Dear Owen, 

 

I don't know how to ask this question without sounding churlish.

 

But why is this question INTERESTING?  That's not a rhetorical question,  It
actually doesn't INTEREST me.  The cranky voice inside me wants to say, of
COURSE we are term limited, of course our term of office could end at any
time.  In fact, I think it has probably come quite close to ending a couple
of times during our life time.  If we are around long enough to be picked
off by a comet, I would say we are doing REALLY WELL.   OF COURSE, there is
no MEANING to our existence.  And of COURSE, we are probably not the only
life in the UNIVERSE, although I don't see how knowing that there is some
bit of slime with two heads on Alpha Romero II makes me feel less ALONE.  

 

There seems to be a huge confusion in this sort of discourse.  Aloneness has
to do our inability to muster the courage to engage with one another. (The
courage to start a reading group; the courage to invite others to dinner;
the courage to go to church, if that is one's inclination.)  It does NOT
have to do with whether there is other life in the universe.   And casting
it in this lofty celestial way only gets in the way of our enjoying, being
grateful for, and doing what we can to nurture, what we have.  

 

I have to admit, much as I have been titillated by the space program, I have
always seen it as evidence of wildly misguided priorities.   See, I really
am in need of help, here. 

 

Nick  

 

 

 

From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf
Of Owen Densmore
Sent: Saturday, March 31, 2012 11:10 AM
To: Complexity Coffee Group
Subject: [FRIAM] So, *Are* We Alone?

 

I got to thinking a bit more about an assumption I (and I bet most of us)
have held, that surely there is "intelligent" life on other planets, one
capable of technology .. thus SETI's radio search. Surely it is hubris to
claim humanity is somehow unique, just look at the diversity of our own
world! Thus there's got to be lots of intelligent life out there, right?

 

(Yes, I know, this is pretty vague, and we're intelligent only for very
small values of intelligent.)

 

But listening to a TED by Hawking, I was impressed with his somewhat
measured approach: that we have not found a radio source within 200-400
light years.  I believe his choice of distance had to do with our own
development of radio a couple of centuries ago.

 

That got me reading up on just how long we've been around, and how long
other civilizations could have existed.  Very roughly speaking, the big bang
was 14 billion years ago, our sun is 4.5 billion years old, and the earth is
4 billion years old.

 

Well, that sounds like we're late to the game: 4 billion years old in a
universe 14 billion years old.  But wait a minute, we know we're the result
of star-stuff, the heavy elements.  The big bang was only able to muster
nuclei of fairly low weight, lithium say .. possibly a bit more.  The first
generation of stars, therefor were fairly odd, huge and short lived.  And
the second generation of stars were less heavy element rich than our sun,
which makes it at best third generation. http://goo.gl/gV54S

 

So given only 14BY for building solar systems, and assuming the requirement
for an at least third generation sun, we may be as young as likely a life
form possible.

 

So SETI is likely playing a loosing game, we're young enough that the
statistics may be that, yes there is life out there, but it's pretty young
too and maybe is no more advanced than we are. (Maybe that is Hawking's
couple of centuries limit)  Of course we're talking about a few centuries,
which would make a huge difference in technology, but still.

 

Hawking does end with a grim comment others have made: maybe civilizations
are short lived .. they self destruct or fall prey to destructive events
(meteors, comets).

 

   -- Owen

============================================================
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Meets Fridays 9a-11:30 at cafe at St. John's College
lectures, archives, unsubscribe, maps at http://www.friam.org

Reply via email to