Aliens
 

Does life exist outside of our planet? If so, why haven't we heard from them yet?

Yes. We have yet to hear from them because we already have enough shit to deal with from ourselves. They see that, and let us be.

I think it's hard to say no given the fact there may be an infinite number of universes and galaxies in 'existence'. Why haven't they contacted us if they exist? Some say that they have, I honestly am unsure about the alien conspiracies, but would you sit down and talk to a cockroach? I'd assume their intelligence is so exponentially superior to ours that they look at us the way that we look at insects.

Uni=one
Oneverse.

Bi=two

Biverse.

Omni = all

Omniverse = D3V's "Universe".Reptiles (Dinosaurs) once ruled the earth.
Now, we, humans... Mammals. We rule.
my history teacher believes Insects/bugs are next in line.
Buzz Buzz!

I should clarify. I don't particularly mean actual visits to the planet, although I am curious why we have never been (conclusively) visited. I meant more in the sense of, why is space so eerily quiet? We have been listening for a while, but have not picked up on anything we can conclusively demonstrate as a sign of intelligence. Even if we are like cockroaches to them, if they use the electromagnetic spectrum to communicate over long distances (which I can't seem to find a way around), why haven't we detected it?

And if you encountered an insect on another planet, would you not study it? Would someone, at least, not study it? Even on our own planet, many do study terrestrial insects -- rather mundane in comparison to extraterrestrial insects. Furthermore, D3V, I think the insect analogy falls apart as we do not believe insects are sentient. Surely we would have far greater respect for sentient beings, even if they are technologically, or intellectually far inferior.

I think you underestimate the vastness of the known universe my good man

I am willing to accept that intelligence exists outside our range of communication. But within 15 light years from home, there are 63 stars. When you increase that number to 50, there are over 1000 stars -- we have broadcast our radio and television signals to over 1000 star-systems. And when you increase that number to 80 there are over 3500 stars.

We have found exoplanets which we think may lie within the habitable region of their star systems within 25 light years from home. Keep in mind, that our current methods can not detect planets unless they are at least 5 times larger than Earth. Also, keep in mind that relative to its lifespan, life arose on Earth quite quickly. This suggests that the formation of life is not as improbable of an event as some would make it seem.

Now, in our relatively primitive state of technology (we have only had the capability of near-home space travel of 60-70 years!), we have already sent out message aimed at systems 25,000 light-years from Earth.

The numbers suggest to me that intelligence should have risen within a range that we can communicate, perhaps on numerous occasions. This is not taking into account intelligence that may have risen beyond that range. Taking this into account, my question still stands: where are they?

They could have a communication system based on entanglement. They could have wormholes to a central comms hub.

My rummaging on arXiv hasn't yielded any feasible approaches for FTL communication based on quantum entanglement so far, since a classical (information) channel (limited by c) has been required for all of them. If an alien civilization has access to wormhole technology, it would (if I recall correctly) require considerably less energy per bit of sent information to use microwaves than to use entangled particles.

Thus, unless the alien civilization goes out of its way to remain invisible in the EM spectrum, or perhaps unless it needs to transmit information through a planet, it will probably be more likely to use microwave communication that we can detect. Unless they've limited themselves to masers...

After further contemplation, I'm inclined to think that it may take less than 200 years for a technological civilization to go from the advancement of electromagnetic communication to the advent of strong AI. Even if it takes 1000 years, it's still an insignificantly short period of time compared to the almost one billion years it took for the first life to form on Earth.

Since a technological civilization will presumably want as much intelligence and computational capacity as possible (to find out one's purpose here, or perhaps to play god by simulating a universe that is as realistic as possible), it seems likely that it billow out like a cloud of nano-, pico- or femtoscale von Neumann machines in all directions at close to the speed of light. This will probably happen within a few minutes after the strong AI is started the first time, since it will recursively make itself more intelligent. Its purpose may likely be to convert the planets, stars and galaxies into intelligent matter. Ideally, every planck volume in the universe will somehow be arranged into a component of its universal computer. Perhaps it will even try to stop the expansion of the universe to invoke the Omega Point to attain the only true immortality and omnipotence there is.

