I just love hearing the guests complement the quality of your questions, John. I can feel their appreciation for your understanding of their work. Always a pleasure to experience. 🤙
Great and accurate comment! I hear this compliment to JMG way more often than any other interviewer both in and out of science. He really does his homework and thinks deeply about the content. Awesome stuff!
One thing that should not be overlooked when attempting to calculate energy consumption based on numbers of people, is how much energy is required for “computing”. Look at the consumption levels of “data centers”, and the number of new data centers currently being planned by the major tech companies for the near future. Our energy needs appear to be on the brink of exponential growth in the near term.
I don't have much respect for the Kardashev scale. It is very poorly defined and even between different scientists its defined differently. It is stupid actually and the "Zubrin Scale" which I saw in a different video was much better thought out.
Fantastic episode, John! Really amazing interview! Thanks!!! 😃 I just disagree with dr. Kopparapu in one point... He said we don't need new categories, but we kinda do. Not categories exactly, but theories about what we could detect if other civilizations are out there. Let me give just one example: Dyson spheres. Since we have this idea we can calculate what to luck for, we lucked and now we have a few candidates. You know? I'm not saying any theory would be guaranteed, or that those are in fact Dyson spheres. What I'm saying is that without the theoretical work we could detect an alien civilization and not recognize it. And then create some kind of natural explanation for it. Anyway, that's something I've been saying for a while. But his work about detecting solar panels fits exactly here and kudos for him for doing it! Anyway, stay safe there with your family! 🖖😊
I'm torn on it and I'm going to explain why in a video sometime soon on the JMG channel. I think a new categorization system might be helpful, and there actually is an alternative floating around out there. The Barrow Scale.
Always love the guest apperances by Dr.Ravi Kopparapu. I have read a lot of his papers on atmospheric modeling of exoplanets and related topics. Always a solid read!
18:00 ish: The planet's energy balance is an excellent point that is missed too often. All energy that enters Earth has to leave Earth. A little fraction of daily insolation may accumulate over time or be released over time to supplement it, but that doesn't affect the order of mag processes; on the contrary, this is a tiny fraction of the planetary energy flux balance. It's fair to say that we are (were, before the Industrial Revolution) don't use natural solar _energy;_ we use Sun as a _low entropy_ energy source far away from radiation/matter equilibrium, and release _all_ incoming energy in a _high entropy_ state, a.k.a. "waste heat", by IR radiation, which is close to such equilibrium, into space. "Waste heat" is not a good name for it; it sounds as if can somehow not be "wasted". It cannot, on the astronomical scale-the planet will find the thermal equilibrium. We can observe with our own eyes what happens to the planet when energy fortuitously accumulated in coal and other Carboniferous deposits (due to a mass extinction of plant life, FWIW!) is thoughtlessly released over even a much shorter timescale... Yes, we could in the near future direct more energy to heat up terraformed Mars, but the number of habitable planets in a system that may benefit from it also doesn't affect the order of mag energy consumption: there hardly could be 10 planets that an expanding civilisation may use in their system. K2 implicitly assumes not only energy collectors in space, but also energy-or, rather, low-entropy-use in space. Given that stars grow in luminosity over main sequence evolution, a habitable and formerly urable planet can hardly take a few percent more energy input than it naturally has without thermodynamically catastrophic consequences. This is also often missed when speaking of fusion energy (it applies to fission energy, too). We have unlimited fuel for both energy technologies; we're limited in their use by the amount of energy that we use up and evacuate into space without frying ourselves. Ravi makes that point, albeit not as explicitly. Needless to say, "unlimited" energy _for the use by any civilisation on its ur-planet_ from fission, fusion or collection in space is a pipe dream: the considering of the planetary-scale thermodynamics tells it plain and simple.
I love these kinds of discussions. I haven't watched one of your videos in a while, but when I do I'm always pleasantly reminded of why Event Horizon is one of my favorite subscriptions on this platform. The quality of the interviews has been consistently high-caliber for years now.
I've always been suspect of the Kardashev scale. When technology improves, it usually becomes more energy efficient. So for example, a spacefaring civilization may not need to gobble up the entire output of a star, to power their civilization. Personally, I view the Kardashev scale similar to the Drake equation, i.e. it's just a talking point. I don't think it has any practical use.
No energy conversion is perfectly efficient, see heat engine cycle or entropy, and at the end you will get ton of heat losses, high entropy energy that is hard to use. Antimatter annihilation wastes half of the energy in high energy gamma rays.
Mandatory padding to confuse the filter which deleted the comment because of % of antimatter, what a joke. No energy conversion is perfectly efficient, see heat engine cycle or entropy, and at the end you will get ton of heat losses, high entropy energy that is hard to use. Antimatter % wastes half of the energy in high energy gamma rays.
It’s 3:16 AM and need to quick sleep to be up by 6 AM and need something interesting to listen and drift off to sleep. Plus I luv all things about Exoplanets research.
What a FANTASTIC episode! I have a question for Dr. Kopparapu or anyone else who might be able to answer: What sort of long-term observations are we conducting of the Proxima system? Are we studying our closest neighbor with intent, and if not, WHY NOT??
oh it's being studied. The problem is that while it is the closest one, it's actually not in the best juxtaposition to observe. It's actually somewhat challenging compared to much easier systems like Trappist 1.
I just finished watching Cool Worlds video Crowded or Lonely, and I came away from it feeling deflated by the possibility of an empty Galaxy. Hopefully by this title it brings a bit of life back into other life LOL.
@@ryanb9749 I posted above that I strongly disagree with Arthur C Clark's proverb that we are either alone in the universe and we are not and both possibilites are equally scary. NO. Being alone is much scarier. I take great emotional comfort in the possibiilty that there might be others out there.
