| |
| Detecting life on other planets
Posted: 1/21/2009 10:28:01 PM | >>>Its called mathematics ....
But the math is arbirtary! You could account for a billion different possiblities as requirements for life to sprout independantly, or only two different possiblities, and neither would be closer to the truth, because the conditions are MADE UP.
We don't know- theres nothing wrong with that statement- we simply do not know what causes life to appear out of nothing, or what causes intelligent life. And to just throw out some numbers and say thats reality, is simply bad science. There is no evidence at all to back it up.
Saying alien life exists cause the universe is big is like saying that Mermaids exist cause the oceans are big
>>>....and logics
Logic? Every since place we've seen shows a universe barren and hositile to the only life we know. There is not a single place outside of our atmosphere that we could transfer life and it would not die. You look at all the planets, all the stars, and with all our observations come to the conclusion.....that our observations are false. You're letting your predictions and assumptions to be the judge- you're projecting the universe as you wish it, not observing the universe as it is. And thats completely illogical. | |
|
| Detecting life on other planets
Posted: 1/22/2009 1:41:02 AM |
There is not a single place outside of our atmosphere that we could transfer life and it would not die.
Tell that to NASA...
Poor buggers have been struggling with ways to sterilize spacecraft for trips to Mars so they arrive 'bug-free' and so far have failed. We've littered the entire inner solar system with Earth lifeforms because they don't die outside our atmosphere.
You're letting your predictions and assumptions to be the judge- you're projecting the universe as you wish it, not observing the universe as it is. And thats completely illogical.
I think you need to update your knowledge of 'our' knowledge...
So far in our solar system alone we've found several places hospitable to life: hydrothermal vents under the surface of Mars, the liquid oceans under the ice of Europa as well as perhaps Ganymede, the interiors of Titan and Triton are also probably hospitable to life as we know it.
When you consider that our solar system alone developed several planets and moons capable of supporting life it would be pure arrogance to assume we are alone or somehow special. | |
|
| Detecting life on other planets
Posted: 1/22/2009 9:40:50 AM | >>>hydrothermal vents under the surface of Mars, the liquid oceans under the ice of Europa as well as perhaps Ganymede, the interiors of Titan and Triton are also probably hospitable to life as we know it.
Are these hypothesized, or actual factual observations? Because I've never heard of any probes 'digging', nor has any probes that I know of landed on Europa.
And if they are hypothesized, I'm all for examining them closer- but someone out throwing out an idea that Mars may have hydrothermal vents(which would be strange because they don't have any liquid water('hydro'), but I digress) is not evidence of life on other planets. Its not even evidence of life on Mars. Its an assumption.
And no, I do not find it arrogent to take our observations not as flawed but as they are- and out observations show a universe without life. We are special- no matter how dirty the claim makes you feel, claiming anything else isn't observing the universe, but projecting it. | |
|
| Detecting life on other planets
Posted: 1/22/2009 8:14:51 PM | | actually plant life depends on carbon dioxide to live . Its waste or bi-product would happen to be oxygen. The ONLY reason plant life does not exist on mars is temperature.! If and when we do decide to explore the surface of mars with boots instead of rovers...we most definately will grow our own food using the resources on the red planet itself!!...all we need is a way of heating up the soil.!! Ohh did i mention mars atmosphere is made up of 80 percent carbon dioxide! | |
|
| Detecting life on other planets
Posted: 1/22/2009 8:23:59 PM | Excellent analogy about the whole mermaids thing ..but those are more like childrens fairytales..heres a better one...how about because the oceans are soooo big that FISH live in them .. | |
|
| Detecting life on other planets
Posted: 1/22/2009 8:26:48 PM | >>> The ONLY reason plant life does not exist on mars is temperature.!
No other reason at all? Not a single one?
What about the lack of liquid water? Wouldn't plants need that? Or the dry, arid conditions- only a few species of plants can seems to survive in such conditions on Earth, and only on the fringes(usually near a source of water)
What about the lack of a magnetic sheild? Many scientists now believe Mars failed to take root because its magnetic shield failed, and it was blasted by solar radation.
And, of course, thats not even touching the fact that there is nothing to imply that life would appear on Mars, since we do not understand the conditions in which life appears independently.
>>>Excellent analogy about the whole mermaids thing ..but those are more like childrens fairytales..heres a better one...how about because the oceans are soooo big that FISH live in them
Oh, the analogy gets better and better the more you think about it- theres far more diverse life in the ocean, and its theorized that life originated from hydro thermal vents- so if intelligent life is highly likely, then it would most definately have appeared in the place with more diverse life, where life existed for a longer period of time, and in a place where the space for life is larger.
