Life on other planets?
- Thread starter JustAGuy85
- Start date
Patrick_S
persona non grata
The schools don´t want you to believe in anything, they just present logical theories based on facts. The church wants you to believe in theories based on legends and fairy tales.
Yes. Absolutely.
It seems he's since clarified/recanted that statement.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buzz_Aldrin
Jesus was from another galaxy. The only one to come over here and die for out sins. Correct, maybe It is the truth.
It's the CERN institute in Geneva. They have recently constructed a Large Hadron Collider. If you are interested, there are several threads where we've discussed the subject.
Have you read the book VALIS by Philip K Dick? The things you are saying sound almost exactly like his ideas in that book.
Last edited:
Carl Sagan was the scientist who pointed out the probability of life elsewhere than earth- that whole bit about billions of stars in billions of galaxies, etc.
I tend to have a scientific / evolutionist outlook on the creation and expansion of life; I subscribe to the theory that life began here on earth as the result of, basically, a cosmic accident. Amino acids in a protozoan soup, the introduction of lightning, some hydrogen and oxygen thrown into the mix- voila. It was an accident, sure- but if you've got all the right factors in place, then the appearance of rudimentary lifeforms is a statistical likelihood. Taking into account the simple fact that our planet was formed in much the same way as (presumably) most other planets in the universe capable of sustaining life, one would be safe to bet that those other planets have those same building blocks in place. To assume that this accident only happened on our planet, that we alone hold the one statistical anomaly, is absurd. That's like dealing out 100 trillion hands of poker (deuces wild) and only getting a single royal flush.
Now then there's the question of intelligent life. The same statistical probabilities are at play. If a planet has the necessities for life, and life begins, then it is only a matter of time until evolution forces upward expansion and yields a reasoning being.
The big drawback here is the vastness of space, and the sad fact that there is a universal speed limit for matter, i.e. very near the speed of light. Just as statistical probability dictates that there will be other planets bearing intelligent life, so also does it dictate that those planets will be extremely remote from each other. There are stars so far from us that a radio signal sent out today won't reach them until a million years after we are dead- more than sufficient time for a race of beings to reach their technological peak and then go extinct. And maybe we're a young race in the universal picture... perhaps millions of other intelligent lifeforms evolved and died out long before we came down out of the trees...
My point is this: I firmly believe that there is life on other planets. I just as firmly believe, though, that time and space will forever keep us separate from them. They are so far away as to be meaningless.
I tend to have a scientific / evolutionist outlook on the creation and expansion of life; I subscribe to the theory that life began here on earth as the result of, basically, a cosmic accident. Amino acids in a protozoan soup, the introduction of lightning, some hydrogen and oxygen thrown into the mix- voila. It was an accident, sure- but if you've got all the right factors in place, then the appearance of rudimentary lifeforms is a statistical likelihood. Taking into account the simple fact that our planet was formed in much the same way as (presumably) most other planets in the universe capable of sustaining life, one would be safe to bet that those other planets have those same building blocks in place. To assume that this accident only happened on our planet, that we alone hold the one statistical anomaly, is absurd. That's like dealing out 100 trillion hands of poker (deuces wild) and only getting a single royal flush.
Now then there's the question of intelligent life. The same statistical probabilities are at play. If a planet has the necessities for life, and life begins, then it is only a matter of time until evolution forces upward expansion and yields a reasoning being.
The big drawback here is the vastness of space, and the sad fact that there is a universal speed limit for matter, i.e. very near the speed of light. Just as statistical probability dictates that there will be other planets bearing intelligent life, so also does it dictate that those planets will be extremely remote from each other. There are stars so far from us that a radio signal sent out today won't reach them until a million years after we are dead- more than sufficient time for a race of beings to reach their technological peak and then go extinct. And maybe we're a young race in the universal picture... perhaps millions of other intelligent lifeforms evolved and died out long before we came down out of the trees...
My point is this: I firmly believe that there is life on other planets. I just as firmly believe, though, that time and space will forever keep us separate from them. They are so far away as to be meaningless.
you mean biographics? only if it is necessary, Its more of a disarry. Elevation of science, medicine, body, and everything. It is the only reasonable explaination I have came across.
You got a point JR34. But if life on earth is so mediocre, would they really be so inclined to put forth the effort? since they would have to be so advanced, it would only be academic to study the earth. Perhaps there are much closer intersteller species that they are studying before they go to earth. Maybe they have higher ethics than we do and they don't believe that in viewing they should interfere in any way with their subjects.
They say the only like ten or 20 percent of the under water depths have been studied on Earth, so I think that provides some kind of parallel for universal discovery as well.
I don't think there is really enough evidence that we can make a firm statement about Aliens visiting the earth, but at the same time, there's more than enough that it would be foolish to entirely dismiss the idea without consideration.
They say the only like ten or 20 percent of the under water depths have been studied on Earth, so I think that provides some kind of parallel for universal discovery as well.
I don't think there is really enough evidence that we can make a firm statement about Aliens visiting the earth, but at the same time, there's more than enough that it would be foolish to entirely dismiss the idea without consideration.
Latterer
Closed Account
But any trip will require you to accelerate to a maximum velocity and then 'decelerate' back to a velocity at which you can safely enter the solar system. This would have the effect of an artificial gravity and nullify any zero gravity concerns. It's Einstein's Relativity.
but what einstein failed to tell you was there was a magnetic field shelding anything and everything trying to force itself through this velocity. In which you have to go around. and can no long decelerate or accelerate. Since matter collapses, and nothing is safe. That equasion was a hypohthesis, and a good one at that. To shield the field you need magnesium trisate which is only found on the planet jupiter, but had traveled from a metoerite during einteins expidition. He figured a way to become invisible, to become ever lasting. He is still around some people say his worked may of been destroyed so Wars could be faught with equal liberty. Not only does this array of blue substance distrant the eye it will cause mental numbness for serveral hours. well, the point of it all being is If one man can substain gravity. Why not be able to walk in outterspace. It means more then just concepts. Its a theory of theroredical truth. Delveloping a leadway to science look at as a counter act in maintaing nutural elements. Elements are derrived from segments which come from nutrients. Which scale fragments, which hold magnites, which control magnets. only movement will tell, time and space is not a factor.
I am sure that somewhere in the Universe there are other forms of life. There are too much stars and planets to think that we are the only ones.
However, I don't think that anything good will come out if we ever meet them. Think about it - we, humans, are often repulsed by alien-looking creatures like insects and spiders and they evolved here, on Earth. Now imagine how much more alien and ergo disgusting (to us) would look actual aliens. It would cause an immense wave of hatred towards them, inspired by fear and disgust. If the aliens are intelligent, I only imagine that they will feel the same towards us.
However, I don't think that anything good will come out if we ever meet them. Think about it - we, humans, are often repulsed by alien-looking creatures like insects and spiders and they evolved here, on Earth. Now imagine how much more alien and ergo disgusting (to us) would look actual aliens. It would cause an immense wave of hatred towards them, inspired by fear and disgust. If the aliens are intelligent, I only imagine that they will feel the same towards us.
Stop using other people as an escuse to fail - notrodumus
Reminds me of the book stranger in a strange land. An Alien arrives on earth preaching universal peace and love and is destroyed by humanity. Some people have suggested that it really isn't about aliens and it's just a metaphor. hmm...
I'm not sure what you are getting at MFL. the earth's magnetic field is not stronger than it's gravitational pull, so it doesn't really have any effect on any significant mass entering the atmosphere. In fact, that is what Einsteins law of energy in motion is all about. the two are usually inverse proportion to each other.
not really, space is micros of gravity not creating any signifigant mass. you would have to comb it to bring togeather the elements needed to fill the void. Which creates black holes. Space is not all togeather, at one point the planets were a line close togeather and now they have faded apart. Once in a while an eclipse will happen where the moon is alined or the planets are a lined. What happened is earth is taking in oxygen and realeasing oxygen slowly, With enough realsed chemicals you can push anything away. Over Billions of years of releasing chemcials they got attached to other planets. Which are now Gas Planets. If exploration is ever done, as they found water on the moon. They will find it reasonable to assume that theory is correct.
I had hoped we wouldn't, but it seems we really need to establish that there is a HUGE difference between the existence of life on other planets, and the earth having been visited by life from other planets. They're barely even related. (ok, one may prove the other, but the reciprocal is far from true).
Without wishing to start a 'did he/didn't he' argument..
I doubt he would have said it as a joke, or as an off-the-cuff' remark.
It's not something that a highly trained astronaut would just blurt out without having thought about it.
Also, if he has altered his statement since, I would guess it's either at the request of a higher authority, or simply that he now feels that it makes him sound like a nutcase.. of sorts.
BTW: I'm sure that I've read about at least one other astronaut, who has confirmed a sighting. :dunno:
My argument exactly (except I would have said 'If just 1% of each..')
Whichever way you do it, the numbers/odds are pretty good, that some sort of life exists elsewhere.
Similar threads
