# Do you think life will be discovered on another planet in your lifetime?



## Chrisinmd (Dec 7, 2019)

Do you think life will be discovered on another planet in your lifetime?  By life I don't even mean it has to be intelligent life.  Just some fungus growing on a rock or some bacteria qualifies as life.

Ive read that Jupitor's moon Europa is one of the most likely locations in the Solar System for potential habitability. Life could exist in its under-ice ocean, perhaps in an environment similar to Earth's deep-ocean hydrothermal vents.

Im 42 years young so not sure im going to make it long enough to find out but who knows.


----------



## jobo (Dec 7, 2019)

Chrisinmd said:


> Do you think life will be discovered on another planet in your lifetime?  By life I don't even mean it has to be intelligent life.  Just some fungus growing on a rock or some bacteria qualifies as life.
> 
> Ive read that Jupitor's moon Europa is one of the most likely locations in the Solar System for potential habitability. Life could exist in its under-ice ocean, perhaps in an environment similar to Earth's deep-ocean hydrothermal vents.
> 
> Im 42 years young so not sure im going to make it long enough to find out but who knows.



probably not in my or your life time. If its going to happen it will need to be found on mars or its going to have to find us

there are two completing philosophies on life other than our own

one) life is wide spread. thats is given the conditions to support life biogenis will happen, thats support by the fact that life it occured on earth multiple times in multiple in multiple places . the problem with that hypothesis, is the galaxy is so big that the right condition must happen millions of times,  some of which will go on to be technological civilisations, some a million years or so before us, so where are the galactic civilization. thats then followed by the depresing theory of the '' great filter'' thats there is an inevitable end to civilisations through natural disaster of they just use their technology to destroy themselves before they conquer space

or the anthropic ( rare earth theory) that we live in a very special place, so special that it only happen once in a galaxy, perhaps only one in an universe, as part of a infinite multiverse.

in which case we are it and no we will never find life elsewhere,


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 7, 2019)

Finding intelligent life on Earth is hard enough.


----------



## Buka (Dec 7, 2019)

I am of the opinion that in other galaxies this very question has been asked for a long, long time.


----------



## Randy Pio (Dec 9, 2019)

If it were me.  I would first establish a presence on the Moon.  It is closer and easily observable.  The one thing that comes to my mind is right now most surfaces are untainted, but as we continue to explore that is going to change.  It is saddening to know this.

Quite a few years ago, I had a conversation with a doctor who was going to Nepal; to help clean up around Mount Everest.  He said, apparently climbers simply discard their waste; there is trash everywhere.

The other day, I read an article about Everest; last year was the deadliest year.  I can't find the article now.  And then, as I was surfing through channels; I caught a segment on Adam Ruins Everything- Nature.  It was highlighting these very Everest facts.  I kind it weird, how that happens.

Anyway...

-RP


----------



## Dirty Dog (Dec 9, 2019)

In my lifetime? Not likely. I strongly doubt there is life outside Earth in our solar system. Yes, I know there is a small chance for places like Europa, but the key word there is SMALL. I'm quite sure there is life, even intelligent life, outside this system. But will we ever meet them? I kind of doubt it. Because physics. And economics.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 9, 2019)

Randy Pio said:


> Quite a few years ago, I had a conversation with a doctor who was going to Nepal; to help clean up around Mount Everest. He said, apparently climbers simply discard their waste; there is trash everywhere.




It's not just the rubbish they leave, it's the dead bodies as well. At the highest altitudes when people die, and die they do, no one can bring them down due to lack of oxygen and time so they are left there. People just carry on past them on the way to the top and back.
Death in the clouds: The problem with Everest’s 200+ bodies

11 tonnes of rubbish cleared from Everest


----------



## dvcochran (Dec 9, 2019)

Tez3 said:


> It's not just the rubbish they leave, it's the dead bodies as well. At the highest altitudes when people die, and die they do, no one can bring them down due to lack of oxygen and time so they are left there. People just carry on past them on the way to the top and back.
> Death in the clouds: The problem with Everest’s 200+ bodies
> 
> 11 tonnes of rubbish cleared from Everest


That is pretty messed up. I have also read it cost $40k-$50k to make the climb. I love a challenge, but...


----------



## Randy Pio (Dec 9, 2019)

The article I read said 100k to retrieve a body.  And the main person, the story focused on spent 66k, for the whole thing.

I often wonder how crowded space is, around Earth; how much space rubbish is there- old satellites and such.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Dec 9, 2019)

dvcochran said:


> That is pretty messed up. I have also read it cost $40k-$50k to make the climb. I love a challenge, but...


I didn't read the whole article, so it might have mentioned this...but the real messed up thing is that they use dead bodies as trail markers/directions.


----------



## jobo (Dec 9, 2019)

kempodisciple said:


> I didn't read the whole article, so it might have mentioned this...but the real messed up thing is that they use dead bodies as trail markers/directions.


lots of the bodies are left there deliberately so they are ''buried'' on everest, if your going to leave them there, you may as well use them for something useful

its no different to saying'' turn left at the cemetery


----------



## jobo (Dec 9, 2019)

Randy Pio said:


> The article I read said 100k to retrieve a body.  And the main person, the story focused on spent 66k, for the whole thing.
> 
> I often wonder how crowded space is, around Earth; how much space rubbish is there- old satellites and such.



it doesnt cost 100k to get a body of everest, they may charge that, but all you need is a few sherpas and some rope, that doesn't come close to being a 100k, there's some serious profiteering going on there


----------



## jobo (Dec 9, 2019)

Randy Pio said:


> The article I read said 100k to retrieve a body.  And the main person, the story focused on spent 66k, for the whole thing.
> 
> I often wonder how crowded space is, around Earth; how much space rubbish is there- old satellites and such.


 wonder no more i9ve googled it for you

the answer 2500, there not much bigger than a small car, so that's a medium car parks worth of space junk.

as space is according to current view infinite, its going to take quite a while to fill it

at 2500 per 60 years


----------



## Randy Pio (Dec 10, 2019)

jobo said:


> it doesnt cost 100k to get a body of everest, they may charge that, but all you need is a few sherpas and some rope, that doesn't come close to being a 100k, there's some serious profiteering going on there



But of course, it is a major source of income for Nepal.


