Is there life in the universe, and if so has it visited Earth?

Click For Summary
The discussion centers on the probability of extraterrestrial life in the universe, supported by the vast number of stars and the Drake equation, which suggests intelligent life likely exists. While participants agree on the likelihood of life elsewhere, there is skepticism regarding whether such life has visited Earth, with some arguing that the technological barriers and vast distances make encounters improbable. The conversation also touches on the implications of advanced civilizations and the potential for interstellar travel, raising questions about our ability to detect extraterrestrial visitors. Participants express varied opinions on the survival of intelligent civilizations and the factors influencing their communication capabilities. Ultimately, the consensus leans towards the existence of life beyond Earth, while doubts remain about direct contact.

Has alien life visited Earth?

  • Yes

    Votes: 81 14.5%
  • no

    Votes: 201 35.9%
  • no: but it's only a matter of time

    Votes: 64 11.4%
  • Yes: but there is a conspiracy to hide this from us

    Votes: 47 8.4%
  • maybe maybe not?

    Votes: 138 24.6%
  • I just bit my tongue and it hurts, what was the question again? Er no comment

    Votes: 29 5.2%

  • Total voters
    560
  • #151
I'm just jumping to this last page after reading the first post, no time to read all of it. I cannot vote on this twofold question by lack of an option for "yes there is life elsewhere; no idea if they have visited us or not".
 
Last edited:
Earth sciences news on Phys.org
  • #152
Jumping to the end as well to chime in "I seriously doubt it".

I've always kind of thought that since the Earth itself is on the order of 1/3 the age of the universe as a whole, and also since it took a "couple" of billion years for intelligent life to evolve here, it seems likely that we're amongst the first. The facts seem to bear this out as well, since AFAIK the universe doesn't yet appear to be teeming with life (though it's probably just a matter of time).
 
  • #153
StuMyers said:
The facts seem to bear this out as well, since AFAIK the universe doesn't yet appear to be teeming with life

How did you arrive at that conclusion?
 
  • #154
Ivan Seeking said:
How did you arrive at that conclusion?

Looking around. :smile:

Seriously though, if the universe were quite a bit older, I might start to expect seeing ancient extraterrestrial spores in old asteroids, life adapted to survive in vacuum, and whatnot. I'm just not seeing any.

Plus, AFAIK, the local part of the galaxy appears to be fairly quiet in the radio, relative to us. I doubt intelligent life would ever stop using radio.
 
  • #155
Spores in asteroids?

With the advent of the internet and directed microwaves, we are already on our way to going radio silent.

Also, I have to wonder why you would simply ignore the extra eight billion years or so... esp considering that we only took a little over four to get where we are today.

The universe may or may not be teeming with life. At this point we have no way to know. In fact, we can't even rule out the possibility of other higher life forms in our own solar system yet. Who knows what we might find in the oceans of Europa?
 
Last edited:
  • #156
Ivan Seeking said:
Spores in asteroids?

With the advent of the internet and directed microwaves, we are already on our way to going radio silent.

I doubt that. We're louder than ever. Radio is cheap and effective. Hard to beat.

Also, I have to wonder why you would simply ignore the extra eight billion years or so... esp considering that we only took a little over four to get where we are today.

The point was an exercise in orders of magnitude. If the universe were trillions of years old, it becomes much more likely that life will have had time to spread. 3xEarth age doesn't seem like all that long to me. In the grand scheme of things, it's reasonable to guess that we're one of the first, no?

The universe may or may not be teeming with life. At this point we have no way to know. In fact, we can't even rule out the possibility of other higher life forms in our own solar system yet. Who knows what we might find in the oceans of Europa?

So far, no evidence in support of any of that. So far, the universe appears barren of life. The default position when considering some phenomena with no supporting data... is false.
 
  • #157
Ivan Seeking said:
Also, I have to wonder why you would simply ignore the extra eight billion years or so... esp considering that we only took a little over four to get where we are today.

Are you saying that first generation stars could have developed life?
 
  • #158
StuMyers said:
Plus, AFAIK, the local part of the galaxy appears to be fairly quiet in the radio, relative to us. I doubt intelligent life would ever stop using radio.

I agree with you that the probability of intelligent life in our vicinity is unlikely, but radio is only important for beings that communicate via sounds.
On Earth, ants communicate via smell, so it is possible that somewhere in the Galaxy smell communicating beings could develop a civilization for which radio would be useless.
 
  • #159
SGT said:
I agree with you that the probability of intelligent life in our vicinity is unlikely, but radio is only important for beings that communicate via sounds.
On Earth, ants communicate via smell, so it is possible that somewhere in the Galaxy smell communicating beings could develop a civilization for which radio would be useless.

From what I recall from my undergrad astro, O and B type stars blow themselves up in a fairly small fraction of a billion years (something like 200my?). So yes, the number of heavy metallic starsystems should be increasing over time, probably exponentially increasing the probability of life over time.

