Solar Systems Like Ours in the Minority

[McCoy]

Re: Solar Systems Like Ours in the Minority

 

Not true. It tells us something else. It tells us that the 50s version of the galaxy' date=' one which swarmed with advanced tool using civilisations travelling from star to star is not what we'll find. Either tool using life is low probability, or interstellar travel is impractical, or of course both. Because if at least one of those things was not true, there would be no us to ask the question.[/quote']

It tells us that at least one of the assumptions in the Drake equation is wrong. The question then becomes which one?

 

The basic framework of the Fermi Paradox is

The apparent size and age of the universe suggests that many technologically advanced extraterrestrial civilizations ought to exist.

 

However, this hypothesis seems inconsistent with the lack of observational evidence to support it.

 

The main theoretical explanations are:

 

5.1 No other civilizations currently exist

5.1.1 No other civilizations have arisen

5.1.2 It is the nature of intelligent life to destroy itself

5.1.3 It is the nature of intelligent life to destroy others

5.1.4 Human beings were created alone

5.2 They do exist, but we see no evidence

5.2.1 Communication is impossible due to problems of scale

5.2.1.1 Intelligent civilizations are too far apart in space or time

5.2.1.2 It is too expensive to spread physically throughout the galaxy

5.2.1.3 Human beings have not been searching long enough

5.2.2 Communication is impossible for technical reasons

5.2.2.1 Human beings are not listening properly

5.2.2.2 Civilizations only broadcast detectable radio signals for a brief period of time

5.2.2.3 They tend to experience a technological singularity

5.2.3 They choose not to interact with us

5.2.3.1 Earth is purposely isolated (The zoo hypothesis)

5.2.3.2 It is dangerous to communicate

5.2.3.4 They are non-technological

5.2.4 They are here unobserved

 

You can read details about each of the options in the link.

If I had to guess, I'd assign the lowest probability to 5.2.4, with 5.2.3.1 not much higher. The most optimistic are 5.2.2.1 and 5.2.2.2. HOWEVER, the one that should draw our attention like a cosmic "Check engine" light is 5.1.2 "It is the nature of intelligent life to destroy itself," to which I would add "or be destroyed by natural events." This would indicate that "L" in the Drake equation is brief compared to the live of the universe, the life of a planet, or possibly even the life of a species. Is it the tendency of tool users to create better ways to kill each other until they are all dead? O tinker with their environment until it breaks? Or eliminate all evolutionary selection and over-breed until they drown in their own excrement? Or just so involved in the local equivalent of beer and TV that they don't look up until the dino killer lands on their heads?

 

And importantly, can we pay attention to this cosmic idiot light and act like the universe is more dangerous than we currently believe? Just in case it is?

[RexMundi]

Re: Solar Systems Like Ours in the Minority

 

I lean towards Danger. They just want to keep us off their Lawn. The people that don't assume Danger, are the ones that end up getting eaten. My thing is, Space is really big, and on THIS planet, you have bunches of people that can't be bothered to go a city block. Now, you want astronomical distances? Heh. Besides, every time they send a tour bus over, we shoot 'em down.

 

The Fermi Paradox thing really doesn't irk me at all. I think the folks that like to toss up the "Lack of Observational Evidence so there for it's wrong and made of epic fail!", need to remember that they need Observational Evidence to support the opposite of that as well. Kind of like the Big Bang. No one was there to watch it happen, so the theories of KABOOOM! and "Let there be Light" .....Or Nathan Brazil rebooting the Well Computer, are all equally valid. If you can't see it happen, doesn't mean it didn't happen, or couldn't happen, but if you are going to use "No ones seen anything to prove it", then the "No ones seen anything to DISPROVE it" is equally valid.

 

~Rex