Are we alone in the Universe?

philosophical debates and companies.
moinsdewatt
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 5111
Registration: 28/09/09, 17:35
Location: Isére
x 554

Re: Are we alone in the Universe?




by moinsdewatt » 09/06/17, 20:07

The mysterious "Wow!" not from aliens

the 09.06.2017

40 years old, the mystery of the signal "Wow!" is finally explained by the passage of a comet. Spotted by a radio telescope in 1977, some hoped that it could be a message from an extraterrestrial intelligence.

https://www.sciencesetavenir.fr/espace/ ... res_113692
0 x
Christophe
Moderator
Moderator
posts: 79117
Registration: 10/02/03, 14:06
Location: Greenhouse planet
x 10972

Re: Are we alone in the Universe?




by Christophe » 15/08/17, 12:44

moinsdewatt wrote:
The mysterious "Wow!" not from aliens

the 09.06.2017

40 years old, the mystery of the signal "Wow!" is finally explained by the passage of a comet. Spotted by a radio telescope in 1977, some hoped that it could be a message from an extraterrestrial intelligence.


https://www.sciencesetavenir.fr/espace/ ... res_113692


This other article contradicts the fact that the comet is at the origin of such an intensity and it gives other facts on this Wow signal that I did not know: http://www.lemonde.fr/les-decodeurs/art ... 55770.html

In particular that the signal is in fact only a signal intensity and not a signal recording in itself ...
1 x
User avatar
sen-no-sen
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6856
Registration: 11/06/09, 13:08
Location: High Beaujolais.
x 749

Re: Are we alone in the Universe?




by sen-no-sen » 17/08/17, 17:03

When statistics announce that we are alone in the Universe

If there are other civilizations in the Universe, then why, in almost 60 years of listening and looking at the sky, have we found no evidence of their existence? According to Daniel Whitmire, an astrophysicist at the University of Arkansas, it may be because there is no one to be found up there. Using statistical analysis, Whitmire concludes that, if the Earth is typical, it is not possible for any other technological civilization to exist at the same time as us.


However, the simplest explanation is that the reason we do not find other civilizations is that they are not there. Whitmire's position is that, if the cosmological concept called the principle of mediocrity is applied to Fermi's Paradox, this gives the reason why we are alone, that we are a typical civilization and that we are going to die out soon, while we are capable of interstellar communication.

http://www.gurumed.org/2017/08/15/statistiques-annoncent-sommes-seul-lunivers/
0 x
"Engineering is sometimes about knowing when to stop" Charles De Gaulle.
lilian07
I posted 500 messages!
I posted 500 messages!
posts: 534
Registration: 15/11/15, 13:36
x 56

Re: Are we alone in the Universe?




by lilian07 » 17/08/17, 23:09

I find Whitmire's approach very interesting; he gives a very credible explanation for the absence of an extraterrestrial signal in 60 years of listening.

It starts from the simple principle that if we have no signal it is because we are currently alone in the universe and for that it brings the Fermi paradox closer to the principle of mediocrity (Earth is a typical case of the universe, in the average sense as opposed to an exceptional life-promoting case).
Indeed our technological species has only recently been compared to biological life so it is in this sense already an unlikely event to have another technological species at the same stage (even with billions of possible extraterrestrial life).
Most of the time the planets inhabited are by biological species which does not necessarily lead to technological species.
Then, even if in the vast possibilities of technological species appear they can in no case be persistent and this is one of the most interesting and credible explanations because a technological species cannot live very long because it destroys the resources of his planet.
The paradox then becomes obvious what unfortunately de facto condemns the human species has not lasted and especially to leave no hope to the other biological generations on the planet.

