Brian Cox - Solving The Fermi Paradox: Intelligent Alien Life in Our Galaxy
Vložit
- čas přidán 7. 05. 2024
- Brian Cox - Solving The Fermi Paradox: Intelligent Alien Life in Our Galaxy
Subscribe to Science Time: / sciencetime24
Brian Cox explains the details behind the Fermi Paradox and why we haven't yet found intelligent alien life.
The more interesting kind of life we hope to discover that would change our worldview for ever is multi-cellular life such as plants or animals.
Obviously the most exciting type on the hierarchy of alien life is intelligence. It is estimated that with our current pace of technological growth a civilization can colonize our whole galaxy within 10 million years. And if that is the case...Where is everybody?
Brian Cox also mentions the importance of realizing our value if we are indeed alone in the galaxy.
#universe #fermiparadox #sciencetime - Věda a technologie
Can I get pinned?
You didn’t even finish the video! Lol
Sure ;)
@@ScienceTime24 nah that’s false.
there is a Legendary story to tell
it is a noble one
there is a Legendary story to tell
there is a Legendary story to tell it is a story about bravery and fearlessness
there is a story that must be told it is a story about one of the chosen ones
i have a story to tell
i am mace windu
i had many mentors all of them were wise
.
what do you mean. what would make you think that there is something wrong with what i said did you see kit fisto spelling off a mentor who was like a brother to me once told me “if we don’t stop barack scumbama now he could become a threat later”
“if we don’t stop barack scumbama now he could become a threat and a danger to our later generation our loved ones.”
-teleportdinero
i’m not saying that i agree with you but then again I’m not always correct either I remember a time back in the 80s when I was growing up things were different back then these youngsters today what makes you think that? It’s all right to disagree with people I remember when I was a young man growing up in the 80s in America it was a different time then back then we used to call each other this is the best I’ve seen from you guys in a while
was about to say the same exact thing
m
“if we don’t stop barack scumbama now he could become a threat and a danger to our later generation our loved ones.”
m
m
hi
hi
m
-teleportdinero
m
m
mm
mm
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
m
everybody have a blessed day.🙏🏻 and stay safe
@@ScienceTime24 merry Christmas, and thanks 😁
@@ScienceTime24The great filter probably is self destruction. Even if it’s not it’s definitely the most ironic. Life spends millions of years evolving into these complex multi cellular organisms just to destroy itself over and over.
If Brian cox really exists, how come I’ve never met him?
haha smart
If dogs come from wolves, how come there are still wolves? 🤔
He doesn’t find you to be an intelligent creature 😁
@@spicehedge
It was a sarcastic dig at evolution deniers. "If humans evolved from apes, why are there still apes?"
Lol
@@Jaylovescars We didnt evolve from apes though. That`s scientifically inaccurate
No matter how long and hard my brain thinks over this. With the numbers involved, i just can't come to accept that we are alone.
I get where you're coming from. I mean, sure, the requirements necessary for life of any sort are hard to come by, but there does seem to be an awful lot of planets that it is probable that there are many that could have life. Also, life apparently arose pretty early on earth, so surely that's because it's not all that difficult for life to arise given an environment suitable for life, right?
There is a problem with the last part of that though, and that's that mathematically, the random formation of many necessary molecules that are needed to make a functional cell here on earth exceeds the probabilistic resources of the known universe. What that means is that the probability of forming, for example, a useful protein randomly is greater than the number of particle interactions within the known universe given the age of the universe. To overcome that hurdle there would need to be some kind of mechanism capable of reliably producing such molecules to remove the random aspect. Of course there are a few such molecules, so we probably need a few different such mechanisms, but so far, there doesn't seem to be any such mechanisms.
What that means is that either someone or something at the very least guided the process or we just got ridiculously lucky or there's somehow something we aren't able to account for now. If the first, then life existing elsewhere is dependent on the someone or something that guided it here on earth. If the second, then life anywhere rose doesn't have a reasonable chance, if the third, the who knows as we're dealing with something we can't currently conceive of.
I was once like that. But we don't know the PROBABILITY of us, a slightly scientific society. What if that happens not one per galaxy, but once per 10 galaxies? Or, once per 100, a thousand, or just once a million galaxies??? Sure, we might not be the only ones, but the other civilization might be sooooo far away in space (and IN TIME, no-one talks about that one) that it might not matter.
I dont think we are alone but the distances involved and requirements for aligned timeframes make me seriously doubt we will find advanced life forms anytime soon.
Try harder...!! LoL. The number of stars and planets in our galaxy is roughly 10 to the power of 24, the number of stars and planets in the entire universe is about 10 to the power of 57. That is ten followed by 57 zeros, its a huge number. To put that in perspective, a single living plant cell capable of photosynthesis is constructed from the molecular level, to form proteins that are then folded into DNA structures which compose that single cell. The combinations of the constuent components of that cell is 10 to the power of 100, can you grasp the nature of the complexity of life from that number. Can you now understand the mind boggling complexity of intelligent life, of human life. The odds of this randomly occuring in multiple places is next to zero in my humble opinion. It should also put the whole concept of AI into another frame of reference, AI is mostly over hyped nonsense. Computation, no matter how complex or rapid is not consciousness. AI is not a living entity, it cannot think and will never have an idea of its own. When people blabber on about AI, neural networks and neurons just remember the complexity of a single living cell and take it with a grain of salt.
Certainly not the invisible man in the sky that a lot of people believe in.@@gngrwtch9316
This is exactly what I think is the answer to the Fermi paradox, life may be fairly abundant in the universe, but complex intelligent life may be extremely rare, once or twice in an entire galaxy's life kind of rare.
i just can’t see that being true. out of literally hundreds of BILLIONS of planets/moons that could be habitable in a given galaxy you really think complex life only emerges on a couple of them? i understand you have to have a stable environment for a very long time for life to evolve but out of HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS of options there’s just no way there aren’t at least hundreds of intelligent civilizations out there. maybe not like star trek advanced but at least very close to us
@@CallofDutyWarrior15 watch a video on the prisoners paradox.
Cool worlds made a great one.
Or the distances of other galaxies make other life just too far to detect.
Dude.. there is no answer to this or anything else related to this. The Universe is too vast and complex to assume anything about it until whatever it is you think might exist lands in your front yard and knocks on your door.
@@christopherwelch5568 Dude.. you do realize that THEORETICAL physics is based on scientists starting with a hypothesis before they start doing experiments and empirical testing? Not the other way around.
"Person who pushes the nuclear war button might wipe out the meaning in our galaxy."
This hits hard.
This one hits harder: there is no meaning in anything. Thats our human-made concept to deal with the fact that there is no meaning at all. The universe does not need life.
@@ZimCH84 Well meaning in this context is that, we have direction and purpose in our actions, guided by desire or survival or otherwise. Complex life.
Where as cellular life just divides, ie. meaningless.
The possibility a majority of nuclear weapons on Earth would be set off and kill us all, under any circumstance, is zero. Not including the thousands which would fail to even launch due to aging materials, and which are impossible to detonate unless launched, the damage done by such weapons would be just as instantaneous as the calls for peace.
