Why Are We Alone? Fermi Paradox Solutions With Author Trevor Williams 

I still think it's distance. I believe there is definitely other civilizations out there but I think they may be to far for us to have detected yet.

I think it’s that it’s not just one step, on Fermi’s equation that’s the issue. It would be that each step needed could be incredible rare. So that each step required, being incredibly unlikely, would mean the probability of there being intelligent life goes down logarithmically. Not up as first suggested.

To use the concept of Occam's Razor, often the simplest explanation is the right one, and in my mind, the simplest explanation is that using the combination of time and distance, we simply haven't bumped into any of the other civilizations yet. I'm sure they're out there, but the universe is obviously enormous and it seems a little too easy for civilizations to miss each other in the vastness of space.

It makes zero sense for biological life to travel the stars. Radiation, debris, mechanical unreliability over prolonged periods of time,... make it unattractive. Any civilization that is advanced is quite likely to value life and knowledge of it's members and thus will strongly seek to reduce loss. What does make sense is for advanced civilizations to send robots out to harvest materials and knowledge. Equally any biological life coming to Earth would be at extreme risk of death by our bacteria and viruses. Who knows how they might affect them... and their microorganisms us. It would be lunacy to even contemplate flying to a planet you KNOW is inhabited. Lunacy. Total lunacy.

YES, we are unaware of a great many things ( including ETIs ), of this you can be sure!

Me going asleep as i also have to go asleep too wake up at six. It's 1 in the morning in Dublin Ireland 🤣

@@GreedRuinsEverything too late, my night is over.

I listen to these at work!!! 🤣 so I just leave it till I'm there lol

Best podcast in the world

I like insane curiosity too...

Check out Isaac Arthur and his channel. His conversations and content are incredible. Thank me later 😉

Isaac Arthur is great too.

Should be in school lessons instead of religion

Thank you Danny, great to know you like it. Every artist used on Event Horizon is linked in the description.

I agree

I hate music meant to toy with my emotions. Decent data shouldn't need iT's soundtrack to be so obvious.

Reminds me of Sagan's Cosmos

@@andrewfrankovic6821 you’re in the minority when it comes to music and info. As a classical musician myself I can attest through my own research papers that music is a definite plus for those learning new information.

A lot of good points here. But I do think that Fermi Paradox is an incomplete equation because there are many other variants that the equation just ignore. I do think that high intelligent life able to develop technology is a way too rare. Look at Neanderthals. They lived for about 400ty, they had almost the same physiology as ours and many studies say they had culture and language. But they never left the stoneage. Why? Therefore, to reach what we have reached requires so many things and luck that we might be one of the first technological civilizations in the entire observable universe.

@@TVaz7777 A few quick responses: 1.) Statistically, it's in the realm of logical possibility that ours might be, as you mention, the only technological civilization in the visible Universe (approx. in an 18 billion LY radius). There are good reasons, however, to argue that that likelihood is vanishingly small (i.e., it's logically possible, but naturally highly improbable): 1.A) There's a version of "the prosecutor's fallacy" or PF (i.e., confusing or equivocating P(E|I) with P(l | E), the conditional probabilities of evidence, given presumed innocence, with that of innocence, given the evidence, ceteris paribus) one must guard against, in these: "We may be the only intelligent civilization game in town" considerations. In short: Lack of evidence does NOT imply evidence of lack. 1.B) How does the PF creep up into some of these methodological assumptions? One of the most intriguing aspects of the question for detecting ETI technosignatures has to do with its overlap with archeology and anthropology: See, for instance, the Event Horizon July 16, 2020 episode, where John Michael Godier interviews Prof. Jason Wright, in which they embark on the question of detecting past technosignatures on the Earth and solar system, in geological deep time scales. How do we know whether or not dinosaurs used cell phones? The Silurian hypothesis is one which entertains the question of whether advanced civilizations evolved in the distant (or even recent) geological past on Earth, of ETI origins. But (mutatis mutandis) you could extend that question past a panspermia hypothesis and ask if Earth-bound organisms achieved technological heights we simply have not detected yet? (And maybe cannot detect at all--plate tectonics and the biosphere and a variable climate do a wonderful job of erasing technosignatures in vanishingly small time scales). 1.C) So, for instance, (in relation to 1.B) paleoanthropology is really scratching at a tiny surface when it comes to the Homo Erectus fossil record--we really at this point cannot assess what heights the Neanderthal may have reached--let alone let's not forget that from a standpoint of epigenetics they never really went "extinct," right? Neanderthal DNA is alive and well among many ethnic strains of Cro Magnon human DNA. 2.) So l bring up the PF as a cautionary point concerning epistemic and methodological humility: Again l repeat, our clumsy methods of detecting ETI technosignatures are really in their embryonic stage. And when you consider where we rank on the Kardashev scale, again, we're a species that has only mastered fire technology "a few minutes ago" in geological time scales. In general, from the standpoint of the history of science, anthropocentric uniqueness arguments don't fare so well. For centuries scientists argued that "only humans" possess tool-making technology, language generation, concepts of death and the afterlife, rational negotiation capabilities in building up a "social contract" in terms of trade-offs of needs and wants, etc. Modern- day primatology and macrobiology has put us in our place: We aren't the only intelligent proto-technological pro-social species on the planet, when we examine similar mammilial species of kindred genotype (or even more broadly avian species, etc.) 3.) Now of course, one must qualify and emphasize (regarding 2.) above) the difference between an intelligent pro-social species versus one capable of evolving into a technological civilization. The latter is obviously a special case of the former and statistically maybe relatively rare. Although HOW rare, well that all depends on the methodological capabilities and the empirical ranges by which we can detect techno signatures in principle and in practice. And again, we have just begun in that endeavor. 4.) To take a scientifically conservative position, of course, one must guard against an "either/or" and "all or nothing" fallacy: l am not suggesting that the visible Universe "must" be chock full of Kardashev Scale 1 (and greater) ETIs everywhere you look just because we haven't detected anything yet. (Though from the Drake equation, I wouldn't be surprised the Universe is teeming with them, even if technological ETI civilizations are relatively rare in their own local statistical sample spaces). I am aware of the Cosmic Filter arguments, for example, which suggest that natural factors (e.g., supernovae, etc.) and species-generated factors (e.g., civilizations destroying themselves by evolving unsustainably and/or warfare, and for a host of other reasons). 5.) On the other hand, from a Bayesian standpoint, as a betting strategy, l believe it's a better incentive for us to assume the alternative hypothesis (H1, i.e., that the visible Universe is teeming with techno signatures we haven't been able to detect yet either in principle or in practice) than the null hypothesis (H0, there "aren't any" intelligent ETI technological civilizations out there.) Scientific progress has often been incentivized by courageously speculating and challenging retrenched positions: This is not just a moral or a sociological point I'm making, it rests at the very heart of the scientific method itself: "lmagination is more important than knowledge" (Albert Einstein) sometimes. And adopting a more risk-prone speculative position also enables us to be more sensitized toward anomalies that we can investigate, rather than just ignore them or brush them aside or explain them away in defense of the null hypothesis. (Imre Lakatos, for example, mentions this "belt" of auxiliary assumptions are often what insulate scientific research programmes against real discovery and innovation.)

