Interstellar

It is my opinon that while you may find elementary life, intelligent life at any stage of developement would be extremely rare in the universe. Intelligent life on this planet was nothing more than a completly random accidental occurance.
The dinosuars ruled this planet for hundreds of millions of years and if they hadnt been wiped out I doubt seriously if they would have evolved into an intelligent species in another 100 million years.

4 Replies

@giujohn,

giujohn wrote:

It is my opinon that while you may find elementary life, intelligent life at any stage of developement would be extremely rare in the universe. Intelligent life on this planet was nothing more than a completly random accidental occurance.
The dinosuars ruled this planet for hundreds of millions of years and if they hadnt been wiped out I doubt seriously if they would have evolved into an intelligent species in another 100 million years.

Thay did not show much potential.

1 Reply

@OmSigDAVID,

Quote:

Thay did not show much potential.

Except for Dino on the Flintstones...he was far superior to Fred

0 Replies

@giujohn,

giujohn wrote:

The dinosaurs ruled this planet for hundreds of millions of years and if they hadn't been wiped out I doubt seriously if they would have evolved into an intelligent species in another 100 million years.

The physiology of many dinosaurs suggests that they may have been pretty intelligent. Many of them were essentially Birds, and we already know that Crows and Parrots are very smart.

But one of the big things preventing Dino's or Birds from developing our "flavor" of intelligence is that they are too good at other things. Birds can fly and dinosaurs had big teeth and sharp claws. Our ancestors didn't have a lot of biological weaponry to work with (no claws or teeth). Instead, their claim to fame was tightly bonded group behavior (which derives implicitly in mammals because we have to wean our young), cunning and manual dexterity (great for exploiting rocks and sticks as tools). I think part of the evolutionary path to intelligence has to do with not having lots of other specialized traits to work with. If our ancestors had wings like bats, I don't think there would have been much advantage in being cunning or in making tools.

This is one reason why I don't think Octopi are headed down the road to technological intelligence, even though they are very smart and have fantastic manipulative skills. They are too good at camouflage and there is no tight group bonding requirement in their life cycle, so they are less likely to get selective advantage from complex communication (another key to our form of intelligence).

1 Reply

@rosborne979,

giujohn wrote:

The dinosaurs ruled this planet for hundreds of millions of years and if they hadn't been wiped out I doubt seriously if they would have evolved into an intelligent species in another 100 million years.

rosborne979 wrote:

The physiology of many dinosaurs suggests that they may have been pretty intelligent. Many of them were essentially Birds, and we already know that Crows and Parrots are very smart.

But one of the big things preventing Dino's or Birds from developing our "flavor" of intelligence is that they are too good at other things. Birds can fly and dinosaurs had big teeth and sharp claws. Our ancestors didn't have a lot of biological weaponry to work with (no claws or teeth).

Our weapon was and is the HUMAN MIND,
whose tangible manifestation we stuff into our holsters.

David

0 Replies

In my best Brando voice, "Stella!"

0 Replies

@giujohn,

giujohn wrote:

It is my opinon that while you may find elementary life, intelligent life at any stage of developement would be extremely rare in the universe. Intelligent life on this planet was nothing more than a completly random accidental occurance.
The dinosuars ruled this planet for hundreds of millions of years and if they hadnt been wiped out I doubt seriously if they would have evolved into an intelligent species in another 100 million years.

You mean there IS intelligent life on this planet.

And with all the scientists we have, we still haven't found it.

Amazing!

2 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

but you have to acknowledge that there MAY BE intelligent life on earth. You just don't have any evidence.

1 Reply

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

but you have to acknowledge that there MAY BE intelligent life on earth. You just don't have any evidence.

There certainly may be. Wink

0 Replies

@Frank Apisa,

Quote:

Amazing!

0 Replies

It may well be that life is fairly common. For that, you just need second, or preferably, third or fourth generation stars with planetary systems. It would also not be unreasonable to assume that where there is life, sentient life will usually arise, sooner or later. The difficulty comes with attempting to estimate the prevelence of technological life. For life, you just need an array of elements--so even second generation stars (if there actually are any left) will fill the bill. Once again, third or fourth generation stars are mofe likely to have the elemental array which makes the rise of life more likely. I say this with the caveat that you'd need a dense atmosphere or a strong magnetosphere, or preferably both (as we have on the Earth), to protect the biosphere from cosmic radiation. Mars has neither, and i think it's a safe bet that even if it once had primitive life forms, it does no longer.

But for technological life, you need a concatenation of circumstances which may not be common. You're going to need oxygen. Enough for combustion to be facilitated, but not so much oxygen that it becomes difficult to control combustion. You're also going to need a metal rich planet--and that's a difficult situation. Mercury has metal galore--but i don't think you'd want to live there. Ditto Venus, although a different atmosphere would render it quite habitable. A candidate planet needs to get enough insolation, but not too much--it needs to be close to its star, but not too close.

