What's new

Are we alone?

As far as the laws of mathematics refer to reality, they are not certain, and as far as they are certain, they do not refer to reality.”

-Albert Einstein
 
but I have a hard time accepting that theres a mathematical equation that would prove life does not exist outside of our planet.

There is no equation the would prove life does not exist, that is impossible to prove, what can be proven is that there is no evidence of life existing anywhere except here. You seem to be under the impression that I am arguing against life existing. I am saying that we can neither prove nor disprove the whole question based on what we now know. All we now know is that life does exist here and nowhere else based on the evidence we have.

My beliefs/reason/logic may scream for the existence of life, but it doesn't change the fact that there is ABSOLUTELY no evidence to support that Theory. And as such my beliefs become matters of faith/spirituality and no longer matters of logic/reason/evidence based.
 

Esox

I didnt know
Staff member
All we now know is that life does exist here and nowhere else based on the evidence we have.

That is a fact I can agree with.

I was under the impression you were convinced life beyond Earth is impossible, yes.

I'm sticking with my guns that it will be proven sooner rather than later, but it wont be intelligent life as we think of it. Yet anyway.
 
I HATE math, failed college algebra more than once and quickly pursued my education in other realms. But Logic/Reason/Evidence is my forte, I have studied and taught it at various levels for most of my adult life. And It is a demanding and frustrating endeavor that becomes a fearful taskmaster. Logic allows no variance from the path and must be strictly followed to it end. Reason is the path which logic must travel and it is a hard road that allows no straying from the prescribed course. And that is where theoretical science lies, it is outside the bounds of the taskmaster and the road. It still clings to vestiges of the latter but it has transplanted the framework from its proper home in reality and placed it in a variable "reality" controlled by the assumptions made.
 
I'm sticking with my guns that it will be proven sooner rather than later, but it wont be intelligent life as we think of it. Yet anyway.

Microbial life, if it has not already been found and hidden from us, will be identified within this solar system in our lifetimes.

If you identify with the theory of evolution it is a logical conclusion to believe that if life exists on other planets within our close family, it exists everywhere in some form or another.
 

Esox

I didnt know
Staff member
If you identify with the theory of evolution it is a logical conclusion to believe that if life exists on other planets within our close family, it exists everywhere in some form or another.

I'd take that one further by saying that because life exists here on Earth, it does elsewhere as well. From its simplest forms to beings far beyond our comprehension.

As previously stated however, that is only speculation.
 
Microbial life, if it has not already been found and hidden from us, will be identified within this solar system in our lifetimes.

If you identify with the theory of evolution it is a logical conclusion to believe that if life exists on other planets within our close family, it exists everywhere in some form or another.

That's a cool belief, but it is simply a belief my friend.:001_smile
 
I once knew a fellow who firmly believed he could fly. And he would argue with anyone who disagreed with him on the issue. I asked him to do one simple thing in order for me to believe him. I asked him to demonstrate his ability. He became angry and said that I was trying to trick him into revealing the secret to me so I could steal it an sell it for money and so he could not demonstrate it to me because I was simply a greedy thief.

And I had to shake my head in wonder at how someone could be so sure of something that he could neither prove nor demonstrate. And I silently wondered why they let nuts like that wonder the streets alone! (just kidding)

But my point is if you are talking about what we know then you must exclude the existence of life anywhere except here. Because we have and will continue to have no evidence to the contrary. Because we are certainly not doing very much to find life elsewhere. As if we actually could do something meaningful on that front.
 
Your analogy is faulty, either there is ONLY what we see, hear, feel, taste, etc... or there is a fuzzy fantastical where anything is possible. I.E. the flying spaghetti monster created the universe and all that is within it by the power of his excellent sauce.

That is where the discussion has strayed at this point if we are arguing from nothingness towards what is known. I agree that human knowledge is frail and limited at best, but it is after all all that we have to work with in this discussion and as such we are immensely limited.

But it still remains that some theories are indeed better than others, and life existing out there somewhere does not qualify as one of the better human theories for a number of reasons. Notwithstanding that of both reason and logic which dictate based upon what we know that life is indeed unique to our terrestrial ball.

I counter that even among the scientific community, there is a ridiculously large fudge factor of the fuzzy fantastical vis a vis "dark matter" and "dark energy" that is required to make the mathematical models work the way they want them to.

From Dark Energy, Dark Matter | Science Mission Directorate
"It turns out that roughly 68% of the universe is dark energy. Dark matter makes up about 27%. The rest - everything on Earth, everything ever observed with all of our instruments, all normal matter - adds up to less than 5% of the universe."
So, we can say "scientists told us such and such..." but it is a false precision fallacy, because they can't examine 95% of the universe.
 
We know little to nothing of the universe/multiverse/whatever we're in, let's face it.
By sheer numbers I think we can't be alone around here, that would be bizarre in the extreme
Probably the main question is how to define - and recognize - a life form, let alone an intelligent one.
Philosophers and scientists have debated that specific question for ages, not sure they've eventually converged on a single answer yet.
 
Considering how vast the universe is, Id say it would be pretty arrogant on our part to think that Earth is the only place where life took hold.
 

Esox

I didnt know
Staff member
Because we have and will continue to have no evidence to the contrary. Because we are certainly not doing very much to find life elsewhere. As if we actually could do something meaningful on that front.

There are ways to lend a helping hand, if one chooses too.

Help out SETI. I run SETI@Home on my PC.

SETI@home
 
I mean are we alone in the universe? Do you believe there are other forms of life elsewhere in the universe? ....

