Extraterrestrial Sightings

[Willbacker]

This is old news actually, but the odds of another earth like planet (one that could sustain intelligent life) are so small that ours shouldn't exist. There was a book published in 1988 called "The Anthropic Cosmological Principle" which goes through much of the requirements for intelligent life and how likely the needs would come together on a planet by chance. That is 33 years old. Since then we have found the life-requiring constraints considerably more so.

The book also covers evolution (their point not being mine) and they found 10 different steps in single cell to human evolution that the odds of any of them, much less all 10, would occur that none should happen in the normal life span of our sun. If you believe we evolved by chance then you would also happen to believe that there is almost no chance life would have evolved faster elsewhere given our evolution required at least 10 different miracles.

If you know me you know my view on the matter. Luck had nothing to do with it.

By the way, all of the science I use is accepted science and not science some Christians use in an attempt to prove the earth is 6,000 years old.

God created man in the likeness of himself so without getting into religion and off track we were created and I agree not by evolution so you would think there is a planet somewhere that can sustain life like ours.

Again, based on our current understanding of science. Everything you are suggesting is accepted science and math, I am not trying to paint it as fringe lunatic realm stuff. We are simply spiking the football after the first play of the game we ran up the middle for a yard.
Silicon based life is expected to be possible.

I believe it to be myopic to claim that for a planet to be able to sustain life, it must be able to sustain US. The more we learn as a human race the more we realize we know almost nothing.

If It takes a trillion consecutive rolls of snake eyes to meet certain conditions, then sure, you are correct the chance is incredibly small, but when given infinite dice rolls it not only will happen, it will happen infinite times.

The chances we come across intelligent alien beings is certainly quite small, it is, however, not zero.

We don’t know what we don’t know.

Is spacetime infinite because it is expanding or because it’s always been infinite?
The more I look into dark matter, dark energy, black holes, white holes, quantum physics etc the less intelligent I think we are as a species.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Where anything ends there's gotta be something on the other side. Your post is spot on.

[Greg]

Again, based on our current understanding of science. Everything you are suggesting is accepted science and math, I am not trying to paint it as fringe lunatic realm stuff. We are simply spiking the football after the first play of the game we ran up the middle for a yard.
Silicon based life is expected to be possible.

I believe it to be myopic to claim that for a planet to be able to sustain life, it must be able to sustain US. The more we learn as a human race the more we realize we know almost nothing.

If It takes a trillion consecutive rolls of snake eyes to meet certain conditions, then sure, you are correct the chance is incredibly small, but when given infinite dice rolls it not only will happen, it will happen infinite times. If It takes a trillion consecutive rolls of snake eyes to meet certain conditions, then sure, you are correct the chance is incredibly small, but when given infinite dice rolls it not only will happen,

How are you getting an infinite amount of tries? No such thing.

The chances we come across intelligent alien beings is certainly quite small, it is, however, not zero.

We don’t know what we don’t know.

Is spacetime infinite because it is expanding or because it’s always been infinite?
The more I look into dark matter, dark energy, black holes, white holes, quantum physics etc the less intelligent I think we are as a species.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Spacetime isn't infinite. Well, unless you want to dismiss current cosmology that accepts the Big Bang happened 13.8 billion years ago, or thereabouts. That the universe had a beginning comes straight out of Relativity and has been verified numerous ways. We still call special and general relativity theories but in fact relativity is as verified as Newtownian physics and all of the "laws" we take out of that.

Current odds for a universe like ours that can host intelligent life coming from chance are at 1 in 10^500. That number grows as we learn more. Sure, we don't know a lot, but as we learn more the trend is going into the favor of some intelligent cause to the universe, or dare I say Intelligent Cause.

To give some perspective the universe at 13.8 billion years is 10^17 seconds old. When numbers like 10^500 come up, well, by chance you would need somewhere around 10^483 tries per second since the universe began to hit those odds. A trillion snake eyes in a row looks a bit easier, mathematically.

