Social Odds for life in at least 2 galaxies are ~100% (near certainty)

Don't really buy into the materialist cosmology myself. Just seems like a lot of mental masturbation with no real telos. Makes for some entertaining books and films though.
 
Takes Two To Tango said:
If there was life even before us, like the dinosaurs. There has to be life in other parts of the universe. Like I said it's nothing special about our planet, sun or solar system.

Even if there just a microorganism living in another planet in another solar system, than that alone proves life exists outside our planet.

As for intelligent life, how do you define intelligence? It doesn't have to be as smart as us. Could be just as intelligent as whales or elephants or even dogs and cats. But it's more than likely they are out there.
Click to expand...

I mean, it doesn't necessarily prove it, just makes it a lot more likely.

The theory that all life that has ever existed on this planet evolved from one single organism, isn't even something we are sure about.

If we could ever prove that life started independently on this planet twice or three times or hundreds of times that would go a long way in showing it's not quite the long shot we once thought.
 
The elements necessary for life—carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen, phosphorus, sulfur—are among the most common in the universe. Spectral analysis of exoplanets, comets, and interstellar clouds shows that organic molecules (like amino acids) exist beyond Earth. We’ve even found water on moons, exoplanets, and in interstellar space.
Our Milky Way has 100–400 billion stars, and the observable universe has trillions of galaxies, each with billions of stars.
The Kepler Space Telescope showed that planets are common—most stars have planets, and many are in the habitable zone (not too hot or cold).
If even a tiny fraction of planets develop life, that still means millions or billions of planets with life in the universe.

Most galaxies contain stars, planets, water, and organic compounds—all ingredients we associate with life.
Many exoplanets resemble Earth, and some orbit Sun-like stars in their star's habitable zone (e.g., Proxima Centauri b, TRAPPIST-1 planets).
The physics and chemistry of the universe are consistent everywhere, meaning the same conditions that led to life here could happen elsewhere. Earth isn’t unique in its chemical makeup or physical laws.
Life on Earth suggests that, under the right conditions, life can emerge.
Given the astronomical number of galaxies, it’s statistically almost impossible that Earth is the only place where life formed.
 
Cool thread. Definitely takes a closed mind to think that there isn’t something like us out there. Because we exist, we can assume the possibility.
 
There's something like 22,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 planets out there. There's life on fucking one of them.

To put it in perspective, even if life doesn't exist on 99.999% of planets that means there's still millions of planets that do.
 
Last edited:
Domitian said:
There's something like 22,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 planets out there. There's life on fucking one of them.

To put it in perspective, even if life doesn't exist on 99.999% of planets that means there's still millions of planets that do.
Click to expand...

In my mind that seems obvious, yeah.

Still, there is a lot of brilliant minds out there who still question it or even flat out doubt it.

One would assume it’s either extremely common or we are alone, no inbetween. If it’s the former I’m guessing we’ll find it eventually. If it’s the latter we’ll never stop speculating.
 
LEWIS540 said:
In my mind that seems obvious, yeah.

Still, there is a lot of brilliant minds out there who still question it or even flat out doubt it.

One would assume it’s either extremely common or we are alone, no inbetween. If it’s the former I’m guessing we’ll find it eventually. If it’s the latter we’ll never stop speculating.
Click to expand...
Just based on sheer numbers, the average galaxy has 100 billion to 1 trillion planets. Then there's 200 billion to 2 trillion galaxies. That's not even accounting all the moons. It's incredible to believe life doesn't exist somewhere else.
 
LEWIS540 said:
That table is pretty dumb, but my belief is that it's very likely yes. It's obviously not a certainty at all, though.

If there's life in other galaxies, probably means there's multiple planets with life in our own galaxy, too.

Probably exists now in some places, probably come and gone millions/billions of years ago in other places.

Doubt we'll ever be able to interact with any of them.