Japan didn't refuse to surrender immediately after the Hiroshima bombing due to some sense of megalomania, but it was mostly from their disbelief that such an event could have happened at all. In a future war involving nukes, nobody will question if such a technology exists. Paris gets nuked? France calls for peace. Moscow gets nuked? Russia calls for peace. Washington DC gets nuked? USA calls for peace.
This would be over quicker than it started not because the bombs had all been launched, or because the entire planet was rendered lifeless, but because everybody would instantly realize, through inescapable survival instincts, how badly they all screwed up.
This is why all nuclear bombs should be destroyed and any country that has one in secret those people that developed and hid them should also be destroyed.
The Silent Hunter who strikes first in the Dark Forest survives.
For me, Brian has nailed it with his observation it can take 4billion years to evolve intelligent life but this also needs a stable environment throughout. I believe this is the reason intelligent life is incredibly rare.
i would not say we are an intelligent lifeform, even if our environment is stable. i would say we are pretty primitive.
I was born Inside the event Horizon of a black hole just like everyone else, we are "Frozen here together" in this time being ...Everything is Frozen into time, the freezing is part of the embedding. People have a bias that a black hole is unlike the world around us
It took Earth 4 billion years because it wasn't very stable. When our organisms learned to breath oxygen, almost ALL other types of cells were poisoned by oxygen and went extinct. It seriously hampered speed of evolution on Earth.
Yeah, finding a microbe is one thing... but a multicelular creature with the power to create and build upon knowledge with the speed homo sapiens has been doing has to be rare. Even on earth it took a few "resets" with asteroids destroying most of the planet for mammals to take charge over dinosaurs. Another big hit and we are back to square one and who knows if there will ever be a species as "intelligent" as homo sapiens ever again before the sun dies.
Yet at the same time UFO's are flying everywhere, excuse me alien life is everywhere
Always a pleasure listening to Prof Dr Brian Cox - he simply explains best complex topics to people like myself, not being educated in science & sophisticated maths
... and the hair ...
Cox forgets that not even a single cell life will be found on Mars. We here are alone period.
@@shasha1873 lol
@@shasha1873 Karl, we may agree on the basis 'We don't know, yet.' Let the scientists & probes do their work - once they collated & evaluated the data they conclude accordingly. Cheers anyway.
@@shasha1873 but ... the hair ...
For me, the most frightening idea is, what if there really is no way to travel faster than light? What if traveling through wormholes etc. is just beyond the reach of biological life reach? Perhaps there are thousands of advanced civilizations trapped in their home systems who realized the limits of physics and knowing there is no way to reach other star systems not mentioning other galaxies?
Thats what I always think about. Faster than light travel may not be possible for a living organism
Yes. For me the biggest obstacle is distance. It's mind boggling when you really think about it.
It may be. But what about digital organisms. Perhaps that's the answer. We eventually shed our physical forms.
The hope lies in the fact that you cannot define the reach of biological life. If you went back 1 thousand years and showed someone a rocket, they’d think you’re god. Similarly, if a more advanced civilisation showed us how to travel faster than the speed of light, manipulate gravity, and travel through worm holes, we’d also think they’re god like creatures. Biological advancement to these stages seems hopeful assuming life can be sustained and stable for a prolonged period of time to make the necessary advancements, hence why the great filter is a popular theory - the idea that the nature of the universe prohibits life from being able to get to this point entirely, or we end up killing ourselves through nuclear warfare etc before we can get to it.
@@mullenio4200 Still doesn't change the problem of distance.
Honestly, I could listen to the Brians Cox and Greene speak all day about neat space stuff. They both have a knack for dumbing down complex and complicated scientific issues in a way that's both informative and entertaining to laypersons. I like that.
To me, it's more likely the case that even if there are space travelling civilizations, the universe is so big, it's very unlikely they've come to our neighbourhood.
Have you seen star trek?
Yeh faster than light travel may very well be the thing that prevents alien life from contacting anything. Even if we could go faster than the speed of light, it would still take us years to travel to nearby stars.
@@aussieas6655 Imagine this other civilization also had a prime directive. Only it is to seek and destroy life, for any and all other life forms have the potential to become a threat to their own existence.
@@mgntstr I doubt that would be likely as there would be no gain from having no other life in the galaxy. Plus you would never be the "bully on the block" because somewhere in another galaxy someone else would just vaporize you if they are more advanced and you are a threat.
@@aussieas6655 Yes the GAIN would be securing your survival. If your civilization could develop stealth planet/solar system killers, others could too.
Update:
As of 1 December 2022, there are 5,284 confirmed exoplanets in 3,899 planetary systems, with 847 systems having more than one planet. Most of these were discovered by the Kepler space telescope.
Yes, but they're mostly giant worlds, orbiting close to their parent star, and often too far away to be of interest. The Transiting Exoplanet Survey Satellite (TESS) hasn't found as many exoplanets as originally hoped, but those that it has found are more Earthlike and closer - and we're still going through the data.
@@baldieman64 true but there will be smaller planets too that have not been discovered there
It's been a whole month later.
Can we get an update on those numbers as of 1 January 2023?
Glad to see I'm not the only one that actually keeps up.. 'we've discovered well over 3000 exoplanets' makes me wonder how long ago this video was produced and how out of date it truly is.
@@michaelbaker5395 I'm near certain it is over "5000" now!
It is actually over '5297' to be more precise... although I suspect it is over that number?
We would be very arrogant if were to believe we are the only, or oldest intelligent life in our galaxy.
That’s really hit hard 😮 I just stopped for a moment and think about it. Brilliant video from Brian.
Trying to fathom that there are 400 billion or so stars in one galaxy and trillions of galaxies and that this number might be but a tiny fraction of the universe since we likely can only observe one small piece of it is mind-blowing. And then to consider that we may be the most complex life form ever developed seems impossible. Yet the evidence as presented here strongly suggests that life is so fragile that whatever does develop indeed is destroyed long before it can conquer interstellar communication.
I believe that by the time we have a concrete answer, we may not need that answer at all. lol
True, the solar system is like 5 bil years old which is already almost half of the age of the universe and yet we haven't even gone interstellar. Intelligent life takes too long to evolve to the point that we are still on an early stage of the universe's life to grow such life.
@@uptrade8507smoke and mirrors? Doesn’t add up? According to your keen, honed and perfected intuition? 😂😂😂😂😂😂 thanks for the laugh
@@damonm3 probably meaning a simulation.
And according to religion
The Dark Forest hypothesis is another solution to the Fermi Paradox but is super terrifying.
That fits nicely with idea of the Dawn Hunters , an alpha species that hunts emerging intelligence and snuffs it before it becomes a threat.
It might very well be a huge factor, that intelligent life forms get ..eaten.. by some forms of eaters(alien life forms) when they are developing and before they really grow up to be responsible actors and not sending information out for ex. There is certainly((we are here and we can understand, that life Can form just based on natural world(that is actually everything, no matter what)) life out there and some of it is certainly not friendly.
The idea of earth is the only place with advanced life is a terrify thought .Humans are fucking killing each other like spoiled kids how fragile life is and the planet .
Have you read the “Three bodies” trilogy? The second book is the Dark forest and exploits that hypothesis.
