Do you believe the existence of Aliens in other planets?
-
ihoecken wrote:
But the point is you may see suns in that distance but no planets, no spaceships, no buildings, no beings.
Actually this is a misnomer, and comes down to what you consider "see". The human eye perceives extremely little of the energy spectrum, if you even widen the energy spectrum from the deepest infrared of biological life to highest ultraviolet perception of biological life, human beings are more blind than bats. "See" being relative to "perceive" measure or record. That we have done quite a few times over in the last decade. Seeing gas giants are easy, as they pass in front of a star they orbit the solar wind burns off the atmosphere. This is easily detected by a spike on the rotational frequency of the orbital body. This is the easiest way to "see" a planet and has been done many times over, a slight variation on the first method of seeing planets. Another way to "see" a planet is to look for a shadow, a simple change in the spectrum, not looking for atmospheric changes of molecular burn, but rather reductions in intensity due to eclipses. These are minute changes even for something as large as a gas-giant, and pretty much only works for gas-giants, any other object would require such finely tuned instruments that they could never be measured from earth. This was, however, the first method used to see other planets. The last method is through simple physics. Gravity is always present as long as there is mass. You can therefore measure the existance of planets by the subtle variations of the sun and/or its other bodies. This was how we know of a 10th planet prior to its discovery and the existance of some moons of planetary bodies before they were spectrumatically "seen". They were measured via subtle variations in orbital mechanics, and the only assumption is that inertia is true which is a fairly mild assumption. We have seen many planets, though do not have the ability to magnify and collect light to any detail to ever see a building or space-ship. Given the relative size, you cannot even see a satellite from the moon, even should we achieve magnification to narrowly view planets in our nearly blind perceptions, we would see nothing because we as human beings can see very little. As far as I know only one other "earth-like" planet has been discovered and its sun produces exceedingly large amounts of radiation. The assumption is that life would be impossible because human life could never live on such a planet. _____
Jeffry J. Brickley wrote:
Actually this is a misnomer, and comes down to what you consider "see". The human eye perceives extremely little of the energy spectrum, if you even widen the energy spectrum from the deepest infrared of biological life to highest ultraviolet perception of biological life, human beings are more blind than bats. "See" being relative to "perceive" measure or record. That we have done quite a few times over in the last decade. Seeing gas giants are easy, as they pass in front of a star they orbit the solar wind burns off the atmosphere. This is easily detected by a spike on the rotational frequency of the orbital body.
That I said, take a look at my post: http://www.codeproject.com/script/comments/forums.asp?forumid=1159&fr=76&select=1478433#xx1478433xx[^]
Jeffry J. Brickley wrote:
As far as I know only one other "earth-like" planet has been discovered and its sun produces exceedingly large amounts of radiation. The assumption is that life would be impossible because human life could never live on such a planet.
Yes, but that doesn't says that high developed life is impossible. It would be different of course, but we don't know anything about the universe. So if someones says that there is no life at all, it's not profound at all. Of course you can't say that there is a developed life anyway, but you can think of it (or not - just how you like :wtf:). Now I'm confused. That's your fault! ;) ------------------------------ PROST Roleplaying Game War doesn't determine who's right. War determines who's left.
