Earth had extremely advanced civilizations for many thousands of years before we ever would have projected our existence into space via Radio Waves, etc. Even though this is factored into the Drake Equation I would suspect that for every "civilization" that transmits its existence there would be thousands of highly intelligent and developed civilizations that wouldn't. Mayans, Egyptians, Incas, 15th Century Europe??? There MUST be millions of advanced civilizations throughout the Universe.
@EricFleet, "If intelligent life is common, then we should see a populated galaxy already."
Now, I recall you mentioned that you have a personal distaste for pure guesswork...Just pointing out the irony...
I'll also ask you be a little more respectful. 'Go read up on....' seems to be your catchphrase for example, and is a rather patronising and forceful way of referencing your information.
why ppl like carl sagan need to die ?? this kind of man need to be immortal and teach for all the human kind what we need to do to touch the stars.. but anyway i hope if there is god up there i want to tell him one thing...... SEND BACK TO EARTH THE CARL SAGAN WE NEED IT
@Elena9525 I think Sagan was just trying to put it to the masses why scientists are so unsure how much life is to be found out there. As for the Drake equation, I think it is a simple and elegant, if inaccurate way of showing us our own uncertainty. In the end, in a few thousand year's time, perhaps, it might prove to be a perfectly reasonable estimate. There is no way to tell, yet.
@bitchslapper12 You are quite correct. Once we go past the number of planets in the galaxy, the following numbers are pure guesses and reflect one's philosophical (religious) bent not science. If intelligent life were as common as Carl Sagan believed, then we should see intelligent civilizations should have colonized the entire galaxy by now. After all, if only 1 intelligence survives to colonize other worlds, then in a short span of millions of years would be able to colonize the whole galaxy.
@truvelocity Wow, really? Go read up on Sagan... he spent quite a bit of his career involved in the search for extraterrestrial life, and was quite an evangelist for SETI.
We can make the Drake equation come out to 1--and even less than 1.
If N=0.5, say, that means there's 1 advanced civilization (radio-capable) per TWO galaxies of 400 billion stars.
So, we could be the only advanced civilization in the Milky Way AND the Andromeda galaxy taken together! The only one in the Local Group. Think of that.
@bitchslapper12 He is getting these numbers from Francis Drake from Cornell University based on estimates of planetary universes observed so far. You take that into a mean scale of all scales from one extreme to another. Calculate the mathematical probability and you get two extreme calculations. Either one could be correct or neither. The point is that we know we are not the only civilization with how enormous the cosmos is. So, why not use the calculations we know of as a model!
@truvelocity We do? (know that we aren't the only civilization). I think that is an assumption, not a calculation. Can you tell me the probability of life originating on a planet? No one can at this point. If intelligent life is common then we should see a populated galaxy already... go read up on the Fermi paradox.
@truvelocity Sagan is alluding to life being a possibility. It cannot be a probability and if that word was used in the video it is false.
We can only know the probability for life to arise on a planet if we study other planets with life on it.
While some of the numbers he used above may be verifiable once he gets to the part (Ne) then it is complete guess work. It wasn't until a few weeks ago that we actually verified another planet like earth.
@truvelocity and further we have never even come close to making contact with any other planet with life on it. (Any numbers substituted for Fl, Fi, Fc, FL is complete guesswork).
We have no data for life existing anywhere in the universe except for earth. And probability requires data.
Earth is the only planet known to support life in the solar system. There -may- be microbial life on Mars, or perhaps in the clouds of gas giants, or perhaps on Titan, or perhaps under Europa's ice sheets. But, who's to say? There's not even enough data to estimate the probability of life on such worlds, so "assuming," as Sagan did in this video, would be ignorant. Going by raw assumption with no supportive data or evidence, ESPECIALLY in science, is an extremely -- hopelessly -- grave mistake.
@Elena9525 Imagination is still required, yes he's assuming in a sense but that wont stop people like him checking if there assumptions are correct. Science would be quite boring then...
@DarkPuppet It's fine to imagine. It's almost absurd to think that we're the only planet capable of supporting life, considering the simple fact that life itself is ultimately comprised of the same elements that can be found in the proverbial backyard, or in nebula clouds.
But, the Drake Equation is a fundamentally, completely flawed method of "imagination" for the reasons below.
@Elena9525 Because, its based on probability. Probability can give you a mean scale from both extremes. Keep in mind if the galaxies were teaming with life, it would take a minimum of 15 thousand years to make it to the nearest star on our fastest space ship. If we could travel in light years, which is physical impossible or we'd self destruct, it would take 3 light years. Again, if it were teaming with life, no one could reach each other because no planet contains enough resources to do so.
@truvelocity The point is we don't have the faintest idea what most of the probabilities are. Not even close. Intelligent fife may be common, it may be virtually non-existent outside of Earth. The only way we will truly find out the numbers is by exploration, not making up numbers.
The Drake Equation is about the equivalent of trying to estimate how many soft balls in the world exist by looking at the number of soft balls in a single town. Whatever numbers the Drake Equation can give us, they're almost certainly EXTREMELY inaccurate.
I believe the Drake Equation is utterly, hopelessly, awe-inspiringly, stupefyingly pointless as a way to estimate the number of hospitable planets. We just don't have any data whatsoever to make any sort of estimate. At all. Period.
even with low figures, you get potentially hundreds of civilizations that we can contact, just in our galaxy. heck, you need ridiculously pessimistic numbers for say 1. like really low.
So, if we take it you're suggesting say 400 civilizations out of 400 billion stars, how much distance on average between civilizations given that they are one in a billion?
So if we say 1 star per cubic light year, the nearest civilization might be 1,000 light years away. The nearest star to us is really _4_ light years away, so let's split the diff and say on your estimate, the nearest advanced civilization is 2,000 ly away.
that's really good! well, first consider the problem that a civilization that sent a signal 2000 light years away and reaches us now would either be extinct, simply left the planet due to some catastrophe, like war or something else, or they simply gone extinct. lest say it survived. best way, in my opinion, to 'converse' at that distance is wormholes. build two machines with two connected wormholes on each planet and send radio signals through. now you got "False FTL", and voila!
thing about wormholes isn't IF they exists, but the inconvenient part in which they a) would take a fuck ton of spacial disruption, b) take another fuck ton of energy to maintain and c) there would be no way of making sure the two wormholes are connected. wormholes are pretty much possible, there's no doubt about that. good luck making one though! talk to me when you do...a billion years from now...
I say that it's pretty much left to chance that, if there ARE other radio-capable civilizations, they'd have to develop both nearby and in the same timeframe to each other, galactically speaking.
So the question underlying Sagan's video is: what are the chances of two civilizations finding out about each other given galactic distances and timescales?
in order for us to contact them, yes they have to develop close. but with that in mind, one or the other is going to be much more advance than the other. maybe is us, or maybe its them, but one is going to be beyond the other. also, by the time the other less advance one is able to detect them, the more advance one might not be listening anymore. they might not be using radio signals anymore and use laser communication, or something else. so yes, its unlikely, but not 0. nothing is 0
Hence my result: N=~0. N equals something near zero.
I await the discovery of an exo-planet with a spectrum showing a strongly oxidizing atmosphere like ours, though. A dead giveaway for life, pardon the pun.
just you wait! a few years from now you'l say "i should have listen to that random dude on youtube...i should have listen!" cuz we already have many habitable zone planets, and now kepler is finding more and more EARTH SIZE planets that are turning the Drake Equation numbers up to previous unexpected sizes.
