That the reason why aliens haven't contacted us yet is because they're observing our development until we're "mature" enough to join the intergalactic community?
You can make up any nonsense and call it a hypothesis
>>8004809
>hypothesis
how do we test it
>>8004815
Its one of the hypotheses of the Fermi paradox. Look it up asshole.
>>8004819
Shoot a nuke into outer space and detonate it...?
What does /sci/ think of my hypothesis that space is really fucking big and thus would make it difficult for life that has cropped up in completely different cosmic places to contact each other?
>>8004821
If the predictions of your model aren't correct, your model is wrong and you need to change it.
>>8004815
I would call it the God placebo paradox. Sky fairies of old don't cut it anymore. I think the powers that be considered all this and called it Operation Bluebeam.
>>8004831
>One hypothesis about extra-terrestrial life is unrelated to another hypothesis about extra-terrestrial life
Sure
>>8004809
>the Zoo Hypothesis
Otherwise known as the Prime Directive.
>>8004809
Its just as possible as 10000 other explanations for the fermi paradox
>>8004809
That's not a hypothesis
>>8004809
You're a fucking idiot if you think this fantastical star trek crap is real.
And Fermi is a dumbfuck and his stupid paradox. Even if you knew exactly where to look in the night sky to find life, you would see zero evidence of life.
>>8004809
I personally find it credible. It is easy to imagine alien life is using cloacking devices to conceal their existence from us, while at the same time, spying Earth or not even caring about some type 0 barbarians. We act in the same manner after all, on some obscure tribes and animal species.
>>8004819
> Being on sci
> Not knowing the meaning of hypothesis
>>8006290
>using cloacking devices to conceal their existence from us
Confirmed for never taking a physics class in your life
>>8006300
watch some michio gucci you penile
>>8004822
The next phase in human evolution
>>8006290
>It is easy to imagine alien life is using cloacking devices to conceal their existence from us
It's easy to imagine that there's some big ass dragon hiding behind the moon, doesn't make it any less bullshit.
>>8004815
You, my friend, with a short sentence, hit the fucking truth.
And we have to be glad that they do not call it a fact.
odds of forming a planet compatible with life: one in billions
odds of having life in those compatible planets: one in billions
odds of living organisms to develop a civilization: one in billions
odds for a civilization to develop at the same time than ours: one in billions
odds for a contemporary civilization to be close to us: one in billions
odds for a contemporary and close civilization to be similar to us: one in billions
>>8006344
> Pulling numbers out of your arse
> Not kowing the difference between odds and probability
>>8006359
sorry, English is not my first language
let's say that the probability of talking 5 minutes to a qt alien like Urusei Yatsura is lower than talking 5 minutes with Kanna Hashimoto: so very, very close to zero
>>8004809
>What does /sci/ think of the Zoo hypothesis?
Untestable speculation isn't a hypothesis.
>>8006327
Do we have to be?
Yea. Thanks society for spreading misinformation
>>8006344
odds for a civilization similar to us to destroy our planet even before talking to us: one in.. t..t.three
>>8006379
>sorry, English is not my first language
Hello. (sorry for bad English)
>>8008883
are you... Kanna? oh, wow, please marry me!
My personal hypothesis is the "no one gives a toss" hypothesis. Basically, the universe is so big and humanity is so insignificant that no one gives a toss about us.
>>8009239
>humanity is so insignificant
Typical retarded "humans are just dumb violent primates" mentality. Try to better yourself.
>>8009337
We are a retarded species desu senpai
>>8009337
Yeah, this anon >>8009368 is right.
Think what we will have in mere 1000 years. And what about a civitilzation which existed for hundred thousands of years longer than ours?
Are they on the same technological and social level? Do they still fight with each other? Do they have limited resources of anything? Are they even physical?
>>8009485
>Think what we will have in mere 1000 years
Retarded Kardashev scale meme
>a civitilzation which existed for hundred thousands of years longer than ours
ascribing human attributes to something inherently non-human
>Are they on the same technological and social level?
ascribing human attributes to something inherently non-human
>Do they still fight with each other?
ascribing human attributes to something inherently non-human
>Are they even physical?
No they are fucking invisible. Now you've gone full retard
It's easy for tools like you to be so limited in imagination granted, but try to picture an alien race that doesn't have a fucked up nose or forehead but is essentially human with human motivations and desires.
>>8004809
The problem with the Zoo "hypothesis" or any explanation of the Great Silence is non-exclusivity. It assumes all aliens are cooperating with each other or act in the exact same manner. All it would take is one alien to go "fuck you" to the United Federation of Planets, drop down for a visit, and say "We're aliens motherfukkas! Whatcha goin' to do 'bout it, bitches!"
>>8004825
I agree with you. I'm 99% convinced we'll never make contact due to the sheer size of space - and unlimited possibilities of communication technology.
Our high/low radio signals make no fucking difference to a being that doesn't rely on such (human) logic to communicate long distances.
and again, there are dectillions of galaxies out there, we've only been looking for the last few hundred years and everytime technology improves - we discover how many orders of magnitude larger our universe is than previously thought.
We havent escaped our satellite, our technology hasnt escaped our star, and our signals have only gone a bit further than our local group at best.
Fuckem. Quit looking.
>>8006300
>what are protons
>>8004822
Already did that:
Operation Fishbowl
Starfish Prime
10 p.m, July 08, 1962
Mid Pacific, Johnston Island, Southwest of Hawaii
Plutonium Bomb atop a Thor Rocket
Successfully detonated at an altitude of 250 miles
Had a yield of 1.4 to 1.45 megatons
It was the largest man-made nuclear explosion in outer space
The EMP pulse caused electrical damage in Hawaii, almost 900 miles away
The explosion created aurora that lasted 16 minutes and was visible for thousands of miles
The explosion also created several new and unexpected beta particle radiation belts that lasted several months, this new belt damaged 1/3 of all the satellites in low Earth orbit and caused 7 to fail completely
For reference the International Space Station orbits Earth at 249 miles
>>8010237
I just looked this up and apparently this was the highest test of 3 detonations. 50km was mostly a lateral blast that wasted energy illuminating air, 150km was dimmer because the radiation followed earths magnetic feild lines. The 150km explosion caused a unique phenomena of auroral activity on opposing hemispheres due to the opposing feild lines.
The 250km straight up bent earths feild lines. The diagram I saw looked almost like a large circular gap that bent the magnetic feilds around it due to conducting electricity.
An electromagnetic radiation shield would be necessary to block our interception of alien communications permeating the Milky-way.
If such a structure existed, we would not be able to see all bands of the electromagnetic spectrum of the Milky-way.
We can receive all bands of the electromagnetic spectrum from the Milky-way.
Thus, if any extraterrestrial civilizations capable of even communicating with Earth do not exist at this time.
Thus, Extraterrestrial civilizations capable of traveling to Earth do not exist at this time.
>>8005527
But is it the most plausible?
>>8010324
Why wouldn't aliens have technology that only filters intelligent communication?
>>8009576
Yeqh this. This is why the solution to the Fermi paradox must be way more fundamental. The great filter needs to be sonething that will potentially affect us too in the future that prevents us from spreading throughout the entire galaxy and later the universe.
This is really what the Fermi paradox is about after all: "Is there something that prevents humanity from exploring the galaxy?"
>>8004809
Bullshit. For this to be true, every single alien civilization/corporation/being/other entity with the ability to contact or visit Earth would all have to agree to not interfere with us. Some dumbass shitbird would decide to fuck the rules and screw with the baby species, since consensus is basically impossible.
>>8009576
You've fucking got it, anon.
>>8010695
There could be space police that enforces the rules.
>>8010324
>An electromagnetic radiation shield would be necessary to block our interception of alien communications permeating the Milky-way.
