P A N

i think the unimaginable vastness of the universe is enough to convince me that if i were to assume there were no technologically advanced species farther along than us, i would be quite ahead of myself and parsimony is dust to the wind. the drake equation is very vague, but only so much as our understanding of our non-local environment is though, and i strongly believe this should be more often considered.

and then there is Paul Hellyer. he is the former Canadian Defense Minister, and was Deputy Prime Minister under Pierre Elliot Trudeau. he's not some quack, and he, along with his current associates (and well over 4,000,000 reported interactions in one form or another since 1957) REALLY believe in aliens. they call the interactions between our race and the many that visit Earth "Exopolitics" and are moving in an effort to psychologically prepare humanity for the eventuality of our integration into a Universe Society.

interesting sh*t.

Dom

While it's almost definate that aliens exist, the vastness of the universe makes it extremely unlikely for any alien race to come into contact with us, and still very unlikely to have done in our entire history. That's one argument against this theory, but there is still a possibility aliens visited us.

__________________

P A N

you can call this arrogance if you wish, but i'd like to point out that from where i stand, i can see no argument.

WHY does the vastness of our universe make it extremely unlikely that any alien race would have come in contact with us?

you just rearranged my words and muttered "nah."

Dom

I see what you're saying but it all depends on exactly how frequent intelligent life is and whether they are alive in human's existance. There are so many varibles to aliens actually visiting us that it is actually extremely unlikely - think about it: first of all there has to actually be other life (almost definate), secondly that life must become intelligent (again, almost definately out there), thirdly that intelligent life must become an advanced space-faring species during human existance. That's where it becomes less likely. Fourthly that intelligent, space-faring life must choose to visit us during human existance. That is extremely unlikely considering the amount of other planets. Assuming this space-faring species can travel across the galaxy, that is hundreds of billions of planets they could visit before they come to us. And all of that must be within human existance, which is relatively an extremely small window.

Now all of that depends on the frequency of life, which we do not have a clue about. If life is very frequent (i.e. life in every other solar system) then yes, it is likely we have been or will be visited by aliens. If it is very infrequent (i.e. a few in every galaxy) then it is unlikely.

What I'm saying is that the vastness of the universe means that the frequency of life becomes the biggest factor is our likeliness to have been visited, and we don't know that.

Also, I'm not saying it is a good argument, just saying that it is sometimes used as a point against this theory.

__________________

P A N

"during human existence" is not an accurate measure at all.

earth is young. that doesn't mean the rest of the planets in the universe are.

the idea of space travel should also not be limited to the idea of limited means. it's likely that with an understanding of physics millions of times greater than our own (relative to our difference in age as a species), these civilizations don't have to deal with overcoming the problems we humans face as the pilots of jet-propelled craft.

then you need to consider the size of a UNIVERSE SOCIETY. i don't know exactly how long humans have been around. but i wouldn't call the notion impossible that a species, or very large group of different species co-mingling, could be millions of times older than humans. thus creating a possible population of numbers and vastness unimaginable. perhaps there are more of them than there are stars in the sky... perhaps enabling them, if they did not create all the planets in the universe themselves, that is, to keep tabs on all life-bearing planets.

and who knows, perhaps we're under an intergalactic quarantine, effectively disabling our evolutionary path... cuz we do SO MUCH STUPID SH*T.

Dom

By "during human existance" I meant that they would have to have become space-faring and find us by the time humans are alive. There may well have been a species with a space empire millions of years before humans but they got extinct by a gamma ray burst or something. What I'm saying is that depending on the frequency of life it is would be very unlikely to come into contact with aliens during our existance. Not ruling out the possiblity at all.

__________________

noise

this conversation only works if we pretend that faster-than-light travel is actually possible.

are we allowed to pretend whatever we want? if so, i have some things to say about invisible emus and their plot to assassinate me (as predicted by the ancient mythology of the Kalahari)

__________________
my flac collection

Dom

There are actually particles theorized to travel faster than the speed of light, and the theory of special relativity does not disallow faster-than-light travel.

Besides, you do not necessarily need faster-than-light travel for space exploration. For example, with technology we have now we could reach Mars within about 210 - 250 days. With technology in, say, 100 years time that time could be drastically reduced. Because of this, it means that, rather than using faster-than-light travel, you could just colonized each planet in turn, slowly getting further out. This is one of the reasons why actual contact with other life is so unlikely.

Edit: In fact, Barack Obama has said:

So space travel without faster-than-light travel is certainly not impossible.

__________________

noise

the nearest star is about 4.2 light years away.
the nearest extrasolar planet is 10.5 light years away.
the nearest earth-like planet orbiting within the habitable zone of its star is 20.3 light years away.

Mars, on the other hand, is a mere 2.4x10^-5 light years away.

so let's imagine that in 100 years we somehow reduce the time it takes to reach Mars form 230 days to just a week. 7 short days, traveling at about 1/800th the speed of light.

it would still take 3,340 years to reach Proxima Centauri, the nearest star. and a full 16,000 years to get to reach the closest known earth-like planet.

do you see the problem?

__________________
my flac collection

Dom

Yes I understand this, but what's to say they don't travel in a sort of space station in which they reproduce on board. I understand I'm getting a bit unrealisitic here but what I'm saying is it is possible, even if faster-than-light travel did not exist (which it could). But yes, I see what you mean.

__________________