Earth-size and in the so-called 'habitable zone' planets are f-sub-p and n-sub-e and were well-guessed at anyway before the Kepler probe.
Like I said, I await the discovery of an exo-planet with a spectrum showing a strongly oxidizing atmosphere like ours.
The latest Grand Tack model shows that in order to have an Earth you need a Jupiter and Saturn as well. I await too the discovery of a solar system like ours.
@Ryagful Perhaps :) The point is that we won't have an idea of the values to assign Drake's equation until we actually discover some intelligent civilizations :)
Last night I did the Drake Equation with a few modern updates (G- and K-type stars, no binaries allowed) and I allowed that an intelligent/aware species would develop technology (or vice versa!)
I came up with a range of N=1 to N=30. I kept having trouble with the chance of 'right' planets actually developing life. 0.00001 or 0.000001 chance (10^-5 or 10^-6)?
Según los últimos datos de la NASA y de la Agencia Espacial Europea el ritmo de producción galáctico es de 7 estrellas por año.2 En el entendido que son aptas Estrellas tipo K y G y si del total de estrellas 12,1% son estrellas de tipo K y un 7,6% son estrellas tipo G como el Sol,3 entonces solo el 19,7% de esas 7 estrellas que nacen cada año son propicias, por lo tanto solo 1,379 de esas siete estrellas anuales es verdaderamente apta.
fp = Fracción de estrellas que tienen planetas en su órbita.
Modernos investigadores del Observatorio Europeo Austral dedicados a la búsqueda de planetas argumentan que aproximadamente una de cada tres estrellas de tipo G podría contener planetas. En la estimación no se cuenta el porcentaje de planetas en estrellas naranjas o enanas rojas.
El número de planetas orbitando dentro de la ecosfera o zona habitable con órbita no excéntrica se estima en torno a uno de cada doscientos, en base al único descubrimiento al respecto hasta la fecha, Gliese 581 d (en torno a una estrella enana roja). En esta estimación no se cuentan posibles satélites de exoplanetas masivos. También cabe esperar que las limitaciones tecnológicas actuales para detectar planetas de tamaño terrestre estén alterando notablemente el dato.
El número de planetas orbitando dentro de la ecosfera o zona habitable con órbita no excéntrica se estima en torno a uno de cada doscientos, en base al único descubrimiento al respecto hasta la fecha, Gliese 581 d (en torno a una estrella enana roja).5 6 En esta estimación no se cuentan posibles satélites de exoplanetas masivos. También cabe esperar que las limitaciones tecnológicas actuales para detectar planetas de tamaño terrestre estén alterando notablemente el dato.
En 2002, Charles H. Lineweaver and Tamara M. Davis (de la Universidad del Sur de Nueva Wales y del Centro Australiano de Astrobiología) estimaron que trece de cada cien planetas dentro de la ecosfera que han vivido alrededor de 1,000 millones de años pueden desarrollar vida. En la estimación no se cuenta con planetas que hayan vivido menos de ese tiempo dentro de una ecosfera estable.
La cantidad de oportunidades para que se desarrolle vida inteligente en esos planetas estables se puede extrapolar de la fracción de tiempo que representa la vida inteligente en la Tierra, en relación con tiempo transcurrido desde la aparición de la vida unicelular. Es decir: de los 3.700 millones de años de vida en el planeta8 sólo en los últimos 200.000 años ha existido el Homo Sapiens.
fc = Fracción de esos planetas donde la vida inteligente ha desarrollado una tecnología e intenta comunicarse.
Según la estimación inicial de Drake, la posibilidad de desarrollar tecnología capaz de emitir señales de radiofrecuencia es de una en cien. Este valor adoptado, no obstante, es una simple conjetura.
Se ha sugerido otra alternativa para estimar la cantidad de oportunidades para que la vida inteligente emita radiofrecuencias, que consistiría en extrapolar la fracción de tiempo que pueda durar la humanidad transmitiendo señales de radio en relación al tiempo transcurrido desde su aparición (hace 200 mil años). El lapso de tiempo que pueda durar la civilización industrial emitiendo señales de radio se podría basar del dato aportado en el parámetro L.
La expectativa de vida calculada en un artículo de la revista Scientific American hecha por Michael Shermer fue de 420 años en promedio, en base a la observación de seis civilizaciones humanas antiguas que usaron consistentemente una tecnología preindustrial.
Según la Teoría de Olduvai el tiempo de vida de la actual civilización industrial será de 100 años (1930-2030) coincidiendo más o menos en su aparición con el comienzo de emisiones de radio (1938)
La ecuación de Drake identifica los factores específicos que, se cree, tienen un papel importante en el desarrollo de las civilizaciones. Aunque en la actualidad no hay datos suficientes para resolver la ecuación, la comunidad científica ha aceptado su relevancia como primera aproximación teórica al problema, y varios científicos la han utilizado como herramienta para plantear distintas hipótesis.
En el Universo existen quizás millones de sistemas solares similares al nuestro, con un sol similar al nuestro con un planeta similar al nuestro que se capaz de albergar una civilización tecnológicamente avanzada o superior. El problema es saber cuántas civilizaciones han sido capaz de evolucionar hacia formas más avanzadas? y saber si estas tienen el deseo de comunicación con las civilizaciones de la Tierra?
So that's (conservatively) 10 per galaxy, and considering that there are billions, if not trillions of galaxies, there's still a vast amount of advanced civilizations out there!
Carl, I think you were being a bit too generous with the intelligent and technoglogy. I think it's quite rare to get those things. Plus, there's also the issue of graspers. In order to have a technologica civilization, the species must have appendages capable of handling tools.
@Keitaro2011 a form of intelligent life doesn't need human type appendages, they would make tools and technology's that are made for their appendages, much like most of out technology and tools requires an opposable thumb, it's not like all tools need to be like ours, I sure some forms of alien technology would be very hard for a human to use because it's not designed for out hands, not all intelligent life will have grasping hands like our own but will still develop tools.
Cool video. But on those estimates where he comes to 10 civilizations, it's only in the milky way galaxy. Since there are like 200 billion galaxies out there, you would have to expect the universe to be filled with life.
I think 10 is a generous estimate for intelligent civilizations in existence, but I'd move N(suitable for life) as well as N(life) down. I'd also use a variable to take into account the stability of a solar system over billions of years as evolution did its stuff. While I was at it I'd probably nudge f(likelihood to not kill self) up a little bit.
Its pretty scary just how long evolution has taken, and it can all be fucked up by atomic war or destroying or planet with polution.
Sometimes i wonder if we are really smarter than animals. Sure we got an ability to create stuff, but at the end of the day, just how smart are we? you dont see animals destroying their enviroment and making pollution.
You need to factor in "suitable stars", stars bright and stable enough for at least a billion years for planet and life formation to evolve.
You also need to factor in "suitable location", the chances of life appearing anywhere in the center of a galaxy is slim due to black holes, intense radiation and cosmic debree. Our remote location is probably no coincidence.
there are more advanced life forms in this universe. i just have this feeling.
while we are talking and doing things here on earth, a super-advanced civilization is having intergalactic tournaments to see which player is the best. while we squabble down here, there are more advanced civilizations that are just like those in Star wars- a type 3 civilization- that is having a huge conflict with a neighboring galaxy.
