Are We Alone?

[danielpalos]

What's your thought on life on other planets? Intelligent life?

sure; at least one intelligent species per galaxy.

 

[SandSquid]

I think you need to take a chem course. Got a cite for your "40 times"? If you knew any chem at all, you'd realize what you're proposing is an impossibility in this universe. All the trans-uranium elements are radioactive, many are solely man-made creations with half lives less than a second. No chemical theory I know of predicts any elements beyond those natural or man-made that would be stable.

I see your throwing evolution at the frontiers of the universe out as a possibility, though you hold on to that theory on one little planet. Chemical theory is settled science in your mind. Then why is it still theory?

this has to do with the definition of theory. holding that there aren't any further elements to be discovered relies on konrad's 'stable' qualifier. i would think we could be afforded more certainty from getting up close to a supernova or with better spectral analysis than we have.

We're talking natural elements here. All the new elements created in labs have decreasingly small half-lives, so even if something totally new were created in a supernova, they'd be gone before we'd even detect them. That's about the only opening I see, but it's hardly relevant in the real world.

So kind of like how gravity works the same... Until it was discovered that only is true locally and at the speed of light it doesn't. But since natural elements only occur the same locally there's no way that could change?

 

[Bruce_T_Laney]

Are we alone?

Most likely no...

Is the Universe ignoring us?

Most likely yes...

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

But since natural elements only occur the same locally there's no way that could change?

What would be the change? You mentioned higher velocities in your example... what "change" would be in play here?

 

[SandSquid]

But since natural elements only occur the same locally there's no way that could change?

What would be the change? You mentioned higher velocities in your example... what "change" would be in play here?

Well let's see. It took Einstein 10 years for his theory and another 10 to prove it. Took 60 years to prove the highs boson.

I'm not that smart in those fields. I don't know what's out there beyond our sight and ability to study. And heck we had a physicist win a Nobel prize by coming up with the finite end to elements at Number 137, which is already being countered by physicists.

And what we are learning is those super heavy elements aren't behaving how we expect. That they gain mass (electrons approaching speed of light),. That table is constantly changing and how elements work. It's not like the science is done there.

But we haven't done any experiments with large scale events that occur in the universe dealing with neutron stars, black holes, core collapsing supernovas, quasars, black hole mergers.... I can't tell you what comes from those... And neither can you

But scientists a lot smarter than me and you have theorized about partially charged protons and electrons and such.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

But since natural elements only occur the same locally there's no way that could change?

What would be the change? You mentioned higher velocities in your example... what "change" would be in play here?

Well let's see. It took Einstein 10 years for his theory and another 10 to prove it. Took 60 years to prove the highs boson.

I'm not that smart in those fields. I don't know what's out there beyond our sight and ability to study. And heck we had a physicist win a Nobel prize by coming up with the finite end to elements at Number 137, which is already being countered by physicists.

And what we are learning is those super heavy elements aren't behaving how we expect. That they gain mass (electrons approaching speed of light),. That table is constantly changing and how elements work. It's not like the science is done there.

But we haven't done any experiments with large scale events that occur in the universe dealing with neutron stars, black holes, core collapsing supernovas, quasars, black hole mergers.... I can't tell you what comes from those... And neither can you

But scientists a lot smarter than me and you have theorized about partially charged protons and electrons and such.

Yes, good stuff.

 

[indiajo]

What's your thought on life on other planets? Intelligent life?

Well, it would be nice because we don't have any here on earth.

 

[DOTR]

We are alone in the universe according to what evidence we have. Not to mention common sense. Life was a singular event.

 

[LittleNipper]

What's your thought on life on other planets? Intelligent life?

Is there really "intelligent " life even here?

 

[AveryJarhman]

Hmmm. Despite being told our universe is populated by billions of galaxies and billions more planets, I'm quite certain Earth is the only home to intelligent life.

All the rest are wannabes.

Peace.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

I'm quite certain Earth is the only home to intelligent life.

You forgot to tell us how you know....

 

[sealybobo]

I'm quite certain Earth is the only home to intelligent life.

You forgot to tell us how you know....

It's based on what he doesn't know. And since he knows very little he is quite certain. LOL.

 

[DOTR]

What's your thought on life on other planets? Intelligent life?

Intelligent life? Not a chance. Some form of life? Very remote possibility and I doubt it...with this caveat...if we ever find primitive life we will find it to be related to ours.
Life is a unique event to all appearances and evidence.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Intelligent life? Not a chance.

Oops, you forgot to tell how you know this.

 

[DOTR]

Intelligent life? Not a chance.

Oops, you forgot to tell how you know this.

All scientific evidence we have points to one origin of life.
And higher life all passed through filters so unlikely as to be considered impossible to replicate.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

All scientific evidence we have points to one origin of life.

A stupid statement in this context,since we have collected so little evidence. The scientific evidence we have only points to one common ancestor of all species on earth. And that is the extent of what it shows us.

And higher life all passed through filters so unlikely as to be considered impossible to replicate.

Also a silly statement, in this context, as the proposition is not"finding life exactly like what we currently have on earth, elsewhere."

 

[DOTR]

All scientific evidence we have points to one origin of life.

A stupid statement in this context,since we have collected so little evidence. The scientific evidence we have only points to one common ancestor of all species on earth. And that is the extent of what it shows us.

And higher life all passed through filters so unlikely as to be considered impossible to replicate.

Also a silly statement, in this context, as the proposition is not"finding life exactly like what we currently have on earth, elsewhere."

That’s what I am talking about. Finding life like here on earth. Or slightly different. Or a lot different. Not going to happen.
I’ve slready explained to you the significance of a unique origin of life on earth. It isn’t a matter of time or statistical probabilities because life originated within a few hundred million years of earth’s cooling. It isn’t a matter of materials because all the materials are here today...even more so. You don’t need “building blocks” or “precursors”. The earth is a soup of organic molecules and has been for billions of years.
And still only once. Life is beyond rare. It appears unique. Work from what you know not wishful thinking.
Maybe life got blasted into space or came from space. It’s still only one type. And if there were intelligent life then we would have seen signs in the heavens. “Where is everybody”?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

That’s what I am talking about. Finding life like here on earth. Or slightly different.

Oh. I dont know why you confine yourself.in this way. There would probably be similarities, like physical forms to match an environment, or modes of locomotion, or self replicating mecules...but otherwise, there ia nit much reason to confine ourselves this way.

And still only once.

You dont know that at all. In fact, its all but certain that more than one type of self replicating molecule formed and somewhat thrived for a length of time. But there are only finite reaources amd finite time available. So, naturally, it would make aense that one form (dna based) came to dominate. In fact, its likely other forms of life are "trying" to form right now. But they face the obstacles of the current lifeforms not only monopolizing the available organoc mass, but also competing for the available organic mass.

Life is beyond rare.

You have absolutely no idea how rare life is. And, we are talkong about the fact of existence, not the frequency of it. You can arbitrarily assign any probability you like, and you will find it still likely,in our vast universe, that life has and will form many,many times. So, even if your arbitrary, made up statistics are granted, you are still wrong.

 

[james bond]

Real science states that we are alone. One is the impossible habitability factor besides planet Earth, i.e. fine tuning facts. Others are that it's very harsh out in space with the solar wind and no atmospheric or magnetic field protection. If there are microbial alien life like what NASA is searching for, then likely they wouldn't have survived. They're willing to accept evidence of past alien life, but they ignore that conditions were harsh in the past, too.

 

[Hollie]

Real science states that we are alone. One is the impossible habitability factor besides planet Earth, i.e. fine tuning facts. Others are that it's very harsh out in space with the solar wind and no atmospheric or magnetic field protection. If there are microbial alien life like what NASA is searching for, then likely they wouldn't have survived. They're willing to accept evidence of past alien life, but they ignore that conditions were harsh in the past, too.

It’s silly to suggest that fundamentalist creation ministries have any connection to real science. Our exploration of the cosmos with radio/powerful optical telescopes only began less than one hundred years ago.

There are no “fine tuning” facts. That is a slogan most heard from the silly fundamentalist creation ministries. As they do no research and attempt to force science to meet a predefined religious view, we can dismiss such nonsense as special pleading.