Is there anybody out there? [Book review]

The Daily Camera ^ | 16November 2003 | David Grinspoon (Clay Evans, reviewer)

[PatrickHenry]

[Review of Lonely Planets: The Natural Philosophy of Alien Life by David Grinspoon.]

Not many scientists have the reputation of being witty or entertaining, even when their subject matter is rich with possibility. But more and more scientists are allowing their Renaissance sides to emerge and publishing books explaining complex, scientific subjects and debates in lively prose.

David Grinspoon, principal scientist in the Department of Space Studies at Boulder's Southwest Research Institute and an adjunct professor of Astrophysical and Planetary Sciences at the University of Colorado, is one of those. His first book, "Venus Revealed" (1997) explored Earth's erstwhile "twin" (turns out the relationship is much more fraternal — if even that — than identical) in loving detail, making the book as poetic and awestruck as it was informed.

Now Grinspoon steps into the Cosmos-sized shoes of the late Carl Sagan with "Lonely Planets," the best, most entertaining examination of the possibility of other life in the universe since Sagan's best work. And he's got a head start: Grinspoon grew up around Sagan, a family friend.

Like Sagan, he brings a joyous, open, even boisterous enthusiasm — "billions and billions!" — to his writing. If you think a survey of "natural philosophical" history regarding the possibility of alien life might be dry, think again. There's something here for a wide audience, from scientists to dreamers to fans of UFOs.

You can tell Grinspoon is having fun early on, when he describes the delight he takes in not just hard science, but the "fringe" beliefs and tales of UFO abductions.

[Snip]

But despite coming up dry so far in our immediate spatial neighborhood (Grinspoon thinks we're spending too much time perusing Mars), like Sagan, he believes it's a near mathematical certainty that civilization exists elsewhere in the big, beautiful universe we live in.

[Snip]

"Who are we to say that our Earth is such a special place? Like parents certain that their baby is the cutest ever born, of course we think our planet is the chosen one."

[PatrickHenry]

Lots of stuff left out. The website where the review is found has a heavy-duty copyright notice. I assume the little I've posted is "fair use" (whatever that means). The whole review is HERE.

[PatrickHenry]

SETI PING. [This ping list is for the evolution side of evolution threads, and sometimes for other science topics. FReepmail me to be added or dropped.]

[js1138]

I'm still thinking in Rare Earth mode. Until we have some baseline examples of extraterrestrial life, I'm of the opinion that the accidents that led to intelligent apes are rather uncommon.

[PatrickHenry]

I'm still thinking in Rare Earth mode.

So far, you're correct. Or to put it another way, you haven't been shown to be incorrect.

[jennyp]

I'm still thinking in Rare Earth mode. Until we have some baseline examples of extraterrestrial life, I'm of the opinion that the accidents that led to intelligent apes are rather uncommon.

I've changed my thinking about this lately. I think intelligence of our level may be rare, but complex multicellular life will be common. I say this because the Earth itself has contained a staggering number of different local environments over its lifetime, so I think we already have a good statistical sampling of the possible types of organism. (At least what we should find on an "earth-like" planet.)

Bacteria form the majority of the biota on Earth, and yet there are millions of species of multicellular life as well.

[js1138]

I have no problem believing that complex life is common, but the existence of big-brained animals without language leads me to believe we are rare, perhaps as much a product of geology and catastrophe as biology.

[PatrickHenry]

I think intelligence of our level may be rare, but complex multicellular life will be common.

Then we'll be rulers of a galaxy populated by nothing more advanced than clams and slugs. Not very stimulating company, but at least they might taste good.

[Skooz]

Call me when they land.

[Physicist]

Until we have some baseline examples of extraterrestrial life, I'm of the opinion that the accidents that led to intelligent apes are rather uncommon.

Considering how little we've actually explored, if we had compelling evidence of any sort of extraterrestrial life this early in the game, we would be forced to conclude that life is ubiquitous throughout the universe.

The fact that we haven't found anything so far tells me nothing.

[stuartcr]

Who has been shown to be incorrect?

