Science/Environment Aliens exist - Hawking

[BigBadCam]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36769422/ns/technology_and_science-space/

Stephen Hawking says aliens are out there, but contact is too risky

BRITISH astrophysicist Stephen Hawking says aliens are out there, but it could be too dangerous for humans to interact with extraterrestrial life.

Professor Hawking claims in a new documentary that intelligent alien lifeforms almost certainly exist, but warns that communicating with them could be "too risky".

With the universe made up of some 100 billion galaxies each containing hundreds of millions of stars, it was unlikely the Earth was the only place where life has evolved.

"To my mathematical brain, the numbers alone make thinking about aliens perfectly rational," he said.

Basically what I've thought for as long as I can remember. The infinite number of stars and galaxies makes the belief that we are the only intelligent lifeform seem almost as ridculous as the belief that we are the centre of the universe, or that the world was flat. His ideas on what contact with an intelligent lifeform might be like seem straight out of StarTrek or Stargate. An interesting read regardless, and I'm looking forward to viewing the documentary.

 

[Brad Roo]

Intelligent life may be out there, but our ability to ever interact with it is severely limited.

Space is an awfully big place.

 

[BarneyBent]

As technology advances, our ability to detect other lifeforms will (presumably) increase. At the moment, you'd have to say it's laughable. If we manage to get in contact with an alien civilisation, there's a very good chance its technological capacity would be significantly greater than ours, and unless their culture was significantly more passive than ours (not out of the question, if they'd developed past the need for war, etc) we'd be militarily raped before we knew what hit us.

 

[DivideandMultiply]

Basically what I've thought for as long as I can remember. The infinite number of stars and galaxies makes the belief that we are the only intelligent lifeform seem almost as ridculous as the belief that we are the centre of the universe, or that the world was flat. His ideas on what contact with an intelligent lifeform might be like seem straight out of StarTrek or Stargate. An interesting read regardless, and I'm looking forward to viewing the documentary.

Could you please link the full article?

 

[100action]

As technology advances, our ability to detect other lifeforms will (presumably) increase. At the moment, you'd have to say it's laughable. If we manage to get in contact with an alien civilisation, there's a very good chance its technological capacity would be significantly greater than ours, and unless their culture was significantly more passive than ours (not out of the question, if they'd developed past the need for war, etc) we'd be militarily raped before we knew what hit us.

There are treaties and policies exempt from biased amendments among aliens that grant protection and immunity to planetary systems that harbor developing organisms (bit like us protecting certain animals or Bf censoring "****" and "*" for use on fitting sub-human individuals such as BONG RIPS), we are protected from having our resources or our blood harvested for now.

 

[DivideandMultiply]

There are treaties and policies exempt from biased amendments among aliens that grant protection and immunity to planetary systems that harbor developing organisms (bit like us protecting certain animals or Bf censoring "****" and "*" for use on fitting sub-human individuals such as BONG RIPS), we are protected from having our resources or our blood harvested for now.

Star Gate???

 

[Wish Wellingtons]

How are there an infinite number of stars?

Big difference between infinite and 100 billion.

 

[Wish Wellingtons]

As technology advances, our ability to detect other lifeforms will (presumably) increase. At the moment, you'd have to say it's laughable. If we manage to get in contact with an alien civilisation, there's a very good chance its technological capacity would be significantly greater than ours, and unless their culture was significantly more passive than ours (not out of the question, if they'd developed past the need for war, etc) we'd be militarily raped before we knew what hit us.

Why should we assume that the aliens would be more highly developed and better warriors than us? By the time we are at a stage of space exploration it could just as easily be us who are ****ing s**t up. We are a pretty aggressive species.

 

[cancat]

Given the apparent age of the universe, other species may have achieved space travel a billion or more years ago. We can't even imagine what their technology and abilities might be like.

 

[Byron_Clanger]

It's insane how big the universe is, it would be ignorant to say we are the only intelligent life form

 

[tesseract]

What's the point of bringing out this kind of news again. It's old news being repeated. The repetition of 'Aliens could exist and they could be dangerous' through the media by way of news, movies, tv shows and video games sounds like the public are being softened up for something - perhaps an extraterrestrial false flag attack, as some would believe.
As inconceivable as this may be to some, it's just as conceivable as saying "Aliens could exist."

No one needed Hawking to tell us that Aliens could exist to come to that conclusion.

 

[BarneyBent]

Why should we assume that the aliens would be more highly developed and better warriors than us? By the time we are at a stage of space exploration it could just as easily be us who are ****ing s**t up. We are a pretty aggressive species.

It's quite simple:

Firstly, our ability to communicate beyond our planet is laughable. The only way we'd have any real chance of communicating with another civilisation would be if they had communication technology that far outstripped ours.

Secondly, if we were to ever (in the short-medium term) come into face-to-face contact with aliens, we'd almost certainly be ****ed, because it would mean their technology would not just extend to communication, but also travel, which requires vast amounts of energy, which is also required for weapons, which unless they're absolutely nothing like any other animal life we have ever seen, they will have put to that use, which I'm sure they would have no problems turning on us.

However, of course, in the long term we could well develop to the point of being able to travel between stars and have impressive weapons technology and all that sort of thing. That won't be for a good long while though, and in the mean time, alien contact, while exciting and fascinating, would also almost certainly be terrible, terrible news.

 

[DivideandMultiply]

What's the point of bringing out this kind of news again. It's old news being repeated. The repetition of 'Aliens could exist and they could be dangerous' through the media by way of news, movies, tv shows and video games sounds like the public are being softened up for something - perhaps an extraterrestrial false flag attack, as some would believe.
As inconceivable as this may be to some, it's just as conceivable as saying "Aliens could exist."

No one needed Hawking to tell us that Aliens could exist to come to that conclusion.

I think Hawking is more focused on biological differences.

Its more inciting discussion about these potential drastic differences and how they could effect interaction.

It also serves to draw peoples focus heavenwards and maybe to incite the old imagination.

 

[linga_is_no1]

But we have no proof Aliens exist.

Our planet is literally one in a trillion, so many things had to go absolutely perfectly right.

The chances of another planet and solar system having absolutely everything go right are astronomically low.

We probably are just the one.

 

[J_Moore]

Linga, they aren't astronomically (heh) low, because one trillion (if that is even the correct figure) is a ****ing massive number.

And earth is "just right" for the type of life that exists on earth. It's not impossible to conceive of life that is capable of existing other under conditions.

 

[cancat]

But we have no proof Aliens exist.

Our planet is literally one in a trillion, so many things had to go absolutely perfectly right.

The chances of another planet and solar system having absolutely everything go right are astronomically low.

We probably are just the one.

No signs of intelligent life shown here.

 

[Richo83]

But we have no proof Aliens exist.

Our planet is literally one in a trillion, so many things had to go absolutely perfectly right.

The chances of another planet and solar system having absolutely everything go right are astronomically low.

We probably are just the one.

I'm sorry J moore, cancat, but I'm with linga on this one.

There is absolutely no proof that aliens exist. We assume that this planet must be filled with life, surely, why would a universe be created just for one planet of life? And surely there are other planets which got the balance right?

Right?

All assumptions. There is no proof that the universe has to contain more life than we know, nor is there any proof that just because, as linga said, things happened to create the right conditions for life, that the same would, and must have happened in another planet. Maybe the fact that so many things had to go right for humanity is an illustration of why life is so rare, and why earth is the only place where life resides?

I don't know. I don't know if aliens exist but the bases of belief in aliens seem unjustified for me to believe aliens exist. Until people can actually prove alien existence beyond "oh gosh, surely aliens exist?" statements, I'm sorry, but I remain unconvinced. It is possible for this planet to be the only place of life. I also find it questionable that we are using notions of logic (if something happens somewhere it must repeat in other places especially if there are a number of possible places exists on a pseudo-logical level, the fact that it's not logic illustrates its stupidity) and apply this to effectively a scientific claim, the existence of an object/life whatever.

I also find it hilarious that whenever we think of aliens, we think of them as mutant humans in a pastel colour set. Anthropomorphism much? We can guess, if aliens do exist, what they look like. Until we actually see them, it's merely guesswork, or, pissing in the wind.

 

[J_Moore]

Richo, I'm not making a claim either way. I'm just saying

1) A trillion planets in a trillion year old universe (whatever the figures are) is essentially the proverbial room full of monkeys with unlimited time, probability wise.

2) To assume that life on earth would be the same as life somewhere else is unimaginative. So it doesn't really matter that "earth had to be just right".

 

[cancat]

I'm sorry J moore, cancat, but I'm with linga on this one.

There is absolutely no proof that aliens exist. We assume that this planet must be filled with life, surely, why would a universe be created just for one planet of life? And surely there are other planets which got the balance right?

Right?

All assumptions. There is no proof that the universe has to contain more life than we know, nor is there any proof that just because, as linga said, things happened to create the right conditions for life, that the same would, and must have happened in another planet. Maybe the fact that so many things had to go right for humanity is an illustration of why life is so rare, and why earth is the only place where life resides?

I don't know. I don't know if aliens exist but the bases of belief in aliens seem unjustified for me to believe aliens exist. Until people can actually prove alien existence beyond "oh gosh, surely aliens exist?" statements, I'm sorry, but I remain unconvinced. It is possible for this planet to be the only place of life. I also find it questionable that we are using notions of logic (if something happens somewhere it must repeat in other places especially if there are a number of possible places exists on a pseudo-logical level, the fact that it's not logic illustrates its stupidity) and apply this to effectively a scientific claim, the existence of an object/life whatever.

