• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Why Haven't Aliens Contacted Us Yet? (Fermi Paradox)

Cochise said:
I agree. Just an opinion. A mathematical friend assures me there cannot be less than 9 dimensions, though, and he's not generally regarded as insane :)

My opinion is based on knowing how difficult (Read: Utterly impractical) travel between galaxies is known to be. There are no such prohibitions of physics on jumping timelines or dimensions. Not yet, anyway.
Click to expand...
The Fermi Paradox goes beyond travel - it's why haven't we observed any signs anywhere of intelligent life - personally I think there are too many assumptions made on how they would attempt to communicate and an overestimation of our ability to detect alien signals, which may be using some medium we haven't even stumbled across yet.

We're using radio-based technology with moves towards light-based technology, and all that in a century or so. What if the window for these communication types is only a few hundred years (or less) before you move onto something more advanced - virtually undetectable in the universe at large on such short time-spans. We could be flooded with alien signals using alternative technologies and not know it.
 
SimonBurchell said:
The Fermi Paradox goes beyond travel - it's why haven't we observed any signs anywhere of intelligent life - personally I think there are too many assumptions made on how they would attempt to communicate and an overestimation of our ability to detect alien signals, which may be using some medium we haven't even stumbled across yet.
Click to expand...
Again, I know that. But we were talking UFO's. The Fermi Paradox doesn't explain how, should they exist, other civilizations could overcome the physical limits on transport. It's very clear the human race are not going to get to the next solar system, let alone the next galaxy, and we aren't capable of building anything like the alleged UFO's people have seen. Evolution would have to come up with a physically very different race, or something would have to be discovered that negates our current understanding of physics, to make interstellar travel possible.

Which is why I don't bother reading SF any more.

So, if, and I stress if, because the evidence is not strong, there are UFO's it makes sense to consider alternate origins for them.
 
Cochise said:
Again, I know that. But we were talking UFO's. The Fermi Paradox doesn't explain how, should they exist, other civilizations could overcome the physical limits on transport. It's very clear the human race are not going to get to the next solar system, let alone the next galaxy, and we aren't capable of building anything like the alleged UFO's people have seen. Evolution would have to come up with a physically very different race, or something would have to be discovered that negates our current understanding of physics, to make interstellar travel possible.

Which is why I don't bother reading SF any more.

So, if, and I stress if, because the evidence is not strong, there are UFO's it makes sense to consider alternate origins for them.
Click to expand...
I agree completely - I don't believe UFOs are extraterrestrial in origin, I tend towards a paranormal origin for many, especially high strangeness entity encounters.
 
When you see a UFO yourself, then you will know that these strange vehicles are someone else's technology.
Nikola Tesla himself was certain of life on other planets, and that 'The transmission of energy to another planet is only a matter of engineering'.
 
Ronnie Jersey said:
When you see a UFO yourself, then you will know that these strange vehicles are someone else's technology.
Nikola Tesla himself was certain of life on other planets, and that 'The transmission of energy to another planet is only a matter of engineering'.
Click to expand...
The problem is, no-one ever really sees the same thing twice, each entity encounter not pulled out of hypnosis seems to be individually tailored. The ones that are "recovered" via hypnosis just can't be trusted as having happened as described (or indeed at all).
 
SimonBurchell said:
The problem is, no-one ever really sees the same thing twice, each entity encounter not pulled out of hypnosis seems to be individually tailored. The ones that are "recovered" via hypnosis just can't be trusted as having happened as described (or indeed at all).
Click to expand...
True, but have you entertained the thought that perhaps there are many civilizations out there, probing the universe as we do.
We also have many different types of vehicles and probes that we send out to Mars, for example.
And the basics seem to remain the same for those reporting to be abducted - they are examined, samples taken, and then returned.
The same things Betty and Barney Hill reported have been told by many others.
Look at us here on Earth - we come in different colors, sizes, we look different, and speak differently.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Ronnie Jersey said:
When you see a UFO yourself, then you will know that these strange vehicles are someone else's technology.
Nikola Tesla himself was certain of life on other planets, and that 'The transmission of energy to another planet is only a matter of engineering'.
Click to expand...
I think Tesla was an absolute genius. But we know more about the limits of the (known) universe now than he did when he was alive.
 
