Page 51 of 84 FirstFirst ... 41495051525361 ... LastLast
Results 1,501 to 1,530 of 2510

Thread: Why still there is no Alien contact ?

  1. #1501
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    14,412
    Quote Originally Posted by R.A.F. View Post
    That opinion is so "divorced" from reality, I'm completely speechless...
    What he means is that we can synthesize it artificially. But I wonder, how much energy would it require to manufacture it compared to the energy you would get out of it?
    As above, so below

  2. #1502
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    101
    Quote Originally Posted by mikeEZfoSheezy View Post
    Because they are very very very far away it would take them millions of years to get to us
    That is exactly my point! It would have taken them less than a thousand of the age of the Milky Way to get to us. A million is 1/1000 of a billion.
    If humanity has existed for 200 000 years, did we do anywhere special during 1/1000 of that time? Like creating industry or so...
    Last edited by Local Fluff; 2014-Jan-29 at 01:18 AM.

  3. #1503
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    101
    Quote Originally Posted by Van Rijn View Post
    At the very most, the accessible universe is that which can be reached by travelling at near the speed of light.
    No, why would it?
    The Sun is already traveling around the entire galaxy and has done about 15-20 full tours already. And this young star is only about 1/3 the age of the Milky Way. The Sun does it without traveling at near light speed.

    Consider the relationshipo of these two numbers:
    - Size of galaxy 100 000 light years.
    - Age of galaxy 10 000 000 000 years.
    How close to the speed of light does that calculation give you?

    The stars are all mixing and mingling with each other.
    Last edited by Local Fluff; 2014-Jan-29 at 01:29 AM.

  4. 2014-Jan-29, 01:27 AM

  5. #1504
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    19,215
    Quote Originally Posted by Local Fluff View Post
    No, why would it?
    You made a claim that the universe is infinite. The accessible universe is finite due to the finite speed of light and cosmological expansion. It is unknown if the entirety of the universe is infinite, but for this it is irrelevant. And as for the rest of your post, I don't see the relevance either. Big numbers don't make the accessible universe infinite, nor do they make available resources infinite.

    "The problem with quotes on the Internet is that it is hard to verify their authenticity." Abraham Lincoln

    I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

    The Leif Ericson Cruiser

  6. #1505
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    19,215
    Quote Originally Posted by Jens View Post
    What he means is that we can synthesize it artificially. But I wonder, how much energy would it require to manufacture it compared to the energy you would get out of it?
    It's going to take more energy than you'll get out of it, so it is no longer an energy source, but an energy transfer medium. You can also get it elsewhere - Titan for example - but it would be more energy expensive than making it on Earth.

    "The problem with quotes on the Internet is that it is hard to verify their authenticity." Abraham Lincoln

    I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

    The Leif Ericson Cruiser

  7. #1506
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    478

  8. #1507
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    3,577
    Quote Originally Posted by litespeed View Post
    I was waiting for that article/report to show up ... unfortunately, its all more about Earth-life.

    Why would we expect Earth-like intelligence to turn up elsewhere in the universe? Are we to assume it would then be so that this model can then be said to be applicable for classifying imagined-to-exist ETIs? (Thereby becoming useful for that particular purpose?)

    One thing's for certain .. it certainly can't be said to be applicable anywhere other than for Earth related life, all of which is commonly related and evolved.

  9. #1508
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Nowhere (middle)
    Posts
    37,984
    Quote Originally Posted by Local Fluff View Post
    With any range to an hypothesis, such as that 1 in 100 billion to 1 in 10 billion stars have developed space faring civilization within the last 10% of the age of the Milky Way, gives a probability distribution which shows that they are not far away, but that they must be everywhere.
    You assume there is life similar enough to us to have developed space travel; OK, let's assume for the sake of this argument that someone else in the universe fits that criteria (although it's hardly guaranteed that this is the case). Let's further assume they have developed a biological immortality or become post-biological.