@julianwerules Wasn’t talking about Sagan, I was talking about Drake. The Drake Equation only applies to the Milky way, but it should have been multiplied further.
Even if there were other people, there may as well not be. Even radio waves won't allow contact. Light takes 4 years to get to the nearest star, and there are no extra solar planets anywhere near that close. Light takes tens and hundreds of thousands of years to get to near by star systems, and hundreds of millions to other galaxies. For all intents and purposes, we're alone.
@ion010101 No extra solar panels? What are you even talking about? Solar panels have nothing to do with whether or not we receive a message or can send a message.
@ion010101 Sorry, but solar panels have nothing to do with being able to contact other civilizations. I have no idea what your train of thought is or why you included it in your statement.
@ion010101 Thank you! I believe that there must be people out there-- but science is not advanced enough for us to find practical value in seeking them out. Even if there are a significant number of planets, the only way to tell would be to send people on nonspecific routes in space to search random planets, several billion of which will be uninhabited. Really.
CARL SAGAN - "Almost no one attempts to educate themselves on the basics of science and technology, yet our society is based on these. TV takes up far too much of our time and is apparently much more attractive to most of us than the beauty and wonder of science. This is a prescription for disaster. We might get away with it for a while, but sooner or later this combustible mixture of ignorance and power is going to blow up in our faces." - CARL SAGAN
To deny the logical stance on extraterrestrial life, which could vary from single-celled microbes to multicellular organisms of immense intelligence, is like saying that humans are made up of some special mixture of elements that are found richly throughout the universe and that this can never happen again. Its completely false of course. There are 400 BILLION stars in one of a TRILLION galaxies. Who knows, 400 billion is a rough estimate, less than 10% of space is visible from earth...
so lets say earth is one grain of sand out in Venice Beach. Our closest neighbor would be another single grain of sand over in some beach off the ivory coast or whatever. And this is if both grains of sand happen to reach its technological peak at the exact same time. This is just within ONE galaxy?
This is of course all supposition. Be that as it may, anyone who denies the existence of other intelligent civilizations, is in my opinion, lacking a scope of vision.
@pfmgf Actually, they are conservative estimates... which is to say that even in the most conservative case, there's still likely to be many other planets with life.
There was never a scientific statement that said that alien life exists. Any and all statements made on extraterrestrial life is speculative. The Drake Equation is not proof, but only a means to show that the possibility of life is still there. We have no reason to believe that we are alone in the entire universe. There's a lot of variables that go into the creation of a technological species, but there's more stars then there are variables. The odds of life are better then any casino game.
If the universe is infinite, then so are the odds that alien life forms exist. But if we are ever able to see them or get in touch with them is a whole different story though.
The Drake Equation is nonsense. Merely stating that there are "billions and billions" is effectively stating any number. And at that point, it's nonsense. While as a discussion piece it's cool to ponder, this ""equation" has nothing substantial at all behind it. IF we knew all of these factors without wild estimates, then we'd have something. But the point is, we know of ONE planet to harbor life, Earth. With no second planet of life, no conclusion or hypothesis can be logically drawn.
@LordWhorfinX2 Holy bible = nonsense. Watch Cristopher Hitchens debate the subject, watch Sam Harris debate the subject, watch Richard Dawkins debate the subject. Your arse has been officially handed to you on a platter kid.
@LordWhorfinX2 Holy bible = nonsense. Watch Cristopher Hitchens debate the subject, watch Sam Harris debate the subject, watch Richard Dawkins debate the subject. Your arse has been officially handed to you on a platter kid.
@LordWhorfinX2 not necessarily a guess can be right to, the thing is its gonna be a long time before we'll ever know the truth, In Carl Sagan's mind He believes the chances of their being life are a lot higher than their not being any life at all, All in all its an educated guess, based on another guess, which to you its apparently non sense.I think its interesting, I mean no we cant take this as 100% equation and you know that, but its making us think )
@ILoveKimPearson Well, anyone can GUESS. And it's not even an educated guess that he makes seeing ashow the formula is based on wild assumptions and vague estimates. This is utter nonsense.
@LordWhorfinX2 You miss the point - its not intended for a conclusion, it's merely a guess based on conservative estimates. Additionally, "Billions and billions" is exactly why the Drake Equation exists - because there are too many possibilities for there not to be intelligent life in the universe. It is an absurd statement to reduce it to "a wild guess" when we have so many great candidates in our own solar system. Carl is not trying to answer "yes" or "no", he's trying to answer "how many?".
@UndeadPizzaGuy how many? None. there is no PROOF of anything. This is all speculation at best. No proof = no existence. Pretty sad that a scientist can't understand that.
@LordWhorfinX2 What kind of statement is that "aliens are not real". Because of this, I know you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. You actually believe intelligent life has only ever been on this planet. You probably believe the biblical stories are true. This illeducated person is one of hundreds of millions, perhaps even billions......
@gunning4fools Can you PROVE alien life? Not just a claim of "billions and billions" of stars. Possibility does NOT equal proof, kid. Also, keep religion out of this, we are talking aliens, not gods.
@LordWhorfinX2 I did not say I could prove aliens life nor did Carl Sagan, just the possibility of it. You definitely have difficulty understanding when watching and listen to others. (I will get back to that) Carl Sagan was refering to our milky way alone, not the other countless hundreds of billion galaxies. lol It's more impossible for there not to be alien life. lol.
@LordWhorfinX2 As you well know, I messaged you a personal reply in response to a vid you posted. The message was extremely polite and put a respectable point across. Guess what, the message had to be approved. This is typical behaivor from someone who want to give a false impression of a particular discussion. Yet I see you were happy to approve a message with obscenities towards you. I guess that person had much weaker points to dispute. At no point have you shown rational thinking or logic.
@gunning4fools I "approve" comments so I do not get trolls flooding my channel or videos. It's my right and it is at MY discretion. I don't tell you how to run your page.
But in any case, no aliens, no proof, and Sagan's little lie here is more "what ifs" than all the Through the Wormhole episodes combined...
@LordWhorfinX2 LOL. Yet again you you chose to ignore the points that were made, and create a strawman argument and go off on a tangent. You do this intentionally, whenever a valid point is made. For this reason it's not worth discussing anything with you. So thank you for yet another display of pure and utter ignorance. lol. I have never heard so much nonsensical drivel from 1 person. Followers of the biblical tale, no doubt hold there head in shame when someone like you opens your mouth.
@gunning4fools Kid, I answered your question. You just didn't like the answer. But no matter, you have no proof of any life other than what lies here on Earth. Sagan's bullshit videos are FILLED with "what if" nonsense. He was a waste and the planet is far better off without his lies and puerile imagination.
You are the one that dragged religion into this in the first place. So if anyone is disingenuous and dishonest, trust me, it's you. ;)
@LordWhorfinX2 LOL, your responses are getting worst.(I'M giggling uncontrolably at your them) Point 1, NO ONE SAID THERE IS LIFE ON ANOTHER PLANET, JUST THE POSSIBILITY OF IT. GIVEN OUR FACTUAL UNDERSTANDING OF THE UNIVERSE. So stop saying "prove there is life on other planets". Your question has no bearing in our discussion whatsoever. You really need to start listening to what is being said, if you are going to comment on these vids, you come across rather obtuse when giving your view.
