# well someone did the math!!!



## hummdaddy (Nov 4, 2013)

http://news.yahoo.com/study-8-8-bil...-212232920.html;_ylt=AwrSyCVoMnhSgx4AcV3QtDMD


----------



## 660griz (Nov 5, 2013)

That's 8.8 billion Gods.


----------



## TripleXBullies (Nov 5, 2013)

8.8*2,500.. Each one of those will have a plenty.


----------



## ambush80 (Nov 5, 2013)

660griz said:


> That's 8.8 billion Gods.




Not necessarily.  Some of them may have evolved passed all that.  They probably see us as rock throwing, chanting, superstitious primitives.


----------



## DCHunter (Nov 5, 2013)

dumb


----------



## TripleXBullies (Nov 5, 2013)

Dang those astronomers!


----------



## ambush80 (Nov 5, 2013)

DCHunter said:


> dumb



Care to elaborate?


----------



## hummdaddy (Nov 5, 2013)

man think of the odds of us not being the only one's


----------



## DCHunter (Nov 5, 2013)

ambush80 said:


> Care to elaborate?


Really dumb


----------



## StriperrHunterr (Nov 5, 2013)

I think it would behoove everyone, including the reporter, to research the difference between calculate and estimate.


----------



## WaltL1 (Nov 5, 2013)

StripeRR HunteRR said:


> I think it would behoove everyone, including the reporter, to research the difference between calculate and estimate.


I think its a calculated estimation


----------



## WaltL1 (Nov 5, 2013)

DCHunter said:


> Really dumb


Thanks for the contribution.


----------



## StriperrHunterr (Nov 5, 2013)

WaltL1 said:


> I think its a calculated estimation



Even an educated guess is still, by definition, a guess. 

And this is all coming from someone who holds it to be true that there is at least one other planet with life in the universe, but those numbers don't look right to me.


----------



## David Parker (Nov 5, 2013)

There can't possibly be stuff that is unknown to man.  We know everything.


----------



## hummdaddy (Nov 5, 2013)

StripeRR HunteRR said:


> Even an educated guess is still, by definition, a guess.
> 
> And this is all coming from someone who holds it to be true that there is at least one other planet with life in the universe, but those numbers don't look right to me.



 i am just saying someone tried to take a stab at it

i already know the answer is infinity.....we don't go out there and smack a brick wall somewhere,it just keeps going....


----------



## StriperrHunterr (Nov 5, 2013)

hummdaddy said:


> i am just saying someone tried to take a stab at it
> 
> i already know the answer is infinity.....we don't go out there and smack a brick wall somewhere,it just keeps going....



What answer is infinity? You lost me.


----------



## David Parker (Nov 5, 2013)

infinity plus 1


----------



## DCHunter (Nov 5, 2013)

David Parker said:


> infinity plus 1


Took the words right out of my mouth.


----------



## hummdaddy (Nov 5, 2013)

StripeRR HunteRR said:


> What answer is infinity? You lost me.



universe


----------



## hummdaddy (Nov 5, 2013)

David Parker said:


> infinity plus 1


----------



## StriperrHunterr (Nov 6, 2013)

hummdaddy said:


> universe



We could agree that space is infinite, but matter/energy are finite, given what we know about the Laws of Conservation of Matter.


----------



## drippin' rock (Nov 6, 2013)

What are we talking about again??


----------



## StriperrHunterr (Nov 6, 2013)

drippin' rock said:


> What are we talking about again??



That someone made an educated guess as to the number of planets in the habitable zone of their parent stars and came up with a wildly larger number than previously estimated. 

The follow on to that is that they could then have liquid water and life, as would fit the only model/example we have of life.


----------



## David Parker (Nov 6, 2013)

I dont' know what they came up with to attribute life only to planets with water in liquid form.  I'm guessing there is other stuff outside the H20 parameter.  Maybe even infinite combinations of elements that would support energy (aka life)


----------



## StriperrHunterr (Nov 6, 2013)

David Parker said:


> I dont' know what they came up with to attribute life only to planets with water in liquid form.  I'm guessing there is other stuff outside the H20 parameter.  Maybe even infinite combinations of elements that would support energy (aka life)



It's the fact that we only know of one planet that has life, confirmed to have it, and that it requires a liquid, in our case water, in which to do biological functions. 

So, until we find a different example of life, one that doesn't require water, we are left with using the search for liquid water as the main criteria by which we also search for life, since water is a requisite and far less common than any other criteria.