    The numbers you attach to them are still arbitrarily chosen; there might be far less that 1 in 10 billion stars. There may be only a handful of cases of interstellar colonizers in the universe. One to a galaxy, or one every 10,000 galaxies. What would drive an immortal species to spread all over? Once they reach the point where no one disaster can wipe them out, there goes that motivation for travel. If, as you say, the Universe is infinite, then there's no way to fill it up, there will always be empty places or unfilled gaps between civilizations; we might be in one of them.
    "I'm planning to live forever. So far, that's working perfectly." Steven Wright

  10. #1509
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    101
    Quote Originally Posted by Van Rijn View Post
    You made a claim that the universe is infinite. The accessible universe is finite due to the finite speed of light and cosmological expansion. It is unknown if the entirety of the universe is infinite, but for this it is irrelevant. And as for the rest of your post, I don't see the relevance either. Big numbers don't make the accessible universe infinite, nor do they make available resources infinite.
    I have only refered to the Milky Way, which is a relevant area because our Sun has made about 18 full orbits around it, mingling with countless other stars. A large number (a hundred thousand?) different stars have been nearer than 10 light years of the Sun since it was formed. We will likely be able to send probes to such stars and reach them within 10 000 years (some of the envisioned propoulsion, communication and radiation protection technologies will make a break through in the early part of that time frame).

    The point with the numbers:
    GALACTIC AGE = 10^10 years,
    GALACTIC SIZE = 10^5 light years
    GALACTIC ORBITAL SPEED OF THE SUN = 10^-3 light years/year
    is to show that the rotating disc of the Milky Way is not large in relation to its age and the natural speed of the stars orbiting its center.


    The infinite universe is a kind of multiverse where all possible kinds of Hubble bubbles exist independent of each other, that's another topic.

    Quote Originally Posted by Noclevername View Post
    You assume there is life similar enough to us to have developed space travel;
    No. I conclude that IF one assumes that we are not alone, then they must be everywhere. They cannot be far away because they would've spread. If we find that noone is nearby, then we can conclude that we are alone in the entire galaxy. We don't need to search much of it to make sure of that. The orbit of the Sun makes our patch representative for the entire galaxy (except maybe for its center and its halo). It would be too much of a coincidence that another space faring civilization in the star field has emerged more recently than we have and therefor still is not pan-galactic as we will be within 0.25 billion years when the Sun has completed another orbit.

    My personal guess is that we are not alone, that we just haven't looked close enough to find them.

    The numbers you attach to them are still arbitrarily chosen; there might be far less that 1 in 10 billion stars. There may be only a handful of cases of interstellar colonizers in the universe. One to a galaxy, or one every 10,000 galaxies.
    But to conclude that there are a few (like a number between 2 and 100 000 000) colonized star systems would need an extremely narrow range of assumptions. That's why it is highly unlikely to be the case. You'd have to make the following assumptions:
    - The rate by which space faring civlizations form is no more than 1/100 billion per 10 billion years. If like us they will spread and become pan-galactic, they just haven't reached us yet.
    OR:
    - They are more plentiful, but they all culturally similar in their conclusion that they should never visit their nearest stars. And none of them changed in that regard during their entire billion year of existance,

    All other ranges of assumptions conclude that we are either alone, or they are everywhere.

    What would drive an immortal species to spread all over?
    What would drive EVERYONE to NEVER to it?

    If, as you say, the Universe is infinite, then there's no way to fill it up, there will always be empty places or unfilled gaps between civilizations; we might be in one of them.
    The Milky Way is a dance floor. All stars have been all around and near each other. Regardless whether the universe is infinite or not.
    Last edited by Local Fluff; 2014-Jan-29 at 12:14 PM.

  11. #1510
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Nowhere (middle)
    Posts
    37,984
    Quote Originally Posted by Local Fluff View Post
    I have only refered to the Milky Way,
    "Everywhere" has the connotation of "the entire universe", not only the Milky Way.

    The rate by which space faring civlizations form is no more than 1/100 billion per 10 billion years.
    And what is so outrageous about that particular set of numbers? The Earth got along just fine with zero spacefaring societies for most of its existence. Genetic analysis of humans show several population bottlenecks in our past which indicate that Homo Sapiens was on the verge of extinction, so it might very well have gone on with zero spacefaring societies for billions more years had we zigged instead of zagged.
    "I'm planning to live forever. So far, that's working perfectly." Steven Wright

  12. #1511
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    101
    Quote Originally Posted by Noclevername View Post
    "Everywhere" has the connotation of "the entire universe", not only the Milky Way.
    Well, why would it be different in other galaxies? The distance to Andromeda is about 1 million times larger than the average distance between stars in the Milky Way. But the main reason do disbelieve inter-galactic travel is that the Sun does not naturally travel between galaxies as it travels inter-stellar around in the Milky Way.

