Do you think there are aliens?

[Viking]

Hibernation exists, yes. It works by the virtue of some organisms living off other organisms that happen to be around without any active doing of the other ones. Animals rely on plants or other animals to `magically' collect the energy all in one place so they can eat all of it quickly before the next hibernation. That works in a complex ecosystem such as the earth because there *are* other energy sources for the plants and prey animals to begin with, recursively, that are not exhausted quickly and replenish. Such ecosystems would (a) have to be understood in their entirety; (b) be possible to `carry around with you' in order for such a thing to work on a spaceship. So far our experiments with sustainable ecosystems have been mostly miserable failures which suggests (a) is a bit more complex than it might at first seem. So far our spaceships do not generally feature much room for passengers, let alone entire ecosystems, suggesting (b) might be a little tricky too: it's after all not just because it is cheaper to build small spacecraft that we keep the dimensions of capsules and rockets down.

Not really sure what you are talking about here. It has been my impression that it is the hibernating animals themselves that are interesting. If we could manipulate humans in one way or the other so to make them biologically capable of entering a state of hibernation, then that's all we need. How to best feed the crew is a good question, but it is also another question entirely.

Spin all you want it does not cause (additional) gravity to spring into existence. That's not how gravity works.

I could have formulated myself more precisely, but it is naturally the acceleration caused by gravity that I am interested in achieving.

[Sasaki Kojiro]

Don't hibernating bears use up hundreds of pounds of fat over the winter?

It's quite possible that as civilizations advance, they lose interest in space travel. Being an astronaut isn't as big a craze today as it was in the recent past is it? Who says we won't be content taking pictures?

[LittleGrizzly]

I associate part of the loss of interest to do with there being a big technological step needed to get to the next stage, although you could maybe think of it as smaller steps, in most peoples minds you get into space, you land on the moon, then you land on another planet (or maybe a moon of another planet) landing on the moon was relatively easy compared with getting to another planet.

I would assume that once space travel starts to take off then technology will quickly advance to make it quicker and cheaper. Although the vastness of space is a huge obstacle to overcome, outside of wormholes or maybe some kind of suspended animation it would take generations to get anywhere, unless its possible to travel faster than the speed of light...

[A Nerd]

Man has and always will have an intrinsic desire to explore. The seas and wilderness were once vast and infinate until they were conqured. It just took the proper ships, navigation equipment, desire etc. to make this possible. I realize that the earth is much smaller that outer space, but I believe we already posses the desire and the rest will follow with time. A proper understanding of the enigma of physics and protection/propultion in conjunction with it is all that is left unfound. Taking pictures is a great start. Maps are meant to be interpreted and expanded upon.

[miotas]

With the incredible vastness of space, I think it's likely that aliens do exist. If there are advanced aliens, I think it would be amazing to meet them. I also think that anything is possible, including the possibility that aliens don't exist.

One would hope that such an advanced society would not resort to such ancient notions of conquest and subjugation. That seems to be a human trait.

Maybe an advanced alien society would be so advanced as to abhor war, but maybe by the same token they would be so advanced as to consider us insignificant. Removing a few humans to make way for themselves might be no more abhorrent to them than clearing a grassy hill to build a house is to humans.

Hibernation exists, yes. It works by the virtue of some organisms living off other organisms that happen to be around without any active doing of the other ones. Animals rely on plants or other animals to `magically' collect the energy all in one place so they can eat all of it quickly before the next hibernation. That works in a complex ecosystem such as the earth because there *are* other energy sources for the plants and prey animals to begin with, recursively, that are not exhausted quickly and replenish. Such ecosystems would (a) have to be understood in their entirety; (b) be possible to `carry around with you' in order for such a thing to work on a spaceship. So far our experiments with sustainable ecosystems have been mostly miserable failures which suggests (a) is a bit more complex than it might at first seem. So far our spaceships do not generally feature much room for passengers, let alone entire ecosystems, suggesting (b) might be a little tricky too: it's after all not just because it is cheaper to build small spacecraft that we keep the dimensions of capsules and rockets down.