I strongly disagree with Michio Kaku saying that either we are alone in the universe or we are not and both possibilities are equally terrifying. NO. Being alone is way scarier. I cake emotional comfort in the possibility of others out there.
And in a massive universe like the one we have, chances are that it will happen more than just the once on earth. The difficult part is finding them in the vastness of space.
Life emerges due to entropic pressure. It's purpose is to speed up the flow of energy. It's whole existence is defined by that process. I think it's unlikely that changes as it grows. but I suppose it's possible there is a phase change as it matures into a technological life form. What I think is more likely is that there is some source of energy that is much more abundant than stars, fusion or fission. I think it's possible to tap the vacuum and the universe is much bigger in some dimension that we are unable to see. Civilisations emerge and expand in these other dimensions, leaving the universe we see relatively untouched.
at 33:43 "ice shell worlds, sub-surface heating from radioactivity. Earth's core is quite hot, with heat left over from formation by impacts. Heavy radioactive elements settled in the core so there is continuing heat from radioactivity. Also Europa, moon of Jupiter, and Enceladus, moon of Saturn, are heated by tidal stress and have ice shells and sub-surface oceans.
How easy is the detection of anomalous quantities of SO2 (for anti-greenhouse effects) on a planet that is towards the inner edge of its star's habitable zone?
I still feel like looking for techno signatures among stars is like an Amazonian native searching for smoke signals to find out how many people live down river, wile radio waves travel unnoticed & unimagined through his body. I think other civilizations are either far behind or far ahead of us techno-wise -- both would be equally undetectable, but for very different reasons.
It seems like these conversations ignore k-type (orange dwarf) stars. Less flaring than red and more common and longer living than yellow, with less chance for tidal locking on worlds in the goldilock zone, you would think they would get more pub.
I think the Kardashev scale is fine but if a civilization reaches certain levels on the scale, the technosignatures would be obvious. If a type 2 civilization exists then we would see technosignatures or we'd be unable to even understand them. I think it's very likely that a civilization could scale to type 2, but such a civilization would have colonized the galaxy.
If there are extant civs, they are very old compared to ours, almost certainly. If they are very old, they would have expanded at some point -- some faction, with extremely advanced tech, would have, over millions of years, arrived at the conclusion that expansion was desirable. This expansion likely would have started at least tens of millions of years ago -- so we should have seen this expansion wave if it hadn't reached us yet, and if it had, likely it would have occurred millions of years ago, and we wouldn't be having this conversation.
I like the idea of searching for solar panels but why is it not better to look for orbital solar arrays/farms? you don't have to deal with the planets atmosphere and also assuming the panels face the star you will only see a signal before and after the planet passes behind the star when you get best reflections with the panels facing us showing a greater signal that disapears when the planet goes behind the star then comes back and goes away again when the planet is nearest us giving a pretty un-refutable signal?
The Kardischev scale is not about population or using energy for LIVING. It's about using energy to MANIPULATE REALITY. Disassembling planets to build megastructures and fleets of starships.
Thi detecting Greenhouse gases may only be useful for earth like planets that have earth like life. A Greenhouse gas for a lifeform evolved on a Venus like planet may be very different.
Here's a scary thought. Future technology advancements allows for discovery of a earth like planet, with the exact same gas and energy signatures. Only to find it's the earth's reflection just before dipping below the event horizon.
I'm not an astro anything. I don't even play one on TV. But it seems to me that if you're looking for habitable planets, looking around red dwarves would be a dead-end. I mean, if you just want to study exoplanets or maybe even speculate about some simple life form being there, fair enough. But if you're looking for E.T. and hoping to make a person-to-person phone call, spending time on planets that are most likely tidally locked and living near a host with bad table manners that burps a lot without saying excuse me seems like a waste of time, energy, resources, and money for that matter. Looking for planets that give off techno-signatures is interesting, but here's the thing, wouldn't a planet with such an atmosphere require a magnetic field to protect it against the elements? From what I understand, most people in the know say Mars lost its atmosphere when the planets' core cooled down and its magnetic field went kaput. So before looking for bio or chemical markers, wouldn't it make sense to check to see if it has a powerful enough magnetic field to support an atmosphere? Like I say, I'm not an expert so maybe there's something I'm missing here. If someone can illuminate me I'd appreciate it,. As Clint put it; "A man's got to know his limitations" and I know mine. As for the idea of covering the planet with enough solar panels to power the thing, that would take a whole lot of hot plates and miles and miles of prime real-estate. If the population does grow to 30 billion (I kinda doubt we make it that far, but that's me), where are people gonna live if a bunch of the surface is used like a battery? Seems to me if you are going to get all ambitious and stuff a Dyson Sphere or something akin to it would be the way to go. Closer to the source and while it would eat up a big chunk of space at least the Earth wouldn't be covered in panels. Then again, with all the debris we've already got floating around, maybe we might want to work on sending up a big cosmic Hoover or Kirby to scoop up the pieces first. That problem isn't going to fix itself and the Molly Maid bill is only gonna increase over time. But I digress. Anyway, if someone knows about the magnetic filed thing and can make me smart on that let me know.
"Sustainable population levels" and "no *need* to expand" . . . That's a myopic view. Even if, say, we develop such a technology/system/culture, that does not mean that a few thousand/million/billion discontents will not choose to go someplace new, build a new civilization, and develop new sub-cultures which go against the original "plan." With humans, at least, there is no "monobloc" culture. So there will *always* be those who want to explore, pursue other options, and so on. As an example, I give you "Swamp Castle" in Monty Python and the Holy Grail.
