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.

[–] towerful@programming.dev 1 points 5 months ago (3 children)

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

[–] HumanPenguin@feddit.uk 1 points 5 months ago (2 children)

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.

[–] towerful@programming.dev 1 points 5 months ago

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"

load more comments (1 replies)