So, you need a dense atmosphere, and a strong magnetosphere just makes the planet safer. You need to be close to your star, but not too close. It's entirely possible that higher life forms don't necessarily need to be oxygen breathers, but you're going to need oxygen in order for them to make, control and use fire. They're going to need that in order to practice metallurgy, so you want a metal rich planet, too. In case it isn't immediately obvious to people, that means you need a fair amount of land--this ain't gonna work on a water world.

That means that planets with the conditions for sentient, technological life to arise may not be so common. As someone has already noted, the use of radio communications may only bee a transitional technology, so spin through the dial and getting nothing but statice does not necessarily mean there's nobody else out there.

0 Replies

Sure got windy out.

0 Replies

By the way, there is enough variation in our star system to suggest that we cannot extrapolate from it to other star systems. Venus' day is longer than its year. Tow of the gas giants appear to have active "weather" systems, the other two don't. Uranus'axis tilts 98 degrees to the perpendicular with relation to the plane of the ecliptic, its axis is almost parallel to the plane of the ecliptic. While the other planets appear to spin like tops, Uranus rolls around the sun like a billiard ball on green baize.

Given that there is no regularity within this star system, there is no reason to take it as exemplary of star systems. When we learn more about other star systems (if we learn more), i think it not unlikely that we will see vary different systems than the one we are familiar with, and systems about which we will not be able to predict.

1 Reply

@Setanta,

you said Uranus.

0 Replies

@Brandon9000,

With only a few hundred stars to search, it wouldn't surprise me if we didn't find any life forms at all, and it would astound me if we were so lucky as to find even one civilization of intelligent creatures.

How many planets would be circling a few hundred suns? I think 10,000 would be too high a number. We could hit the mother-lode and find the home planet of a galactic empire, but the odds against that would be… astronomical.

Space is unimaginably vast (you watch Cosmos) and a period of decades is a less than the blink of an eye. But, we could receive convincing evidence upon waking tomorrow. If it’s ever going to happen it could just as easily be tomorrow as a hundred years from now.

I'm not sure that the mere certain knowledge of the existence of life beyond earth would have the sort of profound effect on us that many people seem to believe. I suspect that most already take it as a given that there is life out there, and learning that Planet 9 has single cell organisms living in pools of sulfuric acid isn't going to be all that impressive to the majority of humans.

It could stir up interest in space exploration that has been lying dormant for some time, but whether anything came of that would be dependent upon the conditions on earth at the time of the discovery. A world preoccupied by a major war, or a global economic crash probably wouldn't have much time or energy to think about going into outer space.

I can imagine theologians giving it a whole lot of thought in terms of how it conforms with their religious beliefs, but I don't see the average Catholic or Muslim having a crisis or renewal of faith.

If the evidence was of an advanced civilization, it would have more of an impact but most likely in terms of the anticipation of contact. The classic idea of cults forming to worship the aliens probably would bear out to a minor extent, and survivalist products would enjoy a boom in sales, as would anti-depressants, while cottage industries based on what the aliens may look or be like would thrive.

To the extent there was any noticeable impact of the way we think, my guess is it would involve a pervasive existential dread rather than some material alteration of the way we think about "our place in the universe." Either way it wouldn't usher in a new age on earth.

It would certainly cause an initial huge splash, but in terms of extended impact, not much.

If they come to visit, that's a different story.

1 Reply

@Finn dAbuzz,

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

With only a few hundred stars to search, it wouldn't surprise me if we didn't find any life forms at all, and it would astound me if we were so lucky as to find even one civilization of intelligent creatures.

How many planets would be circling a few hundred suns? I think 10,000 would be too high a number. We could hit the mother-lode and find the home planet of a galactic empire, but the odds against that would be… astronomical.

Space is unimaginably vast (you watch Cosmos) and a period of decades is a less than the blink of an eye. But, we could receive convincing evidence upon waking tomorrow. If it’s ever going to happen it could just as easily be tomorrow as a hundred years from now.

What I always tell my wife is that it could be today or a million years from now.

Finn dAbuzz wrote:

I'm not sure that the mere certain knowledge of the existence of life beyond earth would have the sort of profound effect on us that many people seem to believe. I suspect that most already take it as a given that there is life out there, and learning that Planet 9 has single cell organisms living in pools of sulfuric acid isn't going to be all that impressive to the majority of humans.

It could stir up interest in space exploration that has been lying dormant for some time, but whether anything came of that would be dependent upon the conditions on earth at the time of the discovery. A world preoccupied by a major war, or a global economic crash probably wouldn't have much time or energy to think about going into outer space.

I can imagine theologians giving it a whole lot of thought in terms of how it conforms with their religious beliefs, but I don't see the average Catholic or Muslim having a crisis or renewal of faith.

If the evidence was of an advanced civilization, it would have more of an impact but most likely in terms of the anticipation of contact. The classic idea of cults forming to worship the aliens probably would bear out to a minor extent, and survivalist products would enjoy a boom in sales, as would anti-depressants, while cottage industries based on what the aliens may look or be like would thrive.

