We surely are not alone?

[XFool]

I think distance isn't the only barrier.
And also another absolutely useless fact ... I think it's Beetlejuice (Betelgeuse) that the men in white are watching as they think it's on the cusp of blowing up? It being on the YouTube video link.

Yes good point time is very important. There is a lot of space and time and relatively few chances for species to meet.

Hah! I When I first (mis)read that I thought it was a nice joke. But not sure it was intended.

When it comes to the universe at large, space and time come to much the same thing, one way or another.

[bungeejumper]

Said it before, will say it again. If there's a civilisation anywhere out there within reach of our little slice of space/time, the chances are pretty good that it'll be significantly more advanced than our own. (I mean, c'mon, we've only been around for a couple of billion years, so we're just toddlers really.)

At best, the aliens might decide to keep us as cute little pets. At worst, they'll view us as a quick roadside snack along the intergalactic bypass, or maybe they'll just chuck us into the cosmic concrete mixer. Douglas Adams, who foresaw the arrival of handheld information technology, had an unnerving habit of being right about such things!

BJ

[tjh290633]

You have to remember that light from the farthest part of the universe is only just reaching us after millions of light years. We don't actually know how far the universe extends, nor if it is continuing to expand. What we see now happened a long long time ago, while the Earth was still forming.

TJH

[Stonge]

Without the likes of us the universe is pointless.

Ah, there it is.

Man's great conceit....

Itsallaguess

The probability of a particular human such as yourself coming into existence has been calculated as infinitesimally small, something of the order of 1 in 10^44 against.

Not small enough though it would seem.























You consider it merely conceit to believe humanity remarkable and singularly valuable.

[XFool]

Without the likes of us the universe is pointless.

Ah, there it is.

Man's great conceit....

Itsallaguess

The probability of a particular human such as yourself coming into existence has been calculated as infinitesimally small, something of the order of 1 in 10^44 against.

I'm not sure how significant that (dubious?) calculation is though, taken by itself. Remember, there are 52! ways any pack of cards can in principle be dealt out. That makes every such deal ever dealt extraordinary 'unlikely'. Doesn't seem to hinder many card games though.

[Itsallaguess]

Without the likes of us the universe is pointless.

Ah, there it is.

Man's great conceit....

You consider it merely conceit to believe humanity remarkable and singularly valuable.

That's not what I said...

Dolphins are 'remarkable and singularly valuable', but they are not by any means the only intelligent living things in the universe...

What I said was that it's conceited for man to think that 'without the likes of us the universe is pointless'....

Of course it then does need to be acknowledged that as individuals, I suppose that each of us might have higher or lower ideas regarding their own particular importance to the universe in general....

Itsallaguess

[mc2fool]

What I said was that it's conceited for man to think that 'without the likes of us the universe is pointless'....

And yet:

"Some interpretations of quantum mechanics require the admission of an infinite number of possible quantum realities. A participatory anthropic principle (PAP) was proposed by the American physicist John Archibald Wheeler. He suggested that if one takes the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics seriously, one may conclude that, because no phenomenon can be said to exist until it is observed, “observers” may be necessary to give the universe meaning." https://www.britannica.com/science/anthropic-principle/Forms-of-the-anthropic-principle#ref1078377

"Wheeler suggested that reality is created by observers and that: “no phenomenon is a real phenomenon until it is an observed phenomenon.” He coined the term “Participatory Anthropic Principle” (PAP) from the Greek “anthropos”, or human. He went further to suggest that “we are participants in bringing into being not only the near and here, but the far away and long ago.”" https://futurism.com/john-wheelers-participatory-universe

While that view may be controversial, John Archibald Wheeler, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Archibald_Wheeler, is hardly a way off crackpot, and it seems he's not the only one:

"Observers are necessary to bring the Universe into being." Barrow and Tipler believe that this is a valid conclusion from quantum mechanics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropic_principle#Variants

More reading on the topic:
(very short) https://www.dummies.com/education/science/physics/string-theory-the-participatory-anthropic-principle/
(long) http://discovermagazine.com/2002/jun/featuniverse

I must say, I do have some difficulty with the concept, but these guys are an awful lot cleverer than I, and I still can't really get my head round Schrödinger’s cat, so what do I know ....

[Itsallaguess]

"Wheeler suggested that reality is created by observers and that: “no phenomenon is a real phenomenon until it is an observed phenomenon.” He coined the term “Participatory Anthropic Principle” (PAP) from the Greek “anthropos”, or human. He went further to suggest that “we are participants in bringing into being not only the near and here, but the far away and long ago.”" https://futurism.com/john-wheelers-participatory-universe

While that view may be controversial, John Archibald Wheeler, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Archibald_Wheeler, is hardly a way off crackpot, and it seems he's not the only one:

"Observers are necessary to bring the Universe into being." Barrow and Tipler believe that this is a valid conclusion from quantum mechanics https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropic_principle#Variants

Thanks - very interesting, and I will read further later on.

What I would say though, is that in the same way that 'far away and long ago' are principles that also affect dogs, for instance, then who's to say that the universe only exists because we're here?

Perhaps we're just dogs to something higher up the universal food-chain...

Cheers,

Itsallaguess

[Leothebear]

MC2Fool,

The reason i was being dismissive was a reaction to this part of UE's post:

But we are the most complex objects in the universe and odds are that we are totally unique and alone. Whether that makes us precious within eternity is another argument.

To which I ask: how much of the Universe do you know? I'd say an infinitesimally small part. Wouldn't you?
If he'd written "known Universe" - a little better.

[simsqu]

I think distance isn't the only barrier.
And also another absolutely useless fact ... I think it's Beetlejuice (Betelgeuse) that the men in white are watching as they think it's on the cusp of blowing up? It being on the YouTube video link.

Yes good point time is very important. There is a lot of space and time and relatively few chances for species to meet.

Hah! I When I first (mis)read that I thought it was a nice joke. But not sure it was intended.

A bit of a lazy throwaway line, but it was intentional. Glad someone noticed though!

[nimnarb]

Ah, there it is.

Man's great conceit....

its funny how we all see things so differently. When the poster stated this, I thought he, could have been a she and therefore the great conceit part was mentioned?

Ok back to having a drink now and sorry you are all wrong anyway as convinced my wife is an alien.

[nimnarb]

sorry should have mentioned for those non-believers that some of you are wrong, not all.

Anyway, from memory which is becoming distinctly foggy these days, it takes I believe around 13 billion years for light to reach us from the most distant galaxy that we are aware of at present. And as was mentioned, so important, then there is time... Are we really alone? Hope not. Better than Brexit this innit!

There was a young lady of Wight,
Who traveled much faster than light,
She departed one day,
In a relative way,
And arrived on the previous night.

[zico]

The probability of a particular human such as yourself coming into existence has been calculated as infinitesimally small, something of the order of 1 in 10^44 against.

Not small enough though it would seem.

For any of us to have been born, every single one of our ancestors going back millions and millions of years had to survive all the hazards of the time in which they lived (at least long enough to breed). How lucky is that?

[PinkDalek]

The reason i was being dismissive was a reaction to this part of UE's post:

But we are the most complex objects in the universe and odds are that we are totally unique and alone. Whether that makes us precious within eternity is another argument. ...

Not that it really matters but those are Stonge’s words:

viewtopic.php?p=257107#p257107

[AsleepInYorkshire]

sorry should have mentioned for those non-believers that some of you are wrong, not all.

Anyway, from memory which is becoming distinctly foggy these days, it takes I believe around 13 billion years for light to reach us from the most distant galaxy that we are aware of at present. And as was mentioned, so important, then there is time... Are we really alone? Hope not. Better than Brexit this innit!

There was a young lady of Wight,
Who traveled much faster than light,
She departed one day,
In a relative way,
And arrived on the previous night.

She married a man who was bright
He left on the very next flight
Qantas confused quantum bemused
And the rest of this poem is just rubbish

AiY

[Clitheroekid]

"Wheeler suggested that reality is created by observers and that: “no phenomenon is a real phenomenon until it is an observed phenomenon.”

But how do I really know that observers exist? The only evidence for their existence is what I consider to be my own observations, but it's perfectly possible that I have unconsciously created everything I `observe', and that nothing at all exists apart from me ...

Sometimes it's tough being God!

[gryffron]

For any of us to have been born, every single one of our ancestors going back millions and millions of years had to survive all the hazards of the time in which they lived (at least long enough to breed). How lucky is that?

100%. Strong survivor bias though

[XFool]

For any of us to have been born, every single one of our ancestors going back millions and millions of years had to survive all the hazards of the time in which they lived (at least long enough to breed). How lucky is that?

But as there are currently about 7.7 billion equally "lucky" people around it doesn't sound especially "lucky" to me.

[XFool]

"Wheeler suggested that reality is created by observers and that: “no phenomenon is a real phenomenon until it is an observed phenomenon.”

But how do I really know that observers exist? The only evidence for their existence is what I consider to be my own observations, but it's perfectly possible that I have unconsciously created everything I `observe', and that nothing at all exists apart from me ...

Simple test. When you have died, does the world still exist? Or is there just nothing?

Keep us posted.

[AsleepInYorkshire]

"Wheeler suggested that reality is created by observers and that: “no phenomenon is a real phenomenon until it is an observed phenomenon.”

But how do I really know that observers exist? The only evidence for their existence is what I consider to be my own observations, but it's perfectly possible that I have unconsciously created everything I `observe', and that nothing at all exists apart from me ...

Sometimes it's tough being God!

It's tougher worshipping you

AiY