Jump to content

Alien life in Universe: Scientists say finding it is 'only a matter of time'

studiot

By studiot
in Science News

 Share

Recommended Posts

studiot

studiot

Posted
Posted (edited)
Quote

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-66950930

 

Many astronomers are no longer asking whether there is life elsewhere in the Universe.

The question on their minds is instead: when will we find it?

Many are optimistic of detecting life signs on a faraway world within our lifetimes - possibly in the next few years.

And one scientist, leading a mission to Jupiter, goes as far as saying it would be "surprising" if there was no life on one of the planet's icy moons.

Nasa's James Webb Space Telescope (JWST) recently detected tantalising hints at life on a planet outside our Solar System - and it has many more worlds in its sights.

Numerous missions that are either under way or about to begin mark a new space race for the biggest scientific discovery of all time.

"We live in an infinite Universe, with infinite stars and planets. And it's been obvious to many of us that we can't be the only intelligent life out there," says Prof Catherine Heymans, Scotland's Astronomer Royal.

"We now have the technology and the capability to answer the question of whether we are alone in the cosmos."

Are they right?

 

Personally I wonder if they haven't already found it in New York

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-us-canada-66970292

 

p0ghmtsk.jpg

Edited by studiot
1
Moontanman

Moontanman

Posted
Posted

I think life outside the Earth has already been found, a new look at old data mixed with new data makes the first Mars landers look for life in a new light. A growing tide of researchers are of a mind that we misinterpreted the data and the landers detected life after all.  

https://www.space.com/nasa-may-have-unknowingly-found-and-killed-alien-life-on-mars-50-years-ago-scientist-claims

1
paulsutton

paulsutton

Posted
Posted

With regard to if we are alone in the universe,  life can probably mean anything from a single cell organism to something far more complex, up to a complex form of life that is intelligent, sentient and capable of developing the technology to communicate and find life elsewhere.

I believe life is out there,   perhaps some intelligent life has evolved from that.  What we should also perhaps consider is if this life is friendly or hostile,  does it have a sort of prime directive (like on star trek) where contact with a pre warp worlds is not allowed, so they may have a similar rules,  so a benchmark as to who can be contacted and how this should take place.

I am not too sure if the Universe is infinite,  what did the article mean by this exactly. ?

Given we can point a telescope at another world and figure out what the atmosphere is made of,  I wonder what an alien astronomer would make of the earths atmosphere.   I would guess if that world was 100 ly away it would perhaps see our atmosphere was it was 100 years ago. 

I think it is exciting times ahead and a great time to encourage people to study STEM.

Paul

swansont

swansont

Posted
Posted
34 minutes ago, paulsutton said:

believe life is out there,   perhaps some intelligent life has evolved from that.  What we should also perhaps consider is if this life is friendly or hostile,  does it have a sort of prime directive (like on star trek) where contact with a pre warp worlds is not allowed, so they may have a similar rules,  so a benchmark as to who can be contacted and how this should take place.

Life being out there is a significantly different proposition than encountering it face-to-face (or whatever passes for a face), since that also requires temporal and physical proximity.

2
joigus

joigus

Posted
Posted (edited)

I was gonna say something similar to what Swanson said. I suspect subtlety is in the word "find."

If "find" = "identify unmistakable telltale signature of", then I think I understand what those scientists are saying, and I wouldn't be totally shocked.

Edited by joigus
minor correction
mistermack

mistermack

Posted
Posted

Finding signs of life outside of the Solar System would be interesting, but irrelevant, as far as we are concerned. A bit like finding that the centre of Jupiter was made of diamond. Very interesting, but you could never have any contact with it.

The time-frames for travel to other stars is pretty mind-blowing when you start to look at the practicalities. So the extra-terrestrial life that might be of more than academic interest is pretty much confined to the Solar System. 

Since we regularly get bits of Mars landing on Earth as meteorites, it's not impossible that life here was seeded from earlier life on Mars. Or from elsewhere unknowns. It could even be that life was floating around dormant in rocks from previous star systems, that eventually formed the Solar System as we know it. We think that life started about 4 billion years ago, here on Earth, but it could have started 10 billion years ago, or more, on much earlier planets. That's why they are so exited about the recent asteroid samples brought back to Utah. There might be primitive life in them, from earlier worlds.

That's also a reason to be nervous about the samples. They don't stress the possibility publicly, but there could be something in it that could be lethal to current life on Earth. Highly unlikely, but not impossible. 

studiot

studiot

Posted
  • Author
Posted
5 hours ago, paulsutton said:

 

Given we can point a telescope at another world and figure out what the atmosphere is made of,  I wonder what an alien astronomer would make of the earths atmosphere.   I would guess if that world was 100 ly away it would perhaps see our atmosphere was it was 100 years ago. 

