Are we alone?

McIrish_

Putting jokes aside,


Does anybody think that we are alone in this universe? I'm strongly under the impression that we are getting closer to finding other life forms somewhere particularly with the way that telescopes and technology are evolving

Wouldn't you think that someone would have come by now? Surely more intelligent life forms exist somewhere. Do you think that they know where we are?

I'd say traveling through space can be a difficult journey with all of the asteroids and radiation could destroy any human being.

I have never really put much thought into the subject but it's definitely and interesting one.......

The Backwards Man

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w6Q3mHyzn78

Rayne Wooney

Sure isn't god out there somewhere

PizzamanIRL

Probably not. If we are, we are. If we're not, we're not.

We'll more than likely never know.

The universe is infinite, and while I'm no expert, it's my understanding that infinite means pretty damn big . In this big space there are millions, nay billions, of planets.

It would be almost comically egotistical to imagine that in an infinite universe of billions of planets, that we are the only intelligent forms of life to have evolved, over the billions of years the universe has existed.

So no, I don't believe we're alone.

Mariasofia

McIrish_ wrote: »

Putting jokes aside,


Does anybody think that we are alone in this universe? I'm strongly under the impression that we are getting closer to finding other life forms somewhere particularly with the way that telescopes and technology are evolving

Wouldn't you think that someone would have come by now? Surely more intelligent life forms exist somewhere. Do you think that they know where we are?



I'd say traveling through space can be a difficult journey with all of the asteroids and radiation could destroy any human being.

I have never really put much thought into the subject but it's definitely and interesting one.......

McIrish phone home........youre drunk:-D

Rayne Wooney

Checking that moon, Europa(?) should be the first thing never mind sending men to Mars.

There's possibly liquid water deep down and anywhere with water on Earth there's usually life.

Home alone!

Keep the change you filthy animal.

Frosty McSnowballs

I'm pretty sure Mac and me is out there...

Duvetdays

Did you just watch Gravity to make you think of this?
I just did and it's a pile of ****e.

No, I don't think we're alone and I think it's extremely ignorant to think we're alone in the universe.

Wacker The Attacker

Go on the aliens

we'llallhavetea

if you could sort me out with the makin's op I'd much appreciate it

Billy86

So alone.

Think I'll go hang myself now, while having a ****.

Mariasofia

I think we're alone now .....doesnt seem to be anyone around
I think we're alone now.....the beating of my heart is the only sound!

Wacker The Attacker

Billy86 wrote: »

So alone.

Think I'll go hang myself now, while having a ****.

The old hanging ****.

You cant beat it

Untouchable Peasant

No fucker knows.

wnolan1992

"Putting jokes aside"?

Wrong forum dude...

Rayne Wooney

Candie wrote: »

The universe is infinite, and while I'm no expert, it's my understanding that infinite means pretty damn big . In this big space there are millions, nay billions, of planets.

It would be almost comically egotistical to imagine that in an infinite universe of billions of planets, that we are the only intelligent forms of life to have evolved, over the billions of years the universe has existed.

So no, I don't believe we're alone.

Most scientists agree that we don't know whether the universe is infinite or finite.

FunLover18

Bill Bryson writes (in A Short History Of Nearly Everything) “Still, statistically the probability that there are other thinking beings out there is good… Under Drake’s equation you divide the number of stars in a selected portion of the universe by the number of stars that are likely to have planetary systems; divide that by the number of planetary systems that could theoretically support life; divide that by the number on which life, having arisen, advances to a state of intelligence; and so on. At each such division, the number shrinks colossally—yet even with the most conservative inputs the number of advanced civilizations just in the Milky Way always works out to be somewhere in the millions”.

Augmerson

Most likely not, but we probably won't like what we find, or what finds us. I think Hawking said something along the lines of, looking at our own history, when a more technologically advanced civilization encountered a less technologically advanced (like Europeans with the Americas and Africa) the results were usually not good for the less advanced party.

I'd imagine that something or somebody knows we are here. We are constantly sending out these electronic transmissions since 40s and 50s with television alone into space. We had so many sightings of flying saucers in the 40s after WWII and into the 50s, right about the time humans perfected nuclear weapons I might add.

Maybe they just don't consider us all that intelligent or worthwhile. Maybe we aren't as smart as we think, and we can't even comprehend how they are, like seeing in 2D all your life and then seeing in 3D suddenly *goes for more tea*

HansHolzel

from Repo Man (1984)

Otto and Miller are in a vacant lot under a bridge. Otto holds up a book he's about to throw in a burning garbage can. Book says Dioretix: The Science of Matter over Mind. By A. Rum Bi.... This is an allusion to Dianetics by Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard.

Miller:
A lot of people don't realize what's really going on. They view life as a bunch of unconnected incidents and things. They don't realize that there's this like lattice of coincidence that lays on top of everything. I'll give you an example, show you what I mean. Suppose you're thinking about a plate of shrimp. Suddenly somebody will say like plate or shrimp or plate of shrimp out of the blue no explanation. No point in looking for one either. It's all part of a cosmic unconsciousness.

