Outside of the most likely answer being that humans are the only intelligent species in the galactic cluster are there...

You're boring, and not interesting enough to talk to.

it would be like trying to discuss Opera with gorillas, or handing an AK47 to a monkey. It serves no purpose.

Maybe in a 100 years.

absence of evidence is not evidence of absence

>handing an ak-47 to a monkey

That's what we need, to become the toys of a bored virtually omnipotent alien who gives us advanced technology to see what will happen.

Maybe aliens prefer to Dysonize instead of colonizing.

this

>Because by now if other intelligent aliens did exist they should have colonized the entire galaxy by now.
Why is this necessarily true? This sounds like a bias towards aliens acting like humans

Humans are in the territory of an extremely advanced xenophobic species. No other species dares to try to contact us.

We are an intelligent ant colony in a huge military base. The species that controls this military base does not care about us at all, completely ignores us.

>most likely answer being that humans are the only intelligent species in the galactic cluster
Jesus you're an idiot.

>any other plausible Fermi Paradox solutions?
Dozens. Here's twenty:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermi_paradox#Hypothetical_explanations_for_the_paradox

The "paradox" itself is retarded.
"If people like us are possible, why haven't we met any others?"
Well, since we've never left home, the universe _could_ be chock full of civilizations just like us, and none of them would ever meet.

There is no Fermi "paradox". Humans are just shit at detecting anything. Just because extraterrestrials don't come down in people's backyards and say "Hi" doesn't mean they don't exist. Only humans could be so stupid to think their inferior abilities and understandings = solitude. This is like fucking baby object permanence bullshit.

>if other intelligent aliens did exist they should have colonized the entire galaxy by now
>implying they didn't
>implying all earthling DNA isn't alien nano technology programmed to replicate and upgrade itself over time
I'm not even memeing. Think of this: An advanced civilization wants to colonize space. It then builds thousands of nano bots, puts each one of them in thousands of laser powered space sails and shoot them into potentially colonizable targets. If the nano bot lands in a coloniziable target, it will be able to replicate itself and develop advanced AI bots, which will set up infrastructure for our civilization and send signals into space by the time it's done (radio or whatever). If that is possible (it is), and if most sentient beings are the civilization's AI, not the civilization itself, then we probably are their bots. Just think about it.

The real question should be: "why were you expecting to meet/find aliens?"
We occupy a tiny spec of dust in a vast cosmos, and it's only been the last century or two that we would recognize aliens as such.

Let's say there's been a million visits to Earth by aliens with the intent of contacting any intelligent life here.
I'm not talking about the occasional fly-by that we might still not detect or recognize.
I'm not talking about stealthy visits to mutilate cattle or probe a few hillbillies.
No, a MILLION "take me to your leader" style visits.
The Earth has been here for 4.6 billion years.
Let's say we only count the post-Hadean era, that's still 4 billion years.
So a million visits would mean one every 4,000 years on average.
All of recorded history is only 6,000 years, so we can expect one, maybe two visits in all of recorded history.
So maybe one or two stories of a god descending from the skies is an actual alien visit, and that's the level of contact I'd expect from a million attempts to contact us in person.

The "great silence" is the result of the inverse square law.
We couldn't pick up broadcasts as powerful as our own at interstellar distances (see en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermi_paradox#We_are_not_listening_properly).

Fermi asked why we can't see any of their "great works", when even today, we still don't have the instruments required to detect a Dyson sphere.

Aside from wondering why aliens haven't set up permanent residence here, there is NO mystery.
It's all just hubris.

>the most likely answer being that humans are the only intelligent species in the galactic cluster

There are at least 100 billion stars in the galaxy.
Never mind FTL limitations, just assume we invent warp drive tomorrow.
Let's say we build a thousand starships to explore the galaxy.
Assuming our thousand Captain Kirks each explore two star systems a week, that's a hundred per year per ship, a hundred thousand systems a year in total.
It would take a decade to explore a million stars, a century to explore ten million, and a million years to explore the galaxy.
Other estimates put the number of stars as high as 400 billion.

The vast number of stars makes starfairing neighbors likely, but also means we're unlikely to bump into them.

