Slashdot Mirror
Are We Alone in the Universe?
cynic10508 writes "CNN is running a story about how ours might be a unique solar system. Of the 100+ systems currently known to contain planets, all contain seemingly only gas giants. However, this may be a case of current technology and techniques being unable to detect planets similar to Earth." There are also
BBC and Space.com stories.
Cheers,
Erick
http://www.busyweather.com/
we develop ways to detect extrasolar smaller planets systematically...
To inhabit those gas giants, of course. :)
Why is this even being posted here?
Its too early to say there are none or few rocky body systems out there. First off, we haven't even come close to surveying a representative portion of the sky, and second, we don't yet have good enough technology to detect small planets. If we were 500 light years away from our system, we probably wouldn't be able to detect earth.
Moo.
How frigging arrogant would we have to be to honestly believe that in the ENTIRE universe, we are COMPLETELY AND UTTERLY UNIQUE?
Come on, people... Seriously.
...Also, I didn't know Buggalo could fly.
Gas giants are no proof of intelligent life.
"... this may be a case of current technology and techniques being unable to detect planets similar to Earth ..." Yeah, exactly. If the only way you have to detect planets orbiting other stars is to look for the gravitational effects of large, massive planets orbiting close their stars, then is what you're going to find.
It occurs to me that a useful way to think about these "hot Jupiters" may be as failed double stars, not planets equivalent to our own gas giants. And we already know that double stars are more common than singletons like the Sun. (Er, I think -- someone please tell me if I'm wrong.)
One thing that frustrates me about the articles I've seen on this subject is that they don't explain why formation of big, close-in gas giants precludes formation of Earth-like planets farther out. Accretion disks are really, really big; surely parts of them can clump into gas giants while others slowly form smaller, rocky planets?
The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
I bought 120 lottery tickets and didn't find a winner. Must not be possible to win the lottery then, right?
This sort of question certainly never occurred to people several thousand years ago. I'm glad we have news agencies that help us ponder these new ideas about the universe now in these enlightened times.
for every one system we know of, there are one billion that we don't. It's a little premature to say we're unique when we have such little data to work with.
We have a hard enough time getting along with each other on Earth. I almost don't want to know how we would get along with inhabitants of another solar system.
--
Are you a Chipotle Fan?
we look alone in the universe because our equipment isnt advanced enough to see something the size of Earth orbiting other suns.
Nah, been done before....
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
I have been impressed with the planets we have found. From what I understand, they are pretty hard to find. Yet there seem to be more than we thought.
The universe is a pretty big place, and I bet somewhere out there is something pretty close to our solar system.
"My pessimism goes to the point of suspecting the sincerity of the pessimists"
It's "news" for dummies.
With current technologies (and the amount of time we've been looking) we can only detect very large planets that are quite close their parent star...
SURPRISE!!!! We've only found systems with large planets close to the parent star.
Big news.
Next story, please.
"A witty saying proves nothing." ~Voltaire
"d'Oh!" ~Homer
Our situation with regard to the physical parameters of our corner of the universe seems to be average:
Average sun
Average location in the galaxy (OK, maybe a little out in the backwater, but we have traversed more dense regions of the spirals of our galaxy in the last x billion years).
Average matter content (gases, etc...)
What might be the case could very simply be that space is awfully big, and we have only scanned a tiny portion of it in a tiny portion of the ways possible to scan it.
I mean come on, if the observable universe is TINY, and we've only examined a TINY portion of that, isn't it a bit too early to say "That's it, we're all alone" ?
After all, why have such a huge place all for the likes of us? What a waste...
I don't know the meaning of the word 'don't' - J
I saw this story earlier today and was tempted to submit it. Yeah, there isn't another solar system in the universe like ours because we can't see any. . The universe is an awfully big place. To say there isn't a solar system anywhere in the universe similar to ours because we can't detect it is just plain silly. You may as well say there isn't life anywhere in the universe except on the Earth because we can't detect it.
But why is the rum gone?
Slashdot: Failed Car Analogies. Amateur Lawyering. Anecdote Battles.
...life still seems to exist here. It does however seem to be very slow at times.
Now, how many Suns are there out there ? Billions in our galaxy, and many many galaxies. So we've discovered 100 of them have planets, and
just a few tenfolds more have been scanned for planets.
From that one draws the conclusion we are alone !!??
The "current technology and techniques" link is in that context also
very interresting, as we at the moment don't know how to detect earth sized planets.
I think a bit more science and research is needed before one draws the conclusion that our solar system is genuine. Heck, even a solar system
similar to ours for 1 in 100 millions solar system would indeed be interresting.
We are alone in the Universe. Who'd a thunk it.
all contain seemingly only gas giants
Maybe that's because our current science is only good enough to detect incredibly massive (*cough cough gas giants cough*) planets? Gee, thanks CNN, great job writing another logically inadequate article for the igrnorant masses to buy right into.
I can't beeee-lieeeve you'd post that on slashdot!
ducks behind rock, awaits 900 post slogfest.
kulakovich
We know that no other planet in our solar system has intelligent life (at least that we can see), and it appears that we are an anomaly among planetary systems, just as our planet is anomaly in our own solar system (70% water, atmosphere, just the right distance from the sun for life, temperature, etc.
Whatever the odds that life exist elsewhere, we should remember that we have a special planet here, and we should take care of it. We have no other feasible options in the near future.
Rhymes that keep their secrets will unfold behind the clouds.There upon the rainbow is the answer to a neverending story
Current technology only sees giant planets next to Stars in other solar systems. What's wrong with gas? Aren't O2 and CO2 gases? Last time I checked they weren't liquid nor solids. I don't see how other plantes or soooo different and we are soooo unique.
Getting scientific information from CNN is like getting political news from The Enquirer.
CNN should do their homework and get Carl Sagan's equation - from what I remember, a galaxy like the milkyway probably has 1000 solar like planets - and only 10 of those probably has earth like atmosphere.
There are lots of stars in the milkyway...
The detection mechanism for planets relies on the planet's gravity shifting the star's spectrum as it orbits. Therefore, we can only see the big ones, so the factor for the percentage of solar systems that have "Earth-like" planets still isn't determinable.
Yes we're alone. And even if we weren't, I don't think another race is just going to drop in and say, "Hi".
Take a look at any of the alien visitation movies we make. Aliens come to Earth. Aliens attack humans. Humans unite (that's the truly unbelieveable part of these movies). Humans destroy all Aliens.
What species in their right minds is going to come to a planet who's inhabitants immediately imprison and disect anything remotely extra terrestrial?
just export our lawyers to other planets, then "try" to find them again.
That way we will always know there is life outside the planet, but we will have no desire to find it.
this is such a non-story. if i want to read pseudo-science, i'll browse cnn.com.
When we finally do meet Spock. I hope he doesn't break out in this tune.
Whether or not we are alone in the universe... the idea frightens me.
Scenario 1: We find life outside our planet, but that life turns out to be nothing more interesting than slightly-better-tasting cattle.
Scenario 2: We find ourselves on the receiving end of Scenario 1.
Let's face it, if the odds of finding intelligent life outside our solar system are astronomical, then consider the odds of that life being even remotely analagous to us, development-wise. We're either gonna be finding some glorified alien algae or uber-beings who don't even blink when their uber-Cuisinarts routinely vaporize solar systems...
Obliteracy: Words with explosions
we don't even know how big our universe actually is, in fact we don't even have a guess because light hasn't had time to travel from one side to the other yet, or more to the point from one side to us. but more on topic, it's a statistical impossibility that we are the only things alive in the universe. we may very well be the only living, communicating beings. or the only beings capable of changing our environment. but put in proper perspective, we're so young, as in our solar system, that i find it also highly unlikely that a galaxy much older than ours hasn't developed "intelligent" life.
as for SETI, things take time. broadcasts of leave it to beaver are just reaching pluto. when you think about it, there just hasn't been time for another civilization to make contact, given the constraints of our technology. i'm not personally expecting any kind of contact in the near future, possibly not in my lifetime (i'm 21) but i think the odds are definitely in our favor for finding something/someone.
The only way to get rid of a temptation is to yield to it.
-Oscar Wilde
Of course it is, everything is engineered and designed, not just the solar system but our DNA, everything is predestined to be the way it is.
Claiming that the universe and man were created by a mere coincidence is like claiming that the wind below sand on a piece of silicon and carved a Pentium processor core by coincidence.
Seems they are formulating the wrong question.
Even if we are the only earth-like body in the universe (a laughable assumption), there may be life on those gas giants.
On the other hand, considering the vastness of space and the difficulty traversing it, we may be effectively alone in a universe teeming with life.
Microsoft is to software what Budweiser is to beer.
Our technology really is no where near good enought to prove the non existance of Earth like planets elswhere.
However in astronomy class I did learn one quite interesting thing about the Earth. Apparently the Sol system was forming just as a near by super nova happend. This caused a lot of short term radioactive material to be injected into our solar system. This stuff has mostly long since decayed, but it provided some extra heat to melt the earth's crust and cause the "iron catastrophy". Basically the Earth became molten and heavy elements began to fall the earth core, this caused more heat melting the crust further.
This is why most of the earths heavy metals are in the core. So it is possible (though no proven) that the Earth might have had very different geological properties AND that a different mix of elements would have been around when life was forming had this "lucky" coiencidence not happend.
This is just the same thing from another direction.
The first postulate of the rare earth theory, namely that a given star has a planetary system at ALL is extremely rare, has already been proven to be more likely than estimated.
Heck, so far it looks like even Sagan's estimate was low-balling it by several orders of magnitude.
It involves five methods currently (all of which are outlined in the article):
The idea that life is unique to our planet is pretty far out there. Agreed that Earth has a lot of special properties, the first being that it's a solid body somewhat near to the sun. But to think that the alomily of a life-sparking planet is unique to earth out of the unfathomible number of solar systems out there is a far stretch.
As to when and if we'll make contact with a life form outside of our planet is a different topic, and I don't know enough about the topic to even venture a guess... but I for one say that just the sheer number of solar systems out there is enough to convince me that there is life out there.
Your mammas flamebait.
I think that we should be more concerned about who will have the upper hand if we ever do encounter aliens. It would suck to come into contact with a cranky alien civilization bent on being jerks and being some kind of ant under a magnifying glass to them. I would be much more comfortable if We held the magnifying glass. I mean I mean I would feel much more comfortable if we could show an alien civilization the kindness, compassion, and generosity of the human race and our wonderful track record for being that way....yeah yeah that is it
could allow for such a statement. As someone said above, how could it be that we are "utterly unique in the entire universe."
By comparison, I relate this as an anecdote (only because my memory is not 100%), there was a forum of leading scientists who came together to discuss and brainstorm about extra terrestrial life. During one event groups were formed and were instructed to draw and depict an "alien". One team returned with a unique drawing (of what specifically I cannot recall), but lacked a bipedal form (our own) and were ridiculed. One memeber of the panel was supposed to have said, "that is is ludicruous, where is the anus?"
The point being, only in our arrogance do we assume a bipedal form that incorpates of all things an _anus_ is capable of evolving intelligence.
Obviously, the sentiment reflects similar thinking. Am I to suppose once again think that the earth is the center of universe? Surely, there can be nothing more important than the planet of our origin.
I think Bill Waterson said it best, "The surest sign intelligent life exists in the universe is that now of it has tried to contact us."
Hey, it is even hard to find intelligent life on this planet.
Fight Spammers!
the Drake Equation
That being said I don't believe in ufo's at all...
I wish I could filter out the annoying Pickens articles...
100 systems is what, the first 10 light years radius? (If that?) How large is our own galaxy, how many galaxies are there, and much is all this constantly changing?
"Gee, we've sampled 100 star systems out of 900 trillion, and none so far are like our own. Nevermind that the technology we have can't even detect earth-like planets except by the dumbest luck, I think we have a CNN science story! Don't forget to add something vaguely religious the last paragraph of the article."
The universe IS infinitely huge, so you'd figure there is some chance of being other intelligent beings out there. However... since we are the only planet that we know of that contains life, how can you even remotely determine that probability?
A part of me does believe that we just happened to be at the right place at the right time. I think it's by pure chance that something we are experiencing even exists.
The complete randomness and unpredictible nature of the universe *head explodes*
We have secretly replaced these Slashdot mods' sense of humor with a rusty nail. Let's see if they notice!!
The proof is, that they are staying the hell away, after observing what we do to eachother ..
I heard that Hillary Clinton lives in New York.
I opened the first page of the New York telephone book. There were no Hillarys there.
I know there are 8000 more pages and about 10 million more names, but I can tell from my sample that there are no Hillarys in New York.
Hence, Hillary Clinton does not live in New York. I was being lied to.
Bonus points:
Which are there more of? Stars in the Universe or People in New York?
The fact that these guys can't detect earth-sized planets isn't a detriment to this "alone" idea. it's the fact that all these systems that they are finding consist of planets with hugely elliptical orbits.
Earth (and all the planets in our system) has an elliptical orbit but it only differs in distance from the sun a few million miles. Any planet in a "class-M zone" (to use Star Trek terminology) in almost all the extrosolar systems they've found so far consist of planets that would have elliptical orbits which would vary their distance from the sun by tens of millions of miles.
That won't work for life as we know it because these planets would be cooked like Venus for the perigee of their orbit and frozen like mars for their apogee.
But, if life is the rule and not the exception, it could lead to some very interesting critters on these planets if in fact they did exist.
Four weeks, Twenty papers, that's two dollars
Um, on the grand scale of the universe, 100 planets is completely insignificant one way or another. I mean, there are like 80 septillion stars, right? Or more?
...Earth isn't hurtling through space at high speed relative to nearby objects, and certainly don't have a sense that it's orbiting the sun. Thankfully science is informed by more than intuition.
Doesn't it make you feel good to know that our freedoms are protected by politicans, lawyers and journalists.
Well, when I composed it there were no other posts. I'm a tad put out by being modded down so much as "offtopic" when I made sure to put a comment about the article into the post. Actually, I posted mostly to make the comment and the bit about maybe being first was just a side-issue. I guess some moderators automatically mod such posts down without bothering to read them, but that's their priviledge.
Good, inexpensive web hosting
into a political flame-fest.
/.'ers will accept this stance, unless it has to do with Bush and WMD's in Iraq. What's good for the goose is good for the gander, I always say.
It's hypocritical how so many
There are 200 billion suns in this Galaxy and 125 billion galaxies. The process in which solar systems are formed is caused by forces of physics and the laws of chemistry which are the same through the universe. Just because a terrestial planet has not been seen by human eyes or touched by human feet does not mean it does not exist. In the same way that Europeans in the middle ages could deduce that the earth is round from seeing ships sink in the horizon, we can deduce that planets like Earth or Mars are plentiful throughout the Galaxy. Our geocentricity misleads us to use phrases like "Known Universe" in the same way that Eurpoean history misleads us to call America the "New World" and to say that Columbus "Discovered" America.
In audio
Fight Spammers!
Sometimes I also wonder why ETs haven't dropped by, that maybe life is such a long shot that we are the only ones in the universe. Then I look at the Hubble deep field pic and see the numerous tiny white ellipsoid specks that are galaxies way the hell and gone out there and think that one of those rocks has to be full of water-swilling idiots like us.
If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
HE UNIVERSE:
4. Population
It is known that there are an infinite number of worlds, simply because there is an infinite amount of space for them. However, not every one of them is inhabited. Therefore, there must be a finite number of inhabited worlds. Any finite number divided by infinity is as near to nothing as makes no odds, so the average population of all the planets in the Universe can be said to be zero. From this it follows that the population of the whole Universe is also zero, and that any people you may meet from time to time are merely the products of a deranged imagination.
--The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy
Ask the government
This is Slashdot. Do you really need to ask? ;)
You don't seem to realize.
I *AM* completely and utterly unique. There is no one else in the entire multiverse who shares my singular combination of attributes.
I AM UNIQUE!
(and so are you)
Non Conformists of the Multiverse - UNITE!
Nope, just you.
Show me on the doll where his noodly appendage touched you.
I didn't write that last part. And you certainly didn't read it. So it never happened. Just keep walking.
And we think we might have inherited a unique environment, after all there's not that many systems in the universe isn't it.
We are 3 monkeys... That's what we are...
Of the extrasolar star systems that we are able to analyze using current methodologies , we have only been able to identify the solar systems that contain gas giants. The only method we have is to take a photograph, wait a while, then photograph the star again, and hope that we can see some variation in the brightness that indicates a large rotating object. That's why the first planet discoveries were of binary arrangements, with gas giants in close orbits around their parent stars, since they had fast orbits, we could (more) easily compare over shorter time. So, given that all the recent discoveries are of inhospitable gas giant system, I can understand why some uneducated reporters might get discouraged.
One writeup on Yahoo made a good point... we have only had the technology to observe at this level of detail for about a decade, while the only directly observable gas giants (Jupiter and Saturn) have orbits of 12 and 26 earth years, respectively. So, in the next few years, expect a lot more "gas giant" discoveries, assuming that the orbits of gas giants in "life-friendly" systems are relatively equivalent to ours.
Then, we'll have to wait until we have telescopes with better resolution and/or more megapixels, so we can resolve better detail of smaller earth-sized objects...
From the article: Either way, it is time to start thinking about the possibility that our system is unique or at least unusual, Livio said.
:)
OK. Perhaps this is true but ultimately I wonder; so what? Even if another M class planet doesn't exist what's the big deal? Even in that model of the universe that doesn't exclude the idea that there may be other life forms. It also doesn't end the possibility of human expansion. While it is possible it's also trivial on many levels.
And with the rate we're going it gives plenty of time for other planets to form...
Dedicated Cthulhu Cultist since 4523 BC.
This article is bogus. About 95% of the planets have been detected so far by causing subtle doppler-motion shifts in their parent stars. The lower threshhold of measuring this doppler shift from earth observatories can only measure the really massive and/or fast (close-in) planets. Several planned space-based observatories will improve on this. They will either have more sensitive doppler or use alternative methods such eclipsing transits (Kepler probe) , or direct observation of planets.
I think that a lot of people are missing the point this article is trying to make. Astronomers have a theory about solar system formation (accretion theory) that will result in a solar system like ours, with large Jupiters far out and in fairly circular orbits. However, astronomers have been finding a lot of "hot" (close-in) Jupiters with very elliptical orbits. True, these are the only ones that can be found with current techniques, but accretion theory predicts that few hot Jupiters should be found at all. So just the fact that many hot Jupiters are being discovered at all casts doubt on accretion theory, and if accretion theory is wrong, then perhaps other theories (which don't bode well for the formation of earth-like planets) are right.
Look up into the sky on the darkest night. Everything you see, every single star, is in our galaxy.
Heck, even use a telescope. The naked eye can't really see that many of the stars still in our galaxy. Every single star that you can resolve with a telescope (lets limit ourselves to say, a 16" reflector - a huge amateur telescope) is in our galaxy. Believe me, with a telescope that big, you can see -a lot- of stars!
Now take a look at the Hubble deep field images. There are a lot of galaxies out there. Each of those galaxies contains more stars than you can see from earth with the BF telescope referenced above.
Now think about it. Even if a solar system like ours is -extremely- rare, there have to still be a large number of similar systems out there.
You don't have to do the math, just look around you and think about it!
A house divided against itself cannot stand.
this is kinda like if, 400 years ago, they denied the existence of atoms, when the smallest things we could see in any detail were cells...
"Faith: Belief without evidence in what is told by one who speaks without knowledge, of things without parallel." - A.B.
Even if there were super-civilizations, they have to overcome the little technicality about not being able to send things faster than the speed of light. I believe that there are many solar systems in the universe that contain intelligent life. The only problem with finding them is that they are too distant. I know this has been said numerous times but I believe it to be true so I will say it again.
If there was a civilization that can send objects faster than light, they most likely would have been able to escape this universe altogether. This seems to be the most likely scenerio because the only thing that we know of that could possibly move faster than light is space-time since inflationary theories point at the universe expanding faster than the speed of light at some point in the past. The point is, if there was such a civilization, they would be advanced enough to employ a non-interference directive for every other civilization below type 4. All in all, either the civilization is too primitive to reach us with any means or they are too advanced to go around bothering us.
Ian Crawford's "Where are they?" presents an interesting argument for the possiblity that we are alone.
"Are We Alone in the Universe?"
With an estimated world population of 6 Billion.
And a projected population of 9 Billion in 2050.
We would be the generation worried about being "alone".
I got my information here:
http://www.prb.org/datafind/datafinder.htm
Cheers,
--The Dude
all of us 6 billion human beings. Alone and lost.
So if we haven't found Earth-sized planets, its probably because we can't see them yet, not because they aren't there.
Mathematics is not a crime.
Those gas giant planets are indicative of truly new solar systems, that formed from nearby materials. That's unlikely in itself, in our mostly empty Universe. According to the H2G2, the amount of material in existence altogether is lower than the sampling error, so even *we* probably don't exist :). But if the Earth wasn't manufactured to order by Magratheans for white mice, it probably was formed from heavy debris from the core of a predecessor star. The combined odds of that star (or multiple) forming, disintegrating, and accumulating around Sol are very low. But of course we've only found 100 systems, and we've only been able to spot them for a few years. Until we have even the vaguest idea of the number of planetary systems, which could be very large, we won't know how relatively common is our configuration.
Then there's the question of whether "intelligence" has to be "alive" like humans, and even the question of where Earth life comes from. "Panspermia" looks more likely all the time, as RNA never on Earth has been found in comets, and there was at least 1By for those particles to infect the Earth's organic soup. Perhaps our life was designed by an alien intelligence, "deliberately" or accidentally. Maybe we should ask the mice.
--
make install -not war
In fact, if you were on trial for a crime, and the chance of you NOT having committed it were the same as you winning the lottery by legitimate means, then that small chance wouldn't even qualify as 'reasonable doubt.'
Since the odds of guessing the pick six lottery numbers correctly, without having rigged the game are so negligably low, we can therefore safely use your winning ticket as proof sufficient to convict you of lottery tampering should you try to redeem one.
Wink wink nudge nudge...
Eat at Joe's.
Regardless of proof, the top poster point is that the odds of winning a lottery by buying 120 tickets is so much larger than the odds of finding an Earthlike planet by examining 120 near planets from afar that it is not even worth discussing.
As Douglas Adams once said about the Universe:
"Area: Infinite.
The Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy offers this definition of the word "Infinite".
Infinite: Bigger than the biggest thing ever and then some. Much bigger than that in fact, really amazingly immense, a totally stunning size, "wow, that's big", time. Infinity is just so big
that by comparison, bigness itself looks really titchy. Gigantic multiplied by colossal multiplied by staggeringly huge is the sort of concept we're trying to get across here."
Findind specific things in such a big place can be hard...
How frigging arrogant would we have to be to honestly believe that in the ENTIRE universe, we are COMPLETELY AND UTTERLY UNIQUE?
Congratulations, you may be the first person I've ever known to argue for the existence of intelligent life on other planets solely by using an ad hominem attack.
I think this is a terrible assumption to make.
Sure, in 'our' bit of space we may be unique, but I am damn sure that the sheer size of the Universe predicts, by maths alone, that there will be a similar system as Sol.
Of course though, scientists, due to diligence and methology, cannot go on probable evidence produced by an infinate measure.
... that there is another, more advanced life form living on a distant planet, should it be included in the Axis of Evil?
--> http://www.astro.wisc.edu/~dolan/constellations/ex tra/nearest.html
nearest 26 stars.
We are one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively. Back to you with the weather, Bob!
Ok, so far I have not seen anything said about this.
First off, if another civilization were looking to detect our radio waves, which travel at the speed of light, and they live 150 light years away (just a number for the sake of arguement) they would not be receiving anything from us for a while, since we have only been broadcasting for less then 100 years, vice versa, anything we look at from our POV would be as old as it is far away, so if we thought a system had a potential planet with life, and it is 200 light years away, they would have to have started sending out signals 200 years ago, and in 200 years, they could either have blown themselves to smithereens, or become advanced enough to possibly travel out into space.
Now imagine a race that is several thousand years more advanced, would you want our petty squabbling to be out and about in the galaxy spreading war and fighting? Not to even mention the fact that some Humans go out of their way to blow themselves up just to kill a bunch of other people? Would you want that coming around your Civilization? some Fanatic decides that your race is evil (in their eyes) and takes a ship and destroys one of your planets with it.
Now as has been stated earlier in other posts,when you search for something specific, and you find that specific thing, how do you jump to a conclusion that you didn't find something else so therefore it does not exist? Thats like saying you went to the store to find some crackers, but you didn't see any cheese in the cracker isle, so cheese must not exist.
Well I guess I am done with this tirade. Have a nice day people of Earth.