    And what is so outrageous about that particular set of numbers? The Earth got along just fine with zero spacefaring societies for most of its existence.
    We've had powered flight for about 100 years (and sent the first probes on interstellar trajectories about 40 years ago). That's 1/45 000 000 of the existence of Earth. A number much larger than 1/10 billion years age of the Milky Way, and also relative to its 100 billion stars. An assumption which requires such a very narrow time interval, much shorter than the one we ourselves experienced, is less likely than an assumption which works in much wider time intervals.

    Intelligence is seen not only in monkeys closely related to us. Even dolphins and octopussies, which are otherwise very different from us, are pretty intelligent. Intelligence is not a random chance, it has evolutionary benefits and is favourably selected once it occurs. Intelligence should be compared with the occurance of for example eyes or legs/fins/wings.

    Genetic analysis of humans show several population bottlenecks in our past which indicate that Homo Sapiens was on the verge of extinction, so it might very well have gone on with zero spacefaring societies for billions more years had we zigged instead of zagged.
    Once you get interstellar, that risk is quickly diversified to zero. If one did it one time, they are everywhere and will stay there forever.

    They cannot be "few and far between". Unless you make the unlikely assumption that they emerge within a very narrow range of frequency: not never and not more often than a single digit number of times in the 100 billion stars of the Milky Way, and also not less recently than within the last 1% of the age of the Milky Way. Or the equally unlikely assumption that they are all so similar in culture across space and time that all of them have always decided to never go interstellar.
    Everywhere or nowhere are the two only logical options.
    Last edited by Local Fluff; 2014-Jan-29 at 04:04 PM.

  13. #1512
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Nowhere (middle)
    Posts
    37,984
    Quote Originally Posted by Local Fluff View Post
    If one did it one time, they are everywhere and will stay there forever. They cannot be "few and far between". Everywhere or nowhere are the only logical options.
    Distances take time to travel. Why, according to your logic, is "still getting there" not an option?
    "I'm planning to live forever. So far, that's working perfectly." Steven Wright

  14. #1513
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    101
    Quote Originally Posted by Noclevername View Post
    Distances take time to travel. Why, according to your logic, is "still getting there" not an option?
    It does not take a long time relative to the age of the galaxy. The Sun has made about 18 full orbits around the galaxy since it was formed. Quite naturally at a speed of less than 0.001c (or about 5 times the orbital speed of Mercury around the Sun).
    Last edited by Local Fluff; 2014-Jan-29 at 04:19 PM.

  15. #1514
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Nowhere (middle)
    Posts
    37,984
    Quote Originally Posted by Local Fluff View Post
    It does not take a long time relative to the age of the galaxy. The Sun has made about 18 full orbits around the galaxy since it was formed. Quite naturally at a speed of less than 0.001c.
    The age of the Galaxy is only relevant as a maximum possible time limit for forming intelligent life. Humans are the minimum. That gives a whole lot of "wiggle room". They could be young enough to still be spreading out while still being much older than we are. They could be only interested in star systems that are different from ours. There are many possibilities.
    "I'm planning to live forever. So far, that's working perfectly." Steven Wright

  16. #1515
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    101
    Quote Originally Posted by Noclevername View Post
    The age of the Galaxy is only relevant as a maximum possible time limit for forming intelligent life. Humans are the minimum. That gives a whole lot of "wiggle room". They could be young enough to still be spreading out while still being much older than we are.
    Now I want you to somehow confirm that you understand the numbers involved here!

    A typical star like the Sun orbits the entire galaxy within 1/50th of the current age of the galaxy.

    Why do you claim that it is LESS likely that a civilization emerged during the earlier 49/50th of that time, than during the last 1/50th of that time?

    And even if one of them emerged during the very last 1/50th of the time, they could cross the entire Milky Way from edge to edge if they traveled at a speed of 100 000 ly diameter divided by their 1/50th age of 250 000 000 years, i.e. at a speed of 1/25 000 of the speed of light. That's 1/4 of the orbital speed of Mercury around the Sun, a very natural and common speed of objects in the galaxy.

