Extraterrestrial Life

Hi!

I noticed your list of SETI links on the Web. Might I suggest you add Sky & Telescope magazine's SETI section? It's at

The articles there include what I think is the best examination of the Drake equation as it stands today, and the most complete comparison of all the SETI programs now operating worldwide, with their strengths and weaknesses.

KryssTal Reply: You're absolutely correct. The link has been added. Thank you.

I read most of your site and was very fond of it.  I had read a lot of the presented material in popular science magazines and books, but had never seen it all together before, and in such a concise and simple way. Thank you for putting your site up!

KryssTal Reply: obrigado (thank you)

I also would like to tell you of Seti@home -- youīve probably heard of it, but I donīt see any harm in telling you about it anyway. Itīs a very interesting dristibuted computing experiment, which attempts to find radio transmissions from extra-terrestrial intelligence amidst data collected at the Arecibo radiotelescope. More info can be found at

KryssTal Reply: conhoso (I know)

I read your essay... and was wondering if there is anymore "hard evidence" that supports the opinion that there is no life elsewhere is the universe...

i am writing a report... and would like to have your input... thanx..

KryssTal Reply: That's a difficult one to prove because we are only familiar with a very tiny part of the universe. The solar system is one of 100 thousand million in our galaxy. There is a larger number of galaxies. It's a bit like trying to answer a question about carpets without leaving your bedroom!

The only way I can think is if you have evidence that conditions on the earth are unique. Water, one of the pre-requisites of life, is a common substance in the universe.

Good luck with your report.

thank you for your suggestions.... i have lots of information that supports my side.. (that is...intelligent extraterrestrial life does exist) soo i think that i will do fine..

thank you ohh so very much.. and best wishes with your cause..

Dear Kryss,

I read your essay "Are we alone in the universe" with great interest.

I wanted to expand on what you said slightly by adding a further comment.  Like you, I believe there must be other life in the universe but that we are never likely to meet it and that it has never visited us here.

The reason for this is the limited time a life form has to become independent of it's parent planet.  If we follow your argument that life will take around 1000 million years to form on a suitable planet, we then have a further period (as with our own Earth) of very unstable geology where life forms which evolve and develop, then become extinct through environmental changes beyond their control.  As the planet becomes more stable (again as with our own Earth) life forms have a chance to develop further. This allows for the growth in intelligence of the dominant life form.

The next problem however, is that the planet has a finite life and, as with our own species, the process of development of intelligent life will be full of "social" hurdles which delay the development of technology for the good of the species.  If we could go back and divert all the resources invested in non-productive (war, greed and leisure) development, we would probably be far, far further advanced in areas such as health (life span) and travel. Now if this had been the case, I believe we could argue that this would actually spell the end of development of a species because from our own evidence, almost all our technological advances have come through conflict. It is also the case that the only time we as a species genuinely pull together is when we are all faced by conflict.

With the clock ticking on the life span of the planet and the risk of partial or complete destruction of our planet or civilization from external, natural causes (asteroid, volcanic etc) for which we can have no control, growing more probable with time, we and other life forms in the universe would appear to be caught in an introverted development which will never allow galactic exploration.

In reality , as animals ourselves, we are still predominantly driven by the Darwin element of our genetic makeup (reproduce and better ourselves). if we arrived at a Utopian state of civilization which should allow the united development of the technology required for inter galactic travel, we wouldn't bother because we would have no incentive!

In summary:

The life cycle of a planet, capable of developing life, is probably to short for intelligent life to escape and travel beyond it's local space.

The fastest developing forms of intelligence will probably face so much conflict on their own planet that they will divert all there energies introspectively and never leave their planet.

Inter galactic travel therefore could never happen.

Sad...

In determining how many planets have life you must take into consideration the amount of time it lasts. It could only take up a small fraction of the history of the universe and be gone before we were here.

KryssTal Reply: This is true - a million years is a very short time on a cosmic scale.

Life contains these requirments -

Reproduction - Abitlity to produce more of its own species
Transport - Ability to move substances through itself
Movement - Ability to walk, swim, fly, crawl, etc.
Growth - Increase in cell size and/or number
Regulation - Ability to adjust to outside conditions
Response - Ability to respond to stimulai
Excretion - Ability to get rid of wastes
Nutrition - Ingestion, Digestion, Egestion

KryssTal Reply: We have to keep definitions simple as we only have one example of life - our planet's.

Thanks for your comments - I'll be checking your web site soon.