If firefighters fight fire and crime fighters fight crime, what do Freedom fighters fight?
http://www.nature.com/news/2004/040726/full/040726 -14.html
"Most of the planets around other stars, known as extrasolar planets, are detected from the wobble that they induce in their own sun's motion. This wobble is caused by the gravitational tug of the planet on the star. Because stars are much bigger than planets, the effect is tiny, and it is only in the past decade that telescopes have been sensitive enough to detect it.
"Even then, the wobble is detectable only for giant planets, which are those about as big as Jupiter, the bloated ball of gas in our Solar System. It is not possible at present to detect planets as small as the Earth."
*clears throat*
And this says _what_ about the possibility of planets such as Earth??? (hint: 0*12521623)
Our forays into space are similar to a child going into his backyard for the first time and stating that he has 'seen the world'
love is just extroverted narcissism
When we've examined over trillions of planets and failed to find any life forms, then maybe we can come to the conclusion that we're alone in the known universe. Please.. PS: I don't believe in ufos being aliens otoh since it would be pretty far fetched imho.
our undetectable interstellar masters.
But seriously: alone? a singularity? in the ENTIRE universe?
Not Bloody Likely.
The mere fact that we speculate about it is an artifact
of the colossal self-centered arrogance of homo sapiens.
If benthic tube-worms were (are?) self-conscious,
I'm sure they'd wonder similarly.
It's not the thought of being alone which we find so disturbing;
it's the thought of NOT being "special".
...you should say 'Known Galaxies'. No-one knows how big the Universe is. Plus no way are we looking at them all that we do know.
The question is not whether there is any life "out there". That is a "no-brainer". The question is What is the purpose of life?. I mean, what is the purpose of rust? Rust and life - two processes that we look at being so different may be more similar than you think.
Here's a comment I added to a thread about this on a religious website, where the author was suggestin this was evidence that God put us here:
"An analogy. I just looked round my workplace, and everyone is white. I have a model of how white people could form. "In that model it is not obvious at all how black people like Elijah Mohammed may have formed."
Hence, it looks very unlikely that there are black people, except for Elijah Mohammed, who was therefore clearly put here as a blessed sign from God. Of course, if I looked somewhere other than a small workspace in Minnesota I might have to revise how universal my model is."
(note: I don't follow any religion)
Alien life would certainly thwart every effort to be detected by us.
Just ease drop on our communications and you have a society that is uncivilized, underdeveloped and worse cannibalistic in the guise of being humane.
No thanks!
We'll check back in another 1000 years and see if you've grown up.
On second thought, nothing useful here, move over for our intergalactic highway.
Most of the giant planets observed in extrasolar systems have very elliptical orbits
Aren't most planets detected by the looking for stars with a wobble? It seems that a wide elliptical orbit would cause the star to wobble in an exagurated way.
In our own solar system, most of the planets have a very circular orbit, and thus the Sun doesn't wobble as much.
Therefore, we can't really see solar systems like our own, because they are less wobbly and are harder to detect. Right?
"Can of worms? The can is open... the worms are everywhere."
So let's play a numbers game. Let's say there's around 100 billion stars in our galaxy (a generally well-accepted estimate) and 100 billion galaxies (again, a fairly well-accepted estimate).
We've surveyed 120 stars. That's a whopping 1.2 * 10^-19 PERCENT of the stars that we know about. Somehow I think it's a little early to be giving up.
--Stupid Sig Here--
I'm telling you, those gas giants are just no good but does anyone listen?
They sent signals to us long ago; it;'s just that we were not permitted to access them without a valid license from the Recording Industry Association of the Galaxy (riag)! Being more advanced than us, the galactic norm defines copyright expiration as the half-life of a proton, and when it expires, we still wont have the decryption keys to view their broadcast because of the Galactic Digital Epoch Copyright Act, nor can the people running the SETI program even copy the signals they are now receiving because of the Galactic Broadcast Flag...
Guys, you're completely missing the point of this article. The "scientist" that speculated that we're alone has an agenda, and that's to feed the creationists some much needed ammo. The problem with you guys is, you're too smart. What seems obvious to you will, with any luck, never occur to the target audience of the creationist extremists. "We've examined over one hundred stellar systems and we haven't detected a single earth-like planet! Well, geez, that makes us special, just like God intended!"
What we need to do is have an real scientist rebutt this kind of junk theory with matching CNN coverage.
Anyone in the crowd with credentials want to make that phone call? I would do it, but just being "really-stinkin-smart" and "not-a-sheep" doesn't qualify as credentials.
*** *** You're just jealous 'cause the voices talk to me... ***
I think have a better chance of finding recognizable signals in gravity waves. Radio only seems to be useful on a local scale and laser is unidirectional. Now all we need is a gravity wave detector.
Crushing my karma one post at a time.
The methods used to "detect" planets in other solar systems can only be used to find very large, quickly orbiting planets. If we can only detect this kind of planetary system then of course we won't have any systems like ours found. I find it amazing that this was even reported by anyone.
1)Find planets by viewing wobbly stars.
2)calculate the mass and orbital rate by the wobblyness.
3)find that they are all large quickly orbiting planets.
There are two conclusions to come to:
We can only measure quickly wobbling stars from our distant vantage point thereby leaving all systems like ours invisible to us or all other stars with planets have really huge fuking planets orbiting too close and too fast.
Just pointing something out to all of you...
There's a lot of, "it doesn't matter if you see it or not, you haven't seen it all so we're still right" comments here...
This is exactly what you guys get onto Christians about. It's called faith - the belief in something that is not seen... and surprise, you're displaying it right now... it's just that it's in the other side of the coin.
This is not meant to start a fight, just point out (what I think is) Hypocrisy.
Certainly every man at his best state is but vapor
...contains only gas giants and harbors intelligent - oh, wait.
It is laughable to believe that scientists are acutally questioning whether or not life exists in the universe based on a sample of 100 planets close to our solar system whos gas giants seem to have formed differently...There are trillions of star systems left to discover. Thousands and even millions of systems would have to be catalogued before a statement such as this could be taken slightly seriously.
"Sometimes I think we're alone in the universe, and sometimes I think we're not. In either case the idea is quite staggering."
It's amazing that not knowing the answer to this is somehow more comfortable than knowing the answer, either way.
"Why can't everyone just be straight with me?"
"Because we live in a bendy world, dear."
Set Darl McBride on to them. OK, will will lose big time, but what a laugh on the way...
Just not sure why when I hit reply - to start a NEW thread, it gets posted into someone elses thread.
Seems random.
Checked FAQ, no mention of this problem.
Not sure what I'm doing wrong, but its got to be one of those obvious things.
I'm *not* hitting the "Reply to this..." link.
So I'm at a loss.
I know this is going to get modded as a troll but it has to be said. Sure the US can't even find Osama Bin Laden and people are surprised we haven't found other earth like planets light years away!?
"Thanks to the remote control I have the attention span of a gerbil."
"Space is big. Really big. You just won't believe how vastly hugely mind-bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist, but that's just peanuts to space."
the author's lack of understanding of how large the universe is. it is difficult for the human mind to grasp the true size of the known universe. There has to be some other life form out there, whether it is microbial or something akin to human. It would be very surprising to me if there WERE NOT any life whatsoever except for humans on earth.
1. Ask them to come get us and give us a lift out of here.
2. "Us" means everyone except the Islamic fundamentalists.
3. We take all our technology and $$$ with us.
4. On our way out, leave the visible side of the moon covered with this image.
Just ease drop on our communications and you have a society that is uncivilized, underdeveloped and worse cannibalistic in the guise of being humane.
No thanks!
We'll check back in another 1000 years and see if you've grown up.
Alien life would certainly thwart every effort to be detected by us.
On second thought, nothing useful here, move over for our intergalactic highway.
The older I get, the less I care about whether or not there is other life in the universe (or galaxy). I'm not "old" but I was around to watch the Saturn 5 launches, and was very excited about space and space exploration then. I'm still very excited about space exploration and colonization of other planets, and very intrigued by the possibility of other life forms (simplistic as they may be) on other planets or moons in our solar system.
But life beyond our solar system? It's just not something to consider, IMHO. We can't get there yet, we probably won't get there anytime "soon," and the odds that it will get here are low too. I'd rather see a focus on mastering our own solar system than worrying about what is beyond it. Perhaps this seems short-sighted, but did we go from non-flying to space shots, or did we spend quite a few useful years of just flying around on our planet?
No Laughing Allowed!
"Space, is big. Really big. You just won't believe how vastly hugely mindboggingly big it is. I mean you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist, but that's just peanuts to space."
If our squidgy soft bodies could endure long-term 9G acceleration, it would take almost 40 days just reach the speed of light.
So that's 40 days to reach the speed of light.
+ 73,000 days to get somewhere (200 years)
+ 40 days to decelerate.
That's 73,080 days to reach a planet 200 light years away.
So put yourself into one of those liquid nitrogen coffins, hope it all stays sealed for 73,080 days, and then whoever finds you will:
1. Beat your coffin with a stick because it makes strange sounds.
2. Eat you.
3. Disect you.
4. Revive you with their superior technology and hail you as a space traveller and all the alien chicks will want to have sex with you (hopefully is weird, kinky alien ways).
Okay so we have scanned one hundred systems and found we only know of life in one of them (our own)?
So 1% of the universe is FULL OF LIFE? OMG!
--- I do not moderate.
If ever aliens come to earth in search of intelligent life; make sure they dont get hold of slashdot ... else they will be very disappointed ;)
Striving to be common...
SETI isn't just looking for Extraterrestrial life, it's looking for advanced Extraterrestrial civilizations.
Maybe SETI is looking in all the wrong places. Maybe the evidence of intelligent alien life is right in front of us and we casually dismiss it as something else. It is not easy to see something if your assumptions have already led you to conclude that it is not there.
Nothing like a common threat (and it would be seen as a threat) to make people stop fighting each other.
Especially if this radio signal would read 'all your solar systems are belong to us'...
Z
To have something like Star Trek where several spacefaring nations simultaneously arise and carve out competing empires is going to be even less likely. Imagine a race that had a 2 million year head start over us in settling the planets in our galaxy. Somehow I don't see us having the technological ability to even compete, much less even be an equal. The same goes for us if we explore even just the Milky Way. If we travel 10,000 light years to find a planet who is technologically at the Bronze Age (building pyramids and basically like Egypt when it was "THE" major political power on the Earth), do they have a chance against us after we have developed interstellar travel capabilities?
All of this has been pointed out by people like Sagan and Hawking. While there may be intelligent lifeforms other than mankind on another planet, the likelyhood of us actually finding a species that can deal with abstract symbols and advanced toolmaking is quite unlikely. If you had come to the Earth 5 million years ago (short time compared to the age of the universe), all you would have found are some very primitive humans, or even just chimpanzees that roamed open savannahs. Certainly not a technological civilization.
I would be very surprised if we found something like the Klingon empire, or even just the Kzinti. Alien races make wonderful science fiction, but I don't see how they can be found.
No Mcdonalds' restaurants discovered on Mt. Everest, they may not exist.
No Ming vases found in a small lake in Idaho, it may be time to consider that China may be a hoax.
Or, in other words:
It may be time to consider that if I get in the newspapers and maybe on a BBC or PBS special, that exposure will help my next grant proposal. The best way might be to say something that appears vaguely profound but is actually vacuous and redundant to a newbie science reporter.
Darned rent-seeking scientists.
The analogy the book is apt: if the volume of the entire universe is represented by the earth, the observable universe is the size of a single grain of sand.
That means we will NEVER, EVER, EVER see light from the extreme end of the universe: right this moment, a photon leaving the end of the universe would take more than 70,000,000,000 years to arrive on Earth. That light could be a giant laser beam from a big ol' alien rave, but it's useless to speculate, so just forget that right now.
Our "grain of sand" may be desolate, but for all we know the next grain over may be full of Earth-type planets just by random chance, but remember, our grain of sand includes ALL the light that will EVER reach earth. They're not in it, they can't signal us, period.
Even worse, keep in mind that the while we're moving around in space, space is expanding. If we could freeze in space two points A and B, the distance from A to B will increase with time, and the rate of increase is increasing. If this rate of expansion ever passes the speed of light (which it will soon), A can NEVER talk to B because the points are too far apart to communicate, forever.
It's intruiges me, searching a space which is mostly constructed by theory and the small experiments we've done so far.
In this, from out perception, "endless" space we're looking for a copy of earth. Our entire being is based on the way our planets interact. It doesn't necessarily mean that the way we are and have evolved is unique, or that life will emerge if the same conditions are met. They do however with us, on earth.