Theres no doubt about it- the assumption that the universe is littered with intelligent life is clearly contradicted by the fact that the oceans are equally not littered with intelligent life- because all the conditions for intelligent life to appear is greater in the oceans than on land.
Of course, thats only if your beliefs on based on the chances of intelligent life, rather than actual observations. | |
|
| |
| Detecting life on other planets
Posted: 1/22/2009 8:37:44 PM | Ohhh this does get fun.
Hypothesis: definitions for hypothesis
a proposal intended to explain certain facts or observations
wordnet.princeton.edu/perl/webwn - Definition in context
Theory:Web definitions for theory
a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world; an organized system of accepted knowledge that applies in a variety of calculations.
Now comes the fun part 2 plus 2 is 4 i think..this is a calculation..
The way I arrived at this extremely difficult equation is something called
MATHEMATICS. | |
|
| Detecting life on other planets
Posted: 1/22/2009 8:42:20 PM | Don't forget to add into your calculations that a Proof is the highest form of proof in mathematics.  | |
|
| Detecting life on other planets
Posted: 2/21/2009 4:46:41 PM | 11110000100011110010001111000100101001
Good evening earthlings.
Do you want to communicate with bacteria from Epsilon minus
Tell me about your life earthlings.
Do you have Coca Cola and HD TV?
My name is CHUG. | |
|
| Detecting life on other planets
Posted: 2/22/2009 12:14:14 AM |
Why is it you're able to support the theory of the universe being teeming with life with absolutely no evidence, but other things, like wormholes, you need evidence to believe it? "Absolutely no evidence" is incorrect.
Quite simply, we know that life is possible, because we have direct observation that life actually exists, here. That is solid evidence.
Since it exists here, it is possible that it also exists other places. By analyzing the conditions under which life exists here, we can focus our efforts toward looking at places where those conditions are likely- for example, we might look for extrasolar planets at distances from stars where liquid water is possible.
On the other hand, "wormholes" are purely hypothetical, and may not exist at all, or, if they do exist, may not behave quite as imagined.
With respect to resolving images of extrasolar planets, we need only launch a number of Hubble-size telescopes into solar orbit, positioning them into an array (as we do with radiotelescopes) , aiming them at a common subject and combining the images into a high-resolution composite; a planet-size reflector may not be necessary. | |
|
| Detecting life on other planets
Posted: 3/5/2009 6:52:16 PM | 0001100101010100001000101110010100001
Greetings earthlings.
My name is Chug from Epsilon minus
We are a form of archaeobacter which live in an ocean of H2O and H2S04
We are luminescent and glow in the dark.
If you were to orbit our planet you would see large areas of low intensity light shining in our oceans.
I hope you do not make the assumption we are a highly advanced civilisation which wastes light into the night sky like you earthlings.
If you observe us it is "Light but not as you know it" | |
|
| |
| Detecting life on other planets
Posted: 6/3/2012 11:08:57 PM | We also have to take in time differences, if we were to see light that looks to be of artificial origin on a planet, well....thats sign there might have been life there "once". What if we then sent an envoy to the planet, spanning a couple of generations, only to find the planets life had become extinct....that would suck!
As it is, i would be excited by an alien life form regardless of "intelligence".
I do believe there to be life out there, we know there are organic compounds floating around the universe and from what we know about abiogenesis, its a very quick process, it happened on earth within 1 billion years of its formation, this is by any means a very quick process and that lends me to the thinking its a process which could "easily" happen given the right circumstances, with the numbers game too, the unbelievable amount of planets in the galaxy, let alone universe, makes me think that life is a common occurence.
However, there is completely no evidence for this so i could be completely wrong. Wouldnt be the first time either! | |
|
| Detecting life on other planets
Posted: 6/4/2012 4:29:13 AM | Back to the original post:
I would say yes, that if we detected what appeared to be artificially created light sources on the dark side of a planet, it would strongly suggest intelligent life was involved.
I also support that we are far from being able to use this in a practical way. What I look at, are the existing pictures of EARTH, as taken from some of our distant and still traveling probes. Even the ones that have not yet left the inner portion of our own solar system, can no longer tell if the dark side of Earth lights up.
