Quote:
Originally Posted by GGG
The weak Anthropic principle dictates that there is at least one world in which intelligent life evolved otherwise we wouldn’t be here to ask the question. However that does not dictate whether a universe in which one location had suitable conditions to evolve intelligent life that there is many.
|
Interesting, but a bit of a red herring. I counter your WAP with the SAP. If science believed in the WAP, they would not continue the search for worlds beyond our own and the intelligences they believe exist.
Quote:
|
Life may be exceedingly rare such that only one intelligent life may exist or may be just one in the duration of time it takes for a civilization to rise and fall.
|
Intelligent life in whose context? There very well may be civilizations in the universe that do not consider us an intelligent life form, and for very good reason, very much the same way we don't consider many of the other life forms we share this planet with as intelligent. So whose context are we measuring things?
Quote:
|
The odds that in a universe as large as ours that two intelligent species overlap in time and space and that one of those species is ours is near zero without FLT or at least faster than light communication.
|
Estimates are that in our galaxy there are 100,000,000,000 star systems. It is also estimated that in the visible universe there are 2,000,000,000,000 galaxies. So you're suggesting none of the 200,000,000,000,000,000,000,000+ stars in the universe yield life or intelligent life? And that multiple intelligent civilizations would not exist at the same time? Doesn't earth's own history, and the development of parallel civilizations, already destroy that premise?
Again, almost everything brought up is based on our privative understanding of the universe. Much of what we know has only developed in the past couple hundred years, with the vast majority of the major discoveries coming in the past century. What if we don't fully understand the fabric of space and time near as well as we like to think we do? How would we compare to a civilization that has maybe a few hundred thousand years in development and advancements on us? This is something hard for us to comprehend because we look at all of these things through our very primitive perspective and have the arrogance to believe that development of any lifeform is going to be driven by the same factors as our species. So our expectation of them destroying themselves is only based on our behaviors and trajectory, which we mistakenly apply to all others, or potential others. That's a failing that we must first get past to really think long and hard on this topic.