Why would aliens use radio to communicate?
Speed of light limitations, inverse square law issues...
Nah, no reason to believe there's anything that needs to be shielded.
>Thus, if any extraterrestrial civilizations capable of even communicating with Earth do not exist at this time.
Nonsense.
We couldn't detect signals similar to our own from even half a light year away.
It's possible that every single star in the universe has radio stations broadcasting at the same strength as us.
We'd never hear a thing.
>>8010695
>For this to be true, every single alien civilization/corporation/being/other entity with the ability to contact or visit Earth would all have to agree to not interfere with us.
Assuming any given part of the galaxy is part of some race's territory, we only need one "park ranger" nation.
>>8006300
nigga do you not understand science FICTION?
>>8010237
superman ;_;
>>8010723
>Nah, no reason to believe there's anything that needs to be shielded.
We use it and there's good reason to assume almost all intelligent life forms used rafio communication at one point in their development. Even if they don't use it anymore there would or could still be aliens that still do and also there would be signals of those past days of when they did use it.
>>8004809
I'd be far happier to bet that they keep us around as an actual zoo.
Fuck aliens anyways.
>>8010723
>just radio waves
>>8004809
Yeah, it's one of the theories, who fucking cares.
Even if they've come down to earth, there's no logical reason why they'd publicize their presence.
Specifically, there's no reason why Earth governments would acknowledge the existence of aliens, as it would destroy the economy, etc.
>>8004831
lol
What DO people suggest is the best solution to the Fermi Paradox then?
The sad truth is that the real reason aliens haven't contacted us is because they don't have faster than light travel either, which is pretty much required to explore the universe
I like the Matrix theory better. At some point in the past some beings created AI and shit. This AI thinks it is real and eventually creates its own AI and on the cycle went.
Probably only the alien zookeepers know which iteration mankind is.
The zoo hypothesis is wishful thinking by man-children who desperately want their star trek fantasies to be around the corner.
Assuming alien civilizations are present at this period of time, are capable of faster than light travel, and aware of our existence, this hypothesis may be possible. It's just as possible as any of countless alternative scenarios that are equally unlikely, but it's certainly possible.
The real question OP is asking is, if this is the case, what would humanity have to do before we're considered acceptable to join the intergalactic community. I don't think hardly anyone in this thread has tried to answer yet.
I think, for starters, we should at least show that we're capable of not destroying our own planet. I feel that's still not clear yet. If we can somehow survive our own destructive habits, then we can start to talk about if we deserve alien contact and/or technology. Maybe that's the only requirement. We better get on it if so.
>>8012723
>considered acceptable to join the intergalactic community
Star Trek was a TV show you retard
>>8012679
>What DO people suggest is the best solution to the Fermi Paradox then?
>Space is big. Really big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind-bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist, but that's just peanuts to space.
>>8012863
That's more a argument in favor of the Zoo hypothesis.
Space is so enormously huge and so unfathomably old, how the fuck isn't it filled with billions of intelligent civilizations everywhere, popping out of every corner or the universe?
>>8012942
fermi paradox is dumb because every star we see in the night sky could have a world exactly like earth orbiting around it, complete with a bipedal mammalian species like ours, and we would see absolutely no evidence of it from our viewpoint with current technology.
so the question of where is everyone is silly. you wouldn't see anybody even if you knew exactly where to look.
>>8012679
Like other anon said,
>space is really big.
Also
>aliens might be quite alien
>they don't necessarily live around sun like stars
>they don't necessarily live on earth like planets
>they don't communicate with radiowaves
>they might be so strange that you couldn't even tell they were there, even if they were right in front of you
>>8012952
What about the billions of planets that are many billion years older than earth?
>>8013024
Your argumentation doesn't work because it only argues against a single alien species.
What you'd really need to say is that
>EVERY Alien is quite
>EVERY Alien doesn't live on sunlike stars
>EVERY Alien doesn't use radio communication
>EVERY Alien doesn't live on earthlike planets
>EVERY Alien is unconceivable to humans
And in this regard the Zoo hypothesis is much more plausible than any of these half assed not well thought through explanations.
Because to run a Zoo it really only requires a single very advanced species that watches over us and we can't tell unless we break out of the Zoo
>>8004809
>That the reason why aliens haven't contacted us yet is because they're observing our development until we're "mature" enough to join the intergalactic community?
No, I believe that we are nothing and that we don't matter at all, and IF another civilization is watching us, its to ensure we don't become a problem, and that if we DO become a problem, to wipe us out entirely. It doesn't matter what you think, another species survival means more to themselves than it does to other species, and as soon as it become apparent that one species gains the ability to start mass genociding other group, they become a problem and would be dealt with accordingly. We do not matter.
>>8012942
>Space is so enormously huge and so unfathomably old, how the fuck isn't it filled with billions of intelligent civilizations everywhere,
It's not really unfathomably old - we've been around for a good fraction of it.
>>8011030
>We use it and there's good reason to assume almost all intelligent life forms used rafio communication at one point in their development.
Please read the entire post.
>>8010723
>We couldn't detect signals similar to our own from even half a light year away.
>It's possible that every single star in the universe has radio stations broadcasting at the same strength as us.
>We'd never hear a thing.
There's really no reason to believe anything needs to be shielded.
But, even if the aliums really were blocking incoming intelligent radio signals (using some technology unknown to us), how would you even know?
I like the Dark Forest hypothesis a lot better.
>>8006344
>odds of forming a planet compatible with life: one in billions
>odds of having life in those compatible planets: one in billions
I'd say the probability of the second given the first is not that slim, but admittedly that is just my intuition.
Also estimated number of stars in the Milky way alone: 100 - 400 billion. Suddenly "one in billions" doesn't seem that slim.
Source: http://asd.gsfc.nasa.gov/blueshift/index.php/2015/07/22/how-many-stars-in-the-milky-way/
>>8013044
>What about the billions of planets that are many billion years older than earth?
First and second generation stars accreted from gas clouds without enough heavy elements to form planets.
A recent study suggests Earth developed earlier than 92% of the potentially habitable planets in the Galaxy.
And then there's galactic habitable zone theory.
It's been debunked as overly pessimistic, but even the optimists have given us some rather low numbers.
Even current stars formed on the outer rim of the galaxy have low metallicity, and probably don't have planets.
Most of the stars in the galaxy are in the core, where frequent supernova events routinely sterilize all nearby star systems.
Someone took the numbers off the Wikipedia page, but it used to say that 98.8% of stars were unsuitable for hosting life because of the time and place of their origin.
And most of the remaining 1.2% are red dwarfs.
Assuming red dwarfs are sketchy at best, that leaves just 0.3% of stars capable of hosting complex life.
And that's the optimistic view.
>>8013213
>Also estimated number of stars in the Milky way alone: 100 - 400 billion. Suddenly "one in billions" doesn't seem that slim.
True, but the vast number of stars that makes it seem likely that we have galactic neighbors, also makes it less plausible to call the entire galaxy our "neighborhood".
Lets say we invented warp drive tomorrow, and built a fleet of a thousand starships.
Let's say a thousand Captain Kirks are exploring an average of two star systems a week each.
It would still take a million years to search 100 billion star systems.
>>8013207
What does that one say?
>completely believes in aliens
>mocks people for believing in deities
>>8013227
>God can't be an alien
ok m8
>>8013226
>This theory is explained very well near the end of the science fiction novel, The Dark Forest by Liu Cixin. The first axiom is that survival is the primary need of civilization. Therefore, civilizations will do whatever it takes to ensure their own survival. The second axiom is that civilizations always grow and expand, but the amount of matter and resources in the universe are finite.