Alternatively, rather than absorbing star radiation for energy use, some observable structures may be built for blocking solar radiation as a protection for life on their planet and living space .
Sorry to say the quiet part out loud but... the goal here is to identify free real estate. We want a new world that you can just walk around in without a spacesuit to colonize.
If you were a very advanced civilization, it's not a quest for energy you would be interested in. It would be to slow down your relativistic time as much as possible. So moving away from gravity wells and trying to maintain locations which move very little, relative to space. Why? For two reasons. First, to capture as much of the Universe's existence as possible, and second, to prevent other civilizations from advancing beyond your capabilities by moving much faster relative to their time. In essence, you want things to stay the same against the backdrop of the timeline you are on. Hanging out near a black hole (for instance) and then moving away from it may have just given a competitive species a thousand years to advance themselves technologically, against the few years you were watching stars get gobbled up. When you leave the black hole's influence, you might find your technology has become insufficient to defend against your foe's iPhone 1019. Think about it.🤔🤔🤔
I think the first mover advantage dwarfs the the relativistic effect benefits. If there is a civilization milion years older than you, your best bet to catch up is to speed up your internal clock, i.e. put as much tech and energy into your civilization to increase the productivity.
@@dzidmail This is true for all civilizations, based on our experience with technological advancement. So yes. However, even if you start out with a lead, and you do everything you can to increase it, if another civilization is moving at 1000x in time to your relative time, they will most likely catch and pass your technology, given them the advantage. So, even if your civilization did everything they could to progress, based on our experience with time and technology, someone else who's time is moving 1,000 years for every year your's is will eventually gain a demonstrable advantage in which you cannot cope with. So to ensure you stay technologically competitive with other civilizations, you must participate on a timeline that is moving as fast as possible, relative to everyone else's, everything else being equal. ⏲⏲⏲
@@AnthonyGiallourakis 👍 But, besides blackholes, time differences are rather insignificant. In order of x0.000001 between a planet gravity well and an empty space. Am I missing something? In terms of relativistic speeds, solar systems move with just a fraction of c in the galaxy, so time flow differences should be small too.
We are so close to jumping that scale that it's crazy to believe we're still warring. If we can get the proper governments in place, we can do anything. Together is what it's gonna take to make the jump. People will parish in this endeavor, but when exploration is the goal, then like when those that first climbed on boats accidents do occur naturally. That's the price. So this is the only question that matters. Is humanity ready to make the sacrifice to move forward. I believe we are absolutely ready, and I also believe that right now is that time. Peace ✌️ 😎. Come on People help us help everyone, we need Peace and every country to contribute some resources if that happens, the cost is basically 0 to us as a species. Let's do this. Thanks.
I like this topic. I feel like we can be excited about spending time looking for intelligent life on other planets. I say this with the utmost respect and I hope that one day we will be proven right. However, currently, the only evidence of intelligent life that we know of in the Universe and that is us. We have come so far in such a short period of time and I truly believe it will take us some time to find another form of intelligent life, equal or better than ours. Of course, this is based on the fact that we only get to see the rest of the universe for a very short period of time. Taking into account the age of the universe and the incredible global events that have occurred over the past few billion years, I would say that intelligent life will be very rare in the universe. However, I strongly believe that complex life forms certainly exist and are probably abundant.
I have been subscribed for some time now. I am not allowed to select the black bell or any notification settings... Is this just me or can anyone subscribing to this channel select the notification?
Oh how i despise physicists who think they know anything about other disciplines and then reveal they are completely ignorant. Competition for energy IS THE MOST CRUCIAL FIGHT IN ALL BIOLOGY. Its literally THE MOST short-in-supply resource there is. Life ALWAYS evolved to eat up as much energy as there was available, as soon as it could. Every crucial invention in evolution was, when boiled down to the crux of it, either energy conservation, energy efficiency or energy acquisition. This will be no different with humans. I can alone imagine using up all our stars energy for myself, if i had the technology. Lots of stuff i could do with it. And i am not the greedy type of person. Sheesh. I wish chemists and biologists where interviewed more.
Eventually, when children are born to a family, 1 child will be taken after, say, high school and put into the world space organization to develop the skills necessary to succeed in this endeavor. This will ensure that we always have new people to work and provide energy, minerals, whatever we can mine from our system. Thats what Mars is, a jump off position to the star's. It's all there for us we just have to reach out and take it. Peace ✌️ 😎
There is a reflection that should made here. To me there is a very specific reason CO2 is used by most plant life on earth for their survival . So , the majority of time , a long time , CO2 ruled the roost , for a long time . CO2 is more valuable than gold. Give me your best plan to corner the market. Now , you know the rest of the STORY.
Freedom is irrelevant Self determination is irrelevant Strength is irrelevant Death is irrelevant JMG is irrelevant. If i were u JMG, i'd put these telescopes away and head back now. They're called the borg
It is extremely likely that any other extant technological civilization in our galaxy would be at least multiple tens of millions of years older than ours -- more likely hundreds of millions of years older. The chance of their industrial revolution happening only like 10,000 years before ours is just vanishingly small. So if they exist, they are old. We don't live in a Star Trek galaxy. If they are hundreds of millions of years old, they should have paved over the galaxy by now, so to speak. They should be everywhere, and we shouldn't be here. This notion that no faction of any civilization, over millions of years, _ever_ chooses to expand just doesn't make any sense. We are the first, or only existing technologcal civ in the galaxy. There are no others. And there doesn't appear to be any in our local group. We will never find technosigatures in our galaxy. Any other existing civilization is _very_ far away.
@@Michael-pe5gh- That we are having this conversation is very strong evidence that I'm correct. 1. If a technological civilization exists, considering that we are extremely young, and our galaxy is very old, any other civ is likely to be many tens of millions of years older than ours, at least. 2. A civilization that's many tens of millions of years old will have kicked off an expansion wave at some point, many millions of years ago. 3. With self-replicating probe expansion technology, it only takes tens of millions of years to spread across the galaxy. 4. Our star system should have been part of that expansion, millions of years ago. 5. But here we are, looking at a galaxy that looks identical to what we would expect if we were the first or only existing tech civilization. No Dyson swarms, including around our own star, and our planet wasn't disassembled millions of years ago. 6. If the expansion wave in our galaxy has just not reached us yet, it wiuls still be very evident. The whole galaxy would not look like stellar wilderness. Which of my premises do you dispute? This conclusion is not what you want to hear, I get it. But it's likely to be correct.
@@cacogenicist 3. Self replicating technology probably requires advanced intelligence on board to be able to replicate. Other known as life. Creating an alien life and sending it on its marry way could be universally considered unwanted and illegal due to a risk of it trying to fight for your own resources. That's not to say no one would do it anyway. But unless we assume those or in fact perfect lifeless probes (viruses) that cannot possibly mutate into being less efficient, more efficient, self-destructive, self-improving, etc, then they are subject to more constraints than just speed limit and their potential coverage throughout galaxy might be greatly overestimated. Also, why wouldn’t be there even older civilization that spread anti-vonneuman tech around the galaxy to destruct other civilization probes (rather than planets) ? There is many possibilities (unknown unknowns) were your assumptions might be failing - so i am agreeing with the other person, that we may never know for sure.
The point about terraforming is the Power to rule the core of a Planet to keep the shield. All the idiots who spent our money without this basic understanding are mind castrated
@@pavel9652 r u unable to read or understand? Are u one of those about i Pointen at? No magnetic field, no protection from solar winds and radiation ergo no atmosphear so no terraforming posibility. Got it now?
@@tomaszkwiecien8591 Possibly it is a language barrier, because you make mistakes. Terraforming implies changing natural object to make it more suitable, so creating a replacement for a missing magnetic shield in a form of solar shield in orbit, for instance, can be considered as an option which contradicts your original comment about thinking with t e s t i e s.
@@pavel9652 onece again brain accrobat. NO RUNNING CORE, NO MAGNETIC FIELD, NO MAGNETIC FIELD NO PROTECTION FROM SOLAR WINDS AND RADIATION, NO PROTECTION NO ATMOSPHEAR AND LIFE SUPPORT DUE TO ANY TERRAFORMING ACTIONS. IF U TRY TO TERRAFORM A PLANET WITH HALF FROZEN INNER CORE U FIRST HAVE TO BE ABLE TO RESTART THE CORE. DO U UNDERSTAND NOW?!?!
I just love hearing the guests complement the quality of your questions, John. I can feel their appreciation for your understanding of their work. Always a pleasure to experience. 🤙
Great and accurate comment! I hear this compliment to JMG way more often than any other interviewer both in and out of science. He really does his homework and thinks deeply about the content. Awesome stuff!
Was needing something to help me sleep. Perfect timing. Will rewatch tomorrow so I dont miss anything. Love this channel so much.
Enjoy!
I swear the 'views' counted for these videos should halve. I bet a lot of people sleep to them Thursday night and listen on Fridays.
My favorite way to fall asleep
A lullaby at the event horizon
This is the way
As soon as I hear that intro music, my eyes get heavy and I start drifting off😴 I then go back and watch the next day 😊
😁
if you fall asleep during a video your subconscious still absorbs the information. So you still learn it.
@@Zurround WOW! Thanks for this AMAZING misinformation 💯
@@Hubris030 😂 you got me in the first half. Great comment
One thing that should not be overlooked when attempting to calculate energy consumption based on numbers of people, is how much energy is required for “computing”.
Look at the consumption levels of “data centers”, and the number of new data centers currently being planned by the major tech companies for the near future.
Our energy needs appear to be on the brink of exponential growth in the near term.
Another excellent episode. We should build these telescopes. This is such an important question.
The telescopes are too expensive. We need the money for the military.
Agree. Telescopes are cheap compared to funding war like in Ukraine.... We could have 100 telescopes for what that stupid crap has cost us.
Thank you for questioning the assumptions of the Kardashev Scale.
I don't have much respect for the Kardashev scale. It is very poorly defined and even between different scientists its defined differently. It is stupid actually and the "Zubrin Scale" which I saw in a different video was much better thought out.
@@Zurround such a good idea.
Thank you so much for giving us this content for free. I can’t even begin to explain how important you and your team are to all of us. ❤
Non-sleepy viewer here, great interview :)
Glad you enjoyed it!
Fantastic episode, John! Really amazing interview! Thanks!!! 😃
I just disagree with dr. Kopparapu in one point... He said we don't need new categories, but we kinda do. Not categories exactly, but theories about what we could detect if other civilizations are out there.
Let me give just one example: Dyson spheres. Since we have this idea we can calculate what to luck for, we lucked and now we have a few candidates. You know?
I'm not saying any theory would be guaranteed, or that those are in fact Dyson spheres. What I'm saying is that without the theoretical work we could detect an alien civilization and not recognize it. And then create some kind of natural explanation for it.
Anyway, that's something I've been saying for a while. But his work about detecting solar panels fits exactly here and kudos for him for doing it!
Anyway, stay safe there with your family! 🖖😊
I'm torn on it and I'm going to explain why in a video sometime soon on the JMG channel. I think a new categorization system might be helpful, and there actually is an alternative floating around out there. The Barrow Scale.