Hello and sorry, I read your WWW page and noticed you perhaps would like to know about my book (it is about alien contacts) Into my page you'll find some very honest comments on it

Thanks

Hello,

I would like to know if you can direct me to any information on the Internet (or anywhere else) that would constitute a critical analysis of Fred Heeren's religious agenda as it applies to his criticisms of the S.E.T.I. search, and his book "Show Me God". The centuries-long war of religion against science seems never-ending. As a person of wide reading on science and in agreement with the philosophal thinking of people such as the late Carl Sagan, I have become disturbed by Fred Heeren's heavy-handed attack on science (both fringe and mainstream) through his religious preachings via his books, quarterly magazine, and Internet web presence. The man's technique of pitting "science against itself" in order to promote the maintream religious cause, must, I feel, have its share of scientific critics.

KryssTal Reply: I've not read the book or heard of the author. If I find anything I'll let you know. If I was a betting man, I would keep my money on science!

I agree. I just had a long debate with an astrology/religius adherent and it was quite an experience. Many such people are militantly anti-science and anti-skeptic....

Thanks for your kind reply.

I honestly feel that Christianity would suffer more than any other religion due to the doctrines of original sin and redemption through Christ's vicarious sacrifice.

If humans are indeed sinful creatures who required the death of God to redeem them, then aliens would have to be either sinless according to Biblical standards or they would be hopelessly lost.

KryssTal Reply: Perhaps they'll do to us what the Spaniards did to the Aztecs: call us Heretics and impose THEIR gods onto us!!

Christians believe that Christ died once and only once for sin. There is no room in Biblical teaching for Christ to have gone to other worlds, incarnated there, and died for other races.

Therefore, if there are other races, and if they they did sin as the Bible teaches that humans did, these beings are hopelessly damned because there would be no way to have their sins atoned for (and evangelism to other worlds is rather limited now, isn't it?)

The proven existence of extraterrestials who had no hope of redemption would cause many to question the justice of a God alleged by the Bible to be loving and merciful (i.e: Why would he place the only hope of redemption in the hands of a race hundreds, if not possibly thousands of years, away from space travel).

KryssTal Reply: I'm sure that people who want to beleive will find a way of beleiving.

I think this would probably force most Christians to rethink their beliefs in original sin, blood sacrifice and redemption, and the existence of eternal damnation in a literal hell.

KryssTal Reply: It would all make it very interesting though, wouldn't it!

Why liquid is required? There may be life forms that don't require liquids to live. We haven't understand the space totally yet. There may be "aliens" (I called them aliens because most of the people call them "aliens") in the space that is only formed of energy or sth else. Maybe we already have encountered them, but we couldn't know how to look.

Mankind always think they are the best race in the space, but I bet it's not.

KryssTal Reply: I'm sorry but I think your English is not good enough to understand this essay properly. None of the things you have accused me of are correct.

I'm sorry about misunderstanding your essay.

KryssTal Reply: This essay states that it is based on what we know. Anything else is speculation. I only speculate depending on our current knowledge.

But I still believe that liquids and carbon are not required for life.

KryssTal Reply: Carbon is special in the way that it forms compounds. Chemistry is divided into two groups: the chemistry of carbon; and the chemistry of everything else. Look at some of the examples in the essay. No other element is capable of this behaviour. The Universe is only made up of the 100 elements and the laws of chemistry are the same everywhere.

As for liquids - this is because of the properties of solids and gases.

There might be life forms that are not based on chemical reactions.

KryssTal Reply: We only know of two types of processes that produce energy: chemical and nuclear. Anything else is speculation.

These life forms might be based on some other energy source which may be we haven't yet explained or encountered.

KryssTal Reply: This is true but without this knowledge, we cannot make any statements about this.

Also I think that other life forms can visit us using a space-time gate.

KryssTal Reply: This is an idea from your head. There is no information about this so we can only speculate wildly. There is no evidence for this idea.

This is not impossible if we think that we still cannot explain how the space formed (but they might explain it).

KryssTal Reply: This is a religious statement. It has no place in a scientific discussion.

According to my personal idea, the other life forms have been visiting us since early ages.

KryssTal Reply: Many people believe this but there is not a single piece of evidence for this. The evidence may come tomorrow but right now this is speculation.

I am glad that my essay has made you think - this is the purpose. By the way - your name looks Turkish. Where are you from?

* * * * * * * * Thanks for answering my e-mails. Now I know what I should.

Of course it wouldn't be a scientifical essay, if you placed speculations in it. And I was wrong in one (don't say "only one!") point: mankind cannot use systems that haven't been researched yet, I think I watch too many science fiction films. (But they cause me thinking and I love thinking.)

Also you are right I'm from Turkey, Ankara.

Thanks for your help.

KryssTal Reply: Teshekur - I have some photos of Turkey on my travel page.

Would you post your review of the recent book "Rare Earth" for its SETI implications?

KryssTal Reply: Hi - I think this message has come through to me by mistake.

First paragraph: second sentence:

You're basing your entire essay on a false assumption. Obviously, no one can prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that there are NOT any other life forms in this universe; but by saying nobody knows the answer you are by default stating that all those who report aliens are either deliberately lying, being manipulated by others, misinterpreting what they've seen, or mentallly unbalanced. You leave absolutely no possiblity for some of these reports being accurate and factual. If someone encountered an alien they would personally know the answer, whether or not they could prove it to someone else. So, I tell you, someone does know the answer.

KryssTal Reply: Thank you for your email.

You are correct that nobody can prove that extraterrestrial life does not exist. This is because we have not studied every portion of the Universe. However it would be extremely easy to prove the existance of extraterrestrial life. We can look at 1,000,000 planets, not find life, yet prove nothing. However, a single example of extraterrestrial life would prove its existance. So the two strands are not equivalent.

I understand that there are many accounts of alien encounters. However none of these are definative. There is no single example of extraterrestrial life that has been documented and studied by the scientific community. No material evidence exists that I am aware of. Evidence must be more than anecdotal.

PS: SETI is also based on an assumption. The basic assumption is that an intelligent civilization somewhere would try to broadcast their existence and location to everyone who might receive their signal; just like encouraging your children to publish their name and phone number on a very distasteful website. SETI does not, and has not the ability to, receive the kind of radio/EM radiation that would be due to normal communications. It is based on the assumption someone would deliberately direct a transmission in the hydrogen line toward our planet, a VERY strong signal. Who would do that in the first place ? And what a limited study with such an infinitessimal chance for success.....

KryssTal Reply: I suspect that our chances of success are very limited. Not because I don't think that such life exists. I think communication between life in the Universe will always be difficult because of the time and space involved.

I would be more interested in finding any life, not necessarily intelligent life. If life is ever found anywhere else in the solar system, it would imply that life is very common in the Universe. However, if no such life is discovered, it tells us very little about how common it is. It may be one per stellar system or one per million stellar systems.

Either way these are fascinating questions.

I have just read your essay Are We Alone in the Universe. I am currently writing an essay for school with a similer theme to that of your "The prospects of finding extraterrestrial life in our solar system" and wonder if you could be so kind as to give me your insigth towards it.

Thank you for your time

KryssTal Reply: I'm sorry about the delay in responding - I've been house-buying. I hope your essay went OK.

Hi- I am currently at uni and am doing a module for non-scientists in astronomy. I am trying to research for an essay on the probability that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe. I found your essay helpful and thought provoking, but would be interested to know how you believe people would react to conclusive evidence of the existence of E.T., how humans really would react to first contact. Cheers.

KryssTal Reply: That has to be one of the most interesting questions humanity faces. The problem is that the answers are not symmetric.

For example, if no extraterrestrial life is found in our solar system, it really does not tell us much because the solar system is such a tiny part of the Universe. However, if we did find life in the solar system, it would boost the chances of finding intelligent life elsewhere. This is because, two independent sources of life in one solar system would imply that the Universe is teeming with life.

As for First Contact, I assume you mean with intelligent life.

Well, let us look at our own history. What has been the result when two civilisations meet? When one of those civilisations is superior technologically, the usual result is colonisation and / or genocide. I think that intelligent life will be much the same anywhere in the Universe. I hope I am wrong in this but I would err on the side of caution.

Philosophically, it may affect the things people believe, especially with organised religions that preach a special place in the Universe for humanity. But in our history, religions grow with the technologically advanced societies that conquer and absorb other societies. Islam, for example never conquered Europe because the Moors lost a battle in France and the Ottomans lost a battle near Vienna. Christianity conquered America and Australia because the conquerors were far more technologically advanced than the indigenous people encountered. And this is nothing to do with the actual intelligence of the peoples involved. Europe had more domesticated plants and animals which gave them more power and resources.

I would recommend you read the book Guns, Germs and Steel for more about how and why societies evolve at differing rates. Click on one of these Amazon links for details.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0393038912/theultimathomepa
http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0099302780/theultimathome02

Good luck with your essay.