In other words, why would the aliens want to talk to us when they can just breeze by us like a dark .999c wind on a rainy Sunday morning, retool our atoms into a computer and fulfil their own digital dreams instead?

Triple p0st!

http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/the_flake_equation.png

Alternative text: Statistics suggest that there should be tons of alien encounter stories, and in practice there are tons of alien encounter stories. This is known as Fermi's Lack-of-a-Paradox.

My statements were two competing theories. If they used wormholes, the signal could be unidirectional and low power.

Do a bunch of wormholes, a bunch of times.

You've obviously done a bit more research on the topic than I have. I don't really follow SETI nor have I looked into any broadcasts we've sent, but let me continue to play the devil's advocate here... because it's fun :)

First thing that I can think of is, do you know at what frequencies these messages were broadcast? I know the Sun is of type... G2V I think? This likely affects what frequencies we find appropriate for communication. The sun's spectral type is also somewhat rare, I think something like only 1/13 stars in the galaxy are of the same type. How long was the duration of the broadcasts we sent? What if the message was simply missed?

Assuming this isn't a problem and communications have a 100% success rate, which is very unlikely, then did we match up time? Remember we live in four dimensions, not three. Considering the life of the universe, the human race has occurred in what some call 'the blink of an eye' and our civilized state of being able to send/receive electromagnetic communications is a much smaller window. Who's to say that the system we've sent messages to didn't have life or won't have life sometime in the future? If civilizations happen in the blink of an eye compared to the life of the universe, what are the odds that two civilizations so close to one another will both be capable and watching the sky trying to engage in communications at the same time?

Lastly, what stars are you referring to? Obviously I'm not asking for a complete list, but a star's lifetime is inversely proportional to its mass at formation (Look up an H-R diagram if you're not familiar). So I would wager (this is a complete assumption on my part) that a good majority of the stars we've broadcast to are massive stars, and therefore have short lifetimes. It's been suggested that evolution of life in these star systems would not occur since there is not enough time. I think some of the most massive stars have lifetimes less than 1 million years? If you look it up correct me if I'm wrong as its been a while. I may be off by an order of magnitude, but either way they have lifetimes that are very short as far as stellar lifetimes are concerned. Assuming that some of these stars are capable of supporting life, what is the distance? Again, we find ourselves limited by the vastness of space. I did take the liberty of looking up the 50 closest stars to us. I think the 50th closest star is around 16 light years. So any communication with a civilization of that system would take 32 years (16 out, 16 back). So maybe some of these messages we've sent to different stars systems haven't even reached the star yet, let alone had time for a message to travel back. Who knows, right now an alien civilization may be reading one of our messages and deciding if it's even wise to respond :p.

I don't think that current search methods depend on sending and recieving a response. They just look for any EM signal with enough order to require inteligence to create (and not so much order that it's obviously naturally occuring).

acually aliens use the element 115 hard to fully explain what it doesnt but it makes you travel near the speed of light

Or, a simple explaination.
We made alot of mistakes, and physics for Aliens is much different. The speed of light is shit compaired to the speed of yes.
Aliens travel at the speed of yes.

Skurai will you just act like a man for once .... god if i had a half cent for every stupid thing you've said it would equal more than enough to repay the U.S. debt. This is a real thing so butt off if you just want to act like a complete retard. I've pwned you many times that ive stopped counting so, ACT LIKE A FUCKING MAN!!

All I said was:
Imagine science made a single mistake when inventing physics. Aliens didn't. They can do things we refuse to imagine. For example, traveling faster than the speed of... anything we can make up. Because "That's not as fast as it goes".
We're human no matter how great someone is, he made a mistake. If he made a mistake making a sandwich, that was his mistake. At the same time, the mistake could've been in any of his theories. That's why they're theories.

o have theories of my own you know ....... they seems to be correct in there own ways

My point in stating that we've sent messages to star systems light years away had nothing to do with whether or not they actually receive the signals. It was more of a proof of concept. If we can do it in our relatively primitive state of technology, then imagine what beings who have surpassed our technological capabilities can do. If we are doing it, I assume they are doing it as well. My question is, why haven't we picked up on their signal? I am not expecting two way communication to be established any time soon.

