• grue@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    51
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    It is statistically impossible for life to exist on exactly one planet in the universe. Earth just isn’t that fucking special!


    Edit:

    A statistical impossibility is a probability that is so low as to not be worthy of mentioning. Sometimes it is quoted as 10−50 although the cutoff is inherently arbitrary. Although not truly impossible the probability is low enough so as to not bear mention in a rational, reasonable argument.

    https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/2049714/can-something-be-statistically-impossible#2049722

    If I’m wrong about the definition, at least I’m not wrong alone.

    • lauha@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      4 months ago

      Life is certain to exist, but multicellular life is less likely and intelligent multicellular who reaches for the stars is even less likely

      • grue@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        Who said anything about multicellularity, intelligence, or space travel?

        Point is, Obama’s answer was vacuously true, and the only answer a non-idiot could reasonably could have given.

        …Okay, I admit he could have quoted Contact for extra style points:

        “The universe is a pretty big place. If it’s just us, seems like an awful waste of space.”

        But aside from that, the answer he gave was the only one he could reasonably have given.

    • SendMePhotos@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      4 months ago

      Earth is special. More special than most of the other planets that exist. But it’s not the only special one.

      • Karjalan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        4 months ago

        More special than ones we’ve detected, but our detection methods have a very biased available dataset.

    • Stern@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      4 months ago

      If we presume a functionally infinite universe sure life pretty much has to exist in multiple spots. That’s a big presumption by itself though.

      After that, is said civilization on some dinosaur shit? Are they so far beyond us we look like cavemen in comparison? Are they looking around the universe and just missed us? Do we want them to find us? Historically humanity finds less advanced groups and kills, enslaves, or just robs them blind. No reason to think the alien conquistadors would be better then the Spanish ones.

    • theherk@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      4 months ago

      It isn’t. Check out this talk by Dr. Kipping. If you role 1000 x D6, you might say it is statistically impossible to role that number. And you’d be close to right; it was very unlikely. But you did role it.

      eta: The number of people supporting the phrase “statistically impossible” is troubling. This is why it is a problem that prominent scientists have made similar statements based on intuition. It isn’t based on statistics. We do not have sufficient data to make binary statements about Drake’s equation, nor even really to make any quantitative statements about the outcome, but certainly not binary ones.

    • ameancow@lemmy.worlddeleted by creator
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      4 months ago

      Yah, but it’s also statistically more likely that we have missed crossing paths with them or even seeing their signs by millions of light years, as well as millions of years of history.

      Entire empires could have risen to galactic power and ruled vast portions of the galaxy and finally splintered, evolved or gone extinct in just the million years before humans invented stone tools. Or some thousands of years during the Devonian period or something. Or the nearest planet with life is still just boneless fish and will need a hundred million more years to develop radio.

      We’re not only a microscopic dot in space, we’re also a microscopic dot in time. And our ability to even look out into space and detect anything is a tiny shaving of time off that dot.

      • SpacetimeMachine@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        As far as the history of the universe is concerned we are actually super early on in its lifespan. So in some ways it’s actually more likely that we will be one of the early civilizations that perish before the others show up.

        • ameancow@lemmy.worlddeleted by creator
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          4 months ago

          Not to mention that this assessment only applies to the universe we can see, we’re missing a LOT so it’s really hard to say even the actual age of the universe (roughly) or if there’s a whole other angle to the universe we can’t observe like we’re seeing hints of with observations of dark matter and dark energy, plus the fact that every time we send up more powerful instruments we detect a whole lot more “stuff” broadly than we ever thought, and of course the bubble of observation we’re stuck in and have no way to know if our observable sphere of the universe is unique or odd in some way, or if there’s even a point in scale where the universe becomes homogeneous, for all we know it’s infinite and varied beyond description at the highest scales.

          The things we don’t know outweigh the things we know by orders of magnitude, so it’s very, very hard to say if we even have the right foundational ideas when we ponder life in the universe besides us.

    • AA5B@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      Also statistically most likely that no life form has ever been able to leave its solar system, huge limited the opportunity to have detected each other

  • dhork@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    4 months ago

    It’s quite simple. If the US had evidence that aliens existed, do you think Donald Trump would gave kept it a secret? He would make a big show of insisting to be the guy who they talk to when they say “Take me to your leader”, and he wouldn’t be able to resist telling us all about it.

    • ameancow@lemmy.worlddeleted by creator
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      4 months ago

      I don’t know about aliens or whatnot, but I don’t believe for a moment that people with actual secrets and important information, along with years or decades of intelligence experience and training, would look at Donald Fucking Trump and say “Damn, it’s too bad I have to share this highly-secret information with this guy, but I guess I have to.”

      Hell no, this is still the liberal mindset that there are “rules” that governments need to follow. We should know well by now that there are no rules, that the government of the US is built largely on lies and image, compartmentalized knowledge, and that nobody with actual power suffers consequences for breaking whatever rules they were supposed to have.

  • CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    I watched Pedophile Pam having her Karen-Thon in the House and if there was ever evidence for the conspiracy theory about reptilians, she looks like a textbook case…in some of her tantrums, I thought she might suddenly wriggle out of her snakeskin…

  • WindyRebel@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    I think his comment was really just him acknowledging UAPs and referring to them generically as “aliens”. That’s why he’s never “seen” them. He can’t confirm or deny little green men in these weird flying craft so his answer is he believes but he has not actually seen one.

    Or he was just being cheeky for a fun clip. 🤷‍♂️

  • mlg@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    If you squint hard enough, you can see the Onion article clarifying that he meant illegal immigrants and not extraterrestrial life