    You must assume that space faring civilizations emerged ONLY during the extremely narrow range of the last 1/1000 of the age of the galaxy up until today. Or else none of them would be "on the way", they would already have reached everywhere. It is more likely to assume that none of them ever happened, or that they are everywhere. Do you understand that? Could you please confirm that we have a dialogue here?

  17. #1516
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Nowhere (middle)
    Posts
    37,984
    Quote Originally Posted by Local Fluff View Post
    Why do you claim that it is LESS likely that a civilization emerged during the earlier 49/50th of that time, than during the last 1/50th of that time?
    I made no claim. I said IT IS POSSIBLE for a species to fall between the extreme ranges you touted as the "only logical" choices.

    [/QUOTE]You must assume[/QUOTE]
    Or, assume different numbers. Or differing rates of travel. Or differing rates of colonization. Or maybe their population growth is not the maximum theoretically possible. Or maybe colonizing every inch of available space is a young species game and they just grew out of it.

    that space faring civilizations emerged ONLY during the extremely narrow range of the last 1/1000 of the age of the galaxy up until today. Or else none of them would be "on the way", they would already have reached everywhere. It is more likely to assume that none of them ever happened, or that they are everywhere. Do you understand that? Could you please confirm that we have a dialogue here?
    I understand it fine, it's just that I disagree with it.

    Apparently, if you continue to insist that only the two extremes are possible, then I guess we are not having a dialogue. Farewell, then.
    "I'm planning to live forever. So far, that's working perfectly." Steven Wright

  18. #1517
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    101
    We have 0.1% probability that they are few and far between, if your chain of unlikely assumptions, which leads to all of them always being on the way but never getting there, would be correct.

    And a 99.9% probability that they are either everywhere or nowhere.

    This derived from pure simple raw data about the size and age of the galaxy and the speed of natural objects inside of it. You have not challenged these facts with any kind of argument. You just repeat your irrational wishful conclusion that they be few and far between.

  19. #1518
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    11,057
    Well put, Noclevername.

    Local Fluff, you might try considering the possibility that your arguments are not as knock-down as you thought, especially when several posters point out your misuse of words (such as "resource") or the unsupported assumptions that form the basis of your assertions. Oh, and maybe read other people's posts a bit more carefully.

  20. #1519
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    101
    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Beardsley View Post
    Local Fluff, you might try considering the possibility that your arguments are not as knock-down as you thought, especially when several posters point out your misuse of words (such as "resource") or the unsupported assumptions that form the basis of your assertions.
    I don't understand why the moderator lets you keep going off topic with your misunderstanding of the concept of "production". But you are free to list all the "resources" which have ended because of production. I'm awaiting it with great curiosity! Just list them all, let yourself go. Maybe you could start with the elements of the periodic system, for sure a few dozen of them have peaked by now?
    Last edited by Local Fluff; 2014-Jan-29 at 05:13 PM.

  21. #1520
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Posts
    11,057
    Quote Originally Posted by Local Fluff View Post
    I don't understand why the moderator lets you keep going off topic with your misunderstanding of the concept of "production". But you are free to list all the "resources" which have ended because of production. I'm awaiting it with great curiosity! Just list them all, let yourself go. Maybe you could start with the elements of the periodic system, for sure a few dozen of them have peaked by now?
    Okay, so you are not going to consider the possibility. As Noclevername put it, I guess we are not having a dialogue. Farewell, then.

  22. #1521
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    101
    Quote Originally Posted by Paul Beardsley View Post
    Okay, so you are not going to consider the possibility. As Noclevername put it, I guess we are not having a dialogue. Farewell, then.
    I did consider the possibility and explained many times lengthy why it must ber every unliekly.
    But please do FARE WELL! (But I have reasons to believe that you won't...)

    And HELLO to those who care to discuss the topic here!
    Why no contact yet?
    Are they everywhere, nowhere, or here and there?
    Last edited by Local Fluff; 2014-Jan-29 at 06:07 PM.

  23. #1522
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Posts
    3,577
    Quote Originally Posted by Local Fluff View Post
    I did consider the possibility and explained many times lengthy why it must ber every unliekly.
    But please do FARE WELL! (But I have reasons to believe that you won't...)

