this post was submitted on 06 Jun 2024
67 points (100.0% liked)
Space
7313 readers
8 users here now
News and findings about our cosmos.
Subcommunity of Science
This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Hmm not so sure.
Hear me out. I am not actually saying it is alians. Just questioning that it is not is the logical conclusion of occams razer.
First remember we have 0 idea atm. So occams assumes the simplist explanation is correct.
But over the past couple of decades. The number of planets we have identified has grown hugly.
We only recently gained the ability to detect anything earth sized. But hav already found several.
Evidence is indication that the number of potential planets that are capable of housing life is far from low. Even if we are taking one in a million planets able. Most scientists interested in the field now agree life existing somewhere is more likely then earth being unique for some reason.
So complexity wise. Other life having evolved and developed radio. Is no more complex then some unknown answer. In fact the idea that it is impossible to be alian life is more complex then the idea that it is possible.
Once we have more information. Things will likely change quickly. And I lack the optimism to claim its likely alians.
But occams razer wise. We have evidence of life creating radio waves and transmitting them into space. As we do it a lot. Where as some totally unknown thing we have never seen up to now is a little more complex as a solution.
The simplest explanation is a new kind of star, or a new kind of star cycle.
We have seen interesting radio signals before, they have all been explained by some sort of star behaviour.
The simplest explanation is NOT the evolution of an entire other species that survives all the way through to advanced tech to send radio signals.
That make a huge huge religion level assumption. That creats so much complexity to throw occam out ass a viable answer.
Is earth unique.
Without assuming the greatest abundance of evidence we have is unique. Then no occams razer is in no way able to make the existance of other planets having reached a similar status as complex.
I'll repeat again. I in no way think it is. I just challenge that occam is a viable evidence it is not.
As assuming earth is more complex then any other phenomenon in space. Requires you to explain why earthonly happened once. In the huge amount of time astrology is able to see. And vast space.
Any answer that comes is almost paradoxical in its level of complexity. Without more evidence.
The complexity involved to have sentient life evolved to the point that it can create radio waves is an astronomically small possibility. Having that coincide with our ability to detect such a thing is even smaller.
The history of "we don't know what this signal is or means" has always been "a new type/phase of star".
The only assumption here is that life is rare, and advanced life is rarer still. Which is supported by all of our science so far
Sorry but those are assumtions based on the idea that the earth is unique.
It is now estimated thatt trillions of plannests wxist in the milky way alone. And abiur 2 million galaxies in the observable universe. We have absolutly no idea how common ir complex the start of life is. Ands assuming we are in anyway unique is not a scientific answer with the knowlesge we have. It is just an assumption.
If life is common and we habe no way of knowing that is not the case. Then we also have ansolutly no way of knowing how common intelegence is.
If intelegence is common. It is reasonable to assume with time radio is an easy invention. Cos lets face it. Based on our data the least intelegent civilization we know off. And the most intelegent discovered it withing 5k years of discovering what we call civalusation.
So again the idea that it is complex for a life to evolve and develop radio is nothing but an assumption. Admitadly a common one. But not one based on any evidence at all. Instead one that is common mainly due to arrogance of mankind assumeing earth must be unique. Just because we lack the tech to see any others.
As for the odds of us developing in time to hear others. Again. The number of plannets and variaty of distances throw that argumebt in the trash.
The estimated number is so great. That no matter when i. The last *estimated" 13.7 billion years we look at. Odd ate high that nillions of planetz exist at the correct distance for us to hear them at some point in the last 100 years of radio until we die as a race.
Again i want to repeat. I am not saying this is such. I have no idea.so to say it is woild be absurdly arragant. And i am far to pessimistic to think such will happen in my lifetime.
I am only sayiing when you remove the (scientifically unviable based on current knowledge) idea that the earth is unique for some reason. Abd add it to the evidence we have found of how many potential planets are in the universe.
Occams Razer is in no way valid to assume it cannot or is provably not alians.
Occam's Razor is not a proof, it's a way to prioritize resources onto more likely hypotheses.
Based on our own experience, over the last 100 years, radio signals have gone from very scarce, to a cacophony of millions of high bandwidth compressed and encrypted emissions that look like random noise from anywhere outside our solar system.
If we consider an intelligence with an evolution similar to our own, "in the clear" transmissions that might've reached Earth 200 years ago, would've gone completely unnoticed, while now we could be getting the sum of their thousands of Tbps of encrypted memes, and be none the wiser.
I'm saying it's false to apply Occam's razor to this scenario and draw a conclusion that this is caused by non-human life.
I'm not assuming earth is unique. There have been many earth-like planets that have been discovered.
I'm not even assuming humans are unique, given all of space-time.
It is extremely unlikely that there exists intelligent life other than humans at this time (or within the window-function of time required for us to receive a transmission from however many million lightyears).
Like, it is vanishingly small. The insane series of events that has lead to an intelligent species being dominant on a planet is ridiculous, to be honest.
In other words, humans are essentially unique at this point in "observable" time.
It is extremely likely it is a natural phenomena that we don't understand, or even equipment malfunction, misinterpretation, miscalculation etc.
We have discovered unknown signals, then learnt what they are. Humans don't know everything.
We have discovered unknown signals, then realised it was a nearby microwave, or a dodgy connection, or whatever. Humans make mistakes.
The simplest explanation in order to not have to deal with a new research project is probably "aliens". But the simplest explanation is "natural phenomena we don't understand yet"