That's a cool belief, but it is simply a belief my friend.:001_smile

But my point is if you are talking about what we know then you must exclude the existence of life anywhere except here. Because we have and will continue to have no evidence to the contrary. Because we are certainly not doing very much to find life elsewhere. As if we actually could do something meaningful on that front.


This has been a wonderful read of a thread and one that has been very civil! Thank you to all the posters whom have taken the time to respond and state their thoughts, logic, reasoning, and beliefs.

@dionesius3 I don't disagree with a word you have stated, when you strip away any theory and base an argument solely on "fact" then yes you have to state that there is no evidence of other forms of life. (I use quotations around fact as the vast majority of what we know as "fact" is not able to be proven or will be overturned in future scientific endeavors).

Though I do have to point out the quotes above, important parts bolded by me, in that the OP never asked about what could be proven or have evidence provided for it. The OP asked what individuals "believe", by not stating your beliefs, as you have stated multiple times you aren't, you are not responding to the OP's question. So, what do you believe, not what has been proven to you?

I would also argue that discussing scientific/mathematical theories is not discussing anything to do with religious context and can easily remain civil and gentlemanly.

My thoughts:
I think that if we believe that the universe is infinite, than it is very short sighted to believe that the numbers aren't great enough to support life. Albeit it might be completely different than what we can classify as life on Earth, as has been discussed by others previously (silicone vs carbon based life forms).
 
Fermi's Paradox comes to mind. But I don't think it's a certainty that there is life elsewhere in the universe. There's an assumption that life is kind of like Sea Monkeys™ - just add water. But the problem is that science does not know how life can form from inanimate objects. There's speculation, and experiments that yield what's thought to be building blocks of life, but part of the problem is that these building blocks are used by existing life rather than being components for life from scratch. There are various problems that have to be solved. Self-replicating chemicals are one; a self-replicating barrier to seal the chemicals in from the outside environment is another, and on and on with each component of the simplest, viable, form of life.

If all this is random, each is influenced by chance. You have the odds of self-replicating chemicals times the odds of a self replicating membrane times the odds of every single component involved in the simplest organism. Right of the bat, we don't have a handle on the odds because we don't know what initial conditions are required. Deep sea smoker? Along a slightly radioactive shoreline (completely serious - no images of big single cell critters going "Amoeba smash!")? In an ice pack? We don't know. And because we don't know the initial steps or what exactly has to be done, we can't calculate the odds of life coming about and not going extinct almost immediately.

Instead, there's hand-waving. Life formed here, it goes, so why not elsewhere? The same physical laws here are elsewhere, and there's life here, so why not life under similar conditions? The reasoning goes that Earth isn't a special case.

Except ... what if it is? What if the odds of life forming from base chemicals are so high that it's a rare event? What if that life managing not to quickly go extinct is even higher? If we look at Earth's natural history, it seems that there were several bottlenecks, including a possible gamma ray burst. What if Earth not only won in the Casino of Life, but broke the bank?

All of a sudden, the idea that we might be alone isn't so far-fetched. There are likely billions of planets, moons, and what have you that could support life, but what if the odds against life are so high as to make that practically meaningless?

Now, I don't know that we are alone, but I don't take it as a given that we aren't.

This is one of the most eloquent arguments against life elsewhere that I have ever heard.
 
That's a cool belief, but it is simply a belief my friend.:001_smile

For me it is a "possibility" not a belief.

Once it has been proven that the universe is a dead sterile place, devoid of all lifeforms, I will believe it. Until then it remains a possibility.

In fact, there is a stronger argument for intelligent life in the universe and we are having it now, so I would go so far as to say that there is a strong possibility which is backed up by the fact we are talking about it now.

.
 
I am still awaiting evidence of intelligent life on this planet.

LOL I would have to agree completely with you on this one especially when I look in the mirror!

I have trouble seeing how the discussion could very long remain civil and gentlemanly if we do delve very far into the realm of beliefs. Because most beliefs are intrinsically bound up with our own unique "worldviews" and those by definition are "religious beliefs" that are held as the operating "axiom's" of a person. They are shaped by environment, education, social customs, parental influences, experience, and sometimes by what we read, hear, see, and participate in. And they are in every sense of the word "religious" in nature. I'm not simply contrasting a western Judaeo-Christian ideal with say an eastern-Buddhist ideal I'm including ALL axiom beliefs held by all humanity. Even the functional prue Humanist who believes in nothing. All those Axioms are held and nurtured and kept exactly like religious beliefs. And changing those in another person can only occur through a process of break-down /destruction followed by a process of building/re-normalizing the new Axiom in it's place.

Something not normally discussed in a forum, but again if the question and answers are so far good to go, and you desire to delve further into the belief/spiritual/metaphysical then I am ready to share my beliefs.
 
I look at most scientists as preachers reading from a different book.

They have the same strong beliefs and desire to convert others to what they strongly believe, even to the point of persecuting others who disagree with them.

And that's about all I have to say about scientists.

Science as a pursuit is a great and noble quest but once someone has sunk into a dogmatic belief of what they have read or heard from others and quelsishes the thoughts and words of "disbelievers" it moves to the realm of non-science.

It took decades to disprove the accepted scientific theory that everything revolved around the earth. Many who disagreed were persecuted, derided, and some outright killed for their radically different view which is now held as the correct view.
 

Esox

I didnt know
Staff member
I mean are we alone in the universe? Do you believe there are other forms of life elsewhere in the universe?

The OP's base questions.

Ones personal beliefs regarding either of those questions doesnt need to become a religious or theological exercise.

No, I do not believe we are alone. No, I cant prove it but I dont need too, even though it will be proven soon enough.

I do firmly believe there are other forms of life in not only in the universe, but in our own galaxy.

No religious connotations in either answer for me.
 
Top Bottom