    And HELLO to those who care to discuss the topic here!
    Why no contact yet?
    Are they everywhere, nowhere, or here and there?
    It would seem you might be more concerned with being right about your version of an imagined reality, than considering others' version of their imagined realities(?)

    Why not stick with the only known fact of: "Not known"?

  24. #1523
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    R.I. USA
    Posts
    10,014
    Well said, Selfism . We have no data . Only entertaining speculation based on fantasy .

  25. #1524
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    101
    Quote Originally Posted by Selfsim View Post
    It would seem you might be more concerned with being right about your version of an imagined reality, than considering others' version of their imagined realities(?)

    Why not stick with the only known fact of: "Not known"?
    We do know how large and old the Milky Way is and how stars move through it. Hence we can draw the conclusion that space faring civilizations cannot be few and far between. Either we are alone or they are everywhere. We have no data about which option is true, but we do know that those are the only possibilities.

  26. #1525
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    Okotoks, Canada
    Posts
    30
    Quote Originally Posted by Local Fluff View Post
    We do know how large and old the Milky Way is and how stars move through it. Hence we can draw the conclusion that space faring civilizations cannot be few and far between. Either we are alone or they are everywhere. We have no data about which option is true, but we do know that those are the only possibilities.
    That's a pretty stark choice Local Fluff, and those are most certainly not the only options. However, in reading back through the tread I see that a number of other options have been suggested to you, so I guess it is useless to try to point out to you that other options exist. I can't help but wonder though, why you seem so adverse to discussing the possibility of other options. Good luck!

  27. #1526
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    101
    Supernovas are less common than stars and nebulas, because the supernova is a brief stage in the history of a star. Brief is also the stage in the history of a space traveling civilization between living on one planet and having spread throughout the entire galaxy. This is evident from the age and size and natural movements of the galaxy. I don't understand how this could be controversial. And I think that the assumption that no space traveling civilization, if they exist, ever would choose to colonize the galaxy, is a very unlikely assumption. Less likely than the assumption that civilizations are different and change over time.

  28. #1527
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Perthshire, UK
    Posts
    223
    Quote Originally Posted by Local Fluff View Post
    We do know how large and old the Milky Way is and how stars move through it. Hence we can draw the conclusion that space faring civilizations cannot be few and far between. Either we are alone or they are everywhere. We have no data about which option is true, but we do know that those are the only possibilities.
    Sorry, but we don't know that those are the only two possibilities, and I can't see anything in this thread that supports that assertion.

    We have one data point, life on earth, on which to base speculations about the development of life elsewhere. And even making an optimistic, or hopeful, guess that advanced, space-faring, intelligent life exists, we're still left trying to estimate the likelihood that it evolved millions of years before we did, or that the huge difficulties of interstellar travel can be solved in such a way that "rapid" (moving to a new star every few thousand years) is practical.

    Perhaps there are other species out there, and perhaps they are slowly moving out to colonise the galaxy, but it could be a very long, slow process, and they just haven't reached this neck of the woods yet...
    Days spent at sea are not deducted from one's alloted span...
    (Phoenician proverb)

  29. #1528
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    101
    It is more likely that they developed within one billion years than within one million years.
    Right or wrong?

    And why would they move much slower than the stars move? What could explain that???
    Last edited by Local Fluff; 2014-Jan-30 at 01:32 PM.

  30. #1529
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Arlington Hts, Illinois
    Posts
    1,814
    Quote Originally Posted by Local Fluff View Post
    And why would they move much slower than the stars move? What could explain that???
    First, if you assume that they are similar to us in biological makeup, then there is a habitable zone for them to exist just as there is in our own solar system. If Earth is relocated closer to the Sun it would be too hot. Further out and it is too cool. In the galaxy any location closer to the galactic center makes us more susceptible to strong gamma ray bursts. Any distance further out makes us susceptible to locations with less hydrogen and fewer G stars, reducing the chances of life evolving. The best place would be places we don't pass at all, those who share our galactic orbit. Now one might think that a rocket speeding up past the solar galactic speed some distant place with intelligent life would get us there in some shorter time but the opposite is true. When a space shuttle tries to dock with the International Space Station, getting behind it and speeding up will take it on a tangent to the shared orbit, moving it out to a further orbit. What the space shuttle did while sharing the same orbit as the ISS was to brake the shuttle by reversing its engines, slowing it down and sending it into a lower orbit. Then the shuttle has to speed up with a precise speed to move tangent to that lower orbit in order for interception to take place. Try that on a galactic level and one has to travel into very dangerous areas to catch up, reducing the chances for survival.