I've had to disappoint myself many times, thinking about the marvelous ease with which our science-fictional characters locate other civilisations. It was depressing to me as a child, to finally realize that ALL of the models and pictures of our own Solar System were gross exaggerations, and that rather than a visiting alien arriving to see a cluster of colorful orbs whipping around a gentle orange star, what one actually sees from outside the elliptic, is a bunch of variously bright and dim points of direct and reflected light. Nothing more.
I nevertheless continue to hope that one day, a spaceship will arrive from Alpha Centauri, and announce that I am the winner of their fabulous Clearinghouse Sweepstakes, even though I never mailed in an entry. | |
|
| Detecting life on other planets
Posted: 6/9/2012 8:06:38 PM | Topic creator,
The whole alien life situation is so darn complex it's ridiculous... After so many hours of looking into the phenomenon, I can say that (at it's deepest levels) it gets into (not just aliens) but also what WE ARE as human beings, as well as the NATURE OF REALITY ITSELF --- and this information is (probably) the most carefully guarded thing I know about...
And remember, we have "science" because WE DONT KNOW EVERYTHING, and human beings are still looking for answers. I suggest to you, however, that someone else isn't looking for answers as hard as we are. (almost guaranteed) | |
|
| Detecting life on other planets
Posted: 6/17/2012 11:22:48 AM | | here's some food for thought: There are an uncountable number of galaxies in this universe, and each one with 100-200 billion stars, most with solar systems. How are we the only one with life on it? And even moons are added in. The nearest Earth-like planet isn't even a planet, its a moon. Another thought to add to it: The search for life on other planets/moons has been narrowed to the search for Earth-like planets and moons. The right conditions, climate, and the presence of water. This is a very narrow minded way to look at it. Life on Earth isn't here because these are the conditions we need to survive, we are here because we adapted to these conditions. Life on Earth evolved as Carbon based life forms with a heavy reliance on oxygen and water because that is what is here. What if life adapted differently to the conditions on other planets? Think of it this way: You wouldn't find a Saguaro Cacti near the polar ice caps would you? Or a Polar Bear in Mexico? Why not? They have adapted to the climate and conditions set forth, evolved as a result of them. They adapted to the conditions set forth, and if you take a polar bear and drop him in Cancun, he wouldn't survive. | |
|
| |
| Detecting life on other planets
Posted: 6/29/2012 7:15:38 PM | if we get to the point we can detect light from dark areas of a planet
Outside of our solar system?
That will never happen.
As for getting any transmissions from intelligent life out there?
Wait 900 years.
That's how long it will take for a message to get sent to us.... if intelligent life is even paying attention in our direction.
And..... we still haven't detected intelligent life on earth in human form..... as can be seen from us being distracted from the fire we started on earth that we are unaware of because we keep looking out there.... instead of at ourselves. | |
|
| Detecting life on other planets
Posted: 6/29/2012 7:26:34 PM | Outside of our solar system?
That will never happen. I wonder how many of our ancestors looked at the moon and thought, "It will never happen..." lol
As for getting any transmissions from intelligent life out there?
Wait 900 years.
That's how long it will take for a message to get sent to us.... if intelligent life is even paying attention in our direction. We did get a transmission, actually. Back in the cold war, they got a transmission and at first thought that it was the Soviets launching a missile at us. Turned out that the transmission came from space. But you are right. That transmission was probably sent waaaay before it reached earth. And who knows what it could have been. | |
|
| Detecting life on other planets
Posted: 6/29/2012 9:22:10 PM | I wonder how many of our ancestors looked at the moon and thought, "It will never happen..." lol
Our ancestors didn't know the Laws of Physics could get them there like we do now.
We also know that you can't travel faster than the speed of light.
We know a lot now.
We know our limitations.
We just fantasize scientifically about surpassing our limitations into space.
It will never happen. . . . and I'm a Star Trek fan. | |
|
| Detecting life on other planets
Posted: 6/29/2012 11:02:44 PM |
...if we get to the point we can detect light from dark areas of a planet Outside of our solar system?
That will never happen.
It's true that detecting (artificial sources of) 'light' from planets outside the solar system is, at present, beyond our capabilities but saying it will "never" happen looks a lot like a subjective opinion presented, improperly, as if it were an objective fact.
To say that it will "never" happen implies an ability, which you probably don't have, to forecast the future.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pioneer_10
http://news.discovery.com/space/voyager-1-about-to-become-interstellar-emissary-120615.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/space/9361031/Voyager-1-poised-to-cross-solar-frontier-into-interstellar-space.html
As for getting any transmissions from intelligent life out there?
Wait 900 years.
