Is there life outside of this planet?

illatly theres been a lot of sighting of UFOS, what do you recon?

is there such thing as other life?

 

I think so

Somewhere out there i reckon there must be some sort of life even if its not at the same level as earth.

 

YES....In my World At least....Or so it seems sometimes.... (chinny) ....

 

according to Drake..

The Drake equation states that:

N = R^{\ast} \times f_p \times n_e \times f_{\ell} \times f_i \times f_c \times L \!

where:

N is the number of civilizations in our galaxy with which communication might be possible;

and

R* is the average rate of star formation in our galaxy
fp is the fraction of those stars that have planets
ne is the average number of planets that can potentially support life per star that has planets
fl is the fraction of the above that actually go on to develop life at some point
fi is the fraction of the above that actually go on to develop intelligent life
fc is the fraction of civilizations that develop a technology that releases detectable signs of their existence into space
L is the length of time such civilizations release detectable signals into space.

The number of stars in the galaxy now, N*, is related to the star formation rate R* by

N^{\ast} = \int_0^{T_g} R^{\ast}(t) dt , \,\!,

where Tg is the age of the galaxy. Assuming for simplicity that R* is constant, then N* = R* Tg and the Drake equation can be rewritten into an alternate form phrased in terms of the more easily observable value, N*.[2]

N = N^{\ast} \times f_p \times n_e \times f_{\ell} \times f_i \times f_c \times L / T_g \,\!

[edit] Historical estimates of the parameters

Considerable disagreement on the values of most of these parameters exists, but the values used by Drake and his colleagues in 1961 were:

* R* = 10/year (10 stars formed per year, on the average over the life of the galaxy)
* fp = 0.5 (half of all stars formed will have planets)
* ne = 2 (stars with planets will have 2 planets capable of supporting life)
* fl = 1 (100% of these planets will develop life)
* fi = 0.01 (1% of which will be intelligent life)
* fc = 0.01 (1% of which will be able to communicate)
* L = 10,000 years (which will last 10,000 years)

Drake's values give N = 10 × 0.5 × 2 × 1 × 0.01 × 0.01 × 10,000 = 10.

The value of R* is determined from considerable astronomical data, and is the least disputed term of the equation; fp is less certain, but is still much firmer than the values following. Confidence in ne was once higher, but the discovery of numerous gas giants in close orbit with their stars has introduced doubt that life-supporting planets commonly survive the creation of their stellar systems. In addition, most stars in our galaxy are red dwarfs, which flare violently, mostly in X-rays—a property not conducive to life as we know it (simulations also suggest that these bursts erode planetary atmospheres). The possibility of life on moons of gas giants (e.g. Jupiter's satellite Europa) adds further uncertainty to this figure.

Geological evidence from the Earth suggests that fl may be very high; life on Earth appears to have begun around the same time as favorable conditions arose, suggesting that abiogenesis may be relatively common once conditions are right. However, this evidence only looks at the Earth (a single model planet), and contains anthropic bias, as the planet of study was not chosen randomly, but by the living organisms that already inhabit it (ourselves). Whether this is actually a case of anthropic bias has been contested, however; it might rather merely be a limitation involving a critically small sample size, since it is argued that there is no bias involved in our asking these questions about life on Earth. Also countering this argument is that there is no evidence for abiogenesis occurring more than once on the Earth—that is, all terrestrial life stems from a common origin. If abiogenesis were more common it would be speculated to have occurred more than once on the Earth. In addition, from a classical hypothesis testing standpoint, there are zero degrees of freedom, permitting no valid estimates to be made.

One piece of data which would have major impact on fl is the discovery of life on Mars or another planet or moon. If life were to be found on Mars which developed independently from life on Earth it would imply a higher value for fl. While this would improve the degrees of freedom from zero to one, there would remain a great deal of uncertainty on any estimate due to the small sample size, and the chance they are not really independent.

Similar arguments of bias can be made regarding fi and fc by considering the Earth as a model: intelligence with the capacity of extraterrestrial communication occurs only in one species in the 4 billion year history of life on Earth. If generalized, this means only relatively old planets may have intelligent life capable of extraterrestrial communication. Again this model has a large anthropic bias and there are still zero degrees of freedom. Note that the capacity and willingness to participate in extraterrestrial communication has come relatively "quickly", with the Earth having only an estimated 100,000 year history of intelligent human life, and less than a century of technological ability.

fi, fc and L, like fl, are guesses. Estimates of fi have been affected by discoveries that the solar system's orbit is circular in the galaxy, at such a distance that it remains out of the spiral arms for hundreds of millions of years (evading radiation from novae). Also, Earth's large moon may aid the evolution of life by stabilizing the planet's axis of rotation. In addition, while it appears that life developed soon after the formation of Earth, the Cambrian explosion, in which a large variety of multicellular life forms came into being, occurred a considerable amount of time after the formation of Earth, which suggests the possibility that special conditions were necessary. Some scenarios such as the Snowball Earth or research into the extinction events have raised the possibility that life on Earth is relatively fragile. Again, the controversy over life on Mars is relevant since a discovery that life did form on Mars but ceased to exist would affect estimates of these terms.

The astronomer Carl Sagan speculated that all of the terms, except for the lifetime of a civilization, are relatively high and the determining factor in whether there are large or small numbers of civilizations in the universe is the civilization lifetime, or in other words, the ability of technological civilizations to avoid self-destruction. In Sagan's case, the Drake equation was a strong motivating factor for his interest in environmental issues and his efforts to warn against the dangers of nuclear warfare.

By plugging in apparently "plausible" values for each of the parameters above, the resultant expectant value of N is often (much) greater than 1. This has provided considerable motivation for the SETI movement. However, we have no evidence for extraterrestrial civilizations. This conflict is often called the Fermi paradox, after Enrico Fermi who first asked about our lack of observation of extraterrestrials, and motivates advocates of SETI to continually expand the volume of space in which another civilization could be observed.

Other assumptions give values of N that are (much) less than 1, but some observers believe this is still compatible with observations due to the anthropic principle: no matter how low the probability that any given galaxy will have intelligent life in it, the universe must have at least one intelligent species by definition otherwise the question would not arise.

Some computations of the Drake equation, given different assumptions:

R* = 10/year, fp = 0.5, ne = 2, fl = 1, fi = fc = 0.01, and L = 50,000 years
N = 10 × 0.5 × 2 × 1 × 0.01 × 0.01 × 50,000 = 50 (so 50 civilizations exist in our galaxy at any given time, on the average)

But a pessimist might equally well believe that life seldom becomes intelligent, and intelligent civilizations do not last very long:

R* = 10/year, fp = 0.5, ne = 2, fl = 1, fi = 0.001, fc = 0.01, and L = 500 years
N = 10 × 0.5 × 2 × 1 × 0.001 × 0.01 × 500 = 0.05 (we are probably alone)

Alternatively, making some more optimistic assumptions, and assuming that 10% of civilizations become willing and able to communicate, and then spread through their local star systems for 100,000 years (a very short period in geologic time):

R* = 20/year, fp = 0.1, ne = 0.5, fl = 1, fi = 0.5, fc = 0.1, and L = 100,000 years
N = 20 × 0.1 × 0.5 × 1 × 0.5 × 0.1 × 100,000 = 5,000

[edit] Current estimates of the parameters

This section attempts to list best current estimates for the parameters of the Drake equation.

R* = the rate of star creation in our galaxy

Estimated by Drake as 10/year. Latest calculations from NASA and the European Space Agency indicates that the current rate of star formation in our galaxy is about 7 per year.[3]

fp = the fraction of those stars which have planets

Estimated by Drake as 0.5. It is now known from modern planet searches that at least 30% of sunlike stars have planets[4], and the true proportion may be much higher, since only planets considerably larger than Earth can be detected with current technology.[5] Infra-red surveys of dust discs around young stars imply that 20-60% of sun-like stars may form terrestrial planets.[6]

ne = the average number of planets (satellites may perhaps sometimes be just as good candidates) which can potentially support life per star that has planets

Estimated by Drake as 2. Marcy, et al.[5] notes that most of the observed planets have very eccentric orbits, or orbit very close to the sun where the temperature is too high for earth-like life. However, several planetary systems that look more solar-system-like are known, such as HD 70642, HD 154345, or Gliese 849. These may well have smaller, as yet unseen, earth sized planets in their habitable zones. Also, the variety of solar systems that might have habitable zones is not just limited to solar-type stars and earth-sized planets - it is now believed that even tidally locked planets close to red dwarves might have habitable zones, and some of the large planets detected so far could potentially support life - in early 2008, two different research groups concluded that Gliese 581d may possibly be habitable.[7] [8] Since about 200 planetary systems are known, this implies ne > 0.005.

Even if planets are in the habitable zone, however, the number of planets with the right proportion of elements may be difficult to estimate.[9] Also, the Rare Earth hypothesis, which posits that conditions for intelligent life are quite rare, has advanced a set of arguments based on the Drake equation that the number of planets or satellites that could support life is small, and quite possibly limited to Earth alone; in this case, the estimate of ne would be infinitesimal.

fl = the fraction of the above which actually go on to develop life

Estimated by Drake as 1.

In 2002, Charles H. Lineweaver and Tamara M. Davis (at the University of New South Wales and the Australian Centre for Astrobiology) estimated fl as > 0.13 on planets that have existed for at least one billion years using a statistical argument based on the length of time life took to evolve on Earth.[10] Lineweaver has also determined that about 10% of star systems in the Galaxy are hospitable to life, by having heavy elements, being far from supernovae and being stable themselves for sufficient time.[11]

fi = the fraction of the above which actually go on to develop intelligent life

Estimated by Drake as 0.01.

fc = the fraction of the above which are willing and able to communicate

Estimated by Drake as 0.01.

L = the expected lifetime of such a civilization for the period that it can communicate across interstellar space

Estimated by Drake as 10,000 years.

In an article in Scientific American, Michael Shermer estimated L as 420 years, based on compiling the durations of sixty historical civilizations. Using twenty-eight civilizations more recent than the Roman Empire he calculates a figure of 304 years for "modern" civilizations. It could also be argued from Michael Shermer's results that the fall of most of these civilizations was followed by later civilizations which carried on the technologies, so it's doubtful that they are separate civilizations in the context of the Drake equation. Furthermore since none could communicate over interstellar space, the value of L here could also be argued to be zero.

The value of L can be estimated from the lifetime of our current civilization from the advent of radio astronomy in 1938 (dated from Grote Reber's parabolic dish radio telescope) to the current date. In 2008, this gives an L of 70 years. However such an assumption would be erroneous. 70 for the value of L would be an artificial minimum based on Earth's broadcasting history to date and would make unlikely the possibility of other civilizations existing. 10,000 for L is still the most popular estimate

Values based on the above estimates,

R* = 7/year, fp = 0.5, ne = 2, fl = 0.33, fi = 0.01, fc = 0.01, and L = 10000 years

result in

N = 7 × 0.5 × 2 × 0.33 × 0.01 × 0.01 × 10000 = 2.3

[edit] Criticisms

Since there exists only one known example of a planet with advanced life forms, several terms in the Drake equation are largely based on conjecture. However, based on Earth's experience, some scientists view intelligent life on other planets as possible and the replication of this event elsewhere is at least plausible.[12][13][14] In a 2003 lecture at Caltech, Michael Crichton, a science fiction author, stated that, "Speaking precisely, the Drake equation is literally meaningless, and has nothing to do with science. I take the hard view that science involves the creation of testable hypotheses. The Drake equation cannot be tested and therefore SETI is not science. SETI is unquestionably a religion."[15]

However, actual experiments by SETI scientists do not attempt to address the Drake equations for the existence of extraterrestrial civilizations anywhere in the universe, but are focused on specific, testable hypotheses (i.e., "do extraterrestrial civilizations communicating in the radio spectrum exist near sun-like stars within 50 light years of the Earth?").

Another reply to such criticism[16]is that even though the Drake equation currently involves speculation about parameters that are, as of the moment, unmeasured, it serves a useful purpose by stimulating dialogue between people about these topics, leading to focus and how to proceed experimentally.

One can question why the number of civilizations should be proportional to the star formation rate, though this makes technical sense. (The product of all the terms except L tells how many new communicating civilizations are born each year. Then you multiply by the lifetime to get the expected number. For example, if an average of 0.01 new civilizations are born each year, and they each last 500 years on the average, then on the average 5 will exist at any time.) The original Drake Equation can be extended to a more realistic model, where the equation uses not the number of stars that are forming now, but those that were forming several billion years ago. The alternate formulation, in terms of the number of stars in the galaxy, is easier to explain and understand, but implicitly assumes the star formation rate is constant over the life of the galaxy.

Alexander Zaitsev mentioned to be in a communicative phase and emit dedicated messages is not the same thing. For example, we, although being in a communicative phase, are not a communicative civilization: We do not practice such activities as the purposeful and regular transmission of interstellar messages. Thus he suggested to introduce a METI factor into the classical Drake Equation.

 

With the size of the universe, it's almost impossible for there NOT to be life outside of earth.

 

Is that a yes then?

 

Most people on here came from another planet !

 

Agreed

Is there a BBS in Andromeda? And do they moan all the time too?

 

Got to be - universe is so large

There has to be something out there! I sometimes wonder if there's life outside of this board?

 

Maybe he cant understand it either!

 

Yes.

I only hope I'm alive to see it discovered so I can enjoy the sheer discomfort of religious spokespeople from all denominations trying to explain it.

 

hehe..me too. nt

 

RE: Yes.

Some Religions? would discount the fact even if they were stood in front of them!....

 

It doesn't as such, but it would make them have to ask some awkward questions, especially if we encounter intelligent alien life.

 

While I think

that given the infinite size of the universe, there's barn to be life somewhere, the chances of finding it within the next million years, never mind our lifetimes are extremely remote. That's what I allus tell mi mate Zardor from the planet Xenib anyway.

 

RE: While I think

Unless they find us first, which may not be the best thing anyway.

 

I like to think about it like this, the "ufo's" that have been seen, could be their own astro's looking for other signs of life, & they could be seeing ours. We will never know..

 

way i see it.....nt

lets say there a million stars
each star is like our sun... only not all have planets so lets say only 1% have planets ... thats 10 thousand
so each star/sun has ....like our sun... has 10 planets ......that means
there are 100,000 planets
similar to our sun where only 1 in the 10 has life...
that would mean there are 10,000 planets with life on....
lets for arguments sake say that only 1% might have life like we know it
that would still make

100 PLANETS POSSIBLY WITH LIFE AS WE KNOW IT.................

Any way you look at that - it is using the lowest possible percentages based on the number os possible suns!!!!!!!!!!!!!

thats the way i see it

 

My view is that if Wednesday are the biggest club in the universe then there must be other planets that support life. Otherwise their fans would settle for being the biggest club on earth.