New York Times re Fermi's Question

Article -(24) Where Are Those Aliens? - by Dennis Overbye (Nov.
11,'03)

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/11/11/sc...partner=GOOGLE

Pop review of Fermi's question.

Regards, Jason H.

Jason H. wrote:

Article -(24) Where Are Those Aliens? - by Dennis Overbye (Nov.
11,'03)


http://www.nytimes.com/2003/11/11/sc...partner=GOOGLE

Pop review of Fermi's question.

Regards, Jason H.

What if it generally takes this long for evolution to produce a species at
our level? Maybe the galaxy just sat around forming for the last 10 billion
years and finally, after all that time civilizations are just starting to
emerge? Perhaps there are a few thousand civiliztions out there and maybe
most of them are at 1000BC or earlier levels and maybe only a few are at
our level and maybe only a very few are ahead of us? Its not inconcievable
(although unlikely) that we are on the leading edge. One thing i hardly
ever hear mentioned is that sure there are 200-300 billion stars in our
galaxy but most of it is a malestrom of radiation and totaly uninhabitable.
Isnt it true that only the outer areas of the galaxy are quiet enough to be
possibly liveable? I'm not willing to say, right yet, that we are on the
bottom end of things. There is no evidence of that, in fact, the current
evidence is that we are on the leading edge and the most advanced species
around. I'll grant you that may change, but right here right now, we are
the first.
Eric

In message amFtb.210203$Tr4.616999@attbi_s03, Eric
writes

What if it generally takes this long for evolution to produce a species at
our level? Maybe the galaxy just sat around forming for the last 10 billion
years and finally, after all that time civilizations are just starting to
emerge? Perhaps there are a few thousand civiliztions out there and maybe
most of them are at 1000BC or earlier levels and maybe only a few are at
our level and maybe only a very few are ahead of us? Its not inconcievable
(although unlikely) that we are on the leading edge. One thing i hardly
ever hear mentioned is that sure there are 200-300 billion stars in our
galaxy but most of it is a malestrom of radiation and totaly uninhabitable.
Isnt it true that only the outer areas of the galaxy are quiet enough to be
possibly liveable? I'm not willing to say, right yet, that we are on the
bottom end of things. There is no evidence of that, in fact, the current
evidence is that we are on the leading edge and the most advanced species
around. I'll grant you that may change, but right here right now, we are
the first.

While I agree that a solution to the "Fermi Paradox" is that we are the
first, I doubt if the others are only a few thousand years behind us.
That's good for cheap TV series, but given the enormous times involved
they could be ten million years behind, and that's still only 0.1% of
the time involved. It's going to be lonely for a while.
OTOH, in another ten million years we could have colonised the whole
galaxy, and be happily evolving into enough alien species for a thousand
"Star Trek" series.
--
Rabbit arithmetic - 1 plus 1 equals 10
Remove spam and invalid from address to reply.

"Jonathan Silverlight"
wrote in
message ...
In message amFtb.210203$Tr4.616999@attbi_s03, Eric

writes

What if it generally takes this long for evolution to
produce a species at
our level? Maybe the galaxy just sat around forming for
the last 10 billion
years and finally, after all that time civilizations are
just starting to
emerge? Perhaps there are a few thousand civiliztions out
there and maybe
most of them are at 1000BC or earlier levels and maybe
only a few are at
our level and maybe only a very few are ahead of us? Its
not inconcievable
(although unlikely) that we are on the leading edge. One
thing i hardly
ever hear mentioned is that sure there are 200-300
billion stars in our
galaxy but most of it is a malestrom of radiation and
totaly uninhabitable.
Isnt it true that only the outer areas of the galaxy are
quiet enough to be
possibly liveable? I'm not willing to say, right yet,
that we are on the
bottom end of things. There is no evidence of that, in
fact, the current
evidence is that we are on the leading edge and the most
advanced species
around. I'll grant you that may change, but right here
right now, we are
the first.

While I agree that a solution to the "Fermi Paradox" is
that we are the
first, I doubt if the others are only a few thousand years
behind us.
That's good for cheap TV series, but given the enormous
times involved
they could be ten million years behind, and that's still
only 0.1% of
the time involved. It's going to be lonely for a while.
OTOH, in another ten million years we could have colonised
the whole
galaxy, and be happily evolving into enough alien species
for a thousand
"Star Trek" series.

Jonathan, I was thinking along the same lines, except at the
level of 1%. But even at 0.1%, and if we look in the other
direction, the "others" (or, at least some of them) could
also easily be 10 million years _ahead_ of us! (Brings us
right back to Fermi again-i.e., where are they?)

That intelligent civilizations could have started quite
early after the BBang is supported by the latest studies
showing that the earliest 1st gen stars in the universe may
have been born as early as 200 million yrs. after the
BBang--possibly, even earlier. More and more, I am coming to
believe that the Fermi question is best answered by the
conclusion that there are myriad ETIs in our galaxy, at all
stages of development, including those megayears beyond us,
and they aren't here because (even at the highest state of
development) interstellar travel is just too difficult, or
too costly, or too dangerous (for many reasons) -- or all of
the above.

Even if it _is_ feasible, IS travel may simply take many
orders of magnitude longer to spread a civ. throughout a
galaxy than we suppose. And orders of magnitude harder to
maintain! There is no sub- or hyper-space, or handy wormhole
stargates to act as shortcuts to the galaxy as in SF--it is
sad to think of the myriad races, on myriad planets, looking
up at the night stars, and feeling every bit as lonely as we
do. I wish it weren't so, but...
....tonyC

--
Rabbit arithmetic - 1 plus 1 equals 10
Remove spam and invalid from address to reply.

Anthony Cerrato replied:

[...]

Jonathan, I was thinking along the same lines, except at the
level of 1%. But even at 0.1%, and if we look in the other
direction, the "others" (or, at least some of them) could
also easily be 10 million years _ahead_ of us! (Brings us
right back to Fermi again-i.e., where are they?)

That intelligent civilizations could have started quite
early after the BBang is supported by the latest studies
showing that the earliest 1st gen stars in the universe may
have been born as early as 200 million yrs. after the
BBang--possibly, even earlier.

Your viewpoint seems overly simplistic. Consider that the BB
created mainly hydrogen and helium. Any early stars are likely
to have only gas giant planets.

The creation of carbon and other elements heavier than lithium
are thought to result from supernova explosions.

More and more, I am coming to
believe that the Fermi question is best answered by the
conclusion that there are myriad ETIs in our galaxy, at all
stages of development, including those megayears beyond us,
and they aren't here because (even at the highest state of
development) interstellar travel is just too difficult, or
too costly, or too dangerous (for many reasons) -- or all of
the above.

At least you correctly identify your belief as a belief.

Personally this is so far beyond what you can know that I
don't see how you gained this belief.

Even if it _is_ feasible, IS travel may simply take many
orders of magnitude longer to spread a civ. throughout a
galaxy than we suppose. And orders of magnitude harder to
maintain! There is no sub- or hyper-space, or handy wormhole
stargates to act as shortcuts to the galaxy as in SF--it is
sad to think of the myriad races, on myriad planets, looking
up at the night stars, and feeling every bit as lonely as we
do. I wish it weren't so, but...

Hmmm, your belief seems to have grown up into a fact.

Rich

...tonyC


--
Rabbit arithmetic - 1 plus 1 equals 10
Remove spam and invalid from address to reply.

"R" == Rich writes:

I was thinking along the same lines, except at the level of 1%. But
even at 0.1%, and if we look in the other direction, the "others"
(...) could also easily be 10 million years _ahead_ of us! (Brings
us right back to Fermi again-i.e., where are they?) That
intelligent civilizations could have started quite early after the
BBang is supported by the latest studies showing that the earliest
1st gen stars in the universe may have been born as early as 200
million yrs. after the BBang--possibly, even earlier.

R Your viewpoint seems overly simplistic. Consider that the BB
R created mainly hydrogen and helium. Any early stars are likely to
R have only gas giant planets.

R The creation of carbon and other elements heavier than lithium are
R thought to result from supernova explosions.

Yes, except that it is also thought that the earliest stars would
quite massive, i.e., exactly the kind of stars that undergo supernova
explosions. For instance, there has been a recent detection of CO
(carbon monoxide) emission in the galaxy SDSS J114816.64+525150.3.
This galaxy is at a redshift of z=6.42, meaning that we are seeing CO
molecules when the Universe was only about 1 billion years old (Walter
et al. 2003, URL:http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/astro-ph/0307410).

The next question is, When did the amount of heavy elements build up
to a sufficient amount that planets and intelligent beings could form?
We don't yet know the answer to this question, though Mario Livio has
speculated that this might have taken a large fraction of the
Universe's age.

--
Lt. Lazio, HTML police | e-mail:
No means no, stop rape. | http://patriot.net/%7Ejlazio/
sci.astro FAQ at http://sciastro.astronomy.net/sci.astro.html

"R" == Rich writes:

I was thinking along the same lines, except at the level of 1%. But
even at 0.1%, and if we look in the other direction, the "others"
(...) could also easily be 10 million years _ahead_ of us! (Brings
us right back to Fermi again-i.e., where are they?) That
intelligent civilizations could have started quite early after the
BBang is supported by the latest studies showing that the earliest
1st gen stars in the universe may have been born as early as 200
million yrs. after the BBang--possibly, even earlier.

R Your viewpoint seems overly simplistic. Consider that the BB
R created mainly hydrogen and helium. Any early stars are likely to
R have only gas giant planets.

R The creation of carbon and other elements heavier than lithium are
R thought to result from supernova explosions.

Yes, except that it is also thought that the earliest stars would
quite massive, i.e., exactly the kind of stars that undergo supernova
explosions. For instance, there has been a recent detection of CO
(carbon monoxide) emission in the galaxy SDSS J114816.64+525150.3.
This galaxy is at a redshift of z=6.42, meaning that we are seeing CO
molecules when the Universe was only about 1 billion years old (Walter
et al. 2003, URL:http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/astro-ph/0307410).

The next question is, When did the amount of heavy elements build up
to a sufficient amount that planets and intelligent beings could form?
We don't yet know the answer to this question, though Mario Livio has
speculated that this might have taken a large fraction of the
Universe's age.

--
Lt. Lazio, HTML police | e-mail:
No means no, stop rape. | http://patriot.net/%7Ejlazio/
sci.astro FAQ at http://sciastro.astronomy.net/sci.astro.html

Anthony Cerrato replied:

[...]

Jonathan, I was thinking along the same lines, except at the
level of 1%. But even at 0.1%, and if we look in the other
direction, the "others" (or, at least some of them) could
also easily be 10 million years _ahead_ of us! (Brings us
right back to Fermi again-i.e., where are they?)

That intelligent civilizations could have started quite
early after the BBang is supported by the latest studies
showing that the earliest 1st gen stars in the universe may
have been born as early as 200 million yrs. after the
BBang--possibly, even earlier.

Your viewpoint seems overly simplistic. Consider that the BB
created mainly hydrogen and helium. Any early stars are likely
to have only gas giant planets.

The creation of carbon and other elements heavier than lithium
are thought to result from supernova explosions.

More and more, I am coming to
believe that the Fermi question is best answered by the
conclusion that there are myriad ETIs in our galaxy, at all
stages of development, including those megayears beyond us,
and they aren't here because (even at the highest state of
development) interstellar travel is just too difficult, or
too costly, or too dangerous (for many reasons) -- or all of
the above.

At least you correctly identify your belief as a belief.

Personally this is so far beyond what you can know that I
don't see how you gained this belief.

Even if it _is_ feasible, IS travel may simply take many
orders of magnitude longer to spread a civ. throughout a
galaxy than we suppose. And orders of magnitude harder to
maintain! There is no sub- or hyper-space, or handy wormhole
stargates to act as shortcuts to the galaxy as in SF--it is
sad to think of the myriad races, on myriad planets, looking
up at the night stars, and feeling every bit as lonely as we
do. I wish it weren't so, but...

Hmmm, your belief seems to have grown up into a fact.

Rich

...tonyC


--
Rabbit arithmetic - 1 plus 1 equals 10
Remove spam and invalid from address to reply.

"Jonathan Silverlight"
wrote in
message ...
In message amFtb.210203$Tr4.616999@attbi_s03, Eric

writes

What if it generally takes this long for evolution to
produce a species at
our level? Maybe the galaxy just sat around forming for
the last 10 billion
years and finally, after all that time civilizations are
just starting to
emerge? Perhaps there are a few thousand civiliztions out
there and maybe
most of them are at 1000BC or earlier levels and maybe
only a few are at
our level and maybe only a very few are ahead of us? Its
not inconcievable
(although unlikely) that we are on the leading edge. One
thing i hardly
ever hear mentioned is that sure there are 200-300
billion stars in our
galaxy but most of it is a malestrom of radiation and
totaly uninhabitable.
Isnt it true that only the outer areas of the galaxy are
quiet enough to be
possibly liveable? I'm not willing to say, right yet,
that we are on the
bottom end of things. There is no evidence of that, in
fact, the current
evidence is that we are on the leading edge and the most
advanced species
around. I'll grant you that may change, but right here
right now, we are
the first.

While I agree that a solution to the "Fermi Paradox" is
that we are the
first, I doubt if the others are only a few thousand years
behind us.
That's good for cheap TV series, but given the enormous
times involved
they could be ten million years behind, and that's still
only 0.1% of
the time involved. It's going to be lonely for a while.
OTOH, in another ten million years we could have colonised
the whole
galaxy, and be happily evolving into enough alien species
for a thousand
"Star Trek" series.

Jonathan, I was thinking along the same lines, except at the
level of 1%. But even at 0.1%, and if we look in the other
direction, the "others" (or, at least some of them) could
also easily be 10 million years _ahead_ of us! (Brings us
right back to Fermi again-i.e., where are they?)

That intelligent civilizations could have started quite
early after the BBang is supported by the latest studies
showing that the earliest 1st gen stars in the universe may
have been born as early as 200 million yrs. after the
BBang--possibly, even earlier. More and more, I am coming to
believe that the Fermi question is best answered by the
conclusion that there are myriad ETIs in our galaxy, at all
stages of development, including those megayears beyond us,
and they aren't here because (even at the highest state of
development) interstellar travel is just too difficult, or
too costly, or too dangerous (for many reasons) -- or all of
the above.

Even if it _is_ feasible, IS travel may simply take many
orders of magnitude longer to spread a civ. throughout a
galaxy than we suppose. And orders of magnitude harder to
maintain! There is no sub- or hyper-space, or handy wormhole
stargates to act as shortcuts to the galaxy as in SF--it is
sad to think of the myriad races, on myriad planets, looking
up at the night stars, and feeling every bit as lonely as we
do. I wish it weren't so, but...
....tonyC

--
Rabbit arithmetic - 1 plus 1 equals 10
Remove spam and invalid from address to reply.

Eric wrote:
Jason H. wrote:

Article -(24) Where Are Those Aliens? - by Dennis Overbye (Nov.
11,'03)

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/11/11/sc...partner=GOOGLE

Pop review of Fermi's question.

Regards, Jason H.

What if it generally takes this long for evolution to produce a species at
our level? Maybe the galaxy just sat around forming for the last 10 billion
years and finally, after all that time civilizations are just starting to
emerge? Perhaps there are a few thousand civiliztions out there and maybe
most of them are at 1000BC or earlier levels and maybe only a few are at
our level and maybe only a very few are ahead of us? Its not inconcievable
(although unlikely) that we are on the leading edge. One thing i hardly
ever hear mentioned is that sure there are 200-300 billion stars in our
galaxy but most of it is a malestrom of radiation and totaly uninhabitable.
Isnt it true that only the outer areas of the galaxy are quiet enough to be
possibly liveable? I'm not willing to say, right yet, that we are on the
bottom end of things. There is no evidence of that, in fact, the current
evidence is that we are on the leading edge and the most advanced species
around. I'll grant you that may change, but right here right now, we are
the first.

It plays on Star Trek but it is highly unlikely civilizations could be so close together
in time. 1000 BC or 3000 years difference. Homo Sapiens has been around for 100,000 years
meaning you are talking a 3% delta in achieving our level of civilization. If we consider
our evolutionary history of about 3.5 million years the percentage delta becomes much
smaller. Even looking at our 6000 years of known history it is an almost trivial exercise
to make a few changes to get alternate time lines that shift our culture a thousand years
either way.

--
The hard way to become an official democracy in the mideast
is to actually introduce democracy. The easy way is to
support US policy in the middle east.
-- The Iron Webmaster, 2915