Are we alone ? Lets find out.

[Shakilai]

Scientific laws are generally laws because they are universal (at least within our known universe), and will apply irregardless of the planet or galaxy.

Datruth, I believe it is far too early to say something like "I've lost hope for extraterrestrial life." As I've pointed out, our technological advances are still akin to baby steps. I find it very strange that at such a time when our knowledge of the "corners of the universe" is expanding someone can actually feel despondent.

(Also: I can't seem to reply to your PMs - evidently because my post count isn't high enough yet. I hope it's okay with the mods if I answer it here - yes, my signature graphic is my own, CS2.)

[Idoru]

the things that you list as requirements for life Datruth are far from the truth. The only currently recognised requirement is water. Water is only a necessitiy for life on earth because the 1st forms of life originated in the oceans, therefore we still require water to conduct our chemical reactions within our cells. you could argue that all life requires DNA or at the least RNA but that may just be earth bound life because thats the only thing we have had oppurtunity to examine. Life IS extremely resilient, you dont need sunlight (life copes perfectly well in caves aswell as around oceanic volcanic vents), you dont really need too much warmth, life funcitions fine in Antarctica (certain forms of bacterial microbes live within rocks and generate antifreeze within their cells) on the opposite side too much heat is generally coped with quite well (again, volcanic vents harbour life quite well at near boiling temperatures), PH levels can vary masively (some life functions perfectly well in conditions of such extreme PH that your hand wold dissolve were you to put it in). Oxygen is well known to not be a requirement (nitrogen fixing bacteria, plants(do require O2 but perfectly capable of making their own via photosynthesis)) And finally it is also known that most forms of bacterial life will survive (although not prosper) in a complete vacuum.

The question that is harder to argue is is there intelligent life out there, and even harder, would we recognise it as such if we found it. My opinion on that matter is if we did realise it then we would probably kill it.

The all important question in my opinion is that if life is so abundant, why dont we see their communications signals, if they are anything like us they must use radio waves and such to transfer info.... Or do they all know something we dont and have a very good reason to keep quiet.

[Edit- to fix some little errors, on the whole im impressed with myself because I wrote this within 2 minutes of waking up this morning ]

[Xordan]

The all important question in my opinion is that if life is so abundant, why dont we see their communications signals, if they are anything like us they must use radio waves and such to transfer info.... Or do they all know something we dont and have a very good reason to keep quiet.

That has a really obvious answer. Let me throw a few numbers.
1) How long have we had radio? Let's say 100 years.
2) How long does it take to reach other stars at light speed? Between 4 and millions of years (depending on the star).
3) How old is the universe? About 14 billion years, which leaves say 9 billion years for life to have cropped up.
4) Is there a better way of communicating other than radio? Possibly.

So for us to have detected signals, the timing of other species using radio would have to have been absolutely perfect. 100 years either side and we'd miss it totally. 100 years out of 9 billion is nothing. So small in comparison that it's not even noticeable. Life can appear and vanish very quickly Plus, we're only monitoring a very very small section of our sky. We can't even see most of our own galaxy, let alone have the accuracy to pick up anything like faint radio from others. I very much doubt that we'll have contact with other intelligent life for hundreds (thousands even) of years, assuming we don't find a way to move around very quickly Getting a colony off this planet would be a good start, so there's less chance of the whole race being wiped out by some event.

[Idoru]

That is a true point but not as simple as it appears,

100 years either side and we'd miss it totally

Radio waves have a handy knack of bouncing all over the place so it would be seemingly possible to atleast pick up on the stray signals. This would lead to a signal sent during that 100 year sweet-spot being bounced around for millenia.

I would really expect to see some sort of cosmic interference that was decipherable in some way. infact it doesnt even need to be deciphered, just not random.

The one obvious argument I can see is from your last point,

4) Is there a better way of communicating other than radio? Possibly.

The answer to that is yes, focused LASERs are a much more effective way of transmitting data, that is if you dont want others to recieve it.