>So every civilization other than your own is a likely threat. At the very least, they are occupying a planet that you could use to expand your civilization. At worst, they are more technologically advanced and will wipe out your civilization to expand their own.
>When two civilizations meet, they will want to know if the other is going to be friendly or hostile. One side might act friendly, but the other side won't know if they are just faking it to put them at ease while armies are built in secret. This is called chains of suspicion. You don't know for sure what the other side's intentions are. On Earth this is resolved through communication and diplomacy. But for civilizations in different solar systems, that's not possible due to the vast distances and time between message sent and received. Bottom line is, every civilization could be a threat and it's impossible to know for sure, therefore they must be destroyed to ensure your survival.
>>8013239
>You might be thinking that if an advanced civilization detects the radio signals from Earth then they would know that we are less advanced and therefore not a threat. But again you have to consider the vast distance and time it takes for those signals to travel. Even if a nearby civilization (only 10 or 20 light years away) detects us, it would take hundreds or even thousands of years for them to reach us and that is plenty of time for a technological explosion. If they don't attack us at once, then we might develop technology fast enough to catch up and threaten them.
>It won't be like Star Trek. Without faster than light travel, there won't be any communication, diplomacy or trade with alien races. It's kill or be killed.
>So that's why we haven't heard a peep from other civilizations. The universe is a dark forest where every civilization is a silent hunter. They desperately try to stay undetectable while hunting for other planets to colonize and threats to destroy.
Another good read with the basic axioms and utilizing logic:
http://philosophy.stackexchange.com/questions/18127/dark-forest-postulate-used-to-explain-the-fermi-paradox
>It starts with two axioms
>1. Survival is the most important goal of every civilization
>2. Every civilization will continue to expand and grow , but resource in the universe is limited.
>With two assumption
>1. Suspicion Chain
>2. Technology Explosion
>>8013241
>>2. Every civilization will continue to expand and grow ,
That's always struck me as a childish assumption.
And if there's just no FTL, any civilization would want to expand within a single solar system (Dyson swarm, etc) rather than crating a competing civilization in the next star system over.
>>8013244
It is explained that simply because there is no FTL, there are only so many useable planets within the grasps of a civilization's mortal lifespan. And if another civilization happens to be on it... Then the Dark Forest kicks in.
On also has to remember that the axiom mentions that civilization expand at exponential pace, while the overall matter in your immediate surrounding remains same. Exponential growth really is the devil here, since you'll reach the material limit of your system sooner than you will want.
Another good explaination:
>Resource is scarce in the universe. Think about how far away star systems are from each other, the universe is like a huge ocean with tiny islands sprinkled in it. Eventually every civilizations will enter the tech boom, hit the resource limit of its star system, and needs to expand as far as it can to collect as much resource it needs. It's inevitable that civilizations will need to colonize more. Think about how many years it took human to spread beyond Africa , and then conquering Eurasia, and then Australia and the Americas. The speed is exponential, just like the speed bacteria taking over a petridish.
>>8013250
And the assumption of Technological Explosion is also important:
>Any civilization can exist for a long time developing very slowly, and then all of a sudden enter into technological explosion. Think about what Humans achieved in the last 5000 years, the most advanced stuff happened in the last 100 years, and it's still accelerating.
This means that a non FTL but space-faring civilization cant be cool with having detected an either peer-level or even technologically inferior civilization on another system, even 50 light years away. Technology can and will be accelerated and does not grow linear, but rather exponential as well. So, that sub-FTL civilization cant be sure that the other civilization wont develop FTL soon, which will directly threaten his own civilization for the scarce resources of the surrounding star-cluster. And Tech-Explosion will kick in even faster, if the other civlization got a clue on you as well, and acclerate R&D because they fear you as well.
And due to the long distances, communication is very hard, which is why both sides will begin to fear each other.
>>8013266
And it is quite funny that this theory is also kinda subscribed to by Steven Hawkings and others, warning us about carelessly sending signals to space:
http://www.space.com/29999-stephen-hawking-intelligent-alien-life-danger.html
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/australasia/scientist-warns-world-to-think-twice-before-replying-to-alien-signals-from-outer-space-10408201.html
>>8013193
>Good fraction of it
In the history of the universe, humanity isn't even a blink of an eye
>>8013213
>I'd say the probability of the second given the first is not that slim
if it's easy, go ahead and reproduce in a laboratory the primordial soup with the lightnings, the eruptions and all the other totally accidental events that might have occurred that day in which life was born out of rocks and gasses:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenesis
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primordial_soup
I think this is the thread.
>>8013325
Never said it was easy. But sure, give me a few billion years to run it and for all those chance events to occur and I'm sure something would happen. Shame we'd have to both die in ignorance of the results though.
From the wikipedia page of Abiogenesis itself: " According to one of the researchers, "If life arose relatively quickly on Earth … then it could be common in the universe." "
>>8013312
"We" being terrestrial life.
>>8013330
>Antimatter
>Black holes
>Schrodinger's Cat
>Time dilation
>String theory
>Quantum teleportation
>Relativity
>FTL travel
These are all definitely science topics. Consider suicide.
>>8006344
>Odds of the 2008 financial crisis happening was 1.309e+135 years (or 1309000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 years)
https://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1103/1103.5672.pdf
>>8013388
>Finance economists being idiots
>G-guys we really don't know how this happened! It's definitely not our fault though lol
>>8013388
Hey asshat, why the FUCK did you start a whole new thread just based on this retarded post?
>>8013405
>>8013388
>economics
>science
pick one
I recommend the following book: "If the Universe Is Teeming with Aliens... Where Is Everybody?", by Stephen Webb. The second edition addresses 75 different "solutions" to the Fermi Paradox, and attempts to assess those solutions to see whether or not they could logically work.
This book made me go from believing aliens were real and hiding themselves to believing that we're more than likely to be alone. Good read. Full of footnotes and references to scientific publications, with a few scattered sci-fi references to explain origins of ideas.
>>8012734
I didn't ask the question, OP did.
Retard.
>>8009485
Regardless of how long a civilization exists, they will fight, regardless over things like Territory, freedoms, ideology, possibly resources
>88 replies
>nobody has still answered OP's question
>>8013374
>theoretical physics is real
/x/ please. kek
>>8013439
>What does /sci/ think of the Zoo hypothesis?
Opinions given.
>That the reason why aliens haven't contacted us yet is because they're observing our development until we're "mature" enough to join the intergalactic community?
Topic debated. Are you looking for an answer that is tailored to your specific mental disability or something?
>>8013448
>get a load of this guy jpg
Holy fuck and I thought narcissism only happened with dumb fucks
>>8013450
>narcissism
That word doesn't mean what you think it means.
>>8004809
Why do people want to believe so strongly in advanced aliens?
Have you ever considered that they haven't contacted us cause they just aren't fucking there?
>>8013486
>Have you ever considered that they haven't contacted us cause they just aren't fucking there?
Given the hundreds of billions of stars per galaxy, and the 100-200 billion galaxies in the observable universe alone, the idea that we're just THAT special is absurdly unlikely.
That huge number stars also makes any one world (like us) a needle in a haystack.
>>8013486
Because there's a possibility they are there. What's wrong with arguing about this?
>>8013486
So you actually believe we're special snowflakes and a complete abnomality in the universe that could never happen again?
>>8013490
The fact that there are many planets just means there are many planets. Life is not required to exist on any of them.
>>8004809
It's not fucking Star Trek.
>>8013457
It does actually. It applies to most people on /g/ and /sci/
>>8013512
>see the numbers here?
Being able to type numbers on a keyboard isn't terribly impressive.
>>8013486
we keep telling you about people reporting contact but you just shout irrelevant facts about relativity
>>8004825
this. fermi paradox solved
>>8005426
That is explicitly what he was saying. He was also correct.