 

 

 

For the purposes of identifying/observing or communicating with life, intelligent or otherwise the universe available is not infinite.

Anything material beyond a certain distance is forever unavailable/inaccessible to us on account of the expansion of the universe.
The reverse is also true that they can't access any of our space either.

 

Perhaps one of the astrophysicists can put a ficure to the size of this universe, I can't remember it offhand.

 

dimreepr

dimreepr

Posted
Posted
21 hours ago, studiot said:

Are they right?

No, it's not a matter of time, it's a matter of probability and there's a very bloody big chance (astronomical), that we'll never see it...

MJ kihara

MJ kihara

Posted
Posted
21 hours ago, paulsutton said:

life can probably mean anything from a single cell organism to something far more complex, up to a complex form of life that is intelligent, sentient

Yes of course and it doesn't need to be based on life on Earth biochemistry nor it's DNA/RNA system.

16 hours ago, studiot said:

Anything material beyond a certain distance is forever unavailable/inaccessible to us on account of the expansion of the universe.

That's why I like sticking on speculation section.

Moontanman

Moontanman

Posted
Posted
21 hours ago, mistermack said:

Finding signs of life outside of the Solar System would be interesting, but irrelevant, as far as we are concerned. A bit like finding that the centre of Jupiter was made of diamond. Very interesting, but you could never have any contact with it.

The time-frames for travel to other stars is pretty mind-blowing when you start to look at the practicalities. So the extra-terrestrial life that might be of more than academic interest is pretty much confined to the Solar System. 

Since we regularly get bits of Mars landing on Earth as meteorites, it's not impossible that life here was seeded from earlier life on Mars. Or from elsewhere unknowns. It could even be that life was floating around dormant in rocks from previous star systems, that eventually formed the Solar System as we know it. We think that life started about 4 billion years ago, here on Earth, but it could have started 10 billion years ago, or more, on much earlier planets. That's why they are so exited about the recent asteroid samples brought back to Utah. There might be primitive life in them, from earlier worlds.

That's also a reason to be nervous about the samples. They don't stress the possibility publicly, but there could be something in it that could be lethal to current life on Earth. Highly unlikely, but not impossible. 

It rains diamonds in Uranus... I just couldn't help myself. 🙄

3 hours ago, dimreepr said:

No, it's not a matter of time, it's a matter of probability and there's a very bloody big chance (astronomical), that we'll never see it...

Why? ET life is probable in our solar system, why would we never see it? 

Moontanman

Moontanman

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, dimreepr said:

What makes you think that?

The conditions for life exist all over the solar system, IMHO where life can form it forms, the swiftness it appeared on earth after the earth formed suggests life forms easily and the detections on Mars suggests there is life on Mars afterall. 

joigus

joigus

Posted
Posted

Don't forget prokaryotes and eukaryotes are worlds apart in almost every sense conceivable.

If I had to bet, I'd say life that's similar in organizational level to prokaryotes is relatively common in the universe. But eukaryotes are a completely different kettle of fish, my friend.

It took many eons, ( a whole boring billion years at least) for them to appear when Earth already looked like there was gonna be nothing but bacteria and archaea forever and a day. This concept of deep time takes a while of ordinary human thinking time to sink in.

The most likely thing out there is some kind of mush, just because the most likely thing around here is some kind of mush. The world we see now is anecdotal in comparison.

1
Genady

Genady

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, joigus said:

worlds apart in almost every sense conceivable

I think it's an exaggeration. They are different in many respects. Perhaps, there were other forms, different, mixed, and intermediate, that did not survive for us to know them.

joigus

joigus

Posted
Posted

I would rephrase "worlds apart in many senses". Maybe "in almost every sense conceivable" is too much.

My point is: It took about 20% of the age of the Earth to get to something like eukaryotes that was sure-footed enough in evolutionary terms when prokaryots already had more than a foothold. Which must mean higher-organization is not easy to come by.

Moontanman

Moontanman

Posted
Posted
On 10/2/2023 at 10:45 AM, joigus said:

Don't forget prokaryotes and eukaryotes are worlds apart in almost every sense conceivable.

If I had to bet, I'd say life that's similar in organizational level to prokaryotes is relatively common in the universe. But eukaryotes are a completely different kettle of fish, my friend.

It took many eons, ( a whole boring billion years at least) for them to appear when Earth already looked like there was gonna be nothing but bacteria and archaea forever and a day. This concept of deep time takes a while of ordinary human thinking time to sink in.

The most likely thing out there is some kind of mush, just because the most likely thing around here is some kind of mush. The world we see now is anecdotal in comparison.

Ants rule the world. we are just onlookers. 

joigus

joigus

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Moontanman said:

Ants rule the world. we are just onlookers. 

Yes, they'll probably still be here after we're long gone.

1
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.