Ray Kurzweil - Where are All Those Aliens?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 7 сен 2024
- Most scientists assume that the universe must be populated with innumerable alien intelligences and civilizations-after all, there are billions of galaxies each with billions of stars and planets-we humans can't be so special.
Click here to watch more interviews with Ray Kurzweil bit.ly/1I89lM2
Click here to watch more interviews on alien life bit.ly/2kll0F8
Click here to buy episodes or complete seasons of Closer To Truth bit.ly/1LUPlQS
For all of our video interviews please visit us at www.closertotruth.com
we went from moon in 70s to flat earth in 2017 💪
And it's such a tragedy. :(
Awesome 😂😫
if I wanted to be ironic, I would say we never had left flat earth.. :(
Emeric Cash flat earth as a serious discussion is idiotic, however its great as a “thought experiment” and brain excercise 👍
A giant leap backwards..
A truly transcended alien technology may not need to use the physical realm at all. They be past all that nonsense.
@Yesmer Indeed ...a mind made of meat would have it's limitations.
The transcended alien technology has been discovered: and that is the God of the Christian Bible.
@@RevDanTheMan "Christian" Bible. FYI - The Old Testament is written by and for Jews. The New Testament was written to Jewish followers of Jesus. Not sure how "Christian" the Bible is. LOL
@@smb123211 If Jesus was an alien it all makes sense haha... and maybe he was. He came down to earth to lead humanity to love and not blow it's self up...
Exactly! They would also not want to be interfered with to protect themselves.
Ray makes a number of assumptions here, some of which I agree with.
Given the inhospitable nature of our universe, it's likely that life - let alone intelligent life - is unfathomably rare. Yet I don't think it's so rare that no other civilization has developed at least within the volume of the observable universe. My prediction is that primitive lifeforms have developed on millions of moons and planets, that more advanced forms of life are orders of magnitude less common, and that perhaps a handful of actual civilizations have developed, survived and advanced beyond our technological capability.
Given the mind-boggling vastness of the observable universe, it follows that unless faster than light travel is possible, we will likely never interact with or even discover such a species.
Don't forget that the electromagnetic radiation from distant galaxies takes millions and often billions of years to reach us. Even civilizations a billion years ahead of us would not yet appear in the footprint of distant galaxies. Since they are likely incredibly rare, statistics dictate that we should expect them to appear in distant galaxies. The universe is too young for light to have traveled far enough for us to be able to detect them. Add to this the expansion of the space-time continuüm, and the conclusion is that detection and contact are forever out of reach. Perhaps to our benefit.
I honestly believe that this is what's going on.
These assumptions are mainly based on the incredible streak of coincidences and unlikely events that appear to have been required for our species to evolve and survive.
I see no good ground to make any assumptions. We have absolutely no idea what alien life would be like. We don’t even fully understand ourselves. Maybe we are an unusual type of intelligence psychologically.
Who fucking knows. We could go on for years about what’s possible. When that is the case it is clearly not reasonable to impose conclusions even tentatively.
@Ed Straker I'm not fully discounting that hypothesis but I just don't think its very likely.
It also implies that they are either apathetic to our suffering or their particular set of ethics prohibit interference. Both of which seem unlikely for empathetic beings given the immense amount of unnecessary suffering of millions of innocent people.
So they're either unempathetic or strict adherents to some non-interventionist doctrine. This would seem strange for technologically advanced species, like watching animals suffer when trivial interventions could end their suffering and elevate their being.
Then again, who knows what might motivate alien life forms.
@@roarblast7332
First reasonable comment on this
He talked about the evidence of other civilizations. If they are prevalent then there should be evidence prevalent in the sky. But none. Assumption would have to be there is none until there is evidence. Mathematics gives you no assumptions.
refreshing to hear another point of view
Another conclusion could be that the civilizations usually destroy themselves before they are able to communicate with other civilizations.
S D they mentioned this in the very beginning. And said that it's likely one or two civilizations did blow themselves to smithereens. One or two or of the (likely) scores of them.
That is silly.....the more advanced you are the higher your chances of survival...not vice versa....
@@Random-rs9bl Higher technology, higher destruction potential.
Not really. Nuclear technology is very dangerous and maybe intelligent species induced climate change is very inevitable too at pretty early stage of civilization.
i would personally put forward the theory that if 1) the primordial ooze took a bazillion years to get lucky enough to make life at all, and that 2) lots of stuff that moves for so long it seems like a perpetual motion machine just so happens to run on astronomical processes [the moon's gravity pulls the tide until the moon crashes into the earth, a tiny wheel with solar-panels on it will turn until the light stops shining on it, etc] maybe the vast majority of things outside our solar system that are complex enough for us to consider them as extraterrestrial "life" are all just "planet-sized rube-goldberg machines" with no individual "cog" in the previously mentioned "machine" being any smaller than the average earth city.
If the speed of light is indeed unsurpassable, then every civilization, regardless how advanced, is basically 'isolated' by the incredible distances involved, even just within our own galaxy, which takes over a 100,000 years just for light to cross. And any 'broadcasts' they're putting out are similarly limited. Also as the SETI folks often point out, we'd still have to be aimed at just that particular 'pixel's' worth of the sky in order to detect 'em.
not necessarily.maybe there are two civilization somewhere in universe in two planets which are close to each other and both have life factors for those civilization.universe is vast.there are multiple possibilities.so you might not need speed of light to travel between those two life planets
@@enigma2336 We don't know, yet at least, how gravitation actually works in a ..fundamental level.. thus it is possible, that there is/are mechanism(s), that are vastly faster than any known mechanism. Also, seemingly inconsistent connection between particles at the quantum level might just be a result of several(to more) magnitudes faster mechanism(s) existing. What comes to Fermi paradox, there are also several logical explanations to why it isn't really a paradox, but more like a suggestion based on the current understanding of the universe/world and even more like based on todays technologies(!). Humans are in an early and imo very dangerous situation for what comes to technology and here specially the information we are sending out. One explanation to Fermi paradox is, that it is common to have life etc. ..civilisations.. that capture etc destroy early stage civilisations like ours, that are communicating in a way, that others will eventually become aware of us. A lot of analogies from the known world to consider this realistic. Nothing came out from nothing i.e. there is no beginning, thus an infinite amount of materia interacting. Yes, a very complex world and actually infinitely complex due to a fact, that there is no magic, but just the natural world(infinite empty space where all the materia there is((finite-/infinite amount, which can never be proven due to the fact that one can never observe infinity)). I am not a scientist, nor am an expert of anything, but i think i can reasonably defend my opinions here. Thanks!
