Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Oct 21, 2007 11:36:29 GMT -4
Or, as I said earlier, concluding that there are no polar bears, since I can't find any in my back yard right now.
|
|
|
Post by Bill Thompson on Nov 6, 2007 20:09:25 GMT -4
For once, I agree with Jason on this one. We just haven't had the capacity to receive or transmit signals long enough to conclusively say there is no intelligent life elsewhere in the universe (or in our galaxy, or even in our galactic neighborhood for that matter). As for the other stipulations, there are just too many variables and possibilities to look at the lack of direct evidence and conclude there is no life around us. It would be foolish to make such premature conclusions so early in the game. It would be like saying the Packers are going to lose a football game because they fumbled on the first punt return. But the way things are looking, it so far does not look promising and as time goes on, we find that the galaxy is more hostile than we could imagine. The track record is something to consider.
|
|
|
Post by Bill Thompson on Nov 6, 2007 20:12:47 GMT -4
Or, as I said earlier, concluding that there are no polar bears, since I can't find any in my back yard right now. Fermi's Paradox is not about bears! Noone at the table was talking about bears when they were talking about ETI. Reducing all this to an animal that has no interest in the kinds of things that we would expect of an intelligent species -- such as space exploration and science to ensure its own survival -- is throwing Fermi's observation out the window. I do not know what the Polar Bear analogy has to do with but it has nothing to do with Fermi's Paradox. The interesting thing I think is that we call his observation a "paradox" we have pre-decided that there must be beings like us without really considering the chemistry and the biology and the environments and the probability. His observation is just that. It is an observation. We, with our hopeful nature, have labeled it a "paradox" because it is a puzzle to us that the evidence says one thing and our hearts say something else.
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Nov 7, 2007 1:26:46 GMT -4
But the way things are looking, it so far does not look promising and as time goes on, we find that the galaxy is more hostile than we could imagine. The track record is something to consider. How long have we been looking for extraterrestrials? With technology that had any chance to find them? On the scale of the universe the track record is infinitesimal. There effectively is no track record.
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Nov 7, 2007 1:29:51 GMT -4
Reducing all this to an animal that has no interest in the kinds of things that we would expect of an intelligent species -- such as space exploration and science to ensure its own survival -- is throwing Fermi's observation out the window. I do not know what the Polar Bear analogy has to do with but it has nothing to do with Fermi's Paradox. Obviously you're taking no effort to try to understand what others are saying to you then. Part of the point is that aliens will likely not be what we expect. There is no way to tell whether aliens would be intersted in exploration or science. But mostly it's to show how ridiculously short our reach and understanding really is. With our current technology and knowledge limited to one planet's life forms we are effectively looking for polar bears in our back yard. Small wonder we haven't found any yet.
|
|
|
Post by Data Cable on Nov 7, 2007 2:10:06 GMT -4
as time goes on, we find that the galaxy is more hostile than we could imagine Even when we're discovering that, for example, the absence of Jupiter acting as an "asteroid magnet" in our own solar system would not significantly increase the number of asteroid impacts on Earth? You speak of an ever-increasing list of absolute necessities for intelligent life to develop, but how many of those have actually been independantly tested and verified *as* "necessities?" But then, astronomy isn't going to cure cancer, so its just a waste of time and money.
|
|
|
Post by Bill Thompson on Nov 7, 2007 14:22:30 GMT -4
Part of the point is that aliens will likely not be what we expect. I am reminded of the ELO song "Hold on Tight to Your Dreams". The Universe Itself is likely to continue to be not what we expect. But all that is besides the point. Whatever you are dreaming of is just that. Dreams. They are not walking down the street. Enrico Fermi had a good point. Trivializing it with "Polar Bears are not walking down the street" is side-stepping the point. Noone cares about searching for stupid life. Dropping the "I" out of "ETI" does not brush asside Fermi's observation.
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Nov 7, 2007 14:48:53 GMT -4
Fermi had a point only if his assumptions are correct. We have no way of knowing at this point if they are correct.
|
|
|
Post by Bill Thompson on Nov 7, 2007 17:42:57 GMT -4
Fermi had a point only if his assumptions are correct. We have no way of knowing at this point if they are correct. His assumptions were logical. It is the best thing to go on. Science from observing our enviornment also say he was correct. It is no great feat to imagine scenerios where some primative, yet intelligent (a contradiction) society exists some where. But basing belief on what we want to believe is true is bad science.
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Nov 7, 2007 18:05:59 GMT -4
His deductions were logical. His assumptions are only logical if we consider Earth and human beings (our only data samples of a life-supporting planet and an intelligent species) to be typical, and we have no way of verifying that this is the case.
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Nov 7, 2007 18:20:06 GMT -4
Someone in Europe in 1491 could have argued that there were no other inhabited continents on Earth using the same logic. "If there were another inhabited continent surely they would have come here by now."
|
|
|
Post by Data Cable on Nov 8, 2007 1:36:13 GMT -4
How can a question be correct... or incorrect? A society cannot be primitive and intelligent? Like wasting millions of dollars every year on a non-existant cancer cure. [edit: re-phrased the first response above]
|
|
|
Post by Bill Thompson on Nov 8, 2007 17:16:23 GMT -4
I think if we want something bad enough it becomes real. I think that there is something like this at play here.
|
|
|
Post by Bill Thompson on Nov 8, 2007 17:17:36 GMT -4
A society cannot be primitive and intelligent? Not for long.
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Nov 8, 2007 17:19:33 GMT -4
How long were the native Americans "primitive"? Would they have ever stopped being "primitive" if Europeans hadn't interfered?
|
|