Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I can safely say (safely since I'll be long gone before I'm proved either right or wrong) that life will be found to be common in the universe and almost every solar system will be found to have life. The vast majority will be VERY primitive, not even to the cellular level but that will leave plenty of planets with complex life and a very tiny fraction of those will have intelligent life.NASA Discovers ‘Clearest Sign’ Yet of Ancient Life on Mars in a Rock Studied by the Perseverance Rover
Minerals in the rock might have been produced by microbes in chemical reactions, but researchers say they’ll need to examine the sample more closely to know for sure
Can you define almost? Is that 99%? 95%? 90% 85%? 80%almost every solar system
Arthur Eddington, the great British physicist, gave us a formula: one hundred billion stars make a galaxy, and one hundred billion galaxies make a universe. The lowest estimate I have ever seen of the fraction of them that might possess a planet that could support life is one percent. That means one billion such places in our home galaxy, the Milky Way; and with about one billion such galaxies within reach of our telescopes, the already observed universe should contain at least one billion billion -- 10<span>18</span> -- places that can support life
Based the only solar system we know about, every single one might contain life. Can I define almost? No. Do we have any idea what the conditions are for life to exist? Not really. Could it exist in the clouds of Venus or the oceans of Europa? Maybe.Can you define almost? Is that 99%? 95%? 90% 85%? 80%
Because no. That's not likely. Do the math. But yes, where the conditions exist for life to arise, given enough time, life will likely arise. The laws of nature and the structure of matter are finely tuned to produce life.
And you believe one data point is a statistically valid representation?Based the only solar system we know about, every single one might contain life. Can I define almost? No. Do we have any idea what the conditions are for life to exist? Not really. Could it exist in the clouds of Venus or the oceans of Europa? Maybe.
There are billions if not trillions of galaxies in the known universe. Galaxy's, like the Milky Way. There is life out there. Even a small fraction means that there may be millions of planets inhabited by life in one form or another. But, we'll never know for sure.I can safely say (safely since I'll be long gone before I'm proved either right or wrong) that life will be found to be common in the universe and almost every solar system will be found to have life. The vast majority will be VERY primitive, not even to the cellular level but that will leave plenty of planets with complex life and a very tiny fraction of those will have intelligent life.
On the other hand, I believe the answer to the Fermi paradox is that the aliens are already here, we just can't see them. I have theories but zero evidence.There are billions if not trillions of galaxies in the known universe. Galaxy's, like the Milky Way. There is life out there. Even a small fraction means that there may be millions of planets inhabited by life in one form or another. But, we'll never know for sure.
We have no idea how many life forms are possible, or what parameters they need.And you believe one data point is a statistically valid representation?
I'm guessing you have never looked at the conditions for life to exist based upon your statement.
Would you say the universe is mostly hospitable for life or mostly inhospitable for life?We have no idea how many life forms are possible, or what parameters they need.
We used to believe that all life on earth derived from the Sun via photosynthesis.
Now we know that chemosynthesis is also a source for life based on the life clustering around black smokers at the bottom of the oceans.
The mathematics of life say that yes, life is most likely everywhere in the universe. We are just too far away to interact with it.
Robert L. Forward wrote an excellent book back in the 1970's IIRC called "Habitable Planets for Man".
It's quite good.
The space between the planets is certainly devoid of life, so because that is the primary nature of the universe, so obviously inhospitable based on that.Would you say the universe is mostly hospitable for life or mostly inhospitable for life?
We have no idea how many life forms are possible, or what parameters they need.
We used to believe that all life on earth derived from the Sun via photosynthesis.
Now we know that chemosynthesis is also a source for life based on the life clustering around black smokers at the bottom of the oceans.
The mathematics of life say that yes, life is most likely everywhere in the universe. We are just too far away to interact with it.
Robert L. Forward wrote an excellent book back in the 1970's IIRC called "Habitable Planets for Man".
It's quite good.
Would you say the universe is mostly hospitable for life or mostly inhospitable for life?
Because life in the universe is extremely rare and limited. Which would be especially true for higher life forms. With that said, the universe is massive and it would be unlikely if we were the only beings that know and create. Why? Because the laws of nature are finely tuned for life to arise when the conditions for it exist and enough time has passed.Empty space is inhospitable to life ... and the universe is mostly empty space ...
Your AI answer is just the standard CW ... and we have all these things on Mars ... but no life ... why is that? ...