A New Estimate of Alien Life in Our Galaxy

just saw this on yahoo!

I think that a low estimate myself. I heard a scientist say on a show I was watching on Science Channel awhile ago he thought there could be as many as 12,000 civilizations in the Milky Way.

originally posted by: carewemust

The totally unknown factor is how many intelligent species did God create in the galaxy, or universe. No way to measure that without first locating a few of them.

The totally unknown factor is how intelligent is God in creating the galaxy, or universe. No way to measure that without first locating him.

Paradox paradox paradox.

Personally, I see the Drake's equation so basic it is just the oxygen in a drop of water at the tip of an iceberg on a glacier of a continent on a planet in a solar system in a galaxy in a so far endless expanse of mainly nothing.

Add a moon to his equation which creates a tide which creates an ebb and flow and the whole thing moves a decimal place way out of sight imo.

First, we need conformation that intelligent life exists anywhere.

a reply to: Gothmog
Give me a link to a scientific journal where a quantum physicist implies the creation of the universe had a divine or sentient creator behind it

originally posted by: noonebutme
a reply to: Gothmog
Give me a link to a scientific journal where a quantum physicist implies the creation of the universe had a divine or sentient creator behind it

All over the place .
That is the reason I asked where ya been for the past 20+ years .
BTW , where ya been for the past 20+ years ?
Either creation or simulation.

This is the same old chestnut used by religious people ever since science was used instead of faith. IE. proof, proof, proof. The majority of science works on theories, the theory of relativity as an example.
These "theories" are just that theories. Ie an idea or reasoning with the available known data to give reasoning to an enigma. Theories hold up till newer data or evidence comes along to alter the theory and the Drake equation is no exception, as when Drake first voiced the equation he used the known data. since then more and more likely habitable planets in "Goldilocks zones" have been identified. NOT hardcore proof but the most likely assumption, but because there is no hardcore proof YET the opposers of science throw all science under the bus.

originally posted by: noonebutme

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: fromtheskydown

The totally unknown factor is how many intelligent species did God create in the galaxy, or universe. No way to measure that without first locating a few of them.

Totally unknown because there is zero evidence for God nor any scientific methodologies to prove he exists.

This OP was about maths and science, not fairy tales, so your post has no value here.

I'm with Fred Hoyle on this.

"A commonsense interpretation of the facts suggests that a superintellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as with chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature. The numbers one calculates from the facts seem to me so overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost beyond question. - Fred Hoyle

Big Bang Cosmology and the birth of matter from quantum fluctuation out of nothingness are the fairy tales. For instance, what force exists that could prevent virtual particles from annihilating back to nothing, if there is nothing?

How can we have stars older than the Big Bang?

What about superluminal expansion? We can see that an expanding universe must have a light cone that pushes its outer edges out past the speed of light, constantly. How can that be?

Why are there massive blue shifted outliers at the fringes of the visible universe, how can that happen?

The evidence shows the currently held hypotheses are the fairy tales.

a reply to: fromtheskydown

I'm speculating...that the closest civilization capable of two way communication calculation, is possibly 17,000 light years away --- Is way too much of a stretch.

I would tend to say...that there are much closer civilizations --- capable of two way communication --- than 17,000 light years away.

a reply to: chr0naut

How can we have stars older than the Big Bang?

We can't. But we can have a quite large uncertainty in the age of a star which, toward the near end, puts it less than the age of the Universe. Which is what you seem to be referring to.

What about superluminal expansion? We can see that an expanding universe must have a light cone that pushes its outer edges out past the speed of light, constantly. How can that be?

Because the speed of light is constrained by spacetime but the expansion is not.

Why are there massive blue shifted outliers at the fringes of the visible universe, how can that happen?

The quasars in question are red shifted, but because they seem to be ejecting material at very high velocities toward us, the [O III] emission band shows a blue shift relative to the inherent red shift.

The [O III] emission line in DMS 0059-0055 is blueshifted by 880 km s-1 relative to Hβ. We also confirm that the [O III] emission line in PG 1543+489 has a relative blueshift of 1150 km s-1.

ui.adsabs.harvard.edu...

originally posted by: Gothmog
All over the place

Then link one to a reputable science journal. Not a fringe site like this

If they’re everywhere, please - show me

a reply to: noonebutme

I don't know about the idea being everywhere, but I recall an interview with Penrose recently where he said he was considering it (the idea of panpsychism and consciousness being fundamental, and less popular meanings of the word "observer"...).

The default scientific stance on this is agnosticism (this is a valid question, but outside the scope of empirical science, which concerns itself more with how than why), not atheism, as Dawkins would have you think. "There is no God" requires as much faith and undue certainty, and is equally unfalsifiable, as "there is a God".

Edit: one could also bring up Bostrom's simulation hypothesis, or some of Tegmark's ideas on fractals, as implying a sentient intervention, but I personally think those are in the realm of metaphysics and scientific philosophy, not empirical science, for lack of testable predictions. That may change.

Edit2: that just made me think of a funny paradox. If you were to devise a God experiment, and the experimental equipment returned a negative result...that still wouldn't actually yield a negative statement about God's existence with any amount of certainty, since you'd require a confirmed deity as a control to show that your instrumentation is capable of returning a positive result if needed, and not malfunctioning...which would render the experiment moot. Heh. It's a question best left to mystics and philosophers, I think.

originally posted by: Gothmog

originally posted by: noonebutme
a reply to: Gothmog
Give me a link to a scientific journal where a quantum physicist implies the creation of the universe had a divine or sentient creator behind it

All over the place .
That is the reason I asked where ya been for the past 20+ years .
BTW , where ya been for the past 20+ years ?
Either creation or simulation.

