1 2 3
Taiden
Taiden SuperDork
2/5/12 9:37 p.m.

First let me say that I am pretty damn far from being a hippie.

I'm sitting here chatting with a friend, the question of "are we alone" came up.

It got me thinking...

Let's say we are alone. Let's say we are the only planet in the universe with life. Those of science will agree that billions and billions of years, and extraordinary amounts of chance went into the creation of the little spark of life we call planet earth.

The fact that we exist is then a huge privlige in a universe of complete emptiness.

Shouldn't our goal as the only intelligent life forms in this giant expanse be to preserve the only example of life in the universe?

In a way, be our own curators for probably the most spectacular work of art that exists.

Thoughts?

Grizz
Grizz Dork
2/5/12 9:49 p.m.

I fall into the "Saying we're the only life out of the untold numbers of planets in the universe is surprisingly arrogant" camp, so I find the premise a bit lacking.

Other than that disclaimer, no, we don't really have an obligation. Mother Nature is a tenacious bitch, so a bunch of moderately smart monkeys aren't going to put much of a hitch in her plans. I bet new intelligences will pop up on Earth after we've had our run.

Osterkraut
Osterkraut SuperDork
2/5/12 9:52 p.m.

So because I believe that in an infinite universe there's an infinite amount of other sentient races, does that mean I can stop sorting my plastics now?

EastCoastMojo
EastCoastMojo GRM+ Memberand SuperDork
2/5/12 9:55 p.m.

All the other intelligent life forms have already figured out how to stay the hell away from us, so LIVE IT UP!

Grizz
Grizz Dork
2/5/12 9:55 p.m.

Yes.

It's a pain in the ass and if people stopped then recycling centers would hire me to do it and I need a job.

Taiden
Taiden SuperDork
2/5/12 9:58 p.m.

I personally believe that we have no basis for saying we are the only life in the universe, but we don't really know that we aren't either. So isn't that enough reason to keep everything going here as best we can?

Grizz
Grizz Dork
2/5/12 10:13 p.m.

See, I'm a cynical shiny happy person. When I think things like that my mind invariably responds with "yeah, work hard for the shiny hippy paradise, so you feel fulfilled when an asteroid hits the earth or pissy lizards come down and turn us into lunch"

I'm really of no use in discussions like this.

SyntheticBlinkerFluid
SyntheticBlinkerFluid Dork
2/5/12 10:27 p.m.

I'm gonna sound crazy but this planet is a living breathing creature. Mother nature will take its course and wipe us out of existence if she wants to. Volcanos, Earthquakes, Tsunamis, Hurricanes, Tornados, etc. are what knock us backwards. We can come back, but mother nature will never be tamed.

DoctorBlade
DoctorBlade Dork
2/5/12 10:33 p.m.

"The surest sign of life in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." -- Calvin and Hobbes

EastCoastMojo
EastCoastMojo GRM+ Memberand SuperDork
2/5/12 10:40 p.m.
DoctorBlade wrote: "The surest sign of life in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." -- Calvin and Hobbes

I wish I could plus this about a million times.

mad_machine
mad_machine GRM+ Memberand SuperDork
2/5/12 10:57 p.m.

on our own or even in small groups.. Humans are not so bad. It's once we get into big groups that stupidity seems to run rampent.

EastCoastMojo
EastCoastMojo GRM+ Memberand SuperDork
2/5/12 11:01 p.m.
mad_machine wrote: on our own or even in small groups.. Humans are not so bad. It's once we get into big groups that stupidity seems to run rampent.

OK, I want to plus that a million times too.

Grizz
Grizz Dork
2/5/12 11:02 p.m.
mad_machine wrote: on our own or even in small groups.. Humans are not so bad. It's once we get into big groups that stupidity seems to run rampent.

Depends on who's in the small groups. I know plenty of people who've got enough stupid to go around.

Trans_Maro
Trans_Maro Dork
2/5/12 11:32 p.m.

Remember the population of the universe is zero.

Simple mathematics tells us that the population of the Universe must be zero. Why? Well given that the volume of the universe is infinite there must be an infinite number of worlds. But not all of them are populated; therefore only a finite number are. Any finite number divided by infinity is as close to zero as makes no odds, therefore we can round the average population of the Universe to zero, and so the total population must be zero.

Grizz
Grizz Dork
2/5/12 11:34 p.m.

Hooray!

I don't exist!

