4 ms·

The more we learn about our place in the universe, the more we realize how insignificant we are. I'm now expecting life to be ubiquitous and intelligent life t

by Tepix 6y ago

The more we learn about our place in the universe, the more we realize how insignificant we are. I'm now expecting life to be ubiquitous and intelligent life to be rare, yet not unusual. If only 0.001% of the hundreds of billions of galaxies in the observable universe contain intelligent life and moving from one galaxy to another is prohibitive, that would mean 1 million instances of intelligent life scattered across the universe. We wouldn't be special, but we could hardly detect or even interact with other intelligent life.

thecopy 6y ago
You are looking only at one dimension: space. But you are forgetting time. Intelligent life on Earth has existed a minuscule amount of time in the span of the universe. You need also to take into the probabilities that we would overlap with another intelligent life on the timeline.
- Tepix 6y ago
  Good point. Perhaps we ourselves originated from von Neumann probes in the form of single cell organisms, flung into space in all directions by a long gone, highly developed civilization? We don't know how long intelligent life lasts on average. Looking at our current trajectory i'd say chances are that technical civilizations are rather short-lived. PS The Paleozoic began with the Cambrian explosion 541 million year ago, that's quite a long timespan with intelligent life (not a technical civilization, however) even in galactic timescales.
  - EamonnMR 6y ago
    Consider how long life existed before the Cambrian explosion happened though. What are the chances that metazoans evolve from a given planet's microorganisms? One in eight per billion years?
  - untog 6y ago
    I wouldn’t recommend it as an exploration of the topic but the movie Prometheus touches on this theory.
darepublic 6y ago
I think you're right but technically we haven't hit paydirt yet in terms of finding life off earth. Maybe the Venusian probe will be the big breakthrough
jcims 6y ago
>The more we learn about our place in the universe, the more we realize how insignificant we are. Insignificant and unremarkable in scale, position and effect certainly. Given that, it seems likely that the presence of life is also insignificant and unremarkable. That said, it's pretty difficult to overstate the complexity of the mechanisms of life as we know them on Earth. Despite the vastness of space and time, it's also trivial to generate circumstances that are almost certainly unique across tremendous spans of both. So it's entirely probable that we're not alone, and it's also entirely possible that we are. In the latter case, we're still insignificant to a universe that doesn't know we're here, but we'd be sitting in a much more precious place in history.
Erlich_Bachman 6y ago
What is the reason and goal of this thinking? The term "significant" stems from the person using it, from what they are trying to convey. There are many different ways to think about significance. Significant to whom? For what reason? Another popular and yet abused argument is saying that human body is "mostly empty space", because the size of the atomic nucleus or an electron is so small compared to the space between them. But so what? It is the interaction between the atoms that matters, that produces all the results including our consciousness, not how much space is between the atoms. What if we are one of the most significant phenomena and results of the universe, regardless of how little or much space we occupy? Or at the very least, what if the rare occurences of the conscious life are the most significant things in the universe, regardless of how many dead planets or galaxies or space is between them. Is it really that hard to see that significance can easily be based on something much more interesting and useful than the banal notion of comparative linear space? This definition of "significance" is not any more or less truthful by any objective standard, so I am wondering why did you choose to use your definition? What does thinking that way achieve for you in your life?
- luhn 6y ago
  I think you've drastically misunderstood OP, they're not talking about our spacial significance. They're considering given the size of the universe, human-level intelligence (or greater!) most likely exists many times over and is not unique to Earth. Also I'm not sure why thinking needs to have a "reason" or further some life goal.
  - Erlich_Bachman 6y ago
    > likely exists many times over and is not unique to Earth. And that is supposed to make it less significant to us?
    - luhn 6y ago
      I think you're reading too much into OP's use of "insignificant." I don't think OP is advocating nihilism.
s1artibartfast 6y ago
In what way do you think life on earth is insignificant and how is this changing? I hear this a lot, but it always seems like an incomplete thought. What is the measure of significance here? uniqueness? Mass? Space?

by Tepix 6y ago

thecopy 6y ago

You are looking only at one dimension: space. But you are forgetting time. Intelligent life on Earth has existed a minuscule amount of time in the span of the universe. You need also to take into the probabilities that we would overlap with another intelligent life on the timeline.

Tepix 6y ago
Good point. Perhaps we ourselves originated from von Neumann probes in the form of single cell organisms, flung into space in all directions by a long gone, highly developed civilization? We don't know how long intelligent life lasts on average. Looking at our current trajectory i'd say chances are that technical civilizations are rather short-lived. PS The Paleozoic began with the Cambrian explosion 541 million year ago, that's quite a long timespan with intelligent life (not a technical civilization, however) even in galactic timescales.
- EamonnMR 6y ago
  Consider how long life existed before the Cambrian explosion happened though. What are the chances that metazoans evolve from a given planet's microorganisms? One in eight per billion years?
- untog 6y ago
  I wouldn’t recommend it as an exploration of the topic but the movie Prometheus touches on this theory.

darepublic 6y ago

I think you're right but technically we haven't hit paydirt yet in terms of finding life off earth. Maybe the Venusian probe will be the big breakthrough

jcims 6y ago

>The more we learn about our place in the universe, the more we realize how insignificant we are. Insignificant and unremarkable in scale, position and effect certainly. Given that, it seems likely that the presence of life is also insignificant and unremarkable. That said, it's pretty difficult to overstate the complexity of the mechanisms of life as we know them on Earth. Despite the vastness of space and time, it's also trivial to generate circumstances that are almost certainly unique across tremendous spans of both. So it's entirely probable that we're not alone, and it's also entirely possible that we are. In the latter case, we're still insignificant to a universe that doesn't know we're here, but we'd be sitting in a much more precious place in history.

Erlich_Bachman 6y ago

What is the reason and goal of this thinking? The term "significant" stems from the person using it, from what they are trying to convey. There are many different ways to think about significance. Significant to whom? For what reason? Another popular and yet abused argument is saying that human body is "mostly empty space", because the size of the atomic nucleus or an electron is so small compared to the space between them. But so what? It is the interaction between the atoms that matters, that produces all the results including our consciousness, not how much space is between the atoms. What if we are one of the most significant phenomena and results of the universe, regardless of how little or much space we occupy? Or at the very least, what if the rare occurences of the conscious life are the most significant things in the universe, regardless of how many dead planets or galaxies or space is between them. Is it really that hard to see that significance can easily be based on something much more interesting and useful than the banal notion of comparative linear space? This definition of "significance" is not any more or less truthful by any objective standard, so I am wondering why did you choose to use your definition? What does thinking that way achieve for you in your life?

luhn 6y ago
I think you've drastically misunderstood OP, they're not talking about our spacial significance. They're considering given the size of the universe, human-level intelligence (or greater!) most likely exists many times over and is not unique to Earth. Also I'm not sure why thinking needs to have a "reason" or further some life goal.
- Erlich_Bachman 6y ago
  > likely exists many times over and is not unique to Earth. And that is supposed to make it less significant to us?
  - luhn 6y ago
    I think you're reading too much into OP's use of "insignificant." I don't think OP is advocating nihilism.

s1artibartfast 6y ago

In what way do you think life on earth is insignificant and how is this changing? I hear this a lot, but it always seems like an incomplete thought. What is the measure of significance here? uniqueness? Mass? Space?