We cannot start to comprehend how other "life" would look or act, cause it'd require to imagine something we cannot imagine. And ofcourse, already mentioned, the time and distances; relativity.
I for one, don't believe we're alone, but I don't either believe we'll find life wherever there's water.
Lets say, we observe with our eyes, our eyes have evolved to see whatever we should see on earth. What if there's more then what our senses, which evolved on our puny planet, can pick up?
Etc...
I think we can keep recursing like this until someone returns 1
It's no accident the first star systems found looked very unlike ours; we didn't have the capability to detect anything else.
The bigger question is are we stable enough to have the time to find or be found by intelligent life? We haven't been here and aware but for the briefest period of time, and unless we diversify out into the universe, we're only here until the next big earth crossing body doesn't quite cross and we join the earlier earthlings (dionsaurs) as a natural resourse on this rock.
Don't bunch up, one grenade will get us all.
I think the existence of life elswhere in the universe is tightly coupled with the result of speculation over whether coffee is beneficial or detrimental to human health, since both seem to vary with equal frequency.
Follow the money trail when someone tells you that results of our ability to study a few hundred nearby solar systems is indicative of anything. The only way to PROVE that there is life elsewhere in the universe is to find it. Likewise the only way to disprove it is to study the entire universe, which isn't likely to happen. If in fact we DO manage to study the whole universe at some point, then enough time will have passed that we will almost certainly have CAUSED life to exist on other planets, either intentionally or not.
I'm all for space exploration etc, but having some publication once a day ask "what's the bottom line on all this?" is a total waste of time.
I disagree with your opinion that most people have an intuitive sense that we are alone in this vast universe. Most people that I know understand that as big a place as the universe is, it's unlikely that we are alone. Very unlikely. Really, really, very unlikely...
The chances are, however, that even though there are lots of other races out there, the distances between races are so vast that we will never meet face to face.
The race isn't always to the swift... but that's the way to bet!
Let's say a mysterious being came and offered you a chance to win a million dollars by giving him $1 per ticket
;o)
Sounds like a 419 scam to me...
Uh, yeah, you think?And CNN continues to amaze with the suckdick quality of its science reporting.
Many of the techniques are rated by the mass of planet they can detect (or mass relative to parent star), and they've been making continual improvements to lower that number, but it still has a way to go.
--- Ban humanity.
I think what many people want to know, is what finding, or not finding extraterrestrial life would mean to themselves, and to earth. Honestly, I don't think we can know ahead of time. I don't think we can prepare for the effects it will have. I don't think I will be around for our first contact should it ever arise, though I would love to see it happen, and think it would be interesting to see how humanity reacts. What new questions and what new answers will this bring? Then again, it's probably just as simple as 42.
Consider of course, the Fermi paradox. If there are/were ETs, then where are they? Why can't we detect even the faintest echo of their long-dead civilization when we can measure the spin of stars at the edge of the universe? Occam's razor leads us to assume that it is because Drake is wrong, or at least the numbers most people plug in to the equation are wrong.
Additional problems with the Drake Equation is that one thing the original research that kicked off this story suggest quite strongly is that the f{p} (fraction of stars with planets) and n{e} (percentage of planets that are inhabitable) numbers are much lower than people think.
Well if religion's brought up, I feel I must chime in with my islamic 2 dinars. As to the problem from a Christian perspective, which I for obvious reasons don't share though (raised Catholic mind you, and my Dad's a minister currently), what I wonder would be what does that say about Christ being God's unique son, whose atoning sacrifice is supposed to save humanity? What about all the other supposed species of beings out there who probably have not heard of Jesus? Are they all damned? Why would God only send his "son" down to one species. If one then thinks "well maybe He incarnated amongst them too" that definately throws the Christian doctrine in bind, about Jesus being unique and all, and rather relativizes the whole thing. Plus, multi incarnations (reincarnations?) definately seems to be drifting far out of accepted Christian orthodoxy.
;-) The imam (for us shias, one of the twelve successors of the Prophet Muhammad) says something like: Do you think yours is the only Adam God has created, rather, He has created thousands upon thousands of other Adams, and yours is but the last.
Anyway, that's your faith, I can only really comment best on mine. I'm a shia muslim, and in the corpus of our traditions, there are a number of references to there being many other Adams out there, other worlds with living beings. Like one that goes something like (don;t have the exact reference in front of me, Im at work
There are other traditions like this, and the Quran does mention a plurality of worlds. Since we don't believe in the Christian paradigms, original sin, Christ being the incarnation and son (we believe in him as a human prophet, not a god-man), the atonement through crucifixion, etc., these concerns wouldn't really affect our theology.
That said, I'm not holding my breadth for us to soon, or even ever, make contact through means of technology. The universe is a mighty big place, our galaxy being only one many many more. Add to that, the enormity of the ages since it was created, who knows where or even when to look for other beings as us or otherwise? But as we say, God knows best....
I'm all for some aggressive scouting... all we need is some n00b race to tower rush our asses before our first expo, & it'd be gg.
When you are talking about the infinite, how can say something is rare? Just because you dont see it, does not mean it is rare. Maybe we are on the wrong side of galaxy. Infinite planets + Infinite stars = a hellva lot of Earths. Even in our own galaxy I am sure there is a lot of life like Earths...we are small and thus think in small scales. We cannot be alone, it is impossible. Anal probing can being..........now.
Deserving got nothing to do with it.....shuffle
In particular there was one chapter which discussed extraterrestrial life, and the very real possibility that it would be so "alien" to us that we wouldn't even recognize it. Think about it for a second, how would you recognize a life form if it looked very similar to a boulder (and just as solid), and had a lifespan of thousands or millions of years? In other words, alien life could appear so completely benign to our senses as to appear insignificant.
I'm a little suprised no one else commented on it. Either a) I'm a pedantic bastard or b) . . . hmmm . . . I can't think of an alternative.
If it means carbon-based organisms similar to the ones on earth, then I think chances that the same kind of thing can be found elsewhere are low indeed. I mean, I bet there's loads of planets roughly similar to earth out there, but in how many of them have similar organic molecules appeared or evolved enough to build something similar to DNA, viruses, bacteria, cells, organisms or anything sentient? I don't think we can assume that life on any other planet will have anything to do with our chemistry biology, let alone the way we interpret, process and exchange information.
If, however, we consider living organisms as having a broader set of properties, such as the ability to create energy from resources in their environment and the ability to replicate, then I think that chances of such systems having formed through natural processes on other solar systems are very high. I bet that most of them, though, haven't discovered (or haven't bothered to discover) radiowaves, and are quite happy hanging out and doing their equivalent of photosynthesis.
(individuality)
Statistical sample = infinitesimal
Extrapolation = huge
CNN = slow science news day, apparently.
AFAIK (IANAAA) our current detection methods are pretty much one of two methods:
1) observing wobble in a sun caused by orbitting planets
2) slight occlusion of the sun if the planet passes in front of it.
Both of these methods are ONLY any good for detecting MASSIVE (!!) bodies close to their primary. Further, both very rapidly become useless if these very particular beasts are not present. Plus, we've examined such a vanishingly small proportion of even the local stellar neighborhood, on any rounded scale we've seen almost precisely 0%. Nice sample size.
Ergo, this would really only be somewhat significant if we found that every star we've analyzed has such a system, this would make it depressingly likely that this is a COMMON configuration. But the fact that a statistically small sample of the measured stars have these giants in close orbits conversely suggests that, as predicted, we are *probably* only looking at a tiny segment of a 'solar system bell curve'.
Conversely, as already pointed out here, the fact that we have a humdrum Sun, humdrum element signature, humdrum stellar neighborhood (a little on the sparse side right now), suggest that our system is more likely to be a humdrum, average system.
-Styopa
This is just such a difficult question and so many mitigating factors exist that it's pretty much an act of mental masturbation to try and guess how many planets have intelligent life on them (and considering our President, and the way business is run around this world, the jury is still out on whether it exists here.) When we talk about intelligent life, we are typically speaking about life like us. That is, DNA based, water and fatty acid based, intelligent, etc. That still leaves a whole lot of possible variations on form and function. This does exclude a wide variety of other possible life forms, that might include nonorganic chemisties, beings that have a virtual existence on some organic processing substrate, and even exotic matter or energy. In the end, life is a complex organization of information, and intelligent life is a complex assembly of information on top of that. The possible means by which that information might be naturally organized may well be staggering. So for sanity sake, limiting the conversation to just folks like us...
On the plus side... there are a hundred billion stars in our pretty average galaxy, a hundred billion galaxies in the universe, and it seems most of those stars have planets. That's a whole lot of planets... even if earths are one in a billion, there will be many trillions of earths in the universe.
Add to that the recent discoveries indicate that life can exist at temperatures above the boiling point of water (at STP), in concentrated heavy metal salt solutions, and pH of 0, as well as ice, and atmospheres with and without oxygen... it's clear that life can put up with a pretty huge variety of environments. Of couse extremophiles are simple single celled organisms, and it may well be that intelligent life needs something closer to the environment we currently live in to form and then thrive.
Another plus factor would be that life seems to engineer the planets upon with it exists, creating a planet suitable for it's own existence, while at the same time becoming more suitable for the environments it creates.
A final plus factor would be that life forming molecules (fatty acids, sugars, and amino-like compounds), water, and other key elements for the creation of life occur in abundance in stellar forming nebulii.
On the down side... You probably need to have a smallish, rocky planet, with sufficient mineral content, lots of available water, and those precursor life forming molecules all at the right place, all at the right time.
Another down factor is that the creation, and continued existence of the moon may have been essential for higher life to develop. The moon creating impact provided a chemically reducing atmosphere, an essential requirement in the formation of DNA. It protected Earth from potentially disasterous later impacts. It stablelized Earths rotation, and tilt, making consistent reliable seasons and years possible. In short it created a favorable place for life to be born, then thrive, and become complex.
There is a fairly small region surrounding any given star, that can produce an environment hospitable to life as we know it.
Having Large gas giants is very important, but so is there placement. Having large gas giants in close to the star like the solar systems we've see so far, would simply throw those suitable, small, rocky earth-like planets into deep space. Having them too far out, would prevent any advantage they might provide in sweeping up potentially deadly impactors to your life giving world.
Finally, galaxies are tempestuous places, having all manner of catastrophies all the time. Super Novii, colliding black holes and neutron stars, colliding galaxies, rogue stars, there are just so many ways that a galaxy might sterilize any given parsec of space, that an intelligent civilization would have to work hard to keep from being zapped by some random interstellar disaster. Of course that would require a technology sufficiently advanced to respond to such a threat... at lea
People should get the numbers straight.
... and we have to rename everything we already named?
"Oh, I'm sorry mostly-bag-of-water, but your universe is called Xezzuylly in your native tongue and your planet is called Hydrobagswamp. After reading your history books, specifically the colonization of America, we have decided to allow you to keep some names. Saturn's 9th moon will now be called Paris. Thank you and have a nice day"
Live web cams
Only 3849812312328372900 solor systems to go and we'll have checked then all!!
You've got your googly eyed star children waiting for the wise alien people to come down and bestow blessings on us. You know--the folks that have built their utopian society, and will now bless us with the fruits of their labor--just for being good ol' terran humans. Wish fulfillment.
Then, you've got the aliens who busted ass to get where they are. Why should they give away their wonders for free? We'd screw it up anyway. You can't bestow wisdom, maturity or utopia on a person or people. They have to find it themselves.
If a people care at all about a less technically developed or economically robust society, they'll stay the hell away.
Look what happens whenever such a meeting occurs between two different groups of humans right here.
Quit waiting for the aliens.
Get busy building spaceships. X-prize just gets the ball rolling.
So, what if we're alone? Doesn't change anything.
Somebody has to be first. Somebody has to do the work. Why not us?
Keep reading your science fiction books. If you like what you read, go out and build it!
"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, it doesn't go away." - Philip K. Dick
My asnwer is that we wouldn't get along with another civilization at all. But we would get along with each other a lot better all of the sudden.
Countries wage war on each other until they see some new enemy, then they ally against the larger foe. It isn't this clear cut, but I see definite clues of this throughout history.
No And no matter what we find or who finds us, we should always treat Jupiter as an enemy planet.
It is better to be the hammer than the anvil.
I know I had the same exact thought when I read the story blip from slashdot's main page. We're scanning for gas giants (seti aside) and all we find are gas giants. Therefore there are no earth sized planets?!?
I think this is what the term "asshat" was designed for.
