Why Habitable Exoplanets Are Bad News

Cypress

Well-known member
Why Habitable Exoplanets Are Bad News for Humanity's Future

Kepler-186f is the first planet almost exactly the same size as Earth orbiting in the “habitable zone.”

Last week, scientists announced the discovery of Kepler-186f, a planet 492 light years away in the Cygnus constellation. Kepler-186f is special because it marks the first planet almost exactly the same size as Earth orbiting in the “habitable zone” — the distance from a star in which we might expect liquid water, and perhaps life.

What did not make the news, however, is that this discovery also slightly increases how much credence we give to the possibility of near-term human extinction. This because of a concept known as the Great Filter.

The Great Filter is an argument that attempts to resolve the Fermi Paradox: why have we not found aliens, despite the existence of hundreds of billions of solar systems in our galactic neighborhood in which life might evolve? As the namesake physicist Enrico Fermi noted, it seems rather extraordinary that not a single extraterrestrial signal or engineering project has been detected (UFO conspiracy theorists notwithstanding).

This apparent absence of thriving extraterrestrial civilizations suggests that at least one of the steps from humble planet to interstellar civilization is exceedingly unlikely. The absence could be caused because either intelligent life is extremely rare or intelligent life has a tendency to go extinct. This bottleneck for the emergence of alien civilizations from any one of the many billions of planets is referred to as the Great Filter.

Are We Alone?
What exactly is causing this bottleneck has been the subject of debate for more than 50 years. Explanations could include a paucity of Earth-like planets or self-replicating molecules.

Other possibilities could be an improbable jump from simple prokaryotic life (cells without specialized parts) to more complex eukaryotic life — after all, this transition took well over a billion years on Earth.

Proponents of this “Rare Earth” hypothesis also argue that the evolution of complex life requires an exceedingly large number of perfect conditions. In addition to Earth being in the habitable zone of the sun, our star must be far enough away from the galactic centre to avoid destructive radiation, our gas giants must be massive enough to sweep asteroids from Earth’s trajectory, and our unusually large moon stabilizes the axial tilt that gives us different seasons.

These are just a few prerequisites for complex life. The emergence of symbolic language, tools and intelligence could require other such “perfect conditions” as well.

Or Is the Filter Ahead of Us?
While emergence of intelligent life could be rare, the silence could also be the result of intelligent life emerging frequently but subsequently failing to survive for long. Might every sufficiently advanced civilization stumble across a suicidal technology or unsustainable trajectory?

Continued
https://www.discovermagazine.com/th...-exoplanets-are-bad-news-for-humanitys-future
 
In recent years, I've been leaning towards the rare Earth hypothesis. Not only did a perfect storm of events create a stable, habitable Earth, but the jump from prebiotic chemicals to complex cellular life might be a result of an improbable and complex series of chemical steps which are only infrequently replicated elsewhere in the galaxy.
 
Or they avoid detection on purpose

Seems possible.

But if we're not finding Big Foot after decades of searching, I think the most likely explanation is that it doesn't exist, not that it's elusive and avoids humans. I think the same principle applies here. But we've really only investigated a small part of the galaxy, so the hunt continues
 
Seems possible.

But if we're not finding Big Foot after decades of searching, I think the most likely explanation is that it doesn't exist, not that it's elusive and avoids humans. I think the same principle applies here. But we've really only investigated a small part of the galaxy, so the hunt continues

There's nothing out there but rocks! Explore within you .
 
In recent years, I've been leaning towards the rare Earth hypothesis. Not only did a perfect storm of events create a stable, habitable Earth, but the jump from prebiotic chemicals to complex cellular life might be a result of an improbable and complex series of chemical steps which are only infrequently replicated elsewhere in the galaxy.

How do you propose we would recognize an alien species that is light years away?

Can we really expect to recognize them with radio signals? We have had radio for less than 200 years. The radios receivers from the 1960's would not be able to recognize most of our current radio transmissions as anything other than static. How many more years will earth be producing radio waves? 100? 500? What is the next technology that makes radio obsolete?

By relying on radio waves to find other species with technology we are relying on the odds that such a species is producing radio waves at the precise time in the past to reach us when we are capable of receiving them. Those are some pretty long odds unless advanced technology relies on radio for thousands of years if not millions of years.
 
If one thinks about life on earth there are zillions upon zillions of species of living thing but only one generates electromagnetic signals which can go out into space and that same one is the only one to throw tiny objects into orbit around the planet (which would probably be VERY hard to detect from a distance).

So it's not so strange that we find ourselves "alone", but that doesn't mean that life isn't quite common. Nor does it say that complex, highly structured civilizations don't either. The exoplanets, if they have life, may all be in our version of the 17th century. Or maybe they are all Bonobo-like complex social societies of highly advanced creatures who simply never stumbled upon electromagnetic signature generation.
 
How do you propose we would recognize an alien species that is light years away?

Can we really expect to recognize them with radio signals? We have had radio for less than 200 years. The radios receivers from the 1960's would not be able to recognize most of our current radio transmissions as anything other than static. How many more years will earth be producing radio waves? 100? 500? What is the next technology that makes radio obsolete?

By relying on radio waves to find other species with technology we are relying on the odds that such a species is producing radio waves at the precise time in the past to reach us when we are capable of receiving them. Those are some pretty long odds unless advanced technology relies on radio for thousands of years if not millions of years.

I leave it to experts in the field to determine which parts of the EM spectrum are most promising to survey, but I think the radio, microwave, and IR spectrums are all being surveyed to one degree or other.

Its possible that technological civilizations are self destructive and don't last long, so we won't overlap with them in cosmic history
 
Why Habitable Exoplanets Are Bad News for Humanity's Future

Kepler-186f is the first planet almost exactly the same size as Earth orbiting in the “habitable zone.”

Last week, scientists announced the discovery of Kepler-186f, a planet 492 light years away in the Cygnus constellation. Kepler-186f is special because it marks the first planet almost exactly the same size as Earth orbiting in the “habitable zone” — the distance from a star in which we might expect liquid water, and perhaps life.

What did not make the news, however, is that this discovery also slightly increases how much credence we give to the possibility of near-term human extinction. This because of a concept known as the Great Filter.

The Great Filter is an argument that attempts to resolve the Fermi Paradox: why have we not found aliens, despite the existence of hundreds of billions of solar systems in our galactic neighborhood in which life might evolve? As the namesake physicist Enrico Fermi noted, it seems rather extraordinary that not a single extraterrestrial signal or engineering project has been detected (UFO conspiracy theorists notwithstanding).

This apparent absence of thriving extraterrestrial civilizations suggests that at least one of the steps from humble planet to interstellar civilization is exceedingly unlikely. The absence could be caused because either intelligent life is extremely rare or intelligent life has a tendency to go extinct. This bottleneck for the emergence of alien civilizations from any one of the many billions of planets is referred to as the Great Filter.

Are We Alone?
What exactly is causing this bottleneck has been the subject of debate for more than 50 years. Explanations could include a paucity of Earth-like planets or self-replicating molecules.

Other possibilities could be an improbable jump from simple prokaryotic life (cells without specialized parts) to more complex eukaryotic life — after all, this transition took well over a billion years on Earth.

Proponents of this “Rare Earth” hypothesis also argue that the evolution of complex life requires an exceedingly large number of perfect conditions. In addition to Earth being in the habitable zone of the sun, our star must be far enough away from the galactic centre to avoid destructive radiation, our gas giants must be massive enough to sweep asteroids from Earth’s trajectory, and our unusually large moon stabilizes the axial tilt that gives us different seasons.

These are just a few prerequisites for complex life. The emergence of symbolic language, tools and intelligence could require other such “perfect conditions” as well.

Or Is the Filter Ahead of Us?
While emergence of intelligent life could be rare, the silence could also be the result of intelligent life emerging frequently but subsequently failing to survive for long. Might every sufficiently advanced civilization stumble across a suicidal technology or unsustainable trajectory?

Continued
https://www.discovermagazine.com/th...-exoplanets-are-bad-news-for-humanitys-future

My guess is that life is not very rare at all, but that it all takes a path of maturation similar to the one we have travelled...with a form of "strongest survive and propagate."

If so, goddam near every evolving entity will encounter a period of time such as we currently are experiencing...a technical evolution to the point where we are able to destroy ourselves and our planet...BEFORE a philosophical evolution to the point were we definitely will not do so.

I suspect most, if not all, evolving life eventually destroys itself before being able to travel the vast distances needed to explore other star systems.

I tend to think we will.
 
I leave it to experts in the field to determine which parts of the EM spectrum are most promising to survey, but I think the radio, microwave, and IR spectrums are all being surveyed to one degree or other.

Its possible that technological civilizations are self destructive and don't last long, so we won't overlap with them in cosmic history

It's also possible that the technological advances happen so fast that our current ability to recognize them has the odds stacked against us since the window where we can recognize them is about 100-200 years of their advancement. An advanced civilization 100 light years away would have to be exactly 100-200 years ahead of us. Any more or less and we miss that window.
 
It's also possible that the technological advances happen so fast that our current ability to recognize them has the odds stacked against us since the window where we can recognize them is about 100-200 years of their advancement. An advanced civilization 100 light years away would have to be exactly 100-200 years ahead of us. Any more or less and we miss that window.

Good point.

It seems to me that any advanced technology would leave some kind of footprint in the EM spectrum whether they are more advanced or less advanced than us.
 
My guess is that life is not very rare at all, but that it all takes a path of maturation similar to the one we have travelled...with a form of "strongest survive and propagate."

If so, goddam near every evolving entity will encounter a period of time such as we currently are experiencing...a technical evolution to the point where we are able to destroy ourselves and our planet...BEFORE a philosophical evolution to the point were we definitely will not do so.

I suspect most, if not all, evolving life eventually destroys itself before being able to travel the vast distances needed to explore other star systems.

I tend to think we will.

Thanks.

Before I jump on the bandwagon that life is inevitable given liquid water and chemistry, I would like us to find microbial life, or fossil evidence of it, on Mars, Europa, Enceladus, Ganymede, etc.

Then I will be more hopeful for sentient life elsewhere in the galaxy
 
Thanks.

Before I jump on the bandwagon that life is inevitable given liquid water and chemistry, I would like us to find microbial life, or fossil evidence of it, on Mars, Europa, Enceladus, Ganymede, etc.

Then I will be more hopeful for sentient life elsewhere in the galaxy

There's nothing out there but rocks!
 
Good point.

It seems to me that any advanced technology would leave some kind of footprint in the EM spectrum whether they are more advanced or less advanced than us.

Why? Human civilization existed for thousands of years before we ever got to the point we could make EM signals that would make it out into the universe with sufficient power to be detectable elsewhere and I don't think anyone would say that humans only achieved "technological advancement" when we could generate EM signals.
 
Back
Top