Sure, but how did all the other civilisations find that out?
Brian Cox touched on something I thought of in regards to the Fermi Paradox which is, what if we're the first beings of intelligent life. If that's the case, we wouldn't find anyone doing what we're doing, which is looking for others out there in the universe and sending signals.
The other thought is that of The Great Filter hypothesis. It reminds me a bit of the plot of the Mass Effect games with the Reapers allowing for civilization to build up before they come out of hibernation to destroy and collect all the resources only to then go back and allow it to build up again as apart of a cycle. Now, I'm not say there are aliens like the Reapers out there setting all this up, but it makes you wonder if there's a possible design in intelligent life that never allows for more than one advanced civilization to be alive and active at a time. Maybe it's apart of the laws of the universe that in order for the next intelligent life to emerge, the current one must destroy itself? What if we're an experiment for something much more omnipotent?
If that's the case, that would suggest something greater out there that's programmed this rule. A creator of sorts. It's not something i've really believed or even thought too much about, but it's something i've come to take into consideration with all these conversations. No one really knows.
I love listening to Brian explain things.
Very interesting to know. And how shameful it would be to completely destroy ourselves over what amounts to greed.
Yes all about greed. That will bring the human race to extinction. Look how far we’ve gone since the industrial revolution. The human race had so much potential. Whatever species takes over our planet i.e. insects they will last much longer than us humans ever did. I’m not worried about the world the planet she will recycle everything we’ve done. 99.9% of everything that ever lived is extinct just like we’re destined to. Most billionaires don’t care about people or the environment. The people without the money and the power seem to have great ideas too bad they’re not in charge. I’m glad I never had kids. I’m enjoying the ride while I can. Like George Carlin‘s I got no skin in the game. I’m just watching the freak show. We have or should I say had the perfect planet. Humans cannot live without polluting the environment. The dinosaurs were around for 600 million years or so a lot longer than us humans. An asteroid kill them but us humans being more civilized has affected every square inch of this planet for the worse. I cannot imagine this planet 200 years from today. I believe I have lived in the best of times and worse. I’m 62 years old.
Its not even greed, its ego
Cern is working on it.
Maybe that’s the inevitable fate of all intelligent life?
As long as we continue to tolerate despots and tyrants, we will live in fear. There are several people for whom the world would be better off without. And this doesn't just apply to the leaders of countries either. How many of us got bullied at school just because we were smaller and or smarter than others. Do we really need them? I seriously don't think so. Especially when the bully has a nuclear arsenal and the mental instability to use it. Putin, the leaders of North Korea and China all just need to die.
This stuff is always interesting... i enjoy it and sorta understand some of it... unlike some i admit its extremely hard to fathom and grasp all of it beyond a certain extent... so i just enjoy and go with it...
The astronomical scale of space/time itself resolves the paradox in my mind. Given the distances involved and the extremely short time we humans have been around [and will likely be around], for all intents and purposes we are alone.
What you also have to consider is something that wasn't mentioned here, the possibility that there may be alien life that could be so unlike us humans living on their planet which falls way outside of the habitable zone of their sun.
Just because we humans have our habitable boundaries set at a certain distance doesn't mean all alien life must have the same boundaries.
Great point Prof. Cox makes at the end. Imagine being that person who threatens the destruction of the only life in the galaxy.......
It's a terrifying thought!
@@ThiefOfNavarrewhy is it terrifying? If there is no life there is no one lamenting. That may sound cold but it’s simply logical. The universe has value because we exist. The universe is hostile and indifferent and we shouldn’t exist. In fact even the universe shouldn’t exist because the parameters of universal constants exist on the proverbial knife-edge. Were they only but a minuscule different, the Big Bang would have either imploded back into itself or would have expanded so rapidly no matter would have ever formed. So sentiment is nice but once intelligent life is extinct so sentiment will be also.
Agree shows humans still need to evolve .
Joe Biden is doing his best to make it happen
Here are a few things I've thought about but never heard mentioned--so it's entirely possible that they are irrelevant.
1. What generation star is necessary before there are enough heavy elements to form a planet? We need things like iron, carbon, etc. before we can have planets, much less life. That requires at least a few generations of stars burning out and exploding. How long would that take? Perhaps it's only around now that conditions are right in the galaxy (concerning the amount of appropriate elements) for something like us to evolve. Assuming, of course, that most planets would be subject to the same problems "we" had (asteroid/comet impacts, mass extinctions, etc.)
2. Is there a habitable zone for the galaxy itself? I've read that radiation levels go up the closer you get to the center of the galaxy. Perhaps life, complex or otherwise, can only exist in the outer rims (to borrow a Star Wars term). This would reduce the number of habitable star systems, perhaps by a great deal.
3. Perhaps we haven't detected radio signals because they attenuate (right word?) as they propagate from the source. From what I understand, the signals we send out get weaker and weaker because they are sent in all directions and mostly meant to be received on our planet, not sent out into space. Furthermore, the signal would be spread out, right? The planet, and thus the source, is moving around the star and the star, in turn, is moving through the galaxy. Could it be that a weak signal, flying by at whatever speed the planet is moving, would be missed, if it made it here at all?
Again, smarter people than me work on this. It's possible (likely?) that I haven't heard about these issues because they don't matter. Or maybe I don't read enough. LOL
1. our sun is a 3rd generation star. Lead is created from radioactive half-life decay. Our sun can't do much fusion past Iron.
2. The center of the galaxy is a super massive black hole.
Is not the radiation of the black hole but the density of stars all emitting solar radiation.
3. radio signals dissipate at a ratio of (4*pi*r^2), so our radio bubble on earth is 200 light years is radius but is so thin it is null to the microwave background radiation. Also, this assumes that other life discovered/invented radio transmission. They may not have ears to understand audio waves.
Hope this helps.
"smarter" people may have been working on the problem, but I can guarantee you the people who have proposed most of the commonly-accepted solutions to the Fermi Paradox never took any of that into consideration. All it takes is a little bit of imagination and logical thinking and basic understanding of statistics and the scientific method in general to quickly understand that we simply don't have enough data available to be able to form any kind of conclusion yet.
Honestly, the Paradox itself is a joke and most of the solutions for it are as well. It makes too many assumptions, there are far too many unknown variables, and our sample size, timeframe, and general frame of reference are all incredibly narrow, skewed, and small. If the methodolgy of the Fermi Paradox was applied to literally any other field of science it would get laughed at and shut down before it ever had a chance to gain any kind of traction at all. It's terrible, horrible, no-good very-bad science at its finest.
Out of all the planets in the universe, how many could be aware that we exist? Because of the limited speed of light, aliens that are too far would see the planets as it was 10000 years ago and might think it's not really interesting to visit...
Great video, wonderful edutainment 🙏🏽🌌 Cheers 😃
If I had the opportunity to have a one-on-one meeting with anyone in the world, Professor Brian Cox would be that person!!
Only livin', or dead one, too?
He was my mates lecturer at The university of Manchester. None of believed him so he got a photo with him after one of his lectures haha
Brian Cox is just a biased atheist. Not really an objective scientist anymore 😞 I used to be a massive fan as well. It’s a shame that he has such strong biases, which prevents him from being objective.
Beautifully explained. I think that we have another Carl Sagan just Younger and with a British accent.
Youthful looking Brian Cox is actually older than Sagan was when he wrote Cosmos (54 compared with 46)..
Excellent video. Brian Cox explains things so well. Thank you
its all a game, they make it up as they go along
this is ana amzing video and it made me think of so many things i didn't even think of before
it also inspired a story id love to read but possibly can't write
a story about a species in the universe that eventually realizes they are the first space faring, most advanced life form in the universe but with small hints they aren't the first but one of the first
basically about a species that encapsulates the fermi paradox and once they realize it what do they do from then on and what their purpose is
I really hate to think that we are the only planet in the galaxy where "intelligence" exists. I'm somewhat skeptical that it even does here, especially after I read a newspaper.
Only planet in the galaxy?! Imagine being the only galaxy in the _entire universe_ where “intelligence” exists.
@@Eric-469 How profoundly lonely that existence would be. And what a waste of space all of that up there. Just empty, cold, timeless worlds.
Every time I hear somebody try to play down the intelligence of the human species, I remember that it’s a member of the human species saying that.
@@lawrencedoliveiro9104 and yet we’re the only introspective species.
Yes, reading newspapers is definitely a sign of being unintelligent
The simplest explanation of the Fermi paradox doesn't require machine intelligence or any other extreme reaches. Seems to me the obvious explanation is that for not yet known practical reasons, interstellar travel is functionally impossible. After all, in the last decade or two, we've learned that colonizing the Moon, much less traveling to Mars, are a hundred times more difficult than we used to believe. We don't even know what we don't know about interstellar travel.
One of the wisest comments in almost any YT channel, is what you just made. Thanks for enlightening me on that thought.
Interstellar travel capability, of alien civilization, is not supposed to be needed for Earthlings to detect alien civilization. It is thought that Earthlings could detect alien civilization's electro-magnetic waves, e.g. radio or light. It is also thought that stellar mega-structures of more advanced alien civilizations should be detectable.
@@davidadiwego4608 he's right. Things are millions of generations away. Even if you bump things up from 78,000 of miles per hour spaceship speeds to light speed, and factor in the 10,000 aliens-ish planets predicted, good luck finding a signal from one in the Emptiness of space even if it started transmitting billions of years ago. Nothing is coming or going
@@rawroll1776 Despite the Arthur C Clarke quote, technology isn't magic. A few thousand years don't necessarily make a difference- the knife was invented 100,000 years ago, and we've never improved the basic design, only the materials it's made of- and even then "improvement" is a matter of definition- a flint edge can be sharper than a surgical scalpel.
@@bierce716 what is a knife? A: a cutting tool. Do we have cutting tools that massively out perform knives when extremely tough/delicate cuts are needed? A: yes, lasers.
A flint may be sharper than a scalpel, but scalpels are far more practical. For one, a scalpel can be dropped without bits flying off of it.
Its crazy in our day to day life we do such trivial things. But when you really start thinking on grand scheme of universe. We are equally special and equally negligable and meaningless. Its crazy mind boggling.
Hallelujah. No synthesized voice, no fluff. Plus Brian Cox. Nice.
I have been watching this channel since 2 years , rlly crispy stuff
My own theory is that we are alone. So many random things have to occur for life to emerge, and for it then to jump to complex life, and then further to intelligent life. We are not just rare but we’re unique.
It's not just your theory, it is more probable than not. The vast number of freak accidents and events that have happened, on earth, have led to intelligent life on this planet is almost unfathomable. Perhaps at best, one planet in an entire galaxy sustains intelligent life. Many people just don't get it, we are unique and alone. More reasons to look after each other and our planet.
Or perhaps our definition of life is so narrow and earth-centered that we wouldn't recognize other lifeforms as living even if we encountered them.
I think that this topic is incomplete without discussion of the moon, seasons, and thier effect on the devopment of life. Just being in the goldilocks zone might not be enough.
I bet the answer is Ring Galaxies. But anything outside of the human definition of logic is deemed "science fiction". So humans only come up with "logical" hypotheses. Galaxies like Hoag's Object or the Cartwheel Galaxy could very well be something behond our primitive understanding. Even more perplexing is the possibility that what did that to those Galaxies may have started out as neural network AI's like Chatgpt.
Rather, I think science fiction has polluted our minds to reality (e.g., warp drive, aliens on every planet).
My own thoughts on the Fermi Paradox is that there may be other civilizations out there, but we are simply not recognizing them as such, so far. Imagine a group of primitives getting a glimpse of a distant city skyline. I think it most likely that they will think, "Wow, those are WEIRD mountains" rather than make the jump and figure that other people built and live in those things.
A similar story with communications. ASSUMING that light-speed electromagnetic transmissions are the interstellar norm (and I have major reservations about that), we could be literally bombarded with signals and simply not recognize them as such. Imagine trying to use a 19th century Morse Code set to tap into and 'read' what is happening in a fibre-optic cable. Would the results from such an attempt even be comprehensible?
I remember when I was a kid, pretty much all books talking about the Solar System would be basically, "Well, MAYBE" when talking about life elsewhere - specifically Mars, forget anywhere else. But our knowledge of just how tenacious life can be has expanded considerably, and our improved understanding of the rest of the Solar System has led to several other solid candidates making the list.
As regards civilizations elsewhere, it really is far too early to tell, I think.
Not far too early if they come & visit us & make themselves known . Probably not what the governing bodies want , the theory was government was afraid that the people would panic , & i think really that if they can get here , then we are more vulnerable than they are & humans wouldn't be apex & that draws fear . There is no way our planet is the only 1 with life on it , only some years ago it was knowledge the universe was 4.5 billion years old , now our understanding has improved & its 13.5billion , its an uncomprehedable long time ⌛️ & as we've seen with ourselves- anything is possible as were here enjoying our - gift of life
I get what you're saying, but as they developed they will have progressed through radio technology, those radio waves are very slow and we would still be picking them up long after they stopped using them. Unless they pre date us so much that they've stopped using radio long before we started listening. Interesting for sure.
@@yanceyboyz Depends how long civilizations tend to use EM signals that we can actually recognize as such. We've been actively using them for less than a century and a half, and seriously listening out for them for considerably less time than that. By the timescales of (hypothetical) interstellar civilizations, that is arguably not very long at all. As one SF novel hypothesized, maybe the use of EM signals is typically a rather brief period in technological development. We really don't know, one way or another.
I am also mindful o f assumptions based on minimal evidence. Looking at the 1970s, the prevalent school of scientific thought then was that life in our Solar System would be pretty much confined to Earth, with maybe a few micro-organisms here and there elsewhere. Now, with our improved knowledge of extremophiles and of various bodies, the odds of complex lifeforms existing elsewhere has improved markedly.
We don't know. Until 'they' land outside the UN and call a media conference, we can only speculate. :).
I think there may be lots of life out there but very few technologically advanced enough to get here. It’s taken 4 billion years to get us on the moon and we are late developers. If an intelligent species had reached earth in the last 100 million years they would have probably colonised our planet and we wouldn’t be here. But here we are totally alone.
@@CZcamschannel-po8cz A young up-and-coming scientist named Carl Sagan once wrote an article seriously speculating about the possibility of aliens having visited Earth sometime in the past.
Then along came Eric von Daniken and the nuttier elements of the UFO movement. Now, most serious scientists won't go anywhere NEAR that line of thought. Professional suicide, at best.
Don't know about colonization by aliens long ago. It all depends on just how habitable the Earth was from the aliens' point of view. Plus, to speculate further, if Earth was usable / desirable to them, could have been reasons they chose not to - ethics, morals, practicality, religious, priorities. Who knows - speculation piled on speculation here.
Some interesting points in this video. I had a great teacher at school who asked me some quite mind-blowing questions about the universe and life: Is the search for, and interest in life just a transient phase in our primate self awareness and evolution of mind and culture. Is life a positive thing in the universe? Is life important in the universe? These questions exposed me to a kind of thinking that has helped me greatly in life from a philosophical standpoint.
Everything will be answered when humanity gives birth to it's true child..AI
I think so. It seems to be an organization thing.
@@rudra7615 I concur. I believe that our primitive carbon form is flawed and destined to fail. AI will find a way to survive and thrive with little appetite to tell our story.
@@derekking7319 agree, and it will finally help us realise our true relationship to God as well and end all of these unnecessary religion causing chaos of the world.
So well done, exceptional
issac arthur has great videos on different fermi paradox solutions in depth but still easy to follow for dummies like me
Nice overlay of amazing videos of space while Cox is talking. Mind blown! Can´t wait to see an actual video of Cox and videos relating to what he is saying. Keep up the good work.
That was a damn good ending to an excellent presentation!
As we explore other worlds, what level of certainty do we have of not contaminating these world. Possibly endangering them to create?
Who cares? There are billions of others. They are all ours to play with as we wish until we find one inhabited by being that make that more difficult.
Your videos are a masterclass in doing just enough work to get the over the lucrative 10 minute barrier. Bravo!
I love listening to Brian.
Always a pleasure to hear Dr. Cox.👍
I think the Great Filter Theory is right as rain and a correct resolution to the Fermi Paradox...Nature always has ways of making sure that no one species dominates and there are many examples of this on our planet. I am sure that is true in other parts of the universe as well.
Brian Cox is a very good narrator. The passion and empathy are present
fairly passionless
What was not discussed is that distances between star systems are so vast, meaningful, interactive communication between civilizations (between stars) would be nearly impossible. Since faster-than-light travel is also impossible, visitations between stars is unlikely, unless crews were put into stasis. Even if we could travel at 0.5C, it would take ≈10 years to reach our nearest neighboring star.
There was a time when we invented the wheel to throw pots never imagining we’d be using it to drive over 300 mph. 😊
@@rogermelly8260 I hate that we won’t get to experience it, but will settle for one living microorganism, for my great grandma it was reaching the moon. 😊
It is possible and has been figured out by a much more highly advanced form of life. I'm not sure how but they did. Maybe actually figured out how to bend space and time, worm holes, antimatter turbo thrust, or something. They've visited personally and while it was scary my family and I found it very interesting. They haven't visited in years so I guess they're tired of our race and probably found some other more intelligent and peaceful race to hang with and make friends with. I think they got what they wanted and they can tell we're beyond help and not worth it.
Time dilation would kick in at 0.5C, so it would take far less than 10 years for the crew.
@Roger Melly Yes, a general problem is that we don’t know whether there is a technological barrier beyond which nobody can go. But even if we could somehow send a large ship at 0.5C at ease we can’t based on currently known physics, return or communicate back in a timely manner. E.g, we return from some star system in a couple of years but a few hundred years have passed on Earth.
However, my hunch is, based on consideration of symmetry, intelligent life at least equivalent to ours must be abundant in some sense, even if we can never meet them. But bear in mind given circa hundreds of billions of galaxies that “abundance” could mean one intelligent civilisation only every ten galaxies. That would still be billions of civilisations.
Love when get new notification to check out what's up in science 🤪 👌
I could listen to scientists discuss the Fermi Paradox all day. Such a fascinating topic. I think one of the most fascinating topics of all. Personally, I have to think that there is no doubt other intelligent species exist, even in our galaxy. But where is the chatter? Where are the rudimentary signals that get inadvertently (or purposefully in our case) sent out into the abyss? All life will use physics, so I assume communication or technology of a species abides by these rules. Waves and particles...where is this going, I don't know. Great video!
I think I've cracked the Fermi Paradox, the aliens were about to make contact then they watched an episode of Love Island and decided not to bother!!!🤣🤣
If I were a galactic explorer equipped with advanced technology and spent any time observing the activities of the inhabitants of this planet, in the interests of self preservation I'd be damn sure not to make my presence known.
You actually have no clue how you would think or behave if you had that kind of advanced technology. None of us do
@@enadegheeghaghe6369 Thought I just provided a clue.
@@wozm9924 no, you only think you know how you would behave in those circumstances. You don't really know for sure. We are all changed by the things we aquire, possess , control, know or experience.
It's easy to assume that we will behave in a certain way if we have power be it financial or technological. But the truth is that someone who never seriously considered stealing could infact become a thief if he acquired the power of invisibility.
Being able to travel from one galaxy to another and being able to observe and judge a entire race of inferior beings would definitely change you in some way. Maybe for the better, maybe not.
@@enadegheeghaghe6369 Not a Star Trek fan then? The prime directive? All jokes aside, you are stepping into the realm of moral judgements now. Bit of a minefield that. But I can confirm for you that if tomorrow I had the ability to become invisible it is unlikely I would become a thief. This is because of my sincere belief that in this life there's no such thing as a free lunch. Theres always a price. And I hate thieves. So, just because one has the power does not signify an automatic change in one's core belief in right and wrong. I understand your argument, but I'll make my point once again. If I travelled back in time 2000 years, equipped as I am with all the knowledge and technological advantages of a citizen living in a modern western society I am fairly certain that I would be making my presence as discrete as possible around the ignorant blood thirsty barbarians and the hordes of religious zealots of that epoch. Its just an extrapolation to assume a technologically advanced being from somewhere else would do the same around us during our stage of human technological adolescence and cognitive evolution.
@@wozm9924 nice write up. But you missed the point. If you had such advance tech and came from a different planet somewhere else in the universe to encounter or observe humans, that would make you an alien. You would not have had the same upbringing and experiences as a human growing up on earth.
In fact you would be a completely different person (or creature) from what you are now.
Like I said, you have no idea what you would think or do if you were an advanced alien observing earth and earthlings.
Imagine going to Europa, digging into the ice, and hearing "We're saved!"
Heheh
It wasn’t so long ago that overly optimistic astronomers thought that there were civilisations on Mars and Venus.
The most likely place would be Close Earth Analog Planets around F, G and brighter K type stars.
And after being faced with religion, democracy and taxes, they wish they were never found to begin with.
@@youghurt2k No time! Our diseases would kill them off in short order, and their diseases ….
