We are not alone?

Viruses are non-living? ... they have no cell membranes nor do they metabolize food stuffs ... and remember, biological viruses evolved after their bacterial hosts ... much like computer viruses evolved after computers were invented ...

I think we need to be more open minded about what life is when we're searching not just "out there", but what was here 2.2 billion years ago ... none of the life forms that exist before survived the Great Oxygen Crisis ... except the blue-green algae that poisoned everything else ...

I will stand by carbon though ... he's the only element known to readily bond with himself ... forming the long chains required for life processes ... I'm no geologist, but I don't think either the aluminosilicates or the silicoaluminates do ... nevermind iron and magnesium contamination ...
Computer viruses are.
 
Last edited:
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.
the Universe is so vast its nearly beyond comprehension ! there are trillions of galaxies in the observable Universe .. anyone who says there is no life or intelligent life out there is arrogant ..
 
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.
more like billions of planets ..
 
Detail the differences between them.
Why? I don't care if you believe computer viruses meet the requirements of living things anymore than I cared that you believe the sun triggers glacial or interglacial periods.
 
the Universe is so vast its nearly beyond comprehension ! there are trillions of galaxies in the observable Universe .. anyone who says there is no life or intelligent life out there is arrogant ..
Good thing I didn't say that. I said the universe is pretty damn inhospitable for life.
 
more like billions of planets ..
Way more than that. There are between 200 billion and 2 trillion galaxies in the observable universe.

There are an estimated 200 sextillion stars (200,000,000,000,000,000,000,000) in the observable universe.

There is no exact number for all the planets in the universe, but the observable universe alone is estimated to contain hundreds of sextillions or even septillions of planets, with estimates often reaching the number 300-sexillion to 700-septillion or more. This number is an extrapolation based on the estimated number of galaxies (around 2 trillion), the average number of stars per galaxy (around 100 billion), and the average number of planets per star (roughly one or two). While we have confirmed over 6,000 exoplanets, the total number is far beyond our current ability to count directly.
 
Way more than that. There are between 200 billion and 2 trillion galaxies in the observable universe.

There are an estimated 200 sextillion stars (200,000,000,000,000,000,000,000) in the observable universe.

There is no exact number for all the planets in the universe, but the observable universe alone is estimated to contain hundreds of sextillions or even septillions of planets, with estimates often reaching the number 300-sexillion to 700-septillion or more. This number is an extrapolation based on the estimated number of galaxies (around 2 trillion), the average number of stars per galaxy (around 100 billion), and the average number of planets per star (roughly one or two). While we have confirmed over 6,000 exoplanets, the total number is far beyond our current ability to count directly.
I was talking about how many planets may contain life .. if 1 in a trillion planets contain life that would mean trillions of planets with life .. its not only possible but extremely likely there is life out there ..
 
I was talking about how many planets may contain life ..
You have to start with how many there are and then multiple that with the probability for each requirement. It gets small real fast.
 
You have to start with how many there are and then multiple that with the probability for each requirement. It gets small real fast.
in comparison with the rest of the Universe its small . but if only one planet in a trillion contains life then there may be trillions of planets with life ..
 
Last edited:
vast regions of galaxies, and indeed most of the universe, are uninhabitable due to factors like excessive radiation from the galactic center, a lack of heavy elements needed for planet formation in the outer regions, and potential disruptions from passing through spiral arms. While the specific "galactic habitable zone" is complex, a large portion of any given galaxy is unsuitable for life, leading to the idea that potentially habitable planets are limited to specific, relatively rare locations within galaxies.

Factors making large portions of galaxies uninhabitable:
  • Galactic Center:
    The extreme density of stars and the frequent, powerful supernovae in the galactic bulge and center create an environment too hazardous for life.

  • Spiral Arms:
    While rich in star-forming regions, spiral arms pose risks due to high levels of radiation and a higher density of stars and gas clouds, which can disrupt planetary systems and expose them to increased supernova explosions.

  • Galactic Outskirts:
    Regions far from the galactic center lack the necessary "metals" (heavier elements) to form rocky planets and the conditions required for complex life.

  • Interstellar Objects:
    The centers of elliptical galaxies, in particular, may be rendered uninhabitable by fast-moving stars that frequently disturb comet clouds, sending destructive debris into planetary systems.
Galactic habitable zones:
  • A galactic habitable zone is not a static, ideal region but a dynamic concept that considers the interplay of these factors.

  • It suggests that only specific regions of galaxies are conducive to the development and sustenance of life, similar to the concept of a stellar habitable zone around a star.
In summary: While there are many galaxies and potentially many planets in the universe, the conditions necessary for life are not universal, leading to the conclusion that a significant portion of even the most promising galaxies is largely uninhabitable.
 
15th post
in comparison with their rest of the Universe its small . but if only one planet in a trillion contains life then there may be trillions of planets with life ..
Yes.
 
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.
Your guesses are still biased toward the bibles, regardless of you having thrown out over 90% of its myths, in favour of your conclusions on it being allegorical hogwash.

Why the efforts now to distance yourself from what we have accepted together?
 

New Topics

Latest Discussions

Back
Top Bottom