Evidence of the Great Filter

[Vmedvil]

Well, for those of you that don't know what the "Great Filter" is it suggests that the reason why there are fewer aliens out there than Drake's Equation suggests is do to self destruction of Intelligent Species via war before becoming an advanced species. https://en.wikipedia...ki/Great_Filter

 

 

 

Today, I have a interesting video to share that may prove the "Great Filter" about a distress call that could have been a hoax about a alien civilization in another galaxy very near to here that self annihilated about 2.53 million years ago, which I would not doubt given humanity's struggle with the Atomic Bomb, during the cold war, the U.S. and Soviet Union almost committed mutual assured destruction during the Cuban missile crisis of 1962. https://en.wikipedia..._Missile_Crisis

 

 

Here is the video that I call evidence of the Great Filter along with of course the Cuban Missile Crisis with the evidence of planet destroying weapons of 3 types discovered already with the strongest of each of these three being the Tsar Bomb, Molecular Machine, and Agent VX.

 

https://www.youtube....h?v=JP9A7wDKuUE

 

Due to the evidence presented I would like to change the Drake's Equation to include a f_a  variable that would include fraction of civilizations that self annihilate before in the Space Age colonization of a second planet or moon, this being equal to the average chance of nuclear war since the discovery of the atomic bomb. https://www.wagingpe...ty-nuclear-war/ , which based on them being used 2 times in 72 years, that would make a average of 2.7% or (27/1000) as the fraction of self destruction with that of survival being (973/1000), assuming most species are as hostile as humans, the more hostile the intelligent species the higher this would be, of course, the Klingon's from star trek or Krogan's from Mass Effect (Having actually had a nuclear war in the game) would have a much higher chance as a result, but we are mammals, for instance, if the dinosaur's had evolved self awareness then they would have had a much higher chance being reptiles. 

 

 

 

Unfortunately for the dinosaurs 65 million years ago around 100 Teratons of kinetic energy via an asteroid hit the planet causing their extinction before self awareness.

 

 

[Roamer]

he

here's the article mentioned, the youtube video didn't add any relevant information to it.

 

2 hours ago, Vmedvil said:

Unfortunately for the dinosaurs 65 million years ago around 100 Teratons of kinetic energy via an asteroid hit the planet causing their extinction before self awareness.

Dinosaurs aren't the only (famlily of) species to go extinct and humans aren't the first creatures to become self-aware.

 

[Vmedvil]

8 hours ago, Roamer said:

he

here's the article mentioned, the youtube video didn't add any relevant information to it.

 

Dinosaurs aren't the only (famlily of) species to go extinct and humans aren't the first creatures to become self-aware.

 

That is funny even the article on the paper said the wrong amount of time it would take light to travel from Andromeda galaxy to here, 80,000 years, now I know that is false but is the actual report correct from Dr. Kulakov and NASA? Actually, that calculation chance of self destruction may be closer to 4.1% since there is some evidence that Saddam Hussein used Agent VX against the Kurds during his regime, backing that three times used not just two being Vietnam Agent Orange by the US and Japan nuclear strikes by the US or at least President Bush jr. believed that.

Edited October 20, 2017 by Vmedvil

[Moontanman]

At this point we have no idea what the great filter is or even if it is. The step from chemical evolution to biological evolution may well be the great filter and that is already behind us.  Or the step between eukaryotic cells and prokaryotic cells could very well be the great filter as well. There is the step between unicellular and multicellular life as well... 

Personally I think religion is the great filter and we are pressing against it right now. 

It could be that intelligence itself is the problem. I see no reason to assume warfare will kill us all other than the fact that we have had more than one other civilization fail, none were are technologically advanced as we are to be sure, but civilizations rise and fall and then rise again. 

Rapa nui , I think, is the best example of what we are currently doing, but we have the power to garner resources those islanders did not so it remains to be seen if the proliferation of a dominate species destroying biodiversity is survivable. 

It could very well be that colonising space, Failure/Success, is the great filter due to us simply consuming ourselves out of house and home here on earth... 

[HB of CJ]

Or it is likely that planetary conditions necessary for advanced life to evolve are so stringent and exact that planet Earth may be the only act in town right now.  There may have been somebody, (some things?) 2 billion years ago on the other side of the Milky Way and there are beings existing today, (us) and there may be somebody else around 1 billion years from now.  But for now we are it.   We are alone.

[Vmedvil]

6 minutes ago, HB of CJ said:

Or it is likely that planetary conditions necessary for advanced life to evolve are so stringent and exact that planet Earth may be the only act in town right now.  There may have been somebody, (some things?) 2 billion years ago on the other side of the Milky Way and there are beings existing today, (us) and there may be somebody else around 1 billion years from now.  But for now we are it.   We are alone.

 

1 hour ago, Moontanman said:

At this point we have no idea what the great filter is or even if it is. The step from chemical evolution to biological evolution may well be the great filter and that is already behind us.  Or the step between eukaryotic cells and prokaryotic cells could very well be the great filter as well. There is the step between unicellular and multicellular life as well... 

Personally I think religion is the great filter and we are pressing against it right now. 

It could be that intelligence itself is the problem. I see no reason to assume warfare will kill us all other than the fact that we have had more than one other civilization fail, none were are technologically advanced as we are to be sure, but civilizations rise and fall and then rise again. 

Rapa nui , I think, is the best example of what we are currently doing, but we have the power to garner resources those islanders did not so it remains to be seen if the proliferation of a dominate species destroying biodiversity is survivable. 

It could very well be that colonising space, Failure/Success, is the great filter due to us simply consuming ourselves out of house and home here on earth... 

Yes, but the primary idea of the great filter is self destruction not leaps of evolution or habitability of the planets those are already factored into the Drake's equation, but valid points, maybe a combination of all of those being f_bt is truly the "Great Filter" , if f_a where added making that f_bta

Edited October 20, 2017 by Vmedvil

[Moontanman]

46 minutes ago, Vmedvil said:

 

Yes, but the primary idea of the great filter is self destruction not leaps of evolution or habitability of the planets those are already factored into the Drake's equation, but valid points, maybe a combination of all of those being f_bt is truly the "Great Filter" , if f_a where added making that f_bta

From your own link:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Filter

Quote

The Great Filter[edit]

With no evidence of intelligent life other than ourselves, it appears that the process of starting with a star and ending with "advanced explosive lasting life" must be unlikely. This implies that at least one step in this process must be improbable. Hanson's list, while incomplete, describes the following nine steps in an "evolutionary path" that results in the colonization of the observable universe:

The right star system (including organics and potentially habitable planets)

Reproductive molecules (e.g., RNA)

Simple (prokaryotic) single-cell life

Complex (eukaryotic) single-cell life

Sexual reproduction

Multi-cell life

Tool-using animals with big brains

Where we are now

Colonization explosion.

According to the Great Filter hypothesis at least one of these steps — if the list were complete — must be improbable. If it's not an early step (i.e., in our past), then the implication is that the improbable step lies in our future and our prospects of reaching step 9 (interstellar colonization) are still bleak. If the past steps are likely, then many civilizations would have developed to the current level of the human species. However, none appear to have made it to step 9, or the Milky Way would be full of colonies. So perhaps step 9 is the unlikely one, and the only thing that appears likely to keep us from step 9 is some sort of catastrophe or resource exhaustion leading to the impossibility of making the step due to consumption of the available resources (like for example highly constrained energy resources).[6] So by this argument, finding multicellular life on Mars (provided it evolved independently) would be bad news, since it would imply steps 2–6 are easy, and hence only 1, 7, 8 or 9 (or some unknown step) could be the big problem.[4]

Although steps 1–8 have occurred on Earth, any one of these may be unlikely. If the first seven steps are necessary preconditions to calculating the likelihood (using the local environment) then an anthropically biased observer can infer nothing about the general probabilities from its (pre-determined) surroundings.

 

I see nothing to infer that nuking ourselves is the most likely answer. 

 

Actually the Fermi Paradox may very well be faulty due to the fact that we could not detect our own signal leakage at the distance of the nearest star. It is well known now that interstellar gas and dust masks all leakage type signals well before they can get to us. We do not routinely send out greetings at a power level that we could detect ourselves. 

There is also the idea that advanced cultures use power more efficiently as they become more advanced and are even less likely to be detected. Our own planet used to radiate far more leakage than it does now due to advances in technology that use radio waves more effectively.  