>>8013498
>Life is not required to exist on any of them.
Sure, but the odds of them all being empty, while not zero, is absurdly small.
>>8013512
>see the numbers here? >>8006344 they multiply too!
Those numbers are completely fabricated, and poorly, at that.
>>8013512
>WE. ARE. ALONE.
There's no evidence for that assertion.
We don't even know enough to say just how unlikely that statement is, but we do know enough to say it's probably wrong.
the idea that life is exclusive to earth comes from a misinterpretation of the bible
that's how wrong it is
>>8013542
Life is not required to exist nor is it required to be intelligent.
Allot of basically random shit had to happen for us to end up where we are now, you think it's likely its all happened somewhere else too? I'll give you that its a non zero possibility but I think its pretty small.
>>8013567
>I'll give you that its a non zero possibility but I think its pretty small.
So we're in agreement.
Unless by "pretty small" you mean less than 1/number of potential life-bearing worlds.
The number of potential life-bearing worlds in the observable universe has over 20 zeros.
>>8013557
>my precious book
>>8013579
We're not just talking about the possibility of life though. We're talking about "why haven't super smart aliens come to visit us yet?"
So life has to exist on another planet, be intelligent, be more intelligent than us, and FTL travel/communication has to be possible or they have to live close by already and we just don't know.
I think the odds of all of those things being true are incredibly small.
There might be advanced aliens out there but to me it seems equally likely that we are alone or at least the only intelligent life. Then there's also the chance that there are other intelligent life forms but FTL doesn't work so we'll never interact with them in any meaningful way.
>>8004825
I agree. Also, any form of communication known to current human science would not be able to permeate the cosmos with enough power to be detectable at distances they'd need to reach.
For instance people tend to forget there's something called "signal attenuation". That is, as a single travels it loses power. Space is fucking massive and isn't empty. There's billions of tons of matter and gasses between any two points in space, on interstellar distances from Earth to where ever. In addition to that, the signal spreads out. It's forward circumference increases as its diameter increases. The signal becomes weaker simply because it covers a larger area as it continues outwards.
In order to communicate, via radio waves across interstellar distances successfully, you'd need more power than what humanity uses right now. You'd need to harness something like a pulsar-level of energy to kick out a signal strong enough to remain clear. How likely is that to happen?
Due to this, we may have been saturated with alien radio signals since before the dawn of man up to now and exceeding man's lifetime. it just isn't powerful enough to even remotely be intelligible. The best scenario to successfully communicate is via a Morse code type of on-off signal. It'd use large gaps between large, high power, bursts of radio. If a alien culture is not specifically doing this and specifically aiming the signal at where we will be in space when it reaches us, we simply won't detect it.
no. no this is a prison, its called hell. this place is only known as earth here.
>>8013595
i think you missed the point, friend
>>8013239
And what if this is not true? What if other species have no concept of war as they never had a tribal society like humanity that was constantly at war with itself?
What if we're the only species seeking the destruction of others?
Are we maybe the monsters alien fairy tales are about?
>>8013728
If other species dont know war, they will be completely irrelevant, because they likely never achieved scientific progress to travel space.
Or they are a single conscience superbeing that doesnt fight 'among each other' and thus dont know war, but travel to space. But that's pretty bad for humanity as well, since they still feed on matter and will likely reproduce and expand themselves exponentially as well. In fact, this would be worse than 'traditional' or 'human-like species', since we'd have to fight fucking locust like ayys who would want to come over to eat us all.
Bottom line is that nothing likely can escape the Dark Forest. We are all hunters who would shoot at the slightest silhouette or shadow of another hunter, because killing them and finding out that they were, in fact, peaceful, is still better than to regrett making peaceful contact with them when they are already murderizing us with anti-matter bombs, dimensional folding attacks or just a single fucking droplet made out of super-dense matter accelerated to 20% of light speed and capable of penetrating the earth like a bullet and shattering our core, while we only have crappy gamma-ray lasers and shitty railguns (i.e. bows and spears vs. thermonuclear weapons).
>>8013608
>We're not just talking about the possibility of life though. We're talking about "why haven't super smart aliens come to visit us yet?"
And I'm trying to debunk the "there are no aliens out there" explanation.
Try to keep up, Anon.
>So life has to exist on another planet,
Which is almost certainly the case.
>be intelligent,
...ok, probably still pretty likely
>be more intelligent than us,
que? Assuming we're intelligent enough to eventually travel to the stars, why would they have to be smarter than us?
>and FTL travel/communication has to be possible or they have to live close by already and we just don't know.
If they live as close as Tau Ceti, or even Alpha Centauri, we just wouldn't know. Why would we?
>I think the odds of all of those things being true are incredibly small.
Assuming UFO reports aren't evidence of E.T.s, it makes sense that contact is a long shot, given that it hasn't happened yet.
>>8013608
>There might be advanced aliens out there but to me it seems equally likely that we are alone or at least the only intelligent life.
>equally likely
That just can't be right.
>>8013756
>If other species dont know war, they will be completely irrelevant, because they likely never achieved scientific progress to travel space.
Why would war need to be a requirement for scientific progress?
>>8013781
Because HFY.
>>8013756
>if other species aren't exactly like humans with human motivations and desires they will be completely irrelevant
>>8013781
Ok, let's not call it "war" then, since this word seem to trigger you.
Let's call it "the struggle for survival". And this something that is inherent in evolution and biology, and a constant among all living beings in the universe.
"War" is just the organized effect caused by it. Or rather, the "institutionalized struggle for survival".
When a peaceful civilization expands into the universe and find nothing but the void among the star-systems, they will be hard pressed to find resources and living space - or they die out eventually. And when there is another species with the same peaceful mindset and needs, war will inevitably break out, as long as the survival of a species as mandated by nature and evolution reigns supreme. When both species are starved for resources and breathing space and only one can survive with the matter available in the light years surrounding, even a peaceful species will have to learn the joys of waging genocidal war against another.
As long as technology and science is naturally constrained by the laws of physics and no species can ever invent a technology allowing them to produce matter out of bare vaccum, the struggle for resources, living space and thus war will be a cosmic constant.
>>8013799
Do you have a better answer to the Fermi Paradox then?
One that is within the laws of Einstein and without theoretical FTL stuffs, I mean.
>>8013810
I believe most intelligent civilizations would quickly rise to be at the top of their food chain amd therefor negate any requirement for killing devices or war.
Humanity is a special case because humanity is it's own predator. We might be the only species with war technology
>>8013810
>struggle for survival is a constant among all living beings in the universe
assumptions ahead
>a peaceful civilization expands into the universe
>a peaceful species will have to learn the joys of waging genocidal war
>another species with the same peaceful mindset and needs
"peace" "joy" "war" "expansion", you're just ascribing human attributes to something inherently non human, and assuming they (aliens) value or even comprehend these human concepts.
>war will be a cosmic constant
Too bad this isnt Star Trek
>>8013810
>Ok, let's not call it "war" then, since this word seem to trigger you.
>Let's call it "the struggle for survival".
There's a difference between the two, though. War needs winners and losers. It's possible, though difficult, to play "the struggle for survival" for mutual benefit.
Hell, I know we like to pretend to be tough guys, but compared to most complex life on Earth we are REALLY good at collaboration.
>>8013821
>Do you have a better answer to the Fermi Paradox then?
Space is really fucking big, Intelligent life is fairly rare, and there are no permitted magic technologies that would provide fast communication or transport. Plus, our own detection capabilities are still pretty shit.
>>8013825
So, what solutions do you have for acquring limited resources and living space while being constrained by the laws of physics (no FTL travel), and having an exponentially growing population to feed?
"War" isnt something humans invented. It is something humans had to do to survive because of material and structural limitations of their habitable areas that couldnt support their population growth anymore.