-
I'm not sure if the cosmologists actually believe the universe is infinite - But I'm no expert. If the universe expanded from a singularity (which is a point) and has only been expanding for a finite period of time it hasn't had time to reach infinite size: after all, it would take an infinite amount of time to reach that size. Again however, I'm no expert in these matters. Steve
Stephen Hewitt wrote:
universe is infinite
Stephen, if you believe everything has an "other side" then you have no other choice other than to believe it's infinite. you say upto this is our universe. And hence it'd be immediately followed by "what's on the other side??".. and like this even the question goes infinite. The possible ambiguity may be like "If the universe keeps expanding?, moving?..ect" but when you talk about universe we certainly get confused about the "superset".. where is the universe is a simple question to narrate it. Universe has been the final word to mean the vastness, if Some other word is there, the same can be replaced with "universe" and the argument can be carried on with in the same fashion. :-D.. But I may be totally wrong too stephen hawkins Hewitt. ;)
--[V]--
-
Jeffry J. Brickley wrote:
Hope is considered an evil in Pandora's story because according to Hesiod it implies the control of the future, and since no one can control the future, to have hope is to be deluded. Other people think that Hope being left in the box symbolizes Hope often being humanity's only comfort
Hope was something good in Pandora's story: "I am Hope,said the fairy, Pandora due to your curiosity you have let out all possible troubles for mankind. There will be no peace of mind for humans from this day forth. There will be greed and jealousy,insanity and lust, there will be plague and hatred,men will fight each other,wives will be set against husbands,sons against fathers,brother againgst brother,there will be famine,pestilence,vice and destruction.The world will know great sorrow............... Hearing this Pandora started to cry and sob terribly, for the great harm she had brought upon herself and her fellow humans."Do not cry so much Pandora,said the fairy, "yes it is true that you have unleashed all manner of afflictions upon the world , but you have also let me out. I will always be there to bring hope to humans, whenever they are in trouble. I will always be there as the promise of Hope!. (Found on http://rrr.kimcm.dk/Notes/Pandora.html[^]) (Another link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pandora_(mythology)[^]) Well I think you are not totally wrong, but in Pandora's story I see hope as something good. :rolleyes: ------------------------------ PROST Roleplaying Game War doesn't determine who's right. War determines who's left.
ihoecken wrote:
I will always be there to bring hope to humans, whenever they are in trouble. I will always be there as the promise of Hope!
ahhh... vain hope... the unfulfilled "promise" of hope. ;) it's always open to interpretation. ;P _________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb) -- modified at 20:10 Monday 8th May, 2006
-
Jeffry J. Brickley wrote:
Actually this is a misnomer, and comes down to what you consider "see". The human eye perceives extremely little of the energy spectrum, if you even widen the energy spectrum from the deepest infrared of biological life to highest ultraviolet perception of biological life, human beings are more blind than bats. "See" being relative to "perceive" measure or record. That we have done quite a few times over in the last decade. Seeing gas giants are easy, as they pass in front of a star they orbit the solar wind burns off the atmosphere. This is easily detected by a spike on the rotational frequency of the orbital body.
That I said, take a look at my post: http://www.codeproject.com/script/comments/forums.asp?forumid=1159&fr=76&select=1478433#xx1478433xx[^]
Jeffry J. Brickley wrote:
As far as I know only one other "earth-like" planet has been discovered and its sun produces exceedingly large amounts of radiation. The assumption is that life would be impossible because human life could never live on such a planet.
Yes, but that doesn't says that high developed life is impossible. It would be different of course, but we don't know anything about the universe. So if someones says that there is no life at all, it's not profound at all. Of course you can't say that there is a developed life anyway, but you can think of it (or not - just how you like :wtf:). Now I'm confused. That's your fault! ;) ------------------------------ PROST Roleplaying Game War doesn't determine who's right. War determines who's left.
ihoecken wrote:
Of course you can't say that there is a developed life anyway, but you can think of it (or not - just how you like ). Now I'm confused. That's your fault!
I never said there was, or was not life. I addressed only the assumptions involved. There is the assumption that someday we can build a device so sensitive as to see a structure from another civilation. You might as well assume a fire-ant in New Mexico could be given binoculars powerful enough to see an army ant in Africa. :) There is the assumption that travel will be possible for either side to eventually stumble across each other, which also assumes proximity close enough to make even some unknown advanced method of travel possible (remember, warp drive won't take you out of the solar system and even it is fictional, so assuming we find such a cheat, you're still only capable of visiting a microcosm compared to the vastness of the universe). There are a lot of assumptions, assumptions that life must be carbon based, and the rules by which carbon based life will exist. Most of those rules have all been shot to pieces since the discover of extremophile organisms which has resulted in the expansions of animal kingdoms to cover the now wide variety of completely alien life that exists within one microcosm known as earth. :) Most people are unaware of just how many assumptions that "were" well known have been shot down due to the discovery of extremophilic life. _________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
-
Jeffry J. Brickley wrote:
I believe that a black hole would be a div/infinite error rather than a divide by 0.
div/infinity is the algorithm into which the universe must be expanding... :-D ~Nitron.
