Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

Do Aliens Exist?

283 replies to this topic

Poll: Does Alien Exist (330 member(s) have cast votes)

Does Alien Exist

  1. Yes (185 votes [61.87%])

    Percentage of vote: 61.87%

  2. No (32 votes [10.70%])

    Percentage of vote: 10.70%

  3. Maybe (82 votes [27.42%])

    Percentage of vote: 27.42%

Vote Guests cannot vote
K^2
  • K^2

    Vidi Vici Veni

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Apr 2004
  • United-States
  • Most Knowledgeable [Web Development/Programming] 2013
    Most Knowledgeable [GTA Series] 2011
    Best Debater 2010

#211

Posted 03 October 2011 - 04:54 AM

QUOTE (playaindahood @ Sunday, Oct 2 2011, 20:24)
ok. but i said the amount of galaxies. there are billions of them. this makes it more likely that there is life on planets in those galaxies.

More likely, yes. But you don't know the base line. If it's improbable enough to begin with, the universe can still have just one inhabited world; this one. We have no way of telling the improbability of life on any given habitable world yet. We need a second habitable world to establish a base line.

playaindahood
  • playaindahood

    Cooljunk Productions

  • Members
  • Joined: 04 Apr 2008

#212

Posted 03 October 2011 - 05:22 AM

QUOTE (K^2 @ Monday, Oct 3 2011, 04:54)
QUOTE (playaindahood @ Sunday, Oct 2 2011, 20:24)
ok. but i said the amount of galaxies. there are billions of them. this makes it more likely that there is life on planets in those galaxies.

More likely, yes. But you don't know the base line. If it's improbable enough to begin with, the universe can still have just one inhabited world; this one. We have no way of telling the improbability of life on any given habitable world yet. We need a second habitable world to establish a base line.

That's a good point, but scientists have also discovered a possible earth-like planet, Gliese 581g. nothing is for sure though, and we may never know for sure unless we can actually see life, so we may never have another base to use.

but we still have one, which is us, so it would be one life bearing planet for every 50 billion planets, and there are trillions of planets.


i think it's safe to say that there must be another planet with some sort of life on it.

K^2
  • K^2

    Vidi Vici Veni

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Apr 2004
  • United-States
  • Most Knowledgeable [Web Development/Programming] 2013
    Most Knowledgeable [GTA Series] 2011
    Best Debater 2010

#213

Posted 03 October 2011 - 07:00 AM

QUOTE (playaindahood @ Monday, Oct 3 2011, 01:22)
That's a good point, but scientists have also discovered a possible earth-like planet, Gliese 581g. nothing is for sure though, and we may never know for sure unless we can actually see life, so we may never have another base to use.

but we still have one, which is us, so it would be one life bearing planet for every 50 billion planets, and there are trillions of planets.

That's one planet out of one planet we studied. Not one planet out of 50 billion or any other number you made up. The probability that life exists on another planet given that life exists on Earth is completely undetermined. And yes, we know there are other habitable planets. Habitable doesn't mean inhabited.
QUOTE
i think it's safe to say that there must be another planet with some sort of life on it.

No, it absolutely is not.

playaindahood
  • playaindahood

    Cooljunk Productions

  • Members
  • Joined: 04 Apr 2008

#214

Posted 03 October 2011 - 07:43 AM

QUOTE (K^2 @ Monday, Oct 3 2011, 07:00)
QUOTE (playaindahood @ Monday, Oct 3 2011, 01:22)
That's a good point, but scientists have also discovered a possible earth-like planet, Gliese 581g. nothing is for sure though, and we may never know for sure unless we can actually see life, so we may never have another base to use.

but we still have one, which is us, so it would be one life bearing planet for every 50 billion planets, and there are trillions of planets.

That's one planet out of one planet we studied. Not one planet out of 50 billion or any other number you made up. The probability that life exists on another planet given that life exists on Earth is completely undetermined. And yes, we know there are other habitable planets. Habitable doesn't mean inhabited.
QUOTE
i think it's safe to say that there must be another planet with some sort of life on it.

No, it absolutely is not.

we have about 50 billion planets in our galaxy, which is where that number came from, so i was thinking, maybe about every 1/50 billion planets there is another earth-like planet, and because there are trillions of planets, the chances are high.

however, instead of saying trillions of planets i should say billions of galaxies, because the estimation has to do with at least one inhabited planet per galaxy (given that it has at least 50 billion planets.)

if you noticed, i wasn't talking about that Gliese planet with the 1/50 billion thing. i was talking about earth. you make it sound like we HAVE to have a different planet to use as a base. I don't see why.


anyway, I'm sure that there is at least one other planet in the entire universe with life on it.