I also find it hilarious that whenever we think of aliens, we think of them as mutant humans in a pastel colour set. Anthropomorphism much? We can guess, if aliens do exist, what they look like. Until we actually see them, it's merely guesswork, or, pissing in the wind.

No one is claiming proof that aliens exist. Just probability based on the huge numbers of stars and planets in the universe. This is Hawking's argument.

But for theists to invoke the "no proof" argument takes the friggin' biscuit. I have faith that aliens exist. I read it in some book. Prove me wrong.

I agree with your anthromorphism argument. Life forms that have evolved in different conditions and in a different time frame may bear little resemblence to us.

 

[skilts]

Hawking has been barking mad for a long time. In his 'Brief History of Time', which I once browsed to see whether it was worthy of a read, I noted that very late in the piece he seriously entertains the idea of the existence of a deity.

Like Dawkins, he has a habit of commenting outside his area of expertise. On second thought though, maybe his whole career, being the examination of the ultimately unknowable, makes these utterances apiece with his previous ones.

 

[Brad Roo]

I always enjoy a good reductio ad absurdam.

 

[WazzaAC]

The idea of extraterrestrial life in the universe intrigues me, will be interested to read that article. By the way, astronomers actually estimate that there are at least 70 sextillion (7 x 10^22) stars in the universe - that's 70 Billion Trillion stars - spread amongst more than 100 Billion galaxies. The size of the known universe is mindblowing.

And with telescopic resolution getting better everyday, we are finding more and more (and smaller and smaller) planetary systems all around us (452 so far). To suggest that we are the only planet in the entire universe to harbour life seems arrogant and misguided. But if we are, and this would be a sad fact for our race, then I can think of no better reason to cherish each other. I personally think that there are other life-forms in the universe, but I don't believe we have encountered any yet.

 

[_JC_]

For those who haven't seen it yet, have a look at the Drake equation

http://www.activemind.com/Mysterious/Topics/SETI/drake_equation.html

Have a play around with the variables and its quite interesting some of the results you get.

 

[DivideandMultiply]

I'm sorry J moore, cancat, but I'm with linga on this one.

There is absolutely no proof that aliens exist. We assume that this planet must be filled with life, surely, why would a universe be created just for one planet of life? And surely there are other planets which got the balance right?

Right?

All assumptions. There is no proof that the universe has to contain more life than we know, nor is there any proof that just because, as linga said, things happened to create the right conditions for life, that the same would, and must have happened in another planet. Maybe the fact that so many things had to go right for humanity is an illustration of why life is so rare, and why earth is the only place where life resides?

I don't know. I don't know if aliens exist but the bases of belief in aliens seem unjustified for me to believe aliens exist. Until people can actually prove alien existence beyond "oh gosh, surely aliens exist?" statements, I'm sorry, but I remain unconvinced. It is possible for this planet to be the only place of life. I also find it questionable that we are using notions of logic (if something happens somewhere it must repeat in other places especially if there are a number of possible places exists on a pseudo-logical level, the fact that it's not logic illustrates its stupidity) and apply this to effectively a scientific claim, the existence of an object/life whatever.

I also find it hilarious that whenever we think of aliens, we think of them as mutant humans in a pastel colour set. Anthropomorphism much? We can guess, if aliens do exist, what they look like. Until we actually see them, it's merely guesswork, or, pissing in the wind.

But did they have to go right?

That sounds like a case of massive hindsight bias.

They are as they are. From one perspective we are just complex systems, in an infinitely complex universe.

An odd permutation, not miraculous.

In such a complex and expansive universe is it not possible nay likely, that other equally complex systems exist?

Or even if you do not want to go that far, logical that it may be considered a possibility.

As for Linga, his religious beliefs may preclude him from considering the possibility. Or maybe a desire for 1 upmanship against the atheist/rationalist hardheads that patrol these boards, smelling a chance that he can now shout hypocrite for a dreamy belief in extraterrestrial life without the requisite proof.

Personally I think Hawking is discussing contingencies and speculating about the potential nature of lifeforms.

 

[cancat]

Hawking has been barking mad for a long time. In his 'Brief History of Time', which I once browsed to see whether it was worthy of a read, I noted that very late in the piece he seriously entertains the idea of the existence of a deity.

He's been quoted as saying that stuff doubled the sale of the book. Maybe he did it for the moola.

He also said

What I have done is to show that it is possible for the way the universe began to be determined by the laws of science. In that case, it would not be necessary to appeal to God to decide how the universe began. This doesn't prove that there is no God, only that God is not necessary.

Der Spiegel (17 October 1988)