Posted on 07/22/2025 6:02:46 AM PDT by MtnClimber
I have always been bothered by the seeming perplexity that people have about the fact that we have yet to encounter intelligent life beyond planet Earth.
It doesn't seem weird to me at all, even though I suspect life--even intelligent life--is not that uncommon in the universe.
Enrico Fermi--a great physicist from the mid-20th century-- expressed the perplexity that many people have in what has come to be known as the "Fermi Paradox."
At its most simple, the paradox is this: if the development of intelligent life is even moderately likely, why haven't we seen evidence of intelligent life elsewhere in the universe? There are so many suns, so many planets, and there has been so much time since the universe began that it is a mystery why we have seen no evidence that life exists off the Earth.
If intelligent life should be common, why don't we see any?
Astronomer Frank Drake tried to create an equation that would predict the probability of intelligent life existing beyond Earth, known as the "Drake Equation."
The Drake equation is expressed as: N = R\* \* fp \* ne \* fl \* fi \* fc \* L.
Where: N = the number of civilizations in our galaxy with which communication might be possible.
R\* = the average rate of star formation in our galaxy.
fp = the fraction of those stars with planets.
ne = the average number of planets that can potentially support life per star with planets.
fl = the fraction of planets that develop life.
fi = the fraction of life-bearing planets on which intelligent life emerges.
fc = the fraction of civilizations that develop a technology that releases detectable signals into space.
L = the average length of time for which such civilizations release detectable signals.
Disposing of the Drake Equation is pretty simple. While it has the benefit of appealing to our belief that math is authoritative, it fails to tell us anything useful because we have no idea what numbers we should put in for any of the variables. We don't even know how many stars have planets, no less habitable planets. I assume that planets are extremely common--it makes sense given how stars form--but as for "habitable planets" we have no idea. We aren't even sure what a "habitable planet" is, since we only have an N of one to study.
In other words, the Drake Equation is useless for our purposes, which leaves us with the Fermi Paradox, which seems to me to be worth thinking about.
Why HAVEN'T we seen evidence of intelligent life elsewhere in the universe?
Obviously we don't know, but I think it is unsurprising that we haven't for some very basic reasons--both because the chances of intelligent life on any one planet might be high while the chances that intelligent life develops on two relatively close planets at the same time are likely to be very low.
Human beings have only been putting out detectible signs of intelligent life on our planet for a little more than a century, and we grossly overestimate how detectible those signs would be from any appreciable distance.
Consider radio and TV broadcasts. We have been sending out such broadcasts for over a century, so any planet within a 100 light years might have detected them, right?
Probably not. If you are as old as I am, you probably put tin foil on your TV antenna trying in vain to bring in a fuzzy signal so you could watch that Star Trek rerun in black and white. When I lived in Tucson our TV had trouble deciphering a signal from a few tens of miles away--it was already snowy or worse. That's because the intensity of the signal diminishes by the "inverse square law," where the intensity of a signal (or light) reduces at a rate of 1/r². What this means is that if you double your distance from a radio or light signal the intensity you can measure is 1/4th of what it was.
So imagine picking up a radio or TV signal from 10 or 100 light years away. It's not going to happen, especially with how "noisy" space is with signals.
Then there is the issue of whether somebody is there to listen at that time. Let's say there is a habitable planet 5 light years away, and intelligent life develops there. Given that it took billions of years for intelligent life to develop here, it's reasonable to assume the same might be true elsewhere.
How likely is that there would be overlap in time? And even if you assume very long lifespans for civilizations--a questionable assumption--"long" is a relative term. If human civilization lasts a million years, that is an eyeblink compared to the lifespan of planets.
Then there is the question of density. Intelligent civilizations may be "common," but only at a galactic scale. In other words, galactically speaking there may be many civilizations--hundreds or thousands even--but the density would still likely be low. The galaxy is HUGE--it's why we use the term "astronomical" to mean really big.
To give you an idea of just how big even a solar system is, it can take light up to 7 hours just to reach Pluto from the Sun. And Pluto is in our solar system. If civilizations are scattered around the galaxy separated by hundreds of light years, they are functionally alone, even if they overlap temporally--which to me seems unlikely.
