What does Veeky Forums think of the Zoo hypothesis?

Its just as possible as 10000 other explanations for the fermi paradox

That's not a hypothesis

You're a fucking idiot if you think this fantastical star trek crap is real.
And Fermi is a dumbfuck and his stupid paradox. Even if you knew exactly where to look in the night sky to find life, you would see zero evidence of life.

I personally find it credible. It is easy to imagine alien life is using cloacking devices to conceal their existence from us, while at the same time, spying Earth or not even caring about some type 0 barbarians. We act in the same manner after all, on some obscure tribes and animal species.
> Being on sci
> Not knowing the meaning of hypothesis

>using cloacking devices to conceal their existence from us
Confirmed for never taking a physics class in your life

watch some michio gucci you penile

The next phase in human evolution

>It is easy to imagine alien life is using cloacking devices to conceal their existence from us
It's easy to imagine that there's some big ass dragon hiding behind the moon, doesn't make it any less bullshit.

You, my friend, with a short sentence, hit the fucking truth.

And we have to be glad that they do not call it a fact.

odds of forming a planet compatible with life: one in billions
odds of having life in those compatible planets: one in billions
odds of living organisms to develop a civilization: one in billions
odds for a civilization to develop at the same time than ours: one in billions
odds for a contemporary civilization to be close to us: one in billions
odds for a contemporary and close civilization to be similar to us: one in billions

> Pulling numbers out of your arse
> Not kowing the difference between odds and probability

sorry, English is not my first language
let's say that the probability of talking 5 minutes to a qt alien like Urusei Yatsura is lower than talking 5 minutes with Kanna Hashimoto: so very, very close to zero

>What does Veeky Forums think of the Zoo hypothesis?
Untestable speculation isn't a hypothesis.

Do we have to be?

Yea. Thanks society for spreading misinformation

odds for a civilization similar to us to destroy our planet even before talking to us: one in.. t..t.three

>sorry, English is not my first language
Hello. (sorry for bad English)

are you... Kanna? oh, wow, please marry me!

My personal hypothesis is the "no one gives a toss" hypothesis. Basically, the universe is so big and humanity is so insignificant that no one gives a toss about us.

>humanity is so insignificant

Typical retarded "humans are just dumb violent primates" mentality. Try to better yourself.

We are a retarded species desu senpai

Yeah, this user is right.

Think what we will have in mere 1000 years. And what about a civitilzation which existed for hundred thousands of years longer than ours?
Are they on the same technological and social level? Do they still fight with each other? Do they have limited resources of anything? Are they even physical?

>Think what we will have in mere 1000 years
Retarded Kardashev scale meme

>a civitilzation which existed for hundred thousands of years longer than ours
ascribing human attributes to something inherently non-human

>Are they on the same technological and social level?
ascribing human attributes to something inherently non-human

>Do they still fight with each other?
ascribing human attributes to something inherently non-human

>Are they even physical?
No they are fucking invisible. Now you've gone full retard

It's easy for tools like you to be so limited in imagination granted, but try to picture an alien race that doesn't have a fucked up nose or forehead but is essentially human with human motivations and desires.

The problem with the Zoo "hypothesis" or any explanation of the Great Silence is non-exclusivity. It assumes all aliens are cooperating with each other or act in the exact same manner. All it would take is one alien to go "fuck you" to the United Federation of Planets, drop down for a visit, and say "We're aliens motherfukkas! Whatcha goin' to do 'bout it, bitches!"

I agree with you. I'm 99% convinced we'll never make contact due to the sheer size of space - and unlimited possibilities of communication technology.

Our high/low radio signals make no fucking difference to a being that doesn't rely on such (human) logic to communicate long distances.

and again, there are dectillions of galaxies out there, we've only been looking for the last few hundred years and everytime technology improves - we discover how many orders of magnitude larger our universe is than previously thought.

We havent escaped our satellite, our technology hasnt escaped our star, and our signals have only gone a bit further than our local group at best.

Fuckem. Quit looking.