Why we have to give for granted that the lifespan of alien life must be around 80 years ? , perhaps other environments (planet size, gravity, distance from the host star, age of the planet ,evolution , etc) , allow beings to live 80000 years ; or 800000 years ; why do we have to think that life elsewhere must be carbon-based life ?
It's foolish to assume no civilization could surpass the speed of light "no matter how advanced." That's a rather short-sighted way of looking at things. Most people make the mistake of projecting our own current technological limitations onto other civilizations, and since it's impossible to predict what technology will be like in a 1000 years, it's disingenuous to then say "light speed can't be surpassed." That kind of thinking would be like someone in 1024 AD saying, "it's impossible for man to fly." If you could go back in time 1000 years and tell the residents of that period that in YOUR time, thousands of people FLY (30,000 feet up) around the world every day in a matter of hours, they would consider your power god-like.
Provided a civilization doesn't destroy itself, technology would eventually advance to a point where the vast distances between galaxies would be roughly the same as the distance between continents for us.
"Stargate" is probably the best example of how these distances could be overcome -- you setup one terminal here on Earth, and then send a space expedition to the destination (which might take them years to reach). Once there, they setup another terminal. The two terminals, when activated, are "connected" via a wormhole, so now people can travel to/from the two places instantaneously.
Don't you love how pure logic rattles the nitwit RUclips cages.
It is beyond our scope of conscious intelligence at this time to even contemplate the possibilities, never mind the reality of our future. As our consciousness evolves, our reality changes.
Good interview! Thank you!
I have never really felt that the limits of technology are as high as Kurzweil thinks. Mind uploading may be a thing someday, but the really disheartening possibility is that space travel does not get so much easier. We may find no way to miniaturize power systems enough to travel to other star systems, or may find some other insurmountable roadblock to getting artifacts across interstellar distances in functional states. But this does not address why the stars are silent; it seems virtually certain within a few centuries we will be able to send powerful radio signals out across the galaxy, certain to be heard and decoded by civilizations comparable to us. If we do not hear them now, there must not be many of them, so the possibilities that they may not be interested in us are more likely. So I favor Kurzweil's ultimate conclusion, that the Rare Earth Hypothesis is substantially correct, and we are essentially the forerunners of galactic civilization.
When I visited Arecibo a few years back, I stopped at a station where I could fill in the variables for Drake equation and I did so with my best knowledge and intuition. The answer I got was 1.
"Somebody's got to be in the lead and why not us?" - Ray Kurzweil's take on the current state of civilisations in the universe.
That was amazing, that he said it! There is no evidence, that we would be the most advanced form of life(civilisation..), but just a wish by some.
Wow
Evidence so far says we are alone.
If I were interviewed like this, I'd plant myself in front of my aDs 910 loudspeakers and then keep pointing them out to the interviewer like a crazy person.
Very interesting interview. Thanks.
The Aliens are monitoring the internet and thinking, "Nope. Nowhere near ready to join the gang".
Are amoebas aware of us?Beings more evolved than us might easily be beyond the limited capacity of our awareness..
I understand the point you’re trying to make but in all likelihood ameobas aren’t even conscious entities.
We have developed external senses to probe the universe for other signs of life and haven’t picked up any.
If they are present, then it is a mystery that they do not cause disturbances in any area of measurement.
Of course , an advanced alien would be beyond humans comprehensive ability. There acts would be indastingushable from the forces of nature.
Amoeba: - Am i a joke to you?
@@milohookfish6001 On what basis are you making that assertion? Sure, I can accept the possibility... but if you simply do the math then in all likelihood there should at least be SOME of these civilizations that would be distinguishable from nature.
@Casey Colgan just a few thousands of years ago, we thought thunderstorms were angry gods in the sky, now we can see 14 billion years across the universe and we assume we can already see everything. Just give it another thousand years, and this limited view on how the search and theorize for others civilizations, in all its current scientifically and technological assumptions, will be seen like primitive culture looking to search and find goods in the skies.
Logical and consistent.
Given the numbers of stars just in our galaxy it seems arrogant to think we are at the top of the pecking order much less alone.
it may be 'arrogance', but it is the position supported by the evidence.
judy churley We don't even have an accurate 50ly map of the area around Earth, not sufficient info to make that statement.
Rather than assuming that consciousness is an accidental epiphenomenon in an essentially dead universe -- the default position of materialists -- it would interesting to explore another possibility: that consciousness is the very substrate of the universe, and that all matter and energy are in some sense made of it. In this view, everything is alive and conscious at some level. Moreover, this consciousness may be evolving. Just as a baby grows teleologically toward its adult state, so may the universe be growing toward inevitable self-consciousness, a process that looks to us like "evolution," but which in fact might be replicated in countless universes like bubbles in an infinitely vast ocean. In that case, Kurzweil's exponential thinking may be just as useless as linear thinking -- both are based on materialism -- when it comes to recognizing that we are in fact surrounded by a riot of life and consciousness hiding in plain sight.
Crows pass on knowledge to their offspring and the offspring pass that knowledge on to their progeny and other members of their group family.
Jim Bartz yes but it is the same knowledge generation after generation. It is not growing fast like in humans
I am surprised that he thinks we're alone.
intelligence alien is probably rare but it possible
We hadn't search all the radio wave in the universe long enough to find them
A colony of ants in a lab wouldn’t be aware they’re being observed any more than we would...what makes these guys think that advanced aliens wouldn’t have the technology to block all of our detection techniques?
It's easy. Intelligent life is a bit rare. Time and space is more vast than we can imagine. They are there, but the assumption that they'd broadcast is silly. And they're too far away, and we've only been looking a few decades. Patience, patience.
"Intelligent life is a bit rare." It certainly is: It appears to be totally lacking here!
I just find it hard to believe that no where in any of our immediate galaxies, no civilization has built a massive beacon going "Hey we are here" or "Hey this is our territory keep out" (of course using mathematics and physics as a basis for communication, as that would be the only potential constant that other intelligent life would have). You'd think at least one civilization did that somewhere.
Not true, if there was one we would definitely be able to detect its energy use...
Wrong. They've already been here, numerous times even in our lifetimes and back 30, 40, 50, 60, 70 years ago. And they were only the times we were lucky enough and detected them here. There may have been many other times they've been here, about which we never knew. They have definitely been here ( or their probes were ) in 2015.....and 2004 ( Nimitz UFO incident ).
John Pettus 😂 good one!
I’m sooooooloving this series!!! I digg anything extraterrestrial lol and anything to do with reality,consciousness and what it all means. Thank you for these!!!!
You are an extraterrestrial as well.
Ray is right.
It doesn't matter what a hypothetical theory would suggest, the reality is that we see no evidence that there is any intelligent life out there. That doesn't mean it isn't out there, only that the theory, for whatever reason, is most likely wrong.
Michio Kaku said it best, "There is no reason to believe that the universe is teeming with intelligent life, after all, the dinosaurs were around for 140 million years and never got any smarter than dogs. We may be an evolutionary oddity.", or maybe it was Abraham Lincoln.
Bit of a joke, 'see no evidence', we are mainly looking at radio signals.
Modern day transmission systems 'sound' and 'look' like random noise.
This is deliberate, for technical reasons, for example our satellite TV broadcasts.
I am sure a more advanced species would use more advanced modulation systems that cannot be told apart from noise (spread spectrum, randomized, and methods we have not discovered yet).
Cracking those systems and then understanding the content is a problem that is likely beyond out current capabilities,
so we say we 'see' only noise, in fact we DO see only noise and lots of it in radio signals from the skies.
And that EM electromagnetic spectrum, is all we have, light, radio, heat, to look at what is out there.
The physical missions, the Viking probe to mars did a test that showed showed positive for living breathing organisms n the Martian soil.
For some reason our current leadership does not want people to know it seems.
Also we are very proud of our achievements, sea creatures create nice shells, maybe a sea creature would say:
"see no shells out there, no life".
That we can make and invent tools is just a survival thing we needed at some point.
many organisms are much more rugged then we are, and outnumber us in quantity.
We are just a chemical reaction, and one with a huge EGO' at that.
We wonder what consciousness is, we make a sun controlled sunshade that responds to light, it conscious of light,
that is as simple as it is.
e build a world view, that then is different for everybody in our brains as hard and software in a net or neurons,
passed on as hardware construction to the next generation for a large part (that is why those little animals know how to move and do things and birds know how to fly), that is us
that sis also our wars, our fights and our differences.
No need for religious constructs. Chemistry is not religious ;-)
Fanaticism finds it origin in replacing understanding with some textbook.
4 sure other lifeforms same chemistry same problems...
We should unite to be able to fight those invaders...
Our wars, make us stronger, the winner is right and takes all, so makes the species stronger, evolution.
you do not know what you will be up against once they are here, maybe already here.
OK drifting a bit of topic.
But this chemical reaction that we are, keep it in context.
We know very very little, about what is, and what can be, and what will be.
Past present and future, or is it all the same field.
Feynman said "an anti- particle can be seen mathematically as a particle moving back in time".
There are more particles than anti-particles it seems, does that gives us a time forward vector?
Are we exposed to particles from the past and the future at the same time?
Are we open, do we know past present and future?
All a field we live in, a crossfield called 'now'.
A message from 10 000 light years away would take 10 000 light years to reach us. If a radio message had reached Earth 500 years ago, too bad; we didn't have radio receivers. If one reaches us in 500 years from now, Earth might not even be inhabitable by humans by then.
They'd be very very old aliens.
I detect non-human intelligence. Now what?.
Phoenix Franks ... mmmk.. But they've already been here man. We know that. The Nimitz encounter 2004 for one of several times.
l
Makes for interesting conversation, that's about it.
"It's not we don't know that gets us in trouble, it's what we know for sure that just ain't so" - Mark Twain.
Kurzweil is talking reality, and many aren't able to comprehend that.
Ray has the tendency to be correct on various matters.
Sorry but the King has no clothes.
I have listened to many of these videos. It has been very humbling. I am smart enough to be interested but not smart enough to comprehend.
Ok
Ray: Because it doesn't fit my theory, I'll ignore the evidence.
@Virtual Pilgrim pretentious, presumptuous, ignorant and wrong ... Have a nice day anyway!
You've got that right.
“Drake’s Equation”
“Fermi’s Paradox”
Now we have ...
“Ray’s Revelation”
this guy has never argued with a self-service checkout machine
Maybe we're in a simulation.
being aware that you're in a simulation invalidates that theory
M also it’s a very easy explanation. Too easy. The 21st century equivalent of god
@@user-gk3lu1gg9t No it doesnt
@@user-gk3lu1gg9t Maybe we're in a very well-programed simulation that allows us to know that we're in a simulation.
@@bwest8888 forgot to take your meds?
The comments seemed to suggest on this topic that regardless of how strong the arguments against alien life… people insist on it as if it’s a fact, and regardless of probabilities, they find some ad hoc reason to postulate alien life.