Anyone else read "Rare Earth"? They make a compelling argument that *intelligent* life may be exceeding rare, as opposed to microbial life which the universe may be teeming with. Obviously in an infinite universe, we can't be alone, but we have absolutely no idea at present how common intelligent life is. Even in a galaxy of 100 billions stars, if there is only 1 in a 100 billion chance of intelligent life occuring, that means there'd be only one civilization in our galaxy, us. We just don't know. One large number times some small number that we don't even know the order of magnitude of means it could be from 1 to a million. Drake's equation anyone?
:)
Just because the Earth has been pushed further and further from it's special place in the universe doesn't mean we shouldn't leave open the possibility that, in fact, our planet, or our sun or even our entire galaxy may be highly unusual. Thinking we're completely average in every regard is ridiculous anyway. Are you average weight, height, build, eye color, blood type, religion, race? (How many families do you know that have 1.8 children? An illogical argument but funny.
just checking to see where this one goes.
Seems my posts are applied to the last thread.
I want to start a NEW thread.
Not sure what is going on.
Please delete.
Of the 100+ systems currently known to contain planets, all contain seemingly only gas giants. However, this may be a case of current technology and techniques being unable to detect planets similar to Earth.
I can end this question right now.
It is because current technology can only detect said planets.
Time to read up for the journalist?
It's kinda sad to see them going these lengths to write these stories when he hasn't even done basic research.
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
"well, you know, the universe is a BIIIIIIG place so there is no way we are alone. (insert shrill whine here) I just know there is life out there"
Translation: the sound of a thousand bubbles bursting.
Sorry guys, looks like any chances of a liason with 7of9 or Princess Leah or Amazon Fembots from space is pretty much nil....
I would have to disagree only in that God was truely meant to be unique and Jesus (from the Gospels), is God on Earth and can be God on other planets if He so chooses.
The Holy Trinity is God's relevance to us and our way to truely understand him. Jesus, being part of the Trinity, could very well have-been/will-be a part of another world, and mean the exact same thing (with room for their own interpretations, etc) to them so as God is still the utmost unique being. Jesus is/will-be God on those planets as well.
I am a Christian, and I believe in this possibility.
We will try to convert it, and should that fail, declare it a godless heathen and wipe it off the face of existance, like a rational god-fearing man should.
(That is IRONY, a form of HUMOR, for you idiots with the mod points...)
HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
So using that reasoning, I just dialed 100 random phone numbers and no-one else answered so I must be ALONE IN THE WORLD...
How can anyone draw conclusions based on such a MINOR sampling of the available spectrum ? Not to mention the HUGE technical limitations we face. We have not even come close to indentifying all the life forms on our planet and the mryiad of ways life finds to flourish but we are ready to speculate we are alone in the universe...Hubris abounds...
errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
You can't trust CNN -- they're not as bad as Fox, but this is just BS.
hi, though we will obviously disagree and I am saying this in a friendly light (I hope ;-), what would you say about the question of original sin then? I mean, if Christianity teaches that Christ's atonement was to free man from the bondage of Adam's sin, (again I using a traditional Christian reference point, not my own), what does that mean for other worlds? I.e., do you believe that say x amount of other beings on other worlds are out there, every one of their first parents made a huge cosmic mistake by taking their own forbidden fruit, and thus would all need salvation? If not, would they then be all free from sin and NOT need Christ to save them? I realize one can understand these traditional concepts rather more metaphysically perhaps, but it does (at least I think it does), throw accepted Christian tradition in a whirl.
Insightful comments, Falkryn and others. I am also a Christian (with many muslim friends). My faith believes that there are indeed many worlds "out there" with people on them--people like us who are also children of God. (I know it is interesting and fun to imagine up aliens that look like something from Star Wars but there is no evidence of that.) We also believe that we are all God's children but that Jesus is God's Only Begotten Son--unique as you put it--and that He is the Savior of all mankind--even the ones on the other worlds. Why do we believe this? It is written in the Book of Moses the follwing: 1 THE words of God, which he spake unto Moses at a time when Moses was caught up into an exceedingly high mountain, 2 And he saw God face to face, and he talked with him, and the glory of God was upon Moses; therefore Moses could endure his presence. 3 And God spake unto Moses, saying: Behold, I am the Lord God Almighty, and Endless is my name; for I am without beginning of days or end of years; and is not this endless? 4 And, behold, thou art my son; wherefore look, and I will show thee the workmanship of mine hands; but not all, for my works are without end, and also my words, for they never cease. Jump to verse 31 31 And behold, the glory of the Lord was upon Moses, so that Moses stood in the presence of God, and talked with him face to face. And the Lord God said unto Moses: For mine own purpose have I made these things. Here is wisdom and it remaineth in me. 32 And by the word of my power, have I created them, which is mine Only Begotten Son, who is full of grace and truth. 33 And worlds without number have I created; and I also created them for mine own purpose; and by the Son I created them, which is mine Only Begotten. 34 And the first man of all men have I called Adam, which is many. 35 But only an account of this earth, and the inhabitants thereof, give I unto you. For behold, there are many worlds that have passed away by the word of my power. And there are many that now stand, and innumerable are they unto man; but all things are numbered unto me, for they are mine and I know them. For the complete reference see The Book of Moses Chapter 1. In short, we believe in a living prophet who has been chosen by God to direct His work on the earth. Through prophets, such things as those written in the Book of Moses are revealed to us. Finally, I give it as my opinion that truth is truth-- that true science and true religion are completely compatible since both are true. At the same time there are false scientific notions and false religious notions, so it really isn't, or should be a "science vs. religion" argument. It really ought to be a "truth vs. error" argument.
Solar system may be one of a kind
Then again..it may not be. There is no way to draw a conclusion on the basis of current knowledge. Total non-story.
M$ owns all the life in the universe. They should be sued for it.
He'll be missed for a really mind-bogglingly long time.
I don't know the meaning of the word 'don't' - J
We pretty well crap up this planet. Let's hope there aren't other civilizations out there doing the same.
My "proof" that there isn't extraterrestrial life is that we haven't located their garbage dumps. Unless, of course, one follows up on the late Francis Crick's ideas & concludes that Earth is an extraterrestrial garbage dump...
Pessimistically, djeaux
"Obviously, I'm not an IBM computer any more than I'm an ashtray" (Bob Dylan)
Our solar system may be unique after all, despite the discovery of at least 120 other systems with planets, astronomers said on Wednesday. All the other solar systems that have been found have big, gassy planets circling too close to their stars to allow them to be anything like Earth or its fellow planets, the British and U.S.-based researchers said. Their reason for not having planets similar to earth say that the gassy planets are circling too close to their stars to allow there any room for an earthlike planet to exist. Well. Gassy planets have moons dont they? Saturn and Jupiter both have PLENTY of moons, and a couple of them are candidates for containing life. Why else are we sending probes, such as Cassini, to Saturn and its moons, including a particular candidate for life, Titan?
Dude! They already have these. What about LIGO? Unfortunately, as far as I know, gravity wave astronomy will NOT help us find extra-terrestrial life or Earth-like planets. We're still stuck with only being able to look for gas giant type planets with our current technology. I thought that there was also supposed to be a satellite in the planning phase to detect gravity waves, but the mission got postponed because good old George W. Bush thinks it would be better to spend our money to go to Mars and look for the little green men who keep sabotaging our unmanned Mars probes. Besides, what's wrong with radio waves? You really need to define what you mean by "local." Radio astronomers routinely study natural radio signals from objects that are light years away. That hardly seems local to me!
I've used a similar argument to really annoy some of the bible thumpers who like to accost people in the street.
Basically, if they claim that Jesus died for my sins (and they all seem to vehemently claim that is the case!) then if I don't sin, won't Jesus have thrown his life away for nothing?
I've practically had them frothing at the mouth after asking them that one!
hey nifty, we can now get a Mormon perspective in too. (I got the reference to the Pearl of Great Price, yes I have some background in your faith, and to this day if a couple of 'elders' stop by I'll gladly invite them in for good conversation.). Here's a challenge for you though since you reference Adam and creation, I know that in Mormon doctrine, at least in the main LDS branch, you believe, in accordance with what Brigham Young taught, and from some references to books like those in the PoGP, that God the father was originally a man who had his own "god" and was elevated to godhood by his devotion. Similarly, those who make it to the celestial kingdom will in turn become gods continuing the chain. Question though, where did it begin? If God had a God, what God did that God have? Ultimately wouldn't there have to be one supreme Deity (unbound by the limitations of time and matter, else matter, not deity would be what's primeval.) starting the whole thing, shouldn't we all just be serving and worshipping him?
Not only can they not detect other Earths, they are heavily skewed towards very large gas giants in near, eccliptic orbits. They're measuring the star's wobble as the gas giant goes about its orbit. Just what do you expect to find first?
Stupid journalists.
"What does that mean for other worlds?"
Whatever God wants it to mean? I sure wouldn't put it past God to know that what happens on Earth is for the inhabitants of Earth and Earth alone. Why would God have any need to confuse the issue (for us) by bringing in all other worlds he created (if there are any)?
Maybe God has had unfathonable numbers of civilizations throughout history. Maybe there is just one at a time. Maybe there are 60 more out there or 60,0000. Maybe God knows that no matter what, each one of them isn't going to find the other because of the huge distances and the cataclysmic end in store for each one of them (before such technologies that would allow them to find each other).
No where in the Bible does it state that "all secrets are revealed here." Maybe the wording used to describe Christ is formulated in a way that we can understand it, because the true relationship (father-son) is completely incomprehensable to human brains.
Maybe it's what faith is all about.
(Not trying to be rude - just tossing out thoughts that crossed my mind. It's like trying to figure out where the dinosaurs fit in. If God had really worried about us knowing that, I figure he would have mentioned it. Otherwise, it is really unimportant in the discussion of salvation.)
Sin is inherent to every human being created by God. If you did not sin (hence be perfect) then you would be equal to God. And since God is omnipotent (something all true Christians believe) then the absense of sin in a human would be impossible. :)
This isn't just the inherent sin from Adam, but also the way we live our daily lives.
We all sin, there is no escaping it... think about it =)
Not sure who these christians were that you supposedly had 'frothing at the mouth', but maybe they, and you, should read the bible a little more carefully
God bless
When ST advances further, we'll find that our neighbors are just around the corner. We'd just to do a dimensional leap and there they are.
The universe is too big for our naked eyes but with some real science trickery as ST, we hope to find some shortcuts.
Thank you. This wasn't a troll.
As one of the most massive, densest and least-disturbed barred spirals known (nearly TWO TRILLION SOLAR MASSES), the Milky Way is a heavyweight where it counts - lots of minerals, little dispersion due to gasses because it has not suffered a major galactic collision yet, unlike Andromeda.
Nor is Sol an average star. Only 10% of stars are Sol's size, and of those, not all are going to be so mineral-heavy.
Nor an average planet. Its crust is the densest in the solar system, and was made by another planet colliding into it and the lighter stuff getting kicked off, leaving us with a large supply of iron and other heavier minerals close to the surface.
Chances of life existing elsewhere are almost certain, but I doubt it's mindboggingly common.
I am a science fantasy fan
I believe, as most Christians do, that Adam and Eve were meant to sin, no matter what. Sin is a necessary part of being 'human'. Sin no doubt existed before Jesus, and Jesus died on the cross for us as a way to know that sinning can lead to forgiveness if we show that He (as in Jesus, the son/earthly-being of God) is always a part of our lives and guiding us. With faith in the Lord, no sin we commit can lead to damnation.
This of course, brings up the question of evil in the world, and why God can't just 'defeat' it once and for all, and thereby make all his creations 'perfect'.
A few days ago I stumbled across this writing (scroll down a bit) that my classmate wrote on his website about the necessity of evil. It was enlightening and something that most faiths can relate to.
Why would any civilization that has the ability to travel on a galactic scale care to come to our planet and say anything?: What is being asked is the equivlent of the US government visiting every mud-hut tribe on earth, handing out pamphlets about themselves, perhaps give the villagers directions on a map of where the US is (on a scale incomprehensible: as local travel is by foot and navigated by landmarks), and then disappear into the ether. What would motivate anyone to come talk to us? Maybe if we had a particular resource that is rare, on a galactic scale: And assuming that they couldn't just take this resource without us being aware in the first place - might be a good reason. From any imaginary galactic viewpoint: We are a bunch of biped hairless tribes living on the limited landmass, barely breeching the atmosphere of the world and having not even reached a level of mutual respect for their own species (ie. We do not take of all people, because they are our people)) - let alone species that demonstrate even a rudiment of post-animal intelligence. Why would any galactic civilization care to speak to us? So we can feel good about ourselves knowing we aren't alone (let's not even bother with the social and religious problems this might have)? Take a deep breath: Breeching the gravity well, 400 foot tall buildings made of concrete and iron are probably not impressive to anyone except ourselves. Let's learn not do each other in, treat each other with mutual respect and general empathy - and just maybe some galactic peace corp. will come visit us and do the galactic equivilent of handing out 10 year old t-shirts and dig wells. Let's just hope we don't have galactic oil, can you imagine what kind of poisoned blankets they could use? Eck. Citizen Philip
Or maybe we are that important and unique....
I don't know that I'd agree that there's mostly gas giants. I mean, at my last family reunion I only counted 5 or 6 at the most and the rest of us had fairly normal reactions to the food....
--
As a matter of fact, I am a lawyer. But I play an actor on TV.
"Earth is Rare, New Study Suggests". Or, so before the study we thought that one in 10000000000 stars had habitable Earth-like planets, not it appears it's more like one in 1000000000 (because we haven't found the second Jupiter yet). Interesting, but not a big deal.
I say, let's wait until 7-10 years, when the results from the Kepler mission will tell us for sure whether Earth-like planets are common or not.
Future Wiki -- If you don't think about the future, you cannot have one.
I'm afraid I don't follow your logic. How does being free from sin make one God's equal? Do babies sin? Is a mouse God's equal? A worm? I really can't think of how they have disobeyed their Creator. If sin is inherent, where do we inherit it from? If you say Adam, I'm afraid I don't get that either. Why should I be damned for someone else's fault? Would a God of love be like that?
Personally, I agree with you on the pervasiveness of sin, but don't look to our ancestor for the blame. Rather human beings have a (limited) power to choose the course of their lives. Many, most, of us screw up in those decisions somewhere along the way. That's where one sees the mercy of God, in forgiving that of us if we just have the humility to ask it. I don't believe God expects perfection of us error-prone beings, after all, He did not create us that way. That's why as muslims we say that what we are judged by are our intentions, not necessarily (at least not strictly) by our actions. As such, a question of the necessity of a god-man dying for our sins just doesn't make sense. God is powerful, and compassionate, enough that He can forgive us, no blood required.
Some though, I believe, can live their lives without sin. For most of us, that time is only when we're babies. But for a select few, (I emphasize the word 'select') the truth of God's power and reality is so pervasive and real, sinning to them would be as ridiculous as one of us jumping into a burning fire. In that, I'm speaking of prophets and saints.
Anyway, I do enjoy the conversation, regardless of the differences in points of view.
A lot of posts have put forth the "Oh, how likely is it that in all the entire universe we are the ONLY planet to have life?" type argument. (I'll call this the "oh come on" argument.)
But this argument is not exactly correct. If you took a random planet out of the universe and it had life, then you would be justified in thinking that there are probably more life-bearing planets in the universe.
But that is not the position we are in. The earth is not a random planet, it's the one we live on.
Suppose, for argument's sake you had a bag full of, say, a billion marbles. You know that all the marbles are either black or red.
Situation 1: You reach into the bag without looking and pull out a red marble. What are the chances that there are any other red marbles in the bag?
Situation 2: Someone else looks through the entire bag and tells you that there is at least one red marble in the bag. What are the chances that there are at least two red marbles in the bag?
In situation 1, if there is really only one red marble in the bag, then you hit the billion in one chance of drawing it out. Pretty unlikely.
But in situation 2, you have no way of knowing what the chances for more red marbles are. All you know is that there is at least one.
We are in situation 2. We didn't draw Earth randomly out of the bag.
Basically the "oh come on" argument boils down to this:
"But if there is only one planet with life on it, what are the odds that that out of all the zillions of planets we happen to live on the one with life?"
I'm not saying that we are definitely alone in the universe, just that the mere fact that we live on a planet with life does not give us any information on the probability of there being life on other planets.
Maybe the chance of life arising is so miniscule that it really did only happen once.
If the geiger counter does not click, the coffee, she is not thick.
8 For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD.
9 For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.
(Old Testament, Book of Isaiah)
There are a number of questions like this one that have answers that we are not privy to yet. But in the meantime there is so much to learn and do that will help prepare us to receive "the greater mysteries".This is a pet peeve of mine: the word unique is meant to be used alone, without adjectives. There is no "fairly unique" or "completely unique."
Use the word "rare" instead if you want to describe how something is relatively easy or hard to find. Unique is one of a kind.
To think that in the entire universe. The vast span of space, so large that you can barely even begin to comprehend. To think, that in that entire area, that we are the only living life, is just sad.
I think we humans feel that we are the best. Top notch at everything we do, and therefore it could not be possible that there is a more intelligent lifeform out there. How could it be possible?
People need to step down from their high hat and look at the big picture. We're but tiny little beings in this huge space. Our planet is but one of billions, if not trillions in the universe.
Not to get too corny quoting a movie, but if we are truly alone in this universe. Well that's a terrible waste of space.
The greatest experience we can have is the mysterious.
- Albert Einstein
Then why put our planet at the edge of a galactic cluster, and why isn't the sun revolving around us? Important but.. not that important?
I was reading the other day about how cnn mentioned all they could find were gas giants bigger than jupiter, and that was one of their conclusions for no life, or hard to find life---but our technology limits us from finding systems like ours, we have to rely on big enough planets to pull the suns tilt some and throw it off before we can detect it, a planet the size of earth with or without life won't produce enough gravity to be noticed by our current telescopes and solar system detection programs
There is really little reason to believe in ETs -- scientifically or otherwise. The arguments against are huge and the arguments for are more like wishful thinking. Try this book:
3 87 952896/qid=1091826133/sr=8-1/ref=pd_ka_1/104-72144 97-5991136?v=glance&s=books&n=507846
Rare Earth: Why Complex Life Is Uncommon in the Universe
by Peter Ward, Donald Brownlee
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0
Our current technology has difficulty detecting whether or not Pluto is a planet! And what was this I heard about another farthest planet out there too?
Given that we can't definitely say how many planets we've got in our own solar system, how can anyone suggest that the lack of finding "Class M" (sorry for star trek terms, but it's too convenient) planets out there is due to their non-existance?? It's ridiculous.
It's WAY too early to make suggestions like that for now.
The whole looking for life in the known universe should be done, but but the actual hopes of being in the right place and the right time is so astronomicaly huge (pun intended) that any rational thinker would concider this much more improbable than the state lottery.
The other side of it is also the quick shots like this artical. There are billions of solar systems out there and we now have a sample of 100 and then there is this quick guess that we are alone....
We have possessed the ability to examine other planets for about a decade, and the ability to explore space for about 4 decades. The earth has supported intelligent life for thousands of years but been in existance for billions.
You have to assume that the other planets intelligent life has a timeline similar to ours. The odds of any timelines colliding have to way higher than hitting the lottery.
For answers philosophical, turn to page 37 in your Monty Python hymnbook: The Galaxy Song
what I wonder would be what does that say about Christ being God's unique son, whose atoning sacrifice is supposed to save humanity?
Nothing in particular. You can find situations to cover aliens right here on Earth. The Bible says that people who seek the truth will find it. Knowing the details of Jesus aren't neccesary to know the purpose of Jesus. I once read a religious Native American poem which described sin, sacrifice, forgiveness, and redemption. The names were different, but it sounded pretty Christian to me. If there's evidence that people that couldn't know the details of Jesus still know the purpose here on Earth, it doesn't seem like a big stretch to extend it to other planets.
As for Jesus being unique, well there's some reason he had to be a Jew. You'll have to ask the big guy why, but his uniqueness and what it means to exclusion was covered in the early church. Him being a Jew was not meant to and hasn't excluded anybody. In fact, he gained a lot more followers among non-Jews than Jews. He's unique, but that didn't make any difference for the Romans living in the same area, the Native Americans who couldn't know the details, and nor would it make a difference for beings not even from this planet.
I don't see how Jesus' uniqueness has caused any issues on Earth, so I don't see that it would make any difference with aliens.
Perhaps the alien races didn't need a redemer such as Jesus. Maybe they weren't as "wicked" and "sinfull". If, from a religious perspective, Adam and Eve hadn't gotten kicked out of Eden then we wouldn't have needed Jesus either.
Maybe we DID take the blue pill. You wouldn't remember anyway.
How would you hold your breadth, anyway? Sometimes I hold my width, especially after eating spicy chicken wings, but I don't think I've ever held my breadth.
WWJD? JWRTFA!
SO - if we are alone - what are we waiting for? Lets colonize!
HD70642 in Puppis 90 light years away...
I see a pattern forming...
Never by hatred has hatred been appeased, only by kindness - the Buddha
Give it, folks. WE are it! This whole mess was made for us and us alone. If we as a civilization die its our own fault. WE cant blame ET. The SETI project is kinda fun, a diversion, but a waste of man-power and bandwidth.
Just because the solarsystem/universe is huge doesnt mean that there are other critters out there. Sorry, Carl.
So, enjoy the universe, use it up , suck up ALL of its resources and live like theres no tomorrow, 'cause there aint! La Dolce vita!
heh, got me there...
See this .
If "over 400 government, military, and intelligence community witnesses testifying to their direct, personal, first hand experience with UFOs, ETs, ET technology" isn't good enough for you, then start here to research our gov's own documents, and then go here and dismiss these reports with "swamp gas" or "venus" or "a flock of birds".
This "we may contact other intelligent creatures someday" is a farce. They are here and have been for millenia.
"The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance - it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel Boorstin
See this story over at sciscoop - and thousands more for breaking science news!
Energy: time to change the picture.
Why is it that every time someone brings up the "Are we alone?" discussion in any fora, that the assumption is made that if we can't find a planet equivalent to our own, we must be alone?
Seriously.. there is life, even on our own planet, living in extremes that we would think would be completely inhabitable to life. Life living at -100F (deep sea) in temperature, or even in +1600F temperatures (lava beds).
Has anyone thought that perhaps the reason why we haven't been contacted by other lifeforms, is because maybe they skipped over our planet because they saw it as uninhabitable?
Perhaps what we consider "habitable" is merely defined by our own skewed metric of what constitutes "life".
Maybe we're looking for a planet(oid) with an oxygen atmosphere, clouds, near a sun.. when in fact, life could be way out in the darkness, nowhere near the sun or heat, in extremely cold or devoid conditions.
Open your eyes. Anyone out there that evolved in this same universe/galaxy/dimension, might not even remotely be close to us in biology or design. Also, there are likely planets out there, which have been in existance for 100,000 years, without any catastrophic events to "reboot" their evolution, as we have endured here several times.
Ever wonder what a planet of humanoid life, evolving for 100,000 consecutive years without interruption would look like? Just think of how much we've evolved (and de-evolved, ahem) in the last 200 years.
I think the answer is not important. In our own planet, there is never ever a moment that ALL people on the earth are happy and getting along peacefully. Why war is always there? Is it possible to get the peace for the whole world? Without realizeing our own peace in the planet, it is not use looking for other life in the universe. What will people on earth do when they find other life in another planet? I can't even imagin..
There was actually a science fiction story about this subject, whose name and author i unfortunatly forget.
It was set in a universe with lots of sentient races about. Some explorers found a planet where something very similar to the whole son of god/death/resurection/whetever thing had just happened a few years or decades ago.
One of the explorers decided this must mean that god sends christ down to every planet so that each species would be enlightened or whatever. So he becomes obsessed with having the chance to actualy meet the son of god, and sets out to visit every habitable planet in the universe in turn until he finds one where christ is actually there right then.
This is all told from theperspective of one of the explorers who choose to stay on the first planet and document everything as carefully as possible. I think he had some theory that if it was true, that the other guy would never be able to catch christ in the act and a few years off was the best anyone could do, so they might as well make the best of the current situation. His reason for this was that not only were there the obvious statistical difficulties, humans had already been "saved" once, so as a human the other guy would never be allowed to meet christ and get a "second chance," or something like that. I guess this was building off the "christ is unique" idea you mentioned, which i'd never heard before.
Interesting thought experiment type SF but probably a good thing it was a short story. As a non-christian i most likely would have gotten annoyed at a novel length treatment.