MG Bryan
MG Bryan Dork
2/5/12 11:37 p.m.
Trans_Maro wrote: Remember the population of the universe is zero. Simple mathematics tells us that the population of the Universe must be zero. Why? Well given that the volume of the universe is infinite there must be an infinite number of worlds. But not all of them are populated; therefore only a finite number are. Any finite number divided by infinity is as close to zero as makes no odds, therefore we can round the average population of the Universe to zero, and so the total population must be zero.

It seems to me that if you want to look at it that way, the universe's population asymptotically trends toward zero.

gamby
gamby SuperDork
2/5/12 11:58 p.m.
Trans_Maro wrote: Remember the population of the universe is zero. Simple mathematics tells us that the population of the Universe must be zero. Why? Well given that the volume of the universe is infinite there must be an infinite number of worlds. But not all of them are populated; therefore only a finite number are. Any finite number divided by infinity is as close to zero as makes no odds, therefore we can round the average population of the Universe to zero, and so the total population must be zero.

mad_machine
mad_machine GRM+ Memberand SuperDork
2/6/12 12:06 a.m.

this assumes that the universe is infinite.

Grizz
Grizz Dork
2/6/12 12:08 a.m.

Doesn't constantly expanding outward generally mean infinite?

novaderrik
novaderrik Dork
2/6/12 12:39 a.m.
Taiden wrote: First let me say that I am pretty damn far from being a hippie. I'm sitting here chatting with a friend, the question of "are we alone" came up. It got me thinking... Let's say we are alone. Let's say we are the only planet in the universe with life. Those of science will agree that billions and billions of years, and extraordinary amounts of chance went into the creation of the little spark of life we call planet earth. The fact that we exist is then a huge privlige in a universe of complete emptiness. Shouldn't our goal as the only intelligent life forms in this giant expanse be to preserve the only example of life in the universe? In a way, be our own curators for probably the most spectacular work of art that exists. Thoughts?

if we are the only life in the universe, then why bother trying to save anything that no one else will ever see?

Graefin10
Graefin10 Dork
2/6/12 6:29 a.m.
Taiden wrote: Shouldn't our goal as the only intelligent life forms in this giant expanse be to preserve the only example of life in the universe? In a way, be our own curators for probably the most spectacular work of art that exists. Thoughts?

Yes we should, but we aren't. Far from it. We dig up ores and drill for oil and then trash much of it. We slice down irreplaceable forests like they were weeds with no thought of the future. We reproduce at a rate far exceeding the death rate even though we know that the planet is already overpopulated. We clearly see that our choices are rapidly warming the planet and if our decision is not to change our habits NOW we may be creating the beginning of the end of life as we know it. These facts matter to very few of us enough to take action to change our ways. Man's technology has increased but his nature hasn't. Instead of beating each other over the head with rocks, we can now do it from long distances with cruise missles. We still haven't learned to take full responsibility for our actions. Is it not time for man to consciously evolve into a new species instead of waiting for the next asteroid, super volcano, or planned nuclear war to do it for us? If given the choice to step backwards into the aftermath of the apocalypse perhaps if we act quickly . . .

Taiden, my guess is that you are relatively young. That's a great time to start thinking and asking those questions.

Streetwiseguy
Streetwiseguy SuperDork
2/6/12 7:12 a.m.

First off, let me say that I don't like waste, I don't E36 M3 where I eat, and I generally support green ideas.

Now: It bugs the heck out of me when greens speak of saving the planet. The planet will survive quite nicely, thank you very much. Humans, not so much.

Woody
Woody GRM+ Memberand SuperDork
2/6/12 7:19 a.m.

Good point. While the planet is essential to our existence, humans are not essential to the planet. We are parasites.

ThePhranc
ThePhranc HalfDork
2/6/12 7:27 a.m.
Grizz wrote: Doesn't constantly expanding outward generally mean infinite?

No. Just means we haven't hit the edge yet.

integraguy
integraguy SuperDork
2/6/12 7:28 a.m.

The idea that "we are the only ones" is an interesting point. It SHOULD resonate with all those folks who think we should "sanctify" life, yet, I don't believe it does.

In an almost seperate note, it is unfortunate, but every time humans move into uncharted territory (be it on this planet, under this planet, on another planet) we seem(?) to take the philosophy that "hey, this (whatever/where ever it is), is LIMITLESS...so don't worry about "trashing" the place, if we ever have to, we can clean it up later.

1 2 3

You'll need to log in to post.

Our Preferred Partners
l23kZdY0JHYE3Sknx2hzsP3xMmk6TswQEat2vA0xpEX5uMtY4Dnu94dptmzZrMnR