----------



## Dirty Dog (Dec 10, 2019)

dvcochran said:


> That is pretty messed up.



Not really. Body recovery is a extremely dangerous. I don't climb mountains, but I do SCUBA dive in caves, which is also a high risk hobby. I suspect that climbing down a mountain carrying a corpse adds about as much difficulty and danger as trying to drag one out of a cave. Should I ever screw up and die in a cave, there better not be any effort whatsoever to recover my body.


----------



## dvcochran (Dec 10, 2019)

jobo said:


> it doesnt cost 100k to get a body of everest, they may charge that, but all you need is a few sherpas and some rope, that doesn't come close to being a 100k, there's some serious profiteering going on there


Send us some pictures when you make the climb @jobo. Should be a snap for you.


----------



## dvcochran (Dec 10, 2019)

Dirty Dog said:


> Not really. Body recovery is a extremely dangerous. I don't climb mountains, but I do SCUBA dive in caves, which is also a high risk hobby. I suspect that climbing down a mountain carrying a corpse adds about as much difficulty and danger as trying to drag one out of a cave. Should I ever screw up and die in a cave, there better not be any effort whatsoever to recover my body.


I thin I get your point. IF I died in an area where it was high risk just to retrieve my body I would not want someone to risk a recovery attempt. IF I knowingly chose to attempt something like climbing Everest then anyone concerned (family and such) would know that may be my final resting place. 
There were two times when I was LEO that I helped recover bodies from auto accidents where the vehicle went off a cliff. We spent the better part of the daylight hours of 2 days on one of them. And that is considering we had tons of people, equipment, and tools to help. It was very challenging and  humbling. They were both teenagers which made the whole thing more traumatic for the parents.


----------



## jobo (Dec 10, 2019)

dvcochran said:


> Send us some pictures when you make the climb @jobo. Should be a snap for you.


i dont need to climb it to estimate the unit costs.

lets say 4 sherpa on $50 a day, two weeks of time, though both of those are on the highside and the use of some equipment

$ 4000 seems a fair price


----------



## Buka (Dec 10, 2019)

As for extraterrestrial life, it wasn't too long ago that if you were in certain occupations and reported a UFO it was career suicide.  

Last night on some down time I was perusing through some of the FAA stuff at the airport. This caught my eye.


----------



## JR 137 (Dec 10, 2019)

I don’t think we’ll find anything for quite some time. And most likely not “intelligent life.”

I don’t believe we’ve been visited by anyone from a galaxy far, far away. But to say there’s no life in any form anywhere else in the entire universe doesn’t make much sense to me. I’m willing to bet there’s a rock out there about the same size as ours, about the same distance away from a star, with an atmosphere like ours, etc. I don’t know what the statistics are of another planet with all the same essential conditions as ours, but the universe is allegedly infinite; therefore there’s got to be at least one other, right?

I wonder if some guy is sitting on his toilet and typing this on a forum on a planet thousands of light years away at this very moment just like I am.


----------



## Monkey Turned Wolf (Dec 10, 2019)

Buka said:


> As for extraterrestrial life, it wasn't too long ago that if you were in certain occupations and reported a UFO it was career suicide.
> 
> Last night on some down time I was perusing through some of the FAA stuff at the airport. This caught my eye.
> 
> View attachment 22608


I feel like that just goes to a phoneline no one uses, to prevent all the crazies from harassing actual employees about it.


----------



## jobo (Dec 10, 2019)

JR 137 said:


> I don’t think we’ll find anything for quite some time. And most likely not “intelligent life.”
> I don’t believe we’ve been visited by anyone from a galaxy far, far away. But to say there’s no life in any form anywhere else in the entire universe doesn’t make much sense to me. I’m willing to bet there’s a rock out there about the same size as ours, about the same distance away from a star, with an atmosphere like ours, etc. I don’t know what the statistics are of another planet with all the same essential conditions as ours, but the universe is allegedly infinite; therefore there’s got to be at least one other, right?
> 
> I wonder if some guy is sitting on his toilet and typing this on a forum on a planet thousands of light years away at this very moment just like I am.



every star they can measure for planets has planets, they cant pick up small rocky planets a bit like our only gas giants like jupiter, so you can assume they exist or assume they don't.

 what does seem odd about our solar system is how the planets are arranged, with the big ones further away from the star. if jupiter was bombing around where venus is then there would be no earth, and it seems at one time long long ago it was doing just that

but the figures are, a trillion stars in our galaxy, and a trillion galaxies in the observable universe , if one in a million has a rock planet the right distances that an awful lot of planets

but there's a lot more than just being the right histance, it needs a magnetosphere,, big enough iron core to stay molten and give enough gravity to hold on to the atmosphere its need to have been bombarded by asteroids containing water, which it seems we have the movement of jupiter for, the tilt for seasons, the moon for tides.

there's a very specific set of circumstances that allow live on earth to flourish that may not be replicated at all often


----------



## dvcochran (Dec 10, 2019)

I do consider the possibility that there may be more than one definition for 'life'. Possibly oxygen and a temperature anywhere near our planet isn't a necessity for some intelligent life to live out there somewhere. 
I do think we are a Long way from space travel and technology far enough to find it.


----------



## dvcochran (Dec 10, 2019)

jobo said:


> every star they can measure for planets has planets, they cant pick up small rocky planets a bit like our only gas giants like jupiter, so you can assume they exist or assume they don't.
> 
> what does seem odd about our solar system is how the planets are arranged, with the big ones further away from the star. if jupiter was bombing around where venus is then there would be no earth, and it seems at one time long long ago it was doing just that
> 
> ...