Not exactly what you're looking for, OP, but consider the following.
Eventually, humans will establish self-sustaining colonies on other planets. It may not be soon, it may be very far in the future, but given ENOUGH time it will happen.
Furthermore, at some point after the colony is established, civilization will collapse on one of the two and communications will break down. Once again, it may take a very long time to occur, but it's unlikely that the intergalactic colonial power in question will be stable enough and stay around for the billions of years required for earth and the sun to die.
Thus, it may take several "revolutions" or collapses, but eventually communications between the colony and Earth will break down, and records of the colony will eventually be lost.
With these prerequisites satisfied, we have now essentially created extraterrestrial life, as we have living beings on two different planets (that have likely evolved to be very different over such a long span of time), and in at least one instant, neither group is aware of the other.

Some retarded asshat probably threw a rock at one in the 1500's and now we are on the list of planets you shouldn't visit.

>they should have colonized the entire galaxy by now.
Don't project, nigger.

The answer is always the same. Space is fucking huge and attenuation is a fucking bitch. Unless you turn the sun itself into a lighthouse communication device, you'll never have enough power to overcome attenuation in order to communicate with anyone out there.

But even going at speeds known to be possible by current engineering it shouldn't take more than a few hundred thousand/million to reach both ends of the milky way.

There are cosmic entities that travel around destroy any right-angles they see. Most civilizations are destroyed before they reach interstellar space because right angles are an inherent part of any possible civilization.

If by our standards they are intelligent they probably can't go more than the distance mars is from earth away from there home planet

>right angles are an inherent part of any possible civilization
Not so fast.

>Humans
You mean all living things or anything that reproduces or uses energy.
If something doesn't want to reproduce then it dies user.

You don't get it. If aliens existed they should be detectable on every star in the sky. That is how exponential growth works.

>Project
>Hurr durr how does growth or natural selection work

Not necessarily. Assuming different starting conditions, you can get an immortal lifeform that's the singular member of its species.

No you can't. That doesn't make any sense. If a species consisted of only one individual who didn't reproduce then he couldn't have evolved in the first place.

You're assuming all life works the same way everywhere as it does on earth.
Assume some sort of creature that has a system of mutation that doesn't revolve around death and reproduction.
Hell, just assume a creature is from an extremely static environment where change is not required, so you have some immortal singular extremophile living in some cave.

Aliens definetely dont have to come to every single planet and say hi. They might actually explicitly avoid that, because of some ethic reason or something.

But of course we might still detect them in some way.

But here, the analogy of taking a glass of water out of the ocean and concluding whales dont exist is fitting.

We are either not able to detect them, or we are detecting them, but we don't know it's actually aliens that we are seeing, and not something natural.

baryonic life is actually pretty rare.
Most life is non-baryonic which is why we can't see them
This is the most reasonable answer

Aliens periodically reset life until intelligent one arises.

If you are FTL travel capable there's a very good chance someone else achieved that millions of years before you so it's not a good idea roaming around and alerting them since if they happen to be hostile you're fucked.

From a survivial standpoint It makes more sense to stay hidden than explore the universe.

Such civilizations are probably aware of you anyway and are just not giving a fuck. At the end of the day it's quite stupid to speculate what the typical millions or even billions old civilization behaves like. We know one civilization, and that is 5000 years old.

It depends how often such civilizations arise.
If there's many of them they are probably into some kind of no aggression alliance and make contact only with arising civilzations that just developed FTL.
Or there's too little of them and they are too spread out making it impossible to find each other even with FTL.

Or they just move into a higher dimension where there is cocaine and hookers en masse and dont give a fuck about this universe anymore. We have one data point about a civilization that is 5000 years old, and 0 about a civilization that is millions or Billions years old. So whats the point of speculating? We dont even know what is actually technologically possible and what not. Might be way more than we can fantasize about, or way less.

We know what's theoretically possible through physics which is universal.
And to the second point, because it's fun speculating, what else are you gonna do give up ?

Look it's very simple. You evolve from something that reproduces, then you happen to be basically immortal. Everyone else dies and you are alone for a long time.

