Mathmatical argument against life elsewhere in the universe
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
09-07-2015, 06:52 PM (This post was last modified: 09-07-2015 06:56 PM by ClydeLee.)
RE: Mathmatical argument against life elsewhere in the universe
(09-07-2015 06:39 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(09-07-2015 05:10 PM)Banjo Wrote:  Seventy billion trillion.

It is hard to get one's head around it.

Thanks to many of you guys my education improves a lot.

I am very grateful. Smile

That's a sextillion as I recall. So there are 600-700 sextillion stars.

That is unimaginably hot! Wink

So why's this thread still going?

"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
09-07-2015, 06:54 PM
RE: Mathmatical argument against life elsewhere in the universe
(09-07-2015 06:52 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  
(09-07-2015 06:39 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  That's a sextillion as I recall. So there are 600-700 sextillion stars.

That is unimaginably hot! Wink

Prevert. Rolleyes

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
09-07-2015, 07:04 PM
RE: Mathmatical argument against life elsewhere in the universe
(09-07-2015 06:21 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  Most predictions of such life existing on other planet, don't take into account the biological factors.

While we are in the game of asking for scientific references, what are your references for these multiple predictions . . . Of which you have concluded "most" don't take into account Biological factors.

I know of one prediction... it's been drawn up already and it's the Drake Equation, of which biological factors is of course one of the key factors of limiting the choices of planets. And nowhere does it not also rule out life not existing on planets that are symmetrically earth like or seemingly life supporting. That would also be relevant to be in the calculation.

(09-07-2015 06:54 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(09-07-2015 06:52 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  That is unimaginably hot! Wink

Prevert. Rolleyes

I'm just talkin' 'bout temperature... What's a double-entendre again?

"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
10-07-2015, 05:24 AM
RE: Mathmatical argument against life elsewhere in the universe
(09-07-2015 07:04 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  While we are in the game of asking for scientific references, what are your references for these multiple predictions . . . Of which you have concluded "most" don't take into account Biological factors.

"Expectation of extraterrestrial life built more on optimism than evidence, study finds:

http://www.princeton.edu/main/news/archi.../52/89I01/
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-07-2015, 05:28 AM
RE: Mathmatical argument against life elsewhere in the universe
(09-07-2015 06:34 PM)Chas Wrote:  That's not substantially different than what I said, except that the number of places life could exist is, quite literally, astronomically large. The search for extra-solar planets is turning them up by the hundreds and we've only just started.

Yet, the likelihood of abiogenesis can be astronomically more improbable.

"Our analysis suggests that abiogenesis could be a rather rapid and probable process for other worlds, but it also cannot rule out at high confidence that abiogenesis is a rare, improbable event," Spiegel said. "We really have no idea, even to within orders of magnitude, how probable abiogenesis is, and we show that no evidence exists to substantially change that."

http://www.princeton.edu/main/news/archi.../52/89I01/
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-07-2015, 06:21 AM
RE: Mathmatical argument against life elsewhere in the universe
(09-07-2015 06:38 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Symmetry_in_biology

Symmetry in biology on earth guarantees no such thing in creatures we can only speculate about living on planets we can only imagine.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes jockmcdock's post
10-07-2015, 06:48 AM
RE: Mathmatical argument against life elsewhere in the universe
(10-07-2015 05:28 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(09-07-2015 06:34 PM)Chas Wrote:  That's not substantially different than what I said, except that the number of places life could exist is, quite literally, astronomically large. The search for extra-solar planets is turning them up by the hundreds and we've only just started.

Yet, the likelihood of abiogenesis can be astronomically more improbable.

"Our analysis suggests that abiogenesis could be a rather rapid and probable process for other worlds, but it also cannot rule out at high confidence that abiogenesis is a rare, improbable event," Spiegel said. "We really have no idea, even to within orders of magnitude, how probable abiogenesis is, and we show that no evidence exists to substantially change that."

http://www.princeton.edu/main/news/archi.../52/89I01/

All of it is estimates of probability. However, complex organic compounds occur all across the galaxy; they are seen in dust clouds and comets.

The ubiquitousness of complex organic compounds suggests that the chemistry of abiogenesis is likely not improbable.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Chas's post
10-07-2015, 07:44 AM
RE: Mathmatical argument against life elsewhere in the universe
(10-07-2015 06:48 AM)Chas Wrote:  The ubiquitousness of complex organic compounds suggests that the chemistry of abiogenesis is likely not improbable.

What's the likelihood of abiogenesis occurring on any random earth-like planet?

If there are 10 million earth like planets, how many of those planets would we expect abiogenesis to have occurred on? At least 1? (besides our own of course)
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
10-07-2015, 09:20 AM
RE: Mathmatical argument against life elsewhere in the universe
(10-07-2015 05:24 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(09-07-2015 07:04 PM)ClydeLee Wrote:  While we are in the game of asking for scientific references, what are your references for these multiple predictions . . . Of which you have concluded "most" don't take into account Biological factors.

"Expectation of extraterrestrial life built more on optimism than evidence, study finds:

http://www.princeton.edu/main/news/archi.../52/89I01/

It's like you're so bullheaded to one view you always pick upon sources you scour through without contemplating the concept. Quote mining and searching online for articles to try to bolster some point is such foolishness. Especially when it keeps being done by someone in a poor unfitting manner. There could be a factor of it being less probable but their study isn't even showing anything. They're also more focused on sentient life which isn't merely the topic of life. That's another topic you seem to be unable to separate topics to their own. Like your poor quoting of Brian Cox making a point about signs show that our Solar System has no signs of such life and interpenetrating it as a claim about the universe in total. There are separate claims and cases of probability that are each factors of the grand scheme of universal exploration.

There is very little in that data.. and there is no known set factor. There is no known factor of how many in 10 million earth-like planets would support life. It's like you can't understand how "unknown" or I don't know is actually the answer and there is nothing scary or negative with that quality. It doesn't make the answer improbable or nothing if you don't have the knowledge of the query.

"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
10-07-2015, 10:24 AM
RE: Mathmatical argument against life elsewhere in the universe
(10-07-2015 07:44 AM)Tomasia Wrote:  
(10-07-2015 06:48 AM)Chas Wrote:  The ubiquitousness of complex organic compounds suggests that the chemistry of abiogenesis is likely not improbable.

What's the likelihood of abiogenesis occurring on any random earth-like planet?

If there are 10 million earth like planets, how many of those planets would we expect abiogenesis to have occurred on? At least 1? (besides our own of course)

We know that abiogenesis has occurred at least once, possibly many times, on Earth.

However, abiogenesis is not an event, it is a process. First, there are molecules that replicate, then there are molecules that self-replicate, then there are more complicated molecules and collections of molecules that interact in replication, then an encapsulation of some self-replicating molecule(s), and so on.

Very probably there were multiple kinds of self-replicating molecules. Once that happened, evolution had begun - some won out, some lost and disappeared.

If you want to estimate the probability, you will need some detailed knowledge of chemistry and a good description of the range of conditions in the environment. without that, an estimate that is based on 'feels' is not likely to be accurate.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: