E.T. Phone Home

[B_Sharp]

The likelihood that other life exists in space has an interesting twist per the following article published in "Journal of the British Interplanetary Society" (JBIS), Jan 2005.

Space.com ET High Likelihood (http://www.space.com/searchforlife/et_betterodds_050114.html)

I especially like how it uses recent discoveries, as evidence to better support Earthlings are rather young beings comparatively. Specifically, suggesting Earth is One Billion years younger than our other Star neighbors. Hopefully the more mankind learns astronomically, the more that evidence 'converges' to the idea of a more populated Universe.

E.G. Had the Earth lifecycle instead been billions of years older, the odds of other life would be far less because it might assume Mankind should be more advanced than we currently are. Young Earth at least does not 'negate' advanced extra life. So far, so good.

"We are in the curious situation today that our best modern physics and astrophysics theories predict that we should be experiencing extraterrestrial visitation, yet any possible evidence of such lurking in the UFO phenomenon is scoffed at within our scientific community," contends astrophysicist Bernard Haisch.

Haisch along with physicists James Deardorff, Bruce Maccabee and Harold Puthoff make their case in the JBIS article: "Inflation-Theory Implications for Extraterrestrial Visitation".

The scientists point to two key discoveries made by Australian astronomers and reported last year that there is a "galactic habitable zone" in our Milky Way Galaxy. And more importantly that Earth’s own star, the Sun, is relatively young in comparison to the average star in this zone -- by as much as a billion years.

Therefore, the researchers explain in their JBIS article that an average alien civilization would be far more advanced and have long since discovered Earth. Additionally, other research work on the supposition underlying the Big Bang -- known as the theory of inflation -- shores up the prospect, they advise, that our world is immersed in a much larger extraterrestrial civilization.

[Loren Pechtel]

We still haven't solved Fermi's Paradox.

Unfortunately, I think we will find out the answer the hard way.

[B_Sharp]

Unfortunately, I think we will find out the answer the hard way.You will certainly because you live in Las Vegas. Art Bell has seen triangular UFO's hovering around your state. Art says it is true, so it has to be. ;)

[Christopher Lord]

This theory also discounts the possibility that we developed *because* of the younger Sol.

For instance, perhaps our sun is the first 'generation' of stars with sufficent heavy elements in the acretion disk to support earth-like planets?

If this is the case, we would be close to the youngest intelligent life out there :(

[B_Sharp]

For instance, perhaps our sun is the first 'generation' of stars with sufficent heavy elements in the acretion disk to support earth-like planets?I'm confused.

A sun does not need heavy elements, only hydrogen.

The heavy elements that created Earth came from a previous super nova that created the Sun also. I believe the article still claims that most other stars are much, much older than our star the Sun. This would make our Earth quite young, thankfully. Thus there is a greater chance of E.T.s :)

[Demosthenes]

Personally in my opinion, a difference of a billion years between Sol and other stars in the galactic habitable zone doesn't make that much difference for the evolution of technological intelligent beings. My views towards the likehood of life, complex life, and intelligent life were strongly colored by the Rare Earth book which trace the development of life on Earth and show the many extreme improbable events that had to occur across 4.6 billion years for us to arrive. One billion years give or take isn't going to change anything significantly when you're dealing on cosmic and evolution scales. If there are E.Ts out there and I do consider that to be most likely, they're probably very far away. I won't be surprised if we realize that we're the only technological civilization to have evolved in our part of galaxy for the past few billion years.

Simple life of the one cellular type is probably widespread throughout the galaxy. Complex life is more difficult to say, it might be relatively common or rare. Intelligent beings? Likely quite rare but many types are expected and also intelligence doesn't imply technological decelopment. Highly intelligent beings with no technology won't be detectable across interstellar distances at all. Those that actually develop into a technological civilization capable of interstellar communication and detection are the most rare of all.

[Demosthenes]

I'm confused.

A sun does not need heavy elements, only hydrogen.

The heavy elements that created Earth came from a previous super nova that created the Sun also. I believe the article still claims that most other stars are much, much older than our star the Sun. This would make our Earth quite young, thankfully. Thus there is a greater chance of E.T.s :)

Strictly, it's not of importance whether the sun has heavy elements. The proportion of heavy elements in a star has a direct correlation to the amount of heavy elements in the acceration disks and thus the amount of elements in planets. Heavy elements are crucial to the development of life on Earth and the assumption is it's also crucial to advanced life elsewhere in the Universe. Also technology requires heavy elements too. If you don't have enough of elements to create something, you can be screwed especially if you can't develop the infrastructure which allows you to go and find or make more of the elements you need.

So stars with good proportions of heavy elements have the highest probability of having technological civilizations around them.

[Tubby Lardmore]

... intelligence doesn't imply technological decelopment...

I've sometimes wondered if creatures who spend all their time underwater would ever become tool makers, and thereby create technology. Dolphins seem to be quite intelligent, but as far as I know, they don't manufacture anything. Having to be a good swimmer to stay alive limits the ability to evolve something as non-hydrodynamic as a hand with fingers, I would think, and that is a problem, as is the difficulty of maintaining a temperature difference of any significance in the huge thermal bath of the ocean. In other words, melting and casting operations are probably out of the question for sea creatures, unless maybe they could make use of a naturally-occurring thermal vent.

[Loren Pechtel]

I'm confused.

A sun does not need heavy elements, only hydrogen.

The heavy elements that created Earth came from a previous super nova that created the Sun also. I believe the article still claims that most other stars are much, much older than our star the Sun. This would make our Earth quite young, thankfully. Thus there is a greater chance of E.T.s :)

The sun doesn't, but if planets are going to form they need heavy elements to form out of.

[Donnmathan]

You will certainly because you live in Las Vegas. Art Bell has seen triangular UFO's hovering around your state. Art says it is true, so it has to be. ;)

Hey, now, don't be bashing Art! Most of his guests are crackpots, it's true, but there are a few that aren't, and even the nuts help one keep an open mind and give you: a) the mental exercise of recognizing where their bizarre ideas are flawed, and b) the occasional really good laugh. Stop and really listen sometimes...it can take a bit to find the actual weakness in some of those ideas, even when you know there is one.

[Sven]

Hey, now, don't be bashing Art! Most of his guests are crackpots, it's true, but there are a few that aren't
Is one of those who isn't a crackpot in your opinion, Allison Dubois (http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?t=111047)?
Is there a reason why you didn't answer the posts in the linked thread any more?