Why aliens haven’t visited Earth yet

[Checkerboard Strangler]

It sounds like, from this article, that the universe is predisposed towards evolving life, just not merging it on planetary scales.

There's a reason why aliens haven’t visited Earth yet, say scientists

The Fermi paradox questions why aliens have never visited Earth despite the Universe being so old and so vast that races should have evolved interstellar travel and come calling by now.

news.yahoo.com

According to a new hypothesis posed by Dr Wong and Dr Bartlett: “We propose a new resolution to the Fermi paradox: civilizations either collapse from burnout or redirect themselves to prioritizing homeostasis, a state where cosmic expansion is no longer a goal, making them difficult to detect remotely.

“Either outcome — homeostatic awakening or civilization collapse — would be consistent with the observed absence of (galactic-wide) civilizations.”

The pair argue that the general principles of life are universal and that although the emergence and evolution of life on other planets remains speculative, it may be inevitable.

A million years worth of rise and fall of intelligent species and their civilizations and their eventual extinction is but the blink of an eye when measured in galactic terms.
There's just never enough time and animal life forms are too fragile and short lived.

 

[Gordy327]

A million years worth of rise and fall of intelligent species and their civilizations and their eventual extinction is but the blink of an eye when measured in galactic terms.
There's just never enough time and animal life forms are too fragile and short lived.

Modern humans arose about 200,000 years ago. After all that time, we've only barely gotten to the point where we can explore outside our own solar system, never mind the entire galaxy or even other galaxies.

 

[CaughtInThe]

Uh....

Watch: Alex Jones declares independence from aliens

Infowars host, notorious right-wing provocateur, and conspiracy theorist Alex Jones has issued a proclamation urging Americans – or whoever is as concerned as he is – to join him in rejecting the tyrannical kakistocracy of humanity's sinister extraterrestrial overlords.“I declare this July 4th...

www.alternet.org

 

[Sabre]

Current best ‘guess’ is the universe is over 14.5 billion years old, we learn more all the time.

Diameter: 93 Billion Light Years

Estimated: 2 Trillion Galaxies (2 with 24 zeros)

Estimated: 100 billion trillion stars (suns) in the observable universe.

NASA estimates our galaxy (the Milky Way galaxy) at 100,000 light-years across.

Our galaxy is considered a middle sized galaxy.

It is estimated that there are 400 billion stars (suns) in our galaxy

So far we have found over 500 solar systems in our own galaxy

We are in the beginning stages of finding planets in other solar systems,

Over 5,000 exoplanets have been discovered and are considered "confirmed."

It is assumed that the majority of Suns contain solar systems i.e., planets.

All the above figures increase as we learn more about our galaxy and universe.

To think that out of all that, only this little planet is the only one to develop life, and intelligent life, to me is shear folly.
There is nothing that says life has to look like us or even be carbon based, possibilities are endless. Just remember, is was not
that long ago all the worlds scientists agreed that heavier than air flight was impossible.

 

[gboisjo]

A million years worth of rise and fall of intelligent species and their civilizations and their eventual extinction is but the blink of an eye when measured in galactic terms.
There's just never enough time and animal life forms are too fragile and short lived.

I completely disagree with the article in one sense, that civilizations all over the universe burnout before they can travel to distant solar systems.

Civilizations like our own are highly unlikely in the universe IMO.

I agree that we as a civilization will burnout if we don't learn how to curb, stabilize our growth. As it stands now we're well on our way to ruining our planet.

 

[gboisjo]

Current best ‘guess’ is the universe is over 14.5 billion years old, we learn more all the time.

Diameter: 93 Billion Light Years

Estimated: 2 Trillion Galaxies (2 with 24 zeros)

Estimated: 100 billion trillion stars (suns) in the observable universe.

NASA estimates our galaxy (the Milky Way galaxy) at 100,000 light-years across.

Our galaxy is considered a middle sized galaxy.

It is estimated that there are 400 billion stars (suns) in our galaxy

So far we have found over 500 solar systems in our own galaxy

We are in the beginning stages of finding planets in other solar systems,

Over 5,000 exoplanets have been discovered and are considered "confirmed."

It is assumed that the majority of Suns contain solar systems i.e., planets.

All the above figures increase as we learn more about our galaxy and universe.

To think that out of all that, only this little planet is the only one to develop life, and intelligent life, to me is shear folly.
There is nothing that says life has to look like us or even be carbon based, possibilities are endless. Just remember, is was not
that long ago all the worlds scientists agreed that heavier than air flight was impossible.

Stand back, way back and look at life objectively. Use evolution on earth as a guide ..from the beginning the trajectory of life wasn't towards intelligence.

It never was about brains, it was about biological weapons until a fluke asteroid changed things.

