Life is a natural consequence of the Energy Content and Laws of the Universe

[sigurdV]

Greetings all of you ;)

With no Manuscript to read from I think I will begin by explaining my personal view:

Life is a natural consequence of the Energy Content and Laws of the Universe.

It is defined as Dissipative Thermodynamic Systems far from equilibrium... which

in layman terms translates to: Life will eventually eat the whole Universe up!

 

"The End" is always considered to be a distant possibility in the far future, but if life

is reproducing exponentially and if every Solar System produce life at some point in its evolution

The End might be,so to say, awaiting us around the corner.

 

Discussing the matter with a friend he asked me why I bother about it personally?

I thought it was a good question and said: I think our descendants will feel grateful IF they find that we cared for them...the thought of their thanking me for thinking of their situation and what they need for their survival is warming my heart, wetting my eye and is enough for me to actually care and think of what we should do to maximise their chanses...no actual "thank you" is necessary.

 

Wherever I look I see "False Prophets" in the sense that they do not think clearly about most matters. They simply repeat the Majority View on the immediate question considered and has not taken a personal stand. They are caught in the net of subconscious expectations and see things only as they are instructed to see them:

 

A good example here is the famous question: Are we alone in the Universe? So let me be slightly flippant (or sarcastic) about it:

What are the chanses that theres life in the universe I ask, and gets the answer that

they probably are very small since life is a low probability phenomenon!

 

WRONG! I say: We are here so the probability actually is ONE!

But I think I understand what you mean, so let us assume that out of the ABSOLUTELY ENOURMOUS thing our Universe is

we remove the ABSOLUTELY INSIGNIFICANT part the Earth is...then how much will the probability of ONE diminish? (lets leave the argument there...)

 

The Paradigm of life as a low probability phenomenon reduces the chanses of survival for our descendants!

PLEASE remove it out of Mental Systems wherever you find them.

[Rade]

We are here so the probability actually is ONE! But I think I understand what you mean, so let us assume that out of the ABSOLUTELY ENOURMOUS thing our Universe is we remove the ABSOLUTELY INSIGNIFICANT part the Earth is...then how much will the probability of ONE diminish? (lets leave the argument there...)

I would offer as opinion only that the probability that life exists within other galaxies reduces to 99.999% from the 100% we know to be true for our galaxy, given billions and billions galaxies in universe. Now for bad news, I think there is [edit] 0.001% probability that Earth humans will ever observe these other forms of life, nor them us. Good news united with bad news = disturbing news. Edited April 16, 2013 by Rade

[Moontanman]

How do you justify saying that life is a low probability phenomena?

[sigurdV]

I would offer as opinion only that the probability that life exists within other galaxies reduces to 99.999% from the 100% we know to be true for our galaxy, given billions and billions galaxies in universe. Now for bad news, I think there is 99.999% probability that Earth humans will ever observe these other forms of life, nor them us. Good news united with bad news = disturbing news.

Suppose the general distribution of life is uniform then surprisingly enough approximately at the same time all civilisations will encounter their first Alien Neighbour!

 

Im not sure if this is preconceived in the Science Fiction litterature...

 

And I know of no serious discussion of this high probability event! I wish there is some SF author in Hypography noticing this ;)

 

So what WILL happen? Will 50% of the civilisations in our universe survive their first contact with an Alien civilisation?

 

Will the survivors be friendly generous civilisations inclined to form a United Civilisations?

 

I find it a disturbing question and think we really should think of how to prepare ourselves! Any suggestions?

 

What so far has prevented first contact is the huge distances involved we have a period (how long?) where we may expand

 

and take control of our surroundings with no opposition but if we wait too long our window of opportunity is closed.

 

A big IF here is the speed limits...how fast can we travel in space? In interstellar space doubling the speed

 

fivefolds the resistance from what seems to be empty space! Is the next Galaxy within reach? What do you think?

[sigurdV]

How do you justify saying that life is a low probability phenomena?

Probably by saying that that gives god something to do?

I hope youre not saying that I think life is a low probability phenomena?

[sigurdV]

I would offer as opinion only that the probability that life exists within other galaxies reduces to 99.999% from the 100% we know to be true for our galaxy, given billions and billions galaxies in universe. Now for bad news, I think there is 99.999% probability that Earth humans will ever observe these other forms of life, nor them us. Good news united with bad news = disturbing news.

 

Suppose the general distribution of life is uniform then surprisingly enough approximately at the same time all civilisations will encounter their first Alien Neighbour!

 

Im not sure if this is preconceived in the Science Fiction litterature...

 

And I know of no serious discussion of this high probability event! I wish there is some SF author in Hypography noticing this

 

So what WILL happen? Will 50% of the civilisations in our universe survive their first contact with an Alien civilisation?

 

Will the survivors be friendly generous civilisations inclined to form a United Civilisations?

