It's a valid point to post possible answers. It's another thing to say Fermi was completely wrong, imply you know why and attack anyone who disagrees.
An illistration: Say we could visist any star, no matter the distance from us, in 5 minutes. That would of course, include all the planning and construction. Far fetched, but bear with me: By this method it would take us about 5000 years to visit the stars in the milky way. This is based on a conservative estimate of the number of stars. The latest estimates are that there are 200 billion galaxies in the universe. to visit just 0.5% of them would take 5 trillion years. The universe is about 14 billion years old. If just 0.05% of galaxies contained an intellectual species, we could make this 5 trillion year search 10 times and still have a better than decent chance of never finding one of the 100 million intelligent species which existed. Fermi's paradox is nonsense.
Look, Enrico Fermi was a very smart man but the "Fermi paradox" is almost unbelievably dumb. It isn't even a real paradox. Consider the following excerpt from the magisterial guide to the topic of SETI, Contact with Alien Civilizations: Our Hopes and Fears About Encountering Extraterrestrials by Michael Michaud: We have utterly no cause to think we've done any kind of real thorough search. And, as I recall, the original formulation of the Fermi paradox wondered why they haven't come here. That adds extra dumb because it assumes that extraterrestrials capable of interstellar travel would even give a **** about contacting us. I think derision and dismissal would be more likely once they catch wind of our radio signals. So don't take the Fermi paradox seriously.
Our galaxy, the Milky Way, has over 100 billion stars. There are over 500 type G stars, like our own Sun, within 100 light years of our own planet, over 60 within 50 light years. Since all are about the same age and, given the same chances of development, it would seem we'd have some kind of evidence of other similar levels of technology. So far, nothing. Nada. Zip. Not a hint. I'm not talking about Lizard people in flying saucers, just evidence such as we've been sending out for well over 100 years and deliberate signals for over 40 years. As wise people know "absence of evidence is not evidence of absence". Why don't we have any evidence of other civilizations? We don't know. It's a curious question because all logic says we should. Since we're on the outer third of the Milky Way, it makes sense that stars closer toward the galaxy center would be millions of years more advanced. Again, nothing. Nada. Zip. Why? I don't know but I find it very curious when people claim to know the answer. http://www.solstation.com/stars3/100-gs.htm Stars: 250 billion ± 150 billion Sun's distance to Galactic Center: 26.4 ± 1.0 kly (8.09 ± 0.31 kpc)
You are making the ethe arbitrary choice of constraining the problem to "life a lot like what we have here", for one. You don't get to rig the game in this way. Second, there is no reason to suspect we would notice any "advanced technology" on nearby stars. Again, there could be 100 million species as intelligence as ours in the universe, and there would only be one for every 2000 galaxies. So to say that we haven't yet detected something is decent evidence than none exist is utterly absurd. Biologists don't study a thimble of water and then declare there are no whales in the ocean. If they did , they would get laughed out of the room, right?(credit Tyson) The correct answer is, "we don't know". I am arguing that the idea that there is any reasonable expectation that we SHOULD have, lest there are likely no such civilizations, is absurd. It's a terrible argument, given the size of the observable universe.
All logic does not say that. Deeming SETI efforts such as have been accomplished now a failure is tantamount to having a big stack of hay, in which it is believed that one or more needles might very possibly exist, and looking at a single straw in that stack of hay, observing it isn't a needle, and concluding that there are no needles in the entire haystack. Just recently, we are finally expanding into optical SETI, where tightly focused beams of electromagnetic energy are being looked for, rather than signals spreading out in all directions and diffusing to the point of uselessness as a consequence. Just recently, we are finally finding planets that are like our own and are thus promising candidates for harboring intelligent life and those planets can now have greater scrutiny focused on them that couldn't have been possible in the past. And still we are just only scratching the surface. There is absolutely no reason to think we've searched the whole cosmos exhaustively for signs of life, utterly no reason at all.
Finally! Thank you for finally admitting we don't know. Ergo your supposition that Fermi is wrong is, by your own admission, erroneous. We don't know. We can wonder why we haven't had contact or why there is zero evidence of other life beyond Earth, but "we don't know".
Life at the bottom of our ocean and Jupiter are not even in the same realm. There is heat and food at the bottom of the ocean and its water. Jupiter consists of mostly hydrogen and helium and only trace amount of water and other gases. You have 300 mph winds, a toxic to life atmposhere, and crap loads of radiation. Jupiter has NO life at all. Even the most difficult areas of earth like the Marinas trench and Antarctica are a summer vacation to every other planet in the solar system. Also, intelligent life is not forming at the bottom of the ocean its all very simple organisms and crabs and fish that have adapted to living down there. Even if they find life on Titan or Io or something it will not be intelligent which is what the discussion is about.
What evidence? What signals? Do you mean that primitive stuff called radio. What do you expect, a phone call? Your argument is not only illogical, it is just silly.
I did not realize we were discussing "Intelligent" life exclusively but, even then we would need to consider what is deemed intelligent. Are Dolphins intelligent? Dogs? Viruses?
Going by your posted Data, There has not even been enough time for the 50 Stars to receive and return communications as of yet, even if they still used old fashioned radio so we could read it.
The idea that because we haven't gotten radio signals from an alien civilization is evidence that no intelligent life exists anywhere in the Universe is one of the worst arguments I have ever heard in this debate. This is coming from people who want to believe that humans are the most intelligent lifeforms in the Universe and want to dismiss discussion. Life on other planets could range from microscopic organisms to beings with technology vastly more advanced than anything humans have created and everything in between. We don't know what is out there and it is arrogant to pretend that we do. Unless humans visit every celestial body in the Universe we can't know for certain that there are no aliens out there. We can only speculate.
While it's good to keep an open mind, but following the advice of James Oberg is wise. "Keeping an open mind is a virtue, but not so open that your brains fall out." -- James Oberg, NASA engineer
The issues with any SETI search are multiple. 1) Signal transit time (as in light years or centuries). 2) Technology compatibility. 3) Civilization timelines of existence. 4) Area of search (almost unlimited).. 5) Time spent listening/watching thus far. These are but a few of the limitations and certainly not the most crippling. Without an incredible stoke of pure luck it is futile at this point.
While the distances and technological challenges are daunting, and while I think the odds there are other civilizations in existence are very large, the fact remains we've seen ZERO signs of extraterrestrial life forms, much less civilizations. The Fermi paradox remains a paradox.
Granted we have not noted extraterrestrial signals of any kind, but we do not even know how or what to look/listen for. The Fermi Paradox merely points out the obvious difficulties involved but does accept the inevitability of extrasolar life and civilization. Humankind is rather ignorant and extremely limited in any quest to find or understand what may be "Out There" as clearly shown by our inability to communicate with any intelligence right in front of us. Do you think Whales and Apes don't communicate? Do you, or any of us know what they are saying?
We have had such close contact with UFO's, all through the ages, it seems space signals aren't needed.
Yes whales and apes communicate. Yes, we do. Example; whales communicate through song warning of dangers, searching for mates, etc. https://www.whalefacts.org/how-do-whales-communicate/ It's not like they are discussing solving the van der Corput difference theorem.
