Geezer

In percentage terms, maybe, but in sheer numbers, the likelihood of intelligent life on other planets probably runs in to the millions, if not billions.

Geezer

hodgy0_2

for an explanation why this is not so see the Religion thread

but put simply, your chances of winning the lottery are close to zero, but the chances of someone winning the lottery are a near certainty

jonc

We first discovered a mass orbiting a star only some 20 years ago and to date we have in total found around a thousand similar systems. It's estimated that there are 50 billion such systems in our own galaxy, many of which are millions of years older than our own and 500 million of which resides in the habitable zone like Earth. Then consider that with our current technology, it is estimated there may be as many as 500 billion of galaxies in the observable universe. The numbers are so massive that the odds are stacked against life not existing elsewhere.

jef

iTrader: (13)

not trying to be a **** lol, but i wouldnt agree

its well known our current laws dont tie in with each other and fail at events like singularities. like my post in another thread, even animals on this planet have senses humans dont, we have no level of what thses feel like or expose.

then we have human vision, evolved to provide and excellent survivable situation, but other animals see differently, currently we have educated guesses to what these expose.

our understanding is based on our exposure - which is understandable, and works well currently but i really think its not conclusive.
there are currently places where the laws of physics dont hold or breakdown. they dont currently tie in with regard for laws governing the very large and very small.
i do understand what your saying, its best to base thoughts on current exposure, but i dont think thats likely to be the end.

occupying such a minisclue portion of available space i do feel its unlikely we have exposre to all elements ect. even if the sun is a first generation star and every origionated froma single near infitely dense point, as things expand i do beleive things would not have been completely uniform. providing even of course everything did follow generally accepted thinking as origionating from a single point.

thoughts?

mart360

Guy's your all way too late

its well documented that he is amongst us



Mart

jef

iTrader: (13)

also were discovering life in enviroments previously thought of as not possible. outwith our current set of accepted circumstances.
so even on our own tiny part of the immesness of available matter its throwing up situations that need explained

life only exists here as a consequence of its ability to adapt to it enviroment, whos to say it cant exisit in an eviroment elsewhere, out with our current acceptance

imo enough time has passed to allow many different life ofrms to develop, provided its been exposed to the same thing that "sparked" life somewhere initially.

its quite possible elsewhere that its adapted to survive out with our "goldilocks zone" and that would mean its likely to beyond all human boundaries, as we can only apply thoughts in refferance to our personal exposure. this means limitless possibilities, the important bit - IMO, lol

JohnSmith

Thats the point I was trying to make with the extremophiles

They have found living creatures (endoliths) in rock miles beneath the ocean floor over 100 degrees C too

I reckon there are more living beings on this planet that we havent discovered yet than what we actually know about

But I think the general meaning is meant to be intelligent life (around a human / humanoid base) and not just something living

hodgy0_2

isn't even more complicated than that, some living things exhibit a sort of group intelligence, colonies of Ants, Termites etc

our whole concept of intelligence, could be a partial and subjective one

jef

iTrader: (13)

oops mustve missed that, sorry.

whether it be microbes or more complex organism living off thermal vents or creatures able to withstand low temperatures beyond the capabilities of humans in the form of anti freeze properties or whatever, the fact is life evolves to suit the immediate enviroment its faced with. it just needs the initial triggering.
whos to say it cant adapt to other scenarios its presented with, where its lethal to us, or overcome other potential "definite" barriers?

imo complex life if its there is quite unlikey to resemble us as our set of circumstances reflect our present form. but could still be developded to any extent.
our bodies represent our reliance on our senses to ensure survival, and the fact we need to extrcct oxygen in its exact concentration from our atmosphere, amognst many other influencing factors.

Terminator X

iTrader: (7)

Perhaps when the odds are 1 in 14 million, the odds I'm talking about are so small that it may as well be zero. Zero is still zero even when there are billions of galaxies etc. Just look how long it took for humans to develop ... 5bn years & here we are.

TX.

hodgy0_2

the principle is still the same, the numbers are just bigger (or smaller)

jonc

Earth is estimated at 4.5bn years old and the oldest fossil suggest that life started 3.4bn years ago in highly toxic environment. Complex life began only 550m years ago (Cambrian Period) and the oldest human ancestral fossil has been dated back to 3.2m years. So if we were to compress whole existence of the universe as we know it into one day, Earth has supported complex life for only 20 minutes and humans have been in existence for barely more than a few seconds. Take that in context for all the other exoplanets elsewhere in the universe, it is improbable that intelligent life has not existed elsewhere. We are proof that the odds cannot be zero.

stedee

iTrader: (4)

a new one - boron