This is one of the possible explanations and the latter finds a lot of meaning on earth and currently.
It is however unlikely to be able to verify it unless you have contact or not before the end.
0 x
izentrop
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 13644
Registration: 17/03/14, 23:42
Location: picardie
x 1502
Contact :

Re: Are we alone in the Universe?




by izentrop » 18/08/17, 01:30

lilian07 wrote:a technological species cannot live very long because it destroys the resources of its planet.
Pessimistic consequence. On the contrary, I think that reason will prevail.
Understanding the mechanisms that lead us to our loss will allow us to raise the bar.
Like Hubert Reeves, I trust the immense possibilities of the human brain… http://www.hubertreeves.info/spectacles/maldeterre.html
0 x
Ahmed
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 12298
Registration: 25/02/08, 18:54
Location: Burgundy
x 2963

Re: Are we alone in the Universe?




by Ahmed » 18/08/17, 09:45

Lilian07, you write:
The paradox then becomes obvious, which unfortunately condemns de facto the human species not to last and especially to leave no hope to other biological generations on the planet.

Technology is only one aspect of the problem and its harmfulness results from the context in which it is deployed. Reason gives hope, as the saying goes Izentrop, a possible change of trajectory, but this hope remains tenuous, due to the predominance of the only performative rationality which is, in an underlying way, at the service of the maximization of the dissipation of energy (or of the accumulation endless of the abstract value, if we refer to another explanatory grid). However, an extinction of the human species and other "sensitive" species is unlikely to result in the destruction of all life on earth, far from it.
You also write:
a technological species cannot live very long, because it destroys the resources of its planet.

It is a somewhat summary analysis which confuses (I recognize that it is tempting!) The means of a system and its aims, but it is in these latter that the reasons for its inevitable annihilation reside (Cf.https: //www.econologie.com/limites-physiques-croissance-pertinentes/).
0 x
"Please don't believe what I'm telling you."
lilian07
I posted 500 messages!
I posted 500 messages!
posts: 534
Registration: 15/11/15, 13:36
x 56

Re: Are we alone in the Universe?




by lilian07 » 18/08/17, 10:43

Technology is only one aspect of the problem and its harmfulness results from the context in which it is deployed.
Learn more about societe-et-philosophie/sommes-nous-seuls-dans-l-univers-t12248-420.html#Z5xZEM1kHyb3gQFl.99


And rightly not, if we are in the simple and concrete explanation of the Fermi paradox of the absence of electromagnetic signal of technological origin (necessarily resulting from the control of the physical parameters present and immutable in all the universe) compared to principle of mediocrity then any technology resulting from the biological evolution of the living is an impasse whatever the context and therefore verified by the absence of signal AND over 60 years of listening.
So we are no longer in the anthropocentrism which Izentrop advocates rather and which leads us to the Fermi paradox which removes all possibility of solving the question of extraterrestrial life .... but I am not saying above all that it is not another track to explore but I prefer a rational track or rather almost measurable.

underlying, in the service of maximizing energy dissipation

You said it yourself the technology resulting from the biological necessarily passes by there and therefore with the absence of signal observed the technological being cannot return to the reason because it is incapable of it or then at a given moment of its technological evolution very short (200 years max ....) it crosses the red line and ends up destroying its vital biological resources to control the physical parameters of the universe (weak and strong nuclear force, electromatics, gravity ....)
Amhed, if I understood correctly your assertion on my analysis that you say summary and which can confuse the means of a system and its finalities I answer simply that in the principle of mediocrity any biological species of the universe will pass through the search for nuclear fission, fusion, electromagnetic communication and therefore get out of its natural balance whatever the context by forever changing the environment regulated by the simple nature of the universe ....
0 x
Ahmed
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 12298
Registration: 25/02/08, 18:54
Location: Burgundy
x 2963

Re: Are we alone in the Universe?




by Ahmed » 18/08/17, 11:18

The problem with your approach lies in the fact that technique is an essential data, but that there is a difference in degree between technique and technology (but at what stage?) Which almost changes its nature (no pun intended! ).
The reference to the paradox of Fermi remains fairly speculative and insignificant for me, in view of other considerations.