Cochise said:
I think Tesla was an absolute genius. But we know more about the limits of the (known) universe now than he did when he was alive.
Click to expand...
I respect everyone's opinions, and Tesla was a genius.
And in years to come even more will be known about the universe, and our place in it.
And nothing will ever convince me that we are alone in it.
 
Ronnie Jersey said:
I respect everyone's opinions, and Tesla was a genius.
And in years to come even more will be known about the universe, and our place in it.
And nothing will ever convince me that we are alone in it.
Click to expand...
Not a problem. I've come to the opposite conclusion, but what do any of us really know?
 
Travel between timelines is likely to be at least as difficult as travelling between the stars. I wrote a short SF story a while ago, that described how to do it; you create a temporally-displaced wormhole using Kip Thorne's method, then travel back in time and change the past. Since you still have the wormhole to the existing present, you can then travel between the timelines at will.

Trouble is it doesn't stop there; once one person finds out how to change the past successfully, everyone else wants to have a go - you end up with an infinitely confusing manifold of timelines, each interacting with each other chaotically. A universe with easy inter-timeline interaction is a messy place, full of conflicts of interest and rival realities - you don't want to go there.
 
Cochise said:
I think Tesla was an absolute genius. But we know more about the limits of the (known) universe now than he did when he was alive
Click to expand...
It's true. Another thing to consider is that Tesla's career had two phases; during the 19th century almost everything he said was right, even though it went against the then-current paradigm. During the 20th century almost everything he said was wrong, and the paradigm has moved far beyond his misguided ideas.

Tesla thought he might have intercepted signals from aliens in outer space; instead he seems to have detected the radio emissions coming from Jupiter - which would have been a remarkable achievement if only he had realized what he had found.

And his ideas about broadcast transmission of power are a fantasy - the boundaries of broadcast power and induction are well known today, and these technologies will become even more important in the future; but Tesla was wrong about them in almost every respect.
 
An astrobiologist writes...

"For astrobiologists like me, the first image from Nasa’s James Webb Space Telescope reveals infinite possibilities of life beyond Earth"

This sums up my feelings at to why I feel Fermi was a bit premature:

"The first spectacular image released was of the galaxy cluster SMACS 0723, known as Webb’s First Deep Field. This image covers just a patch of sky approximately the size of a grain of sand held at arm’s length by someone on the ground – and yet it is crowded with galaxies, literally thousands of them. Within each galaxy, there could be on average 100 billion stars, each with its own family of planets and moons orbiting them."

https://www.theguardian.com/comment...rs-life-nasa-james-webb-space-telescope-earth
 
Paul_Exeter said:
An astrobiologist writes...

"For astrobiologists like me, the first image from Nasa’s James Webb Space Telescope reveals infinite possibilities of life beyond Earth"
Click to expand...
When talking about this subject with friends, I've often said that, as far as I'm concerned, Hubble's deep field image is as good as definitive proof of extraterrestrial life. It's unthinkable that the universe could contain so many galaxies without intelligent life arising in various places.

However, I still think, and everything we learn seems to contribute to this, that it's likely that complex life is rare, and civilisation level life is probably so thinly spread at any given time as to be effectively inaccessible to each other.

The many circumstances that seem to have made us possible do not seem to be replicated very often elsewhere that we've seen. Some, such as the creation of a large moon that stabilises our planet and therefore our local climates, seem to be freak events. Of course, we must be wary having only one data point for the development of life. For all we know, our circumstances are far from optimal for life to emerge and evolve. But we can only go by what can be inferred from the available data.

I don’t think the galaxy of popular science fiction franchises with planetary systems teaming with civilisations is possible. We might be the only civilisation in our galaxy. The best we can probably hope for is a few distant civilisations with which we can send and receive communications every few decades or centuries. Fingers crossed, superluminal travel may turn out to be possible, but we can't know that yet.
 
Last edited:
Hey Fermi, no aliens yet...? Why would they bother?

