Hum Posted April 4, 2011 Share Posted April 4, 2011 (edited) A new depiction of NASA's Kepler mission is worth 1,235 potential alien planets. Created by a devoted mission scientist, the image takes stock of the Kepler observatory's prolific planet-hunting results so far. The illustration (see the full picture here) shows all of Kepler's candidate planets ? which await confirmation by follow-up observations ? crossing the face of their host stars. This provides scale, and it's also a nod to Kepler's planet-hunting strategy: The spacecraft detects alien worlds by measuring the telltale dips in a star's brightness that occur during these planetary "transits." [See the alien planet graphic] The graphic is the brainchild of scientist Jason Rowe, who created it in an attempt convey Kepler's exoplanet discoveries to the masses in a clear, concise manner. source Edited April 6, 2011 by Growled Shortened article length Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pow Posted April 4, 2011 Share Posted April 4, 2011 If only we had a stargate :shifty: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neoadorable Posted April 6, 2011 Share Posted April 6, 2011 well, well, where's Pandora in all that? ladies and gentlement, you're not in Kansa anymore, you're on Paaan-dooo-ra, respect that fact! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hondaa Posted April 6, 2011 Share Posted April 6, 2011 [See the alien planet graphic] Ha. Eggs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hum Posted April 6, 2011 Author Share Posted April 6, 2011 ... astronomers have estimated that our Milky Way galaxy could hold as many as 50 billion alien planets, with 2 billion of those perhaps being about the size of Earth. Well, that makes the odds of other intelligent life, just about dead certain. :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
articuno1au Posted April 6, 2011 Share Posted April 6, 2011 If only we had a stargate :shifty: Hero :p Such a pity Universe is being finished up :( Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Derf Veteran Posted April 6, 2011 Veteran Share Posted April 6, 2011 Well, that makes the odds of other intelligent life, just about dead certain. :laugh: Well, not really. Sure, it makes the odds of any life to be about dead certain but intelligent life is another story. Only about 1/400,000th of Earth's history has sported intelligent life. From this article we know that of the 1,235 possible planets in this particular mission, only 54 of those candidates are located within the so-called "Goldilocks zone". Now there may be 50 billion "alien" planets but how many of those are gas giants? How many are located as close to the sun as Mercury? We can narrow it down and narrow it down until we find the most likely candidates but there is a small change that their small window of intelligent life coincides with our small window of intelligent life. I have no doubt that we'll eventually find alien life but I fear that many people will be disappointed when it turns out to be bacteria or other simplistic life-forms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subject Delta Posted April 6, 2011 Share Posted April 6, 2011 Well, not really. Sure, it makes the odds of any life to be about dead certain but intelligent life is another story. Only about 1/400,000th of Earth's history has sported intelligent life. From this article we know that of the 1,235 possible planets in this particular mission, only 54 of those candidates are located within the so-called "Goldilocks zone". Now there may be 50 billion "alien" planets but how many of those are gas giants? How many are located as close to the sun as Mercury? We can narrow it down and narrow it down until we find the most likely candidates but there is a small change that their small window of intelligent life coincides with our small window of intelligent life. I have no doubt that we'll eventually find alien life but I fear that many people will be disappointed when it turns out to be bacteria or other simplistic life-forms. Seeing as we recently discovered bacteria that can thrive in an arsenic rich environment, it's fair to say that we can't simply assert the narrow predictions of what can and cannot sustain life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevember Posted April 6, 2011 Share Posted April 6, 2011 Everything we see from outside our solar system happened a long time ago, intelligent life on Earth will not survive long enough for them to observe us while we are still here, and vice versa. Also need to remember life alone will only survive for a fraction of the time which will add a massive dividing factor to the probability. So number of planets divided by time divided by probability of life divided by probability of intelligent life still in my opinion makes it a longshot. There are several planets in our solar system but only one has intelligent life that we can pretty well guarantee to be the case. This is all subject to what you deem to be intelligent life! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neoadorable Posted April 6, 2011 Share Posted April 6, 2011 way to go on the optimism...sorry to counter your (apparent) anti-human sentiment, but crap floats...humans will be around for longer than you seem to think. i'd bet our galaxy at this moment sports at least 5-10 technological civilizations, some more advanced than us and already interstellar-travelized. still, it's a big galaxy. unless you figure out FTL tech, journeys longer than 20 lightyears simply won't be worthwhile to anyone. that really narrows down the odds for an encounter. EDIT: doesn't explain the lack of radio/TV signals, those we should be able to get assuming some of those civs have developed them thousands of years ago. unless we happen to have the honor of being the first in the galaxy to come up with those technologies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Growled Member Posted April 6, 2011 Member Share Posted April 6, 2011 i'd bet our galaxy at this moment sports at least 5-10 technological civilizations, some more advanced than us and already interstellar-travelized. still, it's a big galaxy. unless you figure out FTL tech, journeys longer than 20 lightyears simply won't be worthwhile to anyone. that really narrows down the odds for an encounter. I'll take that bet. I'm not so certain anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neoadorable Posted April 7, 2011 Share Posted April 7, 2011 why not? what swayed you? do you believe we are the only technological civ in the galaxy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Derf Veteran Posted April 7, 2011 Veteran Share Posted April 7, 2011 why not? what swayed you? do you believe we are the only technological civ in the galaxy? That we have any hope of encountering, yes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Southern