On the second part of your previous message, I agree, but I still think that the destruction of natural resources and the environment, although far from negligible, is secondary to the internal contradictions of a system that makes us more and more dependent on its metabolism, even though the latter is condemned by its simple functioning. Therein lies the danger: too subject to its trajectory, we will perish with it *. There remains a hypothetical voluntary abandonment which would lead to a smooth transition ... : roll:

The question of possible contacts with extraterrestrials doesn't really fascinate me: can't we make enough enemies on earth? : Lol:

* By inability to build a viable project in a context of brutal collapse.
Note: the collapse has already started and the reactions it causes are overwhelmingly ** directed towards the preservation of what condemns us ...
** I am not talking about the number of reactions here, but their weight in the progress of the world.
0 x
"Please don't believe what I'm telling you."
izentrop
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 13644
Registration: 17/03/14, 23:42
Location: picardie
x 1502
Contact :

Re: Are we alone in the Universe?




by izentrop » 18/08/17, 12:30

Like Ahmed, nothing indicates an extraterrestrial threat. The priority is to take control of our planet.
The real awareness may come with the shortage of drinking water, for now it does not take the path.
Even if "man" does not reason, nature will return to a new equilibrium.
The century of speed probably forgotten and the sun will continue to fuel life on earth for 3 or 4 billion years.
0 x
User avatar
sen-no-sen
Econologue expert
Econologue expert
posts: 6856
Registration: 11/06/09, 13:08
Location: High Beaujolais.
x 749

Re: Are we alone in the Universe?




by sen-no-sen » 18/08/17, 12:46

lilian07 wrote:I find Whitmire's approach very interesting; he gives a very credible explanation for the absence of an extraterrestrial signal in 60 years of listening.


Yes, their approach is based on simple and effective reasoning, however this study eludes UFO observations which, although still unexplained, must be taken into account.
Consider also the fact that statistically if there is another form of life, these are either primitive or hyper-civilizations, it is very unlikely to come across civilizations similar to ours technologically.
Therefore it becomes obvious that primitive forms would not have the means to communicate with us and that a hyper-civilization would avoid coming into direct contact with a too recent civilization.
There is also the possibility that a hyper-civilization is discovered that the universe is after all only a vast illusion and that it turns to "other forms of exploration".

The paradox then becomes obvious what unfortunately de facto condemns the human species has not lasted and especially to leave no hope to the other biological generations on the planet.


I do not think (but this is only my humble opinion) that the human species will disappear as a result of ecological collapse, on the other hand there is a high probability that humanity will undergo "a great leap back" due to the development of certain technologies such as genetic engineering.
Methods aimed at hardening bacteria or viral strains were still 15 years ago the exclusive prerogative of the superpowers, however in recent years "progress" in terms of sequencing or genetic manipulation (such as CRISPR-CAS9) are now accessible to students at the end of their cycle ...
It then becomes obvious that the gear of the technique applies, as an example when the first civil drones were marketed it seemed obvious that its last were going to be used for terrorist purposes, it unfortunately did not take much time to confirm ...
What would be the result of the dissipation of a virus with 99% mortality in the age of globalization?
If we stick to studies on the collapse of civilizations, ours should collapse in record time, a few months at most ...?

Izentrop
Pessimistic consequence. On the contrary, I think that reason will prevail.
Understanding the mechanisms that lead us to our loss will allow us to raise the bar


I would be happy to agree, however it appears that the anthropotechnical system has hypnotic capacities which make the alarmist discourse enter a kind of fiction. Objectively where are the advances in ecological matters, despite the daily news bulletins?
If we escape the gear of the technique (disaster way) we will not escape its technological result ie humanity 2.0, which means that if we stick to the ambient determinisms the humanity should disappear in all cases ...
1 x
"Engineering is sometimes about knowing when to stop" Charles De Gaulle.

Back to "Society and Philosophy"

Who is online ?

Users browsing this forum : No registered users and 221 guests