Suggested solution to Fermi's paradox

F

FUCK THE POLICE

911 EVERY DAY
A certain amount of reasonable predictions that scientists made about the nature of life and how quickly it should spread to the universe lead to the inclusion that an intelligent life form should take over its entire galaxy in about 25 million years. Clearly this isn't happening - if intelligent life spread that fast we'd see radio signals and clear evidence all over the place (there's not clear evidence all over the place - if you are a UFO fanatic please take your leave of absence). It's also possible that some assumptions we made are way off, and that it takes more than the age of the universe to dominate a galaxy, but I'm just going to assume that's not true for the purpose of this.

My suggestion: maybe it's just that difficult to come up with science? People often talk about how bad it was that Rome fell, but honestly, if Rome had been up all this time I think we would have gotten nowhere. Rome had a lot of know-how but not a lot of know-why. This is because they never really developed evidence based science. I doubt we'd have computers or electricity even after all this time if we had been living under that philosophy. What if a dedicated system of knowledge like science is just very, very difficult to come up with and requires a lot of things that are highly improbable? We almost missed it ourselves - the church could have easily stamped it out in its early days (and if it had, it would still probably dominate humanity).
 
Watermark said:
A certain amount of reasonable predictions that scientists made about the nature of life and how quickly it should spread to the universe lead to the inclusion that an intelligent life form should take over its entire galaxy in about 25 million years. Clearly this isn't happening - if intelligent life spread that fast we'd see radio signals and clear evidence all over the place (there's not clear evidence all over the place - if you are a UFO fanatic please take your leave of absence). It's also possible that some assumptions we made are way off, and that it takes more than the age of the universe to dominate a galaxy, but I'm just going to assume that's not true for the purpose of this.

My suggestion: maybe it's just that difficult to come up with science? People often talk about how bad it was that Rome fell, but honestly, if Rome had been up all this time I think we would have gotten nowhere. Rome had a lot of know-how but not a lot of know-why. This is because they never really developed evidence based science. I doubt we'd have computers or electricity even after all this time if we had been living under that philosophy. What if a dedicated system of knowledge like science is just very, very difficult to come up with and requires a lot of things that are highly improbable? We almost missed it ourselves - the church could have easily stamped it out in its early days (and if it had, it would still probably dominate humanity).
Click to expand...

what is older than the universe?

the church had a relatively small influence on the world watermark....are you suggesting that non europeans are stupid and couldn't come up with science thinking and knowledge on their own?
 
Yurt said:
what is older than the universe?

the church had a relatively small influence on the world watermark....are you suggesting that non europeans are stupid and couldn't come up with science thinking and knowledge on their own?
Click to expand...

I'm saying they DIDN'T.
 
The Wokest said:
A certain amount of reasonable predictions that scientists made about the nature of life and how quickly it should spread to the universe lead to the inclusion that an intelligent life form should take over its entire galaxy in about 25 million years. Clearly this isn't happening - if intelligent life spread that fast we'd see radio signals and clear evidence all over the place (there's not clear evidence all over the place - if you are a UFO fanatic please take your leave of absence). It's also possible that some assumptions we made are way off, and that it takes more than the age of the universe to dominate a galaxy, but I'm just going to assume that's not true for the purpose of this.

My suggestion: maybe it's just that difficult to come up with science? People often talk about how bad it was that Rome fell, but honestly, if Rome had been up all this time I think we would have gotten nowhere. Rome had a lot of know-how but not a lot of know-why. This is because they never really developed evidence based science. I doubt we'd have computers or electricity even after all this time if we had been living under that philosophy. What if a dedicated system of knowledge like science is just very, very difficult to come up with and requires a lot of things that are highly improbable? We almost missed it ourselves - the church could have easily stamped it out in its early days (and if it had, it would still probably dominate humanity).
Click to expand...

There may be no way for biological life, life as we understand it, to travel at warp speed, ever, by any species of extraterrestial life.
It may be that attempts have been made to contact us using signals from distant galaxies but we are as yet incapable of discerning it.
It may be that they cannot cast a strong enough signal to be detected. After all, the power of an entire star appears as a tiny glimmer
to us. How strong them, must be the minimum intelligible signal from a race of people revolving around one? We can barely make out planets
in other solar systems much less get them on the 5G network. So, my reconciliation is based on practicality. I think they are out there,
I am sure we haven't been visited, I think they would have to be insanely advanced to even communicate a pulse in our general galactic direction
with 500 million years head start.
 
Micawber said:
There may be no way for biological life, life as we understand it, to travel at warp speed, ever, by any species of extraterrestial life.
It may be that attempts have been made to contact us using signals from distant galaxies but we are as yet incapable of discerning it.
It may be that they cannot cast a strong enough signal to be detected. After all, the power of an entire star appears as a tiny glimmer
to us. How strong them, must be the minimum intelligible signal from a race of people revolving around one? We can barely make out planets
in other solar systems much less get them on the 5G network. So, my reconciliation is based on practicality. I think they are out there,
I am sure we haven't been visited, I think they would have to be insanely advanced to even communicate a pulse in our general galactic direction
with 500 million years head start.
Click to expand...

There is nothing, yet discovered, to demonstrate that life on earth is not a unique phenomenon.
There is no paradox because probabilities can not be projected with only one data point.
 
Last edited:
The Wokest said:
A certain amount of reasonable predictions that scientists made about the nature of life and how quickly it should spread to the universe lead to the inclusion that an intelligent life form should take over its entire galaxy in about 25 million years. Clearly this isn't happening - if intelligent life spread that fast we'd see radio signals and clear evidence all over the place (there's not clear evidence all over the place - if you are a UFO fanatic please take your leave of absence). It's also possible that some assumptions we made are way off, and that it takes more than the age of the universe to dominate a galaxy, but I'm just going to assume that's not true for the purpose of this.

My suggestion: maybe it's just that difficult to come up with science? People often talk about how bad it was that Rome fell, but honestly, if Rome had been up all this time I think we would have gotten nowhere. Rome had a lot of know-how but not a lot of know-why. This is because they never really developed evidence based science. I doubt we'd have computers or electricity even after all this time if we had been living under that philosophy. What if a dedicated system of knowledge like science is just very, very difficult to come up with and requires a lot of things that are highly improbable? We almost missed it ourselves - the church could have easily stamped it out in its early days (and if it had, it would still probably dominate humanity).
Click to expand...

Wokest: "We almost missed it ourselves - the church could have easily stamped it out in its early days (and if it had, it would still probably dominate humanity)."
The Christian Church squelched any attempt at 'original thought' and 'knowledge' that went against it's doctrine. A 1,000 years is a pretty good track record of suppressing the inquiring mind.
 
Micawber said:
There may be no way for biological life, life as we understand it, to travel at warp speed, ever, by any species of extraterrestial life.
It may be that attempts have been made to contact us using signals from distant galaxies but we are as yet incapable of discerning it.
It may be that they cannot cast a strong enough signal to be detected. After all, the power of an entire star appears as a tiny glimmer
to us. How strong them, must be the minimum intelligible signal from a race of people revolving around one? We can barely make out planets
in other solar systems much less get them on the 5G network. So, my reconciliation is based on practicality. I think they are out there,
I am sure we haven't been visited, I think they would have to be insanely advanced to even communicate a pulse in our general galactic direction
with 500 million years head start.
Click to expand...

Maybe they know we are here and are hiding from us. Just because we want to find others doesn't mean others want to be found.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top