The Fallacy of Infinity

[jwoodie]

NASA's prognostication notwithstanding, the currently popular exercise of multiplying the probability of some event by infinity in order to prove its existence is nothing more than a statistical shell game. For example, the probability of replicating the near miraculous conditions that made Earth habitable for intelligent life is infinitesimally small; however, when multiplied by infinity, this probability turns into an absolute certainty. In fact, it "proves" that there are an infinite number of Earths out there!

Additional complications further undermine this absurdity: First, it would require a simultaneous level of technological development for two civilizations to communicate with each other. Secondly, the vast distances between interstellar objects would preclude any effective means of responsively verifying any suspected communication. Finally, the Big Bang Theory (not the TV show) contradicts the entire idea of an infinite universe.

 

[Old Rocks]

When the numbers get big enough, stastically, they may as well be infinity. The near 'miraculous' conditions that were here on earth at the time of abiogenisis occurred almost as soon as the planet cooled enough for liquid water. The most primitive of cells at present are almost all extremeophiles, which indicates that was the conditions of the original event. I would suspect that abiogenisis is a rather common event wherever the conditions allow liquid water. I would also suspect that we are going to find that is not the only route to life.

Intelligent life? Probably out there, but the physics may easy communications. Or, it may simply be a covenant against interefering with developing primitive cultures, such as our species.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

NASA's prognostication notwithstanding, the currently popular exercise of multiplying the probability of some event by infinity in order to prove its existence is nothing more than a statistical shell game. For example, the probability of replicating the near miraculous conditions that made Earth habitable for intelligent life is infinitesimally small; however, when multiplied by infinity, this probability turns into an absolute certainty. In fact, it "proves" that there are an infinite number of Earths out there!

Additional complications further undermine this absurdity: First, it would require a simultaneous level of technological development for two civilizations to communicate with each other. Secondly, the vast distances between interstellar objects would preclude any effective means of responsively verifying any suspected communication. Finally, the Big Bang Theory (not the TV show) contradicts the entire idea of an infinite universe.

Don't need infinity to speculate on 'other Earths.' Just billions. This galaxy has about 200 billion stars. Planets orbiting stars seems to be the rule rather than the exception as exoplanets are being discovered around every star scrutinized. And we know planets can exist independent of stars whether having been ejected from solar systems when their stars nova, or other means. So conservative estimates put the planet count in just our galaxy at at least 200 billion.

We know there's intelligent life in the universe, namely ourselves. So it's certainly possible for life to come from lifelessness and evolve to intelligence. Since nothing else in the universe is unique, it's a safe bet a life rich planet isn't unique either. But even if the doom n gloom types are right and life is exceedingly rare and more mistake than design, if just 1 planet per galaxy has life like ourselves, then there's another 100 billion planets like Earth insofar as lif ebeing on it in the known universe. Even if you make it less likely, and just 1 in a million galaxies has an Earth-like planet...

Of course, the universe could have an Earth-like civilization around every star, but that doesn't do it much good since A) we can't get around in the universe at present, and velocity limitations seem to indicate we never can, and B) even communications may be impractical since even that maxxes out at c which means decades will elapse just to say "hello."

The more depressing thing though is we've been radiating radio transmissions in all directions for about 75 years. That means that if there were any similarly evolved civilizations within half that distance, they'd have received proof of our existing and been able to reply (we'd be picking up similar radiating transmissions if anyone existed with radio-level tech.) Supposedly we haven't (always allow for possibilities that we have, and they just haven't told us.) But if no one's sent us a signal to say hello yet, and we're not picking anything up since we began listening, it might be there's just nothing within any practical reach of us. It's conceivable at least that if we knew there were technologically evolved beings within 50 light-years say that an attempt to communicate might begin. 50 years though each way so it'd have to be a determined effort to undertake. And as some have suggested, we may not want to since if they're anything like us, they might be hostile. Though I'm not sure why that'd matter unless they can get here. And given how we don't care about long term effects beyond our lifetimes as with climate change, I can't imagine we'd care about aliens showing up in hundreds of years.

 

[Sgt_Gath]

When the numbers get big enough, stastically, they may as well be infinity. The near 'miraculous' conditions that were here on earth at the time of abiogenisis occurred almost as soon as the planet cooled enough for liquid water. The most primitive of cells at present are almost all extremeophiles, which indicates that was the conditions of the original event. I would suspect that abiogenisis is a rather common event wherever the conditions allow liquid water. I would also suspect that we are going to find that is not the only route to life.

Intelligent life? Probably out there, but the physics may easy communications. Or, it may simply be a covenant against interefering with developing primitive cultures, such as our species.

Exactly. The universe is simply too big to rule out the possibility of alien life entirely.

Even if life developing is only a one in billion shot, there are easily hundreds of billions of planets just in this galaxy alone.

 

[September]

What if our past is actually our future? What if the future is actually our past?

 

[Old Rocks]

What if our past is actually our future? What if the future is actually our past?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W7x1ETPkZsk]"I'm My Own Grandpa" Performed by Dennis Warner - YouTube[/ame]

Kind of like that?

