RS47 - SETI
Release date: November 6, 2011
Is the search for extraterrestrial intelligence, or SETI, solid science, pseudoscience, or something else, as Massimo argues in his book "Nonsense on Stilts"? What are the theoretical foundations and empirical evidence that justify a multi-decade research program, and what are its chances of succeeding? Have we learned anything thanks to SETI? Also, if the universe is infinite, what problems does this pose for utilitarian ethics?
Julia's pick: "Ask a Mathematician / Ask a Physicist"
Massimo's pick: "Doctor Who and Philosophy: Bigger on the Inside (Popular Culture and Philosophy)"
References:
http://philpapers.org/rec/KUKSOT
http://carl.nbalternatives.com
http://www.nickbostrom.com/extraterrestrial.pdf
http://mcirkovic.aob.rs/paper_v4.pdf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drake_equation
7 Comments
Reader Comments (7)
The link to download the MP3 results in a 404.
Correct URL to download the MP3: http://skepticmedia.org/rsaudio/rs47.mp3
Thanks Chris, the links ha been corrected now.
Benny
Do scientists think that all life on earth evolved from the same primordial soup bowl? Was it one singular event and then all life evolved from that point? If so, then perhaps this is relevant to the probability of life forming on a planet. I don't see why the existence of life should preclude another primordial event. Though, I suppose that fledgling life, were it co-located with existing life would normally, though not necessarily, be at a disadvantage.
Great episode, as always!
One comment on probability ... just because life has formed on earth, it doesn't mean that there is a non-zero probability of its occurrance. Any unique event (or any event that can occur in an arbitrarily large finite number of ways) in an infinite sample space will have a probability of zero. It's a subtle difference between "zero probability" and "impossible". And even if there is an infinite number of possible planets that could produce life, if the sample space (all possible planets) is of a higher order infinity, then the probability is still zero.
IMO, SETI is doomed to failure. But just the fact that the ramifications would be so HUGE make it worth at least a token effort. We flush money away on many things that are much so more ridiculous!
er, "so much more ridiculous".
The only problem with the Fermi Paradox is that it is quite possibly not a paradox at all.
For a paradox to actually be a paradox, it has to compare two assertions that are not only contradictory, but they both must also be arguably true. In the case of the Fermi, the two assertions are:
a. Intelligent life should be common in the universe.
b. We have not seen any evidence of it.
One of these assertions is arguably untrue. No, it's the other one! The key words are "any evidence".