I find the theory that a black hole is helping 'hold' Jupiter in place intriguing. It is a very far distance from anything else of size however.


----------



## JR 137 (Dec 10, 2019)

jobo said:


> every star they can measure for planets has planets, they cant pick up small rocky planets a bit like our only gas giants like jupiter, so you can assume they exist or assume they don't.
> 
> what does seem odd about our solar system is how the planets are arranged, with the big ones further away from the star. if jupiter was bombing around where venus is then there would be no earth, and it seems at one time long long ago it was doing just that
> 
> ...


all the stuff you mentioned was part of my “etc.” I just didn’t want to go on ad nauseum. You’re absolutely correct. The chances of another one like ours is very slight. But the shear size of the universe with the number of stars like you mention, I’d say the chances of not having at least one planet like ours out of everything out there is very slim.


----------



## Buka (Dec 10, 2019)

kempodisciple said:


> I feel like that just goes to a phoneline no one uses, to prevent all the crazies from harassing actual employees about it.



I know several airline pilots here who have used it. I just called it to say “hi” a couple minutes ago.

I’m in that kind of frisky mood today.


----------



## jobo (Dec 10, 2019)

dvcochran said:


> I do consider the possibility that there may be more than one definition for 'life'. Possibly oxygen and a temperature anywhere near our planet isn't a necessity for some intelligent life to live out there somewhere.
> I do think we are a Long way from space travel and technology far enough to find it.


the Copernican principle and statistics say that any life we find is vastly more likely to share our chemistry than not, so that would be oxygen and liquid water (or carbon dioxide and water)

im not at all sure any one will be saying '' its life Jim, but not as we know it''

 as an aside, the planet had next to no free oxygen back at the beginning of life, the oxygen came from plants, spliting carbon dioxide into its constituent parts. it got so bad that an over abundance of oxygen nearly wiped out all life, one of the many near misses we have had, careful about planting tree, you can over do it


----------



## JowGaWolf (Dec 11, 2019)

My guess is that we probably have already found life from other planets and we just don't realize it yet.

Tardigrades would get my vote along with those strange deep sea fish that live where other animals cannot.  Those environments are probably close to some of the conditions found on other planets.

Typically we think of life based on what humans need to survive, but scientist probably look at a wider range of environments that support life.  They probably rank intelligent life different as well.  90% in MT would probably die in the wilderness and have of that would probably die by doing stupid stuff like eating poisonous food, drinking bad water, or trying to pet snakes.

The more civilized we get the more we do stupid things, like suggest exploding a nuke in a hurricane will stop the hurricane or eating Tide Pods.  Soooo.. yeah it would probably be a good idea to classify the types of intelligence. lol.


----------



## jobo (Dec 12, 2019)

JowGaWolf said:


> My guess is that we probably have already found life from other planets and we just don't realize it yet.
> 
> Tardigrades would get my vote along with those strange deep sea fish that live where other animals cannot.  Those environments are probably close to some of the conditions found on other planets.
> 
> ...


panspermia, the seeding of life from elase where is a main stream theory and there are a number of candidates that could possibly survive the journey. if life did exist on mars there a fairly good chance it transferred from there, many millions of years cross the void of space is a bit more difficult, but possibly possible.

intelligent life is general taken to mean technological life, so not pigs, dolphins and horses though they all have intelligence. 

there are three classes of intelligent ( technological ) life of which we haven't fully managed class 1 yet, that being projected to be 1/200 years away at the current state of development.

its worth noting that mankind lost at least a thousand years of development, because of ( mostly) religious dogma, it took us a thousand years or so to get back to the level in place before the fall of the roman empire.

it the reformation and leading to the '' age of reason'' had not happened we would still be driving round in horse and cart. 

its not that unlikely that a rebirth of religious fundamentalism ( and i include the current hysteria about climate change in that) will plunge us back in to the dark ages, so we may never get there


----------



## JR 137 (Dec 12, 2019)

jobo said:


> panspermia, the seeding of life from elase where is a main stream theory and there are a number of candidates that could possibly survive the journey. if life did exist on mars there a fairly good chance it transferred from there, many millions of years cross the void of space is a bit more difficult, but possibly possible.
> 
> intelligent life is general taken to mean technological life, so not pigs, dolphins and horses though they all have intelligence.
> 
> ...


The current hysteria of climate change could actually propel us forward - development of newer energy technologies and the like. The current hysteria is part (but not all) of what’s driving guys like Elon Musk. The uptick in solar panel and wind turbine tech too, among other things.


----------



## jobo (Dec 12, 2019)

JR 137 said:


> The current hysteria of climate change could actually propel us forward - development of newer energy technologies and the like. The current hysteria is part (but not all) of what’s driving guys like Elon Musk. The uptick in solar panel and wind turbine tech too, among other things.


 as far as im aware getting rich on the back of the hysteria is whats driving elon musk and a great deal of others

were at least a 100 years away from efficient solar technology, as the moment you need to cover whole deserts to get a tiny fraction of our energy needs

AND elon and his electric car ??? electric cars only move the pollution problem some where else, ie the power station, either they are burning fossil fuels or producing nuclear waste or wrecking whole ecosystems with dams. The last estimate i saw, was to reach our target of fully electric cars by 2030, we needed 8 power station built, at the moment we cant build even one, so that wont be happening

the same eco lunies that are getting hot and bother about climate change also campaign against nuclear and wind farms and well everything that isn't a return to the 1400.

someone should tell them their xbox wont work,


----------



## JowGaWolf (Dec 12, 2019)

jobo said:


> intelligent life is general taken to mean technological life, so not pigs, dolphins and horses though they all have intelligence.
> 
> there are three classes of intelligent ( technological ) life of which we haven't fully managed class 1 yet, that being projected to be 1/200 years away at the current state of development.
> 
> ...


 ha ha ha.. this sounds like an argument for why humans aren't intelligent lol.  