Spin all you want it does not cause (additional) gravity to spring into existence. That's not how gravity works.

When discussing space travel, there is usually an assumption that this occurring in the future, when we have already figured such things out. Travelling around the globe would have been impossible to an ancient Egyptian, but only takes us a matter of days.

It's quite possible that as civilizations advance, they lose interest in space travel. Being an astronaut isn't as big a craze today as it was in the recent past is it? Who says we won't be content taking pictures?

Not necessarily, being a pilot no longer brings the rock star like adoration that it once did, but more people fly now than ever before.

[Viking]

Maybe an advanced alien society would be so advanced as to abhor war, but maybe by the same token they would be so advanced as to consider us insignificant. Removing a few humans to make way for themselves might be no more abhorrent to them than clearing a grassy hill to build a house is to humans.

The funny question is what "advanced" is supposed to mean. If you let it mean more than technology, then there is the eternal question of what can be considered "wrong" and what can be considered "right". Maybe some alien race is more like Hitler, thinking that war is an act of "cleansing", and furthermore not at all keen on what would have been their version of 'humanism'. Maybe they would be willing to use the science of genetics to actively contribute to their own evolution and create and improve traits that they find ideal.

Anyway, what I wanted to say is that I see no reason why the idea that "advanced = peaceful" should hold universally; though you do yourself point out how the act of being peaceful can be hugely relative. They do though perhaps not have to consider us insignificant/stupid; the fact that we are of another specie could mean that the idea of peace wouldn't count any longer - perhaps they could be wired that way.

[Tellos Athenaios]

When discussing space travel, there is usually an assumption that this occurring in the future, when we have already figured such things out. Travelling around the globe would have been impossible to an ancient Egyptian, but only takes us a matter of days.

But that is largely a fallacy: the ancient Egyptian would've needed a few relatively minor upgrades to his basic sailing kit, and some rather more significant ones to his navigation tools & skillset.
That is purely technological; and not even very much of a leap forward in the sense that ancient civilizations did maintain complex trade routes that span much of the Eurasian continent, Arabian peninsula, Indian subcontinent, and Africa, too. That is equivalent to more than half of the Earth's landmass.

Tell me, pretty please we are even remotely on the same technological discrepancy when it comes to space travel: the Egyptian has through trade and other links contact with much of planet Earth, essentially the same sub-portion the Egyptian of 2000 years later will have contact with. By comparison we can't even visit another planet. It gets worse: the Egyptian would've been generally familiar with the dangers of intercontinental travel. By comparison we don't even know how we would go about traveling significant distances in space in the first place. And worse yet: the Egyptian would be fit and capable to explore the Earth. We are not fit nor capable to survive space: we need complex contraptions. We are not fit nor capable to survive hibernation: to get our body to hibernate you need something like H2S which leaves you with the rather grim choice between your brain or your life.

[Kadagar_AV]

I have been thinking some about this topic today. And I do believe there either are aliens, or will be aliens by the time we can reach them.

1. Have a look at the Drake equation - The Drake equation states that the formula for intelligent life: is N = R* fp ne fl fi fc L

where:
N = the number of civilizations in our galaxy with which communication might be possible;
and
R* = the average rate of star formation per year in our galaxy
fp = the fraction of those stars that have planets
ne = the average number of planets that can potentially support life per star that has planets
fℓ = the fraction of the above that actually go on to develop life at some point
fi = the fraction of the above that actually go on to develop intelligent life
fc = the fraction of civilizations that develop a technology that releases detectable signs of their existence into space
L = the length of time such civilizations release detectable signals into space.[3]

The last factor, L, is for me the most interesting one. If a civilization gets advanced enough, then they would be able to live on forever, meaning L=X. X being death of universe.

Basically, we dont need many aliens life forms, we only need one, given this one learn to spread.


2. If there is one life form that makes it through, they are bound to be good. If they had not mastered their evil side, they would probably have killed themselves since long. I mean, look at us. We are a neutral as can be as a race. We can do sooo much good, and sooo much bad. However, we turn more and more towards good as a race. babysteps, sure, but we are still extremely young as a species.