 

I find it a disturbing question and think we really should think of how to prepare ourselves! Any suggestions?

 

What so far has prevented first contact is the huge distances involved we have a period (how long?) where we may expand

 

and take control of our surroundings with no opposition but if we wait too long our window of opportunity is closed.

 

A big IF here is the speed limits...how fast can we travel in space? In interstellar space doubling the speed

 

fivefolds the resistance from what seems to be empty space! Is the next Galaxy within reach? What do you think?

[Moontanman]

Suppose the general distribution of life is uniform then surprisingly enough approximately at the same time all civilisations will encounter their first Alien Neighbour!

 

Suppose frogs had wings...

 

Im not sure if this is preconceived in the Science Fiction litterature...

 

In some but not all...

 

And I know of no serious discussion of this high probability event! I wish there is some SF author in Hypography noticing this

 

Check out the Star Trek universe vs Heinlein's Foundation universe...

 

So what WILL happen? Will 50% of the civilisations in our universe survive their first contact with an Alien civilisation?

 

No way to show any probability on that, your guess is as good as mine.

 

Will the survivors be friendly generous civilisations inclined to form a United Civilisations?

 

Some will some won't some do some don't...

 

I find it a disturbing question and think we really should think of how to prepare ourselves! Any suggestions?

 

Don't fire the first shot..

 

What so far has prevented first contact is the huge distances involved we have a period (how long?) where we may expand

 

and take control of our surroundings with no opposition but if we wait too long our window of opportunity is closed.

 

It is possible for a civilization with no magical technologies to occupy the entire galaxy in a few million years..

 

A big IF here is the speed limits...how fast can we travel in space? In interstellar space doubling the speed

 

Warp bubbles would allow for rather high arbitrary speeds...

 

fivefolds the resistance from what seems to be empty space! Is the next Galaxy within reach? What do you think?

 

Your guess is as good as mine...

[sigurdV]

 

Suppose the general distribution of life is uniform then surprisingly enough approximately at the same time all civilisations will encounter their first Alien Neighbour!

 

Suppose frogs had wings...

 

Why? Id rather suppose that you belive in miracles...

Like if ... say: All civilisations in the universe exist here in our galaxy.

Put away the fantasy books and read up on standard distributions,

 

So what WILL happen? Will 50% of the civilisations in our universe survive their first contact with an Alien civilisation?

 

 

No way to show any probability on that, your guess is as good as mine.

Guessing again arent you? When we have no clue, the safest bet is 50%... Dont you agree?

 

I see no point in reading your other statements except:

"It is possible for a civilization with no magical technologies to occupy the entire galaxy in a few million years..."

 

You have shown a talent for making the wrong guesses but perhaps not in that remark... You copied it somewhere?

[JMJones0424]

When we have no clue, the safest bet is 50%... Dont you agree?

No. Not at all. This the most stupid thing I've heard in quite some time, and keep in mind, I've recently been encouraged by someone who claims to be a logician to prove that which has no evidence of existence does not exist. I've already explained what a null hypothesis is to you.

[Deepwater6]

http://www.space.com/20711-kepler-exoplanet-discoveries-watch-live.html

 

Nasa is to offer the latest findings from Kepler. They may have found some additional planets in the habitable zone that could accomadate life/ET's.

[sigurdV]

No. Not at all. This the most stupid thing I've heard in quite some time, and keep in mind, I've recently been encouraged by someone who claims to be a logician to prove that which has no evidence of existence does not exist. I've already explained what a null hypothesis is to you.

You do not understand that it makes a difference if an outcome is important or not!

If its dangerous to be wrong, you really should stick to the safest bet! For instance:

 

Suppose theres a horserace, 100 horses is running and its a hard race so not all horses are ecpected to reach the goal. You must guess how many horses will reach it. You must pay ten dollars for every horse you are wrong. You only have 500 dollars. If you cant pay you will get killed. Please identify your safest bet.

 

The most stupid thing youve heard is now what will keep you alive.

[JMJones0424]

Sigurd, you're better than this. In the situation you have now offered as an example, you took the time to lay out specific details so that I may make a choice. A simple examination of the consequences of my choice shows that if I choose 50, there is no possibility for me to not be able to pay and die. So it would be false to claim we have "no clue". As such, your example does not in any way address my complaint with your statement, "When we have no clue, the safest bet is 50%... Dont you agree?"

 

When we have no clue, the only thing that can be said accurately is that we have no clue. Anything else is a guess. To paraphrase Moon, we have no knowledge from which to make an informed decision, so your guess is as good as mine. To adapt your example to the situation I am complaining about, you'd have to have no prior knowledge of horses, races, the number of horses, the amount that must be paid if you are incorrect, etc.

[Aethelwulf]

Well, life must be natural, if the laws of the universe are natural. So I don't see why it wouldn't be a consequence also of natural nature.