This Space Intentionally Left Blank
life is non-linear and you'll be surprised where the positive feedback comes from
ciao
but the men in here are. HAHAHA anyway, maybe that's the problem, maybe all the guys on slashdot just haven't bothered to improve their detection techniques and have had a girlfriend for years!
iron production can be done in stars about 100 million years old. red-giant production might be a minium of half a billion
plus you need to wait for the universe to cool down and some proto galawies need to form.
so you're looking at least at second generation stars made in some stable galaxies
my guess is about 2 billion years after the big bang...don't underestimate the need for a loooong term stable environment
then you need to take into account the production of life (hey we have oxygen now so things are getting easier :) So add 4.5 billion years to the above
see not so hard
ciao
Exercise: Given a compressed encrypted datastream, try to determine through analysis that it is not in fact highly random background noise.
Assumption: Far-foreigners do not communicate in decompressed cleartext, since bandwidth is probably finite everywhere. Or they did at first (like us), but quickly (like us) discovered the advantage of scrunching and obfuscating digitized data.
Conclusion: You are better off spending your cpu time on the Folding@Home project than the SETI radiotelescope data analysis project.
I would, of course, love it if someone gave me a plausible reason why the SETI project has a snowball's chance in hell of finding anything.
"CNN is running a story about how ours might be a unique solar system. Of the 100+ systems currently known to contain planets, all contain seemingly only gas giants. However, this may be a case of current technology and techniques being unable to detect planets similar to Earth."
Let's face it, this CNN story is the slashdot version of "The Death of Gaming"-- Something you run every now and then not because it's fresh, new, exciting or even informative, but because you have nothing else. I mean, regardless of the fact that we really don't have the technology to see earth sized planets reliably over intergalactic distances, it's just something they need to rehash every now and then. Earth is alone in the universe just like the PC gaming industry will come to a crashing, screaming halt exactly one year from today, regardless of the busted logic used to arrive at those assertions.
The thing that does surprise me most is that this is probably the closest you'll ever see a major media outlet all but admit that there is a divine power, because for the Earth to be unique, you need something to control the inherent chaos that would allow for an infinite number of possibilities and life therein on other worlds. After all, random chance over an infinite playing field all but guarantees life somewhere out there.
You need a FREE iPod Nano
Sin is inherent to every human being created by God. If you did not sin (hence be perfect) then you would be equal to God.
That's pretty far out.
So If I had never broken one of the ten commandments then I'd be able to create new planets and stuff out of nothingness?
Wow.
I fail to see how the lack of sin (for whatever specific definition of that you use which is different from everybody else's) is supposed to grant super powers.
Where does it even say that in the bible (or any of the other writings that could well have been part of the bible save for the choices of the human editors)?
Basically, god gave our souls free will and to act apon it within the confines of our body. If we have brain tumor that causes up to go onto a killing spree, then God will forgive. But we all must relise that such obsticles put forth to us in life serves a purpose to teach us all a leason out of the aspect of spiritual growth.
;)
You see, sometimes God allows for pain to take place to not only teach an individual, but to make him/her an example for the greater good of mankind. The way I see it, the older the soul (if you believe in reincarnation), the more trials me must face in the next life. This is so we make grow and become closer to God an his mercy.
Just because you don't like the life put forth by God doesn't mean we should not respect his unfathomable wisdom
Life is not for the lazy.
which is made inside stars... it therefore takes at least one generation of stars to blow up and reform to make planets with life (even life as we don't know it... hydrogen cannot make enough complex chemistry).
Using the life span of stars (including really big stars that can form the heavier atoms) we are near the first generation of life generating planets.
-pyrrho
You question why would God only send his "son" down to one species and yet never question why Muhammad is the last prophet on Earth forever and why questioning the Quran is punishable by death?
FWIW, Adam and Eve are just a story to explain Creation.
size of universe:infinite (i mean you might think it's a long way to the chemist, but that's just peanuts compared to how big the universe is.
number of planets in universe: again infinite.
number of planets with life on them: not infinite
infinity/not infinity=just about zero, so yes we are alone.
When the universe was young, the first stars were born "shortly" after the big bang, there weren't any of the heavy metals (such as iron, silver, gold uranium) in the universe, just gas. As the first og the stars started to collapse into super novae, the sheer pressure formed those metals, which our soceity is so dependant of. It has taken several generations og stars to produce the metals and minerals which we are dependent on today, but the extra-solar systems we are observing are mostly populated by gaseus (sp?) planets. Since the universe is still "young", might the generational gap be unevenly destributed? Maybe there are intelligent life on nearby stars, but they don't have the raw materials to construct anything that can be detected by our civilization. Maybe we are some sorta fluke: being in a young, gaseous part of the universe, but with lot's of metal and minerals at out disposal?
Just Don't
"I believe, as most Christians do, that Adam and Eve were meant to sin, no matter what"
"Sin is a necessary part of being 'human'"
"This of course, brings up the question of evil in the world, and why God can't just 'defeat' it once and for all, and thereby make all his creations 'perfect'."
First off most I dont think most Christains believe that Adam and Eve were meant to sin, they gave up everlasting life for the right to try to rule themsevles. Do you really think that God wanted to have to send his son to suffer and die for us??
Second sin is not a neccesary part of being human because God is working on taking the sin out of humans which will put us back on track to being able to live forever.
Third God is going to, and wants to take sin out of the world and us but there are 3 issues that satan raised that have to come to full before he will act.
1) In the Garden of Eden satan said man is better off ruling ourselves independent of God.
2)In the Book of Job satan said the man was selfish and we serve God out od selfish desires and what we can get and not because we want to.
3)satan said he can turn any man way from serving God, which God is letting him prove it,(If he doesnt then more issues will be raised) some of satans means are (False relgion, Religious lies like Adam and Eve were supposed to sin, and a whole host of others to numerous to put in there.)
KEEP IN MIND THAT THE DAY THAT GOD STEPS IN TO GET RID OF EVIL IS THE DAY OF ARMAGEDDON!!!
A Singularity may be the reason nothing will ever be found by us. Another being could be waiting for a comparable intelligence, rather than attempt communication with mere biologicals.
Look where I'm pointing! Don't you see 'em? Look! Just because you can't see them doesn't mean they're not there.
What do you mean you can't see these 'atoms,' Mr Newton? Newton wouldn't have denied the existence of atoms as the basic building blocks of matter just because no one could conclusively prove they existed at the time.
O~ Him that studies revenge keeps his own wounds green. -- Francis Bacon
Don't try and apply logic to christianity... it just doesn't fit.
The darkness... controls the music. The music... controls the soul.
That I don't know - I didn't build the bus or even drive the bus, I'm just a passenger who accepts the fact that someone else did and does.
The fact is about 100 extrasolar planets have been found, and most of these star systems are not like our solar system. This is likely due to observational bias: Only planets with masses much greater than earth can be detected currently.
As far as I know, most astronomers believe that planets with earth like masses are common in our Galaxy's thin disc, and also in the Bulge.
Today I read an article printed in Scientific American in 2001, about the Galactic habitable Zone. Here, astronomers estimate where in our Galaxy complex life could arise. The conklusion is complex life could exist in an annulus in the thin disc, but it's probably very rare.
These are exciting times, for the first time in human history we have the technological capability to determine if we are alone in our Galaxy. Seth Shostak, senior member of SETI believes contact could be made within 20 years.
If no signal is detected, we are probably alone. Anyhow, we have to keep on looking, detecting another civilization would be the biggest discovery in human history.
because I just descended on earth. Wow, what a dump!
-- $SIGNATURE
Assuming that there exist intelligent life out there, and assuming their are more than just us and them, and assuming they have the power to cross the entire universe. Isn't it safe to assume that they already know that life exists in the universe, and that they are not exactly looking for us? There is probably like a community of aliens across our galaxy who have already mastered space and time, and have created an ordered and peaceful civilization (how else will they have survived nuclear weapons, planet destroying super rays, ect....). If I were part of this super race, I certainly wouldn't want to come into contact with humans.
If for all we know we live in an infinitely large space, then we must have an infite amount of possible outcomes. I do not find it hard to believe that another race more intelligent than humans, exists or has existed at some point in time somewhere in this space. I would thing it would be arrogant to think otherwise.
I cannot fathom an alien race developing along the same moral boundaries or guidelines we have.
Specifically, "Thou Shalt Not Kill." Granted, mankind is not particularly good at observing this one either, but a culture devoid of such engrained guidelines would probably just kill us with impunity.
If we DO discover them, we need to make sure we can overwhelm them if necessary first. If not, then we need to lay low.
Else, It's a cookbook! It's a cookbook!
so Daryl McBride recently claimed.
Shhhhhhh, don't tell them that. Besides, if the Mormons are the ones that got it right, then the originator of the chain was probably some hyper-advanced ancient alien being that was so technologically advanced he became as a deity. Like the ancients on Stargate SG1, though I seriously doubt that is the case. Oh, and if I remember correctly doesn't the quaran say specifically that the Torah as is written in hebrew is to be read and believed? Just asking for verifacation, I heard that during a dinner party and wanted a muslim to verify it for me.
Fucking hell. This is not news people. Research into extrasolar planets has been going on for years. We're not yet at the point of finding earth like planets.
Nothing new to see here. Move on people!
It's a pretty big place and we are still fairly stupid in general.
Anyone passing by will see wars, disease, greed and a rich, but flawed gene pool capable of supporting 100 times as many flawed beings.
We grow like weeds and fight like young children.
Others out there that have the ability to know us, also know better.
When we have grown a bit, we might make some friends...
Blogging because I can...
Not sure I follow you about the Torah question. If you're referring to the parent poster, he was quoting from a writing called the book of Moses found in a Mormon collection called the Pearl of Great Price. Rather interesting collections of texts, but as a non-mormon, obviously I don't for an instant believe its really a book of Moses. But enough of that.
What we believe is this though, as God had sent prophets and warners to all people in the past, God sent man a number of books through some of the prophets in history for the guidance of humanity. Of these, a few receive repeated mention (there are said to have been others though), the Torah with Moses, the Zabur with David, the Injeel with Jesus, and the Quran with Muhammad, peace and blessings on them all. As such, we have to believe in all that God has sent. However, we also believe that though the essential message of God has been the same through all prophets, none the less, other matters, particularly laws for instance, may only be valid for the time of those revalations and their authority. I.e., we do not consider ourselves bound by the specific laws found in the Torah as such, though of course there does exist a good deal of similarity between the Islamic Shariah, and what Jews might refer to a Halachic laws. (if I'm getting that latter right). Yes we are bound to follow it, in the sense of believing in it, the original, uncorrupted scripture, not necessarily though in following what people carry around though calling the Bible today though.
Another point to know, is that most Muslims also believe that the former scriptures as we now have them are incomplete and/or corrupted, through the passage of time, and the hands of men, often by men of "religion" leading their people astray. This was in fact one of the points behind the Quran, to set matters straight, where men had forgotten.
There isn't a passage in the Quran which quite says what you were quoting, but here's a few different ones mentioning the Torah I found for you:
He hath revealed unto thee (Muhammad) the Scripture with truth, confirming that which was (revealed) before it, even as He revealed the Torah and the Gospel.
Lo! We did reveal the Torah, wherein is guidance and a light, by which the prophets who surrendered (unto God) judged the Jews, and the rabbis and the priests (judged) by such of God's Scripture as they were bidden to observe, and thereunto were they witnesses. So fear not mankind, but fear Me. And sell not My revelations for a little gain. Whoso judgeth not by that which God hath revealed: such are disbelievers.
And We prescribed for them therein: The life for the life, and the eye for the eye, and the nose for the nose, and the ear for the ear, and the tooth for the tooth, and for wounds retaliation. But whoso forgoeth it (in the way of charity) it shall be expiation for him. Whoso judgeth not by that which God hath revealed: such are wrong-doers.
And We caused Jesus, son of Mary, to follow in their footsteps, confirming that which was (revealed) before him in the Torah, and We bestowed on him the Gospel wherein is guidance and a light, confirming that which was (revealed) before it in the Torah - a guidance and an admonition unto those who ward off (evil).
And unto thee have We revealed the Scripture with the truth, confirming whatever Scripture was before it, and a watcher over it. So judge between them by that which God hath revealed, and follow not their desires away from the truth which hath come unto thee. For each We have appointed a divine law and a traced-out way. Had God willed He could have made you one community. But that He may try you by that which He hath given you (He hath made you as ye are). So vie one with another in good works. Unto God you will all return, and He will then inform you of that wherein you differ.
If they had observed the Torah and the Gospel and that which was revealed unto them from their Lord, they would surely have been nourished from above them and from beneath their feet. Am
Sorry to go offtopic but I have to disagree with you there. To say that the indiginous peoples had no recorded history and use that as a justification for eurocentrism is laughable. There are several of examples of cultures in the Americas which had "historical awareness" and "recorded history" that were destroyed and annihilated. Do you really think Cortez was interested in learning the history of the indigenous peoples before he cut off their hands for gold? Do you think he was interested in interpreting their historical archives, understanding their medicines, religion, etc. for future scholars to study? Of course not! And just from the sound of your previous post, you don't seem to be very interested either. I thought everyone knew the difference between history and the truth, since history is always biased by the victors (which of course, are currently the Europeans) while the vanquished are often completely ignored.