[Xordan]

I think you underestimate the size of space A deflection of 0.0000000001 radians (smaller even) would mean the difference between the signal missing us by a million miles or getting it. Plus, the signal will degrade a lot over thousands of years, especially if it's hitting a lot of things (also radio can be absorbed by objects, not just deflected).

Yes, I've heard of testing being done between space craft (one near Venus I think) and earth where the communication is by laser. It would make more sense for advanced species (because any out there are highly unlikely to be at the same level as us technologically, most certainly more advanced) to use lasers to communicate.

[Datruth]

I'd have to say this is a VERY interesting thread, i mean the most interesting thread i've seen since being on this board.

Extraterestrial life boggles the mind, and yet now people are thinking it as common as Gravity.

What can i say that hasn't already been said,

Well i can say this, the one thing Idoru failed to mention was the size of the Planet, Regardless if the planet has Water or not, or even looks exactly like earth, if it's size is too big... then we lose, Too much gravity and that will ruin the chance for any life to form.


And distance from the Star is another KEY factor in determining Life, If you notice, Earth is Precicely the Perfect distance away from the Sun, for life to grow.

We notice planets like Mars who are a bit off, an even with the presence of water, we do not see life, or signs of it.

We see planets closer such as Mercury and Venus who are too scorching hot for any DNA, RNA, or Single celled organisms to survive.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

So just with those two factors alone:

Size of planet, and distance from the sun, We probably cut the majority of candidates for planets with life.

And EVEN if it pases these 2 tests, we still have to take into account the CO2-Oxygen factor, as well as presence of water, as well as a myriad of other circumstances.


I have to analyze life twice a week for 2 hours, and the complexity of it IS marveling, and i understand we have Found life in the arctic, and in Deep sea vents; i mean i've studied it lol.

But There are soo many factors that are just unnavoidable for life to get around.

I think we have a one of a kind Gem here, this Earth.

Anyone who disagrees with me, i challenge them to find me one other like this, thus far we've found close comparisons, but no clear matches.

~~Datruth

[Karyuu]

Anyone who disagrees with me, i challenge them to find me one other like this, thus far we've found close comparisons, but no clear matches.

Okay, well, you've just challenged the entire world to continue doing what they are already doing I think people have already explained how we are only analyzing tiny points within our own galaxy at this time - and there may be billions of galaxies. No one is arguing over the complexity or beauty of life, but we definitely cannot be the only planet with the Goldilocks zone. It's mathematical inevitability.

[Xordan]

Datruth; I think what people are saying is... all we know is life as we know it It's quite possible for other forms of life to spring up which work differently to us, and which can survive in far far different conditions. Life is incredibly good at adapting, and even if the only possible way for intelligent life to exist is as a carbon based CO2-Oxygen needing species (which I highly doubt), I think that the chance of there being at least 1 (only 1 is needed remember) other intelligent species in the whole universe is very high, simply because the numbers point in favour of that. Even if only one out of every 100 billion stars has a earth (that's a huge number of stars btw), then there's going to be or have been or will be millions of life forms out there.

[Datruth]

Anyone who disagrees with me, i challenge them to find me one other like this, thus far we've found close comparisons, but no clear matches.

Okay, well, you've just challenged the entire world to continue doing what they are already doing I think people have already explained how we are only analyzing tiny points within our own galaxy at this time - and there may be billions of galaxies. No one is arguing over the complexity or beauty of life, but we definitely cannot be the only planet with the Goldilocks zone. It's mathematical inevitability.

Thank you for reminding me of a great book that i was own

The God Hypothesis, Discovering Design in our "Just Right" Goldilocks Universe.



It actually gives you mathematical formulas to worth with as well as showing you the amount of work it takes to create life.

And Excellent Point Xordan, we don't know the limits of life, for all we know, there could be life living in ways we'd have though impossible.

~~Datruth

[ThomPhoenix]

That book, isnt that creationistic? 

Anyway, I'm sure there's life out there, but the universe is so vast and travel/communication so slow that we'll probably never find alien life unless we invent some kind of warp engine.

[lordraleigh]

*MIBs are spotted invading lordraleigh's house...

Not sure about it. But I witnessed twice strange lights in the sky that moved ridiculously faster to be human planes and in too different patterns to be falling starts and also I saw one of those cigar-shaped UFOs once. In my opinion, if aliens really exist, the governments across the world wouldn't be very willing to let us know and probably made a conspiracy to cover up their existence.

The Conspiracy is REAL: http://www.abovetopsecret.com/pages/mj12.html

and here is the official site of the Majestic Twelve: http://www.mj12.com
(It usually have as information: "we neither confirm nor deny" .... "classified" .... "classified"  )

Anyway, the probability of we being totally alone in the universe is null... it is ridiculously vast(if not infinite) so even the small possibility of a planet having conditions to bring life becomes much larger...

[LARAGORN]

It is great to see the Ideas being discussed here

     As has been pointed out, life does not have to conform to earthly standards to exsist. First lets look at our "laws" of our planet. Our known to be fact laws have changed with our understanding of our environment. It was law that the earth was flat at one point in history, it was law that the earth was the centre of the universe, and the list goes on. Basicly all our laws are still just theories based on our limited knowledge of what is possible and what isnt. Our most intelligent scientists still say somethings are impossible, even when they are proven wrong, simply because they go agianst their accepted laws..
This is an example

Right click this link and save as to your desktop or whereever. A short demo of the cell. No electrolysis plates, only concentric TUBES of t304 steel. no electrolytes just tap water...works with distilled water as well believe it or not. in a pasta jar. 7 cells inside but only 1 hooked up for this demo. about 20v input and only about 2 amps. potential to run an engine on water...not hydrogen, but water.

http://www.thequantumrealm.com/celltest.avi

If this gas is isolated, it is impolosive. If mixed with outside air, then explosive. This is NOT electrolysis and is not within the realm of Faraday's law of electrolysis. I'm pumping unidirectional dc high frequency impulses into the water. The electrons absorb the potential and crank the atoms to higher energy states and it takes on the form of a vapor but is still a fully INTACT water molecule.

And this,

Check out this video:

http://www.thequantumrealm.com/bedini-sg.wmv

Brushless, pulsed dc motor from a sony reel to reel. 4 coils every 90 degrees.
input is 2 X 12v gel cell batts for 24v input. each is about 1.6ah. The ampmeter
is on 10 amp scale but will only go to 1 amp input and you can see input voltage
drops on the batt bank of course since drawing a load.

BUT...you see the amps go up, 200ma, 500ma, 800ma, then 1amp at 5000rpm.
THEN...you see the amps start going backwards and the input voltage starts
climbing back up and by the time it is at 10000rpm, the input amp is only 200ma.

So, 1000ma input for 5000rpm but only 200ma for 10,000 rpm???

It is NOT because of momentum reducing the input requirement. You can see
that the input drops very quickly under FAST ACCELERATION and not after
it gets up to speed and the input drops a little.

After about 5000rpm, the circuit kicks into RESONANCE and instead of the
electromagnetic coils being charged NORTH to repel NORTH magnet on the
rotor...INSTEAD, the speed gets so fast that the NORTH charge on the coils
ATTRACTS the SCALAR SOUTH field in between the magnets.

so, from repelling mode to attracting mode.

It takes work to have an electromagnet get charged to repel an opposing magnet
because the charging of the coil has to work against a like field.

But, when the south field that the north charge is attracted to is not only not
resistance to the coil but a negative resistance that helps to actively pull it out
of the coil. At this point, the magnets on the rotor ADD energy back to the circuit
and you can see the input amps drop backwards towards zero and the input
voltage on the battery climbs back up.

Realistically, the energizer is about 99% efficient..the input battery will eventually
go down but takes a long time. BUT...the output is pure voltage potential, pure
dc impulses...pure longitudinal impulses versus transverse waves and that output
can be absorbed by water molecules or can be absorbed by a dead battery.

Another example of what was thought impossible: http://www.cheniere.org/

There are many more examples around, you just have to look. When a theory is made into law, it is reshearched on a exact course of thinking and all reshearch is to prove the theory according to laws accepted as trueth. I would be willing to wager anything that most of our quantum physics laws and our laws of the univers will change once again as our knowledge increases. Einstien had many theories that have yet to be proven simply because no one has been able to have the same mindset and understandings that he had. The same can be said of Tessler (Tesla).

