Life on other planets?

[Student Mullet]

Imagine putting yourself on Dragons' Den asking for funding for a project with absolutely no payback, and you'll begin to see the problems I'm raising. Which have nothing to do with the problems you were countering.I think Christopher Columbus faced similar problems.

[GavinZac]

I think Christopher Columbus faced similar problems.

Columbus? Columbus thought he was going on a short hop to India the other way round. It'd be like us setting off in the direction of Alpha Centari in the hope of us finding the Moon.

[osarusan]

Assume there are absolutely loads of civilisations in the galaxy. Further assume that the state of development of these civilisations varies a lot. Statistically, there should be someone else miles ahead of us


Let's assume there are 1 million civilisations in the galaxy. They have all developed at a different rate, so there are 1 million differently developed civilisations.
One civilisation will be the most developed, and one civilisation will be the least developed.

What are our chances of being the most developed? Pineapple Stu says-


If there are x civilisations in the universe, it's a 1 in x chance that we're the most developed. Which is either 1, or very small, depending on x.

So we have a 1 in x chance of being the most developed, which in the above example is 1 in a million.

But my argument is that every civilisation has the same 1 in x chance of being the most developed, and the same (x-1) in x chance of not being the most developed.
So I said-

But it is just as likely, statistically, that the Earth be the most developed civilisation as any other civilisation.
Our 1 in x chance is the same as the 1 in x chance of any other civilisation.

So when you say-

That statement is equivalent to saying that there's a 50:50 chance I'm the tallest man on earth.

I don't think it is, unless the earth has only two people on it.

I'm not saying we are as likely to be the most developed as we are likely to not be the most developed. I'm saying every civilisation, including ours, has the same chance.

Now, if our chance of being the most developed civilisation is 1 in x and our chances of not being the most developed civilisation are (x-1) in x, then obviously it is very probable that there are lots of civilisations both ahead of and behind us, and it is impossible to determine how many civilisations are on either side of us.

The idea that a civilisation must be "miles" ahead of us, so far ahead in fact that they would have contacted us if they existed, is a large leap to make, when you consider that we have no way of determining how many civilisations are more and less advanced.

[kingdom hoop]

Osarusan, when, or more importantly, why, did you start putting a second 'e' in argu(e)ment?

[osarusan]

Ah yes, my Japanese keyboard uses an American English program, so little red lines appear all the time, and I basically ignore them. Civilisation has had red lines under it for the duration of this thread, as does any other "isation". Argu(e)ment - never noticed it!

[kingdom hoop]

Damn yanks. Surely you can change the spell check setting to English English though. Not that you really need it, or so I would have thought at least. :)

Anyway, never mind, I was just curious as to whether I missed a language update from Oxford. I don't really like seeing the additional 'e' to be honest (cheers for the edit!!). Ha, just did a quick look around the net, and saw this gem, osarusan you must confess to impure thoughts!

When people think about masturbation, whatever the kind, their mind gets clouded and they spell argument as arguement. :D

[osarusan]

Ha, just did a quick look around the net, and saw this gem, osarusan you must confess to impure thoughts!

When people think about masturbation, whatever the kind, their mind gets clouded and they spell argument as arguement. :D
Kingdem Hoep, I doen't knoew whaet you are taelking abouet. Doen't be stuepid.

[kingdom hoop]

Kingdem Hoep, I doen't knoew whaet you are taelking abouet. Doen't be stuepid.

Den't werry, thet's nermal, I wes thenking of yeu toe.


(sinds very Seth Africen no?)


Ok, that's enough of a grammatical interlude to this scientific gobbledegook!

[Student Mullet]

Columbus? Columbus thought he was going on a short hop to India the other way round. It'd be like us setting off in the direction of Alpha Centari in the hope of us finding the Moon.Would America have ever been discovered without that error?

[GavinZac]

Would America have ever been discovered without that error?

Given that America was "discovered", settled and populated by asians anything up to 75,000 years ago, we can safely assume yes, future events would not have had an impact on past migrations. Even from a European viewpoint, "discovering" america had happened before columbus, and would have happened after him too. Columbus merely had the honour of first reffering to the land mass as west india, engraining it in the minds of fortune seeking adventurers from that point on.

[pineapple stu]

I think Christopher Columbus faced similar problems.
Why would he?

(a) He was dealing with a journey which would last months, not millennia
(b) He was proposing a route to find and bring back spices to Spain without having to go through Portuguese waters => there was an economic benefit to his journey, which isn't the case in the research and invention of a new propulsion system which would cut the distance to the nearest star to a mere 5000 years.
(c) Most of his crew were convicts, so nobody cared about them, and I'd say they were paid very little and
(d) Three boats (already invented) cost a lot less than an intergalactic spaceship (not invented)

It's like saying a two inch wall is as easy to get over as a two mile high wall - both are similar problems (there's a wall in your way), but one's a hell of a lot easier to get around (or over, in this case).


Would America have ever been discovered without that error?
As GavinZac noted, America was already discovered. St Brendan sailed there from Kerry in the 6th century. He wasn't the first to do so either - he just wrote a book about it. Leif Eriksson (Erik the Red) sailed there from Norway in the 11th century. When they got there, they found people (as did Columbus). They'd crossed a land or ice bridge from eastern Russia to Alaska and into Canada. America was discovered in the 15th century. Just, like lots of things, people had forgotten about it.

And in any case, your point again has no relevance to the point at hand.

[Student Mullet]

Are we in agreement then that once boats capable of getting to America were invented, it was pretty much inevitable that someone would go there?

[GavinZac]

Are we in agreement then that once boats capable of getting to America were invented, it was pretty much inevitable that someone would go there?

Well, initially people walked there. Bit of an ask for interstellar transport if you ask me.

[John83]

Amusing thought for the day:
If Columbus had been right, and there wasn't a continent between him and India, he and his crew would have died when their supplies ran out, somewhere in the east Pacific.

[Bald Student]

Well, initially people walked there. Bit of an ask for interstellar transport if you ask me.
Is that a yes or a no?

[GavinZac]

Is that a yes or a no?
It is entirely possible that on some hypothetical space-time possibility chain "we"completely miss the existence of the americas.

as I said early, in an inifinite universe with an infinite number of possible space time lines, anything within the realms of physical possibility has or will have happened.

For instance, in some alternative time line, some poor chap called Brian really did get mixed up with a jewish messiah. That alone makes me sad that "possibility-travel" is physically impossible except in one direction :(

[pineapple stu]

Is that a yes or a no?
It's another "your point is irrelevant". Your jumping straight in at the point where boats are invented. I'm saying that's the problem with our interstellar craft. You're still having those *scene missing* problems.

[John83]

It's another "your point is irrelevant". Your jumping straight in at the point where boats are invented. I'm saying that's the problem with our interstellar craft. You're still having those *scene missing* problems.
Why were the boats invented?

[GavinZac]

Why were the boats invented?

Because God doesnt love us enough to give us his son's abilities.