76 replies to this topic

[Ragamuffin]

There is absolutely no way we are the only source of life that exists. Although we might be the only life to exist in this specific universe, there's many many universes. Of course, we won't be able to get to them in our lifetime.

The concept of multiple separate universes, a multiverse, or whatever else are all just theories.Many exosolar planets have been discovered over the past decade or so and a small amount seem to have an Earth-like atmosphere. Problem is, they're impossible to reach given our current technology and that's likely not going to change for many generations. Of course, the possibility of an Earth-like atmosphere doesn't necessarily suggest life, only a possible home for us. The flip side of that is just because we perceive a planet to be uninhabitable for whatever reason, doesn't mean that some other lifeform that has existed on the particular planet for eons wasn't able to adapt or that new life couldn't flourish.I look at it this way; say there was an omnipotent being that controls the universe. Why make a place so large only to fill a completely negligible portion of it with life? Or, if life just formed here on Earth because the conditions were exactly right, then surely it's happened on other planets to varying extents. Even if that chance was 1 in a billion that still amounts to a lot of life-supporting planets. It's mathmatically impossible for it NOT to occur more than once.

[Ragamuffin]

who knows, maybe 200 years from now we can colonize other planets

Depends on the planet. We'd have a much easier time colonizing Mars than Venus for example. Our best bet would be our moon since we're already very familiar with its atmosphere and makeup, and the fact that it's only 220,000 miles away (approx.). We've even discovered water there which is definitely promising.The downside is that the moon's gravity is very low, which has been shown to decrease bone density and suppress the immune system. And of course the extreme differences in temperature on top of potentially toxic dust and increased radiation exposure pose a whole new set of problems to both people and machinery.NASA plans on returning to the moon by 2020 and as of now they're planning on building a small base there, which is a small but significant step. (link)People of this generation will more than likely live long enough to see at least the beginning of space colonization. After all the Earth's population is quickly reaching critical mass and we simply can't cater to the 1.5 billion+ population increase that is projected for 2050.

[Ragamuffin]

I agree that we will probably start colonizing other planets relatively soon, but there are too many things to do for preparing the planets for colonization to have it done within our lifetimes. The trip to the moon takes months and the ship that would carry the supplies would have to be enormous, far beyond anything we have ever made. A small base wouldn't be too hard to maintain though since, in theory, we could supply it or grow our own food in a controlled environment.

Going to the moon takes less than 10 hours, and with the exponential rate of technological advancements I'd wager to say we'll start seeing colonization within 50 years. Like I said we'll probably only live long enough to see the very beginning of it, I'm not saying that by 2050 we'd have huge cities on the moon or anything but I'm sure at least a few hundred people would be living there as part of some test phase. It's already being done with the International Space Station.Another reason why I mentioned that is because space travel is going to become a necessity when we run out of natural resources and room, which is happening faster than most people would like to imagine. I'd like to think that, for all our flaws and misguided priorities, society as a whole will eventually step up and recognize that this is far more important than many of our current problems, hopefully giving space programs the funding they're going to need rather than spending tens of billions of dollars on largely outdated military resources every year.As far as supplies go, assuming the moon has enough light materials such as Hydrogen and Carbon (which as of now, is doubtful save for us finding lots of water) the Moon could be a self-sustaining place rather than being dependent on Earth decades down the line. When nanotechnology evolves to the point where we're able to effectively build a space elevator then all the better since it would greatly cut down on the cost of sending materials/people into space.

[Kiba]

There isn't an infinite number of stars. What you are referring to is the fact that the universe is infinitely expanding. In reality the universe is expanding at an exponentially slower rate. That doesn't not mean that space is infinite or that there is an infinite number of stars.

[Ragamuffin]

I think there is life on other planets because they said when the went to mars the found ice. so if there is water there has to be something there.

Uh, no.Just because the vast majority of creatures on this planet require water, doesn't mean everything in the universe does. That's like saying fish don't exist because since people can't live underwater, but in reverse.

[kriogenik]

There are billions of planets out there. The chances that we are the only intelligent life is almost nonexistent. Even if you look at it from a religious standpoint, why would God make so many planets and only make one of them inhabitable, with intelligent life? To fill in empty space? In that case, why not save the energy and make the universe smaller? Whether you read the Bible or not doesn't matter, you can't deny that the probability is excessively high.

the universe has a very delicate balance between all the forces out there, just to talk about our solar system its been comfirmed that the slightest change in the positions or the orbit of anything in our system would cause major changes in the way things happen in it so maybe "god" made all of this "infinite" universe so things would follow the balance he has chosen.this said, i do believe that there must be another life form, inteligent or not, in this universe. the mathematical possibility for there not to be any life besides ours in the universe is too slim to even consider a possibility. I believe that in the "infinite" amount of planets in the universe at least on other planet would have life in it, the real problem is if we would ever be able to find it.

[polopbob]

Surely there must be. Like Steven Hawking (and many others) says, it's highly doubt able that in such a vast universe we are the only living creature. Which theoretically has some kind of truth to it.Some has stated it before, and since the forming of planets basically goes the same. The building block for life to form must be available on other planets, throughout the universe as well. Science found more evidence that essential chemicals like water can be found in meteors, which by crashing into a planet, that is yet to be formed brings water to other places, including earth. If abiogenesis is true then with those chemicals, which are delivered or created when planets are formed, life forms like those on earth can be "created". Theoretically then.I think the problems of whether creatures exists on other planets or not depends on the persons who are looking for then. Due to science-fiction and such we have visualised a form, from which we believe extraterrestrial life should look like, and probably stays somewhere in our thought during our search. Or more something like the creatures on earth. But in fact small, bacteria or other cellular creatures are creatures too. Which are about impossible to spot with the telescopes we have now. So until we can get a clearer shot of the inner surface of planets or samples to examine, we can't really determine if there is life or not on other planets.