SPACE

>Were thought to be mathematically/scientifically impossible, right?

Perpetual motion is thought to be mathematically/scientifically impossible.
Do you even listen to yourself?

>its a meaningless expanse full of dead rocks and deadly dangers. Deadly radiation from stars, pulsars and other galactic crap. Gigantic gravity well of meaninglessness like gas giants and black holes. Dead rock and chemicals some so cold they kill everything others so hot they burn everything to death.

Lol all of that sounds cool as fuck to me. It's called opinion my dude; get over it.

>Lol all of that sounds cool as fuck to me.
Can you elaborate on this?
Explain why?
You will never touch Jupiters surface.
You will never walk on the hell planets.
All you will do is see pictures and or numbers from measurements.

There are more important things then this.

It's just unbearably fascinating. We've barely explored our own backyard which is itself a near incomprehensibly small fraction of the universe. There could be planets out there suitable for colonization. There could be life out there that are like gods to us. Even just a 1% chance of alien life existing means there could be many millions of alien civilizations out there.

There's just so much more to explore and learn. It's endless.

Why do we catalogue? For the purpose of archiving, to keep a record for the purpose of future interest or research.

>Your entire calculation becomes meaningless and is invalid.
Alright, I concede that point. Though, equally, your assertion that the only proof being contact is equally invalid as should they be space-faring (something I did not assert) and of freewill they have no obligation to display themselves to us, nor the desire (as we would be of less technological proficiency).

>Yet perpetual motion violates the laws of physics so does FTL.
The Einstein-Wiener bridge and Alcubierre drive do not violate the laws of physics, and the Einstein-Wiener bridge itself isn't strictly FTL.

Not to mention, you said that we're stuck in your solar system, with something like Project Valkyrie or spacecraft that use nuclear reactions as a propellant would allow us to leave our solar system.

There are also other methods that don't rely on speed, such as: seed ships, generational ships; cryostasis ships, et al.

>This is an urban myth.
Source?

>Perpetual motion is thought to be mathematically/scientifically impossible.
>Do you even listen to yourself?
That's true, but there are theoretical methods of 'like-FTL' travel that would be possible with possible future technology.

Even if there is a possibility, we shouldn't give up on it.

Idk man I just think it's cool. I also have a fondness for philosophy and theology, although I find astronomy - and really space in general - more appealing. It might be because of the relative peacefulness and lack of bias that the rest of my life is so full of. Also, I'm still at the beginning stages of my adult life so idk if I'll walk on extraterrestrial bodies or not. I know that it highly unlikely, but I'd like to become an astronaut and I have faith that I might. Space is just different. And I find that cool. Also the science behind it is pretty dope compared to terrestrial science.

>lack of bias
I meant lack of THE bias, as in my life is full of bias and lack of peace

Striving to discover new things and desiring to explore everything around us is the very essence of being human.

>Alcubierre drive

Requires tons of energy, more then if we used up the sun.

>seed ships, generational ships; cryostasis ships

So how fast do you think they can go?
Lets say 99% C and round this to 100%C so remember the light years part of the distance this is how long the journey will take if you are traveling 100%C.

We are starting to talk 100 years and above things start to get beyond comical.

The ships will brake down over time, and what will power them?
do they drag a sun with them? Since there will be no solar energy in the darkness between the stars.

>Requires tons of energy, more then if we used up the sun.
>Do they drag a sun with them?
What about the Dyson sphere as a source of energy?

Considering things like the Alcubierre drive (if possible) would be in the distant future, much like the Dyson sphere.

And until reaching the technologlical stage of a Dyson sphere or Alcubierre drive and such, we could colonise our solar system, or nearby solar systems to prevent overpopulation and to decrease the risk of extinction (by which point we may also have the ability to terraform in a meaningful way).

>The ships will brake down over time, and what will power them?
A couple of options: such as fusion energy, should the distance be great (which it probably will be) you could hop from solar system to solar system and could design the output in a way to minimise loss and promote efficiency.

As for breakdown, automated systems or nanobots could cannibalise unrequired sections or systems of the vessel(s).

>What about the Dyson sphere as a source of energy?
You need to push a star with you.
This is still a problem of insane proportions and the thing is like super super heavy bro.

