/top/
/new/
/best/
/ask/
/show/
/job/
^
slacker news
login
about
←back to thread
First images from Euclid are in
(dlmultimedia.esa.int)
655 points
mooreds
| 2 comments |
21 Oct 24 20:15 UTC
|
HN request time: 0s
|
source
Show context
bikamonki
◴[
21 Oct 24 23:55 UTC
]
No.
41909790
[source]
▶
>>41908075 (OP)
#
So many solar systems out there, life evolved in many planets for sure. No proof but no doubt.
replies(6):
>>41909912
#
>>41909966
#
>>41910089
#
>>41910409
#
>>41911453
#
>>41911920
#
ekianjo
◴[
22 Oct 24 00:25 UTC
]
No.
41909966
[source]
▶
>>41909790
#
Life? Probably. Something that has thinking capabilities? Much more doubtful.
replies(8):
>>41909978
#
>>41910006
#
>>41910113
#
>>41910249
#
>>41910306
#
>>41910347
#
>>41910496
#
>>41910637
#
6stringronin
◴[
22 Oct 24 02:09 UTC
]
No.
41910496
[source]
▶
>>41909966
#
So you're saying out of the trillions upon trillions of stars that the chances are no life can think but us?
I think the odds are that at least one of them does.
replies(2):
>>41910770
#
>>41910827
#
mcmoor
◴[
22 Oct 24 03:06 UTC
]
No.
41910827
[source]
▶
>>41910496
#
We're multiplying a very large number (number of planets) with a very small number (chance of intelligent life). The margin can make the answer go either way.
replies(2):
>>41911131
#
>>41911830
#
1.
lnenad
◴[
22 Oct 24 06:47 UTC
]
No.
41911830
[source]
▶
>>41910827
#
You are basing the chance of intelligent life number on what? Reality is we have no clue what this number is.
replies(1):
>>41912087
#
ID:
GO
2.
mr_mitm
◴[
22 Oct 24 07:41 UTC
]
No.
41912087
[source]
▶
>>41911830 (TP)
#
Exactly, so we shouldn't say things like "no doubt" when it comes to the question of extra terrestrial life.
↑