Mythbusters Banned From Discussing RFID By Visa And Mastercard
Atheist Girl In Rhode Island Faces Stream Of Death Threats
The 'Strange Sounds' YouTube Meme: Apocalypse? HAARP? Viral Marketing?
DISCUSS (4)

The Billion-Year Technology Gap: Could One Exist?

Posted by phunkychic666 on November 29, 2009

YouAreHereRebecca Sato & Casey Kazan write on Daily Galaxy:

Are we the lone sentient life in the universe? So far, we have no evidence to the contrary, and yet the odds that not one single other planet has evolved intelligent life would appear, from a statistical standpoint, to be quite small. There are an estimated 250 billion (2.5 x 10¹¹) stars in the Milky Way alone, and over 70 sextillion (7 x 10²²) in the visible universe, and many of them are surrounded by multiple planets.

Meanwhile, our 4.5 billion-year old Solar System exists in a universe that is estimated to be between 13.5 and 14 billion years old. Experts believe that there could be advanced civilizations out there that have existed for 1.8 gigayears (one gigayear = one billion years).

The odds of there being only one single planet that evolved life among all that unfathomable vastness seems so incredible that it is all but completely irrational to believe. But then “where are they?” asked physicist Enrico Fermi while having lunch with his colleagues in 1950.

Fermi reasoned, if there are other advanced extraterrestrial civilizations, then why is there no evidence of such, like spacecraft or probes floating around the Milky Way. His question became famously known as the Fermi Paradox. The paradox is the contradiction between the high estimates of the probability of the existence of extraterrestrial civilizations and yet the lack of evidence for, or contact with, any such civilizations.

Given the extreme age of the universe, and its vast number of stars, if planets like Earth are at all typical, then there should be many advanced extraterrestrial civilizations out there, and at least a few in our own Milky Way. Another closely related question is the Great Silence, which poses the question: Even if space travel is too difficult, if life is out there, why don’t we at least detect some sign of civilization like radio transmissions?

More on Daily Galaxy

Related Posts with Thumbnails
  • george

    If I was an extraterrestrial, I wouldn't want earth to know I existed.

  • carlmarx

    We are alone, we are the first and the last,we are god, we will be god like if we manage to get off this little planet, we will then be the aliens.

    I feel sorry for the universe, if we do manage to go visit elsewhere. Humans have a bad reputation.

    We need to evolve for about another 10000 years before its safe for us to visit other life forms on other planets
    without trying to distroy them.

  • Jacob

    The odds of life developing to or past our current level of technological advancement may be extremely tiny, and as we will discover in the coming generations, our own technology will become more and more dangerous to ourselves. We currently have already created one way to destroy ourselves, and that number will increase as our abilities in areas such as nanotech, biotech, high energy physics, and other yet uncovered fields advances. If something is possible, such as the destruction of our species, then in a long enough time span it will happen. Therefore, in order to ensure survival and continued advancement, life must be established where it cannot be harmed by events on Earth. With each self-sustainable population center that is created, another “back-up” for life is created. The time span between which self-destruction becomes possible until it occurs is likely extremely narrow, and during this time, alternative life centers must be established to ensure continuity. This hurdle may be one that has not yet been cleared. Another possibility is that there are no civilizations that are currently at a level of advancement which would make their interaction with ours at all likely. Our traditional idea of space-faring life involves a society which is technologically much superior to ours but socially and mentally relatively similar. Once a lifeform achieves a conciousness that much exceeds ours, it seems conceivable that there would no longer be an interest in interacting with us. They might be preoccupied with more important questions. Maybe reversing entropy?

  • Jacob

    The odds of life developing to or past our current level of technological advancement may be extremely tiny, and as we will discover in the coming generations, our own technology will become more and more dangerous to ourselves. We currently have already created one way to destroy ourselves, and that number will increase as our abilities in areas such as nanotech, biotech, high energy physics, and other yet uncovered fields advances. If something is possible, such as the destruction of our species, then in a long enough time span it will happen. Therefore, in order to ensure survival and continued advancement, life must be established where it cannot be harmed by events on Earth. With each self-sustainable population center that is created, another “back-up” for life is created. The time span between which self-destruction becomes possible until it occurs is likely extremely narrow, and during this time, alternative life centers must be established to ensure continuity. This hurdle may be one that has not yet been cleared. Another possibility is that there are no civilizations that are currently at a level of advancement which would make their interaction with ours at all likely. Our traditional idea of space-faring life involves a society which is technologically much superior to ours but socially and mentally relatively similar. Once a lifeform achieves a conciousness that much exceeds ours, it seems conceivable that there would no longer be an interest in interacting with us. They might be preoccupied with more important questions. Maybe reversing entropy?