>what are protons

Already did that:

Operation Fishbowl

Starfish Prime

10 p.m, July 08, 1962

Mid Pacific, Johnston Island, Southwest of Hawaii

Plutonium Bomb atop a Thor Rocket

Successfully detonated at an altitude of 250 miles

Had a yield of 1.4 to 1.45 megatons

It was the largest man-made nuclear explosion in outer space

The EMP pulse caused electrical damage in Hawaii, almost 900 miles away

The explosion created aurora that lasted 16 minutes and was visible for thousands of miles

The explosion also created several new and unexpected beta particle radiation belts that lasted several months, this new belt damaged 1/3 of all the satellites in low Earth orbit and caused 7 to fail completely

For reference the International Space Station orbits Earth at 249 miles

I just looked this up and apparently this was the highest test of 3 detonations. 50km was mostly a lateral blast that wasted energy illuminating air, 150km was dimmer because the radiation followed earths magnetic feild lines. The 150km explosion caused a unique phenomena of auroral activity on opposing hemispheres due to the opposing feild lines.

The 250km straight up bent earths feild lines. The diagram I saw looked almost like a large circular gap that bent the magnetic feilds around it due to conducting electricity.

An electromagnetic radiation shield would be necessary to block our interception of alien communications permeating the Milky-way.

If such a structure existed, we would not be able to see all bands of the electromagnetic spectrum of the Milky-way.

We can receive all bands of the electromagnetic spectrum from the Milky-way.

Thus, if any extraterrestrial civilizations capable of even communicating with Earth do not exist at this time.

Thus, Extraterrestrial civilizations capable of traveling to Earth do not exist at this time.

But is it the most plausible?

Why wouldn't aliens have technology that only filters intelligent communication?

Yeqh this. This is why the solution to the Fermi paradox must be way more fundamental. The great filter needs to be sonething that will potentially affect us too in the future that prevents us from spreading throughout the entire galaxy and later the universe.
This is really what the Fermi paradox is about after all: "Is there something that prevents humanity from exploring the galaxy?"

Bullshit. For this to be true, every single alien civilization/corporation/being/other entity with the ability to contact or visit Earth would all have to agree to not interfere with us. Some dumbass shitbird would decide to fuck the rules and screw with the baby species, since consensus is basically impossible.

You've fucking got it, user.

There could be space police that enforces the rules.

>An electromagnetic radiation shield would be necessary to block our interception of alien communications permeating the Milky-way.
Why would aliens use radio to communicate?
Speed of light limitations, inverse square law issues...
Nah, no reason to believe there's anything that needs to be shielded.

>Thus, if any extraterrestrial civilizations capable of even communicating with Earth do not exist at this time.
Nonsense.
We couldn't detect signals similar to our own from even half a light year away.
It's possible that every single star in the universe has radio stations broadcasting at the same strength as us.
We'd never hear a thing.

>For this to be true, every single alien civilization/corporation/being/other entity with the ability to contact or visit Earth would all have to agree to not interfere with us.
Assuming any given part of the galaxy is part of some race's territory, we only need one "park ranger" nation.

nigga do you not understand science FICTION?

superman ;_;

>Nah, no reason to believe there's anything that needs to be shielded.

We use it and there's good reason to assume almost all intelligent life forms used rafio communication at one point in their development. Even if they don't use it anymore there would or could still be aliens that still do and also there would be signals of those past days of when they did use it.

I'd be far happier to bet that they keep us around as an actual zoo.

Fuck aliens anyways.

>just radio waves

Yeah, it's one of the theories, who fucking cares.

Even if they've come down to earth, there's no logical reason why they'd publicize their presence.

Specifically, there's no reason why Earth governments would acknowledge the existence of aliens, as it would destroy the economy, etc.

lol

What DO people suggest is the best solution to the Fermi Paradox then?

The sad truth is that the real reason aliens haven't contacted us is because they don't have faster than light travel either, which is pretty much required to explore the universe

I like the Matrix theory better. At some point in the past some beings created AI and shit. This AI thinks it is real and eventually creates its own AI and on the cycle went.
Probably only the alien zookeepers know which iteration mankind is.