>Star Trek
kek.
Star Trek is basically the anti-thesis of this. Since in Star-Trek, all species have the technology to produce anything they need out of thin air and random atoms they grab from space. Replicators and the Post-Scarcity society they determine wipes out the entire point in fighting wars - or even struggling to survive.
>>8013835
>Space is really fucking big, Intelligent life is fairly rare, and there are no permitted magic technologies that would provide fast communication or transport. Plus, our own detection capabilities are still pretty shit.
Space might be fucking big, but that's the problem. With no FTL, a species will live and die within their few light-years area after having consumed all available matter. We cant just warp around the milky-way and find a suitable planet somewhere in the galactic core. We live and die here and that's pre-determined by the laws of physics and the limitation of the speed of light. All well and good - if we are indeed the only species in this area around the solar system.
So, what happens when another species is living in our immediate surrounding? We are basically two or more guys standed on an island in the mids of an incredibly large ocean that takes tens of thousands of years to cross and to find the shores of another liveable island. And under these circumstances, it is only a question of time until these guys cannibalize each other, no matter how peaceful they were initially. You cannot feed the hungry by talking.
>>8012723
>I think, for starters, we should at least show that we're capable of not destroying our own planet. I feel that's still not clear yet. If we can somehow survive our own destructive habits, then we can start to talk about if we deserve alien contact and/or technology. Maybe that's the only requirement. We better get on it if so.
The capability for destroying our planet is far more technologically advanced than not destroying it. By that logic aliens would have had us join the intergalactic community millennia ago.
>>8012679
space too big, nothing can go faster than light. since we started emitting radio barely 100 years ago nobody has even heard about us yet
>>8013902
>nothing can go faster than light
You're assuming our understanding of natural laws is infallible
>since we started emitting radio barely 100 years ago nobody has even heard about us yet
After about a lightyear radio waves are so degraded they are virtually indistinguishable from cosmic background noise. You also assume an alien race at this particular time is listening to primitive radio signals when they most likely moved on from that long ago.
>>8013916
> assumptions
No, these are scientific standards establish by thousands of scientists over centuries. I can give you lots of sources on these but you better read all of them because I'll quiz you on them before taking you seriously.
If you know those scientific standards and you have an objection based on a data that we don't know, they provide them. But until you do, nothing can go faster than light and since we started emitting radio barely 100 years ago nobody has even heard about us yet, and if they did, they their replies didn't reach us yet.
>>8013902
>since we started emitting radio barely 100 years ago nobody has even heard about us yet
That is plenty enough distance to reach aliens. The problem isn't the fact it reaches them, but the fact it isn't a comprehensible signal anymore.
>>8004831
So you went to community college and now you're trying to be condescending to someone else doing the same thing?
>>8005792
You think that there are no interstellar space faring civilizations anywhere in the entire universe? Does not seem far fetched if humans can already land robots on Mars.
>>8013928
>>8013916
however advanced their technollogy is, listening to the radio spectrum would be the only way of finding developing civilizations like us, other than looking at each individual planet in the cosmos. and yes i'm assuming that they can distinguish it from the background noise because otherwise there's no way of finding us
>>8013916
>You're assuming our understanding of natural laws is infallible
and yes i'm assuming that too because otherwise the debate is pointless
>>8013824
>Humanity is a special case
We have no experience with other races.
This statement is ridiculously speculative.
>>8013953
We may be listening to alien radio transmissions all the time. It may be the very background noise we are trying to hear passed. The only true way you could determine it would be solid on-off, binary type, Morse code signals with long pauses between bursts of signal.
My main concern is that the human species is pretty much "insane" and other intelligent species may not at all be insane. In this regard, a sane species would not try to contact another species unless it knew it could easily destroy them or predate on them. Of course that assumes FTL travel can actually happen, which I fully doubt. Communication between species would most likely be a problem towards the center of the galaxy where stars and planets are reasonably close enough for travel between them without FTL travel. An insane species would do stupid things like broadcast its location in order to try to contact other species.
You have to remember, altruism is a mental disease and projecting it onto another species is absurdly naive.
>>8012734
But just imagine if we discover an alien species that has a tv show similar to Star Trek... Even if galactic federations and all that are not real, I would be satisfied watching an alien species' space fantasies.
>>8013835
>Space is really fucking big, Intelligent life is fairly rare, and there are no permitted magic technologies that would provide fast communication or transport. Plus, our own detection capabilities are still pretty shit.
Don't forget that if intelligent life can come from many different environments, that means that any given species of aliens is unlikely to find Earth hospitable.
On Star Trek, how unrealistic was it that all these alien races could breath the same air, were comfortable in the same gravity, same light levels, same temperatures. etc?
Everybody ITT talking about war and inevitable conquest overlook the fact that the Earth is only going to be desirable to a small fraction of alien races.
>>8013854
>All well and good - if we are indeed the only species in this area around the solar system.
That's likely to be the case.
There are only 511 stars within 100 LY of Earth.
Only 15 have planets on Wikipedia's list of "potentially habitable exoplanets", and thirteen of them are orbiting red dwarfs, and there are serious questions about red dwarfs hosting life.
The other two have an "Earth similarity index" about the same as Venus.
Given how we find exoplanets, I'm sure we're missing some.
Still, I'd be surprised if there were more than a handful of life-bearing worlds within practical range, and any one of them hosting intelligent, space-faring life is a long shot.
>>8013854
>it is only a question of time until these guys cannibalize each other, no matter how peaceful they were initially. You cannot feed the hungry by talking.
You could say the same thing about nations on Earth, but there about 190 nations that (mostly) aren't hell-bent on destroying each other.
And even those that are trying to destroy/conquer a neighbor aren't likely to succeed.
>>8013980
>On Star Trek, how unrealistic was it that all these alien races could breath the same air, were comfortable in the same gravity, same light levels, same temperatures. etc?
Well, in their IP universe, that Galaxy was purposely seeded by the Progenitors (no known race name I think). They sought out those types of environments and seeds them with the start of life. There are several alien types that were not seeded by the Progenitors and can not live in such environments.
>>8013975
That would be awesome. All those new forms of entertainment. Who was it who said all stories have already been told, in Greek/Roman times? We may get to see new stories through alien entertainment.
>>8014007
That does not make the statement incorrect.
The statement still means it can reach those areas and those areas "might" have alien life. Everything is still a "long shot".
>>8013965
We can extrapolate from animals how rare predators of their own kind are.
Territorial animals usually fight against each other but even then they'll usually refrain from killing each other
>>8014162
Speaking of extrapolating from animals
>Earth is 4 billion years old
>in that time Earth has only given birth to one single species capable of space travel and went millions of years with non-intelligent life with no signs of ever changing if it wasm'tfoe several mass extinctions
>INTELLIGENT LIFE IS COMMON IN THE UNIVERSE GUISE
What if we really are just alone?
>>8014162
>We can extrapolate from animals how rare predators of their own kind are.
Using that same logic, we can assume aliens don't wear clothes.
You're an idiot.
>>8004831
rekt
>>8014193
>>INTELLIGENT LIFE IS COMMON IN THE UNIVERSE GUISE
That's a strawman, nobody is claiming intelligent life is common.
>>Earth is 4 billion years old
>>in that time Earth has only given birth to one single species capable of space travel
Life on Earth isn't quite 4 billion years old, and most of that time was pre-Cambrian explosion.
We've only had "critters" for about 540 million years.
We've still got about a billion years before the sun gets hot/bright enough to prevent liquid water on the Earth's surface.
So it only took about1/3 of available "critter time" for life to reach space.
And if we were to suddenly wipe ourselves out (without taking the entire planet with us), lemurs or chimps will likely fill the void within a few million years or less.