To the extent there was any noticeable impact of the way we think, my guess is it would involve a pervasive existential dread rather than some material alteration of the way we think about "our place in the universe." Either way it wouldn't usher in a new age on earth.

It would certainly cause an initial huge splash, but in terms of extended impact, not much.

If they come to visit, that's a different story.

I feel like that's wrong. I think that finding single celled organisms would tend to verify that the universe is teeming with life and that other intelligent life is inevitable, which would cause some change in society. I also feel that we are not particularly ready for aliens arriving in Earth orbit. Google "outside context problem." I think that we should already have developed the ability to move around our own solar system and have permanent manned presences on the Moon and Mars.

1 Reply

@Brandon9000,

I think the difference in the objectives is a matter of degree, but we can disagree on this.

Brandon9000 wrote:

I feel like that's wrong. I think that finding single celled organisms would tend to verify that the universe is teeming with life and that other intelligent life is inevitable, which would cause some change in society. I also feel that we are not particularly ready for aliens arriving in Earth orbit. Google "outside context problem." I think that we should already have developed the ability to move around our own solar system and have permanent manned presences on the Moon and Mars.

Finding single-cell organisms within the planetary systems of the few hundred closest suns would definitely support the idea you've presented, but verify?

The reality might be that we found the only other planet in the universe that held life.

I indicated that I thought that if intelligent aliens came "to visit" that there would be a huge impact on humanity. The possibilities for how an encounter might unfold are far to numerous and varied for us to be "ready" for them.

Alien visitation will be an Out of Context Problem, but knowledge of the existence of microscopic life many light years away from us will not. First of all it won't be a problem of any sort except for people who have the singular nature of terran life as a foundation of their belief system. Secondly, it's not unexpected, I would venture to say that most people on earth would not find the news surprising in the least. There are probably quite a few who think it’s already been proven.

In order for confirmation of extra-terrestrial life to have a significant impact on the way people view the world it would have to shake to the core some current, fundamental belief.

An alien visitation wouldn't upend a fundamental belief that we are alone in the universe, it will shake to the core our sense of existential security. Most people don't lay awake at night worrying about alien invasions, and while no individual is immune from personal harm or catastrophe, Americans, in general, have a sense of being secure from cataclysmic events on a national level. Very, very few people are worried about being invaded by another country, and while some may retain 1950s anxiety about the country being covered with mushroom clouds, they are the exception. Alien spacecraft orbiting our planet would open the door to a whole new fear for Americans in particular and the rest of world's population in general: the imminent possibility of human eradication, and the destruction of the planet.

This is why I think that if evidence of an alien civilization (albeit it many light years away) has any pervasive effect on human thinking it will have to do with depression and dread, rather than any sort of enlightenment.

This may be cynical on my part, but I tend to see it as realistic, not cynical.

1 Reply

@giujohn,

Quote:

intelligent life at any stage of developement would be extremely rare in the universe.

Depends John on the math of "extremely rare." After all, there could be more than 8 x 10^22 planets

1 Reply

@dalehileman,

Well of course I could be wrong, but I base my assumption on the fact that with our developement it was purely by random occurance and we nearly became extinct several times. There doesnt seem to be be any efficient or economical progression in biological evolution or developement that would give rise to intelligent life having even a fighting chance to grab a foot hold. That we did is not indicative of what would happen in other venues.
I understatnd that the case can be made for the opposite argument based on the shear number of other possble planets. Mathmeticaly maybe, but in any case a very big long shot.

1 Reply

Star systems in the centers of galaxies are likely to be unstable with regard to planetary "residents" because of the gravitational tidal forces. The break-up of comet Shoemaker-Levy in 1994 is a dramatic example of tidal forces in action, on a very modest scale.

http://www2.jpl.nasa.gov/sl9/gif/sl9hst.gif

I cannot state it as a fact, but i strongly suspect that planets orbiting stars in galactic centers lead a very precarious existence. On that basis, i consider that "stable" planets on which life can arise and enjoy billions of years to evolve will most likely be in the spiral arms of galaxies, very far from the centers. Our planet it in such a position. The early solar system was a shooting gallery of "meteors" and planetesimals striking the planets--a look at the surface of Mars will give dramatic evidence of that effect. It is only after such a period in the life of a star system that life will have the opportunity to develop in relative security.

Which leads to the issue of proximity. I've already described what i think are the limiting factors on the rise of sentient, self-aware, technological life. Based on my views of the probability of the rise of technological life, the odds are very good that we are separated from any other such technological cultures by truly vast distances--probably hundreds if not actually thousands of light years.

The point of how often homo sapien sapiens tripped along the edge of extinction applies to the residents of star systems, too. If what geneticists believe was the case for h.s.s. 30,000 years ago--no more than 10,000 on the entire planet, and possibly as few as 1000--apply that to the mere existence of life in other star systems. It's a crazy dance of death.

Therefore, in keeping with my belief that all threads benefit from a soundtrack, here is a song about a dance of death.

0 Replies

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know