[meteorite-list] OT: Listening To Fermi

From: Meteorites USA <eric_at_meteoritecentral.com>
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2010 21:55:58 -0700
Message-ID: <4C92F4DE.7050803_at_meteoritesusa.com>

Hi Phil, I agree completely with your sentiment, and respect your
belief. However I sincerely disagree that your conclusion that
intelligent extra terrestrial life does NOT exist is based on evidenced
fact. There is only a lack of evidence, and the best argument to the
contrary is us. Humans are the biggest single evidence in this universe
that the development of intelligent life forms is possible. (though the
intelligent part is arguable)

I know you believe we're the only intelligent lifeform, and I know you
think it's based on evidence, but it's actually lack of evidence to the
contrary that you are basing your belief on.

You're merely repeating Fermi's "Where are they?" question. Saying show
me... I've already given an analogy that very simply shows Fermi's
Paradox is not a paradox at all because we haven't the information to
quantify the question to begin with.

Lack of evidence is not evidence.

You'll be surprised to know, I don't "believe" in extraterrestrials.
However I can conclude they "most probably" exist because we are "here",
and the chances of them not being "there" (wherever there is) are so
minute it's statistically impossible considering the vastness and the
age of the universe.

We could also phrase this as "when" they were. Or how we "will" be in
1000 years, or 10,000 years. At the rate of technological advancement
(if we don't destroy ourselves first) where will we be in 1000 years?
That is curiously and seriously what I would like to know!

Even so, one can still safely use statistics and numbers to figure the
probability. No, I'm not hanging my alien hat on the Drake equation. I
wouldn't know how to read it any more than I could read War & Peace in
one sitting. I'm saying One must take into account ALL the variables
possible to form a conclusion. Still, probability won't make it so. We
may never know, or we might find ET tomorrow.

I'll agree with Richard in that I believe that the universe is teaming
with life. Intelligent life however is probably extremely rare.

But even that, like time itself is probably relative.

Regards,
Eric



On 9/16/2010 9:19 PM, JoshuaTreeMuseum wrote:
> Hi Richard;
> That's an excellent argument for cancelling the silly SETI project.
> The key word in your argument is "believe". You believe in the
> existence of exo-life without any supporting evidence, I don't. So we
> can agree to disagree.
>
> If life never existed on Mars, I can't see it existing anywhere else.
> But, my beliefs are evidence based, I'll change them in a minute if
> someone will just show me the money.
>
> -----------------------------------
>
> Phil Whitmer
>
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Actually Phil, I'd disagree with that statement, even though I believe
> that the universe is filled to the brim with life, I think that
> intelligent life is exceedingly rare.
>
> Personally I think that SETI is never going to find a signal, not
> because there is no life out there, but that the circumstances
> required to find a signal is exceedingly small. The analogy put forth
> by others in this thread of a child looking out a window for
> 32/1000ths of a second is a good one.
>
> Use ourselves as an example. Radio technology on earth is barely a
> century old and we are already rapidly moving away from high powered
> transmitters to low powered devices for communications. Our most
> efficient long distance communications are already moving via fiber
> optics, so require no radio transmissions whatsoever.
>
> Ask yourself what are/or were the most powerful transmitters used?
> The answer is Early Warning defense radar systems. In fact at those
> frequencies Earth was brighter than the Sun. As the Cold War wound
> down, and the technology improved, lower power transmitters could do
> the same job. For about 40 years, Earth shined exceedingly brightly in
> microwaves, with a peak radiance about 1/3 through that period. So you
> can imagine a shell of microwaves 40 light years in thickness
> traveling out from our solar system, expanding at the speed of light.
> (I'm sure I'll be corrected here, but that's OK. I welcome it.)
>
> Say a intelligent civilization, only a century behind us in technology
> (Almost statistically impossible) 50 light years away from us will
> develop the technology to detect radio waves of that frequency. Our
> microwaves from the early warning systems have been reaching them for
> more than a decade already, but they won't develop the technology to
> detect this radiation for another 30 years or so.
>
> In other words, just as they gain the ability to detect our unintended
> signal to them just as it has completely passed them by. Even if they
> point their radio telescope directly at earth, they wouldn't hear us
> as our signal drops again below the background noise.
>
> And so it goes planet after planet as the signal extends out into
> space in an ever expanding shell, growing ever weaker. If we continue
> our trend to become more radio silent in other frequencies too, our
> civilization could become radio dark again as far as the universe is
> concerned in the next hundred years or so.
>
> Expand this problem by a more realistic estimate that civilizations
> become technologically capable thousands or millions of years apart,
> not mere decades apart...
>
> Now reverse the situation. For SETI to work you have to be listening
> at the precise moment the signals are passing our region of space.
> Miss it by a century, a decade, a year, a day, and its too late. The
> signal is no longer detectable. It may literally take many millenia
> before the right combination of circumstances allow us to detect
> another civilization through just their radio communications, intended
> or otherwise.
>
> Ironically, I think that SETI is an experiment that should not be
> abandoned, because you'll never know if there is a detectable signal
> if you don't look. I just think it will never yield a positive result.
> However, I do believe that the canceled Terrestrial Planet Finder
> mission had a much better chance to find habitable, and planets that
> have abundant life.
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________
> Visit the Archives at
> http://www.meteoritecentral.com/mailing-list-archives.html
> Meteorite-list mailing list
> Meteorite-list at meteoritecentral.com
> http://six.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/meteorite-list
>
Received on Fri 17 Sep 2010 12:55:58 AM PDT