1 in 35^1000000000000

[jonboy79]

How are you getting an infinite amount of tries? No such thing.



Spacetime isn't infinite. Well, unless you want to dismiss current cosmology that accepts the Big Bang happened 13.8 billion years ago, or thereabouts. That the universe had a beginning comes straight out of Relativity and has been verified numerous ways. We still call special and general relativity theories but in fact relativity is as verified as Newtownian physics and all of the "laws" we take out of that.

Current odds for a universe like ours that can host intelligent life coming from chance are at 1 in 10^500. That number grows as we learn more. Sure, we don't know a lot, but as we learn more the trend is going into the favor of some intelligent cause to the universe, or dare I say Intelligent Cause.

To give some perspective the universe at 13.8 billion years is 10^17 seconds old. When numbers like 10^500 come up, well, by chance you would need somewhere around 10^483 tries per second since the universe began to hit those odds. A trillion snake eyes in a row looks a bit easier, mathematically.

1 in 35^1000000000000

The Big Bang is a good guess that kind of lines up with “our current understanding of physics”, kind of. Just the same, it really does not at all.
13.8 billion years is an accurate depiction at one guess of the time that has elapsed since the Big Bang, other manners of arriving at that number provide differing results, also known as the crisis of cosmology.

String theory suggests that the Big Bang was two branes contacting one another s part of a repeatable chain of events. String theory also predicts 11 or more dimensions.

Commonly we find new galaxies and add another trillion stars to what is known, and that would still only fill up the “observable universe” as the only known bound to the universe is something “close” enough for it’s light to have made it back to our retinas, redshifted as it moves away so much faster than physics can currently understand, and accelerating.
When Big Bang to big rip becomes an infinite cycle we see the timelines we study and distances we can observe and numbers we can fathom actually become small, compared to infinite.

Law is just an old fashioned term, theory is a synonym. But that ones not cancel out that Newtonian physics were prone and accepted for more than 100 years before Einstein proved hem incomplete. There is zero doubt the same will happen to Relativity. Relativity already struggles in many areas, most notably meeting up with particle physics. It also has two giant gaping holes currently described as dark energy and dark matter.

You also keep talking about Earth being perfect for us, and the odds there of. You simply refuse to consider that perhaps those conditions led to us not that other conditions could lead to something else. Of course the conditions are perfect for us here, it’s why WE happened HERE. To consistently insist there can’t be other “perfect” conditions elsewhere for some completely different intelligent life elsewhere is very boxed in thinking. I understand it’s accepted, but that still can mean that it lacks creativity.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Greg]

The Big Bang is a good guess that kind of lines up with “our current understanding of physics”, kind of. Just the same, it really does not at all.
13.8 billion years is an accurate depiction at one guess of the time that has elapsed since the Big Bang, other manners of arriving at that number provide differing results, also known as the crisis of cosmology.

String theory suggests that the Big Bang was two branes contacting one another s part of a repeatable chain of events. String theory also predicts 11 or more dimensions.

Commonly we find new galaxies and add another trillion stars to what is known, and that would still only fill up the “observable universe” as the only known bound to the universe is something “close” enough for it’s light to have made it back to our retinas, redshifted as it moves away so much faster than physics can currently understand, and accelerating.
When Big Bang to big rip becomes an infinite cycle we see the timelines we study and distances we can observe and numbers we can fathom actually become small, compared to infinite.

Law is just an old fashioned term, theory is a synonym. But that ones not cancel out that Newtonian physics were prone and accepted for more than 100 years before Einstein proved hem incomplete. There is zero doubt the same will happen to Relativity. Relativity already struggles in many areas, most notably meeting up with particle physics. It also has two giant gaping holes currently described as dark energy and dark matter.

You also keep talking about Earth being perfect for us, and the odds there of. You simply refuse to consider that perhaps those conditions led to us not that other conditions could lead to something else. Of course the conditions are perfect for us here, it’s why WE happened HERE. To consistently insist there can’t be other “perfect” conditions elsewhere for some completely different intelligent life elsewhere is very boxed in thinking. I understand it’s accepted, but that still can mean that it lacks creativity.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The two brane hypothesis, which it is barely, is just a figment of somebody's imagination. There is absolutely zero evidence for it.

