Loading 7 Votes - +

Extraterrestrial Life Unlikely

Since the dawn of the scientific age when telescopes revealed the existence of planets other than our own, humankind began asking questions and fantasizing about whether Earth holds the only complex and intelligent life in the universe. All sorts of opinions have been circling around for a long time, and even a simple Google search reveals hundreds of thousands of items on the subject.
Professor Andrew Watson from the University of East Anglia has derived some mathematical models (pdf) in an attempt to show the likelihood that any intelligent life outside our planet is highly improbable. His main point comes from his theory that it took several very difficult evolutionary steps to get us to where we are, and these steps took 4 billion years, only developing intelligent life near the end of Earth’s total habitability range. This range is based on the effects the sun will have as it expands in the next few billion years. These unlikely combinations of events lead Professor Watson to conclude that intelligent life on other planets is extremely unlikely. He states, “At present, Earth is the only example we have of a planet with life. If we learned the planet would be habitable for a set period and that we had evolved early in this period, then even with a sample of one, we’d suspect that evolution from simple to complex and intelligent life was quite likely to occur. By contrast, we now believe that we evolved late in the habitable period, and this suggests that our evolution is rather unlikely. In fact, the timing of events is consistent with it being very rare indeed.”

Similarly tagged OmniNerd content:

Thread parent sort order:
Thread verbosity:

The Mighty Stephen Hawking thinks otherwise, "Primitive life is very common and intelligent life is fairly rare …. Some would say it has yet to occur on earth." He believes there’s a likelihood of life outside of Earth, just that it’s not anything like we’d expect.

For more good Stephen Hawking fun, check out the Mighty Steven Hawking rap.

3 Votes  - +
Sure there is! by smcbride

There is no new knowledge just old recycled information lost over time, if they didn’t exist, we would not be talking about them! How could we know about something that has no know end. Our knowledge is very limited when it comes to the universe.

It seems that his thesis is based on the fact that you have to have Earth-like conditions to grow life, and it has to last long enough to achieve the series of unfortunate coincides that leads to intelligent life.

Earth-like conditions are incredibly diverse, though. What about these guys? I’d say that the conditions that they live in are nothing like the conditions that these guys live in. Stretch the mind, professor, stretch the mind. Life can develop lots of places, and where there can be life, there can be intelligent life. With an infinite universe and an infinite timeline…

(lets not let this devolve into an intelligent design discussion)

The Universe is just too darn big for intelligent life to occur only once—although because it is so big, the chances of actually meeting that other life seems rather slim. Then again, in the Hitchhiker’s series, Douglas Adams suggests that because of the vastness of the cosmos, even a universe full of life-bearing planets would still have an effective population of zero. So, I guess we’re not really here.

I haven’t looked at the PDF, yet (plan to – just wanted to capture my initial reaction) but my guess is that it’s really irrelevant.

From the UEA text…

Prof Watson suggests the number of evolutionary steps needed to create intelligent life, in the case of humans, … probably include the emergence of single-celled bacteria, complex cells, specialized cells allowing complex life forms, and intelligent life with an established language…. His model … suggests an upper limit for the probability of each step occurring is 10 per cent or less….

When we’re wearing our "frequentist" hats in interpreting probabilities, we’d immediately suggest he’s entirely full of shit. He’s estimating the probabilities for these events based on a sample of one. It’s like walking up to a random person on the street, measuring his cholesterol level, and then publishing a paper on human cholesterol levels.

Even if we’re more sensible and tell the frequentists to go stuff it, and break out the Bayesian interpretation, we’re still pretty certain he’s just making up numbers to get the answer he wants. Again, what we know is that it happened once. It could be almost inevitable that any replicator eventually forms cells, which aggregate and specialize, leading to intelligence.

You’re absolutely right—I hadn’t considered the statistical angle, but it does seem rather odd to be making theories based on only a single known sample.

Another big question in reports like this is the question of what is meant by "intelligent life". Even defining the word "intelligence" is difficult enough, let alone considering the possibilities of alien life having evolved with entirely different environmental and perhaps social conditions. If intelligence means using tools, there’s plenty of other life forms on Earth that use tools. If it’s confined to use of language, we know that dolphins and whales use very sophisticated forms of communication. Heck, even insects can communicate their condition and needs to each other.

I read a short-story about a group of aliens that captured some humans (rendered naked by an extreme environment) and treated them like animals, until one of the humans caught a mouse in his cell, and put it in a wicker cage—the moral of the story is that only intelligent life forms put other life forms in cages. But then, spiders and house cats and all sorts of predators trap other animals for food and amusement all the time, so even making cages isn’t limited to human-like intelligence…

And who knows what any potential aliens would measure intelligence by—the ability to travel faster than light, or maybe the ability to detect and predict solar storms or eat with your toes, or maybe shapeshift or some other strange thing.

In the end, I think we have to remain agnostic about extraterrestrial life—it may or may not exist, but we’re really in no position to decide how likely it is, or what it will even look like if we encounter it. The odds of finding people that look and behave like we do seems pretty unlikely, but life in general? Who knows? Not Mr. Watson.

It seems that Prof. Watson (and he admits it in his paper) is basing all the evolutionary steps from the emergence of life itself to the existence of intelligent life on the singular and only known experience gained from our earth. What he’s trying to say it seems, is that each major step towards intelligent life had a large chance of not succeeding, making each subsequent step all the more improbable as a whole. He claims his model will work for any system based on rare occurrences when he states (from the paper), "Any other property of organisms that is governed by a sequence of rare, random events could be modeled in the same way. For example, if the evolution of an organism that is able to breathe fluorine gas requires a sequence of rare evolutionary events, the same model could be used to investigate when in the history of their planets such organisms tend to appear, in the rare cases that they ever do.‘’
He is also assuming that each habitable planet has a window of about 5-6 billion earth years in which to evolve intelligent life, and since ours took towards the end of this time to develop intelligence, the other ones would probably take that long also (and maybe never make it). He does have a point in this; if intelligent life evolved in the first 500 million years, we might expect that many more planets would contain intelligent life. But, how do we know without having any nearby examples that earth isn’t just on the "edge" of what it take to develop intelligent life, and that’s what made it take so long?

Overall, I guess he’s telling us something we already know, that life intelligence and the consciousness to realize those facts are, in our present experience, rare phenomena however they eventually arrived.

Share & Socialize

What is OmniNerd?

Omninerd_icon Welcome! OmniNerd's content is generated by nerds like you. Learn more.

Voting Booth

Dzhokar Tsarnaev deserves due process?

36 votes, 4 comments