 

[September]

^

No. I mean what if the timeline of past, present, and future is not a straight line, but instead, a circle?

 

[saveliberty]

or a sphere...which is more likely given a big bang in all directions.

 

[saveliberty]

In a sphere it is less likely you will hit the exact same spots, but may cross certain ones. Deja vu.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

When the numbers get big enough, stastically, they may as well be infinity. The near 'miraculous' conditions that were here on earth at the time of abiogenisis occurred almost as soon as the planet cooled enough for liquid water. The most primitive of cells at present are almost all extremeophiles, which indicates that was the conditions of the original event. I would suspect that abiogenisis is a rather common event wherever the conditions allow liquid water. I would also suspect that we are going to find that is not the only route to life.

Intelligent life? Probably out there, but the physics may easy communications. Or, it may simply be a covenant against interefering with developing primitive cultures, such as our species.

Exactly. The universe is simply too big to rule out the possibility of alien life entirely.

Even if life developing is only a one in billion shot, there are easily hundreds of billions of planets just in this galaxy alone.

Yet we still have the Fermi Paradox.

 

[Sgt_Gath]

Yet we still have the Fermi Paradox.

Yes, but that's simply a way of saying that things could ultimately go either one way or the other.

At the moment we simply have insufficient information to guess which with any degree of accuracy.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Yet we still have the Fermi Paradox.

Yes, but that's simply a way of saying that things could ultimately go either one way or the other.

At the moment we simply have insufficient information to guess which with any degree of accuracy.

Given the age of the universe, and the fact that we actually have the technology to detect advanced civilizations, we should have seen something by now. You are correct that it doesn't prove their aren't advanced civilizations out there, but it does make it hard to argue that they are all over galaxy.

 

[Sgt_Gath]

Given the age of the universe, and the fact that we actually have the technology to detect advanced civilizations, we should have seen something by now. You are correct that it doesn't prove their aren't advanced civilizations out there, but it does make it hard to argue that they are all over galaxy.

Not necessarily. The universe is huge, and we've only had the technology to which you refer for a few decades at most.

You've also got to keep the timescales involved in mind.

There could very well be alien life just a star system away; "right next door" in cosmic terms. However, they might not be intelligent. Frankly, even if they are, there's still a strong possibility that they might be in the stone age, or that they could've somehow driven themselves to extinction eons ago. They might also be so advanced that they simply no longer use radio waves to communicate.

Even if alien life does exist, finding an species nearby which is intelligent enough to communicate, and within the same technological window that we are, is always going to be a bit of a long shot, statistically speaking.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Given the age of the universe, and the fact that we actually have the technology to detect advanced civilizations, we should have seen something by now. You are correct that it doesn't prove their aren't advanced civilizations out there, but it does make it hard to argue that they are all over galaxy.

Not necessarily. The universe is huge, and we've only had the technology to which you refer for a few decades at most.

You've also got to keep the timescales involved in mind.

There could very well be alien life just a star system away; "right next door" in cosmic terms. However, they might not be intelligent. Frankly, even if they are, there's still a strong possibility that they might be in the stone age, or that they could've somehow driven themselves to extinction eons ago. They might also be so advanced that they simply no longer use radio waves to communicate.

Even if alien life does exist, finding an species nearby which is intelligent enough to communicate, and within the same technological window that we are, is always going to be a bit of a long shot, statistically speaking.

Did you see the part where I restricted my argument to the galaxy?

 

[SmedlyButler]

NASA's prognostication notwithstanding, the currently popular exercise of multiplying the probability of some event by infinity in order to prove its existence is nothing more than a statistical shell game. For example, the probability of replicating the near miraculous conditions that made Earth habitable for intelligent life is infinitesimally small; however, when multiplied by infinity, this probability turns into an absolute certainty. In fact, it "proves" that there are an infinite number of Earths out there!

Additional complications further undermine this absurdity: First, it would require a simultaneous level of technological development for two civilizations to communicate with each other. Secondly, the vast distances between interstellar objects would preclude any effective means of responsively verifying any suspected communication. Finally, the Big Bang Theory (not the TV show) contradicts the entire idea of an infinite universe.

suggesting that you or anybody else on this board (except maybe Stat) has the tools to opine on the validity of a zero X infinity problem makes me question the validity of all your conditions. For instance what is the basis for saying "nothing more than a statistical shell game". What are the metaphorical "shells" and what are the metaphorical "peas" that must exist in this metaphor? And in claiming the need for "near miraculous conditions" you must claim this is a priori knowledge which of course it is not. It could just as well be that there are billions of planets with intelligent life.

And what is the "absurdity" that is undermined? You haven't posited a logical one. In fact your whole statement relies on circular reasoning and ad hoc assumptions. For one, String (or "M") theory considers multiple big bangs a very real possibility. So there is not a singular monolithic "Big Bang Theory" to use in any argument. This fact alone renders your post internally inconsistant.