The zoo hypothesis is wishful thinking by man-children who desperately want their star trek fantasies to be around the corner.

Assuming alien civilizations are present at this period of time, are capable of faster than light travel, and aware of our existence, this hypothesis may be possible. It's just as possible as any of countless alternative scenarios that are equally unlikely, but it's certainly possible.

The real question OP is asking is, if this is the case, what would humanity have to do before we're considered acceptable to join the intergalactic community. I don't think hardly anyone in this thread has tried to answer yet.

I think, for starters, we should at least show that we're capable of not destroying our own planet. I feel that's still not clear yet. If we can somehow survive our own destructive habits, then we can start to talk about if we deserve alien contact and/or technology. Maybe that's the only requirement. We better get on it if so.

>considered acceptable to join the intergalactic community

Star Trek was a TV show you retard

>What DO people suggest is the best solution to the Fermi Paradox then?

>Space is big. Really big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind-bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist, but that's just peanuts to space.

That's more a argument in favor of the Zoo hypothesis.
Space is so enormously huge and so unfathomably old, how the fuck isn't it filled with billions of intelligent civilizations everywhere, popping out of every corner or the universe?

fermi paradox is dumb because every star we see in the night sky could have a world exactly like earth orbiting around it, complete with a bipedal mammalian species like ours, and we would see absolutely no evidence of it from our viewpoint with current technology.

so the question of where is everyone is silly. you wouldn't see anybody even if you knew exactly where to look.

Like other user said,
>space is really big.
Also
>aliens might be quite alien
>they don't necessarily live around sun like stars
>they don't necessarily live on earth like planets
>they don't communicate with radiowaves
>they might be so strange that you couldn't even tell they were there, even if they were right in front of you

What about the billions of planets that are many billion years older than earth?

Your argumentation doesn't work because it only argues against a single alien species.
What you'd really need to say is that

>EVERY Alien is quite
>EVERY Alien doesn't live on sunlike stars
>EVERY Alien doesn't use radio communication
>EVERY Alien doesn't live on earthlike planets
>EVERY Alien is unconceivable to humans

And in this regard the Zoo hypothesis is much more plausible than any of these half assed not well thought through explanations.
Because to run a Zoo it really only requires a single very advanced species that watches over us and we can't tell unless we break out of the Zoo

>That the reason why aliens haven't contacted us yet is because they're observing our development until we're "mature" enough to join the intergalactic community?

No, I believe that we are nothing and that we don't matter at all, and IF another civilization is watching us, its to ensure we don't become a problem, and that if we DO become a problem, to wipe us out entirely. It doesn't matter what you think, another species survival means more to themselves than it does to other species, and as soon as it become apparent that one species gains the ability to start mass genociding other group, they become a problem and would be dealt with accordingly. We do not matter.

>Space is so enormously huge and so unfathomably old, how the fuck isn't it filled with billions of intelligent civilizations everywhere,
It's not really unfathomably old - we've been around for a good fraction of it.

>We use it and there's good reason to assume almost all intelligent life forms used rafio communication at one point in their development.
Please read the entire post.

>We couldn't detect signals similar to our own from even half a light year away.
>It's possible that every single star in the universe has radio stations broadcasting at the same strength as us.
>We'd never hear a thing.

There's really no reason to believe anything needs to be shielded.
But, even if the aliums really were blocking incoming intelligent radio signals (using some technology unknown to us), how would you even know?

I like the Dark Forest hypothesis a lot better.

>odds of forming a planet compatible with life: one in billions
>odds of having life in those compatible planets: one in billions

I'd say the probability of the second given the first is not that slim, but admittedly that is just my intuition.

Also estimated number of stars in the Milky way alone: 100 - 400 billion. Suddenly "one in billions" doesn't seem that slim.
Source: asd.gsfc.nasa.gov/blueshift/index.php/2015/07/22/how-many-stars-in-the-milky-way/

>What about the billions of planets that are many billion years older than earth?
First and second generation stars accreted from gas clouds without enough heavy elements to form planets.
A recent study suggests Earth developed earlier than 92% of the potentially habitable planets in the Galaxy.

And then there's galactic habitable zone theory.
It's been debunked as overly pessimistic, but even the optimists have given us some rather low numbers.
Even current stars formed on the outer rim of the galaxy have low metallicity, and probably don't have planets.
Most of the stars in the galaxy are in the core, where frequent supernova events routinely sterilize all nearby star systems.
Someone took the numbers off the Wikipedia page, but it used to say that 98.8% of stars were unsuitable for hosting life because of the time and place of their origin.
And most of the remaining 1.2% are red dwarfs.
Assuming red dwarfs are sketchy at best, that leaves just 0.3% of stars capable of hosting complex life.
And that's the optimistic view.

>Also estimated number of stars in the Milky way alone: 100 - 400 billion. Suddenly "one in billions" doesn't seem that slim.
True, but the vast number of stars that makes it seem likely that we have galactic neighbors, also makes it less plausible to call the entire galaxy our "neighborhood".
Lets say we invented warp drive tomorrow, and built a fleet of a thousand starships.
Let's say a thousand Captain Kirks are exploring an average of two star systems a week each.
It would still take a million years to search 100 billion star systems.

What does that one say?

>completely believes in aliens
>mocks people for believing in deities

>God can't be an alien

ok m8

>This theory is explained very well near the end of the science fiction novel, The Dark Forest by Liu Cixin. The first axiom is that survival is the primary need of civilization. Therefore, civilizations will do whatever it takes to ensure their own survival. The second axiom is that civilizations always grow and expand, but the amount of matter and resources in the universe are finite.

>So every civilization other than your own is a likely threat. At the very least, they are occupying a planet that you could use to expand your civilization. At worst, they are more technologically advanced and will wipe out your civilization to expand their own.

>When two civilizations meet, they will want to know if the other is going to be friendly or hostile. One side might act friendly, but the other side won't know if they are just faking it to put them at ease while armies are built in secret. This is called chains of suspicion. You don't know for sure what the other side's intentions are. On Earth this is resolved through communication and diplomacy. But for civilizations in different solar systems, that's not possible due to the vast distances and time between message sent and received. Bottom line is, every civilization could be a threat and it's impossible to know for sure, therefore they must be destroyed to ensure your survival.

>You might be thinking that if an advanced civilization detects the radio signals from Earth then they would know that we are less advanced and therefore not a threat. But again you have to consider the vast distance and time it takes for those signals to travel. Even if a nearby civilization (only 10 or 20 light years away) detects us, it would take hundreds or even thousands of years for them to reach us and that is plenty of time for a technological explosion. If they don't attack us at once, then we might develop technology fast enough to catch up and threaten them.

>It won't be like Star Trek. Without faster than light travel, there won't be any communication, diplomacy or trade with alien races. It's kill or be killed.

>So that's why we haven't heard a peep from other civilizations. The universe is a dark forest where every civilization is a silent hunter. They desperately try to stay undetectable while hunting for other planets to colonize and threats to destroy.

Another good read with the basic axioms and utilizing logic:

philosophy.stackexchange.com/questions/18127/dark-forest-postulate-used-to-explain-the-fermi-paradox

>It starts with two axioms

>1. Survival is the most important goal of every civilization
>2. Every civilization will continue to expand and grow , but resource in the universe is limited.

>With two assumption

>1. Suspicion Chain
>2. Technology Explosion

. Every civilization will continue to expand and grow ,
That's always struck me as a childish assumption.
And if there's just no FTL, any civilization would want to expand within a single solar system (Dyson swarm, etc) rather than crating a competing civilization in the next star system over.

It is explained that simply because there is no FTL, there are only so many useable planets within the grasps of a civilization's mortal lifespan. And if another civilization happens to be on it... Then the Dark Forest kicks in.

On also has to remember that the axiom mentions that civilization expand at exponential pace, while the overall matter in your immediate surrounding remains same. Exponential growth really is the devil here, since you'll reach the material limit of your system sooner than you will want.