Also, learn 2 greentext.
>>8014211
They probably won't. That might be also a thing completely unique to humans.
Heck not even all humans wear clothes
>>8014238
>They probably won't. That might be also a thing completely unique to humans.
You seem to be confused about "probably" vs "might".
>>8014238
>aliens might walk around with the heir delicious thick dicks exposed
Absolutely degenerate, we must build intergalactic weapons to protect ourselves from this.
>>8014244
All I'm saying is that the first alien (and the hundred different aliens following them) we see will be naked
>>8014280
> not building an intergalactic wall to avoid diseased alien insurgents from infecting earth
Trump 2032. Make Milky Way Great Again
>>8004809
I think aliens are jerks if that's the case. Also I'm right.
>>8014305
THEY BRING CRIME, MURDEROUS AI, NEW STDS AND WEIRD SEXUAL ACTS.
BUILD WALL.
MAKE MILKY WAY GREAT AGAIN.
>>8013997
That's because on earth, distance is far smaller and thus communication can prevent most genocidal campaigns for survival, for now. But make no mistake. The current 'peaceful' international order is only 'peaceful' (as in no major countries killing each other) because of Pax Americana and the perks it provides to people who follow the American empire. But the American empire itself is built on exploitation of earth' weakest countries and people in the name of free-trade (meaning = free resource extraction with minimal threat of them to become economic and military competitors) and harsh punishments for countries who try to defy that order by trying to sell their goods at their own prices or with their own currencies (military interventions of the USA to defend the current order benefitting them and their followers are too many to be listed here). And all of this will crumble the day when Earth' finite resources are used up as well. When that happens, Western countries who swore "eternal friendship" with each other yesterday, will cannibalize each other as well to help their own kin survive. We can see it in the refugee crisis in Europe already, where the entire idea of the EU integration crumbles the moment when countries suffer economic consequences because of it.
This American led order is only as effective as there is abundance of resources, stolen and appropriated from the weaker states of the world. And it will crumble when all weaker states are used up and the only thing left to eat are your neighbors.
This is basically the nature of the universe as well. Cosmic sociology, basically.
>>8004809
For aliens having ships with one third of light speed settlements on others planets of their Solar System are possible, but between them and us can be few parsecs therefore between Solar Systems travel could too long time task.
Few aliens (such big distance can not transfer their much in a small ship) in 500 C.E. or in European Caliphate in 2060 C.E. can be beknave devils or shaitans and therefore slaughtered.
>>8013239
If alien civilizations were that distrustful, they would have never formed into civilization in the first place.
It is an inheritly human (and probably any social alien) quality to give the benefit of the doubt
>>8014418
Society exist out of necessity. It is always easier to survive in a community where you can do division of labour and thus achieve more productivity than you could on your own. That shouldnt be human-only. Even apes have that in some form, or ants/bees.
But that's not evidence of the existence or lack of a "distrustful nature". Maybe some communities are formed because it is neccessary for them to band together against a common threat, be real or perceived?
Basically, what a rather manageable number of beings can do on a manageable area with manageable distances, cant be ported to the universe, where distances, numbers and areas are anything but manageable in scale.
A cosmic UN/Council is impossible, as long as Einstein's hard limit of light speed exists. No communication = No trust = No forming of an interstellar relationship that can be peaceful and productive.
E = MC2 has established the tyranny of distance for us and other species out there in the universe.
Hell, even on earth, we cant really form a 'global community' of shared destiny. We just cant. Because we dont give a shit about how many Africans or other we consider to be subhumans die every day. They are too far detached from our daily lives and our social circles to give a fuck about.
>>8014162
cannibalism is way more common with other animals than it is with humans
>>8004809
The "aliens" haven't contacted us because we are the most advanced civilization for billions of light years around us
>>8010734
he's not a gun, anon... not anymore... :(
>>8014432
>Maybe some communities are formed because it is neccessary for them to band together against a common threat, be real or perceived?
And because of this necessity, they either evolve a trusting nature or die out.
>Basically, what a rather manageable number of beings can do on a manageable area with manageable distances, cant be ported to the universe, where distances, numbers and areas are anything but manageable in scale.
There is not really a difference between 1 million, 1 billion or 1 trillion individuals. All of those numbers are outside of our perception, we who evolved to live as hunter gatheres in a group of < 100 people.
Yet we still manage to form nations with millions of people, so there is no reason to assume it is inheritly impossible for billions or trillions of people to form a society
>>8014440
Well, maybe one day when humanity realizes that she has to escape to space, all humans (or most) would band together their productivity to achieve that titanic feat of building colony ships. But before that, it is impossible to assume that we could be in an alliance with a theoretical species living 4 light years next door in Alpha Centauri... Rather we would shadow each other in distrust.
It is rather so that space exploration will be done by competing superpowers again like back in Cold War.
Why should that be different on the cosmic scale?
>>8014447
>It is rather so that space exploration will be done by competing superpowers again like back in Cold War.
>Why should that be different on the cosmic scale?
Because superpowers were competing for limited resources.
Because of the lack of FTL, we don't compete with alien civilization for resources
>>8014453
That good. Jsut hope that there arent ayys out there in our vicinity. And that humanity is content with having this small island that we can reach within the lifespan of our entire species.
>>8013761
The thread is about why haven't we been contacted by aliens anon that's the topic.
If they're contacting us they'd have to smarter than us considering we haven't figured out how to travel or send messages like that yet.
No I don't think UFO sightings count as evidence.
>>8013765
Why "can't" it be? This is what I don't get people who think they "have" to exist and don't talk about how big the universe is or how many planets there are, in no way does the large number of planets mean there has to be life on any of them.
Life does not have to exist and it does not have to be intelligent.
>>8014432
The most successful life forms on the planet aren't gregarious at all.
>>8014823
And they hardly established any continental empires, as humanity did.
Therefor, any ayys who cant into organized community or society to pour in their combined productivity to acheive feats of science and technology can be disregarded by humanity and kept in a zoo at best.
>>8010660
No. The most plausible is that intelligent life has never/could never/will never advance to the point where interstellar travel is possible.
>>8004809
or maybe we're just insignificant, like you wont go to the park just to visit some ants.
Another reason would be they don't want to interact with us because it could affect us in a negative way
The most probable theory, travelling throughout space is just so beyond our capacity and theirs that we'll never meet.
>>8014435
>cannibalism is way more common with other animals than it is with humans
Currently, yes, for the most part, some cultures still practice it, more than a billion still do it ritualistically (Catholic communion)
In the past, it was common, the very recent past
Even modern humans resort to it quite quickly when resources are scarce, when a disaster occurs
Imagine what would happen in Major US cities in the event of an economic collapse that destroyed or government, or a major continent wide disaster, lots of people no resources after a week or two, even modern, educated, enlightened humans will resort to cannibalism very quickly
>>8014447
Human society will have to undergo major changes to our basic, core instincts before that happens
We fight over any and everything, people are killed for "looking" at someone, we fight wars that kills millions over territory or ideologies, we have a long way to go
Why would a species living near Alpha Centauri want/need/agree to any alliance, we with our "titanic" fleet would be perceived as an immediate threat, "Hi, were from Earth, we destroyed our world, can we take one of yours"
>It is rather so that space exploration will be done by competing superpowers again like back in Cold War.
