When will failure in search for sapient galactic life prove that all self destruct near point of sentience?

Answer 1

I assume that you mean beside human beings, but there are two problems with your suggestion: first, we can't "prove" something simply through lack of evidence or even through a statistical model.

Second, we don't know anything about the frequency of sapient galactic life. On the one hand, there's no evidence to suggest that humans are particularly unique, i.e., we have no reason to believe that there wouldn't be others in the universe. However, we don't know whether the frequency of sapient organisms (let alone technological civilizations) occur at the rate of one per universe, one per every few galaxies, one per galaxy, one per solar system, or whatnot. If the frequency was, say, once per galaxy, it's possible that the lack of data is simply because civilizations don't encounter each other due to the difficulties of intergalactic travel.

Answer 2

Failure in the search for ET-I only indicates that at least one variable in the Drake equation is low enough to make detection extremely unlikely. The Drake equation is as follows:

N = R* • fp • ne • fl • fi • fc • L

Where,

N = The number of civilizations in The Milky Way Galaxy whose electromagnetic emissions are detectable.

R* =The rate of formation of stars suitable for the development of intelligent life.

fp = The fraction of those stars with planetary systems.

ne = The number of planets, per solar system, with an environment suitable for life.

fl = The fraction of suitable planets on which life actually appears.

fi = The fraction of life bearing planets on which intelligent life emerges. For more information, please visit Dr. William Calvin's "The Drake Equation's fi"

fc = The fraction of civilizations that develop a technology that releases detectable signs of their existence into space.

L = The length of time such civilizations release detectable signals into space.

Obviously, you're talking about the variable L when you mention self destruction. This is only one part of the equation, and we really have no idea about the rest of the variables.

We can make educated guesses based on our own level of technology, and the fact that we (having reached this level of technology) are not dead yet. It follows that L being a large value is really the safest assumption.

But even if it's value is low, there are too many other variables to consider before assuming that failure to detect ETI is a result of self destructive intelligence

Answer 3

Congrats, a very well stated and thoughtful question.

rjohnson and Jon R, the question stated "near point of sentience" not prior. "Near" would mean a neighborhood of that point past OR future. Since it is only a cosmic blip in time since the dawn of human civilization, there is NO need to exclude "human beings" from the question. The jury is still out on humanity...

Answer 4

The existence of the human race disproves the basic assumption of your question. If all species self terminate prior to sentience then we wouldn't exist.

Answer 5

If I could understand your question, I would give a meaningful answer. But, alas.....Oh, now I see the meaning of your question. Better sentence structure next time, please. But, to answer your question might cause the human race to self destruct. I am not willing to take that chance.

Answer 6

Please elaborate...........

Answer 7

translation, please?