"So let’s run through a thought experiment on what reasons aliens might possibly have to visit the Earth, not because I reckon we need to ready our defenses or assemble a welcoming party, but because I think considering these possibilities is a great way of exploring many of the core themes of the science of astrobiology."

Read on...

https://lithub.com/why-would-aliens-even-bother-with-earth/
 
Agree with PeteByrdie that the lack of contact is cause that thechnological alien civilizations are thinly spread at a given time. But that idea implies consequences. The time and space aproach to contact is then wrong.
But an approach that would be out of the time and space dimensions could work. That sounds nowadays too mystical, but realize that even nowadays we have some glimpses of that kind of level of reality: for example in the physical phenomena of the quantum entanglement that seems to work out of the space level. I'm sure we will have soon some clues of that kind of phenomena but out of the time level. This kind of physics out of space-time would allow contacts no matter how far in space or in time the emitter- receiver were.
 
As somebody who nearly did a PhD in astrobiology (the move to Australia was off-putting), I have to say that I get excited about the prospect of finding extra-terrestrial microorganisms rather than fully functioning humanoid (?) intelligent life.
 
Earth is probably the equivalent of being a hermit in a shack, out in the wilderness, miles from the nearest road, and that road only gets a vehicle drive down it once it a year, and they don't stop because they're in hurry to get to the next nearest village, which is 47 miles away.
And then the next nearest town with a shop, a bar and a postal office is another 200 miles further on.

I expect there are planets out in the universe which have many other populated planets within sensible travel times. And probably other nearby stars with planets which can be travelled to within a few years.
That being the case, if those life-forms developed suitable technology to visit their neighbours then they would exhaust all the explorable areas nearby before venturing further.
In the same way that I have a car and can drive anywhere in the country....but I don't.
I certainly don't drive off to the middle of nowhere to go have a look at a hermit.
 
RaM said:
if they have done a bit of re-con they will have every expectation of being
attacked, imprisoned, interrogated, dissected, killed not necessarily in that order,
and if we find they taste like chicken eaten.
No I don't blame them for not landing on the White House lawn.
:omr:
Click to expand...
I don't buy the "homo sapiens is such a brutal species that aliens have been put off visiting" argument.
If any alien species has mastered practical interstellar space travel, they would be as far ahead of us technologically and culturally as we are from say ancient Rome. And any modern army, even one as grossly incompetent as Putin's new red army, would surely make short shrift of defeating any uppity Roman legion.
Nope. Aliens haven't visited us because the distances involved are so unimaginably and impossibly vast that they don't even know we exist.
 
bugmum said:
I get excited about the prospect of finding extra-terrestrial microorganisms
Click to expand...
Of course the probability of finding some primitive forms of life ( or maybe something even more interesting close to life but not exactly) is far bigger than to find civilizations. Even could be in this galaxy. The problem of detection at huge distances is not a small intellectual challenge.
 
Beings capable of easy travel between worlds/universes/planes of existence would be unlikely to view us as peers, or perhaps even as intelligent.

Like an overgrown lot in the suburbs, the Earth likely attracts attention only from local free-range children, and the occasional scientist. Heaven help us if someone decides to put in a hyperspace bypass!
 
C.O.T. said:
Of course the probability of finding some primitive forms of life ( or maybe something even more interesting close to life but not exactly) is far bigger than to find civilizations. Even could be in this galaxy. The problem of detection at huge distances is not a small intellectual challenge.
Click to expand...
To be honest, I would rather find and observe a planet full of dinosaurs than another Earth full of squabbling humanoids. Imagine finding a planet-scale Jurassic park and sending drones down to capture footage...
 
I think distance is probably the greatest barrier, but that also extends to time, as in distance in time.

Civilisations can potentially rise and falter in 10 million years, which in cosmic terms, is not that much.

There could have been civilisations as technologically advanced as ourselves, if not more, within proximity, but are now long silent. But that proximity might be 100 lightyears.

I think the chances of technologically advanced civilisations rising and prospering at the same time close enough to be aware of, if not in contact with, neighbours is small indeed.
 