That's how long it will take for a message to get sent to us....
Huh? There is no magic number of years we have to wait before receiving a 'transmission'. We are inundated by 'transmissions' of radio waves from every direction right now - the hard part is working out what they mean (if anything).
SETI@home searches for possible evidence of radio transmissions from extraterrestrial intelligence using observational data from the Arecibo radio telescope.
The software searches for five types of signals that distinguish them from noise:
* Spikes in power spectra
* Gaussian rises and falls in transmission power, possibly representing the telescope beam's main lobe passing over a radio source
* Triplets — three power spikes in a row
* Pulsing signals that possibly represent a narrowband digital-style transmission
* Autocorrelation detects signal waveforms.
There are many variations on how an ETI signal may be affected by the interstellar medium, and by relative motion of its origin compared to Earth. The potential 'signal' is thus processed in a number of ways (although not testing all detection methods nor scenarios) to ensure the highest likelihood of distinguishing it from the scintillating noise already present in all directions of outer space. For instance, another planet is very likely to be moving at a speed and acceleration with respect to Earth, and that will shift the frequency, over time, of the potential 'signal'. Checking for this through processing is done, to an extent, in the SETI@home software.
The process is somewhat like tuning a radio to various channels, and looking at the signal strength meter. If the strength of the signal goes up, that gets attention. More technically, it involves a lot of digital signal processing, mostly discrete Fourier transforms at various chirp rates and durations.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SETI@home
The Allen Telescope Array (ATA), formerly known as the One Hectare Telescope (1hT), was a joint effort by the SETI Institute and the Radio Astronomy Laboratory (RAL) at the University of California, Berkeley to construct a radio interferometer that is dedicated to astronomical observations and a simultaneous search for extraterrestrial intelligence.
Key science goals
The ATA will:
* Determine the HI content of galaxies out to z ~ 0.2 over 3p steradians, to measure how much intergalactic gas external galaxies are accreting; to search for dark, starless galaxies; to lay the foundation for SKA dark energy detection
* Classify 250,000 extragalactic radio sources as active galactic nuclei or starburst galaxies, to probe and quantify star formation in the local Universe; to identify high redshift objects; to probe large scale structure in the Universe; to identify gravitational lens candidates for dark matter and dark energy detection
* Explore the transient sky, to probe accretion onto black holes; to find orphan gamma ray burst afterglows; to discover new and unknown transient phenomena
* Survey 1,000,000 stars for SETI emission with enough sensitivity to detect an Arecibo radar out to 300 pc within the range of 1 and 10 GHz
* Survey the 4×1010 stars of the inner galactic plane from 1.42 to 1.72 GHz for very powerful transmitters
* Measure the magnetic fields in the Milky Way and other Local Group galaxies, to probe the role of magnetic fields in star formation and galaxy formation and evolution
* Detect the gravitational wave background from massive black holes through pulsar timing
* Measure molecular cloud and star formation properties using new molecular tracers, to map the star formation conditions on the scale of entire giant molecular clouds (GMCs); to determine the metallicity gradient of the Milky Way
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allen_Telescope_Array
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arecibo_Observatory
See also -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drake_equation | |
|
| Detecting life on other planets
Posted: 6/30/2012 3:00:10 AM | Our ancestors didn't know the Laws of Physics could get them there like we do now.
We also know that you can't travel faster than the speed of light.
We know a lot now.
We know our limitations.
We just fantasize scientifically about surpassing our limitations into space.
It will never happen. . . . and I'm a Star Trek fan. Just saw a show tonight where they were working on some kind of new engine for space travel, much better, much more powerful and efficient than the rockets we're using today. One of the guys said that he was a Star Trek fan and he never thought thought he would see something Star Trek like (this particular engine) in his life time.
And also, with the experimentation of quantum physics, quantum mechanics, and all of that stuff, who knows what kind of doors will be open to us once we crack it. Humans have made astounding discoveries and upgrades within JUST the last 100 years. Think of what humans will be capable of in another 100 years if we continue at the rate we've been going.
Speaking of Star Trek and teleportation: http://www.livescience.com/7647-teleportation-milestone-achieved.html
"for the first time, information has been teleported between two separate atoms across a distance of a meter — about a yard." And you were saying something about knowing our limits! | |
|
| Detecting life on other planets
Posted: 7/1/2012 6:48:46 PM |
Erm...theories are the highest proof in science, I think you mean hypothesis...
I thought a Law was above a Theory? | |
|
Home
login 