----------



## StriperrHunterr (Nov 6, 2013)

We're victims of small sample size, in short.


----------



## David Parker (Nov 6, 2013)

Consider that life is energy and we are the byproducts of energy existing in this specific environment.  There are countless little twinkles in the sky at night and each one represents limitless energy.  How that energy exists in those systems is a question now isn't it?


----------



## Jeff Phillips (Nov 6, 2013)

660griz said:


> That's 8.8 billion Gods.



Or still just the one by other names...


----------



## StriperrHunterr (Nov 6, 2013)

David Parker said:


> Consider that life is energy and we are the byproducts of energy existing in this specific environment.  There are countless little twinkles in the sky at night and each one represents limitless energy.  How that energy exists in those systems is a question now isn't it?



From a human perspective, sure, that energy is limitless; just not from a physics standpoint. 

The Laws of Conservation have been proven repeatedly, and are a cornerstone of physics, which state that matter and energy can change forms, but not be created nor destroyed. So the energy content, and thus the matter content, of the universe is fixed forever. 

I do acknowledge the capacity for life to exist in forms that we don't know about, like those that don't require liquid water for example, but it would seem wise to me to begin our search for other life that conforms to the example that we have been provided, since we know it's already happened once. After that, or concurrently, we can discuss non-standard, relative to ourselves, forms of life.


----------



## 660griz (Nov 6, 2013)

Jeff Phillips said:


> Or still just the one by other names...



Which one? Would the bible be edited to read 'God created the heavens and the earth(s)'?


----------



## David Parker (Nov 6, 2013)

StripeRR HunteRR said:


> our search for other life .



I know how it may proceed.  We will implant life on Mars and study it to make further calculations on probability.  Finding out who else is out there is unattainable at this level.  Now, some other place far far away, may already be approaching that level of intelligence and be able to harness the energy needed to answer these questions.  Just have to wait and continue on our own path.


----------



## HawgJawl (Nov 6, 2013)

David Parker said:


> I know how it may proceed.  We will implant life on Mars and study it to make further calculations on probability.  Finding out who else is out there is unattainable at this level.  Now, some other place far far away, may already be approaching that level of intelligence and be able to harness the energy needed to answer these questions.  Just have to wait and continue on our own path.



I didn't come up with this, I'm stealing it from a science fiction movie, but the thought goes something like this;

Person (A) wonders why a more advanced and more intelligent life form would not try to make contact with humans and try to communicate with us.

Person (B) answers like this:
Are you more advanced and more intelligent than a cockroach?
Have you ever tried explaining that to a cockroach?


----------



## drippin' rock (Nov 6, 2013)

David Parker said:


> Consider that life is energy and we are the byproducts of energy existing in this specific environment.  There are countless little twinkles in the sky at night and each one represents limitless energy.  How that energy exists in those systems is a question now isn't it?



We can wonder about other combinations of elements and conditions supporting life, but I tend to think if and when we do discover it elsewhere, it will be carbon based.


----------



## drippin' rock (Nov 6, 2013)

And the women will be green, and be sporting mini skirts and go- go boots.


----------



## David Parker (Nov 6, 2013)

drippin' rock said:


> We can wonder about other combinations of elements and conditions supporting life, but I tend to think if and when we do discover it elsewhere, it will be carbon based.



It is the most likely scenario if working within known physics laws.  Beyond that, it's hard to say one way or the other.  If the probability suggests that other habitable planets orbitting a sun contain the same elements as we do on Earth, I would agree that it will be carbon based.  If the probability suggests there are unknown elements that we have not been exposed to, I would withhold judgment.


----------



## StriperrHunterr (Nov 6, 2013)

David Parker said:


> I know how it may proceed.  We will implant life on Mars and study it to make further calculations on probability.  Finding out who else is out there is unattainable at this level.  Now, some other place far far away, may already be approaching that level of intelligence and be able to harness the energy needed to answer these questions.  Just have to wait and continue on our own path.



Viewing as unattainable will keep us from attaining it, and a wait and see approach is passive, I believe we should be actively searching for other life.


----------



## David Parker (Nov 6, 2013)

I didnt' mean it like we should wait for them to find us.  Just realistically, we are less than .01 percent of the way to finding a means of getting into the next closest solar system.  Or am I giving them nasa folks too much credit?


----------



## StriperrHunterr (Nov 6, 2013)

David Parker said:


> I didnt' mean it like we should wait for them to find us.  Just realistically, we are less than .01 percent of the way to finding a means of getting into the next closest solar system.  Or am I giving them nasa folks too much credit?



Yeah, I don't think we're even .01% there. Astronomically speaking we're still on the first step in a flight of thousands of stairs. 

I don't think our best methods are physically going, rather using telepresence. 

Dedicate a few earth based antennae to powerful beams to deep space, both laser and microwave transmissions, and let them sweep around. Somehow get SETI more funding to step up more receive stations and pursue the SETI@home project again. 

We're not technologically ready, or willing, to try to physically go anywhere, in the system let alone out of it, even with robots, yet.


----------



## drippin' rock (Nov 6, 2013)

If there are others out there and they know about us, I imagine them sitting around talking about us. "yeah, those humans and their (air quotes) " space program". *snicker*


----------



## StriperrHunterr (Nov 7, 2013)

drippin' rock said:


> If there are others out there and they know about us, I imagine them sitting around talking about us. "yeah, those humans and their (air quotes) " space program". *snicker*



See Robin Williams' joke about our tardiness to the Intergalactic Council's meeting...


----------



## ambush80 (Nov 7, 2013)

HawgJawl said:


> I didn't come up with this, I'm stealing it from a science fiction movie, but the thought goes something like this;
> 
> Person (A) wonders why a more advanced and more intelligent life form would not try to make contact with humans and try to communicate with us.
> 
> ...




You can interact with a cockroach in a way that it can understand by simply making a motion towards it.  It reacts in the capacity that it can.  It perceives a threat and acts according to its instincts.  

What would be an analogous interaction in regards to a human/alien interaction?  A talking burning bush?


----------



## ambush80 (Nov 7, 2013)

StripeRR HunteRR said:


> Yeah, I don't think we're even .01% there. Astronomically speaking we're still on the first step in a flight of thousands of stairs.
> 
> I don't think our best methods are physically going, rather using telepresence.
> 
> ...




I think we should devote more resources toward the search, too.


----------



## TripleXBullies (Nov 7, 2013)

ambush80 said:


> I think we should devote more resources toward the search, too.



Government resources? Time for a political conversation? Would be nice if the resources for it wouldn't take away from something else. Maybe in the private sector.


----------



## DCHunter (Nov 7, 2013)

ambush80 said:


> What would be an analogous interaction in regards to a human/alien interaction?  A talking burning bush?



Exactly.


----------



## David Parker (Nov 7, 2013)

yep.  Have to go about it the right way (pvt), not the most direct way (gov).  So without looking up alot of the terms, Striper says we could use waves to go a billion light years away and basically look around to see if someone's home yes?  in theory at the very least


----------



## David Parker (Nov 7, 2013)

Besides, there are things out there that we are just finding out about 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unobtainium

eyes rolling


----------



## StriperrHunterr (Nov 8, 2013)

David Parker said:


> yep.  Have to go about it the right way (pvt), not the most direct way (gov).  So without looking up alot of the terms, Striper says we could use waves to go a billion light years away and basically look around to see if someone's home yes?  in theory at the very least



I'm saying that light, and other Electromagnetic waves, could be used to broadcast our position and relative technological state much more efficiently than any rocket, or ship, could ever take a person somewhere. 

The beauty of those types of communications are their speed, speed of light, their efficiency, very little energy needed to go great distances, and their ability to be reverse engineered on the receive station side, given a suitable non-random, but repeating, message. 

In conjunction with that, we could, very cheaply, send out, what we called in SATCOM, pizza box antennae with receivers to many houses all over the world. If you point them to dead space instead of a satellite then you have receive stations that sweep the universe looking for signals, using the rotation of the earth and dispersed geographic positions, and could even make use of a re-imagined SETI@home type processing solution where you use distributed processing to analyze, categorize, and flag the signals that are received for human processing. 

Relative to the cost of the physical trip, we could do all of this for what the fuel would cost to simply reach earth orbit. And for those who aren't sure that we'd find anything, take a google search for "The WOW! signal". It's never been observed again, and was never analyzed well enough to determine what it exactly was (it could have just been a GRB of a dying star), but it does show that even passive searches can result in very interesting moments.


----------



## David Parker (Nov 8, 2013)

StripeRR HunteRR said:


> I'm saying that light, and other Electromagnetic waves, could be used to broadcast our position and relative technological state much more efficiently than any rocket, or ship, could ever take a person somewhere.
> 
> The beauty of those types of communications are their speed, speed of light, their efficiency, very little energy needed to go great distances, and their ability to be reverse engineered on the receive station side, given a suitable non-random, but repeating, message.
> 
> ...



agreed but then we can't attend and   

http://www.upi.com/blog/2013/11/06/Lady-Gaga-plans-actual-space-concert/7971383790338/


----------



## ted_BSR (Nov 10, 2013)

660griz said:


> That's 8.8 billion Gods.



Nope, just one. Supreme being.


----------



## bullethead (Nov 10, 2013)

ted_BSR said:


> Nope, just one. Supreme being.



Ted..............


----------



## ted_BSR (Nov 11, 2013)

bullethead said:


> Ted..............



Hey BH!

How does the number of earthlike planets effect someone's concept of God? If you believe in 20 gods, do they just reign over earth? Without getting into the nitty gritty, Wikipedia says this about God:

God is often conceived as the Supreme Being and principal object of faith.[1] In theism, God is the creator and sustainer of the universe.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God


----------



## 660griz (Nov 11, 2013)

ted_BSR said:


> Nope, just one. Supreme being.



(Repeat my question)Then wouldn't the bible have to be changed to make earth plural? In the beginning God created the heavens and the *earth*. 2The *earth* was formless and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was moving over the surface of the waters.…


----------



## bullethead (Nov 11, 2013)

ted_BSR said:


> Hey BH!
> 
> How does the number of earthlike planets effect someone's concept of God? If you believe in 20 gods, do they just reign over earth? Without getting into the nitty gritty, Wikipedia says this about God:
> 
> ...



I'd like to know if the life elsewhere has a guide book written by their kind, but inspired by what we commonly refer to as God, that explains their origins, lineage, and how it all ties into "God" being their creator. The story(ies) can be completely different than ours but....did they also get the "Guide"?

I would also like to know at what point in theism did God become the creator of the Universe. Did people always know this or as theism got "organized" was this concept expanded to the Universe. Who was the first theist and where did he get his info......


----------



## TripleXBullies (Nov 12, 2013)

bullethead said:


> I'd like to know if the life elsewhere has a guide book written by their kind, but inspired by what we commonly refer to as God, that explains their origins, lineage, and how it all ties into "God" being their creator. The story(ies) can be completely different than ours but....did they also get the "Guide"?
> 
> I would also like to know at what point in theism did God become the creator of the Universe. Did people always know this or as theism got "organized" was this concept expanded to the Universe. Who was the first theist and where did he get his info......



Did our savior, Jesus, save them too, or does God have many sons that are really himself that he sends to save each Earth's people from his own wrath? If it's the same Jesus, because one perfect sacrifice should really be enough, does their holy book say that Jesus was an alien sacrificed for them on another planet?


----------



## bullethead (Nov 12, 2013)

TripleXBullies said:


> Did our savior, Jesus, save them too, or does God have many sons that are really himself that he sends to save each Earth's people from his own wrath? If it's the same Jesus, because one perfect sacrifice should really be enough, does their holy book say that Jesus was an alien sacrificed for them on another planet?



And are we the only one's "special" enough to be made in His likeness??

We are in a Galaxy that contains about 200 Billion Stars with each having planets around them. It is estimated that there are 200 Billion GALAXIES in our observable Universe and each Galaxy is said to contain at least 100 Billion Stars with some over 1 Trillion stars, plus the planets. 
No wonder the Bible is the best selling book with all these potential "children".....IF they qualify.....


----------



## David Parker (Nov 12, 2013)

it's mind blowing whichever side of the aisle you're on.


----------



## ted_BSR (Nov 13, 2013)

bullethead said:


> I'd like to know if the life elsewhere has a guide book written by their kind, but inspired by what we commonly refer to as God, that explains their origins, lineage, and how it all ties into "God" being their creator. The story(ies) can be completely different than ours but....did they also get the "Guide"?
> 
> I would also like to know at what point in theism did God become the creator of the Universe. Did people always know this or as theism got "organized" was this concept expanded to the Universe. Who was the first theist and where did he get his info......



Those are real good questions BH. I don't pretend to have those answers.


----------



## ted_BSR (Nov 13, 2013)

660griz said:


> (Repeat my question)Then wouldn't the bible have to be changed to make earth plural? In the beginning God created the heavens and the *earth*. 2The *earth* was formless and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was moving over the surface of the waters.…



I don't think so, the earth is the earth, but another good question.


----------