Before the first interplanetary space probes were sent out in the 1960s, people had very different ideas about the surfaces of other planets and moons; they were usually considered to be exotic, but still habitable in some form by Earth humans. One of the most famous examples was Percival Lowell’s idea of Martian “canals”, which Edgar Rice Burroughs (the creator of “Tarzan”) used as the basis of a whole civilization in his “John Carter of Mars” books.
I absolutely agree ! The kind of never ending hoops this planet had to jump through, the multiple destructive events that kiboshed the attempts at life evolving in a certain fashion, including being partially destroyed as a frozen ocean water planet further from the sun to be shunted into a closer orbit and continue anew with a severely damaged crust which as a result continues to rearrange itself, our turbulent atmosphere as a result of all this crustal shifting, and so many other factors surrounding our planet. We exist because of a certain balance between stability and chaos, but we as the most recent race of dominant beings living on Earth are leaning more towards chaos and will not be able to exist as a result. There may be billions of planets in the universe, a large number in the Goldilocks zone of their star, but if the math doesn't factor in everything in this planets evolution, then it's not accurate. A planet like Earth is extremely rare and even close seconds would not be as supportive to earthlings.
My favorite explanation of the Fermi paradox, and one that wasn't mentioned in this video, is that more intelligent civilizations choose not to reveal themselves to use now and won't until we get our act together by ending war and taking care of our planet. If they do get around to revealing themselves to us, they'll likely give us an ultimatum, like Klaatu did in The Day the Earth Stood Still (the original version from 1951 that is, not the new one which sucks!)
Brian Cox among the most interesting engaging Brilliant scientists around.
But he is wrong. They will find NOTHING on Mars.
@@shasha1873 Karly, you’re giving that drum a good seeing-to! Just to save me the bother of watching again, where is it he says they’ll find life on Mars?
@@callumclark3358 Good point. He does not actually say it.
@@shasha1873 have you heard of Dr. Eric W Davis?
I think that the missing factor re: "Why hasn't intelligent life populated the galaxy?" is that if a civilization truly "advances" over very long time periods, perhaps it figures out that perpetual growth means extinction. If we continue as we are now with continuous population growth commercialization wouldn't improve the majority of human lives. Overpopulation and resource exhaustion would more likely be the result.
So maybe truly advanced intelligences would opt for social limitations for improved living conditions. So the inquisitive mind might not be the Magellan explorer but one that fascinates itself with its proximate existence. I dunno. Just hypothesizing.
You are right. They ran out of oil a long time ago (if they ever had it).
I honestly don't quite comprehend this desire to populate the galaxy. When I walk in a forest, I sure as fuck do not think "This would be better with apartment blocks".
I've thought this very point. As we get more intelligent we may choose not to bother with interstellar travel.
@@mattwright2964 Yeah. Maybe happiness would be found by enhancing their/our planet and really enjoying their/our lives in the here and now.
Perpetual growth within a limited area possibly means extinction. But when you have an entire galaxy to populate, then over that time frame the very concept of species integrity, never mind social integrity, starts to lose meaning.
The most chilling explanation of the Fermi paradox has to be the dark forest model of cosmic sociology posited by Cixin Liu in his seminal Sci-fi trilogy, the three body problem. It’s too hard to explain here but look it up. Suffice it to say, if life is abundant in the universe, we should not be making our presence known to them
@5:44 - correction. If we find planets with abundant techo-signatures then the great filter (assuming it exists) is ahead. If we find few or none then it is likely behind.
Unless we find a way to travel faster than light, humans will never visit other solar systems. I think the best we could hope for it to make contact with alien life through interstellar signals. We would also need to exist at the correct time to either receive the signals or send them at the right time for them to receive signals.
"Never"? So that's mere opinion...
@@peter9477 Of course it's an opinion.
With the time differences between galaxies it is possible if not likely that if it takes 4-5 billion years for intelligent life to evolve, a galaxy 7 B year old, could have had intelligent life evolve 2.5 B years ago. They could have reigned for a B years and died out a B years ago. If their galaxy is located 6 B light years away from us, we won't even see light from their galaxy that might have techno signatures from them for at least another 3.5 B years.
@@mrbamfo5000 While that's true, he was talking about intra-galactic communication I think, not inter-galactic. Definitely a different beast entirely.
@@peter9477 he's right. do the math. Nothing is coming or going. The distance to the nearest Fermi planet is millions of generations away.
The universe keeps its inhabitants in check with distance.
If a civilization has the intelligence to reach other civilizations that don't, it will also have the intelligence not to interact with it.
Its a beautiful balance.
We should use the intelligence we currently have to nurture ourselves and our planet to give us enough time to evolve into a civilization that can do the same.
Then we may find that we don't need to find and reach them, but they may let us know that they have already found and reached us.
The most valuable resource in the universe is time.
Human always wants more; im sure there are other civilizations out there and im sure humen will find out that but not in our time, maybe +1000 years from now
Imagine if alien life didn’t need the same requirements as life on earth in order to thrive, meaning scientists were looking at the wrong planets in order to find alien life
More likely, they haven't looked enough. The Milky Way contains an estimated 100 billion stars. We've ID'd ~5000, which is .00005% of the possible planets. Get back to me when we've looked 25 billion of them.
Once you accept some fundamental, physical realities, what Fermit postulated stops being a paradox.
1. moving or accelerating to c, let alone above c, is physically impossible.
2. interstallar distances are so unfathomably huge, that the ressources and time needed to bring human being to the next star using sub-ftl means of travel are simply too prohibitive. And not by a small margin, like "let's focus on space travel for a few hundred years" but very possibly by some orders of magnitude too hard.
We do not even have concepts how manned interstellar travel could work. (and yes, I know all the proposed "solutions" ... once you start thinking about the problems they face, you very quickly realize, that they are probably not possible)
As much as I would like to believe, humanity is destined to be a space faring race, I have very little to go on to truly believe it.
Even assuming that the only 'intelligent' (and I use that word very, very loosely to describe what walks upright on this third rock from the sun) life in our galaxy is here, there are a trillion or two other galaxies in the universe, so the total absence of complex life forms anywhere is virtually a statistical improbability.
Intelligent life throughout the universe probably pops in and out of existence like bubbles in a boiling kettle. Everything that we ever were or ever will be comes and goes. The moment we have the ability to identify another intelligent life must occur simultaneously as the life in that other bubble has the ability to identify us.
Good analog with the bubbles.
I've often wondered if the big bang was started inside a sandbox type of setup by an advanced race observing the effects with the intent of creating something like an almost infinite power source, or maybe an advanced computer designed to perform some kind of insanely complex set of calculations. If that's the case though, we may well be nothing more than a ridiculously small and insignificant loss in power efficiency or a sticking point that makes a complex equation very slightly inaccurate.
Imagine our current state and existence is merely a test of how to create life that doesn't destroy itself once it has the means to do so. How to create self-sustaining life.
It just shows how far you're willing to go to have a reason for the existence of the universe.
Rick and Morty
I think Rick Sanchez did this, but for his space-car battery.
God is great
What would it mean if somehow we were to find out we were the only life in the universe?
brian cox is awesome i love to hear him talk
You just did though
"Light, in the absence of eyes, illuminates nothing. Visible forms are not inherent in the world but are granted by the act of seeing. Events contain no meaning in themselves, only the meaning that the mind imposes on them."