Even if we--as I hope we do--find a way to travel faster than light--and it would have to be MUCH faster than light to make interstellar travel practical--we might even land on a planet that once had intelligent life and never see any evidence it was there unless it died out quite recently in the lifespan of the planet.
For that matter, it could even be that there have been prior civilizations on Earth--non-human, presumably--and all the evidence has been wiped out due to the ravages of time.
It's even remotely possible that human civilizations have risen and fallen, leaving behind little to no evidence that we could discover. I have no reason to believe that has happened, but I would not be gobsmacked if it had.
Given all the variables, it strikes me as utterly unsurprising that we have yet to discover evidence of other intelligent life in the universe. Not because I think there is none--I share Fermi's belief that intelligent life is pretty common in the universe, and it would be a crying shame if it wasn't. The universe is a wondrous creation.
But life at the same time, nearly the same place, and detectible using ordinary means? That would be extraordinary.
Add to all that the profundity of a complex life-form like ours, or anything in the animal kingdom, or even among the plants…. consciousness, the five senses, emotions, etc.. none of this life we have is a “given”, even on a perfectly suitable planet - even over sufficient number of billions of years.
Just take vision for example. That one sense alone boggles the mind - (certainly my mind) it feels like a miracle to me the way we can simply ‘see’ - not just enough to navigate and survive - but enough to witness the incredible beauty of nature.
I’m not talking about a creator - because that wouldn’t really answer any of these questions (it would just raise more IMHO- like, why would a creator only populate one planet? - not to mention what created the creator?)
But I AM talking about something “supernatural” - in other words - I’m talking about how infinitely small is our scientific grasp of how life and the universe came about, and what comprises it. The limits of our consciousness being what they are, it stands to reason that the explanations for the big questions lie well beyond the reach of our five senses, and thus outside the constructs of time and space which our five senses project.
It almost seems silly for us to expect an answer - that’s how little we know.
Maybe. Maybe not.
It's been theorized, but not proven. I'm not even sure it's possible, much less likely.
Just like with Bigfoot, Loch Ness, an honest politician - I wanna believe! Help me with my unbelief!
The best chance of getting remotely close enough to detect someone (if you haven’t already) is during the long span of years of a galactic collision.
Hence, our best chance would be the Milky Way / Andromeda collision.
Alas, long before then, the sun will be running out of fuel such that it enlarges and envelopes the earth.
Have a nice day.
On the other hand, with advanced telescopes, it will soon be possible to survey great swaths of the sky for planets congenial to life and to then look closely for the spectral signatures of chlorophyll and even industrial activity.
My guess though is that no later than fifty years from now, the whole megillah will known to the public. Disclosure is coming, one way or another.
We have. When they appear we label them Angels and Devils.
————-
Amen. I find it amusing that man runs to it’s Science to disprove a Creator when proof of his existence surrounds us.
If man used all it’s “Science” to prove the existence of God, instead of trying to disprove God, the question of a divine Creator would have been answered long ago.
Put simply, “Science “ has been corrupted by Satan…..the “smarter “ we think we are, the dumber we become.
Yes expecting the same evolution with same time frame of a planet and of the creatures on it the odds can’t be calculated.
Maybe we shouldn’t want to be found…..
A superior intelligence might not be impressed by our “ civilization”
—————
I have long believed that we are incredibly foolish and naive to be purposely broadcasting the fact of our existence to the rest of the universe. We know from our own history what happens when a technologically superior civilization meets one that is much less so - which is that things never turn out well for the less advanced people. Why do we think that different results would be forthcoming when the technological disparity would likely be much larger than we’ve ever experienced here on earth, and the differences between the two species would be immense? Hell, maybe the advanced civilization that we would meet would be one composed of giant, intelligent cockroaches, the females of which are immensely scared of small mammals and have their husbands step on them. What do you think a civilization like that would do to large and intelligent mammals? I raise that rather absurd example because I’m quite sure that our reaction to a race of intelligent cockroach-like creatures would not be good.
The first thought that comes to mind when I read your statement is that a civilization superior to ours may, itself, be very concerned about revealing its own existence, for the exact same reason. All that needs to happen to them is for a civilization that is as little as 50 or 100 years further advanced to take a dim view of their existence, and they disappear forever. Thus, we would be rather unlikely to discover a civilization that wanted to hide itself. Frankly, it is very foolish to be broadcasting to the universe, and a civilization that is superior to our would undoubtedly recognize that and try to hide itself, while furiously trying to expand to nearby star systems, and to advance their technology as rapidly as possible, on the theory that if they do meet another space faring civilization, at least then they might have a fighting chance if the two did not get along with each other. Perhaps we should do the same.
Curious why you did not quote Genesis?
26 And God said, Let us make man in OUR image, after OUR likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.
"To consider the Earth as the only populated world in infinite space is as absurd as to assert that in an entire field of millet, only one grain will grow." -- Metrodorus, 4th c BC Greek philosopher
"Heaven and earth are large, yet in the whole of space they are but as a small grain of rice. How unreasonable it would be to suppose that, besides the heaven and earth which we can see, there are no other heavens and no other earths." -- Teng Mu, 13th c AD Chinese philosopher
"But I am not really willing to accept your premise, because it may well be that the means of communications they have are of a kind that we do not know how to receive, and that they would not have the means of communicating with sufficiently powerful radio or optical signals. That is something which, technologically, is too difficult for them but they would have some other means we would not recognize." -- Thomas J. Gold, 'Communication with Extraterrestial Intelligence' (Sagan, ed)
My theory: all those systems out there were created to eventually be inhabited by mankind. Regular human beings will survive the apocalypse, after which they will start doing what they’ve done ever since the Garden: being fruitful and multiplying. The saints who were caught up to be with Jesus will be in charge of angel crews who will terraform those planets and make them inhabitable, and then transporting human settlers to the new worlds. Worlds without end, amen!
[The Drake equation is expressed as: N = R\* \* fp \* ne \* fl \* fi \* fc \* L.]
Though I keep searching for an answer
Never seem to find what I’m looking for
Dear Lord I pray you give me strength to carry on
Here’s an equation:
John 1:1-4
New King James Version
The Eternal Word
1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2 He was in the beginning with God.
3 All things were made through Him, and without Him nothing was made that was made.
4 In Him was life, and the life was the light of men.
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=John%201%3A1-4&version=NKJV
That’s real nice.
Okay, get back to work people, food needs putting on the table!
Square them first 3 prime numbers
1x4x9
Where Your Elements Came From:
Image Credit & License: Wikipedia: Cmglee; Data: Jennifer Johnson (OSU)
Explanation: The hydrogen in your body, present in every molecule of water, came from the [origin of the universe]. There are no other appreciable sources of hydrogen in the universe. The carbon in your body was made by nuclear fusion in the interior of stars, as was the oxygen. Much of the iron in your body was made during supernovas of stars that occurred long ago and far away. The gold in your jewelry was likely made from neutron stars during collisions that may have been visible as short-duration gamma-ray bursts or gravitational wave events. Elements like phosphorus and copper are present in our bodies in only small amounts but are essential to the functioning of all known life. The featured periodic table is color coded to indicate humanity's best guess as to the nuclear origin of all known elements. The sites of nuclear creation of some elements, such as copper, are not really well known and are continuing topics of observational and computational research.
I’m puzzled that people don’t understand that ETs are already here.
Scrolled thru the comments.
Book 2 of the Three Body Problem trilogy is called The Dark Forest, and it offers a solid reason we have heard no other signs of intelligence elsewhere.
Goes like this. If a presumption exists that there are other civilizations in communications distance then you are faced with The Dark Forest.
In a dark forest, you are sitting there and you hear a sound. Do you rush towards it with open arms? No. You wonder if it is a predator. You shut the hell up.
The next step is you don’t even have to hear that sound. You reasonably presume anyone nearby could be a predator and you shut the hell up . . . pre-emptively.
The theory goes a step further. If you hear that sound, and chose to shut up, then centuries pass and at some point in those centuries a leader arises who says, . . . that sound is a threat that we don’t have to endure. Let’s try to force their sun to go nova or something. Whatever the approach, the safest, wisest course, is erase that potential threat. Over centuries, filled with people who are not inclined to do that, will have one or two who are, and it only takes one.
And so . . . shut the hell up.
The unknown elements that NASA comes across may hold a true or better answer?.
You’ve got it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.