Great idea. Will do.

So a poll with potentially 100+ responses? 🤨

@@EventHorizonShow I agree that would be awesome 😎

Glad to know that.

Mine too

And mine

Absolutely!

Same, I wish I could turn back time when I had still more videos to watch from JMG/Event Horizon, now I have caught up and have to wait after each video.

I clear my calendar and make a tea..

Thanks Strick! Glad you enjoyed it.

It's a lazy hypothesis.

@@7Earthsky Agreed & very fantastical

@@7Earthsky does yours require hard work?

Once you fall into the event horizon you can NEVER leave

@@robdee81 still cant

Thursday is when my work week starts, and it makes it such a smooth transition into work mode knowing I will have JMG and IA to listen to!

@@warehouselead awesome! 👍

Thanks for mentioning Issac!!! Didn’t know he existed

@@leonb.670 You might also like Cool Worlds. If you have not seen them already.

@@warehouselead ah yes another awesome channel!

Sure is❤️

Thank you! Very much appreciated.

Lmao

Mass nap lol

JMG has such a mellow voice, I sometimes doze when I don't really want to.

My thoughts exactly because at one point AI will take over and advance us even further, humans won't really be playing a role anymore.

@@napoleano2748 yeah, AI is going to need a little touch of human creativity to produce the best stuff (as we know it)

Working on it.

Very good point.

Which is why they take such a keen interest in anything we do that involves nuclear power.

@John Barber There was a good episode of The Orville on sort of that subject.

Interesting! What if they were on such a different time scale that they just haven’t noticed us? Like we developed over the course of a long weekend...

Displaying what?

Awesome Darrin, thank you.

Yes, and violence is a premitive behavior. At this point, most civilisation must be peaceful but they are also carefull. If we are new they must have the knowledge that we might be dangerous as a dog could be to his master under fear.

There could be hundreds of millions of alien civilizations across billions of galaxies that exist right now, concurrently with our own civilization. That’s not even counting billions of alien civilizations that have already come and gone into and out of existence, and the billions that will come and go in the future. And we will NEVER be able to interact with any of them or have any clue of their existence. However, I imagine that there are many alien civilizations out there that are close enough to each other that they do communicate with each other if not contact each other. I just think that’s extremely rare, like Super Lotto odds rare. There are probably solar systems where intelligent life developed independently on 2 or more planets within the same solar system. Lucky them. The universe is infinite, all combinations are possible but again those odds of 2 alien civilizations ever being able to communicate or even “hear” is unsurprisingly astronomical.

Hope it helps.

Feel free to watch / listen when Asimov debates with religious fanatics on RU-vid. They are very funny. In class with Frank Zappa's debates.

Good timing Bruno!

More like a prison

Perfect way to relax.

Great show.

Aliens believe in you!

Whys that then ?