Maybe you're right about smell/radio. I've only been thinking about this for like 5 minutes. :smile: But doesn't it seem likely that intelligent beings would want to communicate at lightspeed across their own planet at a very low cost? Might they not figure out a way to modulate radio to reproduce smell, just as we modulate radio to reproduce sound?
 
  • #160
StuMyers said:
From what I recall from my undergrad astro, O and B type stars blow themselves up in a fairly small fraction of a billion years (something like 200my?). So yes, the number of heavy metallic starsystems should be increasing over time, probably exponentially increasing the probability of life over time.

Maybe you're right about smell/radio. I've only been thinking about this for like 5 minutes. :smile: But doesn't it seem likely that intelligent beings would want to communicate at lightspeed across their own planet at a very low cost? Might they not figure out a way to modulate radio to reproduce smell, just as we modulate radio to reproduce sound?

I really don´t believe that smell communicating beings could probably build a civilization. I only mentioned the possibility in order to dismiss the need for radio.
As an EE I don´t see how anyone could use smell to modulate EM waves.
 
  • #161
Digital encoding?
 
  • #162
SGT said:
I really don´t believe that smell communicating beings could probably build a civilization. I only mentioned the possibility in order to dismiss the need for radio. As an EE I don´t see how anyone could use smell to modulate EM waves.
None of our senses, including smell, could function at all without modulating EM waves within our brains. Less directly, if it was important to us, we could communicate smells by Morse code; for example: ... is "the letter H" in Morse code, but this could be alternately interpreted as "fishy smell" using a rudimentary smell-a-phone protocol/language.

R Sandyk said:
I present two fully medicated Parkinsonian patients with long standing history of olfactory dysfunction in whom recovery of smell occurred during therapeutic transcranial application of AC pulsed electromagnetic fields (EMFs) in the picotesla flux density...Interestingly, in both patients enhancement of smell perception occurred only during administration of EMFs of 7 Hz frequency...
Sandyk, R. (1999) Treatment with AC pulsed electromagnetic fields improves olfactory function in Parkinson's disease. Int. J. Neurosci., 97,225 -233. http://chemse.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/external_ref?access_num=000080491600006&link_type=ISI
 
Last edited:
  • #163
How did you arrive at that conclusion?
StuMyers said:
Looking around. :smile:
You must have better eyes than the rest of us. So far, we can't even resolve planets around the nearest stars, let alone life on them.
 
  • #164
See the smiley? It was a half-joke, meaning that if the universe is teeming with life, its not doing so such that it's obvious.
 
  • #165
radou said:
If intelligent life ever visited us, we wouldn't know, since it is not likely that it would be interested in us at all. :rolleyes:

Let's hope when they do visit us they don't do what humans would do when visiting other civilizations. Kill them all. :mad: Or else we certainly would know if they visited us!
 
  • #166
SGT said:
Are you saying that first generation stars could have developed life?

I am saying that we are something like forth or fifth generation stardust.
 
  • #167
Really? Cool. How is that determined?
 
  • #168
Ivan Seeking said:
I am saying that we are something like forth or fifth generation stardust.

To my knowledge there were no fourth or fifth generation stars 8 billion years prior to the birth of the solar system.
 
  • #169
StuMyers said:
Really? Cool. How is that determined?
In the big bang, only the three lightest elements were made: hydrogen, helium, and lithium. First generation stars then formed by gravitational forces acting on these light elements. There was no iron, oxygen, or any other heavy element in existence in the universe before this time.

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v440/n7088/abs/nature04807.html
 
  • #170
Aether said:
In the big bang, only the three lightest elements were made: hydrogen, helium, and lithium. First generation stars then formed by gravitational forces acting on these light elements. There was no iron, oxygen, or any other heavy element in existence in the universe before this time.

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v440/n7088/abs/nature04807.html

Well yes, I understand that. I don't know how it was determined to be fourth or fifth generation.
 
  • #171
StuMyers said:
Well yes, I understand that. I don't know how it was determined to be fourth or fifth generation.
Well, I don't know about that part either. :wink:
 
  • #172
SGT said:
To my knowledge there were no fourth or fifth generation stars 8 billion years prior to the birth of the solar system.

Sure, there is some limit. The most extreme suggestions that I have heard are a billion years or so. I don't know if this limit is an absolute limit or more of a safe guess. However, it is also possible that we took much longer than needed. AFAIK, there is no evidence to show that we evolved in the least amount of time possible. And we have many known setbacks, such as mass extinctions - including a major bottleneck in the human population in recent history. I think it was supposed to have been around ten thousand years ago.