If we live in a simulation, would there be a creation as well, because the simulation was created by someone or something? Would any alien life we happen to encounter also be part of our simulation and if we could, by some miracle, actually communicate with them, would they disagree with our simulation or creation theory?

Or have I just given myself a huge headache?

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: noonebutme

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: fromtheskydown

The totally unknown factor is how many intelligent species did God create in the galaxy, or universe. No way to measure that without first locating a few of them.

Totally unknown because there is zero evidence for God nor any scientific methodologies to prove he exists.

This OP was about maths and science, not fairy tales, so your post has no value here.

I'm with Fred Hoyle on this.

"A commonsense interpretation of the facts suggests that a superintellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as with chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature. The numbers one calculates from the facts seem to me so overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost beyond question. - Fred Hoyle

Big Bang Cosmology and the birth of matter from quantum fluctuation out of nothingness are the fairy tales. For instance, what force exists that could prevent virtual particles from annihilating back to nothing, if there is nothing?

How can we have stars older than the Big Bang?

What about superluminal expansion? We can see that an expanding universe must have a light cone that pushes its outer edges out past the speed of light, constantly. How can that be?

Why are there massive blue shifted outliers at the fringes of the visible universe, how can that happen?

The evidence shows the currently held hypotheses are the fairy tales.

Well, you have that Wolfram project you were hawking as the soon-to-be ‘theory of everything’; I should re-read It just to make sure he never mentions divine creation from nothingness, but you’ve told yourself you have it all figured. C’est la vie

a reply to: fromtheskydown

Thanks for posting this.

I no longer have institutional access to the journal, but I was able to better understand the 6,100 years parameter after reading the linked Guardian article.

I’d love to read the entire study.

Cheers

originally posted by: Cravens

originally posted by: chr0naut

originally posted by: noonebutme

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: fromtheskydown

The totally unknown factor is how many intelligent species did God create in the galaxy, or universe. No way to measure that without first locating a few of them.

Totally unknown because there is zero evidence for God nor any scientific methodologies to prove he exists.

This OP was about maths and science, not fairy tales, so your post has no value here.

I'm with Fred Hoyle on this.

"A commonsense interpretation of the facts suggests that a superintellect has monkeyed with physics, as well as with chemistry and biology, and that there are no blind forces worth speaking about in nature. The numbers one calculates from the facts seem to me so overwhelming as to put this conclusion almost beyond question. - Fred Hoyle

Big Bang Cosmology and the birth of matter from quantum fluctuation out of nothingness are the fairy tales. For instance, what force exists that could prevent virtual particles from annihilating back to nothing, if there is nothing?

How can we have stars older than the Big Bang?

What about superluminal expansion? We can see that an expanding universe must have a light cone that pushes its outer edges out past the speed of light, constantly. How can that be?

Why are there massive blue shifted outliers at the fringes of the visible universe, how can that happen?

The evidence shows the currently held hypotheses are the fairy tales.

Well, you have that Wolfram project you were hawking as the soon-to-be ‘theory of everything’; I should re-read It just to make sure he never mentions divine creation from nothingness, but you’ve told yourself you have it all figured. C’est la vie

Not a theory of everything. Just a newer paradigm for the discovery of physical principles.

originally posted by: noonebutme

originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: fromtheskydown

The totally unknown factor is how many intelligent species did God create in the galaxy, or universe. No way to measure that without first locating a few of them.

Totally unknown because there is zero evidence for God nor any scientific methodologies to prove he exists.

This OP was about maths and science, not fairy tales, so your post has no value here.

Would you suggest that a knowledge of the design and construction of the Model T Ford is some sort of evidence that Henry Ford never existed?

originally posted by: Raggedyman
a reply to: noonebutme

Totally unknown because there is zero evidence for God nor any scientific methodologies to prove he exists.

This OP was about maths and science, not fairy tales, so your post has no value here.

Noone, you said “scientific methodology”, “maths” and “science” was in the op, I simply asked you show me the scientific evidence because I have seen none so, here is your chance, show me the science
Please stop showing me people writing assumptions and faith statements about stars, real science

I am pretty sure you don’t know what scientific evidence really is

From my comprehension, you think some space particles just gather together get hot and make a sun, just like that.
That is scientific whoo, scientific religion, faith, kidding yourself if you think it’s thermodynamics

Reports like the one above are religious statements disguised as science

Some religous people are just plain scary!

originally posted by: chr0naut
Would you suggest that a knowledge of the design and construction of the Model T Ford is some sort of evidence that Henry Ford never existed?

Not in the slightest. As Model-T fords don’t grow on trees or from seeds in the ground, it’s very hard to attribute that type of complexity to nature.

But there is no evidence that the observable universe has any creator behind it. This assumption that, given it’s size and sheer complexity, there MUST be a designer is the ‘God of the gaps’ argumement.

Take evolution. If that too is God’s will/plan, then why make something so inefficient. Because evolution isn’t always efficient. Our eyes have the light sensitive cells behind the nerves, making the light passing through lose some efficiency. The giraffe’s neck has a nerve which loops around it and has extended all the while the neck extended. Why do that? Why not make the design perfect the first time? If you’re God or an ultimate designer, you’d do that. People TRY to do that’s or improve on things. God doesn’t.

You do not have to be religious to believe there is a God.
God could be an undiscovered subatomic particle that gives everything a forward direction in time,
just like the Higgs Boson gives everything mass...

With entropy, anything and everything is possible.

Drake's equation and all these theories are based on the assumption that everything is an accident.If we look at the information coming from abductees and insider sources both the black world and the UFO occupants have a creationist based cosmology.In my opinion the existence of God or a God-like intelligence (sentient universal information field) will be an inescapable scientific fact.