entire universe. You can't hide. Your best bet at surviving is to become bigger.
>or we simply haven't looked in the correct specific locations yet.
Any large scale manufacting project within millions of light years would be very visible to us.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 2 03:00:11 2019 No.10773197 >>10761197 >humans like to expand All life on earth likes to expand, retard.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 2 03:02:32 2019 No.10773199 >>10761163 >Your mistake is assuming physics allows for anything, let alone engineering and economics. There are no physical or engineering limits on any of this.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 2 03:03:46 2019 No.10773203 >>10765305 An alien civ that build a dyson swarm 10 million years ago would be visible to us.

Anonymous Tue Jul 2 03:04:01 2019 No.10773204

>>10773194
>You can't hide.
Why do you believe it's impossible to come up with a way to hide? That doesn't really sound all that outlandish. Difficult maybe, but taking the mediocrity principle that we're likely not an exceptionally advanced civilization ourselves, I don't see why all the civilizations further along on the curve couldn't figure something out.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 2 03:07:59 2019 No.10773206 >>10761472 >we turn to simulation and data instead of the "real world". And then our star dies and we all gracefully accept our deaths instead of harnessing as much resources as possible to keep going for 10^xx years?

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 2 03:10:43 2019 No.10773210 >>10762589 >>10765150 There is, it's called resources. If you're an immortal alien species, all you care about is keeping yourself alive. Watch Madoka.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 2 03:12:01 2019 No.10773213 >>10764115 >There's no way in hell you're going to detect anything in another solar system. Humans can. If there's a big ass heat source that can't be explained by dust, it's an alien structure.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 2 03:12:06 2019 No.10773214 >>10773206 If you got good enough at creating artificial realities maybe you'd be able to cram more and more content into smaller intervals of time so that you'd get 10^xx years' worth experienced within 1 second of external time.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 2 03:18:06 2019 No.10773219 >>10766392 >That's just for people who can't into how fucking big the universe really is Just because you retard can't handle big numbers, doesn't mean we can't either.

Anonymous Tue Jul 2 03:22:11 2019 No.10773225

>>10773204
>Why do you believe it's impossible to come up with a way to hide?
Your planet exists -> it has an oxygen/methan atmosphere, which is unnatural and can be detected from everywhere.
If you're an advanced civilisation, you can't hide either because your energy consumption is way too high. Even if you try to use energy as efficiently as possible, you'd still need to do some large manufacturing first.
>Difficult maybe, but taking the mediocrity principle that we're likely not an exceptionally advanced civilization ourselves
Now the question is, where

Anonymous Tue Jul 2 03:23:16 2019 No.10773229

>>10773214
But you can't simulate an infinite amount of time. If you want to extend your life for as long as possible, it still makes sense to collect every resource in the universe, extinguish all stars and use the resources as efficiently as possible.

Anonymous Tue Jul 2 03:26:25 2019 No.10773233
File: 8 KB, 277x271, proof.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]

>>10773229
>But you can't simulate an infinite amount of time.
Is there a formal proof of this idea? Also:
>it still makes sense to collect every resource in the universe, extinguish all stars and use the resources as efficiently as possible.
That's not infinite either, so I don't see why you're invoking infinity as a requirement for compressed simulation time in the first place.

Anonymous Tue Jul 2 03:30:56 2019 No.10773238

>>10773233
>Is there a formal proof of this idea? Also:
Hard physical limits on computation power.
>That's not infinite either, so I don't see why you're invoking infinity as a requirement for compressed simulation time in the first place.
Not infinite, but a whole lot longer.

Anonymous Tue Jul 2 03:38:51 2019 No.10773248

>>10773238
>Hard physical limits on computation power.
Interestingly Landauer's principle allows for far greater computational gains if you let enough time pass for enough of the cosmic background radiation to die out. So that would be an incentive to focus on compressed simulation time instead of trying to fight against entropy in the non-simulated external world.
>Not infinite, but a whole lot longer.
Where's the proof for this claim? I don't see how it'd be clear whether either focus on compressed simulation time packing in experience more and more densely or focus on exploiting more and more external resources would net you more time by the end of the world. I could plausibly see either one as happening to pay off more than the other.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 2 06:15:54 2019 No.10773372 >>10761112 >There are countless ways of detecting a civilization which has the power to mess with stars/solar systems/galaxies yet we have seen absolutely nothing. How do you tell an artificial star/solar system/galaxy from a natural one?

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 2 08:58:32 2019 No.10773524 There's plenty of evidence of life in the universe, /sci/ is just full of skeptics so they tend to take 2 steps back for every 1 step forward.

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 2 13:05:48 2019 No.10773826 >>10773210 >immortal >worried about keeping yourself alive What did she mean by this

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 2 13:49:13 2019 No.10773885 >>10773210 Kyubei actually gave zero fucks about their life. Also they were ignorant on many problems, believed in exploitation, and as a result were destroyed. That's a nigger's mistake, it literally has many precedents in history.

Anonymous Tue Jul 2 15:32:51 2019 No.10774098

>>10761156
You are wrong for the same reasons that while technically humans could already be colonizing the solar system we simply aren't, and don't really have plans to in the foreseeable future.
You confusing possibility with feasibility, most economic feasibility.
The universe is big, empty, and hostile to life. No one would want to go there unless they had to.

Anonymous Tue Jul 2 17:12:30 2019 No.10774351

>>10773187
>These factors alone already exclude well over 97-99% of existing stars.
How the fuck did you figure that our average star and average solar system is part of the 1%?
> Obviously, the planet must be in the habitable zone of the star and must be big enough to keep its atmosphere.
We've already discovered hundreds of planets like this.

Anonymous Tue Jul 2 18:06:02 2019 No.10774485

the fermi paradox is fucking dumb. habitable planets are few and far between, and the probability of life spawning and evolving to intelligence on one of them is probably astronomically small. if other life exists chances are it's far outside the observable universe

>>	Anonymous Tue Jul 2 18:06:20 2019 No.10774488 >>10764960 you're an annoying person of low intelligence

>>	Anonymous Wed Jul 3 01:01:06 2019 No.10775429 >>10761153 source?

>>	Anonymous Wed Jul 3 07:10:40 2019 No.10776011 >>10765107 Youre aware that if there was the political will we could construct an interstellar space craft right now yes? The reason we havent isnt because it would be too hard, its because it would be pointless.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jul 3 07:12:40 2019 No.10776012 >>10765107 > They didn't. Deal with it. Fucking lol, why are you even on this board? This is functionally the same as saying "idk magic bro". I see a lot of retardation on this board but this is some distilled anti intellectualism.

Anonymous Wed Jul 3 07:17:16 2019 No.10776021

>>10764960
In three sentences you have manage to make a claim that carries the following implicits:
>you know with certainty the upper bound of technology, and by extension have a full grasp of the physics of this universe

Your level of dunning kreuger truly is astronomical.
>essentially the entirety of stem "has no excuse" to be involved in stem

>>	Anonymous Wed Jul 3 09:33:01 2019 No.10776230 File: 277 KB, 1348x1086, 1548658708931.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] Or it could be pic related

>>	Anonymous Wed Jul 3 10:18:55 2019 No.10776301 >>10776230 >Israel, JIDF

>>	Anonymous Wed Jul 3 10:21:03 2019 No.10776305 >>10776301 https://discord.gg/sJpcEqV

Anonymous Wed Jul 3 12:53:03 2019 No.10776607

>>10770591
The very fact of being in a physical system with a specifc set of laws and specific amount of energy proves that our reality was engineered by someone capable of intellect, someone who keeps running the computations to keep it working, because we are clearly able to shitpost on this board.
This kind of stuff doesn't just happen "by chance" because the chance of a sentient being to arise and building it happens several magnitudes earlier.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jul 3 14:29:01 2019 No.10776791 >>10761112 wrong

>>	Anonymous Wed Jul 3 14:30:16 2019 No.10776792 >>10761112 I think we are alone and think that this is likely evidence that we are in a simulation, or a similar scenario. I suspect we are in some kind of giant procedurally generated game. Super-Daggerfall.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jul 3 15:18:22 2019 No.10776898 File: 80 KB, 750x310, cor109.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] >>10765009 why do you assume they are not? because you imagine something like pic related, amiright?

Anonymous Wed Jul 3 15:39:32 2019 No.10776953

>>10765209

the Dyson spheres stuff seems retarded to me. a structure like that would be hugely implausible and does not answer how you transfer the energy.

much more likely would be another localised method of power than can simply be replicated, we are not far off fusion ourselves for example. Also why would these civilisations even need mega-structures, it does not take anywhere near the energy of a star let alone galaxy to do everything humanity could ever dream of.

Anonymous Wed Jul 3 15:50:39 2019 No.10776965

>>10776021
>In three sentences you have manage to make a claim that carries the following implicits:
>>you know with certainty the upper bound of technology, and by extension have a full grasp of the physics of this universe

I think the real point is that this faggot does not know the upper bounds of tech and neither did Fermi. we simply cant know because we have no idea what is possible and how it would look. personally i feel the limitations of physics are the more likely answer, we have one example of intelligent life and none of technology used by a type 1 or 2 civ.

>>	Anonymous Wed Jul 3 16:35:41 2019 No.10777070 >>10764115 This guy gets it

>>	Anonymous Wed Jul 3 22:28:31 2019 No.10777844 >>10776301 oldschool /pol/ flags were random

>>	Anonymous Wed Jul 3 22:30:26 2019 No.10777847 >>10776953 It would make more sense if they actually lived in the sphere-- then energy collection and distribution would be local

>>	Anonymous Thu Jul 4 00:46:12 2019 No.10778092 If we're experimenting with quantum teleportation now, then why wouldn't some very advanced form have already mastered it and communicate that way? We wouldn't observe it at all.

Advanced search
Text to find
Subject [?]Search by post subject. Leave empty for any.
Username [?]Search for user name. Leave empty for any user name.
Tripcode [?]Search for tripcode. Leave empty for any.
Email [?]Search by email. Leave empty for any.
Filename [?]Search by image filename. Leave empty for any.
From Date [?]Enter what date to start searching from. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
To Date [?]Enter what date to start searching until. Format is YYYY-MM-DD
Image hash
Search in	All Posts OPs Only
Deleted posts	Show all posts Show only deleted posts Only show non-deleted posts
Internal posts	Show all posts Show only internal posts Show only archived posts
Order	New posts first Old posts first
Capcode	All Posts Only by Users Only by Mods Only by Admins Only by Developers
Results	Posts Threads
Action	[ Simple ]

/sci/ - Science & Math