Another good explaination:

>Resource is scarce in the universe. Think about how far away star systems are from each other, the universe is like a huge ocean with tiny islands sprinkled in it. Eventually every civilizations will enter the tech boom, hit the resource limit of its star system, and needs to expand as far as it can to collect as much resource it needs. It's inevitable that civilizations will need to colonize more. Think about how many years it took human to spread beyond Africa , and then conquering Eurasia, and then Australia and the Americas. The speed is exponential, just like the speed bacteria taking over a petridish.

And the assumption of Technological Explosion is also important:

>Any civilization can exist for a long time developing very slowly, and then all of a sudden enter into technological explosion. Think about what Humans achieved in the last 5000 years, the most advanced stuff happened in the last 100 years, and it's still accelerating.

This means that a non FTL but space-faring civilization cant be cool with having detected an either peer-level or even technologically inferior civilization on another system, even 50 light years away. Technology can and will be accelerated and does not grow linear, but rather exponential as well. So, that sub-FTL civilization cant be sure that the other civilization wont develop FTL soon, which will directly threaten his own civilization for the scarce resources of the surrounding star-cluster. And Tech-Explosion will kick in even faster, if the other civlization got a clue on you as well, and acclerate R&D because they fear you as well.

And due to the long distances, communication is very hard, which is why both sides will begin to fear each other.

And it is quite funny that this theory is also kinda subscribed to by Steven Hawkings and others, warning us about carelessly sending signals to space:

space.com/29999-stephen-hawking-intelligent-alien-life-danger.html
independent.co.uk/news/world/australasia/scientist-warns-world-to-think-twice-before-replying-to-alien-signals-from-outer-space-10408201.html

>Good fraction of it

In the history of the universe, humanity isn't even a blink of an eye

>I'd say the probability of the second given the first is not that slim

if it's easy, go ahead and reproduce in a laboratory the primordial soup with the lightnings, the eruptions and all the other totally accidental events that might have occurred that day in which life was born out of rocks and gasses:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenesis
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primordial_soup

I think this is the thread.

Never said it was easy. But sure, give me a few billion years to run it and for all those chance events to occur and I'm sure something would happen. Shame we'd have to both die in ignorance of the results though.

From the wikipedia page of Abiogenesis itself: " According to one of the researchers, "If life arose relatively quickly on Earth … then it could be common in the universe." "

"We" being terrestrial life.

>Antimatter
>Black holes
>Schrodinger's Cat
>Time dilation
>String theory
>Quantum teleportation
>Relativity
>FTL travel

These are all definitely science topics. Consider suicide.

>Odds of the 2008 financial crisis happening was 1.309e+135 years (or 1309000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 years)

arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1103/1103.5672.pdf

>Finance economists being idiots

>G-guys we really don't know how this happened! It's definitely not our fault though lol

Hey asshat, why the FUCK did you start a whole new thread just based on this retarded post?

>economics
>science
pick one

I recommend the following book: "If the Universe Is Teeming with Aliens... Where Is Everybody?", by Stephen Webb. The second edition addresses 75 different "solutions" to the Fermi Paradox, and attempts to assess those solutions to see whether or not they could logically work.

This book made me go from believing aliens were real and hiding themselves to believing that we're more than likely to be alone. Good read. Full of footnotes and references to scientific publications, with a few scattered sci-fi references to explain origins of ideas.

I didn't ask the question, OP did.

Retard.

Regardless of how long a civilization exists, they will fight, regardless over things like Territory, freedoms, ideology, possibly resources

>88 replies
>nobody has still answered OP's question

>theoretical physics is real

/x/ please. kek

>What does Veeky Forums think of the Zoo hypothesis?

Opinions given.

>That the reason why aliens haven't contacted us yet is because they're observing our development until we're "mature" enough to join the intergalactic community?

Topic debated. Are you looking for an answer that is tailored to your specific mental disability or something?

>get a load of this guy jpg

Holy fuck and I thought narcissism only happened with dumb fucks

Its the internet

>narcissism

That word doesn't mean what you think it means.

This raised the question