[sigurdV]

Sigurd, you're better than this. In the situation you have now offered as an example, you took the time to lay out specific details so that I may make a choice. A simple examination of the consequences of my choice shows that if I choose 50, there is no possibility for me to not be able to pay and die. So it would be false to claim we have "no clue". As such, your example does not in any way address my complaint with your statement, "When we have no clue, the safest bet is 50%... Dont you agree?"

I think we may come to an an understanding... When we have no clue... we cant be sure if our life depends on how we bet or not! And since any bet as we see them has the same probability to BE the correct bet ...which I think IS your objevtion... we should make the bet minimising eventual costs in making the wrong bet... is my view. So: I took care to explain the situation...but suppose I hadnt done that? Then you would unwaringly select any bet...

What accentuates this is some problem in our understanding of "Probability", Its seen in the problem of how to decide if life is "improbable" or not! So be a little careful in analysing my statements...I TRY not to be stupid! (Or to say stupid things. But I continuously see my posts being disliked: red here...red there ...soon there will be red everywhere and Ill get banned for seeking the truth!!!! ITS NOT FAIR!)

When we have no clue, the only thing that can be said accurately is that we have no clue. Anything else is a guess. To paraphrase Moon, we have no knowledge from which to make an informed decision, so your guess is as good as mine. To adapt your example to the situation I am complaining about, you'd have to have no prior knowledge of horses, races, the number of horses, the amount that must be paid if you are incorrect, etc.

No problem: make a guess again and forget your knowledge of how the situation really IS: Suppose I pay you A billion dollars if you make the correct bet not knowing how tricky the situation is rigged AGAINST YOU! (Suppose one of the "horses" really isnt a horse?)

My point approximately is that when not knowing we should minimise the danger we might be in! Some sort of Razor Principle perhaps.

[sigurdV]

Well, life must be natural, if the laws of the universe are natural. So I don't see why it wouldn't be a consequence also of natural nature.

Heh! This particular feedback is BOTH amusing and thought provoking ;)

[SaxonViolence]

SigurdV—

 

If we were sending a "Cold Sleep" or "Multi-Generation" Starcraft full of humans to colonize a "Near-By" Solar System...

 

What do you imagine us being able to {Reasonably} send along with our "First Wave"?

 

A.} We want enough people and enough technology to let them multiply rapidly and to establish a self sustaining steam age technology within five or six generations...

 

With many books and high tech artifacts still around to point the way farther.

 

Yes, they might end up falling back to the bronze age or even the stone age—but that isn't an acceptable mission objective.

 

We shouldn't be sending folks with malice of forethought intending their great grandchildren to live like animals.

 

B.} Second, third and even more waves with more folk, more varieties of livestock and more technological aids would be great.

 

Long term programs have a tendency to get cancelled or postponed for long periods for political reasons.

 

If your first wave isn't self supporting, don't send it.

 

C.} Several Colonies launched simultaneously—close enough to give some mutual aid is also a good idea. What if your colony ship is the only one that makes it?

 

I'm thinking 3500 people—more is better—and beaucoup Technological equipment—some of it to be carefully mothballed for future generations to employ.

 

Much less than this number just doesn't seem viable. Whether we can ever send that much is debatable. Whether we can send enough is also questionable.

 

How well armed will these folk be?

 

Maybe—if the planners are very pro-gun, and there is demonstrably dangerous game around...

 

Each man and woman, fourteen and above may have a powerful Rifle and a suitable Sidearm with beaucoup shotguns, .22s and big Bowies around.

 

{They might have far less.}

 

Explosives are necessary to building a Civilization. Techies can certainly turn C4 into grenades, claymores and mortars should they deem it necessary.

 

But, especially in the first generation, every life is very precious to to our colony's future. They can afford very few casualties.

 

Just who would these non-military men and women be capable of destroying?

 

If there are 12 000 dug-in Natives there with flint-tipped spears when we arrive, we're screwed.

 

Now turn that around. That is about all your hypothetical "first contact aliens" coming here are most probably going to have.

 

{Maybe 3500 lightly armed operatives—not 12 000 Spearmen...}

 

Not much destruction can happen.

 

Exception one—Aliens that gather inter-stellar material—sparse though they be—and breed and travel continuously as an ever-growing fleet.

 

Exception two:

 

Aliens who are Congenitally Xenophobic to the degree they're willing to send folk willing to devote generations to hiding and developing a "Super-Virus" or something for the simple satisfaction of exterminating another sentient species.

 

Possible.

 

The only real conflict possible, that would not be a foregone conclusion would be if two different races colonized the same planet, at about the same time and only became aware of each other when both their numbers were in the tens or hundreds of thousands.

 

That would be a vast coincidence.

 

 

 

Saxon Violence

Edited August 13, 2013 by SaxonViolence