Like if life is ubiquitous you have to assume on a universal scale it has been around for billions of years and that we are nothing special, ergo if intergalactic travel was possible, it would have already been done. Or maybe 5 billion years ago, on the opposite side of existence it was already happening.
Click to expand...

I suspect intergalactic travel already exists and something knows we're here tbh.
 
tonil said:
The elements necessary for life—carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen, phosphorus, sulfur—are among the most common in the universe. Spectral analysis of exoplanets, comets, and interstellar clouds shows that organic molecules (like amino acids) exist beyond Earth. We’ve even found water on moons, exoplanets, and in interstellar space.
Our Milky Way has 100–400 billion stars, and the observable universe has trillions of galaxies, each with billions of stars.
The Kepler Space Telescope showed that planets are common—most stars have planets, and many are in the habitable zone (not too hot or cold).
If even a tiny fraction of planets develop life, that still means millions or billions of planets with life in the universe.

Most galaxies contain stars, planets, water, and organic compounds—all ingredients we associate with life.
Many exoplanets resemble Earth, and some orbit Sun-like stars in their star's habitable zone (e.g., Proxima Centauri b, TRAPPIST-1 planets).
The physics and chemistry of the universe are consistent everywhere, meaning the same conditions that led to life here could happen elsewhere. Earth isn’t unique in its chemical makeup or physical laws.
Life on Earth suggests that, under the right conditions, life can emerge.
Given the astronomical number of galaxies, it’s statistically almost impossible that Earth is the only place where life formed.
Click to expand...

And that's only based on our understanding of what is required for life as we know it to exist. I think it's absolutely possible for life to exist outside of our current concepts of it.
 
Domitian said:
Just based on sheer numbers, the average galaxy has 100 billion to 1 trillion planets. Then there's 200 billion to 2 trillion galaxies. That's not even accounting all the moons. It's incredible to believe life doesn't exist somewhere else.
Click to expand...

Yeah, and then combine it with 14 billion years (with many more billions to come)…….

It’s kinda like that model they use to describe infinity.

Like, you’re a card man. I believe the possibilities when you shuffle a 52 card deck is something like 10 to the power of 60. Means every time you shuffle a deck, it’s almost going to be the first time to end up in that order and it’s almost impossible to shuffle that order again. Yet with infinite time, you’d do every single combination infinite times.

Guessing life works the same.
 
There is no chance that humans are the most advanced and intelligent species or lifeform in existence.
 
The question is not whether there is other life out in the universe, the question has always been will humanity ever see it in their lifetime.
 
tonil said:
The elements necessary for life—carbon, hydrogen, oxygen, nitrogen, phosphorus, sulfur—are among the most common in the universe. Spectral analysis of exoplanets, comets, and interstellar clouds shows that organic molecules (like amino acids) exist beyond Earth. We’ve even found water on moons, exoplanets, and in interstellar space.
Our Milky Way has 100–400 billion stars, and the observable universe has trillions of galaxies, each with billions of stars.
The Kepler Space Telescope showed that planets are common—most stars have planets, and many are in the habitable zone (not too hot or cold).
If even a tiny fraction of planets develop life, that still means millions or billions of planets with life in the universe.

Most galaxies contain stars, planets, water, and organic compounds—all ingredients we associate with life.
Many exoplanets resemble Earth, and some orbit Sun-like stars in their star's habitable zone (e.g., Proxima Centauri b, TRAPPIST-1 planets).
The physics and chemistry of the universe are consistent everywhere, meaning the same conditions that led to life here could happen elsewhere. Earth isn’t unique in its chemical makeup or physical laws.
Life on Earth suggests that, under the right conditions, life can emerge.
Given the astronomical number of galaxies, it’s statistically almost impossible that Earth is the only place where life formed.
Click to expand...

If anything I would think the odds of earth like planets existing and the quantity of them is likely MUCH MUCH higher than whatever statistics we have based on the few exo planets we have discovered thus far... due to the implicit bias based on the methods we use.