This raises an interesting point. Is it inevitable that an intelligence will eventually extinguish itself? I think it seems that way with humans. But I'm not sure that this will be the case with all forms of intelligence. So, in regards to the argument that we may simply be temporally out of phase with other intelligences in the vicinity, one has to consider two cases: that an intelligence will inevitably extinguish itself, or it will not.

If the former is correct, then your temporal argument has merit. Perhaps our civilization arose at a time when no other civilization exists near enough to communicate with. This would explain our lack of present communication. Still, though, would it be impossible to find some vestige of their existence? Is there any evidence that our solar system has been visited any time in the past? How about some artifact left out in space that we can detect? If the nature of intelligence is to exterminate itself, this would make finding evidence of extraterrestrial life difficult, but perhaps not impossible.

If, however, intelligence doesn't necessarily destroy itself, then this blows the temporal argument out of the water. While we may have only been around for a blink of an eye, other beings may have been around a lot longer. As a corollary, they would have been transmitting for a lot longer. This should actually increase the chance of finding them, in my opinion.

Of course, in both cases there is a lot of wiggle-room. Perhaps an intelligence capable of surviving indefinitely has moved on to a more efficient medium of communication. Perhaps some dying race left a beacon on their world looking for help. Either way, whether the former or the latter is the case remains to be established. This is purely speculative on my part, but I tend to lean towards the latter case being more likely.

I will provide two examples.

The Arecibo message is aimed at globular star cluster M13. This star cluster ranges across 145 light-years, and has several hundred-thousand stars. For taking a shot in the dark, this is a massive target.

The "Hello From Earth" message was aimed at the Gilese 581 star, about 25 light-years from here. Gilese 581 is a red-dwarf star, whose mass is approximately a third of the sun's mass, and it's age is estimated to be around 7-11 billion years. Red Dwarf stars constitute the majority of the stars in the universe, and have an estimated life-span longer than the estimated life-span of the universe.

Why do you think we've made mistakes in developing our physics? Do you think the more exotic physics is mistaken, or even established physics? What does theory mean to you?

I never said I think it did happen. I think it's possible. Humans make mistakes. One little miscalculation and - what should the number 9000.1 is accidently the number 3
Big gap. One mistake.


Theory = something that's more likely than a hypothesis, but it has yet to be 100% proven as fact. From what I know. For example, the Big Bang Theory... is a Hypothesis. Not a Theory.(fact) LOL!

Colloquially, you are correct. However, in the scientific context that is not what a theory is. When talking about a scientific theory, the word "theory" does not insinuate any particular degree of uncertainty. Rather, a scientific theory is a group of propositions used to explain facts observed in nature. Whether or not it is accurate is ascertained by putting the theory to the test.
For instance, the big bang theory is not some gratuitous guess. It is the best model we have to explain the origin and subsequent evolution of our universe. It makes predictions, which can be tested. The overwhelming consensus from experts in the field is that the big bang theory has withstood the tests.

Here are some other examples of theories: the theory of gravity, the theory of evolution, atomic theory, the germ theory of disease, and the theory of limits. Would you relegate these to somewhere between guess and fact? I hope not, as the theory of gravity (probably the most uncertain of the theories presented above) explains the fact of gravity, the theory of evolution explains the fact of evolution, the atomic theory explains many properties of matter, the germ theory of disease is vital in medicine, and the theory of limits is the basis of calculus.

I think if one is intellectually honest, one has to admit to the possibility of mistakes. That said, the fact that our theories make predictions which match reality to a frightening degree implies that there is at least some level of truth to them. Would you agree with this?