K^2
  • K^2

    Vidi Vici Veni

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Apr 2004
  • United-States
  • Most Knowledgeable [Web Development/Programming] 2013
    Most Knowledgeable [GTA Series] 2011
    Best Debater 2010

#215

Posted 03 October 2011 - 08:07 AM

It doesn't matter. Until you find another planet with life on it, you cannot make ANY estimates.
QUOTE
anyway, I'm sure that there is at least one other planet in the entire universe with life on it.

And there are people who are sure there is God.

playaindahood
  • playaindahood

    Cooljunk Productions

  • Members
  • Joined: 04 Apr 2008

#216

Posted 04 October 2011 - 02:16 AM

QUOTE (K^2 @ Monday, Oct 3 2011, 08:07)
It doesn't matter. Until you find another planet with life on it, you cannot make ANY estimates.
QUOTE
anyway, I'm sure that there is at least one other planet in the entire universe with life on it.

And there are people who are sure there is God.

I think we can use our own planet as an indicator. if we couldn't then it seems as if you're saying that our earth has no life on it.

And this isn't a matter of faith, but evidence, and my evidence is the clear vastness of the universe, whith it's trillions of planets, and the probability that there must be at least one other planet with life in there.

coin-god
  • coin-god

    High Roller

  • $outh $ide Hoodz
  • Joined: 18 Mar 2007

#217

Posted 04 October 2011 - 02:34 AM

QUOTE (playaindahood @ Monday, Oct 3 2011, 23:16)
QUOTE (K^2 @ Monday, Oct 3 2011, 08:07)
It doesn't matter. Until you find another planet with life on it, you cannot make ANY estimates.
QUOTE
anyway, I'm sure that there is at least one other planet in the entire universe with life on it.

And there are people who are sure there is God.

I think we can use our own planet as an indicator. if we couldn't then it seems as if you're saying that our earth has no life on it.

Read the first half of the topic.

K^2
  • K^2

    Vidi Vici Veni

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Apr 2004
  • United-States
  • Most Knowledgeable [Web Development/Programming] 2013
    Most Knowledgeable [GTA Series] 2011
    Best Debater 2010

#218

Posted 04 October 2011 - 02:14 PM

QUOTE (playaindahood @ Monday, Oct 3 2011, 22:16)
I think we can use our own planet as an indicator.

If Earth was a random planet we stumbled upon, yes, we could. In fact, if we only ever stumbled upon Earth, and we found life on it, we'd estimate the odds of a random habitable planet having life at whooping 2/3. There would be quite a bit of uncertainty on that estimate, but it'd be an estimate.

Unfortunately, you have to deal with conditional probabilities here. The odds that a random habitable planet has life is some probability p that we're after. Given sample of one such planet, or better more, we can estimate p. But the odds of a habitable planet having life on it, given that you originated from that planet, is 100%. You can't be a life form from Earth wondering about possibility of life elsewhere if there is no life on Earth.

Let me put it in a slightly different perspective. No matter how improbable life in the universe is, and even if there is just one planet that by some miracle happened to have life on it, you'd still be from a habitable planet by definition. So the fact that you found life on Earth gives you no new information.

Earth is the one planet you can't use for statistical analysis at all. Find any other planet with life, and we're in business. Until then, we cannot say absolutely anything about life in the rest of the universe.

Shayan Shaffey
  • Shayan Shaffey

    Want to Advertise in my Sig? PM Me.

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 03 Jul 2011

#219

Posted 04 October 2011 - 02:26 PM

Alright, this may sound stupid at first, but stay with me so I can explain it.
My father always said humans and all other living beings are possibly bacteria and we are infecting a cell, in this case, the cell is called "Planet Earth". The huge universe could be a body of a person, let's call him "Mike", one of his cells (what we call planet earth) has been infected. The cell tries to kill us off (AKA earthquackes, volcanos et cetera.). Long story short: we are bacteria infecting someone, the person we are infecting is infecting another person and so on and so forth.
What do you think about this theory?

coin-god
  • coin-god

    High Roller

  • $outh $ide Hoodz
  • Joined: 18 Mar 2007

#220

Posted 04 October 2011 - 02:29 PM

QUOTE (Shayan Shaffey @ Tuesday, Oct 4 2011, 11:26)
Alright, this may sound stupid at first, but stay with me so I can explain it.
My father always said humans and all other living beings are possibly bacteria and we are infecting a cell, in this case, the cell is called "Planet Earth". The huge universe could be a body of a person, let's call him "Mike", one of his cells (what we call planet earth) has been infected. The cell tries to kill us off (AKA earthquackes, volcanos et cetera.). Long story short: we are bacteria infecting someone, the person we are infecting is infecting another person and so on and so forth.
What do you think about this theory?

