Aliens definitely exist, say legitimate scientists

[Constitution Hour]

I honestly don't know what you're getting at here. A scientist does some math and says aliens are a mathematical certainty. Ok...great. What should my reaction be? I would agree...the numbers do indicate that alien life is mathematically certain. It's also mathematically certain that $2 + $2 = $4...but that doesn't put $4 in my pocket.

You seem to really be enjoying this and for the life if me, I can't figure out why.

Hold on just a moment. When using the $ with a numeric value some people might get the idea you are using a hexidecimal system which would be base 16 and not base ten in which case your sum is incorrect.

 

[dunkel]

Hold on just a moment. When using the $ with a numeric value some people might get the idea you are using a hexidecimal system which would be base 16 and not base ten in which case your sum is incorrect.

You're right...if we were talking about something different, then it'd be different...

 

[GeauxLSU]

Waiting on what? The math is pretty straight forward and simple. Assign whatever small chance of life you want as one variable...then calculate in the number of planets...the number is either 0 or greater than zero. Seems pretty clear the number is greater than 0. That probability says nothing about how much alien life there is or the nature of that life...just that it's mathematically certain that the chances of life aren't 0.

- - - Updated - - -



See above.

It's not that simple. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2_U7P7fkPBY I tell you what, I'll spot you the radio telemetry portion. That multiplies the likelihood by a HUGE factor, so what's the answer?
You can solve an equation when you have AN unknown, but when EVERY variable is unknown, you most assuredly can't say it's "mathematically certain", far from it.
The only FACT is, we don't know. There very well could be intelligent life, microscopic life, or no life at all on other planets and no 'math' weights the likelihood of one scenario over the other. Our simple minds look at the number of stars and postulate "Wow... there simply MUST be." When in actuality, no, there MUST not be, one way or the other.

 

[Constitution Hour]

The discovery of alien life would in no way "disprove" some sort of "divine creation" or "intelligent design".

Wow, a moment please... we agree. I feel as though we had a moment there Dunkel. Thank you. Now back to reality, I was making a refrence to the God particle article which goes hand in hand with the idea of alien life. I realize the two are miles apart as far as the science involved but that does not stop many of those involved from making statements like the speaker in the God particle article. It is all relative and I think you know that.

 

[rOmiLaYu]

Um...I take it this part was aimed at me?

No, squarely at Stuckon....but if you wanted to make it about you, I'm sure that would pour more gas on the fire

 

[Constitution Hour]

You're right...if we were talking about something different, then it'd be different...

Sorry I just can't resist the chance to be a wise arse now and then.

 

[dunkel]

It's not that simple. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2_U7P7fkPBY I tell you what, I'll spot you the radio telemetry portion. That multiplies the likely by a HUGE factor, so what's the answer?
You can solve an equation when you have AN unknown, but when EVERY variable is unknown, you most assuredly can't say it's "mathmatically certain", far from it.
The only FACT is, we don't know. There very well could be intelligent life, microscopic life, or no life at all on other planets and no 'math' weights the likelihood of one scenario over the other. Our simple minds look at the number of stars and postulate "Wow... there simply MUST be." When in actuality, no, there MUST not be, one way or the other.

That's a good point. The number of planets is an estimation. Just like polling data, I suppose. Ask 1000 people a question and you can get a pretty good idea of what the other 300 million are thinking...+ or - of course. So you can look at X number of visible stars, see how many have planets, and extrapolate that out and figure out how many planets there are in the rest of the universe...+ or - of course.

Which is why...as I've said...and to the apparent amusement of certain members here...whatever the math says, until I see some hard evidence, it's all just numbers on paper.

 

[dunkel]

No, squarely at Stuckon....but if you wanted to make it about you, I'm sure that would pour more gas on the fire

Oh ok...I wasn't sure. He specifically said "stuckon" about halfway through that post, so I wasn't sure which part was only for him.

And no thanks...I'd rather stick to the topic, thanks.

 

[dunkel]

Wow, a moment please... we agree. I feel as though we had a moment there Dunkel. Thank you. Now back to reality, I was making a refrence to the God particle article which goes hand in hand with the idea of alien life. I realize the two are miles apart as far as the science involved but that does not stop many of those involved from making statements like the speaker in the God particle article. It is all relative and I think you know that.

If anyone claims they can definitely "disprove" god because of this or that scientific discovery, I will have to humbly disagree with that assertion.

 

[GeauxLSU]

That's a good point. The number of planets is an estimation. Just like polling data, I suppose. Ask 1000 people a question and you can get a pretty good idea of what the other 300 million are thinking...+ or - of course. So you can look at X number of visible stars, see how many have planets, and extrapolate that out and figure out how many planets there are in the rest of the universe...+ or - of course.

Which is why...as I've said...and to the apparent amusement of certain members here...whatever the math says, until I see some hard evidence, it's all just numbers on paper.

The difference is the number of voters is a FINITE and KNOWN number (withing a certain margin of error). The number of planets, the number of planets that 'could' support life etc... (all the variables in the video) are all unknown. But all that aside, the biggest thing of all, the probability of life generating itself, even if we KNEW that the conditions to support life (let's say 'earth like') did in fact exist for certain on at least one planet is still completely unknown. All of that make any assumption about life on another planet using 'math' completely irrelevant. Hence my question about why you would say it's a "mathematical certainty'?