I trust the hysteria about climate change more than I do some of these other groups, like Flat earth society (picture below).  There's no denial that climate change is happening. Much of the debate around climate change is how and why and that's where it gets crazy.   I personally will champion the dangers of Cow Farts and would like to add Human Farts to the equation lol.. I'm pretty sure there are more human on the planets than cows.


----------



## dvcochran (Dec 12, 2019)

I do agree with Jobo that there is a Lot of money being made on the hysteria of climate change. I fully agree that as a species humans do have an impact, just how much that is questionable to me. On a galactic scale, the 12° axis shift of the earth that appears to be increasing is a more rational and factually accurate explanation of not just mean temps but solar, storm, and wind changes.


----------



## Tez3 (Dec 13, 2019)

kempodisciple said:


> I didn't read the whole article, so it might have mentioned this...but the real messed up thing is that they use dead bodies as trail markers/directions.




Many of the bodies can't be removed because of the conditions, would be rescuers need extra oxygen etc so it's physically not possible but climbing Everest has turned into a big business, people just want to say they've climbed it, they don't care about anyone else.


----------



## jobo (Dec 13, 2019)

JowGaWolf said:


> ha ha ha.. this sounds like an argument for why humans aren't intelligent lol.
> 
> I trust the hysteria about climate change more than I do some of these other groups, like Flat earth society (picture below).  There's no denial that climate change is happening. Much of the debate around climate change is how and why and that's where it gets crazy.   I personally will champion the dangers of Cow Farts and would like to add Human Farts to the equation lol.. I'm pretty sure there are more human on the planets than cows.


pointing out that one group of delusion lunatics aren't as bad as another group of more delusion lunatic doesn't really help the case much,

im not convinced that flat earthers actually exist beyond religious dogma and those that should be institutionalised. there are quite a lot of people that have decided its a good way to make a living or are just doing it as thought experiment

though its much the same type of people, those with a marked level of paranoia and an inability to challenge what they are told that buy into both dogmas

we had an election last night and the green party( eco fascists) got a paltry 1% of the vote, that's reassuring that 99% of people aren't buying this nonsense that we are facing imminent extinction. though on the other hand1% of 70 million people is an awful lot of disturbed people in our midst. though i believe several magnitudes higher that flat earthers


----------



## Martial D (Dec 13, 2019)

Chrisinmd said:


> Do you think life will be discovered on another planet in your lifetime?  By life I don't even mean it has to be intelligent life.  Just some fungus growing on a rock or some bacteria qualifies as life.
> 
> Ive read that Jupitor's moon Europa is one of the most likely locations in the Solar System for potential habitability. Life could exist in its under-ice ocean, perhaps in an environment similar to Earth's deep-ocean hydrothermal vents.
> 
> Im 42 years young so not sure im going to make it long enough to find out but who knows.


Very likely yes, and for a few reasons.

Firstly, the building blocks of life are some of the most common 'stuff' in the known universe, and the combinant processes to get there are much more likely than once believed. So by current data, the stronger hypotheses are that life should be fairly common given the (rather broad)spectrum of possible environments life could start in, and the amount of possible planets that might meet this criteria.

Life is inevitable.

Second, the length of our lives (in general) is increasing not only because we live in better conditions than our predecessors but also because of advances in anti aging science. Some of us may live a long time indeed.(though probably not me personally)

My bet is on Mars. They have already discovered water less than a foot under the ground(as the rovers scout for an optimal landing point for a manned mission). I feel like once there are people there investigating and doing science rovers just can't do, the chances are high they will find at least microbial life.


----------



## JowGaWolf (Dec 13, 2019)

jobo said:


> pointing out that one group of delusion lunatics aren't as bad as another group of more delusion lunatic doesn't really help the case much,
> 
> im not convinced that flat earthers actually exist beyond religious dogma and those that should be institutionalised. there are quite a lot of people that have decided its a good way to make a living or are just doing it as thought experiment
> 
> ...


Yeah that's only 1% from a particular issue.  The other 99% may be crazy in other issues that are equally as bad.

I know there are quite a few who thinks voting doesn't matter.  I'm always reminding them that for something that doesn't matter, there are sure a lot of people in power who try to prevent or to take away voting.


----------



## Chrisinmd (Dec 14, 2019)

Martial D said:


> Very likely yes, and for a few reasons.
> 
> Firstly, the building blocks of life are some of the most common 'stuff' in the known universe, and the combinant processes to get there are much more likely than once believed. So by current data, the stronger hypotheses are that life should be fairly common given the (rather broad)spectrum of possible environments life could start in, and the amount of possible planets that might meet this criteria.
> 
> Life is inevitable.



I agree very likely yes.  Not sure life is inevitable but in my opinion it is highly likely.  Given the number of planets that we already know exist within the right distance from their sun to have liquid water it seems to me it is highly likely life developed their as well.  What we don't know is how common is life on earth life planets?  1 in 100.  1 in 1 million.  1 in a billion?