Lol right our

>if other intelligent aliens did exist they should have colonized the entire galaxy by now.
Interstellar travel will never be practical because there is no way to move faster than light.

>. If aliens existed they should be detectable on every star in the sky.
Let's assume there ARE aliens orbiting every star in the galaxy.
Why do you think we'd be able to detect ANY of them????

>That is how exponential growth works.
Lol, no.
Let's start with us.
We're already past "peak child". There were more infants twenty years ago than there are today.
And the more advanced societies tend towards less growth.
Using ourselves as a model, we can't assume unlimited growth of an advanced society.

But never mind that, let's look at your misunderstanding of "exponential growth".
If your hypothetical aliens double their population every billion years, that's still exponential growth, but they aren't filling up the galaxy anytime soon.

And let's not forget that overpopulation doesn't necessarily lead to colonization, nor will expanding to the stars relieve population pressure on the homeworld.
Look at us again. Our population growth is slowing, but we're still gaining 70 million people a year. Unless we ship a million people a DAY offworld, our population will still rise.
cont...

>ITT niggers believe that interstellar civilizations are cannibals too.

...cont
But let's say we build our own star-empire, and that we double the size of the empire every hundred years. Easy enough, right? All we need is for the average human-occupied star system to build and launch a single colony ship once every century.
Now let's get the calculator out. 100 years: 2 worlds, 200 years: 4 worlds, etc.
Every thousand years we multiply the number of occupied star systems by 1000.
100 years: 1000 worlds, 2000 years one million worlds, etc.
We should be able to fill the galaxy in under 4000 years, right?

FUCK NO! It would take longer than that for a ship traveling at 99% of C to leave the local arm.
The far side of the galaxy is 70-80 thousand years away at nearly light speed.

If your aliens are traveling at 1% of c, it would take them millions of years to cros the entire galaxy,
And when they get here? If the gravity, temperature, background radiation, etc, etc, aren't just right, they won't colonize.

>he doesn't understand that aggressor species are more likely to be intelligent than passive species

The limits of technology aren't much beyond what we currently have, a rapidly changing environment due to technological advances leads to behavioral sinks that prevent any civilization from making use of the technology they can even muster.

Don't the ones that hunt in packs tend to be omnivorous?

Yeah, like Sweden.

>*1000 years: 1000 worlds,

why even attempt that instead of taking the comfy vicinity of plants

>you can't have communications that need thousands of years
How about smoke signs?

ITT

>But even going at speeds known to be possible by current engineering it shouldn't take more than a few hundred thousand/million to reach both ends of the milky way.

By "known to be possible", surely you mean "we've already gone that fast"?
So, we can't count the Helios probes, since we dropped them almost into the sun.
That means the fastest outbound speed "known to be possible" is Voyager 1's speed of 38,610 mph.
At that speed, the far side of the Milky way is well over a billion years away.
But Op was talking about the local group.
The local group is about 10 million LY across, so, more than 10 time the age of the universe at Voyager speeds.

Fuck the paradox, let's just uplift a bunch of species and the we'll have someone nonhuman to talk to.

>You are assuming all life works the same way
Natural selection works the same way.
>A system of mutation that doesn't revolve around death and reproduction
Doesn't exist.
That immortal thing would also reproduce though making infinite immortal being since it can't die.

>Alien avoids spreading to every planet
>Other alien doesn't avoid it
>The alien that doesn't outnumbers the alien that does trillions to one
That is why they are either everywhere or nowhere.

False. If the hostile alien has FTL you would have already been fucked because a hostile alien with FTL travel could literally nuke every single planet to death every few million years or so. That is also bad logic because an alien that outnumbers you would have been everywhere anyways so you couldn't hide from them.

>doesn't exist
On earth
Reproduction isn't the only possible survival strategy

You don't have to move faster than light to colonize another solar system.
>Why would they detect any of them
They would give off energy and they would be visiting us to colonize it as well.
>There are more infants tweny years ago than there are today
false

>That is why they are either everywhere or nowhere.
You're assuming an "advanced" civilization will relentlessly expand, consuming all in its path.
And let's not forget, every species will need a particular set of conditions for a planet to be habitable.
You might as well argue humans don't exist because there aren't any living on Mars (or Mercury for that matter).