@LordWhorfinX2 LOL, your responses are getting worst.(I'M giggling uncontrolably at your them) Point 1, NO ONE SAID THERE IS LIFE ON ANOTHER PLANET, JUST THE POSSIBILITY OF IT. GIVEN OUR FACTUAL UNDERSTANDING OF THE UNIVERSE. So stop saying "prove there is life on other planets". Your question has no bearing in our discussion whatsoever. You really need to start listening to what is being said, if you are going to comment on these vids, you come across rather obtuse when giving your view.
I love the way he says "a hundred BILLION"
STATUSTANK 1 day ago 2
why does he say 10 planets?
nightreaper999 3 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Great video - I downloaded this song at iomoio.net
ertomdusket 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
how happy were you when you was goin crazy when ya got an ipad free at bit.ly\w6ooSO
ewingqh 1 week ago
LIFE :) ITS A WORD THATS BIGGER THAN ITS AMOUNT OF LETTERS SUGGEST
rippinshamz 2 weeks ago
@rippinshamz PENIS, LARGER THAN LIFE.
DuhyatheSecond 1 week ago
The day when Carl Sagan died, cosmos cried.
ilikemyfitteds 2 weeks ago
Thumbs Up.
ANGELMARTINEZ420 2 weeks ago
The real question is,
Do you know where your towel is?
Be a hoopy frood,
And Don't Panic!
ha
Enticer666 2 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
two thumbs up if ya got one of them iPads that they be gvin awy at bit.ly\voBmqD
fieldvj 3 weeks ago
Earth had extremely advanced civilizations for many thousands of years before we ever would have projected our existence into space via Radio Waves, etc. Even though this is factored into the Drake Equation I would suspect that for every "civilization" that transmits its existence there would be thousands of highly intelligent and developed civilizations that wouldn't. Mayans, Egyptians, Incas, 15th Century Europe??? There MUST be millions of advanced civilizations throughout the Universe.
randy109 3 weeks ago
@randy109
'Advanced civilization' in this video is defined as 'possessing means to broadcast powerfully in the radio spectrum, and to broadcast coded signals'.
Thus, in the sense of this video, we knkow of only one 'advanced' civilization: Here.
MadHighway 2 weeks ago
This is the greatest thing on the internet..
xGhostFaceKilla 3 weeks ago
@EricFleet, "If intelligent life is common, then we should see a populated galaxy already."
Now, I recall you mentioned that you have a personal distaste for pure guesswork...Just pointing out the irony...
I'll also ask you be a little more respectful. 'Go read up on....' seems to be your catchphrase for example, and is a rather patronising and forceful way of referencing your information.
3000cecil 3 weeks ago
@3000cecil Apologies if my comment seemed rude. It as not intended that way.
EricFleet 2 weeks ago
why ppl like carl sagan need to die ?? this kind of man need to be immortal and teach for all the human kind what we need to do to touch the stars.. but anyway i hope if there is god up there i want to tell him one thing...... SEND BACK TO EARTH THE CARL SAGAN WE NEED IT
roogar76 3 weeks ago
@roogar76 brian cox is still alive and is perpetuating carl sagan vulgarisation work.
GmrWeb 3 weeks ago in playlist Liked videos
The Drake equation:
N* is very well known
fP is become better known through transit and radial velocity observations
nE is becoming better known as well through the Kepler mission though still ambigous as we don't truly know what "suitable for life" means".
fl is an even wilder guess
fI is a ridiculously wild guess.
fL is an absolutely wild guess
We've come a long way in the last century to answering many questions. We have a long way to go until we answer them all.
EricFleet 4 weeks ago
@Elena9525 I think Sagan was just trying to put it to the masses why scientists are so unsure how much life is to be found out there. As for the Drake equation, I think it is a simple and elegant, if inaccurate way of showing us our own uncertainty. In the end, in a few thousand year's time, perhaps, it might prove to be a perfectly reasonable estimate. There is no way to tell, yet.
3000cecil 1 month ago
I'm not buying where he gets all these numbers from..
bitchslapper12 1 month ago
@bitchslapper12 You are quite correct. Once we go past the number of planets in the galaxy, the following numbers are pure guesses and reflect one's philosophical (religious) bent not science. If intelligent life were as common as Carl Sagan believed, then we should see intelligent civilizations should have colonized the entire galaxy by now. After all, if only 1 intelligence survives to colonize other worlds, then in a short span of millions of years would be able to colonize the whole galaxy.
EricFleet 4 weeks ago
@EricFleet This video is about Frank Drake. Not Carl Sagan's opinion. I have no idea what you are making up, here.
truvelocity 3 weeks ago
@truvelocity Wow, really? Go read up on Sagan... he spent quite a bit of his career involved in the search for extraterrestrial life, and was quite an evangelist for SETI.
EricFleet 3 weeks ago
@EricFleet I read his books before you were born SETI was based on even the minimum estimate from Francis Drakes math.
truvelocity 3 weeks ago
@EricFleet
We can make the Drake equation come out to 1--and even less than 1.
If N=0.5, say, that means there's 1 advanced civilization (radio-capable) per TWO galaxies of 400 billion stars.
So, we could be the only advanced civilization in the Milky Way AND the Andromeda galaxy taken together! The only one in the Local Group. Think of that.
MadHighway 2 weeks ago
@bitchslapper12 He is getting these numbers from Francis Drake from Cornell University based on estimates of planetary universes observed so far. You take that into a mean scale of all scales from one extreme to another. Calculate the mathematical probability and you get two extreme calculations. Either one could be correct or neither. The point is that we know we are not the only civilization with how enormous the cosmos is. So, why not use the calculations we know of as a model!
truvelocity 3 weeks ago
@truvelocity We do? (know that we aren't the only civilization). I think that is an assumption, not a calculation. Can you tell me the probability of life originating on a planet? No one can at this point. If intelligent life is common then we should see a populated galaxy already... go read up on the Fermi paradox.
EricFleet 3 weeks ago
@truvelocity Sagan is alluding to life being a possibility. It cannot be a probability and if that word was used in the video it is false.
We can only know the probability for life to arise on a planet if we study other planets with life on it.
While some of the numbers he used above may be verifiable once he gets to the part (Ne) then it is complete guess work. It wasn't until a few weeks ago that we actually verified another planet like earth.
tapasoflife 3 weeks ago
@tapasoflife life other than ours found on earth*
whysers 3 weeks ago
@truvelocity and further we have never even come close to making contact with any other planet with life on it. (Any numbers substituted for Fl, Fi, Fc, FL is complete guesswork).
We have no data for life existing anywhere in the universe except for earth. And probability requires data.
tapasoflife 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
thumbz way yup if you was goin crazy when ya got an ipad free at bit.ly\uPgbEt
sheabgz 1 month ago 11
@sheabgz you just ruined one of the best videos on youtube with your horribly spelled spam.
now i have to kindly ask you to GET THE FUCK OUT.
TheEliteToast 4 weeks ago
Earth is the only planet known to support life in the solar system. There -may- be microbial life on Mars, or perhaps in the clouds of gas giants, or perhaps on Titan, or perhaps under Europa's ice sheets. But, who's to say? There's not even enough data to estimate the probability of life on such worlds, so "assuming," as Sagan did in this video, would be ignorant. Going by raw assumption with no supportive data or evidence, ESPECIALLY in science, is an extremely -- hopelessly -- grave mistake.
Elena9525 1 month ago
@Elena9525 Imagination is still required, yes he's assuming in a sense but that wont stop people like him checking if there assumptions are correct. Science would be quite boring then...