----------



## jobo (Dec 15, 2019)

Chrisinmd said:


> I agree very likely yes.  Not sure life is inevitable but in my opinion it is highly likely.  Given the number of planets that we already know exist within the right distance from their sun to have liquid water it seems to me it is highly likely life developed their as well.  What we don't know is how common is life on earth life planets?  1 in 100.  1 in 1 million.  1 in a billion?


as far as i've been following it, we currently know of two star systems that have  rocky planets in the so called goldilocks zone, ours and one other, but we have no idea if they ( there are quite a number going round this star 5 or 7 from memory ) contain liquid water, have an atmosphere or a magnetosphere, all 3 of which seem a prerequisite for life

having found one such system its a reasonable conclusion there are lots more, but we don't know that as fact

water is abundant in the universe, however earth does have a great deal of it, far more than would occur during its formation, which is not fully understood where it came from, perhaps from being bombarded by asteroids, which may be a very unusual occurrence in other systems

earths atmosphere is protected by its magnetosphere, which itself seems unusually large, because we have an unusually large iron core, that they don't understand why, possibly because earth and its moon is an amalgamation of two planets, so it has the iron core of two planets and then the gravity caused by the mass of nearly two planets which helps it keep hold of its atmosphere 

it also has a very unusually large moon for its size, which places a very strong gravitational pull and gives tides etc, that may or may not have created the conditions for life, as we have no idea what caused biogenis its hard to say

venus is dead because it has to much volcanic activity, mars because it has to little, yet both are rocky planets in the zone, give or take a bit, life on earth has been made all but extinct by volcanic activities on at least two occasions and by asteroid strikes on another two, and it nearly died out because there was to much oxygen and was saved by volcanic activity

 its little short of a miracle that life survived at all.so even if life starts there no guarantee it will last all that long

so its a little more than just a numbers game


----------



## jobo (Dec 16, 2019)

JowGaWolf said:


> ha ha ha.. this sounds like an argument for why humans aren't intelligent lol.
> 
> I trust the hysteria about climate change more than I do some of these other groups, like Flat earth society (picture below).  There's no denial that climate change is happening. Much of the debate around climate change is how and why and that's where it gets crazy.   I personally will champion the dangers of Cow Farts and would like to add Human Farts to the equation lol.. I'm pretty sure there are more human on the planets than cows.


 the first bit is a very interesting point, humans are no more intelligent ( or less stupid) now than they have been for many thousands of years, it just took millenia for the sum of human knowledge to equal the the technological world we have now

switch off all the silicon chips and burn whats left of the books and it will take us another 12 thousand years to get back to this point, as by and large the technological world has robbed us of the knowledge and skills to do anything other than return to the stone age and start again, just that raw materials will be a lot harder to get, any one seen a copper mine recently ?

just as we wont be more intelligent when were a galactic empire, there will still be people thanking/blaming god for things


----------



## Martial D (Dec 16, 2019)

jobo said:


> as far as i've been following it, we currently know of two star systems that have  rocky planets in the so called goldilocks zone, ours and one other, but we have no idea if they ( there are quite a number going round this star 5 or 7 from memory ) contain liquid water, have an atmosphere or a magnetosphere, all 3 of which seem a prerequisite for life
> 
> having found one such system its a reasonable conclusion there are lots more, but we don't know that as fact
> 
> ...


A lot of that is dated info, although at one time considered to be accurate. 

New Study Shows That Life Is Likely Abundant In Universe

www.space.com/amp/1686-life-building-blocks-abundant-space.html


Why the idea of alien life now seems inevitable and possibly | Cosmos

The idea that life should be rare is mostly a religious idea these days.


----------



## jobo (Dec 16, 2019)

Martial D said:


> A lot of that is dated info, although at one time considered to be accurate.
> 
> New Study Shows That Life Is Likely Abundant In Universe
> 
> ...


its dated in that it was current about a months ago, the last time i popped on to PBS space time.

i'm not picking through, reams of text to see what your point is, can you express your objections are to what i wrote above, nothing from a periphery glance seems to contradict it ?


----------



## Martial D (Dec 16, 2019)

jobo said:


> its dated in that it was current about a months ago, the last time i popped on to PBS space time.
> 
> i'm not picking through, reams of text to see what your point is, can you express your objections are to what i wrote above, nothing from a periphery glance seems to contradict it ?


In a nutshell, the preponderance of the current evidence seems to indicate life should be everywhere.

Also, never trust infotainment for sound science.


----------



## dvcochran (Dec 16, 2019)

Martial D said:


> In a nutshell, the preponderance of the current evidence seems to indicate life should be everywhere.
> 
> Also, never trust infotainment for sound science.


Definition of infotainment: reference PBS.


----------



## jobo (Dec 16, 2019)

Martial D said:


> In a nutshell, the preponderance of the current evidence seems to indicate life should be everywhere.
> 
> Also, never trust infotainment for sound science.


well that statement does not at all contradict any of my statement above. and it clearly cant be EVERYWHERE, you've not got that from a scientific journal, that's just made up by you

as you've taken the time to tell me im wrong, it would be nice for you to actual specify which of my statements are incorrect and hopeful point out which bit of which article actually contradicts me


----------



## Martial D (Dec 16, 2019)

jobo said:


> well that statement does not at all contradict any of my statement above. and it clearly cant be EVERYWHERE, you've not got that from a scientific journal, that's just made up by you
> 
> as you've taken the time to tell me im wrong, it would be nice for you to actual specify which of my statements are incorrect and hopeful point out which bit of which article actually contradicts me


I posted the studies/articles. You said you can't be added to read them. I gave a nutshell summary when asked. I have 0 inclination to pick out the bits you might like to save you some effort lol.


----------



## jobo (Dec 16, 2019)

Martial D said:


> I posted the studies/articles. You said you can't be added to read them. I gave a nutshell summary when asked. I have 0 inclination to pick out the bits you might like to save you some effort lol.


i ive read them and they don't contradict anything i said, as you insist they do, its safe to assume that you haven't read them at all. , just googled and copied links,assuming they do

it seems to be you who is lacking effort

lets take your other claim, that there is a preponderance of EVIDENCE that life is abundant, that just untrue, there is no evidence that life besides are own exists at all.

unless i've missed an important news broadcast whilst replying to you


----------



## pdg (Dec 16, 2019)

jobo said:


> its a little more than just a numbers game



Not really.

Every point you raised is subject to a calculable likelihood index. They may or may not compound each other, but the fact it happened once is conclusive evidence that it's theoretically probable that it's happened elsewhere.

EVERYTHING is a numbers game.


----------



## jobo (Dec 16, 2019)

pdg said:


> Not really.
> 
> Every point you raised is subject to a calculable likelihood index. They may or may not compound each other, but the fact it happened once is conclusive evidence that it's theoretically probable that it's happened elsewhere.
> 
> EVERYTHING is a numbers game.


well no its not, there is no evidence that its theoretical possible, theories never have sufficient evidence, that's why they are theories

that would require us to understand biogenis, and as we dont we have conjecture, hypothesis and well nothing else at all

theres only two ways to evidence thats its THEORETICALLY possible, one is to find it and the other is to make it in a test tube

my point was that its not just a point of saying theres upwards of a trillion planets in the galaxy, it MUST have happen elsewhere.

thats not how probabilities work, any thing no matter how vanishingly unlikely it may be can happen once in an infinite universe, that's no indication that it will ever happen again before the heat death of the universe


----------



## Martial D (Dec 16, 2019)

jobo said:


> i ive read them and they don't contradict anything i said, as you insist they do, its safe to assume that you haven't read them at all. , just googled and copied links,assuming they do
> 
> it seems to be you who is lacking effort
> 
> ...


I also have no inclination to have 'the jobo experience' today. Believe as you will old chap.


----------



## pdg (Dec 16, 2019)

jobo said:


> theres only two ways to evidence thats its THEORETICALLY possible, one is to find it and the other is to make it in a test tube



Erm, we've found life in the universe already...

Look, there's some here:




 

To me, that's pretty conclusive evidence that life is possible on some random planet spinning it's way through space on the edge of a bewilderingly large galaxy (a galaxy that's not even all that big in the scheme of things).


So, unless you're claiming that this planet was chosen to be unique and constructed by some form of intelligent designer then really it's the chances that it hasn't happened elsewhere that are ridiculously small.


And even if that is the case, then an intelligent designer itself is another form of life existing in the universe...


----------



## jobo (Dec 16, 2019)

pdg said:


> Erm, we've found life in the universe already...
> 
> Look, there's some here:
> 
> ...


 the only thing im claiming is you have a complete absence of evidence for any thing your saying, other than the dog obviously that possibly true, though in still life it could be stuffed


----------



## pdg (Dec 16, 2019)

jobo said:


> the only thing im claiming is you have a complete absence of evidence for any thing your saying



Is that because there aren't aliens on YouTube?


----------



## jobo (Dec 16, 2019)

pdg said:


> Is that because there aren't aliens on YouTube?


there's lots of aliens on you tube, looney after loony posts up pictures, they seem to be running with the same evidentiary standard as you, ie non

mostly im saying you have absolutely no evidence for anything your saying because you have absolutely no evidence


----------



## pdg (Dec 16, 2019)

jobo said:


> there's lots of aliens on you tube, looney after loony posts up pictures, they seem to be running with the same evidentiary standard as you, ie non
> 
> mostly im saying you have absolutely no evidence for anything your saying because you have absolutely no evidence



So I await your evidence to support your counter claim, because as yet none has been forthcoming.


----------



## jobo (Dec 16, 2019)

pdg said:


> So I await your evidence to support your counter claim, because as yet none has been forthcoming.


ive not made a claim, not in my conversation with you, other than you have no evidence which i know because no evidence exist or there would have been a nobel prize awarded, if you do indeed have such get on the phone to them, i think its worth a million, that might be krona ? but still worth the phone call


----------



## JowGaWolf (Dec 16, 2019)

dvcochran said:


> Definition of infotainment: reference PBS.


Hey.. don't pick on PBS (Public Broadcasting Service).  I grew up with that and I still watch shows from it from time to time.


----------



## dvcochran (Dec 16, 2019)

jobo said:


> well no its not, there is no evidence that its theoretical possible, theories never have sufficient evidence, that's why they are theories
> 
> that would require us to understand biogenis, and as we dont we have conjecture, hypothesis and well nothing else at all
> 
> ...


Let me ask you Jobo, do you use electricity? There is no actual proof of it's existence. However the evidence of it's effects, based on theoretical data proves it does in fact exist. We can only 'see' the individual components of electricity. 
Your argument makes zero sense.


----------



## jobo (Dec 16, 2019)

dvcochran said:


> Let me ask you Jobo, do you use electricity? There is no actual proof of it's existence. However the evidence of it's effects, based on theoretical data proves it does in fact exist. We can only 'see' the individual components of electricity.
> Your argument makes zero sense.


you cant see any of the component of electricity, well not with the naked eye that and there is ONLY one component, you didn't study electrical engineering did you ? just a guess

stick to cow metaphors , your probably not out of your depth with that


----------



## dvcochran (Dec 17, 2019)

jobo said:


> you cant see any of the component of electricity, well not with the naked eye that and there is ONLY one component, you didn't study electrical engineering did you ? just a guess
> 
> stick to cow metaphors , your probably not out of your depth with that


Thank you, livestock is one of my most endeared passions. Coming from you it doesn't count for much but I will take it.
 I was hoping you would walk into this one. I have two Graduate degrees, one in Electrical Engineering, I am an article contributor to the Journal, IEEE, and ASME,  something easily to find had you taken the time to check my profile. Failure one for you. There are 3 fundamental elements necessary to create electricity as we know it. Failure two for you. You do get one passing grade for again showing how big a douche you insist on being. Most all your remarks are very unbecoming and show a drastic lack of maturity. 
As far as cattle are concerned, most cattle operations in the US are not mom and pop out tending a heard in their past time like it is over there. Ours are efficient, for profit businesses ran with that mindset. You(r) country has gotten so accustomed to loosing you have an extreme case of Patty Hearst Syndrome. It has been going on so long, you are like the ball in a pinball machine, you never who, what, where, when, how, why you will be next. 