>They would give off energy
Such as?
See:
>We couldn't pick up broadcasts as powerful as our own at interstellar distances (see en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermi_paradox#We_are_not_listening_properly).

>would be visiting us to colonize it as well.
Assuming they have nothing better to do than multiply like mindless insects, AND they could live comfortably here, AND they have no moral objection to displacing life here, AND life here doesn't pose a serious threat to them living here.

p.s.:
...AND no other species is trying to stop their simple-minded expansion.

>>There are more infants tweny years ago than there are today
>false
google.com/search?q=peak child

Not this. This whole point of the Fermi question is to query the lack of an alien presence in our Observable Universe. So you have to either explain why they're not there or why they go to the massive effort of concealing their observability to light waves that intersect with Earth.

The LSD communications thing is superfluous detail.

Your real proposed explanation is that they go to efforts that are currently considered scientifically impossible to conceal their presence from us because: "we couldn't handle it."

Sick theory bro

>brainlets feeling wise

Learn basic mathematical biology

Your simile really collapsed at the end there. Of all the objects you could combine with subjects too stupid to understand them, you chose a monkey and a gun? Monkeys can use guns, bro, look it up.

>Kardashev-cucks

Jesus not again

Yes it literally is. You can't have immortality. That is fucking impossible because even without aging something can still die. You also can't have natural selection without reproduction.

>Your assuming
I'm assuming laws of math still apply. Every single species biologically wants to reproduce. Even if they aren't biological the things that reproduce grow to outnumber the things that don't want to.
>habitable
That's star wars shit. It's far easier to create your own habitat than find planets.

>Such as
Heat for starters
If literally every other star is colonized it is fucking retarded to believe no one would visit the last non colonized star.

>None of the links prove you right
So you admit you were just bullshitting.

That is a sophistical phrasing of the Fermi question. I agree that it doesn't qualify as a paradox, that's just marketing.

The Fermi question in its most credible form says that the outputs for the Drake equation should result in some alien presence being evident in our Observable Universe.

Since it isn't, it follows that either the presence is being concealed from us or some unknown factor in the convergent path of civilisational progress is preventing the expansion of civilisations or their communications.

This limiting factor would have to lie further down the Kardashev scale than we are currently, because we made it this far with no impediment.

Every time we encounter a phenomenon which adjusts our Drake estimates up (like lakebeds on Mars and gravitational warming on Europa) then we also have to adjust up our prior on the likelihood of this civilisational limiting factor.

It could be grey goo or nuclear war or whatever. But it has to be something. That is why the Fermi question is important. Your post did it zero justice and mis-phrased it badly.

>Other species stop their expansion
That would mean that those species also have expanded across the galaxy. That isn't a solution to the paradox that just makes it even harder to explain away. How are there this many brainlets on Veeky Forums?

Where did you get your math from monkey? Going at Junos speed would take 777 million years and that is just with earth technology. Fusion power is expected to go nearly 100 times that speed and while humans don't have that tech yet it's very likely we will one day. Not only that but you don't have to go from one end of the galaxy to another have a massive presence. If they only covered 1% of the galaxy that would have been a massive detectable presence.

>why they go to the massive effort of concealing their observability
Nigger, there are dozens of objects, the size of Florida or bigger in our own solar system we're just finding out about in the last decade or so.
We've only direct imaged one or two exoplanets, the rest we infer by noting minor variations in the light from their stars.
We're looking for Dyson spheres, and the best we can do is about a dozen "maybes".
We have NO idea what's going on with Tabby's Star or the Fast Gama Bursts.
For all we know, pulsars were deliberately created by aliens who collapse whole stars into blackholes (somehow) just to get our attention.
There could be a civilization like our own orbiting every star in the universe, and we wouldn't have any way to notice them, unless they come here in a deliberate effort to announce themselves.

But if that were true it would be obvious. If there was a civilization on every start there would be so many signs. Even if for some reason NONE of the aliens used signals that could be read by seti we would be able to tell by how much energy they are taking from the sun or many other ways.

>>None of the links prove you right
>So you admit you were just bullshitting.

Here's the first few:
bbc.com/news/magazine-24835822
> fertility is still trending downwards
> In the last decade the global total number of children aged 0-14 has levelled off at around two billion,
(a decade is 10 years, ten is less than 14, you do the math)
>lexicon.ft.com/Term?term=peak child
>Because of falling birth rates there will never be more children in the world than there are today – we are at peak child.
girlrising.com/blog/dr-hans-rosling-the-world-has-reached-peak-child/
>the number of children in the world has stopped increasing; that we have reached “peak child”.
gapminder.org/news/world-peak-number-of-children-is-now/
> the number of children in the world has now reached its peak.

But let's say I was wrong.
Are you claiming that ANY potential alien species MUST breed like locusts?
That population growth is inevitable?

>handing an AK47 to a monkey.

That's extremely interesting dude

>Heat for starters
???
Help me out here.
We can't detect any exoplanets based on their heat emissions, and there must be plenty far hotter than an inhabited planet.

>If literally every other star is colonized
Nobody's making that claim.

>retarded to believe no one would visit the last non colonized star.
Even if the entire universe _were_ inhabited, we could easily be "off limits", either because they don't want to disturb us, or maybe just because the galactic overlords can't live comfortably here.
Maybe the interstellar locusts prefer lower gravity, or a stronger magnetic field.

None of those proven what you said. Fertility rate is decreasing but the human population is still increasing meaning that you have more babies today than before.
>Because of the falling birthrate there will never be more children
Based on a bloggers opinion.
To prove your point you would have to show a long term decrease in the amount of humans born.
>Population growth is inevitable
Either that or extinction. In any group the subgroup that reproduces successfully faster will always outnumbers the ones that don't. You don't have to reproduce every single day for that to accomplish, but it means that population growth will always be positive when possible. That is how all reproducing organisms work.

>Every single species biologically wants to reproduce.
...and yet most species don't invade non-native habitats.
Different places have different species.

>it's far easier to create your own habitat than find planets.
[citation needed]
It sounds like you speak from experience, but in reality, you're just pulling shit out of your ass.
Write back when anybody lives in an artificial biosphere.
But if you're right, why would the aliens ever travel to another star?

>exoplanets
If you had a dyson sphere around a sun you would fucking notice it easily. It would have a radius bigger than that of the star itself.
>Be off limits
So? When you have a population of literally trillions of trillions of aliens do you think every single one will listen?
>Nobody is making that claim
Yeah but it's the only logical conclusion if aliens exist that can travel to different solarsystems. All living things expand.

There are plenty of ways for a interstellar civilisation to get itself noticed without doing stupid shit like collapsing stars.

All you need to do is broadcast organised signals - ie information - of any kind.

So no, any objects in our solar system however low res our current imaging of them, are not likely to be interstellar beacons because if they are that then they're non-functional, and all nearby beacons being non-functional is still a big Fermi mystery, considering that the mass emission of broadcast beacons to neighbouring stars is literally the second most basic interstellar exploration tech after fucking radio waves.

Dyson spheres would only be civ's that don't want to talk to us, considering how close and advanced they would have to be, and the Fermi problem still applies, because even if no one wanted to talk to us, the fact that they all took the same stance despite capabilities for contact is another stupid-big fucking question mark.

>There could be a civilisation like our own around every star
Then the Fermi question would be in the form of "Why the fuck is everyone at 21st C. human tech at the same time instead of many being past it into at least the realms of what we already know to be theoretically possible?"

>Tabby's Star or the Fast Gamma Bursts
Stay with me, here, mate.

>What is strange?
An observable universe with no other life signs.

>What is only SLIGHTLY LESS strange?
An observable universe with no other life signs except maybe these few weird anomalies.

The Fermi question still fucking applies. It would apply even if an alien DID turn up, but in the modified form "What took you so long and where are all the other intelligent races?"

In your attempt to do deference to the scale of the galaxy you are failing to grasp the implications of even our most conservative plug ins to the Drake equation. Life should be more common, but its not. You haven't dissolved the question just by saying "Space is big."

>the outputs for the Drake equation should result in some alien presence being evident in our Observable Universe.
We don't have any real numbers to plug into the Drake equation, so there are no outputs.
The rest of your drivel belongs on /x/.

>That would mean that those species also have expanded across the galaxy.
No. There could be some species local to this part of the Galaxy that doesn't tolerate trespassers.
That's why the Fermi Paradox is just mental masturbation. It's 100% unfounded speculation.
We're locked in a windowless, nearly soundproof room, guessing at what _might_ be outside based on an almost complete lack of information.
The only thing we can be sure of is, nobody seems to be making much of an effort to contact us.
At least presently.
In a way we could detect.

>There could be some species local to this part of the Galaxy that doesn't tolerate trespassers.
That would mean that THEY would have colonized all of the local space of that part of the galaxy. Why is this so hard for you brainlets to understand? .

there are either no or barely any aliens or exo-solar travel isn't possible by any practical means besides robot probes visiting nearby
stars.

The galaxy itself is unfathomably big

Also
>A species is a single person
All it would take is one member of the species to fuck up or purposely want to contact people. This retarded ass zoo conspiracy theory falls flat for so many reasons and is extremely illogical.

>Going at Junos speed

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Juno_(spacecraft)#Earth_flyby
> It used Earth's gravity to help slingshot itself toward the Jovian system in a maneuver called a gravity assist.[28] The spacecraft received a boost in speed of more than 3.9 km/s (8,800 mph) and was set on a course to Jupiter.[28][29][30]

Voyager is moving at only about half the Earth's orbital speed, but it's still the fastest outbound object ever.

>Fusion power is expected
Fusion power has been "expected" for decades.

I'm pretty sure we can figure out how to build an extrasolar spacecraft faster than Voyager, but that's not the same thing as "speeds known to be possible by current engineering".

>If there was a civilization on every start there would be so many signs.
Like what?
SETI estimates that we could only detect radio broadcasts like our own at a distance of 0.3 LY.
There's nothing we do that we could detect from interstellar distances.

>we would be able to tell by how much energy they are taking from the sun
We can barely detect the existence of planets based on how much sunlight they block.
See also:
google.com/search?q=tabby's star

I don't see where in your post you disproven my math user.

>Fertility rate is decreasing but the human population is still increasing meaning that you have more babies today than before.
The fertility rate has been declining since the early 1960's.
The number of new children born each year has been falling since the 1990's.
None of articles mention a specific date for "peak child", but every one says the number of children isn't growing.

>If you had a dyson sphere around a sun you would fucking notice it easily.

No, you wouldn't.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dyson_sphere#Search_for_megastructures
>Identifying one of the many infrared sources as a Dyson sphere would require improved techniques for discriminating between a Dyson sphere and natural sources.[33]
>Fermilab discovered 17 potential "ambiguous" candidates, of which four have been named "amusing but still questionable".[34][full citation needed]
>Other searches also resulted in several candidates, which are, however, unconfirmed.[35][36][37]

>There are plenty of ways for a interstellar civilisation to get itself noticed without doing stupid shit like collapsing stars.
>All you need to do is broadcast organised signals - ie information - of any kind.

They _would_ need to do something astronomically big to get our attention, we're not very good at listening for interstellar signals.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fermi_paradox#We_are_not_listening_properly
>Extraterrestrials might, for example, transmit signals that have a very high or low data rate, or employ unconventional (in our terms) frequencies, which would make them hard to distinguish from background noise.
>Signals might be sent from non-main sequence star systems that we search with lower priority;
>current programs assume that most alien life will be orbiting Sun-like stars.[89]
>The greatest challenge is the sheer size of the radio search needed to look for signals (effectively spanning the entire visible universe),
>the limited amount of resources committed to SETI, and the sensitivity of modern instruments.
>SETI estimates, for instance, that with a radio telescope as sensitive as the Arecibo Observatory, Earth's television and radio
>broadcasts would only be detectable at distances up to 0.3 light-years, less than 1/10 the distance to the nearest star.