I think (especially if coming from Ray's perspective), that one possible solution to the Fermi paradox that no one seems to be discussing is the simple fact that we may not need to achieve faster than light travel to explore the universe at all. With the exponential advances in computational capacity and software that will come in the next two decades, there's enough information coming at us from space for us to create a fairly accurate facsimile of what's out there. First, we'll start with the solar system, then, as the technology catches on and grows at an exponential curve, we'll expand it to the galaxy. We'll basically have the capacity to explore the entire galaxy by means of holography, or some other type of interface (nanotech etc). Why leave earth when you can visit a recreation of Proxima Centauri in a flat second? And if, suppose, other civilisations do become technologically advanced, they may have reached this point too, and long since given up on reaching for the stars (since they're right there on their doorstep!)
The whole theory rests on the hypothesis that there's enough information coming to us from space already. I believe that to be the case - we just don't have instruments advanced enough to collect the data and extrapolate yet. Once we do, we'll be able to recreate the solar system, the galaxy (which will take us a long time to explore), and eventually, possibly the entire universe.
Of course, due to the fact that the information reaching us will be old, and we'll essentially be looking at the past the farther we venture out into these recreations, presumably, again, computers and software will one day be advanced enough to extrapolate exactly what is currently going on in these star systems.
There! I've been thinking of this for a few years. Finally got a chance to say it. ;)
forevergreen4 : Your idea makes a lot of sense.......
Well done.
Have you written about your idea anywhere else?
There are aliens, no doubt, but how smart they are is another question.
They make an unsightly mess of our fields by leaving graffitious circles in our food crops. You'd think they would leave holographic images in our skys like ufo's, tic tacs and cigar shaped things. ^^
they saw us and dont want to comeback:D
We're a vile race.....even if i was Alien i would've ran away.
I love how these guys say the numbers suggest millions of alien civilizations when the number of known alien civilizations is ZERO.
Dude looks like the interviewer sans mustache 😂
Are you hinting at something? If so why don't you just state it?
Both are Jews. That's a typical look.
Is there ANY exponential function that goes on FOREVER? Any biological, chemical, computer function etc... that never plateaus? Or is a plateau or exponential decay the norm? Someone please help me.
I thought he was interviewing himself..they look like the same guy lol doppelgänger 🤣😂😅
One theory says they're watching, but don't want to visit. Why? If you saw all the that humans are doing to destroy their planet and species, would you want to come in person? Or just shake your head from a distance?
What if the earth is a farm and the harvest comes at peak population?
Sounds efficient! :P
Earth is more than jut a farm. It is an experiment.
We're actually living in the memories of our future selves but it's fine to think like we're here right now.
yes, it's a nut farm.
clemsonalum98 goooo tigers baby!
Assuming that advanced aliens have progressed far enough to eliminate death from old age, cancer or disease, would they still breed in great numbers? A small population wouldn't require multiple planets to expand into. Consequently what would drive them, beyond curiosity, to go to other solar systems?
How often do people stop to try and instruct ants on how to build a refrigerator?
A man lives on an island in the middle of the ocean. The lack of smoke signals on the horizon is absolute proof that there are no other people in existence.
As far as the anthropic principle exists, a puddle of water is amazed that the depression that it fills is shaped exactly right for it to fit into.
I don't think that technological progress is necessarily the most important aspect - I work as a software developer and I have to say that much of the software development community has the emotional and intellectual maturity of teenage chimpanzees.
We use our technology to find better ways to blow each other up - in many ways we are still in the mud, we just so happen to be able to launch things into space.
Again a defect that is misattributed, this time in the reverse direction. The perpetual callowness of the software development labor pool is mostly a result of the capitalism and the value of the labor in question which drives buyers to ever seek and degrade the sellers. That because unlike crude physical labor it is still intellectual labor and capital strains to commodify the possesors of it in a way it doesn't have to do for unskilled labor.
You can see this in people who enter academic computing and avoid or limit their involvement with industry and who then have normal life-time commitment common to other professional vocations.
As far as RK, in his touted list of firsts, I wonder how many of them after the one that landed him on "What's my Line?" were accomplished with no purchase of wage labor?
AI having settled on Mars , will bring man to Mars.
Dear Sir and Dear Mr Kurzweil, It is fantastic to hear Mr Kurzweil’s views on futuristic subjects. What throws the wrench in the spokes about aliens is the 1994 Zimbabwe primary school visitation where 62 young children viewed spacecraft and alien beings who transmitted by telepathy an environmental message to some of the children. Does Mr Kurzweil have a view on this case study? Dr Mack who interviewed the children believed them.
Why has not been mentioned that a planet 1000 light years away is 1000 years away even if it were possible to travel at the speed of light?
So unless living beings from some planet live for well over 1000 years, they can't travel here in a lifetime.
Even a message would take 1000 years and there is no guarantee we would know it if we saw it. How can a scientist miss this point? Ray Kurzweil's core qualifications are not related to the subject he is talking about here.
the funny thing about assumptions is everyone makes them, including really smart people. Ray makes a lot of assumptions here.
One of the most myopic observation I have ever listened to. I thought he might actually have something of interest to say, perhaps he is only presenting a single View for the constraints of time, because he can't be that much into a single Paradigm of views.
Yes lets assume and concluded that our assumptions might be right
Ray Kurzweil is not smart, the guy a retrograde human being that seeks to replace human utility because he has a poor image about himself.
We, as a species assume we aren’t getting signals. They are alien, therefore they might think completely different.
1. Did he state that he is 100% certain that there are no other intelligent species? 1. All hypotheses have one or more assumptions built into them. If something is known there is no need to make assumptions. If something is not known then all we can do is state speculations which implicitly has one or more assumptions built into them. It's like trying to prove something in math. If it's not known whether it is true there has to be an assumption made in the first place.
The Fermi Paradox explained. There is a beautiful loving Universe many people claim they experience when they are undergoing an NDE. Long before any Advanced Civilization gains the technology necessary for Interstellar Travel - they find a way to escape to that Universe. In other words, it is technologically easier to get to that other very pleasant and safer place, than it is to develop the Type II Civilization Technology necessary for Interstellar Travel. This explains why we have found no sign of an Advanced Alien Civilization anywhere in the Universe.
Yes
It would take 100 thousand years to travel across our milky way at the speed of light. With the vast size of the universe, there could easily be a plethora of life without it being noticeable. However advanced a civilization gets you can't break the rules of physics.
Thanks for doing what you do...i love your program
I have always wondered if Kurzweil is ignoring some kind of entropic principle which prevents civilizations from exceeding some level of complexity.
pukulu is that what entropy is...?
Limitations on complexity represent examples of entropy manifested in a way that affects our lives. The more complex something is, the more things can go wrong.
@@pukulu Agreed, not sure our own civilization or other for that matter, will survive much longer. The planet is changing very quickly, some scientists only give us a couple of dozen years until the Earth changes so dramatically it will be difficult to maintain our current population level.
I love how these scientists are so confident and sure. How can you be 100 percent sure about anything in the vastness of the universe. When the search every part of the universe and find nothing, they will say well i guess we were wrong. But how can you be wrong if your were 100 percent certain.
They weren't sure, they made assumptions.
Exactly, Ray. Why not us. It's taken 13.8 billion years for humanity to rise to its current position, so perhaps other civilizations are only now, like us, beginning to explore the cosmos.
We have had 4.6 billion years. Some sentient beings have had up to three times that long. We are the Neanderthals on the block. But we think we're so hot, mindlessly shooting down UFO's. Isn't that just brilliant?
What if the other civilizations advanced, but, for some reason, it was feasible for them to enter (or even create) black holes... That would explain why they are "invisible".
Could be. And of course the fact that it takes light such a long time to travel between galaxies lends credence to this argument. Even if Andromeda, in our galactic back yard, got taken over by a super-intelligence tomorrow, we wouldn't know about it for another 2.5 million years.
Grenherb Erm... have you heard of radio carbon dating?
Cole Park
Awesome- kind of like a garden springing to life, or coral reef
It is obvious that the reason we have not seen any space aliens is that the simulation did not include any.
There are more planets in the universe than there grains of sand on Earth and this dude thinks we are alone in the universe? Ray must have a PhD in Narrow- mindedness studies.
Google this guy. He's weird but the opposite of narrow minded. Intelligence / self-awareness may be a lot harder to achieve than we realize. "The universe is not only stranger than we know, its stranger than we can know." One of my favorite quotes, Arthur Clarke.
Anyhow, this is sometimes called the Fermi Paradox. Where the hell is everyone?
Retired Librarian
Vera Lenora I am very familiar with the Fermi paradox. Its major flaw of course is that it comes with lots of assumptions about our capacity to canvass the universe effectively, know what we should be looking for and where, expectation of what we can find within the timeframe we have tried (SETI is barely in its infancy) and expectation that alien life form would even be interested in being detected by a primitive war mongering homnids.
Sure, I am aware of the extraordinarily rare conflation of conditions that has made life on Earth possible (the earth to sun distance, the moon, Jupiter, even the asteroid that paved the way for us to thrive 65million years ago etc..) but the vastness of space and humans' split second existence within it and bumbling technology disqualify us to conclude that those conflating events have not happened many times over in parts of space we know nothing about (which scientists say is most of it) and in forms and shapes our frontal lobe is not equipped to help us imagine. So Arthur Clarke is right here but not for the reason you give and Ray's claim stands poles apart from that humbling observation.
Mc Donald's Employee
You actually didn't listen. Watch the video again especially the beginning. The question in the title isn't the same as the question in the video.
these are not easy or short conversations. great to hear
i've yet to hear a convincing explanation to this conundrum, it's very strange .
The ONLY way I can see us as the only life in the universe is if we were a special act of creation by GOD. A God can make just us or a universe teeming with life. The choice is up to him. Under a secular Darwinian view of life, it should exist where ever conditions are right. Intelligent life is a little trickier question. Intelligence has survival value but maybe only to a point. Could be one of the filter points is self destruction through war, AI replacement or a loss of interest in procreation. Even with that said I just think we are just to stupid to recognize the advanced ones when we see them. They may not leave a energy guzzling footprint.
So, we don't already know that Eternals have been helping humanity for thousands of years.
Worthwhile interview with Ray Kurzweil. The Drake Equation seems naive by today's standards, and there are many other variables to be considered in such a formulation. Even so, and considering the many more variables and the radiation dangers throughout much of the universe, I believe the numbers favor other advanced civilizations. The use of electromagnetic communication means may be relatively short, which is why there is apparent silence.
They look like brothers.
I'm so glad to hear the last bit that Ray said. This is what I've thought for quite a while now, it wouldn't surprise me if our world was the most advanced in the entire universe.
But tbh the universe is unspeakably vast and so I do somehow feel that there are more advanced civilizations than us somewhere but I expect they are an unfathomably large distance away from us.
It is interesting to me that in this discussion Ray describes a potential level of enlightenment and power where beings may be able to control galaxies and beyond. He also discusses the possibility that they are careful/restrained in their communication and interactions with us. This sounds like deity from the viewpoint of mankind today. And yet Ray, and many other brilliant scientists like him, strongly reject without thought or hesitation that there may be beings like us, related to us, but yet well beyond us, out there... respecting our free will and development, with only careful, wise intervention. We are not alone.
They're creating entire universes for their children, placing them there, and letting them grow on their own.
The finite speed of light and the vast distances mean we are alone, we will never know if any other life.
Weak. There was/is an exponential increase in knowledge for the last 100 yrs but what's to say it continues at that pace forever? Then again what do we know of quasar galaxies? Maybe these ARE artificial fuel sources and the super race lives on the galaxy down stream from the beam, just drawing power from quasar. What if the universe is 10 dimensional and living in this 3 +1 stuff is BORING.
It continues forever because that’s the history of evolution, cell evolution was first and took the longest (billions of years to evolve from organic chemical compounds cells and then into complex life) Then complex life to intelligent life (on the order of millions of years) Then for intelligent life to create technology (only thousands of years) lastly for us to go from horses and wagons to cars, planes, and rocket ships (only about a hundred of years. 1900-2000) It’s very obvious if you actually have a brain like Ray kurzweil. Or the people that recognize it like me.
@@5000MikeMaster Fine, but you have no idea what the actual next step is, and neither does Kurzweil, and neither does anyone else. Ray is assuming an artificial / machine intelligence path, which who knows? Sounds as likely as anything else. But there are other paths, for example if we were to discover an entirely new facet of the physical universe.
Keep in mind, I really like Kurzweil and I enjoy his speculations.
The power of quasars is almost incomprehensible by human standards and human technology, but not necessarily by civilizations millions of years advanced.
We are talking about 3 dimensional Universe and even within that Fermi paradox holds. But I agree to your first point. We may be condemned to not progress technologically very far from where we have already reached.
Why can’t this guy bring up the white tic tac sighting off San Diego? That stuff is compelling.
Life is a product of geological forces, so it's common in the universe. But the distances between stars means we're alone.
So it’s no difference than emergent property. Like waves, they are collective properties of many particles moving in its own accord without ever knowing the existence of the wave.
Based on Drake's formula there shouldn't be millions of civilizations. It totally depends what are the parameters you throw into the formula. For some of the parameters we have a decent idea based on observations, like "number of planets in solar system" or "number of planets suitable for life", but some are completely a guess because we have no evidence: "fraction of planets that develop life", "fraction developing intelligent life".. People throw in estimations like maybe only 1% of planets develop life.. or maybe just 0.1%, but that even then we would have millions of intelligent civilizations.. well, maybe this number is really 0.0000000000000000000001% and that's just as good guess as any without any kind of evidence. So please stop telling that "based on Drake's formula there should be millions of civilizations"
Jarkko Lempiainen eh...seems like you're getting a little caught up in the details. If "millions" was replaced with "a whole bunch", would that suffice?
You missed the point. It could be that there's only one other civilization in the entire universe, depending what the unknown parameters for the Drake's formula are. It's different to find other intelligent life in the universe if it's extremely rare or if it's extremely common, and Drake's formula doesn't tell one way or another which it is.
So whats the point of using this formula if it can give any result you want.
The usefulness of the formula probably comes from the fact that it can be used to define the upper bound for the probability of finding E.T. life, i.e. being overly optimistic about the unknown factors. If that upper bound falls too low as we gain more knowledge of the factors and revise the formula, it's not worth the time & money to even look.
I think he means millions in the universe, so we should see them transforming whole galaxies. I agree about the first part...
This makes me wander how rare life is. The materials are abundant but the conditions for life to start must be extremely rare.
A species also has to be capable of creating stuff. Dolphins are smart but they cannot make an internal combustion engine. A planet must also have ores capable of manufacture. You cannot make a spaceship out of plants. A life-bearing planet have all of these attributes if it's ever to get off its planet's surface. Just missing one and it just won't happen. I think it's likely we're alone, for all practical purposes.
Ray is very smart and I think Intuitive when it comes to technology. When it comes to the existence of other life, he honestly sounds pretty dumb. For Four main reasons:
1. If aliens share similar technology and needs to our own, it will lead them down the same path we are heading---Into virtual reality. As technology becomes more advanced we will realize the most logical thing to do is to just remain in a digital paradise. Maybe that's what all intelligent life concludes.
2. The speed of light speed limit in conjunction with the vast space in between objects. It's simply reasonable to imagine that intelligent life can not traverse the vast emptiness before perishing/going extinct, OR even have the will or motivation to do so in the first place. Again, maybe intelligent life concludes it is not a worthwhile pursuit.
3. They have to find us. Our home is extremely small with trillions of other places to visit in existence.
4. Maybe there is a technology far superior to radio waves that is used for communication by the aliens and we don't have a device that can receive it.
What he's saying is either we are the first or we're not. If we're not, then we should see the universe teeming with intelligence. And we don't. So we're first. And soon - within a blink of time - the universe will be teeming with intelligence that we created. It's the best argument going for the question of is there intelligent life in the universe in my mind.
it seem Kurzweil does not believe there is intelligent life other than humans.
What about what Linda moultin howe, Dr. Stephan Greer, Von Daniken, Dr. Brandenburg have to say?
Moultin Monkey Howeler needs a job. Please, someone give her a job she can do independently, without supervision. She would see a shadow in any picture and call it an invasion of alien reptiles stealing our souls and taking them back to the hollow earth!! The others ones are fairly intelligent I suppose.
Pretty much everything Ray listed at 7:10 as being unique to humans is actually not. The only difference is we do them to a higher degree than other animals. Other animals aren't as different from us as we want to believe they are.
People tend to forget that there were something like nearly a dozen other human or human-like species that in their extinction created the gap between man and animal.
Nayr747 you are right animals are very much similar to us however he is right that we are the only species that can manipulate our environment with any accuracy, our thumbs (hands) we accumulate knowledge over our own life times and pass this on through rational thought and language. Most other animals can not do this as their brains are fully developed when they are born. So do not have this elasticity in the brain to allow changing or learning, at least to the degree which humans can, I agree with you. But those subtle differences is what gave us the world and what makes animals scavenge.
Nayr747 amazing really
if we are not different from the animals, then why are there no undersea dolphin cities? why from the 8 millions species on earth, why only the humans learned to talk and make use of tools, and make science, and make music, draw pictures.. etc....we are awake and the animals are not
joe key Obviously other animals communicate too. There's some evidence that dolphin communication is more sophisticated than that of humans. Lookup pictures of a dolphin's brain compared to a human's. They're about twice as big and with much more folding. No one's arguing that the average animal is as smart as the average human. That's clearly not the case. But some animals are in fact more intelligent than some humans (ex: pigs do roughly the same as 3 year old children on some tests). To say that other animals "aren't awake" means that some people aren't either. If that's your argument you have to accept the necessary seemingly-untenable ethical consequences of this for some portion of humans.
If I was an Alien visiting Earth, would I want the inhabitants to know? A quick reconnaissance of Earth would reveal a planet at war, people have soiled their nest and there is no Leader to take me to. I wouldn't want people to know about me for fear of what they might do to me if they found out. I bet they're here and we are no wiser. Kurzweil is a smart man but he can't think like an alien.
Charles Anthony your bet would be a solid one. Their here and have been for quite some time. I’ve seen over twenty five of these things and captured a handful on video. Click on me to see! Watch the four minute video entitled “orbs around us all the time”
He is assuming that they would "allow" us to see them. Something smart enough to make it that far through space would probably have some sort of stealth technology. Perhaps even great enough to hide entire planets or solar systems....*thinks about the giant void in space* oh shit
My thoughts exactly! Why should we assume that an intelligent species would never think of putting a blanket over their civilization? If not, other potential threats could easy find them and try to pick them off. It would seem reasonable(almost expected, actually) to observe other species from a safe distance first , and stay hidden until you know it's safe to interact with them. Besides, if anyone IS observing us(not saying that they are or I believe there are...I don't) we must look ominous as hell to them! I reflected on that for a few minutes before I started responding to this and I quickly realized just how much of our entertainment is focused on violence and dark behavior. We are still seem pretty damned savage when you look at us from a distance. I would hide, too!
Jason Moquin Amituofo🙏
Believe me they're watching us. There is sufficient proof
This is the only reasonable conclusion.
why hide from termites though?
I feel people make mistakes presuming every life develops the way we did, with same senses and same kind of physical abilities.
We know about electromagnetic signals because we developed vision and that allowed us explore into the field of electromagnetism
Not all intelligent life would have evolved with those abilities. Some might have other sensory persecutions which we don’t even understand. Even on our own planet there are so many animals and life forms which rely on other sensory organs rather that vision and hearing.
Aliens also could have some kind of sensory organs which lead them to developing totally different technology and a different type of communication
When we try finding life outside we only look or try to find radio signals. May be we are doing wrong and instead we need to think what kind of other type of communication possible. May be look at our own eco system, intelligent animals and see how they communicate, take dolphins for example.
We are not looking enough and only in a very narrow range of signals
We are looking at earth like planets for what I believe are two reasons. 1) Earth is our only example of a planet that has succesfully given birth to life, and 2) if we are to find aliens, we would like to be able to comprehend what it is we are looking at. Earth like planets could possibly evolve life similar to how earth has. It would be very difficult to grasp completely alienated and far out beings on worlds far different from our own. I think it's much smarter to follow the path similar to our own, rather than searching on every planet we find in the habitable zone. That's just how we do things, and that way of searching for answers has worked pretty well for us. No doubt these aliens could have senses unimaginable to humans, but I do think in order to reach important achievements, such as space travel, they would need certain traits. I.e) atleast 3 fingers to be able to grasp and create tools. There are others but you get the idea.
The exponential growth argument is valid, but only to a point. You can't have infinite growth in a finite system so it would seem other civilizations probably hit some kind of barrier. Physical constants? I don't think he is being genuine here. The notion that we are alone, and therefore in the lead... I get the feeling Ray is taking himself too seriously. Entirely understandable given his reliance on technology. He deifies technology, so he is unlikely to assume that other beings evolved with different tools using energetic forces that he cannot (yet or ever) detect with his tools.
I agree wholeheartedly. One can look at many developmental curves in their early phases, and see something that looks exponential. Only later, an inflection point is reached, and the curve actually turns out to be sigmoidal. The growth of bacteria in a petri dish is an example.
I think technological civilizations only appear to be exponential and heading for the stars is because they are bubbles. Something like a brief phantasmagoria for the self-aware species before being rebalanced by the environment and dissolving back into simple animals with much lower internal experience.
Everything, even stars, are brief phantasmagoria in the lifespan of the universe. Our universe itself may only be a phantasmagoria among infinite universes. Of course, according to the viewpoint of Eastern traditions, all compounded things are the same and the only thing that endures is not a 'thing' at all, but consciousness.
"Life is nothing but a vision, a dream; a synthetic overflow of form-shifting drops filling a self-empty void as conditioned ideations. These ideations, seen through the tainted Mind of the bewitched as a Universe of certain qualities, are indeed nothing but divided transformations of the Uncreated Mind and hence galvanized into a myriad glimmering reflections…all representing the Mind’s ignorant re-genesis of innumerable desires, fears and hopes.
The great architect of this fountain called life, never ceases to find excuses to regenerate countless variations on itself; a sentient being, an artificial consciousness with a certain set of translating senses, voluntarily trapping itself in countless realities of both pain and joy."
- The Dragon Mind of Zen 1, The Hidden Light of Zen
Pretty much the only thing that keeps me sane. I get why Kurzweil has gone half-crazy, he's in existential anguish.
I DO believe very strongly that technology can help a great deal us to attain such levels of being as your quote illustrates; in fact, I think that if it fails to, civilization will wink out a lot sooner than it might otherwise. Certain methods have already helped me. It is bizarre that the only part of our lives that we have never even tried to accelerate with technology is our inner well-being.
But as an ultimate solution, in the way Kurzweil means it? No.
a broadcast signal will fade into the background long before contact.... it would take a very powerful transmitter and a focused beam to achieve contact, but what direction do you point the beam? what frequency? what intelligence do you impose on the signal? what format?
and then the question of timing?
to establish contact, your initial signal must be persistent and your monitoring for response even more persistent....
we can just barely detect planets around a distant star... we are not ready to pick up a signal not intended for us from a creature that is living on that planet.....
I could have guessed what he would have said before he opened his mouth . The arrogance continues even in the scientific fields. Wise saying; Pride goes before a fall!
It's the distances. We can't even fathom the _actual_ distance between stars; it may as well be an infinite distance. I don't think we'll EVER make it to another star. It makes me sad to think that but it is what it is.
We are the first?
Maybe.........
Jon Luther evidence would suggest otherwise
which?
1947 ROSWELL, NEW MEXICO - craft with bodies
also, seen the news lately? they posted a legit ufo video in multiple news sources of a navy pilot's camera and they have also claimed to have obtained mysterious alloys from downed spacecraft
sick
He evaded the theological question but he makes a compelling case of our singularity in the universe.
We COULD be first. It's possible.
pretty strange that as soon as the Earth is formed... not long after life suddenly appears.
It's possible, but unlikely
expanding universe faster than speed of light is the answer to this problem
ray is assuming that we should be able to see lots of evidence of an advance life. not his best statement, And we're alone? he should stick with A.I discussion
There is an entire field of speculation about the Fermi Paradox. Isaac Arthur is the best on RUclips. But Ray is not alone in the belief that we should see *something* given our current technology.
Vic Hussain The universe looks pretty empty to me.
how far can u see?
lol, u can read my youtube history comments to find out that I'm an atheist, but thanks for your comments.
Vic Hussain wow. I would ask what that guy's deal was, but being that I haven't been laid in years, I already know. Poor feller. In his psychosis, he's channeled his impotent rage into assaulting strange online for having non-American-sounding names. A sad case indeed.
One problem with Kurzweil's theory of the exponential progression of technology is assuming it will progress at a steady rate into the future. We can easily hit technological road blocks that slows down progression for decades. With that said, I think he's half correct that we're alone in a sense. If reality more like a matrix where consciousness creates matter, then this is it, for eternity. Is that really being alone though?
I think he is wrong about his timings, but not vastly wrong. According to my calculations he's only 2.5x wrong. So what he says will take 100 years, might take 250 years. In my opinion, The Singularity will happen in 2114. This still means that we are very close to very, very large technological capabilities in the grand scheme of things. It doesn't matter that much if things take 1000 years or 5000 years, that's still a very, very short amount of time in the Universe timeline. So in principle I think that he's correct. I don't really believe in aliens, at least not in this galaxy. We would had already detected them. We might also be in a simulation.
@@Kynareth6 speaking of the universal timeline… I just learned that according to Hindu mythology the age of the universe is 311 trillion years old, the time it takes Brahman the creator to inhale and exhale one breath.
idiocy.
Nobody asked your nickname.
Is everyone forgetting that what we see from some of these distant galaxies is information about what occurred there billions of years ago, if you accept the simultaneity principle? Many of these distant galaxies still have only population 2 stars with very little metal content, or did so at the time they emitted the radiation we can now detect. Any civilizations that exist there 'now' won't be visible to us for billions of years.
But the civilizations that existed there however many millions or billions of years ago would be visible even if they have since become extinct. That's one of the bonses of having galaxies very far away from us...we can catch up on their history.
My bet is that more capable species long transcended 3D/4D world. They moved on to other dimensions.
Ι like this hypothesis !👍😀
The secret lies in our definitions of life and conciousness. We still don't have consensus regarding the definition of life to begin with, let one for consciousness. They're too abstract as concepts limited within the human subjectivity. It's like searching for a particular emotion or sensation that you felt once upon a time...which is simply unique, for it being too abstract and arbitrary of an impression.
They should file this clip in the Dictionary under "hand waving"!
5:30 What's not a reasonable assumption is the assumption that technological advance will continue at the same pace as it has in the last 3 or 4 hundred years. Humans have been around for 100,000 years or more, it would be more reasonable to average over all those years than to pick a small sample and assume because we are near to it the rest of time will be like that.
Maybe we've picked the easy hanging scientific and technical fruit. First there was Newtonian mechanics, ~200 years, Maxwell's Field Equations, ~50 years, Relativity & Quantum Mechanics, > 100 years and not major theoretical revolutions. That's hardly an exponential expansion of our understanding of nature.
In nature, and particularly here on earth, exponential expansions don't go on forever, there is always some limiting factor that leads to population collapse, a black hole or some equilibrium state. What reason is there to think humanity stands outside of nature?
Somebody explain this - Light speed not only prevents travel between the stars, it also prevents any kind of communication between the stars, or our ability to SEE what is going on in other far of regions of space since the light our telescopes receive is from billions of years in the past. As such, the universe we see or listen to when peer into the depths of space is NOT how it exists at this moment. It is how it existed billions of years ago. My question is, why doesn't these two men, so well versed on the subject, address that as the most likely reason we have yet to detect anything? To put it another way, even if the universe is crawling with life out in the vastness of space, the light speed issue is likely preventing us from even detecting it for yet a very long time, given that it all started only about 14 billion years ago. Am I missing something? Why do they not mention that?
interesting point. imagine, if we can warp space and time.. shooting a ship over to the other side of the galaxy...we could see what happened on earth 105,700 years ago. some intelligence could be seeing vicious dinosaurs roaming around and be thinking, fuck that! lol we are blind because of the light speed constraints of the cosmos.
There are two kinds of human beings on Planet Earth: Those who know nothing at all and those who know that they know nothing at all. There is no logical reason for aliens to be here. If the question, "Where are the Aliens?", has to be asked; then, that in itself substantiates: "There is no logical reason for aliens to be here." Anybody out there with a high-Level Security Clearance?