You make my point, we had a space race not for knowledge and humanity we had it because we were trying to out do each other technologically so we could kill each other
We could Oslo arrive at AC after our journey to find nothing, no "Earth-like" habitable worlds for our legions of refugees, what then
We look for "Earth-like Worlds", with no idea if we could exist there, we evolved to what we are because of the environment we live in, change any major variables and we die, how do we exist on a world we did not evolve for
I have read about Terra-Forming, the cost and technology is beyond our current and probable abilities, the time for needed changes would be millennial
If we (humanity) are to colonize other worlds it would be a better use of our time and resources to learn to change our or our children genetics to suit our new world, that opens far more possibilities to humanity than looking for that "Goldilocks" world
Also, just as we do with animals, we are assigning ideas, motivations, desires to alien species based on our own, that is a bad road to travel down, it assumes too much, "they" are not and never will be us, looking at them or expecting them to have similar motivations shows our vast incompetence
>>8004809
I've always been willing to entertain this, but with each passing year I'm growing more skeptical.
Think 'The Day the Earth Stood Still'
I doubt any intergalactic community would allow us to damage this planet this much without intervening by now for the planets sake.
They should have intervened in the 60's.
>>8014949
>Human society will have to undergo major changes to our basic, core instincts before that happens
Na, quite the opposite.
People who say 'violence never solves anything' have it backwards.
Violence solves everything, our problem is we aren't being violent enough. Imagine how great this planet would be if the most civilized, advanced races finally said 'we're sick of your shit' to all the lesser beings/societies (India, Saudi Arabia, Africa, Most of China etc etc) and wiped em all out?
Imagine an earth only populated by Europeans and Japanese.
/pol/'s back again.
>>8014876
That would be depressing
>>8013756
false. intelligent life only has to develop game theory to pass this test. Also, what is a confederation or a law-maker species.
>>8013756
>a single fucking droplet made out of super-dense matter accelerated to 20% of light speed and capable of penetrating the earth like a bullet and shattering our core
are you referencing a book with that? I seem to remember a book with that as a weapon they used, and maybe also with a huge ass tank that had like 4 meter thick metal plates or something.
pls sauce
>>8015298
Well so far, it's true, and you know what's worse? The universe is expanding and things are getting out of our event horizon, so little by little we are becoming more and more isolated.
>>8015409
>The universe is expanding and things are getting out of our event horizon, so little by little we are becoming more and more isolated.
>>8004809
fucking fags if they existed or showed themselves we would kick their stupid asses
>>8014876
>>8015298
>TFW your intelligent civilization was born in the featureless void, lightyears away from the nearest (uninhabited) neighboring system instead of in a dense globular cluster packed with thousands of stars and half a dozen different civilizations
>>8014876
That's impossible to know though.
200 years ago we were a bunch of dumbfucks compared to what we are now. Imagine 200 years from now.
>>8015875
200 years from now we'll be back swinging in the trees cause no one can afford the mortgage
can't we discuss aliens after they contact us?
wasting time and resources now seems pointless, since we don't have any long distance technology yet (100 light years is not long distance)
Right at this very moment, 5000 like years away is a small blue-green planet orbiting a yellow sun.
On that planet are an intelligent space-faring civilization that have developed a world-wide computer network. On this network right now is a discussion board where an individual is wondering why anyone would possibly think that aliens exist because of the Frungy Paradox.
Oh, the thread updated. One of his fellow sentient lifeforms just called him a V0gg0t.
>>8016012
>planet 500 light years away
>species 3 billion years older than hours
>still on our technological level
Are humans the fastest evolving intelligent civilization?
In just 10000 years since we started building houses we managed to discover space travel. Imagine what we'll be capable of doing in another 10 000 years. Or a million. Or a billion.
>>8015997
It's gonna be too late after first contact. We should be ready and consider all possibilities before it happens.
See >>8011232
>>8013448
antimatter is theoretical physics?
Cloaking is pretty possible. You just have to alter the light slightly around your planet which already happens naturally to a certain extent. I'm sure this would be doable with something
as far away as a life sustaining planet.
>>8015997
>Guys stop talking about possibilities of the future!!!
The real question is why does it piss so many people off to talk about aliens? Aliens are more than likely pretty fucking common in the universe and it's only a matter of time until we meet them
https://youtu.be/KRGca_Ya6OM
Just putting this out there...
>>8016109
just calling it bullshit...
It's just as plausible as religion.
>>8016166
But it's mathematical fact...
>>8016190
this
>>8016109
tldr, bears > apes.
>>8016190
possible, not plausible
>>8004825
>what does /sci/ think of my hypothesis that earth is really fucking big and thus would make it difficult for people that have cropped up in completely different continents to contact each other.
retard
the answer is technology like always.
>>8004809
> be ayylien in small ayylmao planet
> only 10% of earth's gravity
> ayylmao's happened to develop kangaroo like anatomy because evolution.
> jump really high
> get in orbit
> tfw ayyliens developed organic space programs
> tfw they explore their whole star system by jumping to planets n shiet
> tfw
>>8016308
kinda deep
>>8016308
>only 10% of earth's gravity
>0.980665 m/s2
There wouldn't be enough gravity to hold a sufficient atmosphere for your faggot kangaroo aliens to evolve in the first place
>>8016308
Isn't this the plot of Starship Troopers?
>>8016319
> implying my ayylien kangaroo needs atmosphere
dude they literally breathe light, they're fucking badass kangaroos
>>8016256
>minutephysics
>tl;dr
Why
>>8016340
cuz u r a fagget xd
>>8016292
This.
The argumentation is stupid. It's entirely possible to colonize the entire Milky Way within a million years with our current technology. Imagine what a species can do that's already had the technological advancement of a million years and then started colonizing space for another million years
>>8017517
Really? How can we do that with current technology?
>>8017724
physics
>>8017736
Explain further.
>>8017517
1 light year = ~63,000 au
milky way = ~100,000 light years in diameter
It has taken almost 40 years for Voyager 1 to travel around 135 au.
Never mind setting up colonies, it would take ~1.85 billion years for Voyager 1 to even travel that distance.
Have we discovered some incredible new advancement in recent years? Even improving this technology 10,000-fold would be utterly insubstantial
>>8006359
>difference between odds and probability
the "difference" is a slight mathematical rearrangement of the terms, you douche
>>8006325
Well no duh, everybody knows the bigass dragon is hiding inside Mars.
>>8017517
>It's entirely possible to colonize the entire Milky Way within a million years with our current technology.
When the first people crossed the Beringia land bridge, it was *possible* for them to walk all the way to Tierra del Fuego in a few years, but it still took them thousands of years to get to South America at all.
And besides, maybe somebody has colonized all the planets in the galaxy that are hospitable to *them*, but the Earth isn't a comfortable place for their species.
>>8004809
I prefer the Kuzco hypothesis.
>>8004809
That implies that aliens have morality that views us as anything other than vermin.
We are lucky to be uninteresting enough that they haven't exterminated us.
>>8017942
>odds of a compatible planet having a big Moon that generates tides and other nice effects: one in billions
>>8017863
You're still arguing with a single species. We're talking about thousands or millions or even billions of here. Your argumentation doesn't work
>>8017724
Van neumann probes
Think
>Probability other life exists
>Probability that other life exists within a communicable distance to us
>Probability of that during the same time period
>Probability that this alien life is complex and not just dumb space animals or even cells
>Probability this complex alien life wants to communicate with others
>Probability this complex alien life desires communication with others and has the sufficient technology to be able to do so
>Probability that even if they can communicate with us, that they actually find out where we are in time
>And THEN we can apply the zoo hypothesis.
I'd say that since the chance is essentially zero, it's not even worth fucking talking about
>>8010666
Nice triple 6.
>>8018278
Those aren't humans.
>>8018273
>We're talking about thousands or millions or even billions of here. Your argumentation doesn't work
Nah, it's entirely possible that there have only been hundreds or even dozens of other races in the Galaxy.
Look at the Galactic Habitable Zone hypothesis.
Older stars accreted from dust clouds without enough heavier elements to form planets.
Modern star systems formed on the outer rim of the galaxy still don't have enough heavy elements to form planets.