Fascinating. Hard to prove.

Something like thatcould be possible (although maybe we are not virus anyways), just really hard to prove.
We have no idea of what's "outside" the universe.

K^2
  • K^2

    Vidi Vici Veni

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Apr 2004
  • United-States
  • Most Knowledgeable [Web Development/Programming] 2013
    Most Knowledgeable [GTA Series] 2011
    Best Debater 2010

#221

Posted 04 October 2011 - 03:30 PM

QUOTE (Shayan Shaffey @ Tuesday, Oct 4 2011, 10:26)
Alright, this may sound stupid at first, but stay with me so I can explain it.
My father always said humans and all other living beings are possibly bacteria and we are infecting a cell, in this case, the cell is called "Planet Earth". The huge universe could be a body of a person, let's call him "Mike", one of his cells (what we call planet earth) has been infected. The cell tries to kill us off (AKA earthquackes, volcanos et cetera.). Long story short: we are bacteria infecting someone, the person we are infecting is infecting another person and so on and so forth.
What do you think about this theory?

Even if this was true, we exist on too short a time scale and have too small an effect on the world around us to present any kind of harm to that "Mike". We can't even make changes to this planet we're on, let alone make an iota of difference to the rest of the universe.

In short, it's a bunch of nonsense.

Shayan Shaffey
  • Shayan Shaffey

    Want to Advertise in my Sig? PM Me.

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 03 Jul 2011

#222

Posted 04 October 2011 - 04:34 PM

QUOTE (K^2 @ Tuesday, Oct 4 2011, 19:00)
QUOTE (Shayan Shaffey @ Tuesday, Oct 4 2011, 10:26)
Alright, this may sound stupid at first, but stay with me so I can explain it.
My father always said humans and all other living beings are possibly bacteria and we are infecting a cell, in this case, the cell is called "Planet Earth". The huge universe could be a body of a person, let's call him "Mike", one of his cells (what we call planet earth) has been infected. The cell tries to kill us off (AKA earthquackes, volcanos et cetera.). Long story short: we are bacteria infecting someone, the person we are infecting is infecting another person and so on and so forth.
What do you think about this theory?

Even if this was true, we exist on too short a time scale and have too small an effect on the world around us to present any kind of harm to that "Mike". We can't even make changes to this planet we're on, let alone make an iota of difference to the rest of the universe.

In short, it's a bunch of nonsense.

Sure we can, it's only this cell for now. But we can move to other cells (on Mike's clock we've probably been around on this cell for one second or so), and when we've around for one hour on his clock, We have probably damaged Mike severely. If there are other bacteria (Aliens) they could also be damaging Mike from other cells, and Mike will be very sick. But who says we have to be in a person? We could be in a drop of urine, water, Trash Can, Chesse, Camera etc.

K^2
  • K^2

    Vidi Vici Veni

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Apr 2004
  • United-States
  • Most Knowledgeable [Web Development/Programming] 2013
    Most Knowledgeable [GTA Series] 2011
    Best Debater 2010

#223

Posted 04 October 2011 - 04:59 PM

We don't influence mechanics on celestial scale. We can be populating every rock in this galaxy, and we still won't. It's nonsense any way you look at it.

Shayan Shaffey
  • Shayan Shaffey

    Want to Advertise in my Sig? PM Me.

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 03 Jul 2011

#224

Posted 04 October 2011 - 05:04 PM Edited by Shayan Shaffey, 04 October 2011 - 05:09 PM.

QUOTE (K^2 @ Tuesday, Oct 4 2011, 20:29)
We don't influence mechanics on celestial scale. We can be populating every rock in this galaxy, and we still won't. It's nonsense any way you look at it.

Not now, you see all we have achieved in one second? Imagine what we could achieve in an hour! Again, if aliens exist they could also be hurting Mike. All together we're killing Mike, slowly but surely. A second on Mike's clock is 2,000,000 years, an hour would take 7,200,000,000 years on our clock. By then all creatures in Mike's body will have evolved to a point where they are hurting mike massively.

