• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

We're Not Alone[W:102,300]

Odds are pretty high that we'll find evidence of simple extraterrestrial life forms within twenty years.

Might find evidence of microbial life on Mars very soon.
 
I've heard there are billions of stars in our galaxy alone that have the capability of having a planet that will support life.

The odds are there, but our planet has been around for 4.5 billion years and we have had the capability here of destroying ourselves for several decades and still do not have the demonstrated capability to contact another intelligent life form.

Given that collection of notions, if there intelligent life on other worlds, contacting them seems like a remote possibility.

On a more local topic of contact, we really don't have the demonstrated capability of conducting meaningful communication among those life forms we have within our own species right here.

Other intelligent life is likely light years in distance from us. I don't think we will be contacting them anytime soon.
 
Re: We're Not Alone

Moderator's Warning:
People, the focus of the thread is extraterrestrial life, not the existence of God. Please get back to the topic.

In my absence these past two days the thread seems to have derailed hasn't it?

Moderator's Warning:
Woah, I can do the moderator thing!
 
Re: We're Not Alone

In my absence these past two days the thread seems to have derailed hasn't it?

Moderator's Warning:
Woah, I can do the moderator thing!

Moderator's Warning:
Under no circumstances can you use a Mod box. Do it again, and the consequences will be severe.
 
If we do it better be us going to them than them going to us.

We are a very long time away from having the technology to go to them, even if we knew where they are.
 
We are a very long time away from having the technology to go to them, even if we knew where they are.

And the same may not apply to them?

I try not to think like a movie director in which humanity is miles behind alien species. For all we know it may be the opposite (boy would that make me happy).
 
And the same may not apply to them?

I try not to think like a movie director in which humanity is miles behind alien species. For all we know it may be the opposite (boy would that make me happy).

Yes...it could go either way. We could be way ahead of the nearest intelligent life in technology or they could be centuries ahead of us. If they are at our level or less...it's less likely that we will contact them any time soon.
 
Re: We're Not Alone

So why do you think that there's a substantial number of physicists - Stephen Hawking among them - who support the Many Worlds Interpretation?

Because they see it as a neccessary result of the fact that we exist. It is a philosophical concept, since there is no way to test it scientifically. Hawking is not expert at philosophy.
 
Re: We're Not Alone

Because they see it as a neccessary result of the fact that we exist. It is a philosophical concept, since there is no way to test it scientifically. Hawking is not expert at philosophy.

Actually, I think there might actually be a way. It's already been shown that it is possible for two discrete particles in two different points in time to be entangled. There is a chance that if particles Alice and Bob are entangled, if the state of particle Alice in an earlier point in time is changed to a specific state, and if the state of particle Bob at a later time is determined to be in a different state, then this may indicate that Alice changed to all other possible states (as MWI predicts)...and that we live in a reality where Alice changed to a state different from what was originally observed.
 
Re: We're Not Alone

Actually, I think there might actually be a way. It's already been shown that it is possible for two discrete particles in two different points in time to be entangled. There is a chance that if particles Alice and Bob are entangled, if the state of particle Alice in an earlier point in time is changed to a specific state, and if the state of particle Bob at a later time is determined to be in a different state, then this may indicate that Alice changed to all other possible states (as MWI predicts)...and that we live in a reality where Alice changed to a state different from what was originally observed.

I suppose that you missed the part of the article where it said that such is theoretical.

So if they were in different states, that could just as well show that they weren't entangled.
 
Re: We're Not Alone

I suppose that you missed the part of the article where it said that such is theoretical.

So if they were in different states, that could just as well show that they weren't entangled.

And such uncertainties are why I used words like "might", "possibly", and "may". The point is, it *might* be possible to verify MWI. Not guaranteed, but "might".
 
Re: We're Not Alone

And such uncertainties are why I used words like "might", "possibly", and "may". The point is, it *might* be possible to verify MWI. Not guaranteed, but "might".

But any possible proof (of the type you mentioned), could be dismissed as showing only that particles cannot become entangled over time, but only over space.
 
Back
Top Bottom