I would. The problem is, we stand around making theories to things we can't ever prove. Unless we find a way to make more existence (create our own Big Bang) then it will always just be a theory.
The point I'm going for is, Aliens might be able to travel WAY faster than we can comprehend at the moment, and thus, be here in a few seconds, and back on the other side of the Triverse (it got bigger since my last post) in a few more seconds.

You're correct. It will always be a theory. It can not go any farther because it is already at the pinnacle -- in science, the status of an accepted theory is about as high as you can go.

Why do you think it is a problem to theorize about things that can't be "proven?" Do you think that because we can not directly observe something we can not ascertain, to a reasonable degree of certainty, its true nature?

Perhaps the aliens are too busy living Starcraft 2. Fear the zerg.

Yes. Unless we see it ourself, we're going to make some kind of mistake about it. Sorta like when the word "slave" sets off a Black guy... even though, he, and everyone he's ever met, was never a slave.

I think that this claim is not self-evident in general. It seems dependent on the situation, rather than a generality. Surely you can think of claims that you can not observe directly, but can be reasonably certain about.

Do you not think that the repercussions of ones history is a legitimate cause for an emotional response; in some cases, anger? And isn't a grave social injustice, no matter when it happened in history, worth being angry about, especially if someone suggests that your entire race should once again be subjugated to it?

No. The chances of slavery ever happening again is low, considering racism is dying and we wouldn't even know where to start, anyway. In my opinion, if it's been over for 80 years or more... then it's over. Everyone, legally, has equal rights in america. If it's not enforced, things go to court. If it ends up that things don't go justly, then everyone is in an uproar about it.
We've become to advanced for us to make the same mistake twice. Other than voting for Bush twice. That was our last repeated mistake.

So in your opinion, the holocaust, genocide, slavery, the inquisition, wiping out a race of people, and racism, since you claim it happened in the past, is not worth being angry about. And not only are you not angry about these things, you think nobody else should be either. Quite telling.

80 years? Where do you get this number?

Slavery is still rampant throughout the world. There are more slaves today than any other time in history. Some of these slave-traders live, and even operate, in America. The fact that it is illegal is great, but the moral zeitgeist of this nation has been quite capricious. There are people today who would repeal the emancipation of blacks, and just because they aren't as vocal as they used to be doesn't mean they can't get that way. It would take about as long to reinstate slavery as it did to repeal it -- about one generation.

This is a fairy tale. I have had first-hand experience with the debacle that is our justice system. Furthermore, on a more theoretical level a very strong case can be made for the antithesis of your statement.

Righteo, then.

Welp. You win. That's what I get for trying to argue at something-or-other in the morning. :(


I sing about those ones.

Yes. I'm not even mad about 9/11. (*Waits to get shot*)
Who am I getting mad at? As far as I know, everyone whow as involved in [the holocaust, (most) genocide, slavery, the inquisition, wiping out a race of people, and racism,] are all either dead, or considered morons by the rest of the world.
By the time the war is over, terrorists will know they f-cked up, and hopefully won't try anything again. Maybe, if I was a soldier, I'd have a different opinion, but, at the moment, I'm not phased by any of it.

Conclusive evidence of an alien presence on the moon:

http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/ap100401.html

That's a terrible edit. I mean, c'mon, I don't even

Edit?! What do you mean, edit?

April fools! I'm the water fountain!

Did this thread have anything to do with this?

http://www.firstcoastnews.com/news/u...155259&catid=6

Probably not, since that's dated to have come out today. I like how he compaired it to Columbus, since he's my least favorite human being. Made my opinion of Aliens to a complete 180, actually.

Yeah but i'm sure the documentary has been floating around beforehand.

LmaO! WTF!??

Anyways... time for me to be useful, for once, Zelaron.

http://isaaccaret.fortunecity.com/pa...1-fullsize.jpg
Picture failed. :/
For more pictures and reports, see website here: http://isaaccaret.fortunecity.com/

I saw this on the History channel, as well as some other stuff. I'll post the rest in a second post (as expected "sorry for double posting!").