Relevant (it should load at the 55:13 mark): http://youtu.be/CAD25s53wmE?t=55m13s
And before someone asks, yes I have been youtubing Neil deGrasse Tyson lately
And before someone asks, yes I have been youtubing Neil deGrasse Tyson lately
myp, et al,
Yes, I like this guy. Especially the Amazing Meeting #6. Brain Droppings
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8vfOpZD4Sm8
He speaks a little about UFOs and Abductions.
Most Respectfully,
R
Yes, I like this guy. Especially the Amazing Meeting #6. Brain Droppings
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8vfOpZD4Sm8
(COMMENT)Relevant (it should load at the 55:13 mark): http://youtu.be/CAD25s53wmE?t=55m13s
And before someone asks, yes I have been youtubing Neil deGrasse Tyson lately
He speaks a little about UFOs and Abductions.
Most Respectfully,
R
Thanks for the share! I haven't seen that one yet- now I have something to do this evening
That proves it's a UFO, which says nothing about extraterrestrial life and everything about unidentified. Many believe that all of these "UFO's" are military projects. Another great example of our tax dollars being spent unjustly. I personally think that alien life has to exist just because of the vastness of outer space, but has not shown itself to us.
6stringnut, et al,
Ah, yes! The probability theory.
The vastness of space, the probability, and the chemistry...
Based on what we know about the universe, the probability is that there is intelligent life, or has been intelligent life, somewhere else in the universe.
But the probabilities also tell us that it is unlikely that we will ever make contact (interaction) with them for the very reason that the vastness is so great. The probabilities are greater that we might "detect" the presence of intelligence life, but against amazing high odds. Still more probable, yet high odds, is that some evidence of a lower form of life may be discovered.
Most Respectfully,
R
Ah, yes! The probability theory.
(COMMENT)
The vastness of space, the probability, and the chemistry...
Based on what we know about the universe, the probability is that there is intelligent life, or has been intelligent life, somewhere else in the universe.
But the probabilities also tell us that it is unlikely that we will ever make contact (interaction) with them for the very reason that the vastness is so great. The probabilities are greater that we might "detect" the presence of intelligence life, but against amazing high odds. Still more probable, yet high odds, is that some evidence of a lower form of life may be discovered.
Most Respectfully,
R
It seems important to also consider another criteria..namely "Time".
There may be ample life out there, and much of it highly evolved. But the chances of someone being capable of interstellar travel would be low. The likely hood of this happening at this point in one billion years of evolution even lower. And, the chances of it occurring in the 100 yrs. when we would notice seem incalculable.
"
The Drake equation states that:
N = the number of civilizations in our galaxy with which communication might be possible (i.e. which are on our current past light cone);and
R* = the average rate of star formation per year in our galaxyfp = the fraction of those stars that have planetsne = the average number of planets that can potentially support life per star that has planetsfℓ = the fraction of the above that actually go on to develop life at some pointfi = the fraction of the above that actually go on to develop intelligent lifefc = the fraction of civilizations that develop a technology that releases detectable signs of their existence into spaceL = the length of time for which such civilizations release detectable signals into space[5] R factor
One can question why the number of civilizations should be proportional to the star formation rate, though this makes technical sense. (The product of all the factors except L tells how many new communicating civilizations are born each year. Then you multiply by the lifetime to get the expected number. For example, if an average of 0.01 new civilizations are born each year, and they each last 500 years on the average, then on the average 5 will exist at any time.) The original Drake Equation can be extended to a more realistic model, where the equation uses not the number of stars that are forming now, but those that were forming several billion years ago. The alternate formulation, in terms of the number of stars in the galaxy, is easier to explain and understand, but implicitly assumes the star formation rate is constant over the life of the galaxy."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drake_equation
That said...there is much we do not know.
Similar threads
