No we almost certainly are not alone in the universe - however - the likelihood of an alien species firstly evolving to be able to create light speed craft, then somehow find Earth from another galaxy (presumably) and then be able to travel many hundreds of light years to get here and then doing so in our lifetime - is next to zero.
UAP - Unidentified Aerial Phenomenon
- Thread starter altodevil
- Start date
No you didn't. You saw something which was an 'unidentified flying object' - that does not equal aliens. It could have been anything and the chances of anything you saw being an alien craft is by far the least likely - by an enormous distance.
An example of something in the sky recorded by a mobile phone:
It could be a drone, it could be an illuminated bird, unfortunately the camera doesn't capture enough detail to confirm what it is, hence the point.
It's pretty much guaranteed that we're not the only life in the galaxy, let alone the multitude of galaxies that are knocking about. That said, the odds of some other space faring civilisation mooching about at the same time as us, and being able to find us in the vast regions of nothingness, is almost infinitesimally small that it's pretty much impossible we'd ever know about each other.
You have figured out the unknown variables of the Drake equation I see. Why do you presume they're from another galaxy?
If "god" exists, it IS just an alien/ET itself isn't it? A being not of the earth.
Because when you are dealing with an infinite number of galaxies then the likelihood of intelligent life sits there rather than in our own.
It's currently impossible to put a probability on it. All we know is there's life in the Milky Way, no detection of life outside of the Milky Way, so you could speculatively say the likelihood of intelligent life sits here.
There's an assumption light speed craft are required which isn't necessarily the case. We're already able to identify possible habitable planets galaxies away so that doesn't seem a leap either.
There's a temptation to reverse it and anthropomorphise such travel but really it could be over thousands of years and any such civilisation could predate us by billions of years.
The only bit I agree on is the chances of them turning up during our lifetime are so remote that it deserves complete sceptisim. It's why it's always been more likely to find an alien craft/probe than to see one flying in the skies. Of course it's more likely governments are just doing experimental flight testing and using UFOs as cover, a strategy they've admitted to in the past.
That is a ridiculous argument
.It is pure speculation, that’s the point.That is a ridiculous argument
No it's maths. It's very clear that probability increases infinitely when you are comparing chances of intelligent life (other than us) in one galaxy vs infinite galaxies.
You saying intelligent life is more likely to visit us from another galaxy than this one isn’t maths.
Number of galaxies in the universe is pretty much a finite number. Rather large one, of course.
ffs ban him just for citing it as a source
In the Observable Universe, definitely. In the Universe... it might be infinite.
I assume it's tongue in cheek. Oh god let it be tongue in cheek.
If the BBT is correct I think it has to be finite. But I have not researched this further, might be wrong.
Actually it could have possibly been anything built by man unless it’s our future coming back. Who knows, but it definitely wasn’t built here. It’s just not possible.
It explains the logic well. It's all speculation relative to how common/rare life and intelligent life is, but the further away something is the less likely it is to find you. So if intelligent life is relatively common across the universe, it is considered to be more likely to find us coming from our own galaxy. Not sure what the taboo is?
Oh it wasn't tongue in cheek
Hit me with it nimic
The object in the sky has to be seen with the naked eye first though right?
So all the mobile devices are showing is what the humans saw and persuaded themselves it was aliens. In that sense the cameras are easily powerful enough to show how easily people fool themselves or jump to wild conclusions.
Yeah you're right. There's 10,000s of mobile phone recordings of people thinking it's a UFO and they could all be bollocks due to people's naivety and imagination, but even if just one of them turned out to be actually extraterrestrial, the quality of the footage wouldn't be good enough to be classed as direct evidence of an extraterrestrial, due to the limitations of a mobile camera.
40 years ago is only 1983. We had space shuttles and (rumoured) hypersonic Aurora aircraft back then.
I don't think it is a surprise that these UFO excitements cycle around every 25 or so years. It's about the time it takes for the older generation to lose interest, and the new generation to have not realised it is the same old story. (A story of fakes, hearsay, blurry photos, no physical evidence and so called expert eyewitnesses getting it wrong).
This story will be dead again by 2030. But in 2050 everyone will start banging on again, this time about UFAs or UMRs, the newly rebranded name, which each new generation of saucer fans brings in to make it all sound new and plausible again.
This story will be dead again by 2030. But in 2050 everyone will start banging on again, this time about UFAs or UMRs, the newly rebranded name, which each new generation of saucer fans brings in to make it all sound new and plausible again.
Last edited:
I'm not sure what your point is
I was agreeing with you, as you were referencing a post talking about something that happened 40 years ago (which isn't that long).
It feels cyclical but I don't think the US government have never been as transparent about UFOs in military airspace as now. According to them there's things showing up on a regular basis and they don't know what it is. It could be a tactical ploy but there's data to back it up. John Brennan, ex CIA director, has said they exist and they could be a different form of life:
Not necessarily. The universe might easily be infinite in size, which means an infinite number of galaxies (and by extension, an infinite number of The Firestarter posting in Redcafe).
If so, you'd hope to see that spending in giant orbiting radio telescopes, 10,000 top class, full time pHDs, laser detection grids, communications berakthroughs and lord knows what else. Rather than 100 guys being funded by eccentric billionaires and a bit of NASA spare change, which is what SETI amounts to.
We had Edgar Mitchell, Apollo astronaut, in the 70s, who was the Brennan figure of his day. We had Roswell incident in the 40s. We had Project Blue Book in the 1950s, CIA programmes across the Cold War period (no coincidence there I bet), the whole thing about Alien Abductions last time this all came around. And ultimately Brennan is just another guy who's talked to a guy who says he's seen UFOs. What we need is something physical scientists can prod at in a lab. Video footage is just not good enough evidence for such an extraordinary claim. Everything else is just noise and can be disregarded , short of Brennan wheeling ET out on national TV or an alien starship landing in Regent's Park.
Last edited:
Fair points.
The universe may be infite in size, meaning there is unlimited space for matter to travel into. But that does not necessarily mean infinite matter available which would have meant infinite number of galaxies.
Also your other comment, maybe you are confusing it with the concept of infinite dimensions ?
if aliens don’t exist then explain this-
if aliens don’t exist then explain this-
Fishman.
Nope, I am afraid I am not confusing anything. The most popular theory is that the universe is infinite in size, and in fact, many believe that even when it was created it was infinite in size. (Btw, the universe does not expand in an empty space, more like the space expands with the universe).
If the universe if infinite, then by definition, there are infinite copies of Milky Way, the Earth, and you.
Of course, this is different to many-world interpretation of quantum mechanics, that allows a large number (potentially infinite) numbers of you. And different to other possibilities of multiverse (such as the string theoretical landscape). Finally, all of them can be at the same time, so the different multiverses are not mutually exclusive.
I'm almost certain this is not a by definition thing. You could have an infinite series of different things.