Military radar is the exception along with our efforts to radar map things like asteroids and we have detected signals suspiciously like this but such signals have not repeated, and we would not expect them to be repeated often enough to be seen, a prerequisite of our own SETI standards.   

Edited October 20, 2017 by Moontanman

[Vmedvil]

15 minutes ago, Moontanman said:

From your own link:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Filter

 

I see nothing to infer that nuking ourselves is the most likely answer. 

 

Actually the Fermi Paradox may very well be faulty due to the fact that we cannot detect signal leakage from us at the distance of the nearest star. It is well known now that interstellar gas and dust masks all leakage type signals well before they can get to us. We do not routinely send out greetings at a power level that we could detect ourselves. 

Military radar is the exception along with our efforts to radar map things like asteroids and we have detected signals suspiciously like this but such signals have not repeated, and we would not expect them to be repeated often enough to be seen, a prerequisite of our own SETI standards.   

Ya, 9 would appear to be the biggest pain due to the enormous resources required for space travel in Energy and Materials. The solution being Nanotechnology and Nuclear Fusion reactors, I would suggest which both require enormous amounts of time and resources to create, most probably don't make it to Nano-materials and Nuclear Fusion reactors due to having to go through Molecular weapons, Nuclear weapons, and chemical weapons to get there being the source of advanced space flight and the three primary types of WMD, any advance species having advance space flight would have mastered all five of these before their first self sustaining colony. 

Edited October 20, 2017 by Vmedvil

[beecee]

1 hour ago, HB of CJ said:

Or it is likely that planetary conditions necessary for advanced life to evolve are so stringent and exact that planet Earth may be the only act in town right now.  There may have been somebody, (some things?) 2 billion years ago on the other side of the Milky Way and there are beings existing today, (us) and there may be somebody else around 1 billion years from now.  But for now we are it.   We are alone.

If by the only act in town you mean in our region, say within a 1000 or so L/years, then yes we probably are it. But the universe is a big place, perhaps infinite (or at least near infinite  ) and the numbers of stars and potential planets also "near infinite", and with the "stuff of life" found everywhere, I'm pretty certain life has, will and is flourishing elsewhere at various levels of evolution. Time and distance though, as I have said before, are the two great barriers to interplanetary contact, at least for now.

By the way, if we were truly "it"  then it would raise far many more questions then any confirmation of ETL.

[HB of CJ]

How many exo planets have we now discovered?  How many are closely like Earth?  So far, not so good.  Good planets may be very rare.  Good meaning a planet where we human beings could walk around and breath the air and drink the water and not drop dead from any number of things.

But ... yep,  ... there are lots of stars.  Lots of apparent planets but so far none of them are Earth Like.  Would that imply that somewhere someplace sometime somebody else different from us might come about?  Right now we just do not know.  Perhaps such an answer may never be known?

[Moontanman]

7 minutes ago, HB of CJ said:

How many exo planets have we now discovered?  How many are closely like Earth?  So far, not so good.  Good planets may be very rare.  Good meaning a planet where we human beings could walk around and breath the air and drink the water and not drop dead from any number of things.

Do you have a citation that supports that assertion? We have found so many planets already, and we can detect only a small percentage of planets skewed toward gas giants due to them being easier to find,  and yet we find lots of small planets and more than a few that are in the sweet spot called the goldilocks zone. In fact current data seems to show the sweet spot is far larger than we at first suspected. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Circumstellar_habitable_zone

Quote

The habitable zone is also called the Goldilocks zone, a metaphor of the children's fairy tale of "Goldilocks and the Three Bears", in which a little girl chooses from sets of three items, ignoring the ones that are too extreme (large or small, hot or cold, etc.), and settling on the one in the middle, which is "just right".

Since the concept was first presented in 1953,[3] many stars have been confirmed to possess a CHZ planet, including some systems that consist of multiple CHZ planets.[4] Most such planets, being super-Earths or gas giants, are more massive than Earth, because such planets are easier to detect. On November 4, 2013, astronomers reported, based on Kepler data, that there could be as many as 40 billion Earth-sized planets orbiting in the habitable zones of Sun-like stars and red dwarfs in the Milky Way.[5][6] 11 billion of these may be orbiting Sun-like stars.[7] Proxima Centauri b, located about 4.2 light-years (1.3 parsecs) from Earth in the constellation of Centaurus, is the nearest known exoplanet, and is orbiting in the habitable zone of its star.[8] The CHZ is also of particular interest to the emerging field of habitability of natural satellites, because planetary-mass moons in the CHZ might outnumber planets.[9]

 

7 minutes ago, HB of CJ said:

But ... yep,  ... there are lots of stars.  Lots of apparent planets but so far none of them are Earth Like.  Would that imply that somewhere someplace sometime somebody else different from us might come about?  Right now we just do not know.  Perhaps such an answer may never be known?