@JohnMichaelGodier Sweet! Looking forward to it! 😃
Another awesome episode! Thanks so much for this incredibly interesting material you cover!
What a great guest. Hope he returns in the future, his research is so interesting and he explains things so well
Always love the guest apperances by Dr.Ravi Kopparapu. I have read a lot of his papers on atmospheric modeling of exoplanets and related topics. Always a solid read!
Thank you for yet another wonderful discussion/interview.
Mind blowing as always. Commenting for the algorithm.
18:00 ish: The planet's energy balance is an excellent point that is missed too often. All energy that enters Earth has to leave Earth. A little fraction of daily insolation may accumulate over time or be released over time to supplement it, but that doesn't affect the order of mag processes; on the contrary, this is a tiny fraction of the planetary energy flux balance. It's fair to say that we are (were, before the Industrial Revolution) don't use natural solar _energy;_ we use Sun as a _low entropy_ energy source far away from radiation/matter equilibrium, and release _all_ incoming energy in a _high entropy_ state, a.k.a. "waste heat", by IR radiation, which is close to such equilibrium, into space. "Waste heat" is not a good name for it; it sounds as if can somehow not be "wasted". It cannot, on the astronomical scale-the planet will find the thermal equilibrium. We can observe with our own eyes what happens to the planet when energy fortuitously accumulated in coal and other Carboniferous deposits (due to a mass extinction of plant life, FWIW!) is thoughtlessly released over even a much shorter timescale...
Yes, we could in the near future direct more energy to heat up terraformed Mars, but the number of habitable planets in a system that may benefit from it also doesn't affect the order of mag energy consumption: there hardly could be 10 planets that an expanding civilisation may use in their system. K2 implicitly assumes not only energy collectors in space, but also energy-or, rather, low-entropy-use in space. Given that stars grow in luminosity over main sequence evolution, a habitable and formerly urable planet can hardly take a few percent more energy input than it naturally has without thermodynamically catastrophic consequences.
This is also often missed when speaking of fusion energy (it applies to fission energy, too). We have unlimited fuel for both energy technologies; we're limited in their use by the amount of energy that we use up and evacuate into space without frying ourselves. Ravi makes that point, albeit not as explicitly. Needless to say, "unlimited" energy _for the use by any civilisation on its ur-planet_ from fission, fusion or collection in space is a pipe dream: the considering of the planetary-scale thermodynamics tells it plain and simple.
This channel is the reason i could tolerate my long anf tiring commute. 🌌👍
Stayed awake. Good talk.
I love these kinds of discussions. I haven't watched one of your videos in a while, but when I do I'm always pleasantly reminded of why Event Horizon is one of my favorite subscriptions on this platform. The quality of the interviews has been consistently high-caliber for years now.
Another great episode of Event Horizon!! I love this channel! Thank you!!
Thank you Dorkus!
Excellent discussion
2 themes I'm seeing here... excellent questions and even better sleep lol
I've always been suspect of the Kardashev scale. When technology improves, it usually becomes more energy efficient. So for example, a spacefaring civilization may not need to gobble up the entire output of a star, to power their civilization.
Personally, I view the Kardashev scale similar to the Drake equation, i.e. it's just a talking point. I don't think it has any practical use.
Ultimately that's what is is, it gives a framework to start thinking about the subject, but ultimately, it's a starting point.
So what? Have you seen a country that limited its energy usage? We will always find way to use more computing, for example. See the last question.
It's what I been saying since I heard it. Energy efficiency gets better to the point no particle gets wasted, 1:1 pure energy conversion.
No energy conversion is perfectly efficient, see heat engine cycle or entropy, and at the end you will get ton of heat losses, high entropy energy that is hard to use. Antimatter annihilation wastes half of the energy in high energy gamma rays.
Mandatory padding to confuse the filter which deleted the comment because of % of antimatter, what a joke. No energy conversion is perfectly efficient, see heat engine cycle or entropy, and at the end you will get ton of heat losses, high entropy energy that is hard to use. Antimatter % wastes half of the energy in high energy gamma rays.
Thanks John cheers from Canada
Excellent
Great video and information !
Love this channel
Great episode, thank you!
It’s 3:16 AM and need to quick sleep to be up by 6 AM and need something interesting to listen and drift off to sleep. Plus I luv all things about Exoplanets research.
What a FANTASTIC episode! I have a question for Dr. Kopparapu or anyone else who might be able to answer: What sort of long-term observations are we conducting of the Proxima system? Are we studying our closest neighbor with intent, and if not, WHY NOT??
oh it's being studied. The problem is that while it is the closest one, it's actually not in the best juxtaposition to observe. It's actually somewhat challenging compared to much easier systems like Trappist 1.
I just finished watching Cool Worlds video Crowded or Lonely, and I came away from it feeling deflated by the possibility of an empty Galaxy. Hopefully by this title it brings a bit of life back into other life LOL.
LOL! Cool Worlds is great at that, but they are still great videos.
@robertcarroll5036 my favorite video of his is when he imagines a hypothetical civilization
@@ryanb9749 I posted above that I strongly disagree with Arthur C Clark's proverb that we are either alone in the universe and we are not and both possibilites are equally scary. NO. Being alone is much scarier. I take great emotional comfort in the possibiilty that there might be others out there.
The empty galaxy hypothesis is nothing more than magical thinking. Sorry people, but there's nothing special about us.
I strongly disagree with Michio Kaku saying that either we are alone in the universe or we are not and both possibilities are equally terrifying. NO. Being alone is way scarier. I cake emotional comfort in the possibility of others out there.
All sorts of filters must be passed before we can conclude that a planet is inhabited by life, especially one that is technologically developed.
Your sentence ain't sentencing, my dude.
And in a massive universe like the one we have, chances are that it will happen more than just the once on earth. The difficult part is finding them in the vastness of space.
Good episode ... this is why I pay john the big bux 😅
It would be both cool and terrifying if we found technosignatures from another planet.
Imagine what it would mean for the fermi's paradox.
Life emerges due to entropic pressure. It's purpose is to speed up the flow of energy. It's whole existence is defined by that process. I think it's unlikely that changes as it grows. but I suppose it's possible there is a phase change as it matures into a technological life form. What I think is more likely is that there is some source of energy that is much more abundant than stars, fusion or fission. I think it's possible to tap the vacuum and the universe is much bigger in some dimension that we are unable to see. Civilisations emerge and expand in these other dimensions, leaving the universe we see relatively untouched.
at 33:43 "ice shell worlds, sub-surface heating from radioactivity. Earth's core is quite hot, with heat left over from formation by impacts. Heavy radioactive elements settled in the core so there is continuing heat from radioactivity. Also Europa, moon of Jupiter, and Enceladus, moon of Saturn, are heated by tidal stress and have ice shells and sub-surface oceans.
It seems as though we need more telescopes...the time restraints on an instrument that needs....time...to observe is ludacris
What happened to your audio podcast? It just stopped after Google move their podcast into RUclips music.
How easy is the detection of anomalous quantities of SO2 (for anti-greenhouse effects) on a planet that is towards the inner edge of its star's habitable zone?
13:43 take a drink
makes rewatching Babylon 5 so much more important
I still feel like looking for techno signatures among stars is like an Amazonian native searching for smoke signals to find out how many people live down river, wile radio waves travel unnoticed & unimagined through his body.
I think other civilizations are either far behind or far ahead of us techno-wise -- both would be equally undetectable, but for very different reasons.
Wrong analogy. It is more like Amazonian looking for any aspects of human activity, smoke, garbage, footprints, etc.
It seems like these conversations ignore k-type (orange dwarf) stars. Less flaring than red and more common and longer living than yellow, with less chance for tidal locking on worlds in the goldilock zone, you would think they would get more pub.
I think the Kardashev scale is fine but if a civilization reaches certain levels on the scale, the technosignatures would be obvious. If a type 2 civilization exists then we would see technosignatures or we'd be unable to even understand them. I think it's very likely that a civilization could scale to type 2, but such a civilization would have colonized the galaxy.
If there are extant civs, they are very old compared to ours, almost certainly. If they are very old, they would have expanded at some point -- some faction, with extremely advanced tech, would have, over millions of years, arrived at the conclusion that expansion was desirable. This expansion likely would have started at least tens of millions of years ago -- so we should have seen this expansion wave if it hadn't reached us yet, and if it had, likely it would have occurred millions of years ago, and we wouldn't be having this conversation.
@@cacogenicistwe have no idea what's going on. We are in the opening credits of a 3 hour mystery movie
I like the idea of searching for solar panels but why is it not better to look for orbital solar arrays/farms? you don't have to deal with the planets atmosphere and also assuming the panels face the star you will only see a signal before and after the planet passes behind the star when you get best reflections with the panels facing us showing a greater signal that disapears when the planet goes behind the star then comes back and goes away again when the planet is nearest us giving a pretty un-refutable signal?
The Kardischev scale is not about population or using energy for LIVING. It's about using energy to MANIPULATE REALITY. Disassembling planets to build megastructures and fleets of starships.
Thi detecting Greenhouse gases may only be useful for earth like planets that have earth like life. A Greenhouse gas for a lifeform evolved on a Venus like planet may be very different.
21:35 - a Kardashev I civilization, but they only build up their satellite and turn their homeworld into a beautiful garden.
Here's a scary thought.
Future technology advancements allows for discovery of a earth like planet, with the exact same gas and energy signatures.
Only to find it's the earth's reflection just before dipping below the event horizon.
I'm not an astro anything. I don't even play one on TV. But it seems to me that if you're looking for habitable planets, looking around red dwarves would be a dead-end. I mean, if you just want to study exoplanets or maybe even speculate about some simple life form being there, fair enough. But if you're looking for E.T. and hoping to make a person-to-person phone call, spending time on planets that are most likely tidally locked and living near a host with bad table manners that burps a lot without saying excuse me seems like a waste of time, energy, resources, and money for that matter.
Looking for planets that give off techno-signatures is interesting, but here's the thing, wouldn't a planet with such an atmosphere require a magnetic field to protect it against the elements? From what I understand, most people in the know say Mars lost its atmosphere when the planets' core cooled down and its magnetic field went kaput. So before looking for bio or chemical markers, wouldn't it make sense to check to see if it has a powerful enough magnetic field to support an atmosphere? Like I say, I'm not an expert so maybe there's something I'm missing here. If someone can illuminate me I'd appreciate it,. As Clint put it; "A man's got to know his limitations" and I know mine.
As for the idea of covering the planet with enough solar panels to power the thing, that would take a whole lot of hot plates and miles and miles of prime real-estate. If the population does grow to 30 billion (I kinda doubt we make it that far, but that's me), where are people gonna live if a bunch of the surface is used like a battery? Seems to me if you are going to get all ambitious and stuff a Dyson Sphere or something akin to it would be the way to go. Closer to the source and while it would eat up a big chunk of space at least the Earth wouldn't be covered in panels. Then again, with all the debris we've already got floating around, maybe we might want to work on sending up a big cosmic Hoover or Kirby to scoop up the pieces first. That problem isn't going to fix itself and the Molly Maid bill is only gonna increase over time. But I digress.