ññòòïðïðB A
startNitron wrote:
div/infinity is the algorithm into which the universe must be expanding...
no... since it started with a singularity and the big bang... that is div/0. ;P ;P :laugh: _________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
-
ihoecken wrote:
Of course you can't say that there is a developed life anyway, but you can think of it (or not - just how you like ). Now I'm confused. That's your fault!
I never said there was, or was not life. I addressed only the assumptions involved. There is the assumption that someday we can build a device so sensitive as to see a structure from another civilation. You might as well assume a fire-ant in New Mexico could be given binoculars powerful enough to see an army ant in Africa. :) There is the assumption that travel will be possible for either side to eventually stumble across each other, which also assumes proximity close enough to make even some unknown advanced method of travel possible (remember, warp drive won't take you out of the solar system and even it is fictional, so assuming we find such a cheat, you're still only capable of visiting a microcosm compared to the vastness of the universe). There are a lot of assumptions, assumptions that life must be carbon based, and the rules by which carbon based life will exist. Most of those rules have all been shot to pieces since the discover of extremophile organisms which has resulted in the expansions of animal kingdoms to cover the now wide variety of completely alien life that exists within one microcosm known as earth. :) Most people are unaware of just how many assumptions that "were" well known have been shot down due to the discovery of extremophilic life. _________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
Jeffry J. Brickley wrote:
I never said there was, or was not life.
No, you didn't. I said that earlier to someone other (Andy). I think we are talking at cross purposes. He said that in this universe no life was found although we can see all of it, my point is yours: we can't see it detailed enough. :-D ------------------------------ PROST Roleplaying Game War doesn't determine who's right. War determines who's left.
-
Andy Brummer wrote:
Only if the interpretation is that the entire 14 billion year distance that we can see is all there is
Who can see 14 billion years distance? Most humans are to blind to see something that happended yesterday or something that may will happen tomorrow. You can't even "see" any planet outside our solarsystem directly, you can just see "shadows" and interference of light. We just took same pictures of mars and venus. There might be a civilization on Jupiter and we just don't know (hey - just an example, I don't believe this). There might be hundreds of million planets with life on it and we don't know it and perhaps we'll never know it...
Andy Brummer wrote:
I don't believe one bit of it, there are too many unknowns to just accept that there are no higher organizing principles to physics or cosmology.
Well, when you look on the priciples you can see the godlike spark. :) ------------------------------ PROST Roleplaying Game War doesn't determine who's right. War determines who's left.
ihoecken wrote:
Who can see 14 billion years distance?
We can see light that has traveled for 14 billion years. It comes from a point further then 14 billion light years away from us because the universe has expanded since it was emitted. I don't have the current estimates for the actual distance so I glossed over it, while still trying to be technically correct.
ihoecken wrote:
You can't even "see" any planet outside our solarsystem directly, you can just see "shadows" and interference of light.
You can't see any yet. But we can see galaxies, quasars and the background radiation.
ihoecken wrote:
There might be a civilization on Jupiter and we just don't know (hey - just an example, I don't believe this).
Who knows about one of it's moons?
ihoecken wrote:
There might be hundreds of million planets with life on it and we don't know it and perhaps we'll never know it...
I suspect there are, and I hope we do.
ihoecken wrote:
Well, when you look on the priciples you can see the godlike spark.
Um, where? Imagining the creator that came up with Quantum Mechanics scares the crap out of me. My post didn't really have to deal with the points you bring up, just trying to give a discription of why I think the Anthropic principle is pointless and borders on intellegent design. You can't ever rule it out, and it isn't an excuse to stop looking for better answers. All it does is scratch the 120 decimal place cancelation itch that dominates cosmology and particle physics right now.
I can imagine the sinking feeling one would have after ordering my book, only to find a laughably ridiculous theory with demented logic once the book arrives - Mark McCutcheon
-
Paul Watson wrote:
because we are probably to intolerant to accept advanced life that isn't sentient
Yeah, 'cause we've a real history of tolerance towards sentient life. :rolleyes: If there is anything out there that we'd call "alive", it'd better know how to look like algae, 'cause that's probably all we'd be willing to let live*****. *****farm at great expense, and sell at even greater price to rich SciFi junkies.
----
Unless of course it travels in massive red blooms threatening our delicious scallops and oysters. Then it's uppence will come. :suss: BW
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
-- Steven Wright -
Link2006 wrote:
There gotta be some other civilizations exist out there.
The reason I can't say that I 'believe' in alien civilations is that the best arguments we have for them are all 'arguments from incredulity'. i.e. "How could there NOT be?". The problem with those types of arguments is that they assume we've got all of our i's dotted and t's crossed already - and certainly we don't. Failures of imagination are not proof. I'd really like to believe that there are alien civilations out there right now. I can't think of anything much more exciting that meeting sentient beings from totally different origins. But until some manner of contact is made, it's got to remain an "I just don't know" thing.
Link2006 wrote:
Did the GOD who created the Earth also created them?
Why not? The imagined creator of earth also created the imagined aliens. His Sauciness must have a truly lengthy noodles! (calling God 'imagined' is perfectly valid - we have no solid evidence either way. Don't get pissy with me, religous folks! :))
-
I mean just look at the sky, how many stars are there! There gotta be some other civilizations exist out there. If they do exist, who created them? Did the GOD who created the Earth also created them? What kind of cars do they drive, do they also have computers and internet too? What do they look like, do they look like us? Are they smarter than us? Think about it, it's kind of interesting.
i think we are just frogs in the well there are lots out there... --- My Unedited article^
-
Jeffry J. Brickley wrote:
I never said there was, or was not life.
No, you didn't. I said that earlier to someone other (Andy). I think we are talking at cross purposes. He said that in this universe no life was found although we can see all of it, my point is yours: we can't see it detailed enough. :-D ------------------------------ PROST Roleplaying Game War doesn't determine who's right. War determines who's left.
ihoecken wrote:
He said that in this universe no life was found although we can see all of it, my point is yours: we can't see it detailed enough.
Well, no intelligent life has been found... including here. ;) _________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
-
ihoecken wrote:
Who can see 14 billion years distance?
We can see light that has traveled for 14 billion years. It comes from a point further then 14 billion light years away from us because the universe has expanded since it was emitted. I don't have the current estimates for the actual distance so I glossed over it, while still trying to be technically correct.
ihoecken wrote:
You can't even "see" any planet outside our solarsystem directly, you can just see "shadows" and interference of light.
You can't see any yet. But we can see galaxies, quasars and the background radiation.
ihoecken wrote:
There might be a civilization on Jupiter and we just don't know (hey - just an example, I don't believe this).
Who knows about one of it's moons?
ihoecken wrote:
There might be hundreds of million planets with life on it and we don't know it and perhaps we'll never know it...
I suspect there are, and I hope we do.
ihoecken wrote:
Well, when you look on the priciples you can see the godlike spark.
Um, where? Imagining the creator that came up with Quantum Mechanics scares the crap out of me. My post didn't really have to deal with the points you bring up, just trying to give a discription of why I think the Anthropic principle is pointless and borders on intellegent design. You can't ever rule it out, and it isn't an excuse to stop looking for better answers. All it does is scratch the 120 decimal place cancelation itch that dominates cosmology and particle physics right now.
I can imagine the sinking feeling one would have after ordering my book, only to find a laughably ridiculous theory with demented logic once the book arrives - Mark McCutcheon
Andy Brummer wrote:
Imagining the creator that came up with Quantum Mechanics scares the crap out of me.
Schrödinger's Cat??[^] well... "He" does seem to have a cruel sense of humor.... :rolleyes: _________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
-
Andy Brummer wrote:
Imagining the creator that came up with Quantum Mechanics scares the crap out of me.
Schrödinger's Cat??[^] well... "He" does seem to have a cruel sense of humor.... :rolleyes: _________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
One recent description I heard is that if you took 1,000 philosophers and gave then 1,000 years to come up with the most bizzare absurd ideas they still wouldn't come up with something as bizzare as Quantum Mechanics.