Its not to say other intelligent life like ourselves doesn't exist, it might but I think its rare.

 

[Sabre]

Stand back, way back and look at life objectively. Use evolution on earth as a guide ..from the beginning the trajectory of life wasn't towards intelligence.

It never was about brains, it was about biological weapons until a fluke asteroid changed things.

Its not to say other intelligent life like ourselves doesn't exist, it might but I think its rare.

If we try to fit what happens in the universe into what happened with our little orb, well, to me that is a very myopic view. Sorta like a blind man grabbing an elephant by the tail and saying it is nothing more than a hairy snake. JMO

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

Current best ‘guess’ is the universe is over 14.5 billion years old, we learn more all the time.

Diameter: 93 Billion Light Years

Estimated: 2 Trillion Galaxies (2 with 24 zeros)

Estimated: 100 billion trillion stars (suns) in the observable universe.

NASA estimates our galaxy (the Milky Way galaxy) at 100,000 light-years across.

Our galaxy is considered a middle sized galaxy.

It is estimated that there are 400 billion stars (suns) in our galaxy

So far we have found over 500 solar systems in our own galaxy

We are in the beginning stages of finding planets in other solar systems,

Over 5,000 exoplanets have been discovered and are considered "confirmed."

It is assumed that the majority of Suns contain solar systems i.e., planets.

All the above figures increase as we learn more about our galaxy and universe.

To think that out of all that, only this little planet is the only one to develop life, and intelligent life, to me is shear folly.
There is nothing that says life has to look like us or even be carbon based, possibilities are endless. Just remember, is was not
that long ago all the worlds scientists agreed that heavier than air flight was impossible.

Oh it is likely to be carbon based, rather than silicon based.
That's been hotly debated for decades and silicon does not seem well suited for intelligent species.
If you like I will re-dig up some of the more salient arguments I've seen that describe the differences and advantages of carbon based intelligent life forms.

And even with only carbon in the superior position, the possibilities are still endless.

 

[eohrnberger]

Stand back, way back and look at life objectively. Use evolution on earth as a guide ..from the beginning the trajectory of life wasn't towards intelligence.

It never was about brains, it was about biological weapons until a fluke asteroid changed things.

While true, that doesn't mean that evolution wouldn't have produced intelligent life without that 'fluke asteroid'.

Its not to say other intelligent life like ourselves doesn't exist, it might but I think its rare.

You might be right, but in the end, we simply don't know enough as of yet to say for sure.

If we try to fit what happens in the universe into what happened with our little orb, well, to me that is a very myopic view. Sorta like a blind man grabbing an elephant by the tail and saying it is nothing more than a hairy snake. JMO

Agreed. We simply don't know enough as of yet to say for sure.

 

[grip]

A million years worth of rise and fall of intelligent species and their civilizations and their eventual extinction is but the blink of an eye when measured in galactic terms.
There's just never enough time and animal life forms are too fragile and short lived.

I believe out of an estimated trillion planets in the Milkyway alone there are definitely some exoplanets out there with forms of intelligent life. But I agree they obviously face the same challenges as we do at interstellar travel and longevity or are so advanced that we're beneath their interest.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

I believe out of an estimated trillion planets in the Milkyway alone there are definitely some exoplanets out there with forms of intelligent life. But I agree they obviously face the same challenges as we do at interstellar travel and longevity or are so advanced that we're beneath their interest.

Imagine them viewing us the way we view scabies...or at best, as slightly amusing house pets.

 

[KevinKohler]

Travel between the stars would require much faster than light speed

Or a change in the thought process of conventional travel. Movement within a body of space is relative. I can fly an aircraft within Earth's atmosphere, and go kinda fast. But what if I had a way of detaching myself from the forces that pull me along with the planets spin?

Go a level out...how fast is the milkyway galaxy spinning? What if I could simply make myself a fixed, unmoving point within that? I'd "travel" out of this solar system in minutes. Then, I wonder...how fast through space are all of these galaxies travel? Is the universe itself in motion?

 

[Galactic Spin]

Take my word for it. We're pretty damn fortunate to even exist. It takes a tremendous amount of luck to have a planet at the right distance from it's sun, To have larger planets further out to absorb most of the killer asteroids and other planet-killing crap in the formation of a system, to have a large enough moon that stabilizes it's planet's seasons.
(imagine if the earth's seasons changed often....90 degrees at one place, 2000 years later..-45 degrees...life would never have a chance to form) plus, the solar system is fairly out in the boondocks...NOT toward the center of the galaxy, where neutron stars would kill everything on a regular basis...and a wonderful extremely stable Sun.. ..and much more. We lucked up bigtime. On Edit: Yeah, we had the asteroid that killed off a lot of species but imagine if that was happening every 20-50 thousand years or so.)