Of course there are extremely many factors. But yeah, if we make it as a race, I think the odds are very good for eventually hooking up with some space-dudes. Most likely not in our lifetime though, unless they are already here, watching us... Louis?

[Myrddraal]

it is imo conceited to believe that aliens are watching us. why us of all people? its ridiculous.

Why would aliens watch us? Why would aliens have eyes? Eyes are a very earthy thing in my opinion.

Lets just remember that if life exists elsewhere, its evolutionary course will be completely independent of ours. The likelihood is that this other life, be it intelligent or not, would be so (dare I say) alien that we would have difficulty recognising it as intelligent. Why, perhaps in some resource rich planet movement was not necessary for survival, and these aliens have developed no natural way to move around. Naturally such aliens would have no interest in exploration, let alone in building spaceships... When we encounter these super intelligent aliens, we will probably mistake them for some kind of primeval sludge, scoop up a handful of individuals (perhaps literally) and make a new type of glue out of them.

But does other life exist at all? Most people seem content to say "The universe is really big/infinite therefore the chances are pretty high", but if the universe isn't infinite, then there's no justification to this argument at all. We have no idea about the number of stars in the universe, nor do we have any idea what the probability of those stars supporting life is (our current sample is way too limited). The probability of life could just as easily be negligible compared to the number of stars.

[Myrddraal]

Just to illustrate how ridiculous our very human interpretations of aliens are, here's that classic clip of the English housewife offering aliens tea:

[Kadagar_AV]

Why would aliens watch us? Why would aliens have eyes? Eyes are a very earthy thing in my opinion.

Lets just remember that if life exists elsewhere, its evolutionary course will be completely independent of ours. The likelihood is that this other life, be it intelligent or not, would be so (dare I say) alien that we would have difficulty recognising it as intelligent. Why, perhaps in some resource rich planet movement was not necessary for survival, and these aliens have developed no natural way to move around. Naturally such aliens would have no interest in exploration, let alone in building spaceships... When we encounter these super intelligent aliens, we will probably mistake them for some kind of primeval sludge, scoop up a handful of individuals (perhaps literally) and make a new type of glue out of them.

But does other life exist at all? Most people seem content to say "The universe is really big/infinite therefore the chances are pretty high", but if the universe isn't infinite, then there's no justification to this argument at all. We have no idea about the number of stars in the universe, nor do we have any idea what the probability of those stars supporting life is (our current sample is way too limited). The probability of life could just as easily be negligible compared to the number of stars.

Have you actually read up on the topic? I dont say this as a flame, just that some of your points are very much covered. Wiki the drake equation and take it from there :)

[Reenk Roink]

2. If there is one life form that makes it through, they are bound to be good. If they had not mastered their evil side, they would probably have killed themselves since long. I mean, look at us. We are a neutral as can be as a race. We can do sooo much good, and sooo much bad. However, we turn more and more towards good as a race. babysteps, sure, but we are still extremely young as a species.

The argument that technologically advanced alien lifeforms would be good because otherwise they'd have destroyed themselves seems very weak to me, as shown by what technologically advanced humans have done to not so technologically advanced humans in the past...

[Kadagar_AV]

The argument that technologically advanced alien lifeforms would be good because otherwise they'd have destroyed themselves seems very weak to me, as shown by what technologically advanced humans have done to not so technologically advanced humans in the past...

well, only a couple of hundred years ago, a drop in the ocean concerning universal time, we thought it natural to enslave others among our species and to kill off animals bordering to extinction.

Today, all over the world, slavery is frowned upon to say the least, and wild life preservations are all over the place, much funded by the average citizen. We are not born to be good, but generation by generation we are getting closer. Evolve that over some million years...

EDIT: I used these 2 examples as they mimic aliens stumbling upon us, or us stumbling upon aliens. If WE did, do you think we would send nukes, or try to make contact and learn from them?