Patriot Posted April 7, 2011 Share Posted April 7, 2011 From this article we know that of the 1,235 possible planets in this particular mission, only 54 of those candidates are located within the so-called "Goldilocks zone". Now there may be 50 billion "alien" planets but how many of those are gas giants? How many are located as close to the sun as Mercury? There is nothing about a gas giant the would keep some form of life (yes, even intelligent life) from existing. And there is nothing about a planet close to its star that would either, if the star was dimmer than our own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HawkMan Posted April 7, 2011 Share Posted April 7, 2011 Well, not really. Sure, it makes the odds of any life to be about dead certain but intelligent life is another story. Only about 1/400,000th of Earth's history has sported intelligent life. From this article we know that of the 1,235 possible planets in this particular mission, only 54 of those candidates are located within the so-called "Goldilocks zone". Now there may be 50 billion "alien" planets but how many of those are gas giants? How many are located as close to the sun as Mercury? We can narrow it down and narrow it down until we find the most likely candidates but there is a small change that their small window of intelligent life coincides with our small window of intelligent life. I have no doubt that we'll eventually find alien life but I fear that many people will be disappointed when it turns out to be bacteria or other simplistic life-forms. We we don't actually know if there was itnelligent life before us that never got the chance to survive, we do however know that two different sentient species evolved on earth, and we killed the other, either by being better adapted or through War, that's they don't know. they don't even know if we interbred, or even could. remains suggest they where possibly more intelligent than Homo Sapiens though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neoadorable Posted April 7, 2011 Share Posted April 7, 2011 are you talking about neanderthals? i'd hardly call them a different species, they were very much just like us. but it's irrelevant anyway, they were/are an Earth people, we're talking about off-Earth life here. i know what point you're trying to make, that even the one planet we know very well has developed more than one intelligent species, but i really see them as one and the same. we're not even all that different from dolphins when you really think about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HawkMan Posted April 8, 2011 Share Posted April 8, 2011 are you talking about neanderthals? i'd hardly call them a different species, they were very much just like us. but it's irrelevant anyway, they were/are an Earth people, we're talking about off-Earth life here. i know what point you're trying to make, that even the one planet we know very well has developed more than one intelligent species, but i really see them as one and the same. we're not even all that different from dolphins when you really think about it. The thing is we where not the same. we developed form different roots. and the point is that it's not that hard for life to evolve to sentient, once there's life and depending on the conditions. So if there's life on other planets, given time it will become sentient. and there's really no if about the first part, there's just to many life giving planets for there not to be just in our galaxy. As for origins, arguably, all planets and thus all life int he universe come from the same place. and if we find carbon based life elsewhere sometime, you shouldn't be surprised if they share similar DNA, maybe not the 99% all of earth does, but fairly similar anyway. as the very design of the DNA may be decided by the basic building blocks that created it in the first place, and there may only be a few ways it will form to start with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Derf Veteran Posted April 8, 2011 Veteran Share Posted April 8, 2011 The thing is we where not the same. we developed form different roots. and the point is that it's not that hard for life to evolve to sentient, once there's life and depending on the conditions. Different branches of the same tree means the same roots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spudtrooper Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 Different branches of the same tree means the same roots. hehehe, it amazes me how people still get confused on that :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HawkMan Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 hehehe, it amazes me how people still get confused on that :) And I pointed out that life on other planets could very well share the same roots anyway. and seeign as only 2 species on earth evolved into sentient, it's obvious that becoming sentient isn't somethign that's part of the "root code". on the flip side, the fact that two difference species tdid become sentient proves that becoming sentient isn't a unique once in the universe thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
neoadorable Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 Hawk, first of all i agree that ultimately all life in the universe, and indeed our entire universe, has originated from the same source code if you will. even if what we think we know is vaguely true, then folks like the navi in Avatar are actually not that silly, it's quite likely there will be great commonality. however, i feel you are contradicting yourself. you say it's natural for sentience to emerge, then you say only two species on Earth have become sentient. you must be using a different definition of the word, because i consider pretty much all evolved mammals as a minimum sentient. i think what you mean is technological? in that case, yes, maybe you can say only a couple of Earth species have become tool users, but i still consider neanderthals as humans. they were basically another major "race" or ethnicity that blended in with modern humans. i don't think it was as dramatic as you suggest, there was no genocide 50K years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spudtrooper Posted April 9, 2011 Share Posted April 9, 2011 And I pointed out that life on other planets could very well share the same roots anyway. Very true, and its because of Chemistry. Chemistry works the same here as it does anywhere and Chemistry is THE base for life. and seeign as only 2 species on earth evolved into sentient, it's obvious that becoming sentient isn't somethign that's part of the "root code". on the flip side, the fact that two difference species tdid become sentient proves that becoming sentient isn't a unique once in the universe thing. What is the importance of being sentient? Evolution hasn't stopped :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts