Are we alone in the universe?

[Shannon]

I just got this month's National Geographic and, though I haven't read it yet, the cover says that there's an article about other life in the universe. This, plus having spent yesterday reading up on ancient astronaut theories, made me wonder a couple of things:

1) Are we alone? I, personally, don't know. It's that simple. There is so much of space that we haven't explored yet that I don't think we can know yet. (In my setting, aliens knew Earth had life, and some ancient astronaut theories and abduction stories are true, but we were too far from anywhere they'd settled for them to be very interested in us until we could get to them too.)

2) Does not having aliens in a setting automatically make it more realistic? I've seen things talking about how realistic Firefly was where this was the sole criteria they were judging realism by. To me, how realistic a setting is has a lot more to do with how the cultures have developed and how the characters act than whether or not there are other intelligent lifeforms out there, but, I'm social sciences geek, so I know my standards aren't the same as most sf fans.

[Paul]

I personally find it hard to believe that there wouldn't be aliens out there.

Everywhere on Earth that has water (in any form) has life. They find things living kilometers into the mantle.

I think every star system that has a planet in the goldilocks zone has life. The question is how many of those have intelligent life.

There are something like 12000 star systems within 500 light years of Sol. Every system we point a telescope at seems to have planets. Many of them in habitable zones.

Most of them probably have life.

The only data we have on civilizations says that 100 percent of planets in habitable zones (ours) create high tech societies. I thought that a little high and set it at 1 for every 1000, but that is probably conservative.


Oh, yeah, I hated Firefly.

Not for the lack of aliens, but for all the other nonsense.

[Anna]

Paul wrote: "Oh, yeah, I hated Firefly...."

Don't like Firefly?

[*pulls on Jayne hat*]
[*goes into corner to sulk*]

I would find it unbelievable if there wasn't life out there in abundance. Now sentient life? Not so sure we want to invite E.T. to visit. I think Stephen Hawking said it best ... first contact didn't turn out to be such a positive thing for the native americans.

[Aurelio]

We are the "NEW" kids on the block,,,they're just being shy.eventually the neighborhood welcoming committee will be over with a casserole

[Jonathan]

I agree that there is probably life in other planetary systems, but I don't think that every star system with a planet in the goldilocks zone necessarily has life on it. That is probably pushing it, in my opinion.

Going down to whatever are the initial conditions favorable for abiogenesis, it also depends on how life is defined. A more inclusive definition will naturally include more of those planetary systems, and a more exclusive definition will subtract from that total. But to assume that every planet in its goldilocks zone is to assume that they have all passed the point of abiogenesis without fail, or received life from elsewhere. There are probably exceptions.

[Paul]

I'm very open in my definitions of life. Grin.

Here on the earth we have some really wildly different types of life. There are the normal types (like us) and then extremophiles that live from sub-zero to boiling temperatures.

There forms of life that thrive in arsenic rich environments. Things that feed on pure radiation.

We even have some archean life still alive today that is similar to life 4 billion years old. That is some extreme stuff.

Life exists on the Earth everywhere, where there is liquid water.

Some of the planets found in other solar systems have free oxygen in the atmosphere, something that is thought to be exclusively a byproduct of life.

That said, I'm not apposed to the idea of planets having been seeded with life, either naturally or by aliens.

We know that bacteria can survive in space, so can many other things. There are trees around the world that have grown from seeds the Apollo missions exposed to the vacuum and radiation of space. They grow just fine.

As far as neighborhood welcoming committees go, all I can say is I hope not.

Humans are cooperative pack predators. That is probably a requirement to reach civilization. Xenophobia is biologically programed. Any species we meet will probably try to kill us, sadly. We will probably act the same way.

[Tim]

odds are we are not alone.....but unless something fundamental changes I'm not sure we'll ever meet an alien culture in the flesh.

The two big problems for me are:

Distance.....space is big....reaaaally big and even at lightspeed the nearest stars are years away. That makes for some real problems I don't see us overcoming anytime soon.

Time....although arguably linked to the point above I think it's worth noting that we have been a scientific culture for (let's be really generous) about a century. As far as we know the universe is 14 billion years old....so even assuming life reaches the right stage of development on another planet will they be able to contact us in time....or do they still think Earth is a backwards planet ruled by dinosaurs etc etc. Have signals already been sent...and we get them tomorrow....the civilisation that sent them may be long extinct before we even reply.

[Paul]

Well, NASA and JPL are currently working on the White variant of the Alcubierre warp drive. That one will get us 10 times light speed.

There are a few other drives I remember reading were in the prototype stages, a negative energy drive, and a micro-wormhole drive.

I don't think getting out there is going to be a problem, might even happen in our lifetimes.

As for the Fermi Paradox (if aliens exist, why haven't we heard from them) there are several simple solution that still have aliens out there.

1) They don't use radio waves. We went big with this from 1932-~1980 since then things are more focused and localized. We aren't beaming powerful signals out there anymore, they might not either. They may never have developed radio wave technology anyway. Lots of other options.

2) The universe may be around 14 billion years old, but life can only form on second or third generation stars. Probably on third and later. (stars form all of the heavy elements, first generation stars would only have gas giants, as there is no carbon or anything heavier in those stellar systems) Sol is third generation. Most stars in the local cluster are third generation. Complex life on Earth is about 380 million years old. I would guess the same for other systems.

3) That still gives a huge range for life to rise and die out, but nature likes complexity, so there are probably civilizations local to us (within 500 LY). The question still comes back why we haven't heard from them, but our window was only 50 years or so. If they are slightly ahead or behind us, we would never know. Also, SETI only scans 11 percent of the sky, and they DO NOT look at anything closer than 1000 LY from Earth. Maybe they don't really want to know...

[Jonathan]

Good ideas here. It's fun too because the impossibility of some ideas is tempered with the "what if?" questions and all is ripe for new stories no matter how much has been written before.

I occasionally watch Star Trek TOS when I'm in the mood, and am always inspired by it. We always seem to underestimate our own capabilities and achievements.

I visited the USAF Museum in Dayton last weekend. The Cold War wing was absolutely breathtaking. Real, decommissioned nuclear bombs (and the massive bombers that carried them), missiles, and ICBMs. One early H-bomb weighed 40,000 lbs. During test runs, pilots reported that dropping it caused the plane to surge upward hundreds of feet due to the sudden weight loss. I was dumbfounded while walking through, thinking, several times, "How did we survive this?" Well, the awesome display of hardware is why we survived.

And I kept thinking, this is 1940s-1960s tech. How did they build this stuff without CAD? So much of it was barely a step beyond hammered steel. You could see Phillips screws used as sheet metal rivets.

I think of the world today, and we just don't see hardware like this very often any more. In the 80s I lived in Sacramento so SR-71s used to fly over our house. Later on, the stealth bomber was stationed at Beale AFB. But that was 30 years ago. What is the latest? Even the exotic F-22 is a couple decades old now.

I also keep telling myself we're rapidly approaching 2020. That year is unbelievable to me, and it's not far off. So what kind of hardware is in the design stages right now?

And as computers continue to prove the pundits all wrong about running into limits, we edge closer to Kurzweil's singularity theory. I met him a few years ago, signed my copy of The Age of Spiritual Machines. He is thin, short, has a soft grip, not a meat eater--he wants to survive to that tipping point. I'm not completely sold on Futurism, as I'm not an atheist, but enjoy his theories at any rate.

[Paul]

I love museum at Wright-Patterson. Did they still have the YF-12 on display? Been a decade or so since I was there.

Military tech is always far in advance of what is on display. The old formula was the military was 20 years ahead of civilians, and military hardware was 20 years behind cutting-edge development.

I saw a test-firing of a backpack-powered laser rifle in early 90's. It used ni-cads for primary power. Think of how much lighter it would had been with lithium-ion batteries. It had a range of about 36 kilometers when used from a fortified hill bunker, to 'see' over the horizon. Punched holes in airplanes on lowest power in the test.

Stuff you never see on the news, like EMP missiles, have been used for 20 years. Fuel-air implosive weapons are also just starting see popular media coverage, along with thermobaric weapons.

I'm not 100% sold on Futurism, either. The moral questions raised by trans-humanism make excellent starting points for fiction, though.

The technology I use in my stories (set 900 years from now) will probably be available by the end of the century.

I still want jet-packs and flying cars!

[Anna]

Just watching the geek-tech ping-pong back and forth and smiling... Alcubierre warp drive. Futurism. Kurzweil's singularity theory. Can hardly grasp what half of that means, but I'm off to Google it all :-)

[Alicja]

I think its highly likely that there is other life out there. I also think there is a possibility that not all life will be carbon based, like us. Many times in science fiction its convenient to find intelligent life that's like us. I love the stuff that explores alternatives, aliens so different than us that they really are alien like in Embassytown.

[Jonathan]

Haha, Anna! That put a big smile on my face. Sorry for geeking out so hard.

Paul wrote a good summary about most likely why we're (as a species) bringing up theories such as Fermi's paradox. The simple explanation is, radio is primitive. Ack, I almost don't want to go here.. (don't like referencing myself).. I'll just summarize. In a story I wrote, humans invent FTL communication. I'll skip the details. But as soon as they turn it on to do a field test, they start receiving messages from outside the solar system!

[Paul]

I am totally non-apologetic about geeking out. Grin.

Alicja, I think the reason for carbon-based life being dominant is it so simple in structure. When looking at the elements, carbon is a lot more common, and binds more freely with things, than most other elements. Look at the abundance of hydrocarbons in the solar system.

That said, silicon-based life is certainly plausible. Here on Earth, come of the Archon lifeforms are silicon based: weird stuff. There are also silicon-based bacteria.

However, despite the abundance of silicon in the crust of the earth, carbon-based is dominant on the surface. It should be noted however that many carbon-based animals use silicon. Silicon skeletons are not uncommon and humans (and all other mammals as far as I am aware) use silicon in our skin. It is what provides the elasticity.

A more common problem in fiction is assuming aliens will be like us both physically and mentally, but that may be for another thread.

[Anna]

I -married- a geek (as in MIT graduate, electrical engineer, works for EMC). I -like- geek and wish I possessed the scientific knowledge to follow 100% of what everybody says. I'm like a magpie, picking up other people's pretty, shiny scientific theories or religious beliefs, and then I weave them into my stories (which are neither pure epic fantasy nor pure space opera, but a little bit of both). So geek away ... if something sparks my interest I'll look it up and research it on Wikipedia so I can B.S. my way through it enough to either discuss it or use it as decoration.

I -am- a licensed ham radio operator, though. I asked a good friend who's an uber-radio-geek if there was a viable theory for FTL radio communications and he said not yet. So ... that's where creative license comes in to call it a 'subspace radio message' and pretend that technology really exists :-) Can't get away with that in 'hard' sci-fi, but in space opera you can.

[Paul]

Cool, I have a technician's license, haven't used it a while. KD4NCJ.

Have you read Creatures of Light and Darkness by Roger Zelazny? He was great at weaving science and magic together. He also liked his science to look like magic and his magic to look science. Creatures is a mythic space opera.

Okay, time to get geeky.

Subspace would cover sub-atomic spaces, quantum tunneling should be in effect. Radios could use micro-wormholes to transmit data. (science fact)

Subspace could also be used to push down past atomic spaces to places like the Dirac Sea (quantum froth) theoretically, such a medium could be used as a waveguide, allowing instant communication across any distant. (science possible)

I use entangled-pair communications (science fact) in my books which take advantage of "spooky action" as Einstein called it. Telepathy is a form of quantum-entanglement in my books. Yours, too, I seem to remember.

Ursula K. Le Guin was the first to this in a story, as far as I know. With her Anseble. Others like Doc Smith, James Blish, and Jack Williamson used FTl communication that was similar, but not as well defined. Le Guin's ansible works like entangled-pairs do in labs now.

Hyperspace should also be able to be used for FTL communications, but it might require a receiver to be in hyperspace to get it. (science possible)

You could also use Tachyon communications. No proof they exist, but still plausible enough. (science maybe)

[Jonathan]

Quantum laser teleportation is already being done experimentally so it's viable for hard sci-fi. I like this idea better than entanglement because it gives you more freedom in a story, as long as you know where to point it. If you want to get really hard in sci-fi, you would have to explain how it would work across light years without some way to point the transmitter precisely at the target. Maybe a race that exploits this tech will set up beacons around the sun to help with orientation tuning. I just like this kind of tech. It's fun to think about the possibilities. Even if this team only sent a single photon 88 miles, it's still exciting because it's real.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/alexknapp...

[Alicja]

Paul wrote: "I am totally non-apologetic about geeking out. Grin.

Alicja, I think the reason for carbon-based life being dominant is it so simple in structure. When looking at the elements, carbon is a lot mor..."

Good to know. I remember reading an article a long time ago about the possibility of silicone-based life forms out there but that left my head and ended up regurgitated as non carbon-based. Thank you for adding depth to my muddled thoughts.

[[deleted user]]

This is one thread I could enjoy all the way back to the "Big Bang" and back!!! Great reading!!

[Anna]

Urg! Goodreads is over capacity again! I went to save my nice geeky comment and got 'Alice' ... urf!

Okay ... brief recap of lost long comment:

Paul - I find it funny that Einstein called quantum entanglement 'spooky action' because if you ever saw my friend Ellen (a professional psychic) pull stuff out of thin air it's like ... yeah ... spooky. My gut tells me quantum entanglement has something to do with the ability to 'know' information about a loved one at the moment it happens.

Jon - that was one heck of fascinating article. The distance they could go before signal degradation was just a bit above the distance we can go using ham radios on 2 meters using a modest power booster before having to relay messages using a series of repeaters. If it's such a secure means of communication, I highly doubt the military will wait decades to put it to use because, just like emergency communications, it's possible to set up a series of portable, temporary mobile repeaters to boost a signal. Of course, I have no idea how massive the equipment is to broadcast that signal ... it's probably a lot bigger than my Yaseau and mobile antenna.

[Ward]

Paul wrote: "I love museum at Wright-Patterson. Did they still have the YF-12 on display? Been a decade or so since I was there."
Me too, and I live in the Dayton area. It is a great place to go. The Apollo 15 capsule is one of my favorite exhibits (and the MiGs).

It does make you wonder that if once we do figure out how the FTL Communication works that we won't all of a sudden be bombarded with alien communications signals. Maybe the SETI folks should be looking into this rather than pointing large antenna skyward to look for signals in band-width that no one uses.

[Jonathan]

Paul wrote: "I love museum at Wright-Patterson. Did they still have the YF-12 on display? Been a decade or so since I was there."

Yes, the "SR-71" is still there, one of my favorites. There is also a B-2 Stealth, F-22 Raptor, F-111, and F-117 Nighthawk. Does make one wonder what military R&D is cooking up right now that we won't find out about for another 20 years. Hopefully leadership will make better decisions than the blunder of the F-22 funding.