Most of the stars in the Galaxy are in the core where closely packed stars are unlikely to go billions of years without a nearby supernova sterilizing the entire system.
Almost all the stars in the galaxy are unlikely to host life because of where and when they formed.
Most of those remaining are red dwarfs, and are unlikely to host life bearing worlds.
And Earth has supposedly gotten a head-start on the rest of the galaxy because we developed earlier than 92% of the potentially habitable planets in the milky way.
But hey, maybe I'm wrong and you're right, but then where ARE the aliens?
You also seem to completely ignore this point:
>>8017863
>maybe somebody has colonized all the planets in the galaxy that are hospitable to *them*, but the Earth isn't a comfortable place for their species.
>>8019209
p.s.: don't forget it's entirely possible that most intelligent, tool-bearing species just plain never leave their home system.
>>8009599
We have to consider the vastness of that other dimension too: time. Not only is space really huge, but the universe is also very old. Maybe it's just that are overlooked, and perhaps there is life outside of our planet that has managed to contact life on other planets. Skipped right past us. Or it could be that they've been here before us and know we're here. A lot of the things that goes on around the universe have happened many times in the past, so I wonder if it's the same with life.
A good possibility is that our means of communication is more primitive. We're communicating with radio waves and they're communicating with something we haven't begun to touch. We're the only reference point we know of so we're the only ones who can tell if we've even reached a point where communicating with them would be feasible. This is what it feels like to be the beginning of an era and knowing you'll die before you see great advances in science (which also means great strides in humanity). It's one of the things people have to accept in life, and especially us since while this industry is growing so fast it's not nearly fast enough to bring a concrete answer to this question to our lifetimes.
>>8017759
We can colonize the ENTIRE galaxy but we can colonize it. And since technology develops it'll improve, but that's not considered in these links it seems:
http://www.open.edu/openlearn/science-maths-technology/science/physics-and-astronomy/how-long-would-it-take-colonise-the-galaxy
http://www.sentientdevelopments.com/2012/01/new-mathematical-study-reveals-that-our.html
http://motherboard.vice.com/read/how-long-would-it-take-to-colonize-the-universe
>>8013325
The universe is very old and very big. If you've seen a phenomenon in the universe, chances are it happened before and many many times in the past.
>>8019220
It's possible, but I doubt it. I'd think that the most technologically advanced species would colonize other planets/solar systems (as a hedge against extinction) and build structures on a planetary/solar system level for harnessing energy/transporting. I mean, I could be wrong, because I really just don't know, but that's how it seems to me.
I think the most likely scenario is that if they exist and if they've visited us, we just can't detect them because they are so far ahead of us. It's also possible that there is no species that is able to travel the kind of distances necessary for us to meet them.
>>8009576
Not unless they're very powerful and could make a united effort to stop them. Why are you assuming a United Federation of Planets would not be able to stop someone from quitting and visit a planet the United Federation of Planets is trying to protect? What's the point of the federation, and why isn't it capable of stopping this rogue group?
>>8014876
But it's developed to the point where it's at least possible to have a generational ship and jump from starship to starship. Who says there isn't a more persistent form of life that is doing that or throwing probes all over space? It's already feasible for us to do it. So maybe interstellar travel isn't possible, but in that scenario it'd still be possible to travel large distances with preparation.
>>8012203
>Specifically, there's no reason why Earth governments would acknowledge the existence of aliens, as it would destroy the economy, etc.
People who just throw one random example and then go "etc."... ugh. Anyways there are other governments that would acknowledge their existence. There are already countries that broadcast UFO reports on national news. Some countries are more open to it than others, so who's to say they wouldn't jump at the chance to acknowledge aliens if they were to visit? The only people could stop them would be other aliens or maybe a powerful nation who doesn't want the truth revealed.
But the chances of them landing on one of those nations? Who knows. It's complicated and it doesn't help when it's possible that this is how our governments would react in the situation.
To judge humanity based on the ignorance of the average is just shitty to be honest.
>>8004822
Trump 2016
What if we wanted to spread life throughout the galaxy? What are some ways?
One way would be to do it blindly. Send out seed probes throughout the galaxy. Or we could choose specific exo planets. I'd still call that blind though, considering the limitations.
Another would be to wait until we improve our AI. If we can have the equivalent of an intelligent human brain floating around in space, repairing itself and outlasting the lifespan of the average person, it could do it's own scientific tasks in space and work towards a goal. Maybe even an AI that could germinate an entire human baby on an exoplanet and build human civilizations out in space.
>>8016308
>MFW when they miss their target and fly off into deep space
>MFW they get stuck on planets with high gravity
>Implying they wouldn't be weak as fuck given that they developed on a low gravity planet
>>8013756
>Bottom line is that nothing likely can escape the Dark Forest. We are all hunters who would shoot at the slightest silhouette or shadow of another hunter, because killing them and finding out that they were, in fact, peaceful, is still better than to regrett making peaceful contact with them when they are already murderizing us with anti-matter bombs, dimensional folding attacks or just a single fucking droplet made out of super-dense matter accelerated to 20% of light speed and capable of penetrating the earth like a bullet and shattering our core, while we only have crappy gamma-ray lasers and shitty railguns (i.e. bows and spears vs. thermonuclear weapons).
That's just plain stupid. Do you have any idea the kind of people manning our telescopes and shooting our probes into space?
>>8013498
But it has on one, and the universe is very old and incomprehensibly large. It's more closeminded to say that we are so incredibly special in a place as massive and old as this that we are the only case of life in the entire universe.
>>8019338
>I'd think that the most technologically advanced species would colonize other planets/solar systems
There's a huge difference between colonizing other planets vs other solar systems.
Assuming no FTL, a colony on another planet is a new province for an existing nation.
An interstellar colony would have to be a new nation, because of logistics.
Every nation wants new provinces, most DON'T want to create a competing nation.
Let's say we create a million-man space ark.
Why in the hell would we go to the trouble and expense to send it to another star?
Why not just park it in solar orbit?
Yeah, yeah, all our eggs in one basket...
Except that aside from a highly foreseeable supernova event, how is a Dyson swarm of O'Neil cylinders NOT multiple baskets?
What IS our incentive to create a new, potentially hostile nation?
>I think the most likely scenario is that if they exist and if they've visited us, we just can't detect them because they are so far ahead of us.
If they've visited us, odds are we weren't human yet.
We;ve been more or less human for only 200,000 years, just 0.004% of the time the Earth has been around.
We've been recording history for 0.00013% of the Earth's age, and for almost all of that time we wouldn't know what an alien was if they tried to explain it to us.
>>8013536
You retard. How is a formula to do with the probable numeracy of alien lifeforms in the galaxy not related to the fact that there may or may not be aliens watching us right now? They are directly related, because the likelihood of one being true has a direct effect on the other. Isn't there a pokemon board on 4chan? Shouldn't you be over there playing with them or something?
>>8019374
>We're early to the party, not late.
Fucking prove it.
More Pop Sci For The Pop Sci Meme Board
protip: Contact has been made already.
>>8019334
Then you'd agree that life extinction happened many times too.
Now, what if the odds of forming a fully developed civilization (capable or interstellar travel) are always lower than the odds for that civilization to die in the middle of the process?
Space is a dangerous place, where things constantly blow up, collide, erupt, emit radioactivity, etc. Not to mention the other extinction-capable elements life can produce itself: viruses, or one specie that overcome all the others and consume all the resources available... oh, wait...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XlkV1ybBnHI
fucking retards
>>8019819
or
for interstellar travel you need a great amount of natural resources and planets compatible with life are always too small, or resources on adjacent planets too difficult to use in time before extinction; and if a planet carrying life is big the gravity would be an insurmountable obstacle... and so on and on...