Just for kicks, in the following Real Player video clip, Dr. Richard Henry - Professor of astrophysics at Johns Hopkins University - suggests it to be most likely that we exist along with civilizations that are tens, or hundreds of millions of years ahead of us, and a very small chance that we would coexist with populations of approximately the same age.
http://play.rbn.com/?url=usanet/usanet/g2demand/scifi/freedomofinfo/richard-henry256k.rm&proto=rtsp
from
http://www.freedomofinfo.org/science.html
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #173
Ivan Seeking said:
Sure, there is some limit. The most extreme suggestions that I have heard are a billion years or so.
What does that mean? 4th and 5th generation stars were formed 1 billion years after the Big Bang?
I don't know if this limit is an absolute limit or more of a safe guess. However, it is also possible that we took much longer than needed. AFAIK, there is no evidence to show that we evolved in the least amount of time possible. And we have many known setbacks, such as mass extinctions - including a major bottleneck in the human population in recent history. I think it was supposed to have been around ten thousand years ago.
Well, I think that 4 billion years is a very reasonable amount of time to create an intelligent species.
The mass extinctions were beneficial to our appearance. Without them the great predators would survive, with no chance for smaller predators like the vertebrates initially and mammals hundreds of million years later to flourish.
Big predators don´t need intelligence. They survive and reproduce very well without it.
Just for kicks, in the following Real Player video clip, Dr. Richard Henry - Professor of astrophysics at Johns Hopkins University - suggests it to be most likely that we exist along with civilizations that are tens, or hundreds of millions of years ahead of us, and a very small chance that we would coexist with populations of approximately the same age.
http://play.rbn.com/?url=usanet/usanet/g2demand/scifi/freedomofinfo/richard-henry256k.rm&proto=rtsp
from
http://www.freedomofinfo.org/science.html

I agree with that opinion, provided that technological civilizations don´t extinguish themselves and can last for tens or hundreds of million years.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #174
I would guess that an intelligent species should last indefinitely. Why only 'tens' of millions of years?

I would also imagine that intelligence or no, life will wind up spreading itself all over the place, adapting to who knows what environment (why not vacuum?), given enough time for it to drift.

I'm sort of puzzled though as to why the universe doesn't look like Times Square, if you get my drift.
 
  • #175
maybe/maybe not. Never had an encounter, not holding my breath.
 
  • #176
SGT said:
What does that mean? 4th and 5th generation stars were formed 1 billion years after the Big Bang?

No, I mean that ETs could have up to a billion years head start on us.

Well, I think that 4 billion years is a very reasonable amount of time to create an intelligent species.

"I think" is hardly a good argument. Again, is there any evidence to show that we evolved in a minimum of time?

The mass extinctions were beneficial to our appearance. Without them the great predators would survive, with no chance for smaller predators like the vertebrates initially and mammals hundreds of million years later to flourish. Big predators don´t need intelligence. They survive and reproduce very well without it.

That all depends on the stressors encountered. There is no way to know what might have evolved in the absense of mass extinctions.
 
  • #177
StuMyers said:
I would guess that an intelligent species should last indefinitely. Why only 'tens' of millions of years?

I would also imagine that intelligence or no, life will wind up spreading itself all over the place, adapting to who knows what environment (why not vacuum?), given enough time for it to drift.

I'm sort of puzzled though as to why the universe doesn't look like Times Square, if you get my drift.

A technological civilization has many means of self destruction. War with high destructive power weapons, pollution caused by technology are two examples. Other causes could be found.
We have barely escaped a nuclear war and pollution is a great concern.
 
  • #178
Ivan Seeking said:
No, I mean that ETs could have up to a billion years head start on us.
Agreed, if their civilization lasted that long.
"I think" is hardly a good argument. Again, is there any evidence to show that we evolved in a minimum of time?
Is there any evidence that this time is not a minimum?

That all depends on the stressors encountered. There is no way to know what might have evolved in the absense of mass extinctions.

Yes, if the Cambrian extinction had not happened maybe we could now have intelligent Anomalocaris.
 
  • #179
SGT said:
A technological civilization has many means of self destruction. War with high destructive power weapons, pollution caused by technology are two examples. Other causes could be found.
We have barely escaped a nuclear war and pollution is a great concern.

I would guess that once an intelligent species managed to spread itself off of it's planet of origin, it would become very difficult to completely extinguish. I can't really image that not happening for us within a few hundred years. In the grand scheme of things then, humans will have taken about 200 000 years to more or less establish themselves permenantly.

Has anybody ever tried to do a quantitative guess at how long it would take an exponentially growing population to spread across an entire galaxy (assuming only known feasible technology)?
 
  • #180
StuMyers said:
I would guess that once an intelligent species managed to spread itself off of it's planet of origin, it would become very difficult to completely extinguish. I can't really image that not happening for us within a few hundred years. In the grand scheme of things then, humans will have taken about 200 000 years to more or less establish themselves permenantly.

Has anybody ever tried to do a quantitative guess at how long it would take an exponentially growing population to spread across an entire galaxy (assuming only known feasible technology)?

A civilization will have the means to extinguish itself hundreds of years before it can spread to other solar systems.
Once the spreading starts in one million years this civilization could traverse the galaxy. The lack of communicating civilizations in our neighborhood (as far as we know), seems to demonstrate that technological civilizations don´t last this long.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
1K
  • · Replies 45 ·
2
Replies
45
Views
8K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 60 ·
3
Replies
60
Views
7K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
5K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
8K
  • · Replies 46 ·
2
Replies
46
Views
9K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
10K