Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

qazplm135

(7,647 posts)
13. there are limits
Mon Jan 7, 2019, 04:45 PM
Jan 2019

even with Bayesian probabilities.

And our knowledge base is SO utterly limited that I don't see how even Bayesian probability can be remotely accurate.
What we don't know far exceeds what we do know.
Our ability to observe is akin to looking into a very very very large, dark room with a matchstick.
What constitutes life isn't even nailed down.
How that life might communicate across interstellar space could very well include means we can't detect yet.

I think you can only really say the following:

1. The odds that life only exists on Earth are infinitesimal even if we consider just the finite observable universe we can see.
2. If the universe is suitably big enough (especially if it is infinitely large) then statistically there are an infinite number of Earths just like ours, in fact, exactly like ours. The tiniest coincidences multiplied by infinity lead to infinite occurrences. Of course, we don't know that the universe is infinite...we only know out to the observable universe. We don't know if there are multiverses.

That's about it. Whether intelligent, space-faring life is rare, common, or ubiquitous is something we simply do not have enough information to determine yet IMO.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»Culture Forums»Skepticism, Science & Pseudoscience»Dissolving the Fermi Para...»Reply #13