My apologies to others from across the pond. Nothing directed at you.


----------



## pdg (Dec 17, 2019)

dvcochran said:


> As far as cattle are concerned, most cattle operations in the US are not mom and pop out tending a heard in their past time like it is over there.



I think the cattle farmers I know would heartily disagree with that statement.

As to certain components of the cattle business model in the US and some other countries ("preventative" overuse of antibiotics in feed contributing to the prevalence of resistant infections along with growth hormone administration), I sincerely hope we continue to restrict the use and importation of those.

If unrestricted imports start and regulations are relaxed, I'm going vegetarian.


----------



## JR 137 (Dec 17, 2019)

jobo said:


> you cant see any of the component of electricity, well not with the naked eye that and there is ONLY one component, you didn't study electrical engineering did you ? just a guess
> 
> stick to cow metaphors , your probably not out of your depth with that


You can easily see electricity. Look out the window during a thunder storm. You’ll probably see it at some point. Being a construction guy, I’m assuming you’ve at least seen someone use an arc welder; you’ve likely used one yourself.

And for the record, the most powerful microscopes in the world still aren’t good enough to show individual atoms nor any sub atomic particles. What they actually look like is theoretical. Based on very sound scientific principles, but theoretical nonetheless.


----------



## pdg (Dec 17, 2019)

JR 137 said:


> You can easily see electricity. Look out the window during a thunder storm. You’ll probably see it at some point. Being a construction guy, I’m assuming you’ve at least seen someone use an arc welder; you’ve likely used one yourself.



In neither case is that actually seeing electricity though, it's the effects of the ionisation of the surrounding molecules and the subsequent plasma production that is visible.

Much like gravity, electricity itself cannot be made visible - only the effect it has other things.


----------



## jobo (Dec 17, 2019)

JR 137 said:


> You can easily see electricity. Look out the window during a thunder storm. You’ll probably see it at some point. Being a construction guy, I’m assuming you’ve at least seen someone use an arc welder; you’ve likely used one yourself.
> 
> And for the record, the most powerful microscopes in the world still aren’t good enough to show individual atoms nor any sub atomic particles. What they actually look like is theoretical. Based on very sound scientific principles, but theoretical nonetheless.


 your not seeing electricity when you see lighting, electricity is charged electrons, what your seeing is ionised air, thats being ionised by the electrons, which then turns into plasma.

that's like claiming you can see wind if your garden gate is banging about, you can see its effect, but you cant see IT


----------



## jobo (Dec 17, 2019)

JR 137 said:


> You can easily see electricity. Look out the window during a thunder storm. You’ll probably see it at some point. Being a construction guy, I’m assuming you’ve at least seen someone use an arc welder; you’ve likely used one yourself.
> 
> And for the record, the most powerful microscopes in the world still aren’t good enough to show individual atoms nor any sub atomic particles. What they actually look like is theoretical. Based on very sound scientific principles, but theoretical nonetheless.


and for the record here are some pictures of atoms
This Microscope Can See Down to Individual Atoms

not amazing resolution il grant you, but you are most certainly seeing atoms


----------



## jobo (Dec 17, 2019)

dvcochran said:


> Thank you, livestock is one of my most endeared passions. Coming from you it doesn't count for much but I will take it.
> I was hoping you would walk into this one. I have two Graduate degrees, one in Electrical Engineering, I am an article contributor to the Journal, IEEE, and ASME,  something easily to find had you taken the time to check my profile. Failure one for you. There are 3 fundamental elements necessary to create electricity as we know it. Failure two for you. You do get one passing grade for again showing how big a douche you insist on being. Most all your remarks are very unbecoming and show a drastic lack of maturity.
> As far as cattle are concerned, most cattle operations in the US are not mom and pop out tending a heard in their past time like it is over there. Ours are efficient, for profit businesses ran with that mindset. You(r) country has gotten so accustomed to loosing you have an extreme case of Patty Hearst Syndrome. It has been going on so long, you are like the ball in a pinball machine, you never who, what, where, when, how, why you will be next.
> 
> My apologies to others from across the pond. Nothing directed at you.


 well in that case you should be ashamed of yourself, i just thought you were misinformed, now it turns out you've been expensively educated and are just wrong

you said you can see the COMPONENTS of electricity, there is only one component part of electricity and that electrons, which you cant see.

you've since changed that statement to be about the ELEMENTS required for generation, which is not at all what your original statement said.
but your still wrong you cant see those either, at least not the ones im thinking of

so just to be clear, what components of electricity are you claiming can be seen ?


----------



## dvcochran (Dec 17, 2019)

jobo said:


> well in that case you should be ashamed of yourself, i just thought you were misinformed, now it turns out you've been expensively educated and are just wrong
> 
> you said you can see the COMPONENTS of electricity, there is only one component part of electricity and that electrons, which you cant see.
> 
> ...


Jobo, that is so far from making sense on any level I am at a loss for how to even begin to answer. Hopefully you understand your gibberish.
If you need to pat yourself on the back and feel like you won, go ahead.


----------



## jobo (Dec 17, 2019)

dvcochran said:


> Jobo, that is so far from making sense on any level I am at a loss for how to even begin to answer. Hopefully you understand your gibberish.
> If you need to pat yourself on the back and feel like you won, go ahead.


i already have, about 4 hours ago


----------



## JR 137 (Dec 17, 2019)

jobo said:


> and for the record here are some pictures of atoms
> This Microscope Can See Down to Individual Atoms
> 
> not amazing resolution il grant you, but you are most certainly seeing atoms


I hadn’t heard of that before. Very cool. Thanks!