I agree with you that eurocentric attitudes dominate the world today, but that does not mean that that will always be the case--as evidenced by the previous cultures that have risen and fallen before us. If this "modern" society can avoid obliterating the planet we live on with pollution and avoid global nuclear war, perhaps we may one day be able to join the ranks of the cultures that came before us which lasted for millenia, and not merely a few centuries (or in your words, a "continuum") as we have up to this point.
You are making some serious assumptions about the needs of life. Life does not have to be like us, and it needn't require things like heavy metals. It might just be something we couldn't imagine in our wildest dreams.
-kaplanfx
Visualize Whirled Peas
.... and the fact that they keep themselves away from us is the proof of their intelligence and common sense...
... y Dios vio que Linux era bueno... Genesis 99.666
...is for humans to find some sort of life on venus or a moon around jupiter. Then how stupid would all these people feel?
But I can already hear their arguments: "Well, it's life in just one solarsystem, so life must have spread internally so we're still unique and alone in the universe. Blah blah blah, I'm a moron."
What people need to realize is that the conditions don't have to be "just right" for life to exist... they just have to be right for a certian type of life to exist.
"Gee we don't see anything so far, so I guess we are alone" What kind of crap is this? We have stone-age technology to look at this crap. Large number statistics support life on other planets. Just that they may be 10 galaxies away.
-- "You can lead a yak to water, but you can't teach an old dog to make a silk purse out of a pig in a poke" - Opus
The Universe is full of life. I'm sorry, but we are the lesser of the species if we think we're the first and only. 200K years we've been here.. How long have the Verse been around? Crap, it's got shitstains older than us.
I think one of the best proffs of there being other intelligent life in the universe, is the fact that nobody has contacted us yet.
-H
Thank You for sharing what Islam teaches on this topic. I'm sure it is correct because it has such a wonderful track record...
Mohammed said "Fever is from the heat of hell, so put it out with water(Vol 4:619)." Who needs silly antibiotics?
Mohammed said " If a housefly falls in the drink of anyone of you, he should dip it in the drink, because one of its wings has a disease and the other has a cure for the disease (Vol 4:537)."
Or how about his explantion of how a baby's looks are determined? Mohammed said, "As for the child, if the man's discharge preceedes the woman's discharge, the child attracts the similarity of the man, and if the woman's discharge precedes the man's, then the child attracts the similarity of the woman (Vol 5:275)."
If you take a real look at Mohammed's teachings you will realize he had no idea what he was talking about, wasn't a prophet but a shrewd guy who created a religion of convenience. What he says is worthless, especially when it comes to science and religion.
In other news, the existence of ants and other insects has been shown to be a unique phenomenon that only exists in my yard, becuase while I can see several of them here at my feet, when I look across at the neighbor's yards, all I can see are the larger animals like dogs and cats - the insects are nowhere to be found over there. In fact, the only insects I seem to notice are the ones within a few meters of me.
Don't label something "offtopic" unless you know the topic well enough to tell what's on topic.
Well, I cannot speak for the whole Universe, but I am.
Sincerely,
Pan Tarhei Hosé, PhD.
"Homo sum et cogito ergo odi profanum vulgus et libido."
By default the technique we are using is good for finding Gas Giants with short orbits. Ergo they are close the systems star and make it highly unlikely to find a rocky core planet in a temperante distance from the star.
This study proves nothing
Even if it didn't occur this way in other planets it could have happend on earth... in another dimension. Remember for every posibility there is a different dimension. Or is god not subject to quantum physics?
Hmmm... Pie...
Don't know why I'm responding, maybe on the odd chance somebody will read what you posted and actually think you have a clue.
First off, clever to quote from something, giving reference numbers, without actually specifying what you're quoting. For those who don't know, those sayings were not from the Quran, but rather from a collection of Hadith, looks like Muslim's or Bukhari's. A hadith is a reported saying of the Prophet, transmitted through a line of narrators whose names will usually be given. Why? Because unlike the Quran, the Hadith are subject to questioning in terms of their actual authenticity, and hence value. It's a well known fact that muslim, like everyone else out there, were not immune to fabrications, hence the need to have some safeguard so one can determine the truthfullness of what one is reading.
Now, if you'd read my post a little clearer, you would have noticed, I am a SHIA. What you're quoting is from Sunni books. Sunni books in particular that Shia scholars have thoroughly criticized in terms of the legitimacy of their narrations, not just due to sectarian politics, but due to where clear weaknesses in many of their claims to accuracy.
As to the sayings you quoted, though no, I don't go dipping flies in my food, none the less there is often different ways of understanding things like this anyhow. Like the first one, ever heard of being figurative? God knows best. However, what's interesting is that if you look at one sayings of Imam Ali (there are several others which would back up my point, but I'll stick to a quick one for now), the sucessor to the Prophet for us Shias (for us, the hadith compose of the sayings of the Prophet, his daughter Fatima, and the twelve Imams), it's reported that he said that the cause of disease is something so small you cannot see it with one's eyes. But if you could, you would see that it is in fact very small living things. Hmm, maybe don't be so quick with throwing out those antibiotics....
The Spanish Conquistadors, no more than a couple of hundred, conquered the vast Aztec empire, whose capital city, Tenochtitlan (today's Mexico City) was inhabited by 200 000 souls.
How did they manage to do that? People that were living under the control of the Aztecs allied themsleves against the Aztecs helping the outsiders (which were seen as gods or demigods, due to their firearms and horses, which did not exist in America).
I reckon that many countries, if given a chance by alien conquerors, will willingly ally themselves against a current, more present enemy, than repel the new masters. IF anything an alien signal may mean for many people a chance for liberation, not a call for planetary peace.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
What about if they ask for the holly prophet Muhammed, peace upon him?
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
I saw the 'To Serve Man' episode on the old Twilight Zone with Rod Serling at least 30 years ago. I remember it vividly, as I do many of those great episodes. My question is this: How is it so many /.ers, most of which are much to young to remember the old Twilight Zone, are familiar with this story? Was it re-made more recently or are you picking it up on cable re-runs?
Posting anon due to mod status today. Ohhh...the power....
The probability of there being life in the universe isn't infinitesimal. It's 1. And all our questions need to be conditioned on the fact that we know there is life here. The correct question is: given that there is in fact life on Earth is it more likely to have arisen as a result of 'blind' evolution or as a result of the work of a Creator. I don't see the former answer to be lacking in sanity at all.
Doesn't it make you feel good to know that our freedoms are protected by politicans, lawyers and journalists.
To me, the biggest question is how many planets will turn out to have water. I think that as our telescope technology improves, we will find that most single stars (roughly half the total) have planets, and that virtually all of those with liquid water have life.
Where there is life there will, eventually, be intelligent creatures. Intelligence isn't a fluke; it's a result of evolution, which tends to produce ever more complex forms (in ever smaller numbers). Given the number of stars out there, it is unlikely that we are the only intelligent creatures in our galaxy.
So why don't we have any evidence of them? I suspect there are three reasons:
1. Planets with a mix of water and land may be rare. Most with life may be water worlds, where intelligent life, even if it developed, wouldn't create the kinds of technology -- fire, electricity, metalworking -- that would get them off the planet or create signals we can detect.
2. We are overly optimistic to think advanced civilizations will produce signals we can detect. Even with us, broadcasting is a short-lived phenomenon that soon will vanish. Any properly advanced civilization will save energy by using wires and compressed signals. Any signals we do detect will be so compressed they will seem like random noise, much like the sounds a modem makes when connecting.
3. There aren't any aliens here because travel between the stars is impossible, or nearly so -- it requires huge amounts of energy and takes lifetimes to get anywhere, and shielding a ship from collisions will be impossible. Somewhere between you and your goal, you are likely to get smacked and wiped out. There are no magic drives, no subspace. The first civilization in a galaxy that could travel between stars and also wanted to colonize them would be able to spread across the galaxy in no more than a few million years by setting up colonies that in their turn sent out more. If there were any spacefaring civilizations, they would have landed here long ago, and we would never have had a chance to evolve.
Given the number of stars, I think there must be other civilizations, most of them much more advanced than ours. They aren't here because they can't get here.
We're only just starting to detect other planets, and so far of course we can only find the heavy worlds and those near their star. In a few years we'll have fairly firm numbers on how many stars have planetary systems, what those systems are like, and perhaps what proportion of them have planets with liquid water. Knowing that, we can start making reasonable calculations of how many may have intelligent life. But don't expect contact. We aren't alone, but we might as well be.
The first radio broadcast by man was around a hundred years ago. How fast does radio/TV signals travel in a vacuum? its not the speed of light is it? even if it was, it would have got around 100 light years away, which isn't really that far. This means that other civilisations would have to have been using TV/Radio for millions or maybe billions of years.
TV/Radio isn't the only sign of inteligent life, as there may even be a way of transmitting data which seemed ovbious to another colony (such as wires, or something we know nothing about).
Think of it like this:
If two people design a protocol for sending email (if SMTP had never existed), they would quite possibly be very different, with very different features, using different technologies but they could be just as good as each other.
What our exterestrial overlords cant use radio signals because of the differences in atmosphere, or electronic noise surrounding their planet/moon/whatever.
That has to by the longest post ive ever written - i bet slashdot complains about me being behind a firewall or something.
C.S. Lewis actually answers this very question in his very good Cosmic Trilogy. The main character visits two planets: Venus and Mars. One is an ancient planet and the creatures look very different and there is no sin there (so they did not need Jesus), the other is a new creation. The creatures look like us because Jesus had already been born, so new beings will be like him(don't know why he had to make it like this). Just keep in mind that this is a work of fiction and not Christian doctrine.
The books are actually called: "Out of the Silent Planet", "Perelandra" and "That Hideous Strength"
Life without heavy metal? If there is life out there that doesn't have any heavy metal and is from a culture based on Bzigtny Speersc do we actually want to meet them?!
|..| Rock on |..|
Music is everybody's possession.
It's only publishers who think that people own it.
Fuck Beta
~John Lenno
I remember one day in high school me an some friends were talking about life on Mars, and one of them - a muslim - quoted from the Quran, and said that the book specifically stated that the only place life excisted in the universe was on Earth.... Was he wrong?
:)
The funny thing was that he first said:
"There's only life on Mars! The Quran says that it is so - There's only life on Mars!"
And so we all got a good laugh
(I'm an atheist.)
Quite, a least I've seen nor heard nothing in the Quran which directly would state that. That is nothing which specifically says, earth inhabitants, you are the only creatures I've made. Other verses might be up to interpretation, the proper interpretation of which would be determined through the hadith literature, as well as cross reference to the Quran itself (at least according to some). Like I mentioned, the hadith (sayings attributed to the Prophet Muhammad, and for us Shia, to the 12 Imams as well), do lend credence to the idea of their being life outside of Earth. Actually in my original post I didn't detail all the ones I've come across, such as one that apparently indicates the possibility of instellar space travel by (at least some) of those worlds. There's one apparently that says that Imam Ali (I think) said something about the inhabitants being able to travel by means of light. interesting stuff, since if travel between the stars is actually possible, it would have to be something way out our reach technologically just in considering the sheer distance between one star system to the next. Something like harnessing the quality of light itself actually be the answer (though of course presently only in the realm of sci-fi for us earthlings at this time in our history ;-)
One has to be careful however, since it is a fact that in the hadith literature you will come across spurious reports of dubious value. That;s why a vast discipline of determining historical worth for each tradition has developped over the centuries. I add this as a caveat.
Anyhow, to get back to the point, your friend may have been well intentioned, but I daresay misinformed. God knows best.
Yeah, well that seems a little bias, considering how hard it is to detect anything smaller that a gas giat.
The universe, it would seem, is just teeming with life. There is a God. One God, but logically a vast administration. We as humans are at the lowest end of the spiritual spectrum and there is great value in going from the lowest end to achieving spiritual perfection. There was an Adam and an Eve. They are probably not the "last" so much as the latest or most recent. Jesus was the material incarnation of one of the orders of divine sonship.
Take it on face value. Take it with a grain of salt, if you want. As I understand it, this is expected of those who would study the Quran, too.
My other car is a 1984 Nark Avenger.