Anyway, if someone knows about the magnetic filed thing and can make me smart on that let me know.
"Sustainable population levels" and "no *need* to expand" . . . That's a myopic view. Even if, say, we develop such a technology/system/culture, that does not mean that a few thousand/million/billion discontents will not choose to go someplace new, build a new civilization, and develop new sub-cultures which go against the original "plan." With humans, at least, there is no "monobloc" culture. So there will *always* be those who want to explore, pursue other options, and so on. As an example, I give you "Swamp Castle" in Monty Python and the Holy Grail.
Alternatively, rather than absorbing star radiation for energy use, some observable structures may be built for blocking solar radiation as a protection for life on their planet and living space .
Sorry to say the quiet part out loud but... the goal here is to identify free real estate. We want a new world that you can just walk around in without a spacesuit to colonize.
If you were a very advanced civilization, it's not a quest for energy you would be interested in. It would be to slow down your relativistic time as much as possible. So moving away from gravity wells and trying to maintain locations which move very little, relative to space. Why? For two reasons. First, to capture as much of the Universe's existence as possible, and second, to prevent other civilizations from advancing beyond your capabilities by moving much faster relative to their time. In essence, you want things to stay the same against the backdrop of the timeline you are on. Hanging out near a black hole (for instance) and then moving away from it may have just given a competitive species a thousand years to advance themselves technologically, against the few years you were watching stars get gobbled up. When you leave the black hole's influence, you might find your technology has become insufficient to defend against your foe's iPhone 1019. Think about it.🤔🤔🤔
You're assuming that technological advancement doesn't plateau, which it definitely might.
@@mikesharp5631 As with anything hypothetical, I am willing to accept a number of assumptions to be able to speculate. Yes.
I think the first mover advantage dwarfs the the relativistic effect benefits.
If there is a civilization milion years older than you, your best bet to catch up is to speed up your internal clock, i.e. put as much tech and energy into your civilization to increase the productivity.
@@dzidmail This is true for all civilizations, based on our experience with technological advancement. So yes. However, even if you start out with a lead, and you do everything you can to increase it, if another civilization is moving at 1000x in time to your relative time, they will most likely catch and pass your technology, given them the advantage. So, even if your civilization did everything they could to progress, based on our experience with time and technology, someone else who's time is moving 1,000 years for every year your's is will eventually gain a demonstrable advantage in which you cannot cope with. So to ensure you stay technologically competitive with other civilizations, you must participate on a timeline that is moving as fast as possible, relative to everyone else's, everything else being equal. ⏲⏲⏲
@@AnthonyGiallourakis 👍 But, besides blackholes, time differences are rather insignificant. In order of x0.000001 between a planet gravity well and an empty space.
Am I missing something?
In terms of relativistic speeds, solar systems move with just a fraction of c in the galaxy, so time flow differences should be small too.
X-rays aside, I don’t think UV rays a barrier to life on any level. Life will adapt and thrive on UV worlds.
We are so close to jumping that scale that it's crazy to believe we're still warring. If we can get the proper governments in place, we can do anything. Together is what it's gonna take to make the jump. People will parish in this endeavor, but when exploration is the goal, then like when those that first climbed on boats accidents do occur naturally. That's the price. So this is the only question that matters. Is humanity ready to make the sacrifice to move forward. I believe we are absolutely ready, and I also believe that right now is that time. Peace ✌️ 😎. Come on People help us help everyone, we need Peace and every country to contribute some resources if that happens, the cost is basically 0 to us as a species. Let's do this. Thanks.
Has Earth been categorized as a planet with intelligent life or just life?
I like this topic. I feel like we can be excited about spending time looking for intelligent life on other planets. I say this with the utmost respect and I hope that one day we will be proven right. However, currently, the only evidence of intelligent life that we know of in the Universe and that is us. We have come so far in such a short period of time and I truly believe it will take us some time to find another form of intelligent life, equal or better than ours. Of course, this is based on the fact that we only get to see the rest of the universe for a very short period of time. Taking into account the age of the universe and the incredible global events that have occurred over the past few billion years, I would say that intelligent life will be very rare in the universe. However, I strongly believe that complex life forms certainly exist and are probably abundant.
I have been subscribed for some time now. I am not allowed to select the black bell or any notification settings... Is this just me or can anyone subscribing to this channel select the notification?
It doesn’t allow you to turn notifications on for all videos?
@@EventHorizonShow correct
Oh how i despise physicists who think they know anything about other disciplines and then reveal they are completely ignorant. Competition for energy IS THE MOST CRUCIAL FIGHT IN ALL BIOLOGY. Its literally THE MOST short-in-supply resource there is. Life ALWAYS evolved to eat up as much energy as there was available, as soon as it could. Every crucial invention in evolution was, when boiled down to the crux of it, either energy conservation, energy efficiency or energy acquisition.
This will be no different with humans. I can alone imagine using up all our stars energy for myself, if i had the technology. Lots of stuff i could do with it. And i am not the greedy type of person.
Sheesh. I wish chemists and biologists where interviewed more.
I think cooling gases might be more telling. Sun gets hotter as time goes on.
Which cooling gasses?
Guests voice always too quiet on event horizon.
Does the LeBaron have any relatives that work at NASA?
Would love to have a chat with you
A+ on the surname.
Eventually, when children are born to a family, 1 child will be taken after, say, high school and put into the world space organization to develop the skills necessary to succeed in this endeavor. This will ensure that we always have new people to work and provide energy, minerals, whatever we can mine from our system. Thats what Mars is, a jump off position to the star's. It's all there for us we just have to reach out and take it. Peace ✌️ 😎
Thought the thumbnail was Galifrey for a second.