    Now Kepler's Laws play a role to explain why intelligent life moves slower than us. An outer orbit has slower orbital velocity than we do and there isn't that many stars in outer orbits. We would have a very short window of time to notice their existence. With density of stars being less in the outer orbits along with our see-saw pattern that our Sun takes relative to some "perfect" orbit we would likely take several journeys around the galactic orbit without noticing one another. How many people can you recognize and communicate with in a rush hour in Chicago?

    Further, the role of Supernovae play into this plot. There is a good chance that the SN that created all our atoms in our bodies blew up some evolving civilization and that such an occurrence could be more likely since the location would be in our neighborhood.
    For a more advance species it would be likely that such a species would likely have a very long life span, say a few million years where the reproduction rate would be much less than here, spawning a culture that places much less significance on the reproductive act, making a one track mind being someone more likely interested in scientific development than we are. Would such a species really be interested in meeting us and why? Loneliness?

    Mostly, a lot of us get suspicious in astronomical circles due to Aristotle's impact upon human perceptions - "We are the center and purpose of the universe, it revolves around us and all civilizations out there must be paying attention to us -WE are the center of universal attention and this narcissism hangs around a lot of the hang ups we see every day - They are all taking about me at school." Nonsense. The CD that was sent out by NASA long ago has a higher chance of being used as a dental plate, with all the pits and lands matching a pet they have who needs it.

    "Moving slowly out to colonize the galaxy" can be taken several ways. The human brain needs in excess of a trillion neurons, all firing in a precise chronological order in order for one to scratch his or her head or even fidget in sleep. Social relations are a part of what many scientists call "emergent properties' that don't grow at the rate that science does. The number of civilizations that blew themselves up could be enormous. The number that fail to develop technology enough to escape the death throngs of the parent star is likely very high, even with advanced civilizations like the million year life spans

    The same would have to happen to catch something in our galactic orbit.
    Last edited by blueshift; 2014-Jan-31 at 03:18 PM.

  31. #1530
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    19,215
    Quote Originally Posted by Local Fluff View Post
    It is more likely that they developed within one billion years than within one million years.
    Right or wrong?

    And why would they move much slower than the stars move? What could explain that???
    There are a number of possibilities, and much of this has been discussed before in thread, so I'm not that interested in rehashing much of it, but here are some of the issues I see -

    We currently are in period of unprecedented technological growth with exponential material and population growth, but this cannot continue for long compared to the age of the galaxy.

    For Earth, growth will have to stabilize in around a century or so. With the solar system, optimistically, exponential growth could continue several more centuries, then it too must stabilize. Even if we colonize some nearby solar systems, they too would reach their limits quickly. Then all sorts of issues come up for a long term civilization, and we really don't know what that would be like. Recycling would have to be essentially perfect. Society would have to be content with their conditons, or would risk damage that could destroy it. A million years is a long time to avoid making the big mistakes.

    It would seem likely to me that if there are any long term civilizations, they must fundametally accept stability. Civilizations that remain restless are unlikely to survive long term. Restless civilizations may colonize several solar systems, yet still end in some thousands of years. Stable civilizations may have little interest in colonizing the galaxy.
    Last edited by Van Rijn; 2014-Jan-31 at 01:37 AM.

    "The problem with quotes on the Internet is that it is hard to verify their authenticity." Abraham Lincoln

    I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

    The Leif Ericson Cruiser

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 12
    Last Post: 2013-Oct-16, 09:12 PM
  2. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 2012-Jun-11, 10:08 PM
  3. Contact with Alien Civilizations
    By Fraser in forum Universe Today
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 2007-Jun-21, 11:21 AM
  4. Possible explanation for lack of alien contact
    By Saorsa in forum Against the Mainstream
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 2005-May-26, 03:54 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •