I heard of a theory that Aliens couldn’t not have visited us, because at this very moment, WE are the most advanced civilisation in the universe. (OR WE are the very first species that doesn’t kill for food in the universe)
So, what about this theory, and maybe some pointers. thx.
Did you mean to say “couldn’t not have visited us”?
Any theories about other civilizations and their technological level remains merely that - theories - Art Bell notwithstanding. Any discussion about that will have no basis in fact. (The Drake Equation is fun to play with, but try to draw a conclusion from that other than “It’s a great big universe and we’re all really puny; just a tiny little speck about the size of Mickey Rooney.”)
Yes: let me rephrase - Alien civilisations were(are) not able to visit us, simply because we are at this very moment the most advanced civilisation in the universe.
Sorry for the confusion.
There is no physical evidence of any other civilisation anywhere in the Universe. We’re looking (with SETI) for radio signals, but no reply yet.
Personally I think the known Universe is large enough that there is a good mathematical chance of another civilisation arising, but that’s just a hypothesis.
So it’s purely a guess whether we are the most advanced beings around.
Feel free to speculate, but that’s all you can do.
As for being ‘the very first species that doesn’t kill for food in the universe’: where do you think McDonalds gets it’s beef from?
I am not looking for a debate. Maybe I’ll post a similar question in the ‘great debates’ section. I am looking for the philosophy behind this idea.
I suspect it is related to the anthroposophic principle, but I am not sure.
This is an interesting topic, to be sure, just in the wrong forum.
My theory is that we are the most advanced civilization in the universe, but every planet is populated with clones of me waiting for my arrival as their Messiah, which will activate their latent alien technology and allow me to conquer the Earth.
Prove me wrong, kids; prove me wrong.
“Where are they?”
That’s the question Enrico Fermi asked about ET’s.
If the Galaxy is as full of technical civilizations as some propose, we should have detected evidence of their presence by now.
It does not follow that a big universe equals abundant intelligent life.
Even Sagan, a strong proponent of SETI, said we may be alone.
On our planet, all the species, save one, have done just fine for 3 billion years without technology.
And geologically speaking, we’re the newest kids on the block. We wouldn’t even be here if a devastating impact wiping out countless species 65 million years ago hadn’t occurred.
Zweistein, do not post the same question in another thread. The proper protocol is to email a moderator and ask to have the thread moved to the appropriate forum. It sounds to me like you’re asking for opinions so I’d say this belongs in IMHO and not GD since you’re not positing an argument and attempting to persuade others to your belief.
There is no way we can make a statement like “We are the most intelligent species in the universe.” We currently can’t prove such a statement one way or the other and the lack of evidence does not mean it doesn’t exist. If other alien civilizations exist, and they are more advanced than us, they may have no desire to communicate with us and will certainly be capable of hiding their presence from us. We can only discover aliens if they:
- make themselves known to us.
or - lack the ability to hide themselves from us but are close enough to us for us to detect them.
If the aliens are out there and feel like colonizing the galaxy, they could have it completely full in twenty million years or less; even if they move at a small fraction of the speed of light.
This gives what seems to be a pretty good overview:
http://www.angelfire.com/ms/melsandberg/paper3.html
The SETI site goes into more detail and has many more links:
http://www.seti.org/science/Welcome.html
To amplify previous answers: what’s being discussed is the so-called* Fermi paradox. The paradox states that if intelligent extraterrestials exist, we should have already made contact with them. This link
describes some of the proposed resolutions to the problem. And here’s a recent cnn.com article on it:
http://www.cnn.com/2000/TECH/space/12/27/part.five/index.html
*I call it “so-called” because IMHO it’s not really tightly specified enough to be a paradox. If one disposes of the assumption that advanced alien civilizations must expand indefintely, the paradox disappears.
Knowing fully that I am no expert on this subject, I will give my theory. Someone please tell me if this has any basis in truth.
In order to find evidence of other civilizations in our universe, we are pointing large sattelites towards the distant stars, listening for radio waves, correct?
As humans, we have been broadcasting radio waves for what, a century, give or take a few years? Perhaps even less years than that figure.
Let us say, for arguement sake, that distant civilizations were able to begin using radio waves about the same time as us, or perhaps haven’t discovered that technology till after we did.
These distant galaxies being hundreds of light years away, and knowing that the radio waves can only travel towards our planet at the speed of light, who is to say that there aren’t beings as advanced as us, and the evidence just has not reached us yet.
Like I said, just my thoughts.
What about these guys?
It seems to me that Zweistein is asking what are arguably general questions about the theory: who came up with it, and what was their reasoning. If so, I don’t see why the thread can’t stay here, at least for now. The theory he’s talking about may be the same as the Fermi Paradox, but it’s hard to tell from the unclear description he gives.
Please don’t. This thread may develop into a debate that will have to be moved there anyway. Posting idential (or similar) threads in two or more different forums is called “cross-posting” and it is not allowed here.
bibliophage
moderator, GQ
The theory works off the assumption that we are the only advanced beings (or possibly the only ones existent) in the universe. It seems to me that it’s a bit obtuse to assume that we are alone in the universe, even though we currently lack visible proof.
It took until the 14th century for us to believe that the sun was at the center of our solar system. Before that people believed in a geocentric universe, just like some people now believe that we are the smartest beings in the universe. They believed in the five planets they could see with the naked eye, but it never occured to them that more distant planets could exist. I would say that since we are, just in the last couple hundred years coming to understand our own solar system, it would be a bit hasty to decide anything about the universe at large, especially considering that we haven’t even figured out how to see a good portion of the universe because it is obscured by our own galaxy.
Zweistein–I agree with all the posters who have suggested you check out Fermi’s Paradox. If you really want to sink your teeth into this subject, I heartily recommend that you read this So…Where are they (Fermi’s Paradox) thread. It’s one of the more informative threads I’ve read on this subject. It attacks this question from every angle, and I think it will answer most of your questions…
bwahaha! ah, gotta love human arrogance.
Most advanced civilization based on what evidence? We have no idea what other life forms are in the rest of the universe. Heck, we don’t even know if there’s other life or not in our own solar system (although I think it’s safe to say there is no other intelligent life in our solar system).
Human-created signals that managed to leave Earth have only extended 60 ot 70 light years away which means our presence has only been revealed to a few dozen neighboring stars. (I think those numbers are approximately correct). That’s just a speck of the whole Milky Way galaxy and it doesn’t even register on the scale of the universe.
And we’ve only been listening (on a very limited number of search channels) for signals from other civilizations for about 30 years now. (Another short time span.)
It may be that we’re #1 (so far there is no evidence to the contrary), but given the size & possibilities of the whole universe, I’d bet that we’re not alone. (Being visited now? Probably not.)
Sorry for my previous outburst, but let me comment on this too.
I think you are correct that the ‘theory’ you mentioned is probably related to the (strong) anthropic principle. The ‘strong’ version of this is that the universe was created so that humans would be created. This puts humans in the center of the universe (i.e., we are the purpose of everything). A more advanced alien civilization would immediate topple that belief.
Another recommended read: Carl Sagan’s Pale Blue Dot. One of the early chapters (#2?) is called “The Great Demotions” where he discusses (and debunks) all the past and current types of beliefs and rationalizations that people have used to keep humanity as the Purpose of it all.
I believe Zweistein is referring to the First Come, First Served hypothesis:
Even though it sounds terribly anthropocentric, a la the earth-is-at-the-center-of-the-universe theories of centuries past, it’s as valid as any other solution to the paradox.
The main problem with the Drake equation is that all of the numbers that you plug into it are pure speculation. We have exactly one observed example of intelligent life in the universe. Moreover, we have exactly one observed example of an earthlike planet–the only kind we know of that supports ANY life whatsoever. So how common are earthlike planets in the galaxy? How long does it take for an intelligent species to arise? You got me. Is there any good reason why intelligent lizards didn’t build a civilization 65 million years ago? Or earlier? Why’d it take us 4.5 billion years in a 12-20 billion y.o. universe?
I believe Zweistein is referring to the First Come, First Served hypothesis:
Even though it sounds terribly anthropocentric, a la the earth-is-at-the-center-of-the-universe theories of centuries past, it’s as valid as any other solution to the paradox.
The main problem with the Drake equation is that all of the numbers that you plug into it are pure speculation. We have exactly one observed example of intelligent life in the universe. Moreover, we have exactly one observed example of an earthlike planet–the only kind we know of that supports ANY life whatsoever. So how common are earthlike planets in the galaxy? How long does it take for an intelligent species to arise? You got me. Is there any good reason why intelligent lizards didn’t build a civilization 65 million years ago? Or earlier? Why’d it take us 4.5 billion years in a 12-20 billion y.o. universe?
gtzaskar00, and a few others who have posted similar
thoughts, the reason people are making the statement that
we should have been visited by aliens by now, if they
exist, is this:
Our sun is not as old as many millions of stars in the
galaxy. The universe has been around 12 or 13 billion
years, stars formed in our galaxy (I think) 7 billion
years ago, and our star is about 4.5 billion years old.
Millions of stars had a 3 billion year head start on us,
yet not one of them had life that had come to Earth and
populated the planet before we ever evolved.
Colonizing a galaxy (interstellar travel, and
populating all habitable planets in the galaxy) has been
calculated to take about 5 million years, if I recall,
assuming travel speeds at .1 c, and something like 1000
years to colonize a planet before the colonists send some
off to other planets.
I think it was 5 million years. For argument’s sake, let’s
say 100 million. That’s a flash in the pan.
The theory goes that whoever develops life first would be
able, by all odds, to colonize the whole galaxy before any
other intelligent life exists.
This does assume we’re only talking about the galaxy. Life
in other galaxies is not addressed. It also leaves open the
possibility that a small handful of planets developed life
that chose not to go travelling and colonizing. But if
there are many instances of intelligent life, surely one
of them would have gone out by now.
That’s what everyone’s talking about, and why it’s not
arrogant to make a guess that we’re alone in our galaxy.