[js1138]

I have no problem with life being common, but the scenerios for the evolution of language seem improbable. This is something that will seem obvious, one way or the other, after the aquisition of data.

[general_re]

...the existence of big-brained animals without language leads me to believe we are rare...

Interesting. On the other hand, the existence of all those birds that don't weave hanging baskets for their nests suggests that the oropendula of the Amazon basin is rare - the oropendula is the only bird that does that, as far as I know. Perhaps that behavior is as much a product of geology and catastrophe as biology, as you say.

Many species have some unique aspect about them, or some unique combination of features. Perhaps the only reason we find language and big brains significant is because that happens to be our unique combination of features. If an oropendula could opine about such things, he might very well think the same thing about his nests ;)

[RightWhale]

I'm still thinking in Rare Earth mode.

Same here. The galaxy [and other galaxies, not that it will ever matter] is teeming with microbes, but complex life in the galaxy is mainly just what is here on earth.

[js1138]

You are beating me up for lapsing into g3 mode. My basic argument stems from the assumption that there is no inherent direction to evolution. Competition may select for big brains, but big brains don't automatically produce language. Life seems to work just fine without language, and we will hardly be missed if we exterminate ourselves.

[general_re]

Naw, I'm not trying to beat you up, just point out that there are lots of pathways that are unlikely, and we don't really know if language is really more unlikely than some other behavior, so we ought to be careful about deciding how significant or insignificant it is that we have language.

Competition drives lots of animals to build nests - birds, chimps, hamsters - but none of them have the hanging basket design of the oropendula. Who knows? Maybe there are hundreds or thousands of language-using species throughout the universe, but only one hanging basket-weaver. It would be somewhat disappointing if the intelligent races of the universe were more interested in the unique oropendula than in yet another boring old language-using species ;)

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!

[Moleman]

Is there Anybody Out There
Just nod if you can hear me, is there anyone home (/PinkFloyd)

[edwin hubble]

Thanks for the post. (and ping)

The Drake Equation variables are constantly being revised:

Rare Earth now seems more likely...
for its unlikely causal chain:

very early microbial life-->
put oxygen in the atmosphere-->
ozone in upper atmosphere-->
ozone protects water vapor in atmosphere from destruction by UV over eons (this one is essential as all our planet's water would be gone by now - like Venus) -->
water retained in oceans -->
water facilitated tectonic plate movements -->
tectonic plate motion recycled and deposited minerals and metals -->
made technological (metal-using) civilization possible..

Many other unlikely chains of causation; among them:
* Almost circular orbit
* Presence of moon (collision with Mars-sized object) stabilizes the Earth's axis tilt.


Drake Equation:

N = R* • fp • ne • fl • fi • fc • L
Where,

N = The number of civilizations in The Milky Way Galaxy whose electromagnetic emissions are detectable.

R* =The rate of formation of stars suitable for the development of intelligent life.

fp = The fraction of those stars with planetary systems.

ne = The number of planets, per solar system, with an environment suitable for life.

fl = The fraction of suitable planets on which life actually appears.

fi = The fraction of life bearing planets on which intelligent life emerges.

fc = The fraction of civilizations that develop a technology that releases detectable signs of their existence into space.

L = The length of time such civilizations release detectable signals into space

[PatrickHenry]

Rare Earth now seems more likely... for its unlikely causal chain

Yes, that's a lot of things that need to fall into place; but with the Hubble telescope, we've recently discovered that the presence of planetary systems is far greater than was previously supposed. So I don't know if the overall number of planets we deem suitable for life is now supposed to be small or what. My very rough guess is that the "rare earth" factors are cancelled out by the "abundant planetary systems" factor. So maybe we're back where we were when Sagan estimated there might be thousands of intelligent species in our galaxy at any one time. If he were around today, it might still be his estimate. Or it might not ...

[longshadow]

Then we'll be rulers of a galaxy populated by nothing more advanced than clams and slugs. Not very stimulating company, but at least they might taste good.

You better hope they aren't thinking the exact same thing about us.....