----------



## jobo (Dec 22, 2019)

just been reading an article on the latest generation of space '' telescopes'' the first of which has launched this week

there 4500 systems that they know of with big planets, that may or may not have small rocky worlds. these will allow them to find them, if they are there and also, most importantly analyse the atmosphere of all the planets contained and therefore hopefully pick up the signs of life

so we may be very close to finding life if it is indeed abundant , though we seem no closer to being able to shake hands with it, if its somewhat rarer wi still have another trillion or so star systems to look at so it may take a little time, possible a good bit longer than the time the earth has left before its swallowed by the sun


----------



## Chrisinmd (Jan 8, 2020)

New Discovery on this subject.  First potentially habitable Earth-size planet discovered by TESS mission, and it's nearby
First potentially habitable Earth-size planet discovered by TESS mission, and it's nearby


----------



## Parzival (Feb 19, 2020)

I mean water has been found on mars and where there's water there's life


----------



## Flying Crane (Feb 20, 2020)

Chrisinmd said:


> New Discovery on this subject.  First potentially habitable Earth-size planet discovered by TESS mission, and it's nearby
> First potentially habitable Earth-size planet discovered by TESS mission, and it's nearby


Astronomically speaking, 100 light years is pretty close.   It in realistic terms for us humans, it is completely out of reach for us.  That is a long ways away.


----------



## Flying Crane (Feb 20, 2020)

Parzival said:


> I mean water has been found on mars and where there's water there's life


water is common in the universe.  So far the only life we have discovered is on Earth.


----------



## Chrisinmd (Feb 21, 2020)

Flying Crane said:


> water is common in the universe.  So far the only life we have discovered is on Earth.



Because we have not been able to test the water on other planets for life as of yet with our current technology.  There could be dolphins swimming in the oceans on Jupiters moon Europa for all we know.  Or there may be life at a bacterial level.  Or nothing at all.  Hope I live long enough to get the answer


----------



## Flying Crane (Feb 21, 2020)

Chrisinmd said:


> Because we have not been able to test the water on other planets for life as of yet with our current technology.  There could be dolphins swimming in the oceans on Jupiters moon Europa for all we know.  Or there may be life at a bacterial level.  Or nothing at all.  Hope I live long enough to get the answer


Huge doubts for the dolphins on Europa.  But the bacteria, yeah, I hope I live to see those answers.


----------



## dvcochran (Feb 21, 2020)

Chrisinmd said:


> Because we have not been able to test the water on other planets for life as of yet with our current technology.  There could be dolphins swimming in the oceans on Jupiters moon Europa for all we know.  Or there may be life at a bacterial level.  Or nothing at all.  Hope I live long enough to get the answer


I forget which element it is but the 'water' we once thought is on Titan (a Saturn moon) is actually an elemental liquid. It is cold enough there to be in a fluid state. Not everything that looks like gold is.


----------



## Buka (Feb 23, 2020)

If we don't wipe ourselves out first, I think we'll eventually discover some forms of life on other planets.

But according to people I know in the Military, life from other places has already been _here_.


----------



## Flying Crane (Feb 23, 2020)

dvcochran said:


> I forget which element it is but the 'water' we once thought is on Titan (a Saturn moon) is actually an elemental liquid. It is cold enough there to be in a fluid state. Not everything that looks like gold is.


Likely to be liquid ethane or methane.  There is some thought that a life form could evolve to survive in that environment.  If so, we might be unable to recognize it as a life form, it would be so different from us.


----------



## dvcochran (Feb 23, 2020)

Buka said:


> If we don't wipe ourselves out first, I think we'll eventually discover some forms of life on other planets.
> 
> But according to people I know in the Military, life from other places has already been _here_.



Unless the military is doing an excellent job of keeping secrets and we are much farther along in the space travel department, I feel 'they' will visit us first on a scale that everyone will be aware.
I hope it will not be some kind of Independence Day (the movie) extinction event. It is anybody's guess.


----------



## jobo (Feb 23, 2020)

dvcochran said:


> Unless the military is doing an excellent job of keeping secrets and we are much farther along in the space travel department, I feel 'they' will visit us first on a scale that everyone will be aware.
> I hope it will not be some kind of Independence Day (the movie) extinction event. It is anybody's guess.


you can put a little bit of science into your guess, if they are out there they almost certainly dont know we are here, our communication bubble is about a 100 light years away by now, if they arnt really really close by galactic distance scales, we are invisable to them. lets say say they discover us tommorow and that they have technogigt to travel at .5 C it will take them 200 years to get here if they leave straight away`, seems like a lot of time and trouble to drop in for a cup of tea, particularly as all they know about us is watching laurel and hardy of course if they have seen '' i love lucy'' they will be sending a battlefleet


----------



## Chrisinmd (Feb 29, 2020)

17 New Planets Including Habitable Earth-Sized World Discovered 

Officially named KIC-7340288 b, the planet discovered by Michelle Kunimoto is just one and a half times the size of Earth and in the habitable zone of its star. 

https://www.ndtv.com/science/17-new-...bia-ub-2187518


----------



## dvcochran (Feb 29, 2020)

Chrisinmd said:


> 17 New Planets Including Habitable Earth-Sized World Discovered
> 
> Officially named KIC-7340288 b, the planet discovered by Michelle Kunimoto is just one and a half times the size of Earth and in the habitable zone of its star.
> 
> https://www.ndtv.com/science/17-new-...bia-ub-2187518


The article clearly says "*potentially habitable*" and that it is in the *habitable zone* which just means it is in the correct relationship from it's sun to have water IF any exist.

You post is misleading. What is the point?


----------



## Chrisinmd (Feb 29, 2020)

dvcochran said:


> The article clearly says "*potentially habitable*" and that it is in the *habitable zone* which just means it is in the correct relationship from it's sun to have water IF any exist.
> 
> You post is misleading. What is the point?



Im not saying that life exists or trying to prove that it does.  Just seen the article this morning.  Its a potential planet where life could exist and conditions may be favorable for it to exist


----------