Quote

From the link above:

According to extended habitable zone theory, planetary mass objects with atmospheres capable of inducing sufficient radiative forcing could possess liquid water farther out from the Sun. Such objects could include those whose atmospheres contain a high component of greenhouse gas and terrestrial planets much more massive than Earth (super-Earth class planets), that have retained atmospheres with surface pressures of up to 100 kbar. There are no examples of such objects in the Solar System to study; not enough is known about the nature of atmospheres of these kinds of extrasolar objects, and the net temperature effect of such atmospheres including induced albedo, anti-greenhouse or other possible heat sources cannot be determined by their position in the habitable zone.

http://phl.upr.edu/projects/habitable-exoplanets-catalog

 

 

Quote

 

Current Number of Potentially Habitable Exoplanets

Subterran (Mars-size)	Terran (Earth-size)	Superterran (Super-Earth/Mini-Neptunes)	Total
1	21	30	52

subterran = 0.1 — 0.5 M_E or 0.4 — 0.8 R_E, terran = 0.5 — 5 M_E or 0.8 — 1.5 R_E, superterran = 5 — 10 M_E or 1.5 — 2.5 R_E. M_E = Earth masses, and R_E = Earth radii.

 

---

Conservative Sample of Potentially Habitable Exoplanets

---

This is a list of the exoplanets that are more likely to have a rocky composition and maintain surface liquid water (i.e. 0.5 < Planet Radius ≤ 1.5 Earth radii or 0.1 < Planet Minimum Mass ≤ 5 Earth masses, and the planet is orbiting within the conservative habitable zone). They are represented artistically in the top image.

 

Name	Type	Mass (ME)	Radius (RE)	Flux (SE)	Teq (K)	Period (days)	Distance (ly)	ESI
001. Proxima Cen b	M-Warm Terran	≥ 1.3	0.8 - 1.1 - 1.4	0.66	229	11.2	4.2	0.85
002. TRAPPIST-1 e	M-Warm Terran	0.6	0.9	0.65	229	6.1	39	0.85
003. GJ 667 C c	M-Warm Terran	≥ 3.8	1.1 - 1.5 - 2.0	0.88	247	28.1	22	0.84
004. Kepler-442 b	K-Warm Terran	8.2 - 2.3 - 1.0	1.3	0.70	233	112.3	1115	0.84
005. GJ 667 C f*	M-Warm Terran	≥ 2.7	1.0 - 1.4 - 1.8	0.56	221	39.0	22	0.77
006. Kepler-1229 b	M-Warm Terran	9.8 - 2.7 - 1.2	1.4	0.49	213	86.8	769	0.73
007. TRAPPIST-1 f	M-Warm Terran	0.7	1.0	0.38	200	9.2	39	0.68
008. LHS 1140 b (N)	M-Warm Terran	6.6	1.4	0.41	200	24.7	41	0.68
009. Kapteyn b*	M-Warm Terran	≥ 4.8	1.2 - 1.6 - 2.1	0.43	205	48.6	13	0.67
010. Kepler-62 f	K-Warm Terran	10.2 - 2.8 - 1.2	1.4	0.39	201	267.3	1200	0.67
011. Kepler-186 f	M-Warm Terran	4.7 - 1.5 - 0.6	1.2	0.29	188	129.9	561	0.61
012. GJ 667 C e*	M-Warm Terran	≥ 2.7	1.0 - 1.4 - 1.8	0.30	189	62.2	22	0.60
013. TRAPPIST-1 g	M-Warm Terran	1.3	1.1	0.26	181	12.4	39	0.58

 

[beecee]

27 minutes ago, HB of CJ said:

How many exo planets have we now discovered?  How many are closely like Earth?  So far, not so good.  Good planets may be very rare.  Good meaning a planet where we human beings could walk around and breath the air and drink the water and not drop dead from any number of things.

But ... yep,  ... there are lots of stars.  Lots of apparent planets but so far none of them are Earth Like.  Would that imply that somewhere someplace sometime somebody else different from us might come about?  Right now we just do not know.  Perhaps such an answer may never be known?

It seems Moontanman has shown the misinformation in your post quite nicely. Let me just say that discovering extra solar planets was always going to and always will, find the gas giants and larger planets first, and particularly when close/er to their star. They of course have the greatest gravitational effect on the star (one of the discovery methods) It was only as precision and advanced technological methods improved that we were able to discover more Earth like planets, and that refinement is being updated and improved all the time.

You are correct in your assumption that we do not as yet no if ETL does exist or not, but for the reasons I have given, most scientists certainly think it does. In fact many now believe some confirmation of ETL will be forthcoming within the next decade or two.

[HB of CJ]

None of the so called Earth Like exo plants could support Earth life.  Probably not even Earth Like life.  None of them as far as we know could support a Earth Colony., which was my lessor point.  My major point is we have not yet found that close Earth Cousin.   And we may never.

But ... like already said before me better and thank you, that does not preclude the possibility of non like Human intelligence developing some place else.  It is just so far with what we know, the odds of such remain very remote.  Right now a possibility but a long shot.  This may change.

Hopefully. 

 

 

 

[Moontanman]

1 hour ago, HB of CJ said:

None of the so called Earth Like exo plants could support Earth life.  Probably not even Earth Like life.  None of them as far as we know could support a Earth Colony., which was my lessor point.  My major point is we have not yet found that close Earth Cousin.   And we may never.

Can you give a citation to go with that assertion? I doubt very much if we will find a planet exactly like Earth anywhere. A rocky planet with water is about as close as you can expect. I personally doubt if we'll ever colonise other planets, far too many variables would have to sort out just right and then you have the problem of any native life, viruses and other pathogens, might very well overcome earth life. Coming into contact with an alien biosphere is something that could be dangerous and judging from the way life on earth exchanges genetic material via virus infection and other virus interactions the effects of an alien biosphere might not become apparent for generations. 

 

1 hour ago, HB of CJ said:

But ... like already said before me better and thank you, that does not preclude the possibility of non like Human intelligence developing some place else.  It is just so far with what we know, the odds of such remain very remote.  Right now a possibility but a long shot.  This may change.

Hopefully. 

Any and all alien intelligences will be non human. Do you expect humans to evolve on another planet? 

It is important to point out that there may very well be planets far more "life" friendly than the earth is. Earth life has evolved to fit Earth, on another planet gases that are poisonous to earth life H2S, CO, NH3 etc could be produced and used far more widely than on Earth. 

Now for a mention of my personal dog and pony show... It is, even with the technology we currently have, relatively easy to build artificial habitats circling the sun from material already in space that colonising planets like Mars might take so long as to be impractical. I think advanced beings probably would not star travel to colonise a planet that is not perfectly earth like. Easier to create earth like habitats from water and carbon containing asteroids like Ceres, or Jupiter's Trojan asteroids than it will be to star travel... In fact orbiting habitats can be made to enclose many square miles and you can put whatever you want in it. Such habitats could, within the time it takes to travel to one star, be built to house many times the populations of earth, one small habitat at a time... If you want I can point you toward a youtube account that deals with things like megastructures and stay within the lines of reality...  

[beecee]

4 hours ago, HB of CJ said:

None of the so called Earth Like exo plants could support Earth life.  Probably not even Earth Like life.  None of them as far as we know could support a Earth Colony., which was my lessor point.  My major point is we have not yet found that close Earth Cousin.   And we may never.

Your rather pessimistic attitude is just rhetoric.  We have not yet measured any atmospheric content in the many Earth like planets already found as far as I know. In any case oxygen and water could be produced by some future colony on another planet. You are aware are you not, that  the elements that we find in our region of the galaxy/universe, are the same elements generally found in any other region of the universe/galaxy? As you say, we are not sure whether they could or could not support life, except that some are within the Goldilocks zone where liquid water can exist. We may not as yet no if they can support life as we know it, but we also do not know that they can't. Your major point is wrong, and the fact that the universe both in extent and content is rather big, along with the evidence of Earth like planets already found, makes you final claim that we may never find any Earth like planet more empty rhetoric at worst or just plain sad pessimism at best.

Quote

 

But ... like already said before me better and thank you, that does not preclude the possibility of non like Human intelligence developing some place else.  It is just so far with what we know, the odds of such remain very remote.  Right now a possibility but a long shot.  This may change.

Hopefully.  

 

It's a big big universe out there, with the stuff of life being everywhere we look. While we certainly as yet have no empirical evidence of ETL, the likelyhood of that would indeed be strange and raise many more questions then when we do finally find life. 

[Vmedvil]

4 hours ago, Moontanman said:

Can you give a citation to go with that assertion? I doubt very much if we will find a planet exactly like Earth anywhere. A rocky planet with water is about as close as you can expect. I personally doubt if we'll ever colonise other planets, far too many variables would have to sort out just right and then you have the problem of any native life, viruses and other pathogens, might very well overcome earth life. Coming into contact with an alien biosphere is something that could be dangerous and judging from the way life on earth exchanges genetic material via virus infection and other virus interactions the effects of an alien biosphere might not become apparent for generations. 

 

Any and all alien intelligences will be non human. Do you expect humans to evolve on another planet? 

It is important to point out that there may very well be planets far more "life" friendly than the earth is. Earth life has evolved to fit Earth, on another planet gases that are poisonous to earth life H2S, CO, NH3 etc could be produced and used far more widely than on Earth. 

Now for a mention of my personal dog and pony show... It is, even with the technology we currently have, relatively easy to build artificial habitats circling the sun from material already in space that colonising planets like Mars might take so long as to be impractical. I think advanced beings probably would not star travel to colonise a planet that is not perfectly earth like. Easier to create earth like habitats from water and carbon containing asteroids like Ceres, or Jupiter's Trojan asteroids than it will be to star travel... In fact orbiting habitats can be made to enclose many square miles and you can put whatever you want in it. Such habitats could, within the time it takes to travel to one star, be built to house many times the populations of earth, one small habitat at a time... If you want I can point you toward a youtube account that deals with things like megastructures and stay within the lines of reality...  

 

Ya, they may have different element bases and biochemistry like how they think that they may have found bubbles of vinyl cyanide that could form a different biochemistry's cell membrane. Vinyl Cyanide Bubbles proteinlike on Titan. Carbon based in the form that we are used to is unlikely, They DNA may be different bases, they proteins different chains of amino acids. Most likely they are immune to our organic pathogens of RNA + DNA due to base pair synthesis and vice versa incompatibility. Alternate Biochemistry Theory

 

Humans are in the process of making a alternate biochemistry silicon and diamond nanobots all that is needed is a slightly smaller electron lithography to make them to nano-scale right now processing chips are made with 36 to 12 nm electron beams about 1 nm would be needed for nanobots to have filters the size of molecules for respiration. 

 

Molecular Filter

Edited October 22, 2017 by Vmedvil

[Moontanman]

13 hours ago, Vmedvil said:

 

Ya, they may have different element bases and biochemistry like how they think that they may have found bubbles of vinyl cyanide that could form a different biochemistry's cell membrane. Vinyl Cyanide Bubbles proteinlike on Titan. Carbon based in the form that we are used to is unlikely, They DNA may be different bases, they proteins different chains of amino acids. Most likely they are immune to our organic pathogens of RNA + DNA due to base pair synthesis and vice versa incompatibility. Alternate Biochemistry Theory

I was not considering a non standard base pairs and other differences but you make a good point. It is a point of debate as to whether or not alien diseases would affect us, I would suggest a less extreme approach but we have no data points to guide us at this time. 

Life on Titan interests me greatly, if there is life on Titan it would be a second genesis of life in one solar system. This would indicate statistically life must be very common or at least wildly more diverse than we know.   

 

13 hours ago, Vmedvil said:

Humans are in the process of making a alternate biochemistry silicon and diamond nanobots all that is needed is a slightly smaller electron lithography to make them to nano-scale right now processing chips are made with 36 to 12 nm electron beams about 1 nm would be needed for nanobots to have filters the size of molecules for respiration. 

 

Molecular Filter

Unless they reproduce with variation they could not be said to be alive but it is a good point as well...