K^2
  • K^2

    Vidi Vici Veni

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Apr 2004
  • United-States
  • Most Knowledgeable [Web Development/Programming] 2013
    Most Knowledgeable [GTA Series] 2011
    Best Debater 2010

#225

Posted 04 October 2011 - 05:09 PM

Dude, you have absolutely no concept of scale, do you? To seriously hurt Mike, we need to throw some stars out of alignment. Considering the fact that we're powered by the stars, we simply can't achieve necessary biomass or energies.

3niX
  • 3niX

    Lazy idiot

  • Members
  • Joined: 28 Aug 2005

#226

Posted 04 October 2011 - 05:10 PM

Well...

I think what K^2 was saying is that we have a very miniscule effect regardless of what we do on this planet. The planet can toy with us pretty easily though. You have to consider the scale of things here.

Even if we nuked the whole planet (which would only equate to scratching the surface) the long term effect from the planets point of view would probably be pretty minor. Were sort of like moss on a rock... and the rock really doesnt give a flying f*ck if were on it or not. So, the only ones who have anything to lose in such a parasitic relationship is us.

DjGDA86
  • DjGDA86

    CH.024.Productions®

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2011

#227

Posted 06 October 2011 - 12:19 AM

¬_¬ No they don't exist, so as we, we don't exist either... maybe we are just a bunch of trash made out from someone's imagination...



Stop watching the bloody news and start thinking rationally.

K^2
  • K^2

    Vidi Vici Veni

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Apr 2004
  • United-States
  • Most Knowledgeable [Web Development/Programming] 2013
    Most Knowledgeable [GTA Series] 2011
    Best Debater 2010

#228

Posted 06 October 2011 - 01:03 AM

Existence in that sense isn't relevant. It makes no difference. If it persists in your perception, it exists for all practical purposes.

HaydenHarman
  • HaydenHarman

    Peon

  • Members
  • Joined: 04 Mar 2011

#229

Posted 06 October 2011 - 02:49 AM Edited by sivispacem, 06 October 2011 - 09:31 AM.

I post pointless videos in debate and discussion threads. Please lampoon me.

OysterBarron
  • OysterBarron

    You need a Pearl necklace? Hit me up ;)

  • Zaibatsu
  • Joined: 17 Dec 2004
  • United-Kingdom

#230

Posted 10 October 2011 - 06:19 AM

They say that size is relative to the person observing it. so yes there could be a mike. i myself have therioized that infact we are in some kind of experiment tube. as you know most big experiments are done within a vacum when you look at the the different systems in galaxys they look sort of like particles with differnt substances gathering on different
rings with one main neutron in the middle. we could in therioe be inside a particle accelerator like lhc.

LittleBlueTroll
  • LittleBlueTroll

    ★★★★

  • Leone Family Mafia
  • Joined: 07 May 2008
  • England

#231

Posted 12 October 2011 - 03:09 PM

I believe in a galaxy this size we are not the only life forms occupying it. Now im not saying that aliens are necessarily a million times more advance then we are, but i do believe there is something out there.

As for aliens ever visiting earth, there have certainly been some strange occurrences here and there! I remember hearing this theory once (i forget who by) about how if aliens where to view earth by using a highly advance telescope for example, the distance between our planet and there's, and the millions of light years away it might be, they would view earth perhaps millions of years before the present day because of the time scale it takes.

So they could be viewing us as prehistoric times perhaps?

(Im sorry to completely butcher the explanation, i cannot remember the source and only read the theory once, so if anyone can explain the idea better, feel free)



OysterBarron
  • OysterBarron

    You need a Pearl necklace? Hit me up ;)

  • Zaibatsu
  • Joined: 17 Dec 2004
  • United-Kingdom

#232

Posted 17 October 2011 - 02:18 PM

Yeah thats pretty easy concept light hits objects on our planet and gets refracted then the light gets processed by our eyes. Im pretty sure its the same principal for telescopes light travels at light speed. it takes one year to travel a light year at the speed of light roughly so in therory you could work out how far away a system is and roughly what part of the earths evolution they would be viewing. so if a system is one light year away they would be viewing the earth from a year ago. ten light years and they might just be witnessing 911. the mind boggles but working on that basis if you could overtake the original light from the start of the universe you would be able to see its creation.

