What If We ARE Alone?

[Fort Fun Indiana]

But how long will the biosphere of 99.999999999999% of planets survive long enough for any life to evolve beyond "pond scum"?

Probably a very small percentage. But who knows how small that percentage is.

We know you can get multicelliular life in 2 billion years. Maybe even faster, under better conditions.

 

[egp320i]

Here are some thoughts about the STATISTICAL likelihood of life existing outside of Earth. It seems to me that we may be looking through the wrong end of a telescope by presuming that because life exists on Earth, it MUST exist elsewhere in the universe. What if it doesn't?

One way to look at this question is through statistical sampling. Let's hypothesize that there are 10 billion data points in the universe. Let's also take a random sample of a billion of these data points in order to determine the probability of life in the universe. A sample of this size is certainly enough to provide a confidence level of near certainty regarding its results. What if no life was detected in this sample? Wouldn't this lead us to conclude that there is no life in the universe?

Another way to look at this question is through probability calculations. A well-known equation is often used to assign probabilities to a finite number of conditions presumed to be necessary for life to exist and then essentially multiply them by infinity to produce a foregone conclusion of life existing elsewhere. However, since infinity is NOT a number, the universe can not contain an infinite number of data points. As a result, these calculations are based on a type of circular logic.

In addition, all of the conditions necessary for the creation of life are not known. But even if they were, the probability of them simultaneously occurring at the same time and place may be extremely small. Even without the time element, if there were 100,000 of these conditions with each having a one in a 100,000 probability of existing, there would be less than a 50% probability of them all occurring more than once.

Maybe we ARE all alone in the universe.

Here are some thoughts about the STATISTICAL likelihood of life existing outside of Earth. It seems to me that we may be looking through the wrong end of a telescope by presuming that because life exists on Earth, it MUST exist elsewhere in the universe. What if it doesn't?

One way to look at this question is through statistical sampling. Let's hypothesize that there are 10 billion data points in the universe. Let's also take a random sample of a billion of these data points in order to determine the probability of life in the universe. A sample of this size is certainly enough to provide a confidence level of near certainty regarding its results. What if no life was detected in this sample? Wouldn't this lead us to conclude that there is no life in the universe?

Another way to look at this question is through probability calculations. A well-known equation is often used to assign probabilities to a finite number of conditions presumed to be necessary for life to exist and then essentially multiply them by infinity to produce a foregone conclusion of life existing elsewhere. However, since infinity is NOT a number, the universe can not contain an infinite number of data points. As a result, these calculations are based on a type of circular logic.

In addition, all of the conditions necessary for the creation of life are not known. But even if they were, the probability of them simultaneously occurring at the same time and place may be extremely small. Even without the time element, if there were 100,000 of these conditions with each having a one in a 100,000 probability of existing, there would be less than a 50% probability of them all occurring more than once.

Maybe we ARE all alone in the universe.

guess it's up to the human race to not wipe itself out or expand to the moon and mars

so far the path is not looking so good.......ever growing population

need more food, more power, more room......trees get in the way

more water, tap areas already too dry

only nuclear powered desalination could come close to putting water in an area
that is naturally dry.........like the middle east, US SW

 

[Carl in Michigan]

And I bet the overwhelming majority come in the form of the latter.

Even out of all the planets in the "Goldilocks Zone", and around the right kind of star, how many are then going to have a core capable of life ever evolving past "pond scum"?

We know out planet has an oversized core, a core caused by a lucky collision shortly after it was created that is basically the core of two Mars sized planets. That will remain molten for so long that the sun will consume the planet before it ever goes cold.

I bet the majority are far more like Mars. The conditions are right, life starts, then goes extinct after the core solidifies and it can not even evolve to the point of multi-cellular life.

Mars has no magnetic shield and no atmosphere to stop the continuous radiation bath

Even if you believe in life sprouting from Nothing, it never happened on Mars -- or anywhere else in the solar system

 

[Woodznutz]

Irony illustrated.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Mars has no magnetic shield and no atmosphere to stop the continuous radiation bath

Even if you believe in life sprouting from Nothing, it never happened on Mars -- or anywhere else in the solar system

Mars once had both of those things and a lot of liquid water. And every time we look, the amount of time it took life to form here shrinks. We are now at only a couple hundred million years.

 

[Woodznutz]

Here are some thoughts about the STATISTICAL likelihood of life existing outside of Earth. It seems to me that we may be looking through the wrong end of a telescope by presuming that because life exists on Earth, it MUST exist elsewhere in the universe. What if it doesn't?

One way to look at this question is through statistical sampling. Let's hypothesize that there are 10 billion data points in the universe. Let's also take a random sample of a billion of these data points in order to determine the probability of life in the universe. A sample of this size is certainly enough to provide a confidence level of near certainty regarding its results. What if no life was detected in this sample? Wouldn't this lead us to conclude that there is no life in the universe?

Another way to look at this question is through probability calculations. A well-known equation is often used to assign probabilities to a finite number of conditions presumed to be necessary for life to exist and then essentially multiply them by infinity to produce a foregone conclusion of life existing elsewhere. However, since infinity is NOT a number, the universe can not contain an infinite number of data points. As a result, these calculations are based on a type of circular logic.

In addition, all of the conditions necessary for the creation of life are not known. But even if they were, the probability of them simultaneously occurring at the same time and place may be extremely small. Even without the time element, if there were 100,000 of these conditions with each having a one in a 100,000 probability of existing, there would be less than a 50% probability of them all occurring more than once.

Maybe we ARE all alone in the universe.

We're probably alone, which is why so many people are lonely.

 

[GLASNOST]

Two Questions for us all:
1). What if we are alone?
2). What is the meaning of life?

There are no answers forthcoming. We may discover the answer to the first question in a life-time but the second question will never be and what we call "religion" only leads us astray.

Speak for yourself.

I am speaking for everyone on this earth. If you say that you do not want to know the meaning of life then I say you are being dishonest.

"This is the day the Lord hath made. Let us rejoice and be glad in it."

Not everyone can rejoice in "this day". Not the Palestinians. Not the Iranians. Not the Americans. In any case, there isn't a shred of evidence that any lord exists. Our evidence proves (beyond any shadow of doubt) that the surface of "this day" is created by man ..... but the depth of "this day" is unknown.

The Brilliant Creator's Scriptures and abundant works lead every one of His followers to truth and hope.

That is completely untrue. Those who produced "the scriptures" created nothing at all and the "followers" you speak of are left scrounging to find meaning in what those non-creators have imagined in their fantasy.

The meaning of life is thoroughly explained in Scriptures.

Again ...... those who wrote the scriptures have created nothing but superstitious fantasy. I am not criticising you for believing it. You are criticising me for calling it out for what it is.

Your problem is that you reject Them.

That fact is not a problem. That is my strength of wisdom and it makes life acceptable. Your problem is FEAR;

1). Fear of life.
2). Fear of death.
3). Fear of solitude.
4). Fear of knowledge.
5). Fear of sincerity.
6). Fear of my humble words.

Large numbers of stars and planets are trivial compared with the insuperable statistics of original polypeptide synthesis.

They are trivial, yes, with the insuperable statistics that scientific endeavour alone seeks to understand.