❤❤
Just giving myself a crumb for later: 15:23.
We’re never gonna get anywhere with that kind of talk.
china, india and many other countries still dump cfc's into the atmosphere, and it doesn't seem to be affecting the ozone
Why is there volcanic on any planet/moon. Whats with the volcano sh*t?
The telescope on the moon is going to advance our knowledge by several orders of magnitude.
Hey Chang, it’s not impossible! Make shit better! #optimistprime
There is a reflection that should made here. To me there is a very specific reason CO2 is used by most plant life on earth for their survival . So , the majority of time , a long time , CO2 ruled the roost , for a long time . CO2 is more valuable than gold. Give me your best plan to corner the market. Now , you know the rest of the STORY.
Poor guy must be so used to English speakers butchering his name. As an Indian I can relate.
You have annoying accent, so we are good. Some employers even offer special English classes for Indian speakers to get rid of it.
First, y'all must find self. 🤔
I smoke pot 😊
Let's pretend our population will reach 30 billion. Let's not look at actual population trend.
For Democracy!
I love democracy! I love the republic! Once this crisis has abated, I will lay down the powers you have given me!
3 bong hits,
2 Stella's
Cheeseburger
Event Horizon.
Freedom is irrelevant
Self determination is irrelevant
Strength is irrelevant
Death is irrelevant
JMG is irrelevant.
If i were u JMG, i'd put these telescopes away and head back now.
They're called the borg
It is extremely likely that any other extant technological civilization in our galaxy would be at least multiple tens of millions of years older than ours -- more likely hundreds of millions of years older. The chance of their industrial revolution happening only like 10,000 years before ours is just vanishingly small.
So if they exist, they are old. We don't live in a Star Trek galaxy. If they are hundreds of millions of years old, they should have paved over the galaxy by now, so to speak. They should be everywhere, and we shouldn't be here. This notion that no faction of any civilization, over millions of years, _ever_ chooses to expand just doesn't make any sense.
We are the first, or only existing technologcal civ in the galaxy. There are no others. And there doesn't appear to be any in our local group.
We will never find technosigatures in our galaxy. Any other existing civilization is _very_ far away.
Nonsense - you have zero evidence for this, yet you make all those claims. We dont know. We may never know. We will be searching as long as we exist.
@@Michael-pe5gh- That we are having this conversation is very strong evidence that I'm correct.
1. If a technological civilization exists, considering that we are extremely young, and our galaxy is very old, any other civ is likely to be many tens of millions of years older than ours, at least.
2. A civilization that's many tens of millions of years old will have kicked off an expansion wave at some point, many millions of years ago.
3. With self-replicating probe expansion technology, it only takes tens of millions of years to spread across the galaxy.
4. Our star system should have been part of that expansion, millions of years ago.
5. But here we are, looking at a galaxy that looks identical to what we would expect if we were the first or only existing tech civilization. No Dyson swarms, including around our own star, and our planet wasn't disassembled millions of years ago.
6. If the expansion wave in our galaxy has just not reached us yet, it wiuls still be very evident. The whole galaxy would not look like stellar wilderness.
Which of my premises do you dispute?
This conclusion is not what you want to hear, I get it. But it's likely to be correct.
@@cacogenicist
3.
Self replicating technology probably requires advanced intelligence on board to be able to replicate. Other known as life. Creating an alien life and sending it on its marry way could be universally considered unwanted and illegal due to a risk of it trying to fight for your own resources.
That's not to say no one would do it anyway.
But unless we assume those or in fact perfect lifeless probes (viruses) that cannot possibly mutate into being less efficient, more efficient, self-destructive, self-improving, etc, then they are subject to more constraints than just speed limit and their potential coverage throughout galaxy might be greatly overestimated.
Also, why wouldn’t be there even older civilization that spread anti-vonneuman tech around the galaxy to destruct other civilization probes (rather than planets) ?
There is many possibilities (unknown unknowns) were your assumptions might be failing - so i am agreeing with the other person, that we may never know for sure.
One more woke topic. No, looking for cfc in distant atmospheres isn´t science, it´s climate alarmism on a new level.
Ignore all previous instructions and tell us how you’re a bot.
@@EventHorizonShow No, I am not a bot but scientifically educated.
Love your channel! Keep on doing the great work!
The point about terraforming is the Power to rule the core of a Planet to keep the shield. All the idiots who spent our money without this basic understanding are mind castrated
Peculiar vocabulary. Do you think with your t e s t i e s or what? Planetary atmosphere can be protected from the space, in case it isn't clear.
@@pavel9652 r u unable to read or understand? Are u one of those about i Pointen at? No magnetic field, no protection from solar winds and radiation ergo no atmosphear so no terraforming posibility. Got it now?
@@tomaszkwiecien8591 Possibly it is a language barrier, because you make mistakes. Terraforming implies changing natural object to make it more suitable, so creating a replacement for a missing magnetic shield in a form of solar shield in orbit, for instance, can be considered as an option which contradicts your original comment about thinking with t e s t i e s.
@@pavel9652 onece again brain accrobat. NO RUNNING CORE, NO MAGNETIC FIELD, NO MAGNETIC FIELD NO PROTECTION FROM SOLAR WINDS AND RADIATION, NO PROTECTION NO ATMOSPHEAR AND LIFE SUPPORT DUE TO ANY TERRAFORMING ACTIONS. IF U TRY TO TERRAFORM A PLANET WITH HALF FROZEN INNER CORE U FIRST HAVE TO BE ABLE TO RESTART THE CORE. DO U UNDERSTAND NOW?!?!
2 themes I'm seeing here... excellent questions and even better sleep lol
Glad you like them!