Otter
  • Otter

    sea dwelling madman

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 30 Jan 2003
  • Canada

#233

Posted 17 October 2011 - 02:34 PM

I've always loved that concept. Thinking that, far far away, our history is still playing out live. Of course, the optics required to make out anything would be pretty much beyond the realm of physical possibility, but let's not kill the romance with all that jazz. tounge.gif

The cool parallel to that, as seen in a lot of science fiction, is the idea that our first attempts at broadcasting are now floating out beyond our solar system. Makes you wonder about the flipside to that; if we ever receive an alien broadcast will it be an example of their technological infancy as well? Would we even be able to comprehend it? A species that communicates by sense of smell, or telepathically - that would create some very odd data to interpret. Ooh, that gets the creative juices flowing.

K^2
  • K^2

    Vidi Vici Veni

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Apr 2004
  • United-States
  • Most Knowledgeable [Web Development/Programming] 2013
    Most Knowledgeable [GTA Series] 2011
    Best Debater 2010

#234

Posted 17 October 2011 - 03:24 PM

QUOTE (Otter @ Monday, Oct 17 2011, 10:34)
Of course, the optics required to make out anything would be pretty much beyond the realm of physical possibility, but let's not kill the romance with all that jazz.

I was going to say, "Hey, it can't be that bad," but then I did the math. sad.gif

OysterBarron
  • OysterBarron

    You need a Pearl necklace? Hit me up ;)

  • Zaibatsu
  • Joined: 17 Dec 2004
  • United-Kingdom

#235

Posted 17 October 2011 - 03:46 PM Edited by oysterbarron, 17 October 2011 - 03:49 PM.

Oo please share k2 for those who cant do the math! also if astronaights are in space does that mean there actually looking into the past when looking at tue earth?

Otter
  • Otter

    sea dwelling madman

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 30 Jan 2003
  • Canada

#236

Posted 17 October 2011 - 04:06 PM

QUOTE (oysterbarron @ Monday, Oct 17 2011, 07:46)
Oo please share k2 for those who cant do the math! also if astronaights are in space does that mean there actually looking into the past when looking at tue earth?

Heehee, this is pretty fun, too. You don't have to look farther than the person next to you for this to be true. Not measurably, of course, but true. You'd have to go out a ways for there to be a discernable visual lag, I reckon. I believe sunlight takes 15 minutes to hit the earth, if thats any indication for you.

Sound is far easier to notice the delay. Its funny how your brain learns to ignore the delays from sounds, but an extreme case is thunder... You're actually "hearing" seconds into the past! Kinda neat. In a dorky way.

OysterBarron
  • OysterBarron

    You need a Pearl necklace? Hit me up ;)

  • Zaibatsu
  • Joined: 17 Dec 2004
  • United-Kingdom

#237

Posted 17 October 2011 - 04:51 PM Edited by oysterbarron, 17 October 2011 - 04:56 PM.

Lol i didnt think on tha sorta scale i thnk the official time is 8 mins 15 secs for light emmited from the sun for it to reach earth. the thing is that if astronaughts had a ftl spacecraft then in therioe they should be able to watch themselves take off if the stopped and alowed light to catch up.

K^2
  • K^2

    Vidi Vici Veni

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Apr 2004
  • United-States
  • Most Knowledgeable [Web Development/Programming] 2013
    Most Knowledgeable [GTA Series] 2011
    Best Debater 2010

#238

Posted 17 October 2011 - 04:56 PM

QUOTE (oysterbarron @ Monday, Oct 17 2011, 11:46)
Oo please share k2 for those who cant do the math!

Well, I estimated the size of a mirror/lens it'd take to pick up one photon of Earth from 1m˛ of Earth's surface per second from 1 light year away, went 0_0 at the number, and decided not to think on these things ever again.

OysterBarron
  • OysterBarron

    You need a Pearl necklace? Hit me up ;)

  • Zaibatsu
  • Joined: 17 Dec 2004
  • United-Kingdom

#239

Posted 17 October 2011 - 05:21 PM

The question i think is do you really need that sort of resolution to pick out buildings on a planets surface from that distance.

K^2
  • K^2

    Vidi Vici Veni

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Apr 2004
  • United-States
  • Most Knowledgeable [Web Development/Programming] 2013
    Most Knowledgeable [GTA Series] 2011
    Best Debater 2010

#240

Posted 17 October 2011 - 05:58 PM

Let me put it this way. I'd be happy if you can make out continents.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users