Mathmatical argument against life elsewhere in the universe
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
08-07-2015, 04:26 PM
Mathmatical argument against life elsewhere in the universe
According to Stephen Hawking, there are about 200 conditions that need to be present in order for life to exist.

There is substantial evidence that life does indeed exist on the earth.

If you take a deck of cards, walk into a room, and throw them into the air: it is a 100% probability that they will land in a certain configuration. Let's say, that that configuration represents the configuration of natural elements needed to support life. As said above, obviously this is what occurred on the earth (over billions of years). In no way does this suggest that the configuration was designed to produce life, but, simply, that life developed as a result of this configuration being what it was.

This is, however, an argument against this particular configuration ever occurring again, in a finite universe (or multi-verse). Perhaps, this is why SETI (or Jodie Foster) failed in their efforts to contact extraterrestrials.

If we believe absurdities, we shall commit atrocities.--Voltaire.

"To argue with a man who has renounced the use and authority of reason is like administering medicine to the dead." --Thomas Paine.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-07-2015, 05:27 PM
RE: Mathmatical argument against life elsewhere in the universe
(08-07-2015 04:26 PM)666wannabe Wrote:  According to Stephen Hawking, there are about 200 conditions that need to be present in order for life to exist.

10^10 stars in a galaxy. 10^10 galaxies in the universe. What are the odds that those 200 conditions didn't occur again in 10^100 chances?

There is only one really serious philosophical question, and that is suicide. -Camus
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like GirlyMan's post
08-07-2015, 05:27 PM
RE: Mathmatical argument against life elsewhere in the universe
I... I don't see what the argument is "against" it. You mean merely the random chance of a draw situation that it is like the cards landing in a particular order. Yeah, that's well known, it's not an argument "against" life anywhere. It's merely a factor.

It's merely a factor that is taken into account in the mathematical estimations of potentiality for there to be life elsewhere. Like a piece of what the Drake equation is calculating.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes ClydeLee's post
08-07-2015, 06:30 PM
RE: Mathmatical argument against life elsewhere in the universe
(08-07-2015 05:27 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(08-07-2015 04:26 PM)666wannabe Wrote:  According to Stephen Hawking, there are about 200 conditions that need to be present in order for life to exist.

10^10 stars in a galaxy. 10^10 galaxies in the universe. What are the odds that those 200 conditions didn't occur again in 10^100 chances?

What is (10^100) / (200 x 199 x 198 ... x 3 x 2 x 1)?

If we believe absurdities, we shall commit atrocities.--Voltaire.

"To argue with a man who has renounced the use and authority of reason is like administering medicine to the dead." --Thomas Paine.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-07-2015, 06:32 PM
RE: Mathmatical argument against life elsewhere in the universe
(08-07-2015 05:27 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  I... I don't see what the argument is "against" it. You mean merely the random chance of a draw situation that it is like the cards landing in a particular order. Yeah, that's well known, it's not an argument "against" life anywhere. It's merely a factor.

It's merely a factor that is taken into account in the mathematical estimations of potentiality for there to be life elsewhere. Like a piece of what the Drake equation is calculating.

It is certainly not impossible for the factors to be duplicated, but it would have to be a rare occurrence.

If we believe absurdities, we shall commit atrocities.--Voltaire.

"To argue with a man who has renounced the use and authority of reason is like administering medicine to the dead." --Thomas Paine.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-07-2015, 06:35 PM (This post was last modified: 08-07-2015 06:40 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: Mathmatical argument against life elsewhere in the universe
(08-07-2015 06:30 PM)666wannabe Wrote:  
(08-07-2015 05:27 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  10^10 stars in a galaxy. 10^10 galaxies in the universe. What are the odds that those 200 conditions didn't occur again in 10^100 chances?

What is (10^100) / (200 x 199 x 198 ... x 3 x 2 x 1)?

Why you dividing by 200! ? Divisor should be 200 not 200 factorial. The set of 200 conditions is fixed a priori. We're not talking about all possible permutations of 200 conditions.

There is only one really serious philosophical question, and that is suicide. -Camus
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes GirlyMan's post
08-07-2015, 06:54 PM
RE: Mathmatical argument against life elsewhere in the universe
This thing of referring to "the configuration of the elements to support life" is highly ambiguous and means nothing to me as a chemist. The configuration of chiral molecules is something real and it is one of the big things that we don't yet understand about the emergence of life and living things using only one configuration (mirror image) of the amino acids or nucleotides for example, but this doesn't seem to me what you are referring to.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Iñigo's post
08-07-2015, 07:00 PM
RE: Mathmatical argument against life elsewhere in the universe
(08-07-2015 06:35 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(08-07-2015 06:30 PM)666wannabe Wrote:  What is (10^100) / (200 x 199 x 198 ... x 3 x 2 x 1)?

Why you dividing by 200! ? Divisor should be 200 not 200 factorial. The set of 200 conditions is fixed a priori. We're not talking about all possible permutations of 200 conditions.

Now, I'm confused. The presence of any of the factors is not on a 50/50 basis. For example, the presence of water, oxygen, etc. Then, a planet would need to be just the right distance from it's sun. Then the orbit of the planet would have to be just right so that it wouldn't come so close to it's sun that it destroyed life by burning or too distant to destroy life by freezing it. I don't know how to quantify these factors. But, you are right. My methods were flawed.

If we believe absurdities, we shall commit atrocities.--Voltaire.

"To argue with a man who has renounced the use and authority of reason is like administering medicine to the dead." --Thomas Paine.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-07-2015, 07:12 PM
RE: Mathmatical argument against life elsewhere in the universe
(08-07-2015 04:26 PM)666wannabe Wrote:  According to Stephen Hawking, there are about 200 conditions that need to be present in order for life to exist.

There is substantial evidence that life does indeed exist on the earth.

If you take a deck of cards, walk into a room, and throw them into the air: it is a 100% probability that they will land in a certain configuration. Let's say, that that configuration represents the configuration of natural elements needed to support life. As said above, obviously this is what occurred on the earth (over billions of years). In no way does this suggest that the configuration was designed to produce life, but, simply, that life developed as a result of this configuration being what it was.

This is, however, an argument against this particular configuration ever occurring again, in a finite universe (or multi-verse). Perhaps, this is why SETI (or Jodie Foster) failed in their efforts to contact extraterrestrials.

I sure hope that wasn't Hawking's analogy, because it is false. In order to use it, one would have to compute the odds of the configuration of the cards, and it may be 1/googleplex. BUT the odds of life arising in this universe, with Choas theory having proven that order arises spontaneously, and chemistry and physics what they are in this universe, life arising is FAR from a ''random" event, it's far more probable than the cards configuration, and in fact it may be MORE than 1/2 odds. Many of the "conditions" are already "built in" such as the outer electron orbit of carbon, the chemistry of oxygen and hydrogen, etc etc.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Bucky Ball's post
08-07-2015, 07:21 PM
RE: Mathmatical argument against life elsewhere in the universe
(08-07-2015 07:12 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(08-07-2015 04:26 PM)666wannabe Wrote:  According to Stephen Hawking, there are about 200 conditions that need to be present in order for life to exist.

There is substantial evidence that life does indeed exist on the earth.

If you take a deck of cards, walk into a room, and throw them into the air: it is a 100% probability that they will land in a certain configuration. Let's say, that that configuration represents the configuration of natural elements needed to support life. As said above, obviously this is what occurred on the earth (over billions of years). In no way does this suggest that the configuration was designed to produce life, but, simply, that life developed as a result of this configuration being what it was.

This is, however, an argument against this particular configuration ever occurring again, in a finite universe (or multi-verse). Perhaps, this is why SETI (or Jodie Foster) failed in their efforts to contact extraterrestrials.

I sure hope that wasn't Hawking's analogy, because it is false. In order to use it, one would have to compute the odds of the configuration of the cards, and it may be 1/googleplex. BUT the odds of life arising in this universe, with Choas theory having proven that order arises spontaneously, and chemistry and physics what they are in this universe, life arising is FAR from a ''random" event, it's far more probable than the cards configuration, and in fact it may be MORE than 1/2 odds. Many of the "conditions" are already "built in" such as the outer electron orbit of carbon, the chemistry of oxygen and hydrogen, etc etc.

It wasn't Stephen Hawkings analogy. It was my own concoction. As it has turned out a very flawed one. Sorry. My typing muscles were in third gear while my brain was still in first.

If we believe absurdities, we shall commit atrocities.--Voltaire.

"To argue with a man who has renounced the use and authority of reason is like administering medicine to the dead." --Thomas Paine.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: