Comments on: Fermi’s Paradox http://www.ghostwoods.com/2009/09/fermis-paradox-551/ Something beautiful and strange is hiding in the dark. Wed, 01 Feb 2012 08:35:26 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Sean OBrien http://www.ghostwoods.com/2009/09/fermis-paradox-551/comment-page-1/#comment-272 Sean OBrien Wed, 23 Sep 2009 22:43:09 +0000 http://www.ghostwoods.com/?p=551#comment-272 We can see detailed views of thousands of galaxies. Not one of them has a visible artificial structure. That means that in several thousands of galactic lifetimes (that's about 100 trillion galaxy-years) not one single species has ever built a galactic superstructure. There are no aliens anywhere. We are alone. We can see detailed views of thousands of galaxies. Not one of them has a visible artificial structure. That means that in several thousands of galactic lifetimes (that’s about 100 trillion galaxy-years) not one single species has ever built a galactic superstructure.

There are no aliens anywhere. We are alone.

]]> By: Scary http://www.ghostwoods.com/2009/09/fermis-paradox-551/comment-page-1/#comment-253 Scary Sat, 19 Sep 2009 19:34:37 +0000 http://www.ghostwoods.com/?p=551#comment-253 e) is a huge issue in itself! IMHO all others (except maybe a) - hyperintelligent shades of blue, anyone?) are subservient to that. See <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drake_equation" rel="nofollow"> Drake's equation </a> for all the variables we must accept that Fermi was right about for it to be a true paradox. Summarized, you need to have the right order of magnitude for; the rate of star formation in the galaxy (tick, known); the number of stars with planets and the number that are habitable (tick: and working on it as we speak although 'habitable' is a bit anthropocentric); the number of those planets which develop life (uneducated guess: one data sample to work with) and subsequently intelligent communicating life (same); and finally the expected lifetimes of such civilizations (same again). And until we have something to work with, I'm not going to call it a paradox: more of a big open plain of a question. e) is a huge issue in itself! IMHO all others (except maybe a) – hyperintelligent shades of blue, anyone?) are subservient to that.

See Drake’s equation for all the variables we must accept that Fermi was right about for it to be a true paradox.
Summarized, you need to have the right order of magnitude for; the rate of star formation in the galaxy (tick, known); the number of stars with planets and the number that are habitable (tick: and working on it as we speak although ‘habitable’ is a bit anthropocentric); the number of those planets which develop life (uneducated guess: one data sample to work with) and subsequently intelligent communicating life (same); and finally the expected lifetimes of such civilizations (same again).

And until we have something to work with, I’m not going to call it a paradox: more of a big open plain of a question.

]]>