We have 2 methods, and based on my limited knowledge, the "wobble method" which is really not giving a whole lot of useful info and zero spectral analysis.

And

the "transit method" which is going to heavily skew in favor of big planets orbiting VERY close to small stars, which I don't think is the recipe for life, there is way too much likelihood of excessive radiation from coronal mass elections, and much of what we have discovered is expected to be tidally locked, which certainly COULD support life, but wouldn't have the same balanced seasons and attributes which drive evolution forward and would leas from simple life to intelligent life.

TL/DR Truly "Earthlike" exoplanets are going to be nearly impossible to locate and perform spectral analysis with the transit method.

- We only orbit our star once every 365.25 earth days
So you would have to be observing for MANY years
And
- have to be able to notice whatever miniscule dip in light was created by:

- a planet 1 millionth the size of the star
- Passing by at a distance of 150 million kilometers
- At a speed of roughly 100,000 kilometers per hour

For all of those factors to fall into place, and to observe repeated eclipses I'm guessing you probably have a margin of error of a fraction of a degree (at earth orbit range, 1au) in order for the observational angle to be correct.

______________________________

Moat of what we are seeing, due to the limitation bias, is a scenario on the order of:

Planets size roughly similar to Saturn
orbiting a star 10-30× Jupiter
At a distance of a fraction of the orbital distance of Mercury

That's not where intelligent life is going to be, in my humble half tarded not exceptionally scientifically educated opinion.

______________________________

the most ideal scenarios, AKA potential "superhabitible star systems" are going to be much harder to find than the hot Jupiter's going around red dwarfs every 2-12 days which seem to account for a lot of the known exoplanets



your best bet for advanced intelligence would be Orange Dwarfs (K dwarfs) whch have much longer lifespans than our sun a G dwarf.

We exist in this perfect little pocket of time where after 4.5 billion years we now have reached intelligence to JUST BARELY begin space travel
(most of which is debatable if it is really "space" but rather low earth orbit)

Supposedly by 5 billion years our sun will expand to somewhere between the orbits of Mars and Jupiter and fry our oceans away and end habitability. Meaning of that 5 billion years, only maximum of 10% featured intelligent life, half a billion years is the blink of an eye in astronomical terms.


K Dwarfs supposedly remain stable for up to 70 billion years, potentially leaving a duration 140x longer for intelligent life to exist.

If I understand correctly, that is what Keppler 442 B is.
There might be some smartypants aliens there.
Now we just need to train a carrier pigeon to fligh 1200 light years to drop them a note and say hi.

___________________

I think there is likely a lot of life out there, the vast majority not intelligent life, and the instances of intelligent life are probably separated by nearly impossible amounts of time &/or distance.
________

I'm quite curious about life as we don't know it.

Are there photosynthetic sentient beings out there?
Silicone based life?
Have any intelligent beings evolved to achieve immortality or near immortality by merging consciousness with machinery?

Have any intelligent species figured out how to actually achieve:
Warp drives?
Worm holes?
Terraforming?
 
LEWIS540 said:
Yes there is.
Click to expand...

The universe is estimated to be 13.8 billion years old. I find it very hard to believe that something more advanced than us hasn't developed during that time.

I'd be surprised if we're even anywhere near the list of most advanced species.
 
Hellowhosthat said:
The universe is estimated to be 13.8 billion years old. I find it very hard to believe that something more advanced than us hasn't developed during that time.

I'd be surprised if we're even anywhere near the list of most advanced species.
Click to expand...

Sure.

Unlikely maybe.

But “no chance” is an absolute.

Until facts change, we are the most advanced species we’ve ever been aware of in the history of the universe

There is another theory that any civilization that gets as advanced as (potentially) us, it will destroy itself before it achieves its optimal state.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,262,011
Messages
57,135,410
Members
175,552
Latest member
kyejay87

Share this page

Back
Top