Check out some similar questions!

excon · Mar 5, 2014, 06:45 PM

Hello:

If there's no life on the trillions of inhabitable planets in the universe, does that mean that each and every one of us has already WON the megabillion lottery of life?

excon

Fr_Chuck · Mar 5, 2014, 07:24 PM

Yep, I used fake ID to get your winnings, reason I am living in China now.

But from both a evolutionary view or a religious view, there is no reason to rule out life, as we know it, but what about planets we do not view as being able to sustain life. It is narrow minded of us, to believe we have the ability to define what life is.

For the evolutionist, it is just a matter of odds, what energy released in the "Big Bang" sparked the right combination of DNA material. And of course even then was everything else in place to sustain that life, or if it was, how did it mutate and evolve, why did only animal life produce brain cells, since all started from same spark of DNA material.

For the religious, I would also say that they are narrow minded if they think that God may not have created other worlds with other types of forms of life. Our creation in God's image was a spiritual one, not a material one.. Perhaps he did several exactly the same, giving all free will to see how they would do different.

talaniman · Mar 5, 2014, 07:34 PM

Maybe we did hit the lottery of life, but I don't think we are ready to have lunch with giant bug from Zago yet. Even if they bring the lunch. They might smoke some good weed though.

No telling what's out there.

Fr_Chuck · Mar 6, 2014, 12:35 AM

No weed here, but any pain pill you want with no doctors prescription.. .

ebaines · Mar 6, 2014, 06:41 AM

You are touching on the anthropic principle, which answers the question "why are we lucky enough to be here on this planet which has just the right amount of water, perfect temperature to support the organic chemistry critical for life, and in a solar system with a shepherding planet like Jupiter that helps shield us from constant bombardment of killer asteroids and comets" with the circular answer "because if all that didn't exist you wouldn't be here to ask that question." The Weak Anthropic Principle basically suggests that only in a universe with fine tuning compatible for sentient life can a life form like ours arise that has the ability to observe that fine tuning. So in a sense it was inevitable that we would "win" your lottery. However, I (along with the others who previously responded) must question your premise that we are the only habitable planet that actually has life - given the speed with which life first arose on this planet so shortly after it first became habitable about a billion years ago it would seem that life is almost inevitable if conditions are right.

excon · Mar 6, 2014, 07:38 AM

I (along with the others who previously responded) must question your premise

Hello again, E:

I DON'T make such a premise. I simply asked a question. I've asked it the other way too - even if the odds are a million to one AGAINST finding planets with life, there would BE millions of planets with life.

It was really a mathematical question, rather than a philosophical one. Plus, I don't get that the answer to my question is that I'm here to ask it. Philosophy and me, ain't buds...

excon

catonsville · Mar 6, 2014, 08:22 AM

Guess I am to old to understand. As opposed to too young. You guys are deep thinkers.

talaniman · Mar 6, 2014, 08:28 AM

Maybe life from another world is already here. Lots of people think so.

excon · Mar 6, 2014, 08:45 AM

Hello again, tal:

Maybe life from another world is already here.

WE might be life from another world. I can't wait to find out.

excon

talaniman · Mar 6, 2014, 09:04 AM

Hey Ex,

I can see us humans getting kicked off another planet. We were deported as illegal aliens. Don't blame 'em one bit, given how we can act up!

ebaines · Mar 6, 2014, 11:55 AM

Hello Ex:

I mentioned the premise of your question because you said: "If there's no life on the trillions of inhabitable planets in the universe ..." That's a big "if," and not one that could perhaps ever be proved (it's very, very difficult to prove a negative). If you're trying to make the point that among the trillions of habitable planets that are assumed to exist there must be at least millions with life, then OK - that's playing the old Drake equation to guess how many planets may have intelligent life. See: Drake equation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (I have to give a plug for a fellow Cornellian).