why aint the sky filled with ets

Things and events are composed of smaller
Things and events, roughly I’m patterns, albeit
With plenty of outliers and exceptions to the
Patterns.
Like in an explosion, heavier shit don’t go as far
As the lighter shit, which stays up longer and lands
Farther away from source. There’s a time and
Place, kinda, for the particular tjingevent.

So whether were on the leading or lagging edge,

Or somewhere in the middle of it, we can be said
To b livin in the time of solar systems with planets
And other properties to support physical life.

Again, unless were extremely singular, and somehow
I don’t believe we are, y ain’t our skies flat crowded
Like an LA guest at rush hour?

I’m more pessimistic than anyone I’ve ever met
, read, or read about. I think its cuz a species
Hits a level of awareness, and suicides its whole
World.

Watch tomorrow or later today thirty friendly
Species land…

That’d b what it would take for me, not these hoke
Shadowy claims of this r that Roswell r whatever.
Life is incredibly fast when u think about it, once
Our world formed, it apparantly only took half a
Billion years or so to happen and its everywhere
Here, no niche unfilled, so to speak.

In the time of planets and suns that support life
Y the hell ain’t our skies like our ground, chock
Full? At least enough to where its easily noticeable?

Fuckin small screens, apo for the crap parts

You are describing Fermi’s Paradox (and your free-form poetic style is interesting, by the way).
It must be remembered that space is really really big.
Matter is scattered very very thinly throughout this immense void.
It is entirely possible that faster than light travel is impossible, so any space faring species would have to use generation ships to colonize other worlds.

Or, we may be the only sapient species. We don’t have large enough of a sample size to determine that, really. We have the good old Greenbank formula, but there are a couple of variables that we can only guess at.

Was it Sagan who said, “Either we are alone in the universe, or we’re not - and either way it’s a staggering thought.”

I always liked this quote from the movie Contact:

Young Ellie: Dad, do you think there’s people on other planets?
Ted Arroway: I don’t know, Sparks. But I guess I’d say if it is just us… seems like an awful waste of space.

O’rion, you’ll be taken a lot more seriously on the SDMB (and get more responses to your questions), if you write in full English words and sentences. For many of us, it’s just not worth the time and effort to try and decode posts like this.

It’s aging eyes on a phone touch
Screen.
Don’t know why, but reply boxes’re
Just about impossible to navigate
To correct. I enlarge to better see
N correct, and other than that, if
The books judged by the cover,
Well, it is. I try not to post junk, all I can
Say.
As for not bein read or taken seriously,
:slight_smile: shiiit, story a my life.
Thanks much for the tip tho, I agree
With u.
It’s just using a phone onefingered,
And no, or seemingly no, way to
Anchor and navigate a text box in
Under three days.

:slight_smile:
And to a great extent, ah tok lakkat…

I can’t figure out what the fuck you are talking about. First, what’s an “et”?

He’s referring to ETs, or extra-terrestrials.

If you had read the rest of the thread you’d know “et” means E.T.s, aliens.

[quote=“Gary “Wombat” Robson, post:6, topic:658403”]

O’rion, you’ll be taken a lot more seriously on the SDMB (and get more responses to your questions), if you write in full English words and sentences. For many of us, it’s just not worth the time and effort to try and decode posts like this.
[/QUOTE]
Oh, I don’t know; it’s kind of like Shel Silverstein puked, and that puke wrote the o.p. Since we’re not going to get anything more from thr departed Mr. Silverstein it may be the next best thing.

Stranger

Just don’t hit “enter” at the end of each line. Your phone will handle wrapping to the next line, you don’t have to do it manually.

As for “ets”, he means aliens. You know, E.T.s. Extraterrestrials.

It’s pretty clearly a poem, its a nice free-form poetic style anyway

The answer to the OP is simple. Space is really, really, really big. Regardless of what sci fi says, the laws of physics say that interstellar travel ain’t gonna happen.

[quote=“Gary “Wombat” Robson, post:6, topic:658403”]

O’rion, you’ll be taken a lot more seriously on the SDMB (and get more responses to your questions), if you write in full English words and sentences. For many of us, it’s just not worth the time and effort to try and decode posts like this.
[/QUOTE]

Which reminds me, what ever happened to Super Kaplowzer? At least his (her?) streams of conciousness bordered on poetry.

My answer is with as vast as space is, what is the probability that any ET would have found us? Pretty low.

Yeah, it looks like that’s what he’s doing. He’s hitting “return” when the text reaches the right side of the screen and doesn’t realize the text box will slide over so you can see everything you’re typing. It also won’t awkwardly break words in the middle when you reach the right edge of the box. Just type and don’t hit “return” and the phone (or iPod Touch, or whatever) will automatically format the text for you. FWIW, I’m typing this on my iPhone and don’t have a problem with justifying my text.

I don’t think that’s necessarily true. We don’t know for sure if future propulsion technologies will be unable to help us traverse interstellar distances in reasonable amounts of time. and I’m not talking about warp drive. I do think it’s possible that we’ll develop technology that can accelerate a craft to say 20% of light speed. Just probably not within the current millennium.

Intergalactic distances, are probably right out.

I read the entire thread, up to my post, and it was highly un-enlightening.

[snagglepuss]Gibberish, even.[/snagglepuss]

I though maybe I et something bad for lunch.

This is not really a satisfactory answer. We have already sent objects to other stars; they won’t get there for tens of thousands of years, but it seems to show we are not surrounded by impermeable crystal spheres or some such thing.

The laws of physics say interstellar can happen, and is happening; what you might mean is that rapid, worthwhile interstellar travel isn’t gonna happen. This is a result of massive problems of engineering and economics that dictate that we are not going to do it in the foreseeable future.

The economic questions might dictate that no intelligent species ever develops interstellar flight; what return could anyone ever expect on such an expensive mission? But would every single intelligent species see it that way?

It is possible to imagine, as John von Neumann did, a series of self-replicating machines that can build almost any other device, including an interstellar probe. Using such self-replicating devices it would be possible to send a probe to every star in the galaxy in a few tens of millions of years. In a galaxy that is about a thousand times as old as this length of time, one wonders why this hasn’t been done before.

Perhaps it has, and we just haven’t found the evidence yet.

For a moment there I thought archie the cockroach had returned - and that is definitely a compliment, by the way.

There are many possible answers. Perhaps there is a probe parked in the asteroid belt watching us. Perhaps the ETs visited 5 million years ago and are planning a return visit in another 5 million years. Perhaps there is a strict no-contact rule. The one in Star Trek is nonsense - even the knowledge of the existence of extraterrestrial intelligence is going to have a major impact on a culture, no fiddling necessary. A true no-contact rule would mean watch without being observed - not very good for ST plots, I know. In my universe a successful interstellar flight is qualification for being contacted, but I have ftl travel for plot purposes.

I do think this thread will travel to GD at relativistic velocities.