And it demonstrates the problem if you need to take X KG of mas of fuel with you however do to the X KG mass it will not start you will not start your travel.

>fusion energy
I was thinking nuclear however if the time traveled is over 100 years you start to have problems. The fuel will deteriorate with time and you simply will be left with no power.

I'm talking about power for the crew and to get them food and stuff like it since if you bring your ship to speed T and stop accelerating you simply wait to get to your destination.

>hop from solar system to solar system

This is the problem take a look at a star map, and see that there are insane distances from earth to the rest of the galaxy.
In the under 10 LY we have like 3 or 4 systems and non of them give a good hop to anything else.
and you can say good night if you get a hop of 100 LY.

i just realize
there is no thing stop me from sail across the world in pirate boat
except maybe china and somalia professional cocaine pirate, and scurvy
but, maybe worth it?

where buy pirate boat?

>you could hop from solar system to solar system
>use up a star for energy
Daily reminder that if aliens hop into our solar system they eat our sun to get a good hop and we all freeze to death.

>Dyson sphere
I agree, it is insane and certainly not feasible under current technological constraints.

Though, possible if we don't hit one of those Kardashev scale technology filters.

>Energy source
Still though, it would allow us enough energy to reach places like Proxima Centauri, which as a habitable planet.

>System hopping
See 'Energy Source'.

That is still an accomplishment and would give us the resources, time and space to work toward technology marvels like the Dyson sphere or Alcubierre drive.

>Resources
With a generation ship, I could see food, oxygen and space becoming an issue. With cryostasis or seed ships, not so much.

Though, you could work around things like hydroponics and cloneable protein sources?

Oxygen, water and hydrogen (fuel) from hydrolysis?

I thought about doing this, but my thalassophobia would be an issue (another reason I fear Europa, certainly after watching the film with the giant xenocephalopod.)

Why is our Universe so scary and interesting at the same time?

>oxygen
Not a problem if you have power.
>food
Make one ship with a biosphere, put energy lamps on the plants get food + oxygen.
Not hard if you have power.

>cryostasis
1) Dose not work kills the human.
2)You still need someone to check the ship or the automated systems can break down or blue screen or something while no one is watching.

Worst idea.

>Proxima Centauri
And form Proxima Centauri you have nothing to jump to. you literally have like 4 systems and then a big black nothingness check the star maps if you don't believe me.

So there is Wolf and some other systems and us and this is it.

>Food & Oxygen
Agreed.

>Cryonics
1) Debatable, the field has made some progress.
2) With working cryonics you could have 'chore roster' so that everyone ages equally as each person at some point, would have to wake up to perform higher maintenance outside of the automated systems.

>Proxima Centauri, et al.
As said though, they still gives humanity plenty of breathing room and time to progress to the stage of a type II civilization allowing for longer distance travel via a Dyson sphere source.

>II civilization
This crap is 100% bullshit.
You don't level up if you burn your resources faster.

>Proxima Centauri
And how do you get out of your neighborhood you have 4 systems and then nothing no chain jump.

What is your speed on the generational ship?
50%C?
You are also not calculating that you might have a perpetual motion machine for the power however this will not help you the rest of the universe will burn out before you get out of your region do to time and you not having enough speed to get there in time.

>II civilization
I was using it as an example, whether it actually applies or not doesn't matter, it is a handy generalisation.

>Interstellar travel outside of our neighborhood
With an Alcubierre drive, you would be accomplishing apparent FTL speeds and with a Dyson sphere and a star with decent mass you wouldn't need to worry about energy, until you reached your objective.

As for limits of travel, we are officially limited to the Local Group, which includes several galaxies: the Andromeda Galaxy, the Milky Way and the Triangulum Galaxy.

>Dyson sphere and a star with decent mass you wouldn't need to worry about energy, until you reached your objective.

I don't think you get it.
Let me put this into numbers.
Lets say you have the capacity to drive a car on earth.
Lets say this car burns 1 liter per kilometer of travel with no load.
However it has a tank of 100 liters so it can only travel 100 kilometers.

We are on the same page right?
You say
>put more fuel on the car
However this increases the mass of the car and suddenly this overloaded with fuel car is crap now. It burns 2 Liters per kilometer however its ok you have 300 liters now so the max travel distance is 150 kilometers.
Its diminishing returns.

The problem is you need to drag more and more fuel with you and there is a point where it simply becomes silly.

My example is simplistic because while you travel you burn fuel the vehicle gets lighter and I ass puled the numbers to visualize something.

And you are thinking about dragging a star with your drive?

TL;DR the problem is not the amount of fuel its the energy to mass ratio.

Einstein-Rosen bridge, burn all your fuel generating the wormhole and travelling through it.

Having all the eggs in one basket isn't a good idea.

So, you spread throughout the system and nearby systems with fusion and seed ships, generational ships; cryostasis ships, et al.

Then you progress to fusion and Alcubierre drives for slightly further distances and speed between the already existing colonies.

Then one you've had time to progress further to Dyson spheres you start working on the Einstein-Rosen bridge.

Once you have your fusion, Alcubierre drives; Dyson spheres and Einstein-Rosen bridge, you burn up your star to Einstein-Rosen bridge to further objects and use the Alcubierre drives for lesser interstellar travel and ion thrusters (or something) for interplanetary travel.

So when you want to long distance jump again, you use your Alcubierre drive to locate a star without any habitable satellites and use that as your energy source.

On that note, you could extract the hydrogen you need for the fusion reactors from ocean and ice worlds (that don't harbour life).

>burn all fuel generating the wormhole and travelling through it.
>So when you want to long distance jump again, you use your Alcubierre drive to locate a star without any habitable satellites and use that as your energy source.

This is a solution however I hope you realize that doing this is literally equal to destroying the star system and it works only one time for one jump in the unknown for one ship.

This is literally the most destructive thing I have ever seen you will be destroying the universe while you spreed.
Captain planet villains have nothing on this.
You are literally destroying planets while doing this.
With no sun they will fly off into space.

I am aware, which is why I said not habitable and with the hydrogen, devoid of life.

As for the planets which would be ejected into space, you could strip them of materials to create another Dyson sphere (in case your original one is damaged or becomes too populous.

I'd say possible life and planets with life matter more than random hunks of elements, compounds and mixtures.

On a side note, I used to love watching Captain Planet as a child. I think I still have one of his VHS cassettes in the conservatory.

If you find one diamond ring in some chitlins, does that prove there must be more diamond rings in more buckets of chitlins? Would you immerse yourself in an olympic sized swimming pool filled with chitlins to weed through them to find more rings?

OK so lets imagine how your trip across the galaxy might look like.

You go of to Proxima Centauri build your stuff and use up the sun to make a jump for ONE ship.

You take some pictures or whatever.

Proxima Centauri ceases to exist and the remaining planets fly off into space.

No one can ever live in Proxima Centauri like ever.
So you do the some star tracking the galaxy and taking selfies on different planets and after you finish you use up the sun destroying the solar system or devastating it massively.

This ends the planets and no one will ever use them, you can not jump back to them since you used up the sun and would have no way of ever jumping out of this dark space with no sun.

So you jump from place to place it is all fun however every system you visit will be destroyed after you go for the next jump.

So what is the plan on this road trip?
Are you out there to take pictures or something else?
No one will ever colonize the star systems you jump out of.
So you return to earth after visiting 100 solar systems and show your photos and trophies.
So whats next?
You do another trip?
So you need to crawl to another available star system that is not Proxima Centauri do to getting used up in a jump.

How many available star systems do we have left after this? 3? whatever if you start jumping you annihilated more systems and for what? Pictures? Samples?

Fuck man this reminds me of the movie Superman Unbound where brainiac does this, a little sample collection and annihilate the planet/solar system.

However this time its not optional its required.

Finding other life is worth more than a diamond ring, so yes, yes I would.

>I'd say possible life and planets with life matter more than random hunks of elements, compounds and mixtures.

Not the point.
With every jump you make the universe more dark, there is less and less stars so there will be a point when this method of traveling will be impossible do to you using up all the stars in your area.

The more you travel like this the less someone else might travel in the universe.
You are making space travel impossible with every jump, star after star.

I remember a ST:TNG episode about warp damaging a tiny bit space and making travel impossible this is the same only on uber-GOD steroids.

No, no, I think you misunderstand, you were to use my system incorrectly you would do that.

The way I would operate it without obliterating everything of use:

You go to Proxima Centauri after having already colonised your native system.

From there you go to other systems near to you that don't require the Einstein-Rosen bridge, instead you use fusion and Alcubierre drives until you have colonised your neighbourhood of star systems.

You pick one of these stars (prior to colonising it) for a lack of resources, no habitable planet or something along the lines of that.

You build your Dyson sphere, Einstein-Rosen bridge; Alcubierre drive and ion thruster vessel around the star of this 'useless' system.

You could even strip the planets of this system of their materials to build the Dyson sphere (so that they have some use).

Once ready, you locate another distant neighbourhood of star systems, much like your native one and take a large population with you before jumping to this star system.

Once at this similar star system, you locate habitable and useful planets/stars, around those you colonise using the previous methods you used in your native neighbourhood.

Planets devoid of life that have a source of hydrogen, you cannibalise for use in fusion reactions.

Stars that have planets around them without overly rare materials, life or those that do not have a habitable zone planet you use to power your original Dyson sphere.

If damaged, you could use these 'useless' planets to repair, or build another Dyson sphere.

If you build another Dyson sphere because of population increase, rather than damage, it locates another star that fits the parameters of being 'useless' and cannibalise the planets around it (before jumping) for materials for your new neighbourhood colony.

So essentially you repeat this process of jumping to different neighbourhoods, colonising and repairing or building another Dyson sphere before moving onto another neighbourhood and colonising that.

You stop once you've colonised the galaxy, or met an intelligent species.

As you perform the colonising, you make sure to not damage habitable planets/systems and those with verified 'lesser' life.

>Captain Planet
Ahh good times good times.
Even as a child I quickly realized what level of propaganda this is and cheered for the villains.

Anyone else did the same?

That doesn't matter, as per my system, you have already colonised the galaxy and therefore would only need to use remaining 'useless' stars for emergency travel as it would already be very unlikely that the human species would go extinct.

And after you've colonised the galaxy, or met intelligent life, you then turn your attention (or collective attention, if you have an intelligent allies) to colonising Andromeda and Triangulum galaxies.

I think it had a good moral grounding; unironically says the guy who wants to steal suns to power his Dyson sphere fuelled colonisation of the galaxy.

>colonised the galaxy

How far apart are the colonies?
How many stars are in one of these clusters?

I hope you realize that after you blast of no one will ever return to this colony.

You spread across the universe however every colony will be forever alone and never have the ability to leave their region (whatever this is).
There will be no Star Trek traveling once you get out no one will have contact with them and they will not have the resources to get out of their colony.

And even if you meat a civilization practically no other colony will ever know about it. since you need to jump into their system and this requires stars.

This is a bitter sweet fate however it rapidly brings us to the OP.
So what will you say to the colonists?
They are humans and will never have the the capability to travel or see the universe, they will need to stay forever in their colony star system cluster and only watch old records of the past travels of their ancestors.

>Sorry kids you can not travel your ancestors blew up the last remaining free star to get another colony ship to a place you will never see or visit.

The OP was about peoples interest in space travel, looks like a horrific fate for people like you and shows why the OP was right.

We are full circle people.

>colonised the galaxy
Yes, we have ensured that humanity will not go extinct any time soon.

>How far apart are the colonies?
There would be several systems per every colony, they could travel fairly rapidly between stars/planets with the Alcubierre drives.

>I hope you realize that after you blast of no one will ever return to this colony.
I am fully aware, though, having several systems within which to live isn't too bad.

If a colonist wants to see the galaxy 'bad enough' they can board one of the Dyson spheres before it leaves to colonise another cluster.

>You spread across the universe however every colony will be forever alone and never have the ability to leave their region (whatever this is).
I don't see that as overly a problem? It means humanity is safe.

>There will be no Star Trek traveling once you get out no one will have contact with them and they will not have the resources to get out of their colony.
Not for the colonists, but for the Dyson sphere communities there would be a lot of travel until the galaxy, or nearby galaxies are colonised.
(Perhaps even the Universe, if wormhole travel can overcome redshift).

>And even if you meat a civilization practically no other colony will ever know about it. since you need to jump into their system and this requires stars.
True, but that Dyson sphere community, the resulting colony and perhaps other Dyson sphere communities will though.

>So what will you say to the colonists?
>They are humans and will never have the the capability to travel or see the universe, they will need to stay forever in their colony star system cluster and only watch old records of the past travels of their ancestors.
I would offer them passage upon a Dyson sphere before it leaves, so that those of them with a wanderlust could see the Milky Way, the Local Group or even the Universe.

>We are full circle people.
For some people it wouldn't be overly interesting, but those, as I've said, with a wanderlust could keep travelling (with cryonics) or their descendants (with generational ships).

>Dyson sphere community

Yes this is true, however I'm talking about the colonists.

And I'm thinking about a scenario when the last sphere did leave.

Look at the OP (Original Post).
The OP is about people bitching that they can not explore earth/galaxy.

Look at the picture.

So the OP is all like
>Who gives a crap about looking at other rocks we are far more interesting

And all the colonists will be in the same situation like we are today.
So going back to the OP what is your opinion about these people who feel bad because they don't get to see different planets?

After all even today you can visit different places on earth, same like with planets in one colony.

Why did humans expand all over the Earth?

The answer to that question is the same answer to your question.

I'm more in it for the longevity, first, the exploration, second.

Any who one who doesn't want to come with us can stay on Earth, or the native system/cluster.

And to be honest, if we don't bother, no one will be able to see the galaxy or Universe.

With my system? At least some people can see the galaxy, Local Group or Universe.

See
And the whole discussion.

So you expanded OK, good.
Now why you user who are born after the age exploration are bitching that you don't get to explore the earth?

Seeing unknown places is not something I define myself by.
Humans can and never where explorers after you explore everything there is nothing left.

The TNG crap about human = explorer is wrong and impossible today.

And explain what is so great about it(exploring)?

By the way, Next Gen is my favourite iteration.

By the way, I'd like to keep in contact with you user, you seem interesting: [email protected]
>Provide proof that it is you, with a (you) or something.

>Any who one who doesn't want to come with us can stay on Earth, or the native system/cluster.
Not possible for the ones who are born after some point in time.

See OP for a modern example.

>I'm more in it for the longevity
More the same here.

However the whole point is about the mindset of wanting to see everything there is in the universe.

And the OP is
>its all pointless!

I was expecting to see people defend the position that was in the OP picture.

So what do you think about these people?

>Not possible for the ones who are born after some point in time.
Still better than no one being able to see it.

>However the whole point is about the mindset of wanting to see everything there is in the universe.
If you can create species longevity, whilst allowing some to explore, I'd consider that, at least, a partial win.

>its all pointless!
It isn't though if you can, see above ^.

Also see this: , in-case you missed you.

user you are a great conversation partner.
I love to give you my contacts however, how am I to prove its me?

What are you talking about a (you)?

Notice how when you link a post it becomes underlined, take a screen-shot of aforementioned link that links to your post as proof that you are the user I've been talking with.

OH OK no problem
I think its most of them I'm [email protected]

Here is the proof.

nice photoshop

Ye, how do u fucking know that? What if I become astronaut Bop Zomger and touch Jupiter with everything in place to not die

Good, good, just trying to figure out how to make this Fedora piece of shit actually detect my prntsc key.

I have to say this is the most legendary conversation I was in.

Great quality of posts and intelligent conversation.

Thank you, user.

You where also great.

Now to take the screen-shot.

Side note can you send me a e-mail response
thanks.

Sent.

>80% of the ocean is unventured
>only .1% of bacteria have been identified in the lab
>crying about muh space

If you find it to be a sterile, dangerous, uninteresting expanse, you simply don't understand it. Or you aren't capable of appreciating wonder and beauty.

While the earth is a miraculous and awe-inspiring place, it's made all more amazing when compared with the expanse of space. But that does not imply that the earth is the only interesting place in the universe.

That would sort of be like saying "look at this painting, i really like this one little part of it, but I'm not going to look at most of the rest of it because... wow this part is cool."

Granted , most of the space on the universe is empty (not technically) or filled with lifeless rocks, but the fact that something like the earth CAN exist, means there are so many more possibilities your little primate brain can't begin to imagine.

>PS: Don't start with alien civilizations we all know the chance of even bacteria forming are so astronomical that we can assume with 99% certainty that we are the only intelligent life in the universe.

Seriously? I think your problem is that you simply don't understand how big and old the universe really is. Do some astrophysics and return with that same opinion, and I will call you an idiot.

>tfw I'm under an NDA and can't tell you about the project i'm working on that's changing all this shit

Even if it works the Emdrive is already outdated tech. We're going ot have boots on alien planets in at most a decade. You of course shouldn't believe a word i'm saying, but keep your ears open over the next year, shit's about to get CRAZY.

(pic slightly related, but not the same project)

cbf replying to all these.

Dyson spheres are fucking stupid for this purpose. They are only useful for long-term, (relatively) lower-yield energy accumulation.

If you want enough mass-energy density to warp spacetime in a warp drive, you would have to store a considerable amount of a star's mass-energy. With a Dyson sphere, you would have to be prepared to wait billions of years for this, by which point thermodynamics would fuck any chance you have at storing enough energy.

If there was a way you could induce a premature supernova, and manage to subsequently survive one of the most violent events in the universe, and harvest enough energy from it, you might be able to power a wormhole or a warp drive. But then you've fucked the entire system to oblivion.

Look into antimatter for a power source. Then you could get away with converting a planet to almost pure energy and reap the rewards without destroying an entire star system.

So what would you suggest they do? What is the alternative for these "space freaks?"

Humanity is destined for the universe. Space is our future, Earth is and will always be our sacred homeworld but our future is in the stars

>The possibility of a non-dead rocks of bearable temperate and without deadly radiation.
But we're already on one of those.

So we wanna find more

>Seriously? I think your problem is that you simply don't understand how big and old the universe really is. Do some astrophysics and return with that same opinion, and I will call you an idiot.

I did the drake equation.
My numbers:
FP= 1/(10^6)
>you get gas giants and hell planets or nothing I don't consider them normal planetary systems
NE =4
>4 planets for one solar system
FL = 1/(10^100)
>life emerging is literally like winning the lottery every single day of your life while only playing with one ticket
Fi= 1/(10^45000)
>even if life emerges its so astronomically improbable that it chooses (evolution) the extremely unlikely rout of intelligence that its more laughable then finding bacteria or other self replicators

Other bull crap is ignored
Every civilization will develop communication and destroying themselves is silly nonsense of its time.

So how many stars are there in the cosmos?
Do the calculation.

Gestimations are fun.
Fact there is no proof of hydras therefor hydras are considered to not exist unless evidence is provided.

Fact there is no proof of alien life therefor alien life are considered to not exist unless evidence is provided.

that's spore

You were just born too early, Grandpa.

Nice fanfic m8

>the Drake equation

You genuinely have to be fucking joking. I study cosmology dude, the universe is bigger than you can comprehend. It is a statistical fact that other lie exists in the universe.

The Dickwad Equation doesn't factor in even close to enough things we already know about star populations, formations, elemental composition of planetary bodies, Goldilocks zones, planet formulation, supernovae and the fact that we don't have a number for how many planets there are in the universe.

Gas giants and "hell planets" could still harbour life we only have the experience of earth to go by. What fits standards of life here may not be the same elsewhere.

>4 planets for one solar system
Why?

>even if life emerges its so astronomically improbable that it chooses (evolution) the extremely unlikely rout of intelligence that its more laughable then finding bacteria or other self replicators
I don't think you understand evolution m8. At one point there were several other hominids across the planet that had at least equal intelligence to humans. Once one species mutates to have slightly greater intelligence than the species around it, it will begin fiercely competing with itself and other cousins around it and the overall intelligence of all species will explode by evolutionary timescales. It takes one fucking mutations to spawn dozens of intelligent species.

>Every civilization will develop communication and destroying themselves is silly nonsense of its time.
Imposing your (incorrect) view of humanity on the rest of the universe is the only silly nonsense going on here.
Please don't be a moron; look into it further.

>We're going ot have boots on alien planets in at most a decade.
>shit's about to get CRAZY

W-what did he mean by t-this? G-guys...?

Full pic. Fuck space.

...

Wishful thinking the post.

>I don't think you understand evolution m8
I recommend a lecture from Stephen Hawking or Richard Dawkins on how intelligence is not a inevitable result of evolution and it silly to think this.

However I bet they don't know anything compared to your masters degree from basement university.

>Stephen Hawking the evolution expert
>Richard Dawkins the non-moron

Who ever said intelligence was the inevitable result of evolution? With the correct mutations, however, it is very prolific in generating intelligent species. It is frankly unknown how likely these mutations are, because we haven't observed extraterrestrial ecosystems yet. Because we lack the technology to do so, not because in some mystical defiance of statistics they don't exist anywhere.

Look up galactic distance scales, look up star populations in the Milky Way, and look up the number of galaxies in the local group, Virgo supercluster, observable universe, and tell me there are no further permutations (except special snowflake earth) that harbour intelligent life.

How many stars are in the cosmos?
is it more then 10^45000 ?
I think not.

Fucking saved

The drake equation has no practical use at this point, since even if one of the factors is wrong, your whole result is wrong, and you have to pull like three of the factors right out of your ass. The galaxy could be booming with life for all we know, since SETI would be incapable of detecting radio leakage even from the closest star system (and there is no logical reason to assume that a more developed civilization would have that much more radio leakage), and it has only scanned star systems within 200 light years, at which distance it could only pick up a gigawatt fucking beacon pointed right at us, so even if there was a civilization in the nearest star system, we would not know it.
Also, only finding some shitty microbes or dumb animals would be really interesting too. But even if we ignore the possibility of finding life, there's plenty of interesting things out there. Currently we can't directly observe black holes or neutron stars, and there are some pretty interesting types of hypothesized neutron stars that may actually exist, it would be pretty interesting if we could actually observe one. Also, we could probably colonize some planets that are much more Earth-like than mars.

Who gives a fuck how many shithole planets are out there? You just visit the ones that are non-shit. It's like having 50 tons of dogshit and 5 kilograms of gold, sure most of it is shit, but that doesn't decrease the value of the gold.

>most of it is

those are just the things that are easier for us to detect.

>if i cant see it right now its not there
classic empiricist retardation desu, science needs to let proper skeptics take over

>Bop Zomger
can I use that for my scifi novel?

Iirc another solution of the alcubierre drive requires a lot less energy. Also, accelerating to relativistic velocities can be achieved realistically, and there's nothing to slow you down in space, so you don't have to constantly propel yourself to avoid slowing down once you've reached a certain velocity. If you meant powering the ship itself, then I guess they could use fusion of fission reactors, or just plain old radioisotope thermoelectric generator. They are a tried technology, you could feasibly build one that could put out tens of kilowatts for hundreds of years, and they don't have many moving parts or other things that can go wrong. Also I guess you have to keep some fuel for the deceleration, but if you can build a ship that can reach 0.1 c, you most likely also have the tech to build a ship that can reach 0.1 c, and then slow down back to zero. Also, many things in space can function on their own for decades, so a couple hundred years don't seem infeasible. That kind of reliability has a price, sure, but it's not impossible.

>Here, I pulled some nice numbers out of my ass that are conveniently very small and prove that life is improbable.
Not an argument, please tell me why is Fi=10^(-45000).
>Fact there is no proof of hydras therefor hydras are considered to not exist unless evidence is provided.
>Fact there is no proof of alien life therefor alien life are considered to not exist unless evidence is provided.
Alien life and life on Earth aren't qualitatively different in the sense that they are both life, so your comparison is flawed, since we already know that life is possible in the universe, while no-one has ever observed a hydra. The next step is to find out what are the chances of life arising on another planet, and the answer to that is we don't know, so we'd better keep looking.

...

This desu. Earth exploration is still far from finished, we've still got the depths of the oceans to explore

bumo