Scotty99

Then why did you say this:

Don't just take what he says with a pinch of salt, ignore it.

 

Should we not take all theories into account and not shut anything out? Is this forum now about politics more than anything? Its just really offputting when someone tells me to ignore something, it almost puts a bullseye on you as having an agenda.

But aren't we completely stuck in contemporary physics right now? Isnt string theory viewed as the leading theory to get out of the rut? If i am not wrong isn't science trying to get away from dark matter and dark energy?

Fair enough on your last point, but if he is one of (if not the) leading proponents of the theory how do you not talk about his latest conclusion?

Just because someone comes up with an accepted idea doesn't mean that they are all viable.

I didnt link the post because it was michio kaku, i posted it because of string theory. Is string theory not an accepted theory on this forum?

 

 

I get the impression that there are more threads about bad science that refer to Michio Kaku than any other individual.

 

Don't just take what he says with a pinch of salt, ignore it.

First off i know almost nothing about this man, all i know is string theory is a legitimate theory and along with brian green (is that his name?) he was at the forefront. My only question here is does this at least legitimize the question of a created universe to be talked about in public arenas etc?

Kind of curious tho, if michio is so unpopular with scientists (or at least this forum) how is he so popular with people? Where is the disconnect?

For the love of money is the root of all evil.

Not sure what this even means lol. Are you accusing michio as being a money grubber and that is his lifes goal? I dont have any stake in the guy, im just only aware of him because he presents well to the general public.

You know i really cant add much here other than does this at least bring the discussion about god to the mainstream? Michio is quite a large figure in science, will this announcement allow people to discuss the possibility the universe was created?

I also wonder how miciho feels about geocentrism and the cosmic microwave background? I am not gonna start up a whole other thread on the topic, i am just curious what his thoughts on the subject are. I know he was interviewed in the principle movie, but i cant seem to play it on my computer (tried to rent it, it failed somehow).

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/barbara-hollingsworth/string-theory-co-founder-sub-atomic-particles-are-evidence-0

Very intriguing stuff.

Alrite so.

I am 34 year old man and have never been able to fully grasp politics. I get the endgame, (at least in this country) that it does matter who runs the show and how that can affect your everyday life. But what i have had trouble grasping for years, is how do smart people get so passionate about these topics.

Am i the idiot for not understanding politics, or have i mentally skipped that step in my brain to move onto bigger and better things (again, in my brain).

I only bring this up as ive recently been introduced to a show labeled the young turks who do a youtube podcast about the most relevant and popular political videos. These people aren't dumb, the host cenk yugur (sp) is a bright guy, but i just cannot grasp how he got into the industry. I know it matters your upbringing and how that affected you, but a logical person can dictate what is truly of importance.

I don't want donald trump as my president anymore than the next guy, but what i just dont get is why people feel the need to talk about it endlessly even down to the gestures he makes on his face in a debate.

Explain, my ears are wide open.

I wrote this very fast, but what it boils down to in my mind is this: Why waste your brain power on something so frivolous when there are bigger problems to solve. But wait, there is more. At the same time i realized maybe politics are actually what i should be focusing on, as that is what directly affects my day to day life.

Its a conundrum to me, there are a ton of smart people on this planet but why oh why are we so fragmented on goals. Am i wrong? Are they wrong?

 

Or if you were capable of accurately reporting what the article said.

 

(BTW You do realise that "within an order of magnitude" means the results could be 10 times too large or small. Which is a pretty enormous margin of error.)

I left you alone, why even come back to the thread? Are you bored?

Assuming i don't know what order of magnitude entails is quite insulting.

 

An order of magnitude on the possibility? That makes no sense. How do you measure the possibility of special?

First off im not going to dig my foot into strange (im not that guy)

And yes you're question has validity, from the article:

 

The scientists also have similar concerns about the galactic and cosmological inputs of their model but nonetheless they suspect that their final numbers are accurate to within an order of magnitude.

 

I wouldn't have to post such things had you read the article.

 

So you cherry picked the bits you liked.

This reply assumes you feel they messed up in some way, right? I mean, unless i missed something, the scientific american article was accurate in saying there is a possibility (within an order of magnitude) that the earth is special.

 

Have you actually read the paper?

I know you don't expect an actual response, but ill give you one. In fact ive read the PDF over multiple times, some of it i understand, some of it i dont. TBH it wasn't even necessary because i took away from it the same as the scientific american article, there is a possibility earth is special.

 

But that isn't what you said.

I said:

How can you assume another civilization would have the same tendencies as ours?

And then in reference to phi's "You're the one wandering into the weeds with this latest fallacy-filled guesswork."

Its not ok to say that if other life existed in the universe its possible they arent exactly the same as us?

Where did i misstep on this one?

 

If you had paid a second of interest to the article you might realize that "700 quintillion terrestrial exoplanets they studied" is incorrect. That's an extrapolation based on what has been found much closer to earth. They even mention they are making assumptions about planets that haven't been discovered yet ("predict that ≈ 1/3 of the terrestrial planets in the local Universe are orbiting stars in a metallicity range for which such planets have yet to be been detected ") (emphasis added)

 

You also might note the umber of times they say "mild violation of the Copernican/mediocrity principle " (again, emphasis added)

No i paid a lot of attention. You all seem to dismiss the fact that the study is based on what we KNOW. So in that, you are all denying all of the work that has been done. I purposely put the 700 QUINTILLION because i knew id get comments like this, and its a pretty number. If you say the sim isnt valid, you say known science isnt valid. I never said this was an exacting study, but an interesting one.

 

Stupid?! I will assume you're speaking for yourself, and not trying to insult the membership.

 

 

I didn't. I posed it as a possibility of why you aren't seeing extraterrestrial civilizations, and I supported it with known facts. You're the one wandering into the weeds with this latest fallacy-filled guesswork.

Its not ok to say that if other life existed in the universe its possible they arent exactly the same as us? Actual question.

 

No. You missed the mark if you think this kind of guesswork is interesting or productive to a scientific discussion. Most here prefer explanations that have support from actual evidence.

How can you assume another civilization would have the same tendencies as ours? Your comment is quite confusing to me.

 

There are already several threads on the Fermi Paradox. Do we need another one?

 

 

And you know that how?

Well obviously i dont KNOW. But considering what humans have done in such a short time, and how relatively stupid we are you can extrapolate 3.5b years we would probably be ethereal beings that run on pure instinct and exacting knowledge of the cosmos (with the tools to harness every system of known energy).

 

We don't need to speculate on that. We have a very good history of development of nuclear technology, and we know how dangerous the path was for us. Crazy has little to do with it. It's about the fission reaction of the element, and what you can do with it once you think you've harnessed it.

You missed the mark on this one, i knew that was part of what you were talking about. Im saying, who says this other civilization wouldnt be more careful and once they saw the destructive capabilities of such a technology, abandon it before that could happen.

It will be more likely an evolutionary process rather than technology.

Right, i was only responding to the first line of your post about transmitters and receivers. And my comment was assuming we evolved intellectually at the same rate, of course.

 

Right, but when you're posting on a science discussion forum, evidence is better than guesswork and entertainment. Belief, other than what you can empirically trust, shouldn't come in to it.

What evidence do we have for life existing outside of earth? I get the gist of your post, but it seems to be pointed to my comment about life in the cosmos.

If we want to detect them we have to match theirs. Can we pick up radio on the TV. So the receiver has to match the signal.

Unless they have a way of setting up BHs to merge they won't be doing it through gravitational waves.

Distributing quantum entangled particles; could they be a possible method?

So you are saying for us to determine if life has existed, we need to live another 3.499999 (repeating, of course (i hope someone gets that reference lol)) billion years to create a device to transcode signals buried in the cosmos?

The comment I usually get is that your beliefs count for nothing in the scheme of things.

Ya thats completely fair, i only said that because if someone was new to the thread and was reading thru it id want them to know where i stand on the topic (i seen a few guests reading).

Just to be clear to anyone new to the thread, i dont believe any life has ever existed in the cosmos outside of earth, but i like to entertain the idea. Its like when you watch movies you suspend yourself in disbelief otherwise you ruin it for yourself lol (bad analogy probably, best i can come up with).

OMG, I can't believe this thread is 20 pages long! On geocentrism, no less!

 

I don't know what this has to do with the OP anymore, but has anyone mentioned that extra-terrestrial civilizations may not have dealt with the discovery of what you can do with uranium as well as we have? We still need to tread lightly, but the threat of destroying ourselves in global nuclear war diminishes as time goes by. But there were times when we could have pressed the buttons.

 

Surviving knowledge that increases your destructive power by several orders of magnitude may not be easy, and may account for why we haven't seen any signs of colonization in the galaxy in the hundred years or so we've been looking seriously.

That is something that has crossed my mind many times, and is one of the more insightful things ive read in this thread. But on the other hand, how do we know these other civilizations are as crazy as us humans and have that in their DNA? (do they even have DNA?)

BTW i am the OP and i find these topics relevant to the discussion.

No it is a fact, not an absurdity. It will only travel at the speed of light at best and the signal will get less as it progresses.

 

Missed the point a bit there rob, im saying we cannot imagine the sort of technology a civilization could have invented in 3.5 bil years.

I understand that, those were my questions brought on by Tegmarks quote. No one knows whats possible in 3.5 billion years, so even talking about radio waves and how far they travel is absurdity.