The Fermi Paradox.

[Anonymous No.11193772]

Consider the following: Pic related was in a singular direction, and a very small patch of the sky. 99.99999% of all other galaxies haven't even been observed.

Does anyone here genuinely doubt there is intelligent alien life somewhere else in the universe? If so, can you explain why you do not think it's likely?

[Anonymous No.11193794]

no

[Anonymous No.11193853]

It may be like this:

"Prokaryotic life" is abundant in the universe. It doesn't want to communicate with each other or with us, so it is invisible to radars and even to visual observation.
"Viral and eukaryotic life" is a rare and short-lived state of life caused by weird cataclysms like the artistic "adam and lilith life seed" landing on the same planet. Because it is short-lived, it doesn't ever advance enough to achieve interstellar travel or obsevation of other life.

[Anonymous No.11193955]

Bump.

[Anonymous No.11193979]

What if successfully building viable machinery for interstellar travel is the great filter and the universe is filled with intelligent life that is trapped in their solar systems, whether they invent fusion of the singularity or whatever?

[Anonymous No.11193995]

>>11193772
>Does anyone here genuinely doubt there is intelligent alien life somewhere else in the universe?
We have no a priori reason to assume anything about the frequency of intelligence life per galaxy or even regions as large as our observable universe. Our understanding of abiogenesis and the evolution of life from simple bacteria to complex multi-cellular life simply isn't good enough. We can presume that life is probably not a miracle or extremely unlikely... given enough time and space. That's all. "Enough" could be anything, even so much that for any given advanced civilization, on average there wouldn't be another one within their light cone - which would mean that they'd be "alone in their universe", if by universe we mean the one observable to the civilization in question, which is how the word is often used.

[Anonymous No.11194015]

>>11193772
Listen, this is a sci board. We don't "genuinely doubt", we don't "believe", we don't "think it's likely" and we don't care about your or your uncle's opinion.
No, instead we deal with proven facts. We oppose arguments until we can get a mental picture as close to reality as possible.

[Anonymous No.11194074]

>>11193995

So. No.

>>11194015

This isn't an answer to the question, at all.

[Anonymous No.11194346]

>>11194074
You didn't challenge anyone's ideas or beliefs, you asked a question, you made zero argument.

[Anonymous No.11195189]

It doesnt matter if theres 10e2000 life supporting planets if the chance for life is 10e-3000

[Anonymous No.11195192]

stupid idea
it's like all of the retarded guesses people had about what other planets in the solar system were like before we actually went and looked at them
turns out that you can't make educated guesses from insubstantial data

[Anonymous No.11195249]

If life is common, it should be everywhere. We don't see other life so it's probably uncommon.

If life is uncommon, it's probably so uncommon that we will never ever see it.

It would be unlikely for life to be just common enough to be seen eventually but not common enough to be everywhere by now. It's like tossing a coin for heads or tails and having it land on its side.

And when I mean "uncommon", I mean there are like a million universes between us and the next sentient life. And you can't travel between universes so we don't see 'em now or ever.

[Anonymous No.11195262]

>>11193772
A great filter styled simulation universe. The only thing in question is the ethics of a late stage civilization willing to enact such draconian and death filled simulations.

[Anonymous No.11195278]

>>11193772
If there are a billion intelligent civilizations at any given time and a hundred billion galaxies in the visible universe, then that's one intelligent species for every hundred galaxies. So intelligent life would have to be in the trillions across the galaxy just to be close enough to detect with our current technology.

[Anonymous No.11195287]

>>11193772
there are literally trillions of things that happened to get to where humanity is lmao, there's a pretty good change life more complex than a cell is just very very very very very very very very very very very very rare, like, one in a few galaxies or more rare lmao

[Anonymous No.11195311]

>>11195249
>If life is common, it should be everywhere. We don't see other life so it's probably uncommon

This.

[Anonymous No.11195346]

>>11193772
are galaxies really as close as they appear in this image? They look like the distance between them is as little as a dozen times their diameter.

[Anonymous No.11195350]

>>11193772
https://arxiv.org/abs/1806.02404

[Anonymous No.11195352]

>>11195262
Relevant:
http://www.unz.com/akarlin/katechon/

[Anonymous No.11195356]

>>11193979
That still doesn't explain why people haven't detected evidence of civilizations that are confined to their own solar systems, such as Dyson spheres.

[Anonymous No.11195383]

>>11193772
>Does anyone here genuinely doubt there is intelligent alien life somewhere else in the universe?

ZERO doubt there is intelligent life out there, 100% doubt that any are technologically advancing.

[Anonymous No.11195454]

>>11195356
Well it kind of would explain it if we'd accept the argument (not that I do). Civilizations here and there each stuck on their own solar system wouldn't be very easy to detect, the "paradox" raises from the assumption that even if just one started expanding it would quickly (by astronomical time scales) become very visible, or as it would seem.

[Anonymous No.11195557]

Dark Forest.

[Anonymous No.11195573]

>>11195311
>take a cup of water from the ocean
>catches no fish
>there is no fish in the ocean.

[Anonymous No.11195577]

>>11195249
"Life out there is unlikely, not even in 2 trillion galaxies!"

Brainlets will always think they are unique the center of everything

[Anonymous No.11195581]

>>11193772
Fermi Paradox?

Here's the solution to this problem: Space is fucking huge

[Anonymous No.11195590]

>>11195577
Who said anything about being unique? No one.

It's a simple observation that life is not common. The probability of it being just common enough to be only a bit outside our horizon is miniscule. It's way more likely that it's so uncommon that we're alone in this universe and would need to travel billions of universes to find the next one.

[Anonymous No.11195593]

>>11195581
Here's a counter-argument to your "solution": space is definitely not huge when you consider exponential growth and robotics. Even when travelling at less than the speed of light.

Do the math.

[Anonymous No.11195610]

>>11195593
How many axioms one gotta make to assume intergalactic travel is easy/possible/sustainable tho?

[Anonymous No.11195613]

>>11195610
Seeing how asteroids do that all the time with stone age technology, I'd say not too many.

[Anonymous No.11195619]

>>11195593
What if the robots keep splintering off from one another and keep cohesive teamwork over vast distances? Or maybe organics expand only end up in a dark forest scenario with their colonies, expansion could be impossible because of communication speed limits. By the time humans colonized another star (unlikely) we would be alien to each other, and being so far away it's be difficult to have empathy for one another. There could be billions of disparate colonies all hiding out.

[Anonymous No.11195622]

>>11195619
Can't keep**

[Anonymous No.11195662]

>>11193772
You alien cultists won't stop until we scan the last planet of the last star.

[Anonymous No.11195694]

I read on reddit that its a mathematical proof that we are actually living in a simulation. Therefor life must exist elsewhere....but we dont

[Anonymous No.11195712]

>>11195573

>implying we can catch more than just a cup with our current technology

[Anonymous No.11195727]

>>11193772
Space is fucking huge and attenuation is a fucking bitch.
/thread

[Anonymous No.11195731]

>>11195356
Because those are 200% science fiction you popsci turbo normie.

[Anonymous No.11195830]

>>11193772
>>11194074
If both of these are you OP, you're not only a dummy, you're kind of annoying about it too

https://arxiv.org/abs/1806.02404

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1892545/

Last paper is by a biologist with one of, if not the highest h-index in biology and by his calculations it is effectively impossible life has emerged anywhere else in our universe. Abiogenesis just continues to defeat simple explanation. And since you are asking for intelligent life, you also have to consider the evolutionarily near impossible step of eukaryogenesis. A new understanding in the future might change all of this but for now the stance that there is not life anywhere else is not that silly

[Anonymous No.11195868]

>>11195356
One look at the linear decline of fertility rates as earthbound societies increase in intelligence and technological prowess should tell you that the civilizations most capable of building Dyson spheres, ringworlds, etc are likely those with the least need whatsoever for them.

What's far more likely is that there are a handful of civilizations in the galaxy at a given moment that are at various stages along the path to becoming Alita/Cowboy Bebop/Firefly-style system-spanning civilizations that live out their lives in a stagnant, spacebound version of the 18th century age of sail, only with planets instead of nations, before they either kill each other off, exhaust their resources, turn inward or become stationary AI or something like the matrix.

Interstellar travel is probably the great filter, and the largest that most civilizations probably ever get is becoming Battlestar Galactica-style collections of a handful of star systems that are close enough to each other to sustain an Avatar-style interstellar economy based on relativistic sublight travel, before they succumb to the same fates as the solar system-level civs.

I'd also bet that when the interplanetary or interstellar economy shuts down, it probably leaves a few leftover planetbound civs that are locked in a set of Westeros/Middle Earth-style technological stasis that ranges anywhere from the stone age to where we are today.

[Anonymous No.11195897]

>>11193772
don't you know the old joke, if it's that intelligent of a life, she will avoid us humans? It seems pretty basic knowledge among real anthropologists.

[Anonymous No.11195937]

Selfish Gene gives a really great perspective on the huge number of variables that have to all line up in order for life to evolve. Super unlikely

[Anonymous No.11195942]

>>11195573
Plenty of ubiquitous lifeforms in any cup of ocean water. Analogy fail.

[Anonymous No.11195945]

>>11195942
The analogy was between "fish in the ocean" and "life outside our planet". Not "life in the ocean" and "life outside our planet"

[Anonymous No.11195951]

>>11195830
interesting papers

[Anonymous No.11195957]

>>11195868
>One look at the linear decline of fertility rates as earthbound societies increase in intelligence and technological prowess should tell you that the civilizations most capable of building Dyson spheres, ringworlds, etc are likely those with the least need whatsoever for them.

Fertility decline is just a temporary effect, the breeders always win in the long run.

[Anonymous No.11195961]

>>11195945
The point is that as far as we know, life fills every available niche thoroughly. So unless space travel is literally impossible (does not seem like it), the galaxy should be filled with life already. Unless life is very rare.

[Anonymous No.11196091]

>>11195957
But the societies that get swarmed by the breeders almost certainly die off before they're anywhere near being advanced enough to build a Dyson sphere.

[Anonymous No.11196130]

>>11193772
maybe life its incredibly rare.
you need the right type of galaxy, you need to be in the right location of said galaxy, you need the right type of star, you need the right solar system formation, you need the right type of planet, located at the right distance from the star, you need the right amount of water, the right amount of oxygen, the right amount of everything.
maybe the conditions for life are so incredibly specific that even in the billions of years the universe has existed life has only formed a couple of times, spread out through millennia in a way that no 2 civilizations have ever or will ever inhabit the universe at the same time.
or
maybe life is the ultimate goal of the universe so it has even formed in the most inhospitable and desolated of places and we were just unlucky enough to be born inside a void, a place no alien would ever bother visiting because it either looks empty from the outside or the cost to traverse a seemingly empty place is too high

[Anonymous No.11196174]

>>11195830
2nd paper is interesting. He seems to say abiogensis is mindbogglingly unlikely (like it would take many many lifetimes of the universe to happen once) but if the multiverse theory is true it's inevitable, but even if multiverse theories aren't true it doesn't matter because we're here so abiogensis must be possible anyway.

Strange, very interesting, but strange.

[Anonymous No.11196182]

As far as I know, there was a shitload of luck to even give us the most basic possibilities for life.

Like getting water after earth formed.
Or getting a moon this big.

And all this as an absolutely common planet in a common solar system in a common galaxy.

[Anonymous No.11196267]

>>11193772
There is no compelling reason to think that, if alien civilizations exist in this galaxy, we should have observed them by now.

Other galaxies aren't relevant to the Fermi paradox as it's usually formally proposed. That's not a pedantic distinction and it shouldn't be elided as if it's meaningless.

If you put forward a rational argument for a positive claim, justify your fucking premises.

[Anonymous No.11196323]

>>11195961
We have no reason to think that interstellar colonization - which is what you're talking about if I'm not misunderstanding, not space flight per se - is sufficiently conducive to life for life to inhabit that niche. It's possible to imagine a hypothetical organism which could live in (not beside) magma, but no such organism has been found. That it's physically possible for life to exist somewhere isn't sufficient cause to reasonably predict that it will.

[Anonymous No.11196598]

Stars are visible which is direct proof that there are no technologically advanced species in the universe.

[Anonymous No.11196687]

>>11196598
Hamburgers prove there are.

[Anonymous No.11197037]

>>11195249
>We don't see other life intelligent so it's probably uncommon.
fify
If Europa has liquid water under that ice, there will be some kind of life.
We need to get our species off this planet.

[Anonymous No.11197072]

>>11195961
>life fills every available niche thoroughly.
yup

[Anonymous No.11197702]

>>11195712
But he said fish and only fish.
The analogy still works if you want to bring tech into it. There may be some physical phenomena of detecting life that we have yet to discover