You pin a lot on what we don't know. There is some validity but as we learn more in pushes us closer to an Intelligent Cause to the universe.

But let's step outside of science and try simple old logic. Can the universe exist eternally? Can there be an infinite regress in time? Can cause and effect go back infinitely? Long before the scientific method Aristotle figured out you needed an umoved mover, an uncaused cause. Something had to start it all.

Add to that the fine tuning of the universe and the most logical cause and mechanic of the universe would be an Intelligent Being of some kind that is uncaused and exists eternally.

[jonboy79]

The two brane hypothesis, which it is barely, is just a figment of somebody's imagination. There is absolutely zero evidence for it.

You pin a lot on what we don't know. There is some validity but as we learn more in pushes us closer to an Intelligent Cause to the universe.

But let's step outside of science and try simple old logic. Can the universe exist eternally? Can there be an infinite regress in time? Can cause and effect go back infinitely? Long before the scientific method Aristotle figured out you needed an umoved mover, an uncaused cause. Something had to start it all.

Add to that the fine tuning of the universe and the most logical cause and mechanic of the universe would be an Intelligent Being of some kind that is uncaused and exists eternally.

Ah, the existential proof of god. I am familiar with that as well. I’m not even specifically arguing against a creator, simply more towards an open mind that isn’t hell bent on confirming one.
The more we learn, the more we realize how little we know. Relativistic physics are certainly nothing to hang ones hat on... it is massively incomplete and flawed. Our understanding of how galaxies form, rotate and expand are completely incompatible with relativistic physics.

I am absolutely basing almost everything on the unknown, and am willing to admit how little we actually know, not just myself but man as a species, are you?

Also, football spiking in science disgusts me... I far prefer the curious scientist that constantly test retests and questions what we already believe to know completely, because chances are... we do not.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[2bynight]

There is more knowledge human beings don't know than do know. I believe UFOs exist. Whether they represent intelligence in action, unknown physical phenomena, a cross-over from another dimension, some type of time machine sent back from future humans - or something else entirely that has not been speculated - is fascinating. One thing is for sure....no one today will possibly unravel what they actually are unless they land in a populated area for a look see and somehow I doubt that will ever happen. Maybe a 100 years from now they will be figured out with more advanced science.

[NCRAVEN]

Ah, the existential proof of god. I am familiar with that as well. I’m not even specifically arguing against a creator, simply more towards an open mind that isn’t hell bent on confirming one.
The more we learn, the more we realize how little we know. Relativistic physics are certainly nothing to hang ones hat on... it is massively incomplete and flawed. Our understanding of how galaxies form, rotate and expand are completely incompatible with relativistic physics.

I am absolutely basing almost everything on the unknown, and am willing to admit how little we actually know, not just myself but man as a species, are you?

Also, football spiking in science disgusts me... I far prefer the curious scientist that constantly test retests and questions what we already believe to know completely, because chances are... we do not.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

WHy not just an open mind in general that goes where ever the most logical and likely conclusion leads?

[jonboy79]

WHy not just an open mind in general that goes where ever the most logical and likely conclusion leads?

Sure... Works for me!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Greg]

Ah, the existential proof of god. I am familiar with that as well. I’m not even specifically arguing against a creator, simply more towards an open mind that isn’t hell bent on confirming one.
The more we learn, the more we realize how little we know. Relativistic physics are certainly nothing to hang ones hat on... it is massively incomplete and flawed. Our understanding of how galaxies form, rotate and expand are completely incompatible with relativistic physics.

I am absolutely basing almost everything on the unknown, and am willing to admit how little we actually know, not just myself but man as a species, are you?