If we have the ability to consider things with an open-minded skeptisism, we will be able to understand many many more possibilitys. When Tessler (tesla) invented the radio ( yes Tesla not marconi) no one could have evn imagined how the transfer of information would change in the future, but today we are able to do the impossible by yesterdays standards.

Fermi Paradox has been used by people on both views of ET, it is an interesting read.

* LARAGORN walks of still mumbeling

Editted to add: This video is just under 2 hours, although I dont agree with a lot of Greens views, it does open a lot of new questions.

[Datruth]

I hope you guys have read my last posts about why the size of the universe doesn't potentially matter.

It could be tiny, or 100 lightyears big, all that matters is the number of Potential Candidates for life.

You all saying that the numbers are so high, High enough to guarentee life.......

Is like me saying, there are so many oxygen Atoms, that one of them Must turn to Gold when put inside a brown paper box.
It just doesn't work, Putting an oxygen atom in a brown paper box will not make it turn to gold.

But datruth...... There are SOO many oxygen atoms, you couldn't have possibly tested them all, the number is just sooo vast.
And who knows what Oxygen Atoms are capable of, our understanding of them has changed many times over the years.

Who are we to say we know all the inner workings of Gold and what it's about, i truly believe that an oxygen atom can be turned into Gold in a brown paper box, you just need the right atom.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

You see what i mean, it's all speculation, and false hope.
I hoped too at one time.... i admit... i was actually completely sure, that is untill a took a few more classes in College and it dawned on me.

We know what it takes for life to survive, we've tested it, and if we want to find life elsewhere, we need certain factors in the making of the planet.

Thus far we've found no planet with all the factors we need for life, and that's a fact.
Even missing one factor, such as distance from the Star, will ruin the whole planet.

Saying life can thrive on Mercury, or Mars, is again false hope, we've seen the devestating effects of nearness to the sun as well as the effects of planets whose vacinity has been too far from the sun.

And having Water alone on a planet isn't the end all be all, because as we know Mars has Water, and yet there is no life.

I don't mean to burst your bubble, or my own, I Want intelligent life, ANY life, it doesn't matter to me.

But i also want World Peace, and I know both are equally unlikely.

~~Datruth

[Coneitic]

it is possible to move faster than light speed! you have to use anti matter. its a process where protons or nuetrons are speeded up to very high speeds and then slam into something and create an antimatter or something like that... i was a little High on life  and i saw it on the history channel and looked it up at a library, i cant remember everything it was  years ago but something about  there is a .05 percent rate of transfering matter into antimatter, and they used the example of a car. we can only make at the most like 1 penny worht of gas, it would take 400 years as of right now to fill that gas tank up to travel light speed. there is a building in washington DC that speeds the protons like in a 3 mile circle underground to speed them up. if they could find a way to speed up the process and increase the percentage they could travel faster that light speed, but from what they explained... it would take a few masters to understand how work with it.

[Seytra]

Datruth, the example is a bit skewed, to say the least. I don't know how many planets have actually been found, but I don't think that more than a couple of star systems have been examined for planets. And while noone has as of yet found an oxygen atom changing into gold, thus noone knows if it is possible (Edit: except if you artificially fuse it to the right amount of protons and neutrons, obviously /Edit), we all know that life is possible. Given then that we can't even make out indvividual star systems in the many distant galaxies, how can you even think of claiming that a sufficient percentage of planets have been examined to disprove possibility of life?
Also, noone as of yet knows if Mars harbours life. Noone knows if it may have done so in the past. Yes, life does need certain properties, and Mars doesn't have them. Not anymore, anyway. It is possible that Mars once had a decent atmosphere containing water, even had oceans. Thus life may have formed, even if it only got to bacteria before Mars lost it's ability to support it. If that is true, then we'd have not only life somewhere in the universe, we'd have had life on two adjacent planets.
Even if not, the presence of both mars and venus shows one thing: that it's certainly not uncommon for planets to be of the right size and at the right distance. So they both are a tad off, but let only one comet hit one of them, and they may change distance and move where earth is ATM. There are plenty of those comets around the universe.

