Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Why isn't anyone else bothered by the fact that life is only on Earth?

news.ycombinator.com

11–20 of 67 posts

Re: Ask HN: Why isn't anyone else bothered by the fact that life is only on Earth?

#11
The easier explanation is a higher power seeded life here. If you find a functioning phone on a beach, you don't just think a bunch of silicon molecules just evolved into a phone over millions of years. Someone is manipulating those molecules via complex processes.

Most of the universe is entirely predictable. Planets and stars go in predictable orbits for billions of years. Climates are fairly predictable. But as soon as there's a tiny bit of life, the behavior of a planet becomes unpredictable.

We already have space travel. We have artificial satellites. We have radio signals. In a century, we'll have colonized other planets. In a millenia, we would be changing climates on planets or polluting the universe with more satellites. Nukes are supposedly visible from space. So it's surprising we haven't seen this behavior in the rest of the universe. But an advanced enough civilization may have learned how to clean up after themselves and hide all traces.

As far as life goes, we've been around for 5 billion years. There's enough space out there for life to have emerged 8 billion years ago. Even with just a billion or so years of tech head start elsewhere, they should be far ahead of us. Arguably they'd be so far ahead of us that they'd be godlike in comparison.

Where does this higher power come from? There's a lot of answers, but it's sensible seeing that there are other hierarchies. We are a higher power. Higher than cells, molecules, electrons, quarks. Earth may well be some kind of chip or an egg farm. Maybe our purpose as a species is heating up the planet for some kind of galactic yeast.

Re: Ask HN: Why isn't anyone else bothered by the fact that life is only on Earth?

#12
post #4

> The most reasonable explanation after you exclude something artificially forcing life to exist on Earth, or preventing it from existing anywhere else, is that we just need to explore the universe more, and grab samples from other planets in habitable zones. I suppose we would if we could. Distance presents a fairly big problem. With current technology just getting to the nearest known exoplanet would take about 10,…

I think the first problem is long-range communication capabilities. I am not in this field, but I think a network of optical communication nodes which span light years is needed. I imagine each node should be small, cheap to manufacture, and self-repairing in some form [1].

The second step is meeting energy requirements for deep space exploration, and I think the answer there is nuclear-powered deep space probes which can use the optical network to relay information back to Earth. But more importantly, there needs to be a self-contained autonomous system which can detect signs of life, ascertain next steps for making a determination, and ask for help when it doesn’t know the right next step, amongst other things [2].

Note that both of the things I am mentioning are half-done.

[1] https://www.nasa.gov/general/spear-probe-an-ultra-lightweigh...

[2] https://spacenews.com/space-force-taps-four-firms-for-laser-...

For me, the incentive for deep space exploration is answering the why question of human loneliness in the universe. But another incentive is deep space mining.

Re: Ask HN: Why isn't anyone else bothered by the fact that life is only on Earth?

#13
post #4

> The most reasonable explanation after you exclude something artificially forcing life to exist on Earth, or preventing it from existing anywhere else, is that we just need to explore the universe more, and grab samples from other planets in habitable zones. I suppose we would if we could. Distance presents a fairly big problem. With current technology just getting to the nearest known exoplanet would take about 10,…

We can buy more teslas to support space travel /s

Re: Ask HN: Why isn't anyone else bothered by the fact that life is only on Earth?

#17
post #10

There is life everywhere in the universe. Just because we haven’t find evidence doesn’t mean there isn’t life elsewhere in the universe. Till recently we didn’t even know that life exists in the depths of oceans near volcanic vents. We can’t even see astronauta footprints on the moon. How can we ‘see’ life on far away planets or astroids or whatever we haven’t discovered yet.

> There is life everywhere in the universe. How do you know this?

Trillions is an unfathomable number. There are trillions of planets out there. Statically there is life on one of the trillions of planets besides earth.

Re: Ask HN: Why isn't anyone else bothered by the fact that life is only on Earth?

#19
post #11

The easier explanation is a higher power seeded life here. If you find a functioning phone on a beach, you don't just think a bunch of silicon molecules just evolved into a phone over millions of years. Someone is manipulating those molecules via complex processes. Most of the universe is entirely predictable. Planets and stars go in predictable orbits for billions of years. Climates are fairly predictable. But as so…

Or you believe we are not a higher power, and are equally relevant permutations of the reality of the universe.

Re: Ask HN: Why isn't anyone else bothered by the fact that life is only on Earth?

#20
post #12
post #4

> The most reasonable explanation after you exclude something artificially forcing life to exist on Earth, or preventing it from existing anywhere else, is that we just need to explore the universe more, and grab samples from other planets in habitable zones. I suppose we would if we could. Distance presents a fairly big problem. With current technology just getting to the nearest known exoplanet would take about 10,…

I think the first problem is long-range communication capabilities. I am not in this field, but I think a network of optical communication nodes which span light years is needed. I imagine each node should be small, cheap to manufacture, and self-repairing in some form [1]. The second step is meeting energy requirements for deep space exploration, and I think the answer there is nuclear-powered deep space probes whic…

Given the time required for space travel compared to human lifespans this doesn’t get close to the threshold for something I would worry about. Even if we launched a probe to the nearest planet tomorrow neither I nor any of my descendants for hundreds of generations will know what it finds.

I get the impression that you have mixed science fiction, wishful thinking, press releases, and outright grifting together. A species that can’t unite to stop destroying the one planet we know can sustain life seems ill-prepared to unite to explore the universe.

Post reply on HN