Also, football spiking in science disgusts me... I far prefer the curious scientist that constantly test retests and questions what we already believe to know completely, because chances are... we do not.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Let's be clear on one thing. I am presenting evidence. Proof is left up to the receiver of the evidence. Proof is attained at three levels. Absolute proof where no doubt exists. Proof beyond a reasonable doubt where some doubt at unreasonable levels exists. Then there is proof by preponderance of the evidence, or which way the evidence leans to some small or large degree.

Absolute proof is unattainable except for one idea and it proves the same yet different thing to every person. That is "I exist." As Descartes noted, "I think therefore I am." The only thing you can know beyond any doubt is that you exist based on your mind contemplating it. I can know I exist. We can't know each other does outside of our own imaginations/delusions. Nothing else can be known beyond any doubt because anything outside of our own mind (including our bodies) can be illusion.

The other two standards we should all be familiar with because they are used in our legal system.

I think the existence of a Creator is evident beyond reasonable doubt. JMO. I don't see anyway to avoid a supernatural agent that is vastly more intelligent than we are.

I think the evidence for this Creator to be one as described in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam is if not beyond reasonable doubt is very heavily weighted toward the truth by a considerable preponderance of the evidence.

I think that Jesus was who he claimed to be by the preponderance of the evidence to a very large degree but not to the level of a Theist God as described in the Abrahamic religions.

And then for me personally, something attainable only to each on a personal level, is what a Christian would call the witness of the Holy Spirit. If you don't have it you don't know it and it serves no purpose as evidence to another but it is something one can have. If you have ever met a devout Christian who offers no evidence and doesn't care to learn any but is rock-solid sure of Christianity this would be their own personal knowledge you just can't get. It isn't a cop out, it's an explanation of the surety some have you can't understand.

Me, despite the witness my intellect wanted intellectual assurance and after praying about it I all of the sudden had a book in my hand I still don't know from whence it came. It is "The Creator and the Cosmos" which is decades old and the information is out-dated. Still true, but behind the many more discoveries since. It then became a mild obsession, or perhaps more :) and I studied the many sides of the issue and can find no good reason, not one, to be an atheist or pantheist.

[Greg]

God created man in the likeness of himself so without getting into religion and off track we were created and I agree not by evolution so you would think there is a planet somewhere that can sustain life like ours.

I am not exactly sure of your take here but I am not denying another life-sustaining planet exists. I am saying that even one happening without intelligent design or guidance behind it given physics as we understand it is beyond all odds. That one exists is a massive miracle. But if this miracle could happen once, given the Cause I believe to be behind it, a second or third isn't out of the question.

That said, the chance that life is advanced beyond us to travel here from millions of light years away is also highly unlikely.

[Captain Silver]

I think life exists elsewhere in the universe. Trillions of galaxies, some 50 times bigger than our own. To put it in perspective, imagine a white blood cell, that would be the size of our sun, the rest of our galaxy would be the size of North America.

Too big for their not to be more life out there.

If aliens visited this planet, I believe it to be inter dimensional. The physics of traveling at the speed of light is just not possible. Even the material of a ship would deteriorate of age even if it could go light speed. 100K in light years? Not sure the windshield wipers are going to hold up.

I saw some shit I couldn’t explain before, but perhaps that was all just glitches in the Matrix we have all seen!

[jonboy79]

I am not exactly sure of your take here but I am not denying another life-sustaining planet exists. I am saying that even one happening without intelligent design or guidance behind it given physics as we understand it is beyond all odds. That one exists is a massive miracle. But if this miracle could happen once, given the Cause I believe to be behind it, a second or third isn't out of the question.

That said, the chance that life is advanced beyond us to travel here from millions of light years away is also highly unlikely.

Your last statement is even exceedingly more rare and unlikely when adding another factor, that we are existing in the same “when”.

However, I actually believe in time, we will discover that life is common in the galaxy; and that intelligent life is not common but certainly not unique.

I believe our understanding of physics is minuscule and flawed: I also believe there will be such a thing as superlumjnal travel, but that will come at great cost.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk