The problem with the Drake Equation?

a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

It might also be that human perception is very limited and we just don't know it. The electromagnetic spectrum starts from Class Y (ionizing radiation) through ELF (extremely low frequency). To my knowledge, those are the limits of what we can "see" or detect. We can't "see" the quantum world but we can detect it. So perhaps we humans are just limited in our ability to see other life forms. Maybe they're in another universe right in front of our noses - who knows.
The thing is we're always looking for "us" out there. And "us" would have to communicate on our terms i.e. within our electromagnetic spectrum or else we would never hear them. There's thousands of possibilities.

If I had my wish, I would like to see hard evidence on Mars that some type life that we can detect and characterize is or was there. At least that would give us some hope that our life form could have developed elsewhere and isn't entirely unique.

originally posted by: Phantom423
a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

...So perhaps we humans are just limited in our ability to see other life forms. Maybe they're in another universe right in front of our noses - who knows.

Maybe.

That aside, and just talking about the universe that we CAN see right in front of our noses, I still think that -- overall, and on galactic timescales -- technological universes in our galaxy could be a very common thing when looking at those long timescales.

However, right now (or at any given moment) those techonological civilizations are so few and far between that interaction between any two is unlikely, and that answers the Fermi Paradox.

a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

Just browsing through the literature this morning on the subject, I came across the article below. Perhaps our ability to communicate on the quantum level will open doors. Who knows - they may be knocking and we don't hear them!
But if, as you hypothesize, we're all so far away from each other, maybe it will take one extraordinary civilization (maybe ours?) to develop a communication capability that will connect us.

The article:

Scientists Achieve Direct Counterfactual Quantum Communication For The First Time
Communication without particle transmission.
FIONA MACDONALD 10 MAY 2017

Direct counterfactual quantum communication on the other hands relies on something other than quantum entanglement. Instead, it uses a phenomenon called the quantum Zeno effect. Very simply, the quantum Zeno effect occurs when an unstable quantum system is repeatedly measured. In the quantum world, whenever you look at a system, or measure it, the system changes. And in this case, unstable particles can never decay while they're being measured (just like the proverbial watched kettle that will never boil), so the quantum Zeno effect creates a system that's effectively frozen with a very high probability.

www.sciencealert.com...

I never heard form the Quantum Zeno Effect - guess that's one more thing I have to look up.

Understanding Nature despite some is a work in progress. Having taken that, into consideration that we focus upon such a project makes sense. One consideration that, is probably relevant is the fact that despite environment the most, likely cause of an advanced race it that it originates from predatory forms of animal life that developed. on the planet from which they originated.

As far as human civilization, yes there has always been a time when there was an end. But despite these events as well as whatever mass extinctions have occurred since the advent of Proto-Humans on Earth we survived. A rather fringe perspective upon why we exist that life found a way. In other words, the reason Consciousness, exist to the extent it does, on Earth is the result of life dealing with what life had to deal with on Earth.

Our situation is that our, galactic cluster is actually isolated from areas at some distance wherein there is more density with, respect to Galaxies, that could potentially place us in a similar, situation to an isolated truck stop in a desert.

Thoughts?

a reply to: Kashai

Its mathematically unlikely that we are the only species capable of doing what we do, or rather, that we are the only species that HAS been or WILL be capable of doing what we do, and more besides.

Its also possible that life, intelligent life, does not conform in all cases, to that which we would recognise as such. Recent studies into mycology, suggest that fungus has the ability to manage its environment, in the microbial scale, and as a result and later on, in terms of what plants, therefore what insects, therefore what mammals and birds, lizards, amphibians and so on, might be drawn to dwell in places where that particular fungus lives. The largest living thing that has ever been recognised on this earth as ever having lived at all, is a mycelial mat of a specific variety of honey fungus, which can be found in Oregon. Its 2.4 miles across, far larger than any mammal, dinosaur or other ancient creature.

In fact, the oldest multicellular life that has ever been found in the fossil record, is a fungus. Now, you and I know the humble mushroom to be a spore carrying, fibrous thing, some species or strains of which happen to be edible, some are extremely toxic to human life, others have properties which make them interesting to the chemical voyagers amongst us. But they also have hidden depths. I mention above that mycelial mats are not only the largest living things ever found, but are capable of regulating their environment. Well, one of the most obvious elements of intelligence, is not just to be able to find a good location for a habitat, but to create the habitat on which one will best thrive, by modulating ones surroundings. Fungus does this. It operates on unimaginably long time scales, but it absolutely does this, especially in the case of certain "meadow maker" fungi.

These fungi kill trees, which eventually collapse back into the soil over long periods, nourishing the soil with their chemical constituents, constituent parts, which the fungus which killed the tree, requires easy access to in the soil, to grow a solid mat under the ground, thereby to make it more resistant to weathering and able to withstand catastrophic circumstances, floods, fires, and so on. The mat grows, nourished by that tree, and all the while, regulates its environment, promoting the growth of some microbes, the banishment of others, which alters the soil yet more to promote the arrival of plants, insects and animals...the presence of these things means that excreta from those "more complex" forms of life will now be present in the soil, another resource that the mat can use to generate growth and nutrition from. Meadow makers are not the only sorts of fungi to modulate their environment to better facilitate their growth, but they are a good example.

If you think about it in these terms, its likely that fungi have modulated the environment of this planet, far more and to a much deeper degree, than human beings ever have. We may not be able to visibly watch it happen, fungi may not be involved in high physics or the creation of sky scrapers, but virtually all of the natural world, from the plants to the largest mammals, might never have existed if it were not for fungi, and the mycelial mats under the Earth.

There may be a kind of intelligence, right here on Earth, capable of modifying an entire planetary biome, in order to facilitate its own continuation, that we ignore or are unaware of in the main. It has no audible language, it does not write its history in decipherable text, it does not construct vehicles from materials unnatural to its own composition, in which to travel, nor does it do differential calculus, or even recognise the benefit of understanding it. But it DID basically terraform this planet in order to facilitate its continuation, and I can think of few expressions of intelligence more grandiose, than to influence, over eons, and by tiny degrees, the environmental circumstances a species finds itself in, in order to promote its longevity of existence.

a reply to: TrueBrit

When we actually develop the technology to explore the Galaxy we could actually find that while there are plenty of planets with life, none currently exist which has the capacity to leave their planet or the ability to create technology by converting raw materials into useful technology akin to us. Does not mean there is some equivalent to a beaver out there and so on. The potential level of diversity in relation to what intelligent life would look like is enormous. There could actually be planets out there that due to conditions is actually an organism in, every regard and perhaps, not in the sense of it being ambulatory.

In relation to a very general idea as to what causes life suggesting that our existence was the result. of an accelerated development due to mass extinctions on Earth. In consideration that any planet in our Galaxy that can support life is not as advanced as ours, could very well mean it, will take more time but it will occur potentially upon each and every one of, those worlds eventually.

Also, my position does not suggest other planets in our galaxy could not have life, such as ours. My point is that the extent to which mass extinctions have occurred on Earth could very well have something to do with why we, are here
now, 13 billion years and change after our Island Universe came into existence.

a reply to: TrueBrit

In consideration of your point somewhere out there could be mushrooms, that understand E=mc2 or more.

But it could take, trillions of years for that to be possible.

originally posted by: FlyingFox
Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

Absence of Absence is not evidence of evidence.

Either.

A largely meaningless quote in the end.

Problem is all kinds of things could be known and many discoveries have been made...that just are not allowed to be talked about

More than the stars in the skies are the lies.

originally posted by: dfnj2015

originally posted by: Kashai
So here is the problem.

One consideration to life like us would include realistically all the mass extinction events that occurred on Earth and could seriously have a lot to do as to why we are having this conversation.

Thoughts?

Doesn't I, that is, "the length of time over which such civilizations release detectable signals" take into account mass extinction level events.

I read with our present rocket technology it would only take 20,000 years to populate our entire Milky Way galaxy. And this could have happened 20 times. So then where are all the extraterrestrials?

Either we are the first. Or we missed the colonization event. Hard to say. There's probably really advanced extraterrestrials studying us the way we study ant hills in Africa.

3) We are the product of the colonization event. We just haven't graduated.

4) The rest of the universe is doing just fine, but use some form of encryption for all communication precisely because it is dangerous to speak in the clear when a planet of uncivilized barbarians lives nearby and has developed rocket technology and nukes before they developed any empathy.

5) A variation on four keeps us in a deliberately fallen state because we once ruled the galaxy as a race of tyrants.

6) All remaining life in the galaxy lives in a higher dimensional state where space/time collapses in some predictable way enabling the higher D's the appearance of FTL travel when glimpsed through a slice of 3D.

7) A variation on 1. We are the first and we are inventing the mindset that will eventually conquer the galaxy near the beginning of some sort of grand cycle of galactic awakening to sentience.

Binary choices are so Piscean.

a reply to: Kashai

No; the idea that mass extinction events brings about the possibility of intelligent life is covered under this fraction.

fi, the fraction of planets bearing life on which intelligent, civilized life, has developed, 

a reply to: DanDanDat

Ok but seriously don't you think in relation to the Drake Equation in this context this issue has been downplayed.

A point would be that in consideration of the math such an issue would dimish the potential of life at present to those, worlds that experience as many mass extinctions to the extent we have.

With respect that could drop the possibility of plants that have technology equivalent to us substantially.

