If we were at our closest star, Proxima Centauri at 4 ly away from Earth, would we have any chance to find out that there's life on Earth, given the technology we have today? Would it even be possible to detect Earth?
What if we are at a star 100 ly away, what if 1000 ly? Still relatively short distances compared to the 100,000 ly diameter of our milky way.
I suppose that the whole Fermi Paradox is stupid because it assumes that we should clearly see it when there's other intelligent life around us, but that assumption seems to be totally unrealistic.
I think we can only detect planets whenever they are in line with their star (by detecting the decrease in light when it passes the star)
Luis Roberts
>I suppose that the whole Fermi Paradox is stupid because it assumes that we should clearly see it when there's other intelligent life around us, but that assumption seems to be totally unrealistic. This. Space is intangibly massive and I don't think people give it the due credit of being so massive. We're barely able to detect anything outside of our own solar system and still struggle in some regards to extremely distant objects. Not only that, we have observed only a fraction of the observable universe, not even 1%. I'd say extraterrestrial life existing is highly likely. But nearby? Who knows. And let alone if they are technically on par with us, or even greater. I just wonder how many civilizations make it past their various Great Filters. In short, taking the Fermi Paradox as evidence is silly and naive, but whether we will ever meet a species from another planet? I'd say that is unlikely.
Christopher Miller
exoplanets are also detected by the way their stars wobble due to the planets gravity. there are also systems that will be implemented in the next few years that are capable of occluding the star and detecting light reflected off the exoplanets themselves.
Ethan Davis
There are probably 3 types of civilizations:
1. civilization A.: like humans from origin to about year 1,000 AD. No comprehension of where they are, the universe, or basic sciences.
2. civilization B.: like our present civilization. Have some idea of the universe, science, but no way to fast travel through space. No idea where alien species may or may not be living.
3. civilization C.: Has the technology we'd be projected to have by year 3,000 AD. Knows exactly where all alien species worlds are. Probably watches all or most of them with some kind of remote probes that are cloaked in ways we couldn't comprehend. Will never contact us. Is content to watch us like ants in an ant farm.
Andrew Lee
>Will never contact us. Is content to watch us like ants in an ant farm.
Why won’t they? They have a lot of scientific knowledge to gain, and for sure even more entertainment if they contacted us. They would have nothing to fear from us if they are so technologically advanced. I believe that life that has civilization C as you describe it is relatively scarce, let’s say there are 4 of them in out milkyway, all of them at least 10,000 ly away. I think even for them to see indications of intelligent life from that far away. Like seeing that there are some 5 m tall sattelites flying around this tiny rocky planet we call Earth. Btw, even if say saw us today, travelling 10,000 ly+ might be a skill that we need a civilization type D for, which is probably even more scarce
Brody Collins
I think it's possible that intelligence and advanced technology are inherently self-limiting, i.e. they reach an evolutionary dead end because of inevitable self-destruction.
Joseph Cooper
This planet is highly conducive to life, and out of the 8.5 million species, we can count the number of species that formed a civilization with literally one finger. We in all likelihood are unique. It would be highly improbable for life elsewhere to evolve almost the exact same way as humanity. Random mutations and all that.
Dominic Lee
Since we've been sending signals for over 80 years, proxima centri could detect em from us since 2013. We're looking for signals the same way. If there was comparable technology existing there, we'd know.
Robert Parker
>This planet is highly conducive to life Didn't life only emerge once on Earth? I'd only call something conducive to life if it generated life on an ongoing basis. >we can count the number of species that formed a civilization with literally one finger That might just be a consequence of civilization having species locking down the niche from every other species after it emerges, in which case it wouldn't really say anything about rarity in terms of life in the universe.
Jordan Evans
It's still not a bad question. Given the age of the universe, we would expect some civilizations to be at least a million years older than us. If they have tendencies towards conquest/colonization/exploration, as humans do, then we would expect to detect their presence in the galaxy.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-replicating_spacecraft >It has been theorized[2] that a self-replicating starship utilizing relatively conventional theoretical methods of interstellar travel (i.e., no exotic faster-than-light propulsion, and speeds limited to an "average cruising speed" of 0.1c.) could spread throughout a galaxy the size of the Milky Way in as little as half a million years.
So yeah, I think asking why there isn't a Von Neumann probe (or many of them) in our solar system is a relevant question.
Ryan Brown
they are outside nerd
Ryan Williams
yes, we are already designing telescopes allowing us to see images of other planets, hence the idea of universe being Dark Forest is flawed. You can detect and see biospheres easily, same goes for signs of civilisation
>They have a lot of scientific knowledge to gain, and for sure even more entertainment if they contacted us.
If technological civilizations are rare, our development is unique, if their civilization is millions of years ahead it would dominate our culture and technology, and we wouldn't create anything new that would interest them.
Aaron Evans
>Didn't life only emerge once on Earth? I'd only call something conducive to life if it generated life on an ongoing basis. We don’t know the mechanism for abiogenesis >That might just be a consequence of civilization having species locking down the niche from every other species after it emerges, in which case it wouldn't really say anything about rarity in terms of life in the universe. How likely is that? And it assumes in th first place that civilization species are inevitable instead of a result of a specific series of evolutionary pressures.
Easton Rogers
It took us 4 billion years to become advanced enough to ponder these questions. That's about 1/3 the age of the universe. And we are a long way still from building Von Neumann probes.
Joseph Watson
>it assumes in the first place that civilization species are inevitable No it doesn't. All I wrote is that the first civilization having species on a given planet might prevent other species from having civilization by already occupying that niche. Nothing about that suggestion involves assuming civilization is inevitable. Inevitable and impossible aren't your only two options here. That said Copernican principle would be an argument against assuming we're rare or special relative to the rest of he observable universe, and the standard cosmology model is premised on the Copernican principle. Without strong evidence either way there is more reason to believe we're the average case than there is reason to believe we're an exceptional case.
Kevin Brown
our Solar System and Sun is rare, there are others but not many. I think we will learn planets like Earth are rare too.Probably plenty of primitive life though in tidally locked planets around red dwarfs and beneath ice worlds
Luis Flores
But again, in order to have a civilization in the first place you need a mexhanism that selects for intelligence and social behavior which is a much more giant hurdle than another civilization species existing given what we know about evolution. I’m not saying we’re special just that evolution doesn’t automatically lead to civilizations after billions of years.
Thats one of the methods yes. The other being detecting the level of light they block form their host star when passing in front of it. This requires the planets orbital plane to coincide with our line of sight but is much better for detecting smaller Earth like planets that may not impart an observable wobble.
Xavier Russell
Yes it is, while G type stars are not rare our Suns subclass is. Also configuration of our solar system is very rare. Most systems are close to the star with Super-Earths and huge Gas Giants, we know solar systems like ours but they are few of them.
Jaxson Howard
The paradox takes into account all the questions you posed. It doesn't only doubt whether there is other life in the universe but whether we can ever make contact with it.
Jacob James
Yes, but there's nothing ruling out other planets from having a few billion year head start. I think we might be building von Neumann probes a few billion years from now if we survive that long.
Cameron Sanders
There are many reasons why we have no contact with ayys 1.We are too retarded for them to bother showing themselves, they observe us secretly in a way we cant detect 2.The Milky Way is full of retards like humans who are still in the modern era in terms of technology 3.Some ayys slaughtered most of the advanced civilizations a very long time ago leaving the Milky Way a retard galaxy 4.We are alone in the Milky Way galaxy
Juan Walker
I'm sure if there are aliens they are disgusted at what we are doing to each other and to the environment.
We have a long way to go before we're ready for contact, and the way things are going I don't think we'll ever get there.
I'm actually a bit sad about the potential life on planets like Mars whose habitat and chance for evolution will be destroyed by our presence. The Earth is lost, are we really that foul to ruin other worlds as well?
Aaron Phillips
Von Neumann probes make too much sense not to exist. My guess is such; if they are the virus, then there must be lymphocytes as well. Or, God made the universe for man.
Michael Ortiz
>They have a lot of scientific knowledge to gain, and for sure even more entertainment if they contacted us. Don't worry, they backed up our internets.
Blake Carter
Life may be common, but intelligence is not if they have intelligence, they might not be tool using, and thus unable to advance technologically if they do, they might not be technologically orientated, progressing very very slowly compared to humans
The idea that ALL alien life must be technologically orientated, as well as be MORE advanced than we are is stupid as shit It's entirely possible we're the most advanced species in the galaxy, and the rest are still bronze age space goat herders
Blake Powell
Trying to contact aliens is a bad idea. Hope we haven't already been detected.
Mason Sanders
>The idea that ALL alien life must be technologically orientated, as well as be MORE advanced than we are is stupid as shit
I don't think anyone really believes that. I would suggest, though, that alien life has a distribution of intelligence/tool use/etc. and, given our ignorance of this distribution, it is unlikely that we are at the most extreme end of it. Therefore, we must wonder why there are no signs of aliens who are further along that distribution than we are, either by virtue of a higher natural intelligence, or by getting a 1 or 2 billion year head start on us (or both).
Jonathan Collins
>It's entirely possible we're the most advanced species in the galaxy, and the rest are still bronze age space goat herders That's not a good guess to make. The generalized Copernican Principle says we're more likely to be average than not in any given respect, including intelligence. >given our ignorance of this distribution, it is unlikely that we are at the most extreme end of it ^This. It's always a bad idea to guess you're special in the absence of evidence for your relative status in a given topic.
Matthew Powell
>Yes, but there's nothing ruling out other planets from having a few billion year head start. Well, life needs 2nd and 3rd generation stars. Idk how much this cuts back on the available time.
Zachary Garcia
>1,000 AD. >No comprehension of where they are, the universe, or basic sciences.
