"Fire" Could Be The Key To Solve The Fermi Paradox! 

Within a short 900 ly Radius around our system we count no fewer than 40 potential dyson swarm/spheres. Sure, 900 light years is a great distance, but these current numbers are phenomenal in their potential for *nearby* life outside of our solar system.

@@strixfiremind 900 LYs for US now is beyond anything we can even think of. I don't want to sound pessimistic cuz I'm not. In our enormous universe there is, I believe, all kinds of intelligent life. Yet we can't yet see the details that are necessary to definitely say there is life and there is intelligent life. Some day in the future we will be able to see much more detail. Specific detail. I know we are advancing but unfortunately we have a ways to go. I watched the Dyson sphere video, and they are a little more distant than you're speaking about. We can't definitely say if there is life on Mars, Venus, Titan, Europa, and on, and on. Those bodies are in our own solar system. So I hold to the idea that it's the distance.

@@jssomewhere6740 If you watched the video in question you know the number of candidates found was 53; I spoke of the 40ish that are *within* the 900 ly range. And sure, that is out of our current range, would take a generational ship likely 4000 years + to make that journey; but I wasn't speaking about us. If even one of those checks out, that shows an intelligence likely capable of covering those distances much faster than us, they already have questions of power answered. And saying it is "beyond anything we can think of" silly hyperbole.. if a single person can think in those scales, you lose; and many of us do think in these scales.

@@strixfiremind fine you win leave me alome

@@strixfiremind Dude, the man @jssomewhere6740 clearly meant distance to visibly see (from our planet's observation), DISCOVER (as in now) 🙄 I agree with him. However my comment does slightly agree with portions of yours.😌

Indeed, this whole place was created for our edification and the experience, it is the medium in which we are tested. There are no extraterrestrial beings period. There is no way to determine whether or not what is seen in the heavens is real or not. A lot of assumptions have been made about many things that are not subject to being physically examined and looked at from all perspectives. Empirical analysis, the very basis of what constitutes true science, cannot be applied to what is seen in the heavens. Manipulation of or producing a predictable effect from anything in the heavens is as well not possible. Yet you have a considerable amount of people who actually claim with a straight face that they believe in science. I'm sure they mean they believe what science has publicly been claimed to have been proven. Science isn't meant to be a faith requiring faith in anything. That's the point of being empirical, an independent methodology that is restricted to only what can be physically observed, inspected, and most importantly tested. Yes as a consequence of eliminating the usual ways that results can be fabricated, falsified, and manipulated in order to deceive many people to the benefit or detriment of a specific target. Real science is supposed to be immune from the political ideologies of the time. So any politician that claims their actions are founded on/supported by scientific principles are trying to deceive(lie) to all who will listen. If what can be observed by anyone, doesn't match what is claimed, then what is claimed is wrong. If something that is claimed to be known and understood as a discipline and is able to display actions or features that either couldn't be predicted or explained, then we don't know or understand it period. A question cannot be dismissed or ignored because the only truthful answer is, "We don't know." There should be no shame or hesitancy in saying one does not know the answer to what is essentially the unknowable. There should be nothing but shame to have the temerity to lie to everyone, especially children, about that which has no tangible support for any claims of being true. Much as religion was once used to undermine and control large numbers of people, the powers that shouldn't be now use the claim of science to undermine and control large groups of people.

You're right! Those factors play a big role in determining if there's a fire or not.

You need to melt and form metal to make things. Even bricks are hardened in fire.

CREATE our type of intelligence and conditions are rare..‼️ Let’s hope so, like one of a kind in the Universe. LOL.

Really how many other planets have you personally visited?

@@doubleooh7337 Does Walmart stores qualify as a Planets..??

It's a valid perspective, but the search for extraterrestrial intelligence is ongoing. The Fermi Paradox prompts us to consider why we haven't encountered other civilizations despite vast possibilities.

What are “ fractal odds”? Please explain. There are odds and probability mate, but fractal odds? Sounds like you have no ideas of mathematical theory whatsoever.

Tbh people never really specify if we're talking about the milky way or the whole universe. I think there's probably life similar to earths in our galaxy, but one in 5 billion species have ever used fire productively on earth, a lot of other species have seen us using it but still can't copy/learn that skill (sea creatures just can't anyway), and furthermore we've not really done anything that will ever be picked up (I think our radiowaves deminish to much over interstellar distances). When we factor in the 1/5000000000 chance of using fire the chances aren't so hot to see "intelligent" life from a far within our galaxy. I think in the entire universe probably, but will we ever be able to see that? Knowing my luck an alien is probably reading this thinking "what a clown, let's beam him up and give him the anal probe".

Oxygen does not make a better life form, just a different one. An oak tree is 99% as genetically sophisticated as any mammal. It was sexual reproduction that caused the explosion of genetic diversity and rapid diversification of life. "Life producing chemicals" are probably the ones we already have. We have found amino acids in comets and asteroids. CO2 + cyanide followed by reduction easily gives you glycine. Similar chemistry makes the bases of DNA/RNA rapidly with nothing other than an energy source and some water. Silicon cannot make life. For an element to have a mild redox cycle it cannot bind irreversibly to oxygen. Silicon, phosphorus, sulfur and even chlorine bind almost irreversibly to oxygen, with little pi-bond character. Carbon can easily undergo redox with oxygen going all the way from methane, to methanol all the way to the carboxylic acids and CO2.