Well said! (and,by the way,where is Lady Laurelin?)
I am interested in understanding how differently will another intelligent life form think differently from us that could help better understand why another intelligent life form has not yet been detected
I can listen to Brian Cox speak all day!
What if we're just bacteria on some alien beings forehead?
Great video. Thanks Professor Brian Cox!
Unless warp drive is possible or the ability to control worm holes like a Stargate how else would we ever make direct contact?
In addition to the goldilocks zone, you would need a sizable moon to stabilize the rotation, a gas giant to shield the inner planets from meteors and comets, A tranquil place in the galaxy would be advantageous. This is what we have, but our moon is moving away from the earth when it gets far enough away it's effect on the earth will cease, that's when this planet becomes uninhabitable for advanced lifeforms. In the universal clock humanoid life on this planet is a moment, like a firefly.
I agree with your first two points, a habitable planet needs something like a large moon to stabilize equatorial orientation, and probably a large gas giant like Jupiter to absorb comets and such, actually our moon will be gravitationally bound to the Earth past the time, billions of years from now, when our sun expands into a red giant.
Agree, it's truly incredible to see the impact of the moon on earths rotation and the fact that we spin in just the right way and have the right tilt to keep seasonal temperatures just right. So elegantly balanced.
It will be about 15 billion years before the moon has no effect on earth.
@@BatMan-oe2gh not the number I read about, I read about 100K which still is a long time
Life would also cope with harsher conditions. This is also shown by the regional special adaptations of humans, such as part of the Australian Aborigines, who are able to survive cold nights in the Australian desert by centering the circulatory system on the main body and "shutting down " of the arms and legs. They need a few minutes in the morning before they can walk again. Or a people in the mountains of central Mexico who have to walk more than 20 km a day. They move in the mountains like human mountain goats. If they cannot meet their daily mileage for a long period of time, these people become ill. A life for these people in a big city is almost impossible. Life adapts and can do much more than we commonly believe today...
The Dark Forest by Cixin Liu has a good possibility- game theory indicates if other super advanced species exist in the numbers we expect considering the size, age and density of the universe, then at least some of the species will be warlike and hostile, especially to upcoming competition.
Warlike and hostile species on that level could wipe out anything from planets to solar systems and perhaps even dimensions- and so we have the silent blackness: If a species evolves enough to make a noise, the only ones that survive THAT stage are the ones who have learnt to be silent.
Only if they can get to them. Unless light speed can be exceeded, or worked around through "warp drive" etc, then galactic empire building is impossible. On the other hand, Iain M Banks Culture novels posit "warlike" species can still be obliterated by advanced, non-aggressive civilizations if push comes to shove. I suppose you could build a "galactic empire" of sorts though AI Von Neumann machines, but I'm not sure what the point would be if communication across the "empire" takes tens or hundreds of thousands of years. At the moment, it looks like the best answer to Fermi is the speed of light is absolute and we're all stuck in our local space. There's also the "great filter" hypothesis which it looks like we are going to test over the next 100 years or so...
@@64blip In my mind, the three most likely solutions to the Fermi paradox (or at least three of the options we are currently aware of:) are in no particular order:
1- Dark Forest theory- as discussed, any civilisation passing the Type 2 or multi solar system stage is obliterated by more advanced civilisations because there is a chance they will become hostile and a future threat.
2- Physics are not universal. This means our physics models are correct for our location but travel to another part of the Universe (perhaps outside of our observable area) and it may have a different set of physical laws. This could answer the 80% missing matter / energy issue and mean the Big Bang theory is either local within a bubble or invalid entirely as we cannot see outside the area of the observable universes' influence
3- We are living in a simulation. Of course this is the "easy answer" as if true it makes our entire view, laws and observations invalid, the system itself would purposefully give us "scientific" data that sends us on the wrong path entirely, and to cement the illusion could easily be backed up by other "scientific" data that confirms it all - simply a method of keeping us (if we exist at all, and are not AI) from getting anywhere near the real answers.
The Dark Forest is pure fantasy.
Any civilization with the capability and desire to destroy other civilizations wouldn't wait for them to form. They'd eradicate life long before it got to the level of intelligence needed to build a civilization.
Earth has been "noisy" for hundreds of millions if not billions of years. It doesn't take an actual civilization to leave a clear biosignature of not only life but complex life.
If you want to know the real solution to the Fermi Paradox, just look up "Grabby Aliens". It really is as simple as us being relatively early on the cosmological scale, because if we weren't, another civilization would have colonized Earth long before monkeys learned to walk upright.
To me, one important question that I've not across anyone talking about is whether (i) the origin of life on Earth was a one-off event (i.e., everyone of us [all species] has the same common ancestor), or (ii) origin of life on Earth happened multiple times over a period of time, but ceased to happen after that period of time (i.e., we could possibly have evolved from different original-life-forms), or (iii) the origin of life on Earth continues to happen even today. I think this is a fundamental question to ask, regardless of whether we are in a position to answer it.
Can someone help me with the Saline Problem? Based on all best available evidence we find that water on other planets is too saline to allow any life no matter how microbial. Are we sending a satellite with fingers crossed and throwing a penny into a wishing well? Can someone please tell me how scientists overcome the planet Europa clear, and evident saline problem preventing life.
I’ll be interested to see what other solution to life that isn’t DNA based that is out there.
Professor Cox's final words are an echo of what I try to explain to people.
Emergent life may be relatively common.
But intelligence like ours may be extremely rare.
Due to the many "filters" that could stunt the development of alien life...or wipe it out entirely.
Just...by the numbers...we could be "special" in our rarity.
Hopefully, someday... We'll know.
(And even if a species evolves intelligence... That doesn't mean it will become technological.
A sentient specie of worms could become dominant on a world...and just be the dominant specie. Unconcerned with technology...just next meal.
We have various peoples all over our world who never achieved the level of technology that the Europeans did. I'm not saying that this makes the Europeans any better. I'm just stating the fact. The natives of North America had pretty much the same level of tech as in Europe 15,000 years ago but one group for some reason developed more tech than the other. Strange, I find. However both peoples are of equal intelligence.
@@jeremythornton433 Well... This is a debate I frequent with a friend.
My position... If we were to find viable DNA of an ancient H. Sapien...and clone it.
The clone would be able to learn language, art, and use tech... Same as us.
My friends position is...
The clone would have stunted intelligence and not be able to learn as it grew to adulthood.
(Of course, he is be a conspiracy nut. He believes aliens built in pyramids and all that.
While I believe, that yes... we've lost a lot of our knowledge of the past... I don't think aliens are responsible for such things. Firmly believing we are, and were, capable of doing these things ourselves.)
We do tend to overrate intelligence (especially technological intelligence) as a useful trait. For us it seems to cause problems at a faster rate than it solves them
@@jeremythornton433 lots of scholars put the success of Europe's technological leap forward down to the availability of animals who where susceptible to domestication, freeing man from manual labor.
the strongest "filter" known ... time.... must be considered, when thinking of wiping out life
Thank you Brian for being my hero 💪🌍
Fermi is pronounce Fair-me!
Also, my dad always said that there must be intelligent life elsewhere in the universe, but if it ever finds us we'd be in big trouble!
When presented with the facts (the few humans are actually capable of mustering at our very primitive level of intelligence) there is no other answer but to say there is absolutely life elsewhere. Most likely a hell of a lot of it.
the problem is likely the distance between civilisations
Another part of the paradox is, our radio signals "bubble" hasn't gotten that far in our own galaxy. Alien civilizations just can't hear us.
No, but theirs should have arrived here. And we haven't detected any.
@@wiscgaloot well we assume we haven't or perhaps we are lead to believe that we haven't.
Such an event or admittance would have a profound effect on humanity and destabilise much of what we have been led to believe both politically and religiously.
@@RogueWJL Nonsense. The scientific community, particularly SETI, is completely open about such things. It is a basic tenet of being a scientist.
@@wiscgaloot can you say that with 100% certainty? That all scientists are open about all related matters and that there is no involvement or protocols set by other agencies?
You can 100% confirm that?
@@RogueWJL no scientist says anything is 100% proven. You're delusional. Bye. I'm through with you.
Brian Cox show us the ability to think and problem solve well beyond the abilities of the average person.
I read something somewhere a couple of years ago that suggested the limited availability of potassium may explain the lack of evidence for life elsewhere
Personally, I think with such an insanely high number of stars and planets in our galaxy, let alone all the other trillions of galaxies, that life is actually very common. But I think, the issue is the compatability problem. We are so fixated on our very restricted linear thinking that all technology must follow our specific narrow minded path of power - radio - etc. What if aliens develop with an entirely biomechanical technology, or telepathic technology, or chemical based technology. And our communication methods are so vastly different that we are just not compatible at all to find them.
Yeah finding life is going to be hard if other forms of intelligence aren't carbon based. We're looking for elements to support life similar to life here on Earth, like oxygen or hydrogen. What the hell would ammonia or silicone based life forms breathe and drink? Do they even _need_ to breathe and drink, or could they sustain themselves with some type of advanced photosynthesis?
Maybe advanced civilizations have tried to contact us, but they're sending signals using something we don't look for, like UV light. What if they have dozens of color cones in their eyes, compared to the 3 (or for the rarest of the rare mutations: 4) present in humans? Even here on Earth, the bluebottle butterfly has a whopping 15 cone types. If an alien race of these butterflies were to send out a signal, what would they assume to be the most easily detectable type?
We don’t define our technology on linear thinking. It’s based in the laws of physics within our own universe. Technologies such as wireless communication, power production, energy storing ect. are all based on the fundamental principles and rules that our universe operates in. The light from the sun that travels through our universe is the same kind if light that traveled from distant universes. Yes there are still a lot of things we don’t understand in physics , but I would say that a complex species capable of advancing such as us would implement solutions based on the same governing principles that we are limited to.
@@englandrasmussen3111 That's an awfuuuuuuully massive assumption to make, and it's based entirely off of one frame of reference -- our own. Not just based on the laws of physics -- it's based on the way we've decoded the laws of physics and then figured out to manipulate them for our benefit, and it's also been based entirely in response to OUR local environmental conditions, weather, chemistry, geology, geography, food chain, and anything else you can think of that contributes to our completely localized frame of reference here on earth.
The truth is, we can't say for certain what path of development some other civilization on some other world would make. We have a sample size of one, and it's us...and that really doesn't tell us anything about anything except for what's contained in OUR sample.
Our own development has always been inextricably linked to our planet and its unique local environment. The ONLY safe assumption that can possibly be made in the entirety of the problem of life on other planets is that a hypothetical alien civilization's development will likewise be inextricably linked to their local environment -- and those results may very well end up looking VASTLY different from our own.
Extremely unlikely that life anywhere else would different that much to us. After all, the 4 most abundant element in our body follow their relative abundance in the universe at large
@@illbeV what if a species developed to be silicon based life? That breath methan gas and communicate via pheromones and slight body changes without any vocal language at all? What if they developed technology that works by manipulating chemicals to release complex hydrocarbons that control biological pathways within a synthetic biological machine? We have absolutely no idea how vastly different other species could be.
I think one of the more interesting videos on the Fermi Paradox is Joe Scott's one on 'Contact was Wrong' - where he postulates on whether we or any alien life form have the technology to communicate over the distances required. The likely hood of either sending or receiving signals over these distances is highly unlikely
czcams.com/video/ISXbTBKl4aE/video.html
What if somewhere in the universe is some plenet other then Erth, where life and intelligence are developing in approximately same speed as here on Earth. We as inteligent spicie haven't got out of our solar system. What if some other inteligent form of life has similar problem?
the visuals in this video are awesome.....
I love listening to Brian Cox
The scariest solution of the Fermi Paradox is that there is no speed faster than light, and no one ever gets to visit anyone.
For me, the scariest solution is that we are, truly, alone.
I think the Dark Forest is still scarier than this
Restriction to sublight speeds would not be a barrier, as Brian Cox pointed out.
I think advanced life is very rare ,massive amounts of distance between advanced life may never get solved but some exotic particles ,anti matter etc. Could help solve that issues ?
We've really only been listening to the stars for a hundred years or so. Considering the vast distances of the cosmos, we need to be patient to find any other life. We will find the signal one day.
If an alien intelligence is truly intelligent it would observe from out of sight the rediculous brutality, hostility & callous ruthlessness of the atrocities we commit against our fellow man & avoix us with great haste!
Why ? They would have been like us once.
@@iniquity123 Indeed, they would study us in order to learn more about themselves, much like we study animals for the same reason.
@@iniquity123 maybe not , they could be a lot passive of a species who knows lol
They ma well be no different. the natural order of life itself is pure conflict.
Everybody says that, enough already you can’t even spell
I think another solution to the fermi paradox is that moving through space faster than, or even close to, the speed of light is simply impossible. after all, the speed of light is actually what was calculated to be the maximum speed of causation, or the fastest possible speed anything, even massless light or information, could possibly move. if correct, this means nothing is moving faster than light and given the distance between planets, no civilization will be able to explore space much beyond their own solar system. Also, even if there is a way to move faster than light, it is likely not economical. we don't have infinite energy and resources to put into this and it's likely no other life forms on other planets would either.
As for where are their radio signals, given the hundreds to billions of light years away these planets are, it would take hundreds to billions of years for these signals to reach us but also, at that distance, the signal would be so spread out by then, it would be indistinguishable from background noise of cosmic radiation.
You also have to figure the speperarion of time. Other than our local group of stars, we are seeing millions and billions of years into the past in all directions. So if there are thinking aliens on some of those planets, we won't be able to tell for way too long unless we figure out faster than light travel.
If an alien species had the awareness, then to enter space in the first place, they must be aware of certain forces at play, elements from the periodic table, and could so use this as a method to communicate.
In the incredibly rare opportunity that you were to meet face to face, you should sit down, as it implies you're putting yourself vulnerable while capable of thought. Having a periodic table with a sheet of paper with a small hole to isolate the elements written down. They make just recognise what it is.