Otto:
You do a lot of acid Miller, back in the hippie days?

Miller:
I'll give you another instance. You know the way everybody's into weirdness right now. Books in all the supermarkets about Bermuda triangles, UFO's, how the Mayans invented television. That kind of thing.

Otto:
I don't read them books.

Miller:
Well the way I see it it's exactly the same. There ain't no difference between a flying saucer and a time machine. People get so hung up on specifics. They miss out on seeing the whole thing. Take South America for example. In South America thousands of people go missing every year. Nobody knows where they go. They just like disappear. But if you think about it for a minute, you realize something. There had to be a time when there was no people. Right?

Otto:
Yeah. I guess.

Miller:
Well where did all these people come from? Hmm? I'll tell you where. The future. Where did all these people disappear to? Hmm?

Otto:
The past?

Miller:
That's right and how did they get there?

Otto:
How the fück do I know?

Miller:
Flying saucers. Which are really? Yeah you got it. Time machines. I think a lot about this kind of stuff. I do my best thinking on the bus. That how come I don't drive, see?

Otto:
You don't even know how to drive.

Miller:
I don't want to know how. I don't want to learn. See? The more you drive, the less intelligent you are.

Pushtrak

There probably is some intelligent life elsewhere in the universe... The universe is a pretty damn big place, though. Encountering them isn't something one should expect in their life time. This applies to us and future generations. At some point, it may happen, but it isn't like "Sure that'll happen in a couple of years" and be even remotely accurate except by accident.

F1ngers

I think, in the 6,000 years that the universe has been around, it would be very naive of us to believe that we are alone.

humbert

A more salient question might be, is it possible to contact anyone far away? If information cannot travel faster than light we might as well be alone.

My money is on advanced civilisations losing interest in reproducing long before they are advanced enough to be immortal.

jimmytwotimes 2013

Doubt we will see it in our life time, or over the next century or two. We can just about identify a planet with requirements for life, distance from sun, mass etc but we cud only guess if there was life there or not, or water or atmosphere. And as it takes a few decades to get a probe out of our solar system, let alone communicate with one beyond that, I wouldn't spend too much time thinking on it.

Shur we don't even have the technology to get to Mars and back.

There probably is, but we most likely will never know.

Pushtrak

F1ngers wrote: »

I think, in the 6,000 years that the universe has been around, it would be very naive of us to believe that we are alone.

:pac:

humbert

F1ngers wrote: »

I think, in the 6,000 years that the universe has been around, it would be very naive of us to believe that we are alone.

Very good.

Starscream25

It's statistically likely that we are not alone, you'd want to be pretty narrow minded to think otherwise.
Whether or not we've been visited already is another question.

Hello_MrFox

We will keep on evolving adn developing new technologies, there is no limit to anything. In a few million years in humans still exist we will be able to do what ever we want. We will be able to create new universes at the click of our fingers and travel to Heaven and Hell (if they exist) for a day trip when ever we want. We will also be gods and control the universe. I think on a long enough time line everything is possible.

EuropeanSon

We're not alone, and we won't find anything for thousands of years, at a minimum. The distances involved are simply too great.

jobeenfitz

I think some of yis are right and some of yis are wrong, maybe.

Too Tough To Die

They're out there. Somewhere...

masti123

We have already been contacted many times

Muise...

G A F F C

B♭ C A♭ A♭ E♭

Hello?


hello


hello

Frosty McSnowballs

Muise... wrote: »

G A F F C

B♭ C A♭ A♭ E♭

Hello?


hello


hello

Is there anybody out there......?

Fat Nav

The Truth is out there

Billy86

Muise... wrote: »

G A F F C

B♭ C A♭ A♭ E♭

Hello?


hello


hello

WWAAAAAAASSSSSSSSSSSSSSAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAPPPPPPP!!!

Sorry. So, so sorry.

*Jesus that ad is FOURTEEN years old!?
**JESUS, and Bud-weis-er frogs are EIGHTEEN years old!? WHAT THE F!%@!?

Billy86

Wacker The Attacker wrote: »

The old hanging ****.

You cant beat it

I call it a hank!

Baked.noodle

Two billion planets in our galaxy may be suitable for life

Our galaxy probably contains at least two billion planets that, like Earth, have liquid water on their surfaces and orbit around their parent stars in the "habitable zone" for life. The nearest, according to astronomers, could be a mere 12 light years away.

A new study, published on Monday in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, suggests that Earth-like planets capable of supporting life are far more common than previously thought. Using measurements from Nasa's Kepler space observatory, scientists led by Erik Petigura at the University of California, Berkeley, estimated that 22% of our galaxy's sun-like stars have rocky planets circling them in the zone where they get roughly the same amount of light energy as Earth receives from the sun. There are around 100bn stars in our galaxy, of which 10% are like the sun.

So far Kepler has studied more than 150,000 stars and identified more than 3,000 candidate planets, but many of these are "gas giants", similar to Jupiter, that orbit close to their parent stars. If there is life out there, it is far more likely to have evolved on rocky planets with liquid water on their surfaces, similar to Earth.

To get their results, Petigura's team looked for planets in Kepler data that had a radius up to double that of Earth. They searched for planets that orbited far enough from their star that liquid water would not evaporate, but not so far that the water would all freeze.

Subhanjoy Mohanty, an astrophysicist at Imperial College London who was not involved with the study, said: "This is the first estimate of the frequency of Earth-like planets around sun-like stars, in orbits large enough to lie in the habitable zone of their stars. The finding that roughly one in five sun-like stars may host such planets is an incredibly important one, probably exceeding the expectations of most cautious astronomers."

He added that the latest analysis increased the chances that there might be life somewhere among the stars. "Previous analyses of Kepler data had shown that red dwarfs – the most common type of star in the galaxy, making up about 80% of the stellar population – very frequently harbour Earth-size planets, including in their habitable zones. This new study shows that the same is true around stars more like our own sun. This is certainly an added impetus for planned future missions which will study the atmospheres of these potentially habitable planets, enabling us to investigate whether they are in fact habitable or not, and also whether their atmospheres show actual biosignatures of existing life."

Nasa also announced on Monday that the Kepler probe would be given a new lease of life, following fears that it would have to end its mission after only four years in space. In May 2013, scientists discovered that one of the gyroscopic wheels – known as "reaction wheels" – that kept the probe pointing in the right direction had stopped working and, try as they might, Nasa engineers could not restart it. Unable to point itself at the stars with any accuracy, the probe could no longer be used to collect data about the position of new exoplanets.

But it looks as though there could be a solution that involves reorienting the probe to look along the plane of the galaxy, which will allow it to remain stable with only two of its reaction wheels working. "The old saying 'necessity is the mother of invention' has rung true here, with engineers and scientists from Nasa and the spacecraft manufacturers having figured out this way to – we hope – recover much of the performance we thought we had lost. We are very excited," said Bill Chaplin, an astrophysicist at the University of Birmingham in the UK.

If all goes well, the new Kepler mission – dubbed "K2" – will look for planets around smaller stars than the sun, and will also study the stars themselves. "There are a wealth of fantastically interesting targets for astrophysics that can be observed in the ecliptic plane, which were not accessible in the original Kepler field, notably brighter clusters of stars – where the common origins and distances to these stars make the clusters excellent laboratories for testing our understanding of stars – and young, star-forming regions," said Chaplin.

nocoverart

F1ngers wrote: »

I think, in the 6,000 years that the universe has been around, it would be very naive of us to believe that we are alone.

This post deserves more love!

Rayne Wooney

F1ngers wrote: »

I think, in the 6,000 years that the universe has been around, it would be very naive of us to believe that we are alone.

Are you saying...that dinosaur bones... are fake?


<insert Keanu Reeves scared face meme>

Muise...

Billy86 wrote: »

Sorry. So, so sorry.

*Jesus that ad is FOURTEEN years old!?
**JESUS, and Bud-weis-er frogs are EIGHTEEN years old!? WHAT THE F!%@!?

light years, baby, light years.

Sam Kade

WTF is up with the op, theres another ejit over in the farming forum wanting wet peat to send to his aunt in the US to clear her eczema and he has only a few posts as well :mad:

EoghanIRL

Life = finite

number of planets = infinite

Finite / infinite = 0

Rayne Wooney

EoghanIRL wrote: »

Life = finite

number of planets = infinite

Finite / infinite = 0

Infinite number of planets?

smcgiff

Imagine sitting alone in a remote cottage in the wilds of Mayo with the electricity on the blink wondering if there's some dogging going on somewhere in Rio.

There probably is but you'll never know about.

Maximus Alexander

Starscream25 wrote: »

It's statistically likely that we are not alone, you'd want to be pretty narrow minded to think otherwise.
Whether or not we've been visited already is another question.

Putting my pedant hat on for a second (who am I kidding, I sleep in it), you can't really say this. You can't draw information from statistics with a sample size of one.

EoghanIRL

Rayne Wooney wrote: »

Infinite number of planets?

Infinity is a relative concept not a number

Muise...

Sam Kade wrote: »

WTF is up with the op, theres another ejit over in the farming forum wanting wet peat to send to his aunt in the US to clear her eczema and he has only a few posts as well :mad:

Are you suggesting he's

an alien

??? :eek:

Rayne Wooney

EoghanIRL wrote: »

Infinity is a relative concept not a number

Or it is a number greater than any assignable quantity

EoghanIRL

It is known that there are an infinite number of worlds, simply because there is an infinite amount of space for them to be in. However, not every one of them is inhabited. Therefore, there must be a finite number of inhabited worlds. Any finite number divided by infinity is as near to nothing as makes no odds, so the average population of all the planets in the Universe can be said to be zero. From this it follows that the population of the whole Universe is also zero, and that any people you may meet from time to time are merely the products of a deranged imagination.

Doulas Adams