DarkPuppet 1 month ago
@DarkPuppet It's fine to imagine. It's almost absurd to think that we're the only planet capable of supporting life, considering the simple fact that life itself is ultimately comprised of the same elements that can be found in the proverbial backyard, or in nebula clouds.
But, the Drake Equation is a fundamentally, completely flawed method of "imagination" for the reasons below.
Elena9525 1 month ago
@Elena9525 The key word is 'known'....Earth is the only planet that we KNOW supports life.
That was no assumption. Who's to say there isn't life on other planets? We don't KNOW nor have the data to know...yet.
TheKashmirPirate 4 weeks ago
@TheKashmirPirate Precisely. So, why try to estimate? An estimation with no supportive data is verdically worthless.
To reiterate, it's fine to wonder and to imagine. But, trying to estimate something on paper is silly.
Elena9525 4 weeks ago
@Elena9525 Because, its based on probability. Probability can give you a mean scale from both extremes. Keep in mind if the galaxies were teaming with life, it would take a minimum of 15 thousand years to make it to the nearest star on our fastest space ship. If we could travel in light years, which is physical impossible or we'd self destruct, it would take 3 light years. Again, if it were teaming with life, no one could reach each other because no planet contains enough resources to do so.
truvelocity 3 weeks ago
@truvelocity The point is we don't have the faintest idea what most of the probabilities are. Not even close. Intelligent fife may be common, it may be virtually non-existent outside of Earth. The only way we will truly find out the numbers is by exploration, not making up numbers.
EricFleet 3 weeks ago
The Drake Equation is about the equivalent of trying to estimate how many soft balls in the world exist by looking at the number of soft balls in a single town. Whatever numbers the Drake Equation can give us, they're almost certainly EXTREMELY inaccurate.
I believe the Drake Equation is utterly, hopelessly, awe-inspiringly, stupefyingly pointless as a way to estimate the number of hospitable planets. We just don't have any data whatsoever to make any sort of estimate. At all. Period.
At ALL.
Elena9525 1 month ago
Comment removed
EvanEnterprises 3 weeks ago
Comment removed
EvanEnterprises 3 weeks ago
@Elena9525
Thought experiment: ~5,000 softballs per town of ~1,000,000 people (1 in 200).
~7,000 million people x ~5,000 per milllion = ~35,000,000 softballs in the world.
MadHighway 2 weeks ago
10? get the fuck outa here, theres way more than that....
MrToxicheyna7 1 month ago
@MrToxicheyna7 Did you even watch the rest of the video?
ArcturusLeng 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@MrToxicheyna7 Did you even watch the rest of the video?
ArcturusLeng 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
thums if todays was your day to get an ipad from bit.ly\sj2SBV
briettavo 1 month ago
even with low figures, you get potentially hundreds of civilizations that we can contact, just in our galaxy. heck, you need ridiculously pessimistic numbers for say 1. like really low.
Ryagful 1 month ago
@Ryagful
So, if we take it you're suggesting say 400 civilizations out of 400 billion stars, how much distance on average between civilizations given that they are one in a billion?
So if we say 1 star per cubic light year, the nearest civilization might be 1,000 light years away. The nearest star to us is really _4_ light years away, so let's split the diff and say on your estimate, the nearest advanced civilization is 2,000 ly away.
How do we 'converse' at that distance?
MadHighway 2 weeks ago
that's really good! well, first consider the problem that a civilization that sent a signal 2000 light years away and reaches us now would either be extinct, simply left the planet due to some catastrophe, like war or something else, or they simply gone extinct. lest say it survived. best way, in my opinion, to 'converse' at that distance is wormholes. build two machines with two connected wormholes on each planet and send radio signals through. now you got "False FTL", and voila!
Ryagful 2 weeks ago
@Ryagful
If you can show us that wormholes exist, and where one is, and how to use one, your idea works.
Sounds like a shortcut, though, since there's no evidence for wormholes.
MadHighway 2 weeks ago
thing about wormholes isn't IF they exists, but the inconvenient part in which they a) would take a fuck ton of spacial disruption, b) take another fuck ton of energy to maintain and c) there would be no way of making sure the two wormholes are connected. wormholes are pretty much possible, there's no doubt about that. good luck making one though! talk to me when you do...a billion years from now...
Ryagful 2 weeks ago
@Ryagful
I say that it's pretty much left to chance that, if there ARE other radio-capable civilizations, they'd have to develop both nearby and in the same timeframe to each other, galactically speaking.
So the question underlying Sagan's video is: what are the chances of two civilizations finding out about each other given galactic distances and timescales?
I say N=~0%.
MadHighway 2 weeks ago
in order for us to contact them, yes they have to develop close. but with that in mind, one or the other is going to be much more advance than the other. maybe is us, or maybe its them, but one is going to be beyond the other. also, by the time the other less advance one is able to detect them, the more advance one might not be listening anymore. they might not be using radio signals anymore and use laser communication, or something else. so yes, its unlikely, but not 0. nothing is 0
Ryagful 2 weeks ago
@Ryagful
Hence my result: N=~0. N equals something near zero.
I await the discovery of an exo-planet with a spectrum showing a strongly oxidizing atmosphere like ours, though. A dead giveaway for life, pardon the pun.
MadHighway 2 weeks ago
just you wait! a few years from now you'l say "i should have listen to that random dude on youtube...i should have listen!" cuz we already have many habitable zone planets, and now kepler is finding more and more EARTH SIZE planets that are turning the Drake Equation numbers up to previous unexpected sizes.
Ryagful 2 weeks ago
@Ryagful
Earth-size and in the so-called 'habitable zone' planets are f-sub-p and n-sub-e and were well-guessed at anyway before the Kepler probe.
Like I said, I await the discovery of an exo-planet with a spectrum showing a strongly oxidizing atmosphere like ours.
The latest Grand Tack model shows that in order to have an Earth you need a Jupiter and Saturn as well. I await too the discovery of a solar system like ours.
MadHighway 2 weeks ago
@Ryagful Perhaps :) The point is that we won't have an idea of the values to assign Drake's equation until we actually discover some intelligent civilizations :)
EricFleet 2 weeks ago
@EricFleet
Last night I did the Drake Equation with a few modern updates (G- and K-type stars, no binaries allowed) and I allowed that an intelligent/aware species would develop technology (or vice versa!)
I came up with a range of N=1 to N=30. I kept having trouble with the chance of 'right' planets actually developing life. 0.00001 or 0.000001 chance (10^-5 or 10^-6)?
MadHighway 2 weeks ago
@MadHighway Hi, may I know ur facebook email add? I am very fascinated with your ways.
rockinfetus916 2 weeks ago
What's that sound at 4:35? It freaks me the fk out...
RaulGoesTrance 1 month ago in playlist Weitere Videos von CarlSaganPortal
@RaulGoesTrance sounds like someone in the background (cameraman, etc) choked or coughed. haha
MrToxicheyna7 1 month ago
R* = Ritmo de formación de estrellas "adecuadas" en la galaxia (estrellas por año).
maximusmagnanimus100 1 month ago
Según los últimos datos de la NASA y de la Agencia Espacial Europea el ritmo de producción galáctico es de 7 estrellas por año.2 En el entendido que son aptas Estrellas tipo K y G y si del total de estrellas 12,1% son estrellas de tipo K y un 7,6% son estrellas tipo G como el Sol,3 entonces solo el 19,7% de esas 7 estrellas que nacen cada año son propicias, por lo tanto solo 1,379 de esas siete estrellas anuales es verdaderamente apta.
maximusmagnanimus100 1 month ago
fp = Fracción de estrellas que tienen planetas en su órbita.
Modernos investigadores del Observatorio Europeo Austral dedicados a la búsqueda de planetas argumentan que aproximadamente una de cada tres estrellas de tipo G podría contener planetas. En la estimación no se cuenta el porcentaje de planetas en estrellas naranjas o enanas rojas.
maximusmagnanimus100 1 month ago
ne = Número de esos planetas en el interior de la ecosfera de la estrella.
maximusmagnanimus100 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
El número de planetas orbitando dentro de la ecosfera o zona habitable con órbita no excéntrica se estima en torno a uno de cada doscientos, en base al único descubrimiento al respecto hasta la fecha, Gliese 581 d (en torno a una estrella enana roja). En esta estimación no se cuentan posibles satélites de exoplanetas masivos. También cabe esperar que las limitaciones tecnológicas actuales para detectar planetas de tamaño terrestre estén alterando notablemente el dato.
maximusmagnanimus100 1 month ago
El número de planetas orbitando dentro de la ecosfera o zona habitable con órbita no excéntrica se estima en torno a uno de cada doscientos, en base al único descubrimiento al respecto hasta la fecha, Gliese 581 d (en torno a una estrella enana roja).5 6 En esta estimación no se cuentan posibles satélites de exoplanetas masivos. También cabe esperar que las limitaciones tecnológicas actuales para detectar planetas de tamaño terrestre estén alterando notablemente el dato.
maximusmagnanimus100 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
fl = Fracción de esos planetas dentro de la ecosfera en los que la vida se ha desarrollado.
maximusmagnanimus100 1 month ago
En 2002, Charles H. Lineweaver and Tamara M. Davis (de la Universidad del Sur de Nueva Wales y del Centro Australiano de Astrobiología) estimaron que trece de cada cien planetas dentro de la ecosfera que han vivido alrededor de 1,000 millones de años pueden desarrollar vida. En la estimación no se cuenta con planetas que hayan vivido menos de ese tiempo dentro de una ecosfera estable.
maximusmagnanimus100 1 month ago
fi = Fracción de esos planetas en los que la vida inteligente se ha desarrollado.
maximusmagnanimus100 1 month ago
La cantidad de oportunidades para que se desarrolle vida inteligente en esos planetas estables se puede extrapolar de la fracción de tiempo que representa la vida inteligente en la Tierra, en relación con tiempo transcurrido desde la aparición de la vida unicelular. Es decir: de los 3.700 millones de años de vida en el planeta8 sólo en los últimos 200.000 años ha existido el Homo Sapiens.
maximusmagnanimus100 1 month ago
fc = Fracción de esos planetas donde la vida inteligente ha desarrollado una tecnología e intenta comunicarse.
Según la estimación inicial de Drake, la posibilidad de desarrollar tecnología capaz de emitir señales de radiofrecuencia es de una en cien. Este valor adoptado, no obstante, es una simple conjetura.
maximusmagnanimus100 1 month ago
Se ha sugerido otra alternativa para estimar la cantidad de oportunidades para que la vida inteligente emita radiofrecuencias, que consistiría en extrapolar la fracción de tiempo que pueda durar la humanidad transmitiendo señales de radio en relación al tiempo transcurrido desde su aparición (hace 200 mil años). El lapso de tiempo que pueda durar la civilización industrial emitiendo señales de radio se podría basar del dato aportado en el parámetro L.
maximusmagnanimus100 1 month ago
L = El lapso de tiempo que una civilización inteligente y comunicativa puede existir (años).
maximusmagnanimus100 1 month ago
La expectativa de vida calculada en un artículo de la revista Scientific American hecha por Michael Shermer fue de 420 años en promedio, en base a la observación de seis civilizaciones humanas antiguas que usaron consistentemente una tecnología preindustrial.
maximusmagnanimus100 1 month ago
Según la Teoría de Olduvai el tiempo de vida de la actual civilización industrial será de 100 años (1930-2030) coincidiendo más o menos en su aparición con el comienzo de emisiones de radio (1938)
maximusmagnanimus100 1 month ago
La ecuación de Drake identifica los factores específicos que, se cree, tienen un papel importante en el desarrollo de las civilizaciones. Aunque en la actualidad no hay datos suficientes para resolver la ecuación, la comunidad científica ha aceptado su relevancia como primera aproximación teórica al problema, y varios científicos la han utilizado como herramienta para plantear distintas hipótesis.
maximusmagnanimus100 1 month ago
En el Universo existen quizás millones de sistemas solares similares al nuestro, con un sol similar al nuestro con un planeta similar al nuestro que se capaz de albergar una civilización tecnológicamente avanzada o superior. El problema es saber cuántas civilizaciones han sido capaz de evolucionar hacia formas más avanzadas? y saber si estas tienen el deseo de comunicación con las civilizaciones de la Tierra?
maximusmagnanimus100 1 month ago
is he reading off something?? lol
pokehimon 1 month ago
Dr. Sagan only did the equation for the milky way, not other galaxies!
TheBbergner86 1 month ago
So that's (conservatively) 10 per galaxy, and considering that there are billions, if not trillions of galaxies, there's still a vast amount of advanced civilizations out there!
MonounsaturatedBliss 1 month ago
DRIZZY!!!!
giggty90 1 month ago
thumbs up if think he is an alien
quto01 1 month ago
The fraction of planets with life is f sub 1 not f sub L, oh well I forgive you Mr Sagan.
av733 1 month ago
Kepler 22B is suitable for life.
walmartpimp2 1 month ago
Carl, I think you were being a bit too generous with the intelligent and technoglogy. I think it's quite rare to get those things. Plus, there's also the issue of graspers. In order to have a technologica civilization, the species must have appendages capable of handling tools.
Keitaro2011 1 month ago
@Keitaro2011 a form of intelligent life doesn't need human type appendages, they would make tools and technology's that are made for their appendages, much like most of out technology and tools requires an opposable thumb, it's not like all tools need to be like ours, I sure some forms of alien technology would be very hard for a human to use because it's not designed for out hands, not all intelligent life will have grasping hands like our own but will still develop tools.
ASTRUMLABS 1 month ago
Some of these can be roughly estimated. But the odds of a life-supporting planet creating intelligence are not 1 in 10. Vote down please.
manthatsgood11 1 month ago
Cool video. But on those estimates where he comes to 10 civilizations, it's only in the milky way galaxy. Since there are like 200 billion galaxies out there, you would have to expect the universe to be filled with life.
AlexanderVankan 1 month ago
I think 10 is a generous estimate for intelligent civilizations in existence, but I'd move N(suitable for life) as well as N(life) down. I'd also use a variable to take into account the stability of a solar system over billions of years as evolution did its stuff. While I was at it I'd probably nudge f(likelihood to not kill self) up a little bit.
9Mystere9 1 month ago
Its pretty scary just how long evolution has taken, and it can all be fucked up by atomic war or destroying or planet with polution.
Sometimes i wonder if we are really smarter than animals. Sure we got an ability to create stuff, but at the end of the day, just how smart are we? you dont see animals destroying their enviroment and making pollution.
RMJ1984 2 months ago
@RMJ1984 Or maybe were the animals. But we all don't know.
TheJefrey24 1 month ago
@RMJ1984 That is because they can't on our level because of their lack of intelligence (in comparison to us).
AbyssCrown 1 month ago
Two major flaws/omissions in the Drake Equation:
You need to factor in "suitable stars", stars bright and stable enough for at least a billion years for planet and life formation to evolve.
You also need to factor in "suitable location", the chances of life appearing anywhere in the center of a galaxy is slim due to black holes, intense radiation and cosmic debree. Our remote location is probably no coincidence.
unapologeticmind 2 months ago
Comment removed
odiexx 2 months ago
there are more advanced life forms in this universe. i just have this feeling.
while we are talking and doing things here on earth, a super-advanced civilization is having intergalactic tournaments to see which player is the best. while we squabble down here, there are more advanced civilizations that are just like those in Star wars- a type 3 civilization- that is having a huge conflict with a neighboring galaxy.
damn.... i wish i can see all this!!!!!!!
OyonTheAdept 2 months ago
That was kind of depressing when he said 10 worlds, because if it is only a few like that we will probably never contact them.
MIDNAq1LINK 2 months ago
Mountain dew is the best soda ever made!
bozzy446 2 months ago 2
Did anyone else click on this video only because the thumbnail looked like Sagan was about to puke something up?
SkyFortStudios 2 months ago
Comment removed
jljdjf102 2 months ago
amazing open mind
ihatefuckinglogins 2 months ago
Uncharted 4: Drake's Equation
JokerFan252 2 months ago 17
@JokerFan252
You genuinely made me lol, I thank you for that good sir.
DmNt 2 months ago
So this is what a woman feels like when a guy cant stop looking at their breasts. Why does he keep looking down?
absinthe5765 2 months ago
I love Sagan.
tedwilli9 2 months ago
He could be talking about doing laundry and I could still listen to him talk all day.
SteveHolt1984 2 months ago 6
Very smart man, but he evidently had a hard time doing videos without reading each sentence form the teleprompter.
MrCatbutt 2 months ago
He forgot to multiply this number by the hundreds of billions of galaxies out there. (That we can see : )
MrCatbutt 2 months ago
@MrCatbutt I think this only applies to the Milky Way galaxy
julianwerules 2 months ago
@julianwerules Wasn’t talking about Sagan, I was talking about Drake. The Drake Equation only applies to the Milky way, but it should have been multiplied further.
MrCatbutt 2 months ago
@MrCatbutt I guess but the Drake equation is very unstable as it is
julianwerules 1 month ago
He has a singular voice that just captivates me
dollypatinson 2 months ago
Such an erudite individual :')
dollypatinson 2 months ago
Reading is fundamental.
ion010101 2 months ago
I've only just started reading Sagans books and watching these clips.
What a guy!
WobbleSkanker 2 months ago
Carl Sagan wants, if we cannot find ET, us to be the first to be a spacefaring species. Let us not disappoint him! Or ourselves!
gameill 3 months ago
Then you need to multiply THAT by the number of idealistic civilizations that aren't spontaneously destroyed by the reapers...
Psychonaut117 3 months ago
Even if there were other people, there may as well not be. Even radio waves won't allow contact. Light takes 4 years to get to the nearest star, and there are no extra solar planets anywhere near that close. Light takes tens and hundreds of thousands of years to get to near by star systems, and hundreds of millions to other galaxies. For all intents and purposes, we're alone.
ion010101 3 months ago
@ion010101 No extra solar panels? What are you even talking about? Solar panels have nothing to do with whether or not we receive a message or can send a message.
UndeadPizzaGuy 2 months ago
@UndeadPizzaGuy Ah ha ha, ya big silly.
ion010101 2 months ago
@ion010101 The silly person is the person who thinks solar panels have anything to do with this.
UndeadPizzaGuy 2 months ago
@UndeadPizzaGuy Eh heh, alrighty.
ion010101 2 months ago
@UndeadPizzaGuy ...can't tell if serious or not.
ion010101 2 months ago
@ion010101 Sorry, but solar panels have nothing to do with being able to contact other civilizations. I have no idea what your train of thought is or why you included it in your statement.
UndeadPizzaGuy 2 months ago
@UndeadPizzaGuy I didn't say anything about taking a train to another planet!
ion010101 2 months ago
@ion010101 Such a terrabad troll.
UndeadPizzaGuy 2 months ago 17
@UndeadPizzaGuy Hey, it's better than yours! ;) Solar panels... pfft.
ion010101 2 months ago
@UndeadPizzaGuy I did not say, "solar panels". There. Happy?
ion010101 2 months ago
@ion010101 Thank you! I believe that there must be people out there-- but science is not advanced enough for us to find practical value in seeking them out. Even if there are a significant number of planets, the only way to tell would be to send people on nonspecific routes in space to search random planets, several billion of which will be uninhabited. Really.
manthatsgood11 1 month ago
@AntyeyPL Gamma rays, hypervelocity stars, planetary collisions...
buffer545 3 months ago
@buffer545 Hurricanes, volcanoes, tornados, other et species, earthquakes, tsunamis, winterstorms, etc
gameill 3 months ago
Just remember - various (inter)stellar phenomena can literally decimate hundreds of civilisations (e.g. magnetars, novas, blackholes...).
AnteyPL 3 months ago
Blasphemy lol.
MetalMastar 3 months ago
schandalig dat er voor dergelijke films een reclame zit!!! Laat hen geld niet vooruitgaan op kennis en wijsheid!!!
thecosmosisgreat 3 months ago
The most accurate current estimate is 2.3, and we count as 1.
HeatherMeadow 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
CARL SAGAN - "Almost no one attempts to educate themselves on the basics of science and technology, yet our society is based on these. TV takes up far too much of our time and is apparently much more attractive to most of us than the beauty and wonder of science. This is a prescription for disaster. We might get away with it for a while, but sooner or later this combustible mixture of ignorance and power is going to blow up in our faces." - CARL SAGAN
TheLogicalBrain 3 months ago
To deny the logical stance on extraterrestrial life, which could vary from single-celled microbes to multicellular organisms of immense intelligence, is like saying that humans are made up of some special mixture of elements that are found richly throughout the universe and that this can never happen again. Its completely false of course. There are 400 BILLION stars in one of a TRILLION galaxies. Who knows, 400 billion is a rough estimate, less than 10% of space is visible from earth...
VoLCoMzYaDiGG 3 months ago
so lets say earth is one grain of sand out in Venice Beach. Our closest neighbor would be another single grain of sand over in some beach off the ivory coast or whatever. And this is if both grains of sand happen to reach its technological peak at the exact same time. This is just within ONE galaxy?
nuggz503 3 months ago
@johnycoolk We would not be there to see it.
Doum92 3 months ago
does this count earth as one of the ten?
kiopi94 3 months ago
This is of course all supposition. Be that as it may, anyone who denies the existence of other intelligent civilizations, is in my opinion, lacking a scope of vision.
OM3N1R 4 months ago
@OM3N1R Well said
givemeblowjob69 3 months ago
@givemeblowjob69
thank you.
OM3N1R 3 months ago
I don't think we are alone, but those fractions are just far wild guesses.
pfmgf 4 months ago
@pfmgf Actually, they are conservative estimates... which is to say that even in the most conservative case, there's still likely to be many other planets with life.
askantik 3 months ago
he smoked weed!
Jacarter99 4 months ago
There was never a scientific statement that said that alien life exists. Any and all statements made on extraterrestrial life is speculative. The Drake Equation is not proof, but only a means to show that the possibility of life is still there. We have no reason to believe that we are alone in the entire universe. There's a lot of variables that go into the creation of a technological species, but there's more stars then there are variables. The odds of life are better then any casino game.
Fragacide 4 months ago
@Fragacide god that 'then' misuse is an eyesore, totally ignored anything valid you said.
ant1ph0n 4 months ago
@ant1ph0n lol That's fine with me. I had forgotten you existed until you replied.
Fragacide 4 months ago
In a mere 4 minutes i can now work out formulas for probability of life in the universe.
Wish he was still with us.
WeKeepEvolving 4 months ago
If the universe is infinite, then so are the odds that alien life forms exist. But if we are ever able to see them or get in touch with them is a whole different story though.
OhReallyNoWai 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The Drake Equation is nonsense. Merely stating that there are "billions and billions" is effectively stating any number. And at that point, it's nonsense. While as a discussion piece it's cool to ponder, this ""equation" has nothing substantial at all behind it. IF we knew all of these factors without wild estimates, then we'd have something. But the point is, we know of ONE planet to harbor life, Earth. With no second planet of life, no conclusion or hypothesis can be logically drawn.
LordWhorfinX2 4 months ago
@LordWhorfinX2 we know that its just a guess,
ILoveKimPearson 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ILoveKimPearson That's all I needed to hear from someone ;)
Drake = nonsense
LordWhorfinX2 4 months ago
@LordWhorfinX2 Holy bible = nonsense. Watch Cristopher Hitchens debate the subject, watch Sam Harris debate the subject, watch Richard Dawkins debate the subject. Your arse has been officially handed to you on a platter kid.
gunning4fools 4 months ago 4
This has been flagged as spam show
@LordWhorfinX2 Holy bible = nonsense. Watch Cristopher Hitchens debate the subject, watch Sam Harris debate the subject, watch Richard Dawkins debate the subject. Your arse has been officially handed to you on a platter kid.
gunning4fools 4 months ago
@LordWhorfinX2 not necessarily a guess can be right to, the thing is its gonna be a long time before we'll ever know the truth, In Carl Sagan's mind He believes the chances of their being life are a lot higher than their not being any life at all, All in all its an educated guess, based on another guess, which to you its apparently non sense.I think its interesting, I mean no we cant take this as 100% equation and you know that, but its making us think )
ILoveKimPearson 4 months ago
@ILoveKimPearson Well, anyone can GUESS. And it's not even an educated guess that he makes seeing ashow the formula is based on wild assumptions and vague estimates. This is utter nonsense.
LordWhorfinX2 4 months ago
@LordWhorfinX2 Yes anyone can and he is, So you have a better answer than the drake equation?
ILoveKimPearson 4 months ago
@LordWhorfinX2 You miss the point - its not intended for a conclusion, it's merely a guess based on conservative estimates. Additionally, "Billions and billions" is exactly why the Drake Equation exists - because there are too many possibilities for there not to be intelligent life in the universe. It is an absurd statement to reduce it to "a wild guess" when we have so many great candidates in our own solar system. Carl is not trying to answer "yes" or "no", he's trying to answer "how many?".
UndeadPizzaGuy 2 months ago 4
@UndeadPizzaGuy how many? None. there is no PROOF of anything. This is all speculation at best. No proof = no existence. Pretty sad that a scientist can't understand that.
LordWhorfinX2 2 months ago
@LordWhorfinX2 no proof does not mean no existence...this is all just speculation....ofcourse there's no proof...duh
nwin6 2 months ago
Aliens are NOT real. Drake Equation is complete and total nonsense.
"Billions and billions"........what a jackass
LordWhorfinX2 4 months ago
@LordWhorfinX2 What kind of statement is that "aliens are not real". Because of this, I know you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. You actually believe intelligent life has only ever been on this planet. You probably believe the biblical stories are true. This illeducated person is one of hundreds of millions, perhaps even billions......
gunning4fools 4 months ago 4
@gunning4fools Can you PROVE alien life? Not just a claim of "billions and billions" of stars. Possibility does NOT equal proof, kid. Also, keep religion out of this, we are talking aliens, not gods.
Can you PROVE alien life or not? Yes or no....
LordWhorfinX2 4 months ago
@LordWhorfinX2 I did not say I could prove aliens life nor did Carl Sagan, just the possibility of it. You definitely have difficulty understanding when watching and listen to others. (I will get back to that) Carl Sagan was refering to our milky way alone, not the other countless hundreds of billion galaxies. lol It's more impossible for there not to be alien life. lol.
gunning4fools 4 months ago 4
@LordWhorfinX2 As you well know, I messaged you a personal reply in response to a vid you posted. The message was extremely polite and put a respectable point across. Guess what, the message had to be approved. This is typical behaivor from someone who want to give a false impression of a particular discussion. Yet I see you were happy to approve a message with obscenities towards you. I guess that person had much weaker points to dispute. At no point have you shown rational thinking or logic.
gunning4fools 4 months ago 4
@gunning4fools I "approve" comments so I do not get trolls flooding my channel or videos. It's my right and it is at MY discretion. I don't tell you how to run your page.
But in any case, no aliens, no proof, and Sagan's little lie here is more "what ifs" than all the Through the Wormhole episodes combined...
Sagan+you=fail
LordWhorfinX2 4 months ago
@LordWhorfinX2 LOL. Yet again you you chose to ignore the points that were made, and create a strawman argument and go off on a tangent. You do this intentionally, whenever a valid point is made. For this reason it's not worth discussing anything with you. So thank you for yet another display of pure and utter ignorance. lol. I have never heard so much nonsensical drivel from 1 person. Followers of the biblical tale, no doubt hold there head in shame when someone like you opens your mouth.
gunning4fools 4 months ago 4
@gunning4fools Kid, I answered your question. You just didn't like the answer. But no matter, you have no proof of any life other than what lies here on Earth. Sagan's bullshit videos are FILLED with "what if" nonsense. He was a waste and the planet is far better off without his lies and puerile imagination.
You are the one that dragged religion into this in the first place. So if anyone is disingenuous and dishonest, trust me, it's you. ;)
LordWhorfinX2 4 months ago
@LordWhorfinX2 LOL, your responses are getting worst.(I'M giggling uncontrolably at your them) Point 1, NO ONE SAID THERE IS LIFE ON ANOTHER PLANET, JUST THE POSSIBILITY OF IT. GIVEN OUR FACTUAL UNDERSTANDING OF THE UNIVERSE. So stop saying "prove there is life on other planets". Your question has no bearing in our discussion whatsoever. You really need to start listening to what is being said, if you are going to comment on these vids, you come across rather obtuse when giving your view.
gunning4fools 4 months ago 4
This has been flagged as spam show
@LordWhorfinX2 LOL, your responses are getting worst.(I'M giggling uncontrolably at your them) Point 1, NO ONE SAID THERE IS LIFE ON ANOTHER PLANET, JUST THE POSSIBILITY OF IT. GIVEN OUR FACTUAL UNDERSTANDING OF THE UNIVERSE. So stop saying "prove there is life on other planets". Your question has no bearing in our discussion whatsoever. You really need to start listening to what is being said, if you are going to comment on these vids, you come across rather obtuse when giving your view.
gunning4fools 4 months ago