Unfortunately for your post -- which is just a long version of Hoyle's fallacy anyway -- nobody is talking about finding humans on other planets. So arguing against the likelihood of finging life elsewhere "exactly as it appears on earth" is folly.

 

[Galactic Spin]

Imagine them viewing us the way we view scabies...or at best, as slightly amusing house pets.

But we don't view other sentient creatures that way. It would be more like how we view great apes, or monkeys.

 

[Galactic Spin]

Again, for you. You don't get to decide for me the cause of physical phenomena.

Sorry.

You can believe any nonsense you like. But you would not do well in any forum that requires evidence, as evidence relies on determinism, physical laws, and no magic.

 

[HIP56948]

Unfortunately for your post -- which is just a long version of Hoyle's fallacy anyway -- nobody is talking about finding humans on other planets. So arguing against the likelihood of finging life elsewhere "exactly as it appears on earth" is folly.

Sometimes I like talking about folly and strange enough, one may actually enjoy reading about folly.
Sorry, but you don't get to standardize what other people think and/or enjoy.

 

[Galactic Spin]

Sometimes I like talking about folly and strange enough, one may actually enjoy reading about folly.
Sorry, but you don't get to standardize what other people think and/or enjoy.

Nor does commenting on a message board imply that I would get to do that. That's a bizarre response. In fact, you just told me what I can and can't do, when I never implied such a thing in my post to you.

And yes, anyone is free to commit fallacies until the cows come home.

 

[grip]

But we don't view other sentient creatures that way. It would be more like how we view great apes, or monkeys.

I agree that a hyperintelligent species would probably be less emotional and more analytical about humans. They would most likely have a prime directive to not interfere with the natural development of alien life until we're able to travel the stars and galaxies.

Our race has not emotionally matured as fast as we've grown technologically, which is becoming a serious impediment to our stability and future progress. We fight like little, egotistical babies about how to solve our problems, rather than find common ground and practical solutions. More advanced races would probably be turned off by our current state of affairs.

 

[Rich2018]

It sounds like, from this article, that the universe is predisposed towards evolving life, just not merging it on planetary scales.

There's a reason why aliens haven’t visited Earth yet, say scientists

The Fermi paradox questions why aliens have never visited Earth despite the Universe being so old and so vast that races should have evolved interstellar travel and come calling by now.

news.yahoo.com

According to a new hypothesis posed by Dr Wong and Dr Bartlett: “We propose a new resolution to the Fermi paradox: civilizations either collapse from burnout or redirect themselves to prioritizing homeostasis, a state where cosmic expansion is no longer a goal, making them difficult to detect remotely.

“Either outcome — homeostatic awakening or civilization collapse — would be consistent with the observed absence of (galactic-wide) civilizations.”

The pair argue that the general principles of life are universal and that although the emergence and evolution of life on other planets remains speculative, it may be inevitable.

Or basically manned inter-Stella travel is impossible.

 

[gboisjo]

I agree that a hyperintelligent species would probably be less emotional and more analytical about humans. They would most likely have a prime directive to not interfere with the natural development of alien life until we're able to travel the stars and galaxies.

Star Trekian stuff.

 

[Rich2018]

Star Trekian stuff.

...yeah, next they'll say they're green with some kind of prime directive.

 

[Mulefoot]

You can believe any nonsense you like. But you would not do well in any forum that requires evidence, as evidence relies on determinism, physical laws, and no magic.

What does that mean?

 

[Galactic Spin]

What does that mean?

The concept of evidence itself relies on determinism. It relies on causation. If determinism does not hold, then the concept of evidence simply has no meaning. There can never be evidence for or against anything at all. As such, anyone who introduces the concept of magic into a discussion has disqualified themselves from the use of or the discussion of the concept of evidence.

 

[Mulefoot]

The concept of evidence itself relies on determinism. It relies on causation. If determinism does not hold, then the concept of evidence simply has no meaning. There can never be evidence for or against anything at all. As such, anyone who introduces the concept of magic into a discussion has disqualified themselves from the use of or the discussion of the concept of evidence.

This explanation doesn't help. Evidence no more than a sign that something happened, something exists, or something is true. And of course, what is evidence that something happened, something exists, or something is true for me may not be evidence for you. And vice versa.

 

[Galactic Spin]

This explanation doesn't help. Evidence no more than a sign that something happened, something exists, or something is true. And of course, what is evidence that something happened, something exists, or something is true for me may not be evidence for you. And vice versa.

Evidence requires determinism. If this, then that.

If determinism can be violated at will, then the concept of evidence has no meaning. Else I could just say something magical occurred. A dependent in court could just claim a unicorn took a blood sample in his sleep and teleported it to the crime scene.