Star Trek

Thanks for the link, 4_o_20.

Curious, however I am a little sceptical about loyalty of New Scienctist to the truth. Have you read this article:

http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20727741.300-is-quantum-theory-weird-enough-for-the-real-world.html?full=true

There is no need for this to be a hoax per se, just that the author of this so-called paper (blog post?) simply does not have the expertise to support his conclusions.  What this sounds like to me is the unscientific practice of starting with a conclusion (panspemria) and seeing what they can find to support the conclusion instead of going where the evidence leads, even if it contradicts your initial hypothesis.

Or it's quite possible that we may be the first advance civilization in the universe.

Hi, porthos432, actually "billions" is not awlays a big number. Have you or anyone else here made an estimate calculations of expectation value of life-forms in our galaxy or in galactic cluster? Take e.g. Drake equation (it is not exactly what we need here for several reasons, just an example of very rough estimation), as someone seems to have mentioned already.

I agree with your estimations, 4_o_20.

First off not much investment is put into looking for life elsewhere in the Universe because the the very notion of finding life elsewhere in the Universe would up-end religion's across the planet that have built their empires on a foundation of assumption's of Earth being at the center of all creation and that humans are the only life that exist's in the Universe. Which is a very narrow minded and very un-intelligent thought and logic processing occuring in the brain. To limit yourself to thinking that human life is the only life in the Universe set's you up for being simple minded and branded as common and unremarkable.

Dr. Hoover's find although only microbial does prove that life does exist elsewhere in the Universe and that somewhere out there in the Milky Way Galaxy there are humanoid species of life forms looking for us as well.

The metoerite microbial egg could also be a simple form of communication from an EST civilization. We know that radio waves can communicate at very fast rates of time but because they are scattered across the Universe after so many millions of miles the signal would be lost.

So why not find a local microbial that can survive the rigors of space plant them on meteorites and then distribute them throughout the Universe? The meteorite would last billions of years unless it came into contact with another object or blackhole and would make the perfect message delivery system.

The real question is can Dr. Hoover trace the trajectory of the meteorite's impact on Earth in a straight line across the Universe unti the trajectory comes close to a planetary body from which the location of the inhabitants that sent the microbial meteorite might live on?

Also alien life is different that microbial life. Alien life is considered to be sentinent life or life that can think and logically deduce patterns of thought necessary for their survival such as building shelter's from a storm, making spears to hunt food with developing math's and science.

Microbial life is an un-evolved form of life that did not develop the necessary cells to evolve from a microbial based life on the thought of need to the sentient life form.

kudos to dryson! Couldn't possibly have stated it better myself! I admire your insight and honesty. Thanks for posting your views..I couldn't agree more!

I don't think that it is a surprise that the stuff in the Universe would also be similar to that here on Earth. Why wouldn't it be?

In the '50s an astronomer named Frank Drake came up with what is known as the Drake equation to calculate the

potential planets in our galaxy capable of supporting life as we know it. The equation goes as follows:

N* x fs x fp x ne x fi x fc x fl = N

N*= stars in our galaxy
fs= fraction of sun like stars
fp= fractions of stars with planets
ne= planets in a star's habitable zone
fi= fraction of habitable planets where life does arise
fc= fraction of planets inhabited by intelligent beings
fl= percentage of a lifetime of a planet marked by a communicative civilization
N= numbers of planets with intelligent life
Keep in mind that little was known regarding most of these variables in the 50s. There was no Hubble and there

was no estimation of planetary masses orbiting around other stars so many assumptions were made.

By the late 90s, evolutionary biologists Peter Ward and Donald Brownlee revised this equation to place it more

in line with current understandings of cosmology. They have named this updated equation the Rare Earth

Equation.

N* x fp x fpm x ne x ng x fi x fc x fl x fm xfj x fme = N

N*= stars in our galaxy
fp= fractions of stars with planets
fpm= fraction of metal rich planets
ne= planets in a star's habitable zone
ng= stars in a galactic habitable zone
fi= fraction of habitable planets where life does arise
fc= fraction of planets with life where complex metazoans arise
fl= percentage of a lifetime of a planet marked by the presence of complex metazoans
fm= fraction of planets with a large moon
fj= fraction of solar systems with Jupiter-sized planets
fme= fraction of planets with critically low mass extinction events
N= number of planets with intelligent civilizations

Ward and Brownlee admit that this is a sketchy equation, though less sketchy than Drake's. They have left out

some factors whose effects can't as yet be determined, such as the effect of repeated ice ages, and inertial

interplay between celestial bodies within a solar system. But they contend that even from sparse data a general

signal may be perceived. And yes, this is using Earth as a model for a life bearing planet. Terra-centric perhaps,

but it's the only model available to us. And as with any equation, when any term in the equation approaches zero,

 so too does the product. Earth may be one of a very few planets capable of supporting life as we know it.

Admittedly, this model presupposes animal life. I am fully aware that there could be types of life that would not

fit any definition we use (It’s life, Jim, but not as we know it!). I really think that life is the exception rather than

the norm, even by evolutionary standards, which do not presuppose a creator with a bias towards life. I

personally lean towards a designer rather than chance.

Now to the explanation of the terms-

N*- we will limit our discussion to this galaxy. Isn’t that a big enough sample?

fp- not all stars will have planets. A star must be of sufficient mass for planets to form and then hang around

after their formation.

fpm- if the star from which planets form is not metal-rich, planets with an outer lithosphere upon which water

may form are not likely.

ne- There is a very narrow band around any star that will constitute a habitable zone. Any planet forming outside

 this zone is not likely to have liquid water. Prospects for life are not good.

ng- there are places in the galaxy that are less conducive to the formation of life. Anywhere life formed in the

galactic core where radiation is much more intense, they would have to develop sunscreen with an spf of several

 million long before the wheel.

fi- life simply is not going to happen everywhere. Water won’t form every time a planet in the right place does.

fc- bacteria may be living, but if they never organize professional sport teams, are we really going to consider

them alive? If the basic portions of life do not gain complexity, creatures of even greater complexity may never

arise.

fl- complex  metazoans that die out the first time the tide rises a little too high simply don’t have the stuff required

 to make it any further up the food chain.

fm- If there is no moon, there are no tides, and tidal pools are thought to be likely pots in which life potentially

ferments. Also, the moon takes a lot of hits intended for us. There are no seas on the dark side. Just lots of

meteor strikes.

fj-You need a large gravity well farther out in a solar system to attract objects capable of crossing the orbit of a

life bearing planet at the wrong time. Note the Shoemaker-Levy comet impact on Jupiter in the early 1990s.

fme- too many mass extinction events will eventually wear down any life form to the point where it finally gives

up trying.

Hmm. Will it be a surprise for you if the stuff you find is Amazon rainforest is kind of different from the stuff in North Africa?

From the other side, if you are talking about laws of physics - then they are the same everywhere, of course. However it is not a topic of this thread... .

I think they'll look more like species 8472!

About bloody time!

Apparently, even STAR TREK fans aren't too swift on the uptake ...

And what is your position on the question?