That would be my point.

originally posted by: Kashai
a reply to: DanDanDat

Ok but seriously don't you think in relation to the Drake Equation in this context this issue has been downplayed.

A point would be that in consideration of the math such an issue would dimish the potential of life at present to those, worlds that experience as many mass extinctions to the extent we have.

With respect that could drop the possibility of plants that have technology equivalent to us substantially.

That would be my point.

Why are you assuming the number of mass extinctions matters? What if our level of intelligent life sprung forth from the first explosions of life rather than the last?

a reply to: DanDanDat

Because based archaeological investigation when life first formed and if no mass extinctions had occurred after that it is possible it would make sense human life would never have formed.

In other words, had nothing changed when only one-celled animals, lived on Earth? Today Earth could potentially mean, Earth is only be populated by one-celled animals.

originally posted by: Kashai
a reply to: DanDanDat

Because based archaeological investigation when life first formed and if no mass extinctions had occurred after that it is possible it would make sense human life would never have formed.

In other words, had nothing changed when only one-celled animals, lived on Earth? Today Earth could potentially mean, Earth is only be populated by one-celled animals.

Or it's possible that life on Earth could have taken some other path that would have resulted in an intelligent species with a technological civilization -- but that species would be something other than humans.

Sure -- lots of things had to happen "just so" for humans to be what they are today, but maybe things could have instead happened in a different "just so" way that resulted in totally different set of living things on Earth.

Dinosaurs actually lived in tangent with mammals which at the time lived underground predominately and could have been as intelligent as modern Gophers. The Meteor that hit Earth near the Yucatan peninsula created conditions on this planet were smaller animals gained control of the environment.


Earths path in relation to the life it has formed has been, affected by mass extinction events.

Well, if we are to assume that humans are unique, of which there is no direct conflicting evidence, what then should be the goal of humanity?

Setting a good moral example is important, but it's also important to sure that a moral "state" is what persists on Earth.....which may require less-than-moral actions.

White lies...?

Punitive actions against enemies (first strike, assassinations)...?

Suppression of dissent...?

All things humans are already practiced in.

Just like young James Kirk finishing StarFleet Academy in 3 years instead of 4....humans are very likely to emerge from Mother Earth.

a reply to: FlyingFox

What is being addressed are issues concerning events that could potentially relate to Human existence in thousands of years.


Literally 5 thousand years ago we were contemplatively building Pyramids whereas, 5 thousand years, from now we could have a really accurate map for the purpose of navigating the Milky Way Galaxy, throughout.

a reply to: Kashai

I think the point is, that we misunderstand intelligence.

An intelligent species might never attain space faring status, but might express its intelligence by other means, that we might not currently recognise as intelligence, but which we, ourselves, have already proven incapable of even thinking about, leave alone achieving.

For example, we are bad at habitat management. We have designed our lives to require the destruction of the habitats in which we live, laying roads over otherwise good Earth, cutting through forests rather than flowing around them, carving our legend in the Earth like the egoists of the classical period, rather than learning, or re-learning how to live in some form of balance with the world around us.

We COULD do much better than we do, but we do not, which is a terminally stupid move on our part. By that measure, we are no where near as intelligent as the fungus under our feet.

a reply to: TrueBrit

I consider that there is a difference between efficiency and intelligence. There are very effective forms of life, like Water Bears that have been shown capable of surviving in space. Beyond the point that you have made consider
Dolphins and whales.

When I was a teenager and living with my parents and sister we were home and Mom and Sis one day tell me that a baby bird was by itself in our front yard. They wanted me to go out with my sister and bring the poor thing inside and raise it. My sister and I walked out and as soon as I was close enough to see it, I saw something move from the corner of my eyes.

Looking in that direction there had landed a solitary adult bird that clearly was the same species as the chick on our lawn. About 50 feet away from us the bird cried out but did not move. Within the span of about a minute found ourselves practically surrounded with perhaps 20 such adult bird but with an escape path to the door of our home.

I Instructed my younger sister to back up slowly and we are able to get inside without incident. Once inside we watched from a window as the adult bird that had arrived initially approached the chick and it few away the other adult birds followed, what probably was the chicks mother.

I come from a culture that to put in contemporary terms, present that the soul is a component of matter, so therefore everything is conscious and intelligent.

Have you ever considered a vision quest?

originally posted by: TrueBrit
Its mathematically unlikely that we are the only species capable of doing what we do, or rather, that we are the only species that HAS been or WILL be capable of doing what we do, and more besides.

I suppose so. On the other hand, how high do the numbers need to get? We're the only species out of millions ON EARTH that managed to evolve to figure out how to do what we do. Those ain't great odds. Piling more hypothetical millions into the equation doesn't necessarily result in a higher probability that another creature out there could evolve as we did. It's like buying lottery tickets. Buying a lot of them doesn't significantly increase your chances of winning.