It is assumed that the moon stabilises earth and thus makes life possible. The oon is also assumed to have come from such a collision. It certainly is improbable, but then again, give it not only an innumerable amount of options (AKA, solar systems), but also close to infinite time, and I'm certain that once in a while life will appear. Given that there are galaxies which are just forming, and also galaxies that have existed for ages before this one formed, noone can know what the solar systems will be or have been in the past. Maybe life existed in one of the old galaxies, even, but doesn't anymore? The history of life on earth as we know it is only quite brief compared to the universe.

Also, radio signals as used for everyday communication would get extremely weak when far away from earth. Life would have to be pretty close to this solar system in order to send radio that could be received here AFAICS.

Regarding Tesla, I think he had noticed that resonance is the key to efficiency anywhere. Todays technology rarely makes use of resonance at all. A tuned circuit poses almost no resistance to a signal, thus one would think power transmission could be much more efficient if resonant lines were used. In fact, Tesla suggested the use of high frequency power transmission, and I suspect that it was for exactly this purpose, as well as the fact that with high frequencies, transformers can be significantly smaller. That's BTW why computers use switching power supplies instead of normal ones.
However, the power industry had by that time just finished the adoption of AC transmission (before that, it was DC). IIRC, that also was Tesla's concept. Thus they didn't want to yet again ditch all their equipment. Understandable, but sad, as todays world is stuck with clumsy low frequency power transmission.

This technology you're referring to must be the EM weapon ("death ray") that he allegedly had developed. Teslas Wardenclyffe Tower never was finished, and never even in operation. However, the magnifying transmitter that it was supposed to be is still a bit of a mystery, so it may or may not have caused the Tunguska explosion, be it as weapon test or accident. I think Tunguska was something else, though. Transmitting energy is one thing, but focusing it in one place is something else entirely, especially when you only have one single nondirectional transmitter, so you can't even rely on interference. I might be wrong there, though, since Tesla obviously used different mechanism which may easily have different characteristics and effects.

The free enery things have crept up very often as of yet. One time it's magnets, then it's static electricity, then it's water. I've seen several websites claiming to have a working free energy source, and that it was ready for mass production "by the end of next year". Oddly, I haven't been able to purchase one yet. So if they'd actually have developed one, and managed to keep their website up so long (long enough for me and loads of other people to stumble accross it), wouldn't they also have managed to finish the thing? Of course the governments could have seized the stuff, but if that'd have happened, why would they wait so long? It's surely possible. And if it is the case, then I find it quite humorous that it obviously was the greed of the inventors that enabled the governments to steal it. Had they provided a full disclosure (not the usual stuff that leaves out the crucial parts), and had they posted a link on for example slashdot (even if it stayed online for only a few hours), then there'd have been no way for the knowledge to ever disappear again. Maybe they got scared by the prospect of giving everybody a device to annihilate earth... though in this case, they all choose an interesting point for that realisation. No, I am pretty sure these are fakes.

As for the motor, I have yet to look at it, but I doubt that it manages to retain this performance when a load is connected to it.  A motor that doesn't move anything besides itself isn't exactly useful, and usually the power to drive the load us usually much greater than that required to move the motor itself, so whether or not the motor itself puts a strain on the power source doesn't really matter in terms of efficiency. If it converts 99% of it's input power to movement of it's load, then that would be something different entirely.

Edit: I've never heard that antimatter could move faster than normal matter. AFAIK, antimatter didn't have any properties different from matter (except the "polarity" so to speak, obviously).

Edit 2: Oh, BTW: if you were an alien lifeform, capable of movement through the universe to rwach and observe earth, would you not do your best to avoid humanity's attention at all costs? Seriously, humanity is more than PG-18 to intelligent life.

Given that humanity is on the verge of annihilating itself, if life on another planet didn't take radically different directions (meaning more or less a very different concept for nature's and evolution's workings), it very likely wouldn't have developed to the point where it had the option to contact earth before blowing itself up or just damaging it's host planet beyond habitability.