Trevp666 said:
Earth is probably the equivalent of being a hermit in a shack, out in the wilderness, miles from the nearest road, and that road only gets a vehicle drive down it once it a year, and they don't stop because they're in hurry to get to the next nearest village, which is 47 miles away.
And then the next nearest town with a shop, a bar and a postal office is another 200 miles further on.

I expect there are planets out in the universe which have many other populated planets within sensible travel times. And probably other nearby stars with planets which can be travelled to within a few years.
That being the case, if those life-forms developed suitable technology to visit their neighbours then they would exhaust all the explorable areas nearby before venturing further.
In the same way that I have a car and can drive anywhere in the country....but I don't.
I certainly don't drive off to the middle of nowhere to go have a look at a hermit.
Click to expand...
Good point. Even in the USA you have places like the Northern Forest of North-East Maine that are virtually impenetrable and only navigated by logging roads, yet there are tens of millions of people living on the East Coast and most have a car.
 
Ascalon said:
I think distance is probably the greatest barrier, but that also extends to time, as in distance in time.

Civilisations can potentially rise and falter in 10 million years, which in cosmic terms, is not that much.

There could have been civilisations as technologically advanced as ourselves, if not more, within proximity, but are now long silent. But that proximity might be 100 lightyears.

I think the chances of technologically advanced civilisations rising and prospering at the same time close enough to be aware of, if not in contact with, neighbours is small indeed.
Click to expand...
That is why Oumuamua was so tantalising and as yet unexplained. We don't need to find a now extinct civilisation if one of their solar sail probes slingshots around our Sun on its never-ending voyage through the stars...


https://www.scientificamerican.com/...ays-aliens-have-visited-and-hes-not-kidding1/
 
Trevp666 said:
Earth is probably the equivalent of being a hermit in a shack, out in the wilderness, miles from the nearest road, and that road only gets a vehicle drive down it once it a year, and they don't stop because they're in hurry to get to the next nearest village, which is 47 miles away.
And then the next nearest town with a shop, a bar and a postal office is another 200 miles further on.

I expect there are planets out in the universe which have many other populated planets within sensible travel times. And probably other nearby stars with planets which can be travelled to within a few years.
That being the case, if those life-forms developed suitable technology to visit their neighbours then they would exhaust all the explorable areas nearby before venturing further.
In the same way that I have a car and can drive anywhere in the country....but I don't.
I certainly don't drive off to the middle of nowhere to go have a look at a hermit.
Click to expand...
This is pretty much my theory too. WHY on earth would any sentient species bother coming here? Although, if you say this over on the UFO thread you get shot down pretty quickly by the 'they are already here and among us' brigade.
 
catseye said:
This is pretty much my theory too. WHY on earth would any sentient species bother coming here? Although, if you say this over on the UFO thread you get shot down pretty quickly by the 'they are already here and among us' brigade.
Click to expand...
The conversation always seems to ignore the possibility of planets whose inhabitants are at a lesser stage of development. I would love to visit a planet where the inhabitants were still exploring ‘dark continents’ and plying the oceans in galleons and frigates
 
Paul_Exeter said:
“By definition, super-Earths have many of the attributes of a super habitable planet. To date, astronomers have discovered two dozen super-Earth exoplanets that are, if not the best of all possible worlds, theoretically more habitable than Earth.”
Click to expand...
The idea that super-Earths are 'super-habitable' is somewhat debatable. A super-Earth would be larger than our planet, and if it had the same composition as the Earth it would be denser (due to compression) and would therefore have a higher gravity. This higher gravity would cause the planet to retain more volatiles, and this would affect the density and composition of the atmosphere; the air could contain abundant hydrogen and helium, and the hydrogen would combine with any free oxygen to make water. This would flood the continents and probably make it difficult for land-dwelling lifeforms to evolve.

Far from a planet suitable for Earth-like life, a 'super-Earth' would probably be a drowned world covered in a dense, hydrogen/helium atmosphere; life may evolve there, but it wouldn't be much like life on Earth, and the higher gravity would make space-exploration difficult.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top