Replies

Um, Dr Ross is an astrophysicist. Perhaps what you have not plugged into your calculus is the very narrow window of conditions (and timing is a major factor) necessary for higher life forms to develop on a planet with rudimentary life on it, and to go to the level of contemplative life (intelligent seekers) is even more astonishing.

It became popular to use statistics (the Drake equation), without applied science, and the notion that the odds are in favor of life popping up all over the universe was popularized. Applying science methods to 'false' the statistical vagaries leads to a very different set of conclusions.

Here's one factor --merely one of more than a hundred factors-- about the fundamental necessities for life to arise and reach multicellular expression and eventually intelligent life investigating the universe: that star which exploded half way across the universe likely ended whatever cycle was leading to life evolving on any planet in that galaxy where the star arose; but the galaxy where that star existed was not likely to have been a suitable galaxy for the rise of life conditions on any planet around any star in that galaxy because the 'star formation/generation/demise' process was too violent that many billions of years ago in any galaxy generating such massive, short-lived stars, and those conditions were the norm for the universe of that far back in time; it was those violent rapid star generator galaxies which eventually seeded the galaxies with sufficient heavier elements to sustain the processes for generating life.

Put that notion together with the distances galaxies were apart back when that galaxy generated that now exploded star, and you see that the violence of the universe 'back then' was such that life sustaining planets with 500 million year 'quiet periods' without massive gamma ray bombardments was not likely, not even predictable.

Please, before poo pooing the work of folks at reasons.org go and do some reading and listening. Dr. Ross has several books now available to help you along in this discovery process. I can tell you, the information was an eye opener for me.

Dr Ross is an astrophysicist. Perhaps what you have not plugged into your calculus is the very narrow window of conditions (and timing is a major factor) necessary for higher life forms to develop on a planet with rudimentary life on it, and to go to the level of contemplative life (intelligent seekers) is even more astonishing. It became popular to use statistics (the Drake equation), without applied science, and the notion that the odds are in favor of life popping up all over the universe was popularized. Applying science methods to 'false' the statistical vagaries leads to a very different set of conclusions

So, statistics are okay to use as long as conclusion is that the odds of life are vanishingly low? I don't look to astrophysicists regarding the likelihood of life's arising. Nor did I bring it up.

The Cycle of Cosmic Catastrophes:
Flood, Fire, and Famine
in the History of Civilization
by Richard Firestone,
Allen West, and
Simon Warwick-Smith

Life had to start some where first.. Why not here?..
Could be theres a use for this Universe that hasnt even started yet..
i.e. that human life here is a qualifing phase for future tasks..

That the future maybe even current heaven will be a tangible expanded experience of the "Garden of Eden".. Except the the real Garden is so big the human mind csnnot rightly concieve of it.. Populating this planet is and has been one thing fraught with precious experience of what not to do.. So that populating the Universe can done with minimun error..

As spirits maybe we can move thru the Universe much faster than "light".. and monitor and guide cultures thru periods fraught is all kinds of possible errors.. What cultures?.. Cultures not even created yet.. Cultures not hampered by Satan but guided by beneficial spirits instead.. All kinds of creatures both untelligent and not.. Evolving to and though spiritual growth then they can be added as spiritual monitors also, some of them..

Why such a big Universe?.. That may be what "heaven" is all about.. Not a fixing of mans errors but a continuation of the grand plan.. You know, "BE fruitful and multiply".. On a scale that beggars description.. Humans usually have such small eyes.. for observation..

The universe was not created to put life on but one world.

The universe is teeming with life. Life is as much a part of the “physics” of the universe as heat, ligth, gravity.

Life is the reason for the universe to exist.

Ross just won’t let his ego get out of the way of common sense.

John

The problem with your assumptions is that as much as we profess to, we don’t KNOW what conditions life needs to exist. We have one single solitary data point. We now know that planets seem to be relatively common. But our current methods can’t do much more than give us a probability cloud of their orbit around their home star, let alone exact masses and surface conditions.

What we need to do is actually get more data. We need higher resolution telescopes, and unmanned missions to all stars within 10 light years. In order to do that we need a proof of concept of various advanced propulsion technologies, such as the Bussard Ramjet. Not to mention fusion rockets (without the ramjet) and various other high specific impulse methods.

I’m going to have to scan the chart in my copy of Space Propulsion Analysis and Design, but basically if you have a high enough specific impulse rocket, you can have the first data from Alpha Centauri within 15 years, accelerating at 0.1g for 5 years, before decelerating at 0.1g for the same amount of time. Using the same scheme, we can have data from Tau Ceti (11.8 light years distant) at 38 years from launch.

Between the distances of Alpha Centauri and Tau Ceti, there are 17 known star systems. Quite a few of which are known to have planets. So we need 19 probes with the same capability and we have mission durations from 15 to 38 years. Probably up to 50 if you want a decent amount of data from each probe.

A few issues that need to be taken care of:
1) NASA needs to get over it’s fear of launching a mission in multiple parts.
2) The US public has to support this.
3) The US government has to agree with the people.
4) A few minor technical hurdles need to be cleared.

If we don’t find evidence of Earth-like planets within 11.8 light years, well I still wouldn’t be convinced that life is all that rare. Life doesn’t have to look, act, or exist like it does here on Earth. This is just one of at least two possible conditions of life.

Now we get in to the possibilities of silicon-based life forms...that gets interesting.