I can imagine the sinking feeling one would have after ordering my book, only to find a laughably ridiculous theory with demented logic once the book arrives - Mark McCutcheon
-
i think we are just frogs in the well there are lots out there... --- My Unedited article^
Quartz... wrote:
i think we are just frogs in the well
I thought it was bricks in the wall. Oh well. Anyone who thinks he has a better idea of what's good for people than people do is a swine. - P.J. O'Rourke
-
Stephen Hewitt wrote:
universe is infinite
Stephen, if you believe everything has an "other side" then you have no other choice other than to believe it's infinite. you say upto this is our universe. And hence it'd be immediately followed by "what's on the other side??".. and like this even the question goes infinite. The possible ambiguity may be like "If the universe keeps expanding?, moving?..ect" but when you talk about universe we certainly get confused about the "superset".. where is the universe is a simple question to narrate it. Universe has been the final word to mean the vastness, if Some other word is there, the same can be replaced with "universe" and the argument can be carried on with in the same fashion. :-D.. But I may be totally wrong too stephen hawkins Hewitt. ;)
--[V]--
Just because something has sides doesn't been it's infinite: the room I'm in has 6 sides but is reassuringly finite. You seem to believe that the word "universe" is simply a synonym for "everything": again I'm no Hawking, but the fact that scientists talk of alternate universes suggests that they don't share this definition. Steve
-
ihoecken wrote:
I will always be there to bring hope to humans, whenever they are in trouble. I will always be there as the promise of Hope!
ahhh... vain hope... the unfulfilled "promise" of hope. ;) it's always open to interpretation. ;P _________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb) -- modified at 20:10 Monday 8th May, 2006
Indeed 'all' things are open to interpretation, but it's very much a case of knowing which bias is the 'best' bias! On to the subject of Aliens, for those of you who are interested in exploring the question of 'whether aliens exist?' may want to check out a highly recommended book by Dr. Gary Bates titled 'Alien Intrusion'. I believe it was the best seller on Amazon.com for a few weeks when it was first released (2004).:-O Paul Mu
-
I mean just look at the sky, how many stars are there! There gotta be some other civilizations exist out there. If they do exist, who created them? Did the GOD who created the Earth also created them? What kind of cars do they drive, do they also have computers and internet too? What do they look like, do they look like us? Are they smarter than us? Think about it, it's kind of interesting.
-
Yes I do believe there are life forms outside the solar system, and some of them possibly intelligent (in our view of it anyway). I don't believe a god created the earth or the universe. Regards, Nish
Nish’s thoughts on MFC, C++/CLI and .NET (my blog)
The Ultimate Grid - The #1 MFC grid out there!If God did not created all this, then why do we see things as good and bad acts. lets involve in robbery and be rich. lets have too much sex and just fulfil our desires. Lets attack neighbouring nation to have their land. lets kill our collegeue , he is such a nuisance. lets do anything. WHy to restrict our minds and just restrain ourselves. See people like gangsters, smugglers have too much money :laugh: pathak -- modified at 0:54 Tuesday 9th May, 2006
-
fat_boy wrote:
If we f*** up, he gets a D in his end of term exam.
"if" ??? _________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb)
D's all round!! If there is other "intelligent" life out there, I don't really want to know, because I think the people pf planet earth have enough trouble getting along with one another, throwing another planet full of people into the mix will not do us any good at all. If they are "intelligent" they are probably using thier intelligence to steer well away from us!!
-
ihoecken wrote:
I will always be there to bring hope to humans, whenever they are in trouble. I will always be there as the promise of Hope!
ahhh... vain hope... the unfulfilled "promise" of hope. ;) it's always open to interpretation. ;P _________________________ Asu no koto o ieba, tenjo de nezumi ga warau. Talk about things of tomorrow and the mice in the ceiling laugh. (Japanese Proverb) -- modified at 20:10 Monday 8th May, 2006
The world is so great. I hope to see the Aliens in other planets . Aborz