The big question about life on other planets: 1000000000000000000000 planets in the universe

[Deplorable Yankee]

This, according to some estimate, give or take quite a few zeroes I'm sure. A deeper philosophical question which goes beyond theology, though it certainly entangles it.

So, this number again, 1000000000000000000000 planets! According to The Institute of Astronomy at University of Cambridge. How many solar systems are there? | Institute of Astronomy

Putting the exact estimation aside. We would have to take a massive leap of faith to think that not only is there NOT other life in the universe, but, also of such existences, that there aren't many far more advanced than us.

Imagine a planet the size of Jupiter, 100's of billions of citizens. Imagine them not having our reptilian instincts of rage and violence, or developing weapons of war to be used against each other. Consider if they had the average brain power 250x that of our smartest humans, and existed for much longer, maybe lived on average 10000 years.

What would be the end result? Is there any religion that makes any consideration for this possibility (outside, I think Scientology)? It really is a daunting concept. We could be the most advanced by far, we might be Gods great creation. It would hardly seem we could be alone though based on the odds and even plain randomness.

The white people who enslaved the universe are out there !
Long live the patriarchy of the cosmos and their hot bitches !

In UFOlogy, Nordic aliens are humanoid extraterrestrials purported to come from the Pleiades who resemble Nordic-Scandinavians.[1] Professed contactees describe them as typically male, six to seven feet tall (about two meters) with long blonde hair, blue eyes,[2] and skin tones ranging from fair to tanned.[3][2][4] UFOlogist George Adamski is credited with being among the first to claim contact with Nordic aliens in the mid 1950s, and scholars note that the mythology of extraterrestrial visitation from beings with features described as Aryan often include claims of telepathy, benevolence, and physical beauty.[5][6][1]

 

[Frannie]

There is no gravity here

Actually, untrue. Every grain of space dust, in fact, every free floating atom that exists in space has its own minute mass and therefore its own gravity.

That might be true and it might not, in fact gravity is well understood on one hand and an enigma on the other. Remember according to gravity as we know it 85 percent of the universe is missing. Lunacy

Dark matter isn't 'missing' matter. It's a concept to explain why the amount of observed matter in the known universe isn't sufficient to explain why the universe behaves the way we observe it.

Dark matter is certainly missing matter, it is like this

15% + (blank)% = 100%

That simplifies it, the dark matter is missing from the equation. The interesting thing is that the equation might be wrong because we are not seeing the universe right. If the equation is wrong dark matter is no longer needed. There is no agreement here, some are now with straight faces saying that the universe is not real, or that a pulling force from outside the universe is causing expansion

However if as you say dark matter is not missing.

WHERE IS IT?

 

[Frannie]

This, according to some estimate, give or take quite a few zeroes I'm sure. A deeper philosophical question which goes beyond theology, though it certainly entangles it.

So, this number again, 1000000000000000000000 planets! According to The Institute of Astronomy at University of Cambridge. How many solar systems are there? | Institute of Astronomy

Putting the exact estimation aside. We would have to take a massive leap of faith to think that not only is there NOT other life in the universe, but, also of such existences, that there aren't many far more advanced than us.

Imagine a planet the size of Jupiter, 100's of billions of citizens. Imagine them not having our reptilian instincts of rage and violence, or developing weapons of war to be used against each other. Consider if they had the average brain power 250x that of our smartest humans, and existed for much longer, maybe lived on average 10000 years.

What would be the end result? Is there any religion that makes any consideration for this possibility (outside, I think Scientology)? It really is a daunting concept. We could be the most advanced by far, we might be Gods great creation. It would hardly seem we could be alone though based on the odds and even plain randomness.

The white people who enslaved the universe are out there !
Long live the patriarchy of the cosmos and their hot bitches !

In UFOlogy, Nordic aliens are humanoid extraterrestrials purported to come from the Pleiades who resemble Nordic-Scandinavians.[1] Professed contactees describe them as typically male, six to seven feet tall (about two meters) with long blonde hair, blue eyes,[2] and skin tones ranging from fair to tanned.[3][2][4] UFOlogist George Adamski is credited with being among the first to claim contact with Nordic aliens in the mid 1950s, and scholars note that the mythology of extraterrestrial visitation from beings with features described as Aryan often include claims of telepathy, benevolence, and physical beauty.[5][6][1]

US Navy confirms previously released UFO videos show 'unidentified aerial phenomena' - CNNPolitics

No more weather balloons?

Anyone looking for ET at Area51

Is dumb

 

[FA_Q2]

Everything in the universe is exactly the same age

Demonstrably not true ...

Again the elements composing those two people are exactly the same age

Wrong. The hydrogen atoms are as old as the universe. The other atoms are a lot younger.

There is zero evidence of that...………………

Grow up, no one was there or knows anyone who was, and the people blurting out that nonsense are now saying that there are no Hydrogen atoms because we are all a computer simulation.

No one can explain why the universe is expanding as fast as it is you do know that right

That is not really what holographic theory suggest. It is just an explanation for the seeming observation all volumes of space can actually be explained through a 2 dimensional plane.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Not just, no. I have cognitive ability.

And that makes you not just a deterministic physical system, how?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

LOL the mental imbecile says that there is no such thing as interstellar space.

Not what I said. I said all matter is affected by the gravity of all other matter in the universe.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Science has been unable to establish what life came from ergo we do not know. That does not mean abiogenesis is fact, it means that we do not know.

But we do know a few things. We know there was once no life, then there was. So, we know life formed. And that's all we need to know in order to know that abiogensis is a fact. Life formed by some sort of process that follows all the same laws as every other process. Star formation, volcano formation, hurricane formation.... And formation of life. "Abiogensis" is just the name given the process. It's not any less a fact than is hurricane formation. "Hurrigenesis"...

 

[fncceo]

Not just, no. I have cognitive ability.

And that makes you not just a deterministic physical system, how?

In a deterministic model, you will always get the same output from the same initial state.

Does that sound like humans to you?

 

[Frannie]

Everything in the universe is exactly the same age

Demonstrably not true ...

Again the elements composing those two people are exactly the same age

Wrong. The hydrogen atoms are as old as the universe. The other atoms are a lot younger.

There is zero evidence of that...………………

Grow up, no one was there or knows anyone who was, and the people blurting out that nonsense are now saying that there are no Hydrogen atoms because we are all a computer simulation.

No one can explain why the universe is expanding as fast as it is you do know that right

That is not really what holographic theory suggest. It is just an explanation for the seeming observation all volumes of space can actually be explained through a 2 dimensional plane.

Wrong Tyson says everything is a coded simulation

Why, because none of the math adds up, and math is never wrong, so the universe is wrong and there is no expansion happening. Laughing

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

In a deterministic model, you will always get the same output from the same initial state.

Does that sound like humans to you?

Yes. And you won't necessarily always get the same output, due to quantum effects. But yes humans are just deterministic systems. Else...what? Magic?

 

[bripat9643]

Not just, no. I have cognitive ability.

And that makes you not just a deterministic physical system, how?

In a deterministic model, you will always get the same output from the same initial state.

Does that sound like humans to you?

Is weather deterministic?

 

[Weatherman2020]

Mutations don’t work that way. A mutated life is always inferior to its original.

Not always. It depends on the context. A different shaped beak, for instance, may be inferior for picking bugs from holes, but superior for cracking a nut. If this trait or better ability is selected for by any of a number of means, then it starts to prevail.

There’s not a mutation that’s ever been beneficial.

How many parents say ‘oh good, our baby has a mutation!’? Same with every species, mutations are always a hinderance if not death.

 

[Weatherman2020]

You think dust will naturally evolve into champion frisbee players.

I never said or implied that. Your silly bait and switch nonsense wont work, here.

But, interestingly enough,humans create much of the actual dust in your house with skin particles.

"Nature grows more complex"

Yes, you certainly did miss that day, and even that century. We have known for quite a while that entropy laws dont preclude local instances of decreasing entropy. Welcome to the year 1865. We should give you some time to catch up!

Good luck watching your dust.

It's your dust, not mine. You can keep your silly magical nonsense, i have no use for it.

This is what you claim rights poetry. 170 pounds of chemicals you can buy on Amazon.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

There’s not a mutation that’s ever been beneficial.

False.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

You think dust will naturally evolve into champion frisbee players.

I never said or implied that. Your silly bait and switch nonsense wont work, here.

But, interestingly enough,humans create much of the actual dust in your house with skin particles.

"Nature grows more complex"

Yes, you certainly did miss that day, and even that century. We have known for quite a while that entropy laws dont preclude local instances of decreasing entropy. Welcome to the year 1865. We should give you some time to catch up!

Good luck watching your dust.

It's your dust, not mine. You can keep your silly magical nonsense, i have no use for it.

This is what you claim rights poetry. 170 pounds of chemicals you can buy on Amazon.

View attachment 280626

No, you are confused again. You are the one claiming the body is made of something else besides elements in the periodic table. Stop pushing your nonsense and your burden off on others, son.

 

[bripat9643]

Mutations don’t work that way. A mutated life is always inferior to its original.

Not always. It depends on the context. A different shaped beak, for instance, may be inferior for picking bugs from holes, but superior for cracking a nut. If this trait or better ability is selected for by any of a number of means, then it starts to prevail.

There’s not a mutation that’s ever been beneficial.

How many parents say ‘oh good, our baby has a mutation!’? Same with every species, mutations are always a hinderance if not death.

Only bad mutations become a medical issue. When there's a good mutation, how would a doctor know it's a mutation and not an existing gene? If some mutation made you immune to cancer, would your doctor know? Nope. Furthermore, there are probably thousands or even millions of bad mutations for every good mutation, but that's all it takes.

Your claim lacks any visible means of support.

 

[Weatherman2020]

There’s not a mutation that’s ever been beneficial.

False.

Do tell.

 

[Weatherman2020]

Mutations don’t work that way. A mutated life is always inferior to its original.

Not always. It depends on the context. A different shaped beak, for instance, may be inferior for picking bugs from holes, but superior for cracking a nut. If this trait or better ability is selected for by any of a number of means, then it starts to prevail.

There’s not a mutation that’s ever been beneficial.

How many parents say ‘oh good, our baby has a mutation!’? Same with every species, mutations are always a hinderance if not death.

Only bad mutations become a medical issue. When there's a good mutation, how would a doctor know it's a mutation and not an existing gene? If some mutation made you immune to cancer, would your doctor know? Nope. Furthermore, there are probably thousands or even millions of bad mutations for every good mutation, but that's all it takes.

Your claim lacks any visible means of support.

Feel free to name an event.

The only thing that ever occurs is a recessive gene becoming dominant and visa versa.

 

[FA_Q2]

Demonstrably not true ...

Again the elements composing those two people are exactly the same age

Wrong. The hydrogen atoms are as old as the universe. The other atoms are a lot younger.

There is zero evidence of that...………………

Grow up, no one was there or knows anyone who was, and the people blurting out that nonsense are now saying that there are no Hydrogen atoms because we are all a computer simulation.

No one can explain why the universe is expanding as fast as it is you do know that right

That is not really what holographic theory suggest. It is just an explanation for the seeming observation all volumes of space can actually be explained through a 2 dimensional plane.

Wrong Tyson says everything is a coded simulation

Why, because none of the math adds up, and math is never wrong, so the universe is wrong and there is no expansion happening. Laughing

It is a catchy analogy but that is still not what holographic theory states. It is not saying that we do not exist or that the math proves the universe wrong, nor did Tyson allude to that in any way. He just used something in common parlance to describe the idea. What it does do is make the observation that the entirety of a black hole can be described by its surface area rather than its volume. As a black hole is representative of the largest amount of matter, or stuff, that can occupy that volume of space then it follows that ALL of space time can be described with the 2 dimensional surface area of a sphere and the math described in string theory (which really is a hypothesis so that makes holographic theory even more of a conjecture) seems to support this.

All holographic theory really shows is that any dimension that includes gravity can actually be understood to have one fewer dimension than appears and can be mathematically understood as such.

Holographic principle - Wikipedia

 

[FA_Q2]

Science has been unable to establish what life came from ergo we do not know. That does not mean abiogenesis is fact, it means that we do not know.

But we do know a few things. We know there was once no life, then there was. So, we know life formed. And that's all we need to know in order to know that abiogensis is a fact. Life formed by some sort of process that follows all the same laws as every other process. Star formation, volcano formation, hurricane formation.... And formation of life. "Abiogensis" is just the name given the process. It's not any less a fact than is hurricane formation. "Hurrigenesis"...

That is the most likely but is not all encompassing.

Life may have been seeded by another form of life. Life may have come from an extra solar meteorite. Perhaps there are extra dimensional beings involved and of course there is always the god did it excuse.

Each may be more unlikely than the last and certainly not a complete list but that does not equate to us KNOWING anything. It strongly suggests such but that is not the same thing as a fact. Abiogenesis is still a guess because science has been unable to establish any real framework as to how it works. We do not even understand what original life looked like as it is now believed that DNA was not the starting point of life.

The same thing goes for humans being nothing but deterministic systems, another claim of hard fact that you made. While I ascribe to both Abiogenesis and determinism as physics strongly points to that direction there is still absolutely zero understanding of what consciousness is or how it arises strictly from deterministic systems. Science is very specific here and that is what makes it so damn effective - the answer I do not know is an acceptable one and the fact is that we do not know if either of those contention are, indeed, accurate. The problem that arises with religions views often times is the assertion that it is known, God did it and that is that. Science does not need to go down that same silly road. We do not know if life arose form non life and we do not know that we are strictly deterministic machines. Physics has shown that those are both extremely likely and scientists are working to prove those two hypotheses right now. Abiogenesis has proven to be very difficult as we do not even understand what original